This is the second blog I’ve used the same title for, the original one about the Syrian invasion being way back in 2015 (who knew I’ve been blogging for 10 years).
“Oh, what a lovely war” was a film (which I liked) made in 1969 about the Great War of 1914-18, the war to end all wars it was called (I wonder how that turned out). It was a war in which millions died for no particular reason at the whim of their rulers. It was really just an argument between the German Kaiser Wilhelm II and the King of the United Kingdom and British Dominions and Emperor of India George V about who had the biggest and bestest Empire or, more realistically, who had the biggest and bestest willie. George won because he had the biggest title and he was the biggest prick (I know it should be the bigger prick, but I’m allowed some license).
Now the UK government are financing a remake in real life in Ukraine. Unfortunately, the shooting (wow, what a pun!) has gone on longer than Starmer expected so, as co-producer, he’s had to boost the budget by £3bn a year for as long as Zelensky wants to keep it going (remember, as director, he’s paid for each month it lasts). So far, the casualty rate has been disappointingly low and the casualties have been mainly Russians and Ukrainians, but the recently appointed Leader of the Western World, Sir Keir Starmer, has a plan to improve matters.
“We’ll put peace-keeping boots on the ground and peace-keeping planes in air to monitor any peace agreement in Ukraine to make sure it doesn’t happen. We have to get the British casualty rates up there with the biggest and bestest in the world, because, as everybody knows, Britain is a world power and every patriotic Englishman (including every Scottish, Welsh and Irish Englishman) is only too happy to die for his country, England. I am patriotic too, but in a different way that doesn’t involve dying.
“We’ll make sure these Ruskies are made to realise they can’t dictate who’s in charge in Ukraine and we’ll dare Putin to fire his nuclear weapons at us, because, if he does, we’ll retaliate, assuming, of course, we get US permission in time”, he said.
Or at least, that’s what he should have said, but he’s never been quite able to string a truthful sentence together, so he probably did his bestest.
He’s now preparing to put the UK on a war footing, possibly the only example of this when there’s no war, but he won’t be afraid to declare war on Russia to justify his decision and he knows all his Western allies will quickly follow his lead, or they’d better as 90% of British forces will already be dying in Ukraine and there will be hardly any left. But he won’t be worried as he and his family have probably already got their seats booked on the Airbus A-390 escape pod headed for Washington with all the really important people to run a government in exile.
But, surely there are politicians who aren’t in favour of war, politicians who want to see a peaceful resolution and an end to the deaths?
SNP politicians, for instance. Their former leader Alex Salmond and many of their former senior members often spoke out against war and the need for a political resolution to conflict. The current leadership couldn’t be in favour of a continuation of the war, could they?
Well, let’s see.
Swinney goes all out to support Starmer’s position on Ukraine, but at the cost of how many Scottish lives?Flynn is in favour of increased defence* spending. I wonder if he’s got shares in armaments companies.Swinney thinks it’s important to support Ukrainian independence. Pity he doesn’t feel the same about Scottish independence.
Swinney and Flynn taking the Scottish government another step along the way to full support of Westminster’s position on Ukraine. Yet another of the SNP’s long held policy positions binned, particularly the one on Scottish independence. When did the SNP become an overtly pro-war party, where unity with Westminster becomes more important than an end to conflict and death.
While I’m at it, can I just say that Keir Starmer is the worst PM in modern times. To be fair, it wasn’t a high bar to clear as that can be said about every PM elected in the last 50 years. It’s astonishing that we can think about every new PM that “at least they’ve got to be better than the last one”, only for it to turn out they’re even worse. How low can we go? Can we go lower than one who boasts openly about breaking every pledge he made to get elected (Is a pledge different from a promise? Don’t pledges count?) and boasts about his involvement in corruption. He might at least have the decency to try to hide these things like a proper PM.
PS. *In the phrase Defence Spending, Defence can be taken as a synonym for Attack, as the vast majority of Defence spending is spent on attacking and invading other countries.
BEAT THE CENSORS Many Facebook sites are still censoring bloggers like myself who can be critical of the actions of the SNP and the Scottish Government. They are attempting to prevent bloggers from getting their message out, so we have to depend on readers sharing the blog posts. If you liked this post or others I have written, please share this and take out a free subscription by clicking the follow button on the home page or on the posts. You will then be notified by email of any new posts on the blog. Thank you.
SALVO The progress of Salvo has been the most encouraging development since 2022. It is doing sterling work educating Scots about the Claim of Right and spelling out what it means that the Scottish people are sovereign, not any Parliament. Salvo has joined with Liberation.scot to develop campaigns the results of which will be available soon.
LIBERATION.SCOT We are seeking to build up liberation.scot to at least 100,000 signatures as part of our plan to win recognition at the UN as an official liberation movement. We intend to internationalise our battle for independence and through the setting up of the Scottish National Council we will develop our arguments to win progress in the international courts. Please help by signing up at liberation.scot. The members of liberation.scot have been asked to approve their new constitution, a necessary step towards international recognition.
Just to show I’m not the horrible anti-SNP blogger many think I am, here’s my contribution to the SNP’s 2026 campaign. It’s freely available to the party to commission a recording from someone who can actually sing (so not me) to be played at campaign events for the 2026 election. As you can see from the picture, John Swinney has already learned the words and is giving it laldy from the podium.
Just one more mandate
(SNP 2026 campaign song – to the tune of ‘O Sole Mio’)
Just one more mandate, give it to me Then you’ll get Indy, we promise, you see Though you may think you’ve heard this before We need a mandate or we’re oot the door
Just one more mandate, we still need the cash This could be our last chance, before the backlash We’re not used to working, we need to be free To write newspaper columns, do spots on TV
Just one more mandate, we’ll promise the moon But after election, a different tune When we’re campaigning, it’s Scotland the Brave But once you vote for us, it’s you who’s the slave
Just one more mandate, we’ve no Indy plans We’ll spend all your money promoting just trans Because it’s important (and we all agree) That men show their willies for young girls to see
Just one more mandate, is it not enough That once every five years, we talk Indy stuff We’ve made it so obvious, why can’t you see If you stick with us, you’ll never be free.
BEAT THE CENSORS Many Facebook sites are still censoring bloggers like myself who can be critical of the actions of the SNP and the Scottish Government. They are attempting to prevent bloggers from getting their message out, so we have to depend on readers sharing the blog posts. If you liked this post or others I have written, please share this and take out a free subscription by clicking the follow button on the home page or on the posts. You will then be notified by email of any new posts on the blog. Thank you.
SALVO The progress of Salvo has been the most encouraging development since 2022. It is doing sterling work educating Scots about the Claim of Right and spelling out what it means that the Scottish people are sovereign, not any Parliament. Salvo has joined with Liberation.scot to develop campaigns the results of which will be available soon.
LIBERATION.SCOT We are seeking to build up liberation.scot to at least 100,000 signatures as part of our plan to win recognition at the UN as an official liberation movement. We intend to internationalise our battle for independence and through the setting up of the Scottish National Council we will develop our arguments to win progress in the international courts. Please help by signing up at liberation.scot. The members of liberation.scot have been asked to approve their new constitution, a necessary step towards international recognition.
It seems to be the in thing to start producing information about events way before they are actually due, hence, for example, Christmas presents and decorations being advertised in September. So, in keeping with this trend, here’s my first column of advice about voting in the Holyrood election in 2026.
First, some background.
There are now four English political parties which, for some reason, are allowed to take part in Scottish only elections, elections for the Scottish parliament and elections for Scottish local government. These are the Conservative and Unionist party, the Labour party, the Liberal Democrats and Reform UK. Three of these parties (all except Reform UK) operate in Scotland under a Scottish brand name, a ploy that has fooled the punters for decades. To make it clear what they are, I’ll refer to them with an English prefix.
If someone can come up with a good reason for allowing political parties from a neighbouring (foreign) country to take part in Scottish only elections, I’d be interested to hear it.
In the 50 years up to 2010, English Labour were dominant in Scotland. “Who else can you vote for”, they would say. People said English Labour votes weren’t counted, they were weighed. People said Scots would vote for a monkey with a red rosette. English Labour came to believe they were invincible and from that came their change of attitude towards their Scottish constituents.
While earlier English Labour MPs from Scotland did argue for some government action that would benefit Scotland (I think particularly about Willie Ross, Secretary of State for Scotland in the 1970s), later MPs didn’t think they had to bother with all that nonsense to get re-elected, so they could do what they were there for, picking up their large salaries for doing practically nothing and spending most of their time in the bars and restaurants drinking subsidised champagne and eating subsidised caviar, paid for by you and me. Of course, there were occasional breaks to vote down Scottish matters, if they were sober enough to find their way into the correct voting lobby. We’ll all (fondly?) remember George ‘Pishy Pants’ Foulkes as a keen exponent of the art of being an English Labour MP from Scotland. Now, of course, he’s Lord ‘Pishy Pants’ Foulkes (yon birkie ca’d a lord – Burns), honoured for services to keeping Scotland down and free to continue his subsidised lifestyle without the need to find his way into the correct lobby.
Despite the SNP taking charge of the Scottish government in 2007, unionists still believed that while Scots might vote for the SNP in the “wee pretendy parliament in Holyrood”, they would never vote for them in the real parliament in Westminster. This view seemed to be justified by the 2010 Westminster election which resulted in (another) landslide for English Labour. Unionists could breathe a sigh of relief, everything had returned to normal. English Labour MPs from Scotland could continue their subsidised lifestyle free from worry. A job for life.
But then the impossible happened. In 2011, the SNP became, not just the largest party, but had a majority in a parliament designed to prevent such a possibility. Unionist MSPs couldn’t prevent it now as they had from 2007, so an independence referendum was set for September 18th, 2014. Cue unionist panic.
I won’t go into any detail about the campaign (it’s already been covered extensively) except to say that yours truly played a part in the Rutherglen area and I started the day of the vote convinced Yes was going to win, an opinion made more certain by speaking to many voters at several different polling places throughout the day. I thought I was going to be part of the generation that delivered Scottish independence. But, it was not to be. Despite all the signs pointing to a Yes win, the No campaign, peppered with lies, won out in the end.
Famously (infamously?), during the referendum while campaigning for the No side, Johann Lamont, then leader of English Labour in Scotland, said that Scots were not programmed to make political decisions, provoking great outrage among Yessers. But was she right? More on that later.
Despite too many Scots believing English Labour, Tory, LibDem and MSM lies during the campaign meaning that Yes lost, there was a huge reaction against the lying unionists in the 2015 Westminster election leading to massive swing to the SNP, now led by Nicola Sturgeon.
English Labour’s decision to pair up with the English Tories in the referendum campaign and the lies they told, many of which became obvious shortly after the result was announced, were simply the last straw for an electorate already unhappy about English Labour’s lack of interest in doing anything for Scotland. The SNP won 56 of the 59 seats on offer, with the then three unionist parties reduced to a single MP each. Surely this was a great basis for a declaration of independence? Not so, said Nicola Sturgeon, a vote for the SNP is not a vote for independence, the first of her many ‘tractorous’ (ed.) acts.
I won’t go into the performance of the SNP Scottish Government over the next 9 years (worth a post on its own), so let’s move forward to 2023. With the 2024 Westminster election looming and Labour showing very few signs of a resurgence in Scotland, but with the SNP trying their best to discourage their previously loyal supporters by concentrating on gender issues, the SNP managed to create a worst-case scenario where a by-election was called in a highly vulnerable seat when they were at a low ebb. Having decided it was more important to get rid of independence supporting Margaret Ferrier (arguably the most active elected member in the party) than retain the seat, the party conducted a nasty, hateful campaign to force Margaret to stand down (see here), and the unionist parties and the MSM were encouraged to join in. When she wouldn’t quit, English Labour voted for a suspension in Westminster which triggered a recall petition, which they won, not hard to achieve as it only requires 10% of the electorate to vote for it. The net result was a by-election where the SNP lost the seat though stupidity and spite (well done Nicola Sturgeon) and English Labour got an unexpected boost in Scotland which a sensible party would not have given them. What effect will that have on the Westminster election, we all wondered.
Now the result of the Rutherglen by-election was important not only for the boost it gave the English Labour party but also for what it told us about what Scotland means to the English Labour party and to English Labour MPs. Michael Shanks was the elected English Labour candidate, pledging to support Scotland’s interests, pledging to put Scotland’s case to Starmer and saying he would not be frightened to disagree with party leaders. Within a couple of weeks, he had voted twice against Scotland’s interests, including preventing Scots having any say on their constitutional arrangements, and was rewarded with promotion to a shadow ministerial position. If anyone had forgotten the reason why Scots dumped Labour in 2015, Michael Shanks’ behaviour after his election was the perfect reminder. Michael Shanks does not support Scottish interests. The English Labour party does not support Scottish interests.
Now we come to this year’s Westminster election.
The polls were showing that the result was expected to be a big English Labour victory despite the party being extremely coy about what their plans were. “Vote Labour for change”, they said, without being specific about the change they had in mind. So nearly all voters had to go on were the pledges made by Keir Starmer about what an English Labour government would deliver if they were elected. Unfortunately, Starmer was (and is) a known liar and you couldn’t trust anything he said. Fortunately, Scots would obviously remember that just 9 years earlier, they had dumped English Labour because they were a lying bunch of Scots-hating toerags who couldn’t be trusted to deliver anything for Scotland and the few who didn’t remember would have seen from the actions of Michael Shanks that nothing had changed. English Labour were still the same bunch of lying toerags that they were before 2015. Surely, there was no way that Scots would vote for a continuation of English Labour’s pre-2015 behaviour towards Scotland.
But here again, I was wrong.
In their tens of thousands, Scots flocked to help put the lying English Labour toerags back into office. So deperate had they become to get rid of the English Tories, they threw their thinking caps in the bin and gave their critical faculties the week off. The net result was that the English Labour party gained a total of 37 seats in Scotland, 36 more than in the 2019 election. How could Scots so willingly vote for English Labour, a party from a neighbouring, but still foreign, country, that only 9 years earlier they had soundly rejected because they realised the party didn’t have Scotland’s best interests at heart and their MPs from Scotland were only there for the money and the (nearly) free food and drink.
Since the election, English Labour have shown themselves in their true colours. Not only has Starmer broken every one of his pre-election ‘pledges’, but in most cases his government have done the opposite. Here are some examples.
GB Energy would cut consumers energy bills by £300. Now prices are higher and show no signs of coming down any time soon and energy companies are raking it in. Shell profits $40Bn in 2022, $28Bn in 2023. BP profits $28Bn in 2022, $14Bn in 2023.
GB Energy will be based in Aberdeen, except CEO and all his admin staff will be based in Liverpool.
English Labour would scrap university tuition fees, but fees have been retained and even increased.
Pre-elecion sympathy for pensioners struggling to choose between heating and eating has become removal of the Winter Fuel Allowance (WFA) except for the very poorest, the government’s excuse being that they were retaining the triple lock on pensions so the WFA was no longer required, totally ignoring the fact that the WFA cut was happening immediately, but the pension increase wasn’t till next year.
Increased income tax on the top 5% of earners was dropped amid government comments about the ‘high tax burden’ in the UK.
Abolishing Universal credit and the current ‘cruel’ sanctions regime became instead an undefined reform of the system some time in the future.
The pledge of no more illegal wars has been circumvented by simply calling Gaza and Ukraine legal.
Review of arms sales and the promotion of peace have been effectively scrapped with huge volumes of arms and huge amounts of money shipped to Israel and Ukraine. Support for genocide was not included in the English Labour manifesto.
Not mentioned before the election, but the English Labour government is apparently considering introducing compulsory military conscription and are discussing putting troops into Ukraine with the French. Are these tow points connected?
Plans to renationalise railways, water, energy and Royal Mail have been dropped because it’s allegedly too expensive in the current climate.
Pre-election plans to end outsourcing in the NHS have been watered down.
Abolish the House of Lords has become removal of hereditary peers, leaving only failed politicians, party donors and bishops. It’s always worth reminding ourselves that the UK is one of only two countries that permit religious leaders to make laws, the other being Iran.
Etc., etc., etc.
The excuse for a lot of these English Labour changes is the so-called fiscal ‘Black Hole’ of £22Bn (or is it £40Bn?) in the economy inherited from the English Tories, though the government refuses to provide any details of how it’s made up. They claimed that they couldn’t find out about it before the election because the English Tories even hid their plans from civil servants. However, if civil servants didn’t know about it, how could it ever be implemented? Are English Labour merely talking about some spending ideas that English Tory ministers were thinking about, but for which there were no actual plans? Is it a lie, another lie, another English Labour lie?
Since the election, English Labour have made so many extremely obvious policy u-turns, even prompting a petition demanding a new Westminster election which has currently attracted over 3 million signatures, that you might think they were deliberately trying to ruin their chances of re-election. Is the petition an extreme example of buyer’s remorse, or in this case voter’s remorse, a feeling some get after a big purchase or after a far-reaching action that they may have made a mistake? If so, perhaps these concerns would have been better thought about before the election rather than after when nothing can be done.
What did Scottish voters hope to achieve by voting in their tens of thousands for English Labour? Of course, they wanted rid of the English Tories, and that was achieved, but that would have been achieved without Scottish votes. Did many Scottish voters really think that replacing one English unionist party with another English unionist party would improve matters for Scotland? Did many Scottish voters really think that replacing one unionist party whose only interest in Scotland was how much they can screw out of it with another unionist party whose only interest in Scotland was how much they can screw out of it? Or, did they think at all?
Looking back to Johann Lamont’s pre-referendum comment, are many Scots really not programmed to make political decisions? Do many Scots really think about their vote or are they just looking for excuses to vote English Labour, just like their parents and grand parents did? Do many Scots really believe that they are uniquely incapable of running their own country? Do many Scots disbelieve the evidence of their eyes and ears and really think Scotland are better off being controlled by a foreign country who make all the decisions and make sure Scotland remains a country gripped by poverty. Do many Scots really want their resources stolen by a foreign country, leaving them with very little? Or, do many Scots really think about who they are voting for?
The results of the 2024 Westminster election showed that Scots voters voted for English parties by a majority of 48 seats to 9, though a closer result in voters terms, by 58% to 30%. No matter how you look at it, a majority of Scots voted for English parties who lie, cheat and steal from Scotland, trusting English parties to control them rather than Scottish. What’s the explanation for such insanity? How can any Scots think that ceding control to a foreign country is a good idea? How can any Scots think that a foreign country will ever treat them fairly? Do some Scots really like living in a colony?
Here’s just a couple of examples of what English Labour MPs from Scotland think of their Scottish constituents.
Here’s how the English Labour MPs from Scotland voted in the Commons division on scrapping the changes proposed to the Winter Fuel Allowance (WFA). It’s safe to say that there was considerable opposition in Scotland to the proposed change and you might think that Scotland’s representatives in Parliament might reflect that opposition in their voting. However, 35 of the 37 chose to ignore their constituents views, followed the party line and took no chances on losing their inflated salaries. The 2 others may have chosen to abstain on principle or maybe they had something better to do. We’ll never know.
To make English Labour in Scotland’s position even more ludicrous, following this vote and following all English Labour MSPs voting against a Holyrood motion to tell the English Labour government to have a rethink on WFA, Anas Sarwar, the English Labour Scottish branch manager first said that if English Labour formed the Scottish government, they would reinstate universal WFA, then said that he would bring forward a motion to demand that the Scottish government makes up the difference. People’s lives are at stake, but English Labour in Scotland want to play politics.
Now here’s what one London based English Labour MP from Scotland thinks is a fun comment to make about the Scottish parliament and those hoping to stand for election to it. Does he include the English Labour MSPs in his slur? Just maybe his English colleagues thought it a funny comment, but they’d still think he’s a second class English Labour MP. Crichton is just a House Jock and why he was elected by the good people of the Western Isles is a mystery.
Will Scottish independence ever be achieved if a majority of Scots voters think that voting for foreign parties is acceptable. Will Scots ever stop paying attention to the English controlled mainstream media which constantly tells them not to vote for Scottish parties, to only vote for English parties? Will Scots ever realise that the mainstream media do that so that England can continue to steal our oil and gas, our wind energy electricity and shortly, our water, leaving Scotland poorer and many Scots in poverty.
My advice. Don’t vote for a foreign party, and certainly not for the lying bunch of Scots-hating toerags that is the English Labour party.
Time will tell if the majority of Scots voters will ever wise up.
BEAT THE CENSORS Many Facebook sites are still censoring bloggers like myself who can be critical of the actions of the SNP and the Scottish Government. They are attempting to prevent bloggers from getting their message out, so we have to depend on readers sharing the blog posts. If you liked this post or others I have written, please share this and take out a free subscription by clicking the follow button on the home page or on the posts. You will then be notified by email of any new posts on the blog. Thank you.
SALVO The progress of Salvo has been the most encouraging development since 2022. It is doing sterling work educating Scots about the Claim of Right and spelling out what it means that the Scottish people are sovereign, not any Parliament. Salvo has joined with Liberation.scot to develop campaigns the results of which will be available soon.
LIBERATION.SCOT We are seeking to build up liberation.scot to at least 100,000 signatures as part of our plan to win recognition at the UN as an official liberation movement. We intend to internationalise our battle for independence and through the setting up of the Scottish National Council we will develop our arguments to win progress in the international courts. Please help by signing up at liberation.scot. The members of liberation.scot have been asked to approve their new constitution, a necessary step towards international recognition.
First, an apology. It’s been ages since my last blog posting, occasioned in part by an accident I had just before Christmas last year which left me struggling a bit with concentration for a few months, and partly by there being so little positive happening in the independence scene. Though there’s been much improvement in the first issue, unfortunately I can’t say the same for the second (but more later).
12th October, 2024 a date that will always be remembered for the death of Alex Salmond, whom many have characterised as the greatest Scottish political figure of modern times, or even the greatest ever. For myself, all I can say is he was the greatest in my lifetime so far and I cannot see that changing given my age and the current state of politics in Scotland.
I only met Alex a handful of times, mostly at SNP and Alba campaign events, though he played a big part in my life in encouraging me to become more active politically, starting in the run up to the referendum in 2011. One event I remember particularly was when Alex, turning up late from an earlier event that had overrun, probably because he talked too much, arrived with a bunch of Alba pens which he gave out to those standing close to him. Down to his last pen, he spotted me standing a few yards away. He strode over and gave me the pen “you can have the last one, Ron”. I was just a guy he had met a few times, more a casual acquaintance than anything else, but that was his style. I cherish the pen. I’ve still got it and will use it only sparingly to make sure I keep it forever.
But I want to take this opportunity to comment on the response of our two governments and the reaction of the English MSM to Alex’ death.
Handed to opportunity to show they were a proper government capable of reacting with speed and consideration to a situation no one could have anticipated, the Scottish Government stumbled and fell at the first hurdle. On hearing of Alex’ death, their first action was to send Kate Forbes to London to persuade Westminster to pay for the repatriation of Alex Salmond’s body. It was not unexpected that Westminster weren’t keen. In recent history, their financial dealings with Scotland have all involved money going the other way, so you can imagine their confusion when asked to pay for something to benefit Scots. ‘Does not compute’ you can hear them saying. While the two governments were arguing about who should pay, Sir Tom Hunter stepped in and paid for a private plane to bring Alex back to Scotland. The Scottish Government later claimed that they had (belatedly) offered to pay for the flight. That may or may not be true, but their excuse for their delay was that there was no protocol in place for them to act. An extremely poor excuse in my opinion.
Whether the Scottish Government’s lack of decency in the face of a tragic event was caused by them not wanting to be decent to a man they had spent 10 years trying to destroy, whether they were just too embarassed being put in a position where doing ‘the right thing’ went against all they had tried to do for 10 years, or whether they were just too inept to make a decision quickly enough, can only be speculated on, but, whatever the reason, they certainly managed to make Scotland look as if it had a parliament full of numpties. However, no matter how bad that looked, there was worse to come.
The North Macedonian Government have received much praise for their reaction to Alex’ death, holding a memorial service and providing a guard of honour at an officially arranged send-off, making them look like a government that understands how to respond to the death of an important visitor to their country. So here was the opportunity for the Scottish Government to make up for their appaling handling of Alex’ repatriation. All they had to do was follow the North Macedonian example.
But what happened was almost exactly the opposite. A hastily arranged press release from Murray Foote about his decision to resign as SNP CEO, a press release that could easily have waited for a few days as he won’t actually leave until a replacement is found, was deliberately designed to take attention away from Alex Salmond’s return, and was followed by John Swinney’s equally hastily arranged embarrassing statement praising Foote’s contribution to the party (helping to flush them down the pan, perhaps?). No comment on Alex’ return, no official welcoming party from the Scottish Government or the SNP, no red carpet, no guard of honour, all as if it just wasn’t happening. Fortunately, the Scottish public knew how to act. Hundreds turned up at Aberdeen airport to accompany the hearse on its way to Alex’ home, Yes Bikers leading the way and a long column of cars following, most with Saltires waving proudly in the wind. The Scottish public did what the Scottish Government were unable or unwilling to do, making them look even more useless.
How could our government do that? (Are they even our Government any more?) How could they insult Alex Salmond and his family like that? Why would they want to show themselves as a bunch of useless toerags who couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery? Why would they want to disgrace Scotland on the international stage as a country who can’t even acknowledge the death of a former leader? Why wouldn’t they have something to say about the man who brought the SNP from the fringe of Scottish politics to a leading position, the man without whose efforts they wouldn’t have their current jobs and income?
Was it incompetence? Their actions, or lack of them, around the repatriation of Alex Salmond’s body could, if you were feeling generous, be put down to their total inability to do anything properly, but surely their lack of acknowledgement of Alex’ return must put incompetence into the unlikely category.
Was it jealousy? They were never able to do what Alex did, He built up the SNP and the reputation of the Scottish Government but in the last 10 years (the Sturgeon years) the only way for the SNP has been down.
Was it hatred? It certainly was for Sturgeon and her pals. Sturgeon’s one ambition in government was to show she was better, more popular and more internationally recognised than Alex Salmond and, when she failed, she tried to have him jailed on made up accusations of sexual impropriety from her political allies and friendly civil servants. Though these efforts were unsuccessful, they affected Alex financially, they impacted on his reputation and the stress could also have ultimately cost him his life. Is it too strong to call Sturgeon and her fellow conspirators murderers?
While the Scottish Government were doing their best to ignore Alex Salmond, which I suppose was a bit better than their attitude to him when he was alive, the unionist media were making up for that in spades. Columnists and (so-called) reporters were falling over themselves to say the most nasty things they could think of, not constrained by the laws of libel following Alex’ death. I won’t repeat examples of what I mean as they are (covered much better here in Wings) for those who haven’t alread seen them.
What has prompted this outpouring of abuse in the media against a man who, now deceased, can no longer hurt them or argue against their political views? In my opinion, this is simply an effort to besmirch Alex Salmond’s reputation to try to prevent him becoming a martyr who, in death, still has the ability to lead and encourage Scots to work to deliver his dream of Scottish independence. Their hate pieces, with one or two exceptions (you know who you are Kenny Farquharson), are not so much aimed at Alex Salmond as they are at what he stood for. In effect, the pieces are just a continuation of their efforts to make sure Scotland continues as a willing colony whose only function is to deliver Scottish assets and Scottish production to benefit their English coloniser. BBC Scotland (should it be renamed BBC Coloniser?) continue in their leading role in this regard, commissioning productions from those known for their dislike of Alex Salmond and getting their news broadcasters to drop direct or implied insults into any news item that mentions his name.
However, have the media gone too far this time? Have they now reached a point where even those who wouldn’t necessarily have agreed with Alex Salmond are now concerned that an individual is being traduced within hours of death and for days afterwards, even before a funeral could be held. There used to be an unwritten law that the period before the funeral was respected as free from criticism, a sort of a purdah period if you like, but just like the purdah period before an election or a referendum, this is no longer recognised by the unionist media who just can’t wait to disparage all things Scottish.
All in all, I don’t think either government or many in the media can look back on their efforts following the death of Alex Salmond with any great satisfaction. – Westminster did what they always do for Scotland, nothing. No surprise there. – For the Scottish Government, this has been a disaster. Had their objective been to show themselves as a group of petty incompetents, they would have succeeded royally. – Those in the media who were trying to show Alex in a bad light went so far overboard that they generated more disgust at their efforts than belief in their point of view.
In the end, the unionists won’t win. The nastier they become, the more abuse we get, the more they tell us Scots and Scotland are just shite, the more Scots will realise that they’re just a lying bunch of thieves whose only interest is benefitting England at Scotland’s expense and the more Scots will work to achieve Alex Salmond’s dream of an independent Scotland joining the world community of nations on equal terms.
BEAT THE CENSORS Many Facebook sites are still censoring bloggers like myself who can be critical of the actions of the SNP and the Scottish Government. They are attempting to prevent bloggers from getting their message out, so we have to depend on readers sharing the blog posts. If you liked this post or others I have written, please share this and take out a free subscription by clicking the follow button on the home page or on the posts. You will then be notified by email of any new posts on the blog. Thank you.
SALVO The progress of Salvo has been the most encouraging development since 2022. It is doing sterling work educating Scots about the Claim of Right and spelling out what it means that the Scottish people are sovereign, not any Parliament. Salvo has joined with Liberation.scot to develop campaigns the results of which will be available soon.
LIBERATION.SCOT We are seeking to build up liberation.scot to at least 100,000 signatures as part of our plan to win recognition at the UN as an official liberation movement. We intend to internationalise our battle for independence and through the setting up of the Scottish National Council we will develop our arguments to win progress in the international courts. Please help by signing up at liberation.scot. The members of liberation.scot have been asked to approve their new constitution, a necessary step towards international recognition.
A tale of Scottish entrepreneurialism and Westminster treachery by Annie Harrower-Gray
Prestwick Airport offered (and offers) not only uninterrupted access to the Western hemisphere, it sits where the cold air of the surrounding low lying hills meets the warmer air of the sea and the resulting uprising bores a hole through mist and fog. It’s Europeʼs only all year clear weather airport. Heathrow on the other hand, suffers constant delays and cancellations due to bad weather. These facts alone, beg the question – why is Prestwick not the UKʼs second major international airport?
In 1933 little was known about the effects of extreme cold or lack of oxygen on planes and pilots but two Scots, the then Marquess of Douglas and Clydesdale and Flight Lieutenant David F MacIntyre ignored the unknown dangers and flew over Mount Everest in two tiny bi-planes, a Westland and a Wallace, their wings held together by struts and wire. On their return the two men, together with the Dukeʼs brother, the Earl of Selkirk, founded Prestwick Airport in order to realise yet another dream. Planned by experts, Prestwick was to be the greatest international airport in the world.
In the thirties, under the management of David MacIntyre, Prestwick was designing and building planes intended to become the ordinary manʼs bus, on which he could travel to the ends of the earth for 3d a mile. One plane, the ‘Prestwick Pioneerʼ was designed to meet the specific needs of the Highlands and Islands and carried the sick to hospital on the mainland. After the second world war it was denied a license to fly in the UK but sent by the UK government to carry guns in the jungles of Malaya instead.
Prestwick was using skilled labour at a time when unemployment was high in Scotland . Figures for 1935 showed forty nine percent unemployment in Airdrie, and 42% in Port Glasgow. In comparison, Birmingham had an unemployment rate of only 7%. The high unemployment figure was due to the dependence on heavy industry in these areas and an unbalanced economy where most of the lighter industries were distributed throughout England . The airportʼs extensive plans included trade booths for Scottish manufacturers. Scotland had become air minded early on and Prestwick was well on its way to becoming a World Centre of Air Transport. Its accomplishments were far in advance of London Airport where they were still trying to disperse the fog with ‘Fidoʼ flame jets.
Scots had high hopes that a white paper on Civil Aviation published in 1945 would promise a bright future for Prestwick. Instead, neither the airport nor Scotland received as much as a mention in the document.
It was a rare event in that Scottish politicians from every party joined forces to fight for their country and Prestwick. In a House of Commons debate on 29th March, 1945, every available Scottish Member of Parliament signed the motion. Alexander Sloane (Labour:South Ayrshire) opened the debate quite eloquently, though perhaps his speech did not endear the entire house to his cause. For the benefit of those MPs south of the border Sloane explained that Prestwick Airport was situated next to the ‘Barns oʼ Ayrʼ where William Wallace experimented with the very first incendiary bombs. He razed the barns to the ground after tying up the English inside.
Next on his feet was Lieut-Colonel Sir Thomas Moore (Scottish Unionist :Ayr Burghs) he praised Scotland, something we would not hear a Scottish Tory do today. “We are not greedy in Scotland. We realize that the capital of the United Kingdom must necessarily have the No 1 terminal airport for world air traffic. All we do insist on, is that Prestwick should be the alternative and secondary trans-oceanic and Trans-Atlantic Airport . Moore questioned the refusal of the Government to approve an airline service in Scotland before going on to praise the skills of the Scots: “We have long been seized of the dramatic, indeed the almost miraculous, potentialities of air transport and in this we are many generations in advance of England. Just as for generations we have built the best and biggest ships in the world, so we are determined to handle this new form of transport in the same way and built the best and biggest aircraft in the world. Why not? We have the best scientific brains, the most expert designers and the most highly skilled craftsmen, except for those who are at present loaned to England. “
One by one the Scottish members took the floor each making a solid case for Prestwick to become the UKʼs second international airport.
George Buchanan (Labour) asked in his speech, ‘We read of great things being accomplished by Scotsmen. Our people constantly say this – and it is difficult to answer them: Is our greatness always reserved for the battlefield and the glories of war; have we no great capacities for the glory of peace production?”
The member for the Glasgow Gorbals received his answer later in a patronizing speech from Sir Stafford Cripps (Minister for Civil Aviation) “ I do appreciate very full the pride of accomplishment that Scottish men and women feel in the aircraft industry and in their own contributions to air services and training. They have played a very distinguished part in the course of the war, and I have taken many opportunities of going to Scotland in order to inform them of the appreciation of the Government and Department in the work they have done. I believe that this type of what we may justly call local patriotism is of the very greatest importance in the proper development of our nation as a whole,….”. The underlying message was clear. Prestwick had been allowed quite graciously, to contribute to the war effort but that was their lot.
For those who would like to read the full debate, this can be found in Hansard here.
The protests from the Scottish People, the undisputable facts and the debate were all ignored, Sir Stafford Cripps would not change his mind – Prestwick was not going to be allowed to set foot on the great highway of the air. The government would back Heathrow, which had twice been turned down as unsuitable. The Scottish people, the industrialists, the financiers and others must organize themselves said Cripps . An uphill struggle, as the government undermined Prestwickʼs every effort to realize its potential. Investors in light industries waiting to move into Prestwick would now withdraw as they would be unable to obtain licenses to go ahead with production. Previously in 1935, Prestwick made an application for permission to build and extend the airport. It was refused, because in the opinion of ‘expertsʼ it was ‘exceptionally unsuitable from the flying weather aspectʼ. Later, authorities at Prestwick who applied to go to the Havana Conference of Air line operators were refused exit permits by the Westminster Government.
The Scottish people were right to suspect that in the their treatment over Prestwick they were being well and truly screwed. Sloane warned that Westminster refusing to give the airport its place in the sun could well mean the parting of the ways for Scotland and England.
Clement Attlee and the Labour party ousted the Tories from government in July 1945 but it made no difference to Prestwick. In 1946 Group Captain MacIntyre received a letter from the Minister for Civil Aviation ‘any aviator taking a plane from Prestwick airport will incur the penalty of a £2,000 fine and/or twenty years imprisonment ‘. Prestwick was being paralyzed. It was not to compete with London Airport and show it in an unfavourable light for London was to receive a grant of £30 million, some of it Scots taxes.
In the years that followed, it mattered little what party was in power at Westminster. Labour and the Tories shared the same policy – keep Prestwick in a state of strangulation, ensuring that all the wealth to be accumulated from civil aviation stayed firmly in the South East of England.
In 2013, the Scottish Government bought Prestwick from its private owners Infratil after it having been on the market for eighteen months. Only a small part of aviation, development and planning of airports mainly, is devolved to Holyrood. The regulation of aviation is reserved to Westminster. With the airport in public ownership and plans recently revealed for a £65 billion, manufacturing site near the airport, we may yet see the dreams of its founders realized in an independent Scotland, free from London interference. To quote Lieut-Colonel Sir Thomas Moore “ Scots have imagination in their minds and a spirit of progress in their blood, which are often lacking in those of our compatriots South of the Border”.
Perhaps Nicola Sturgeonʼs vision for Prestwick goes far beyond just saving an airport struggling under private ownership from closing.
My comments
A highly unusual example of Scottish MPs of all parties joining together in support of a single cause. Wouldn’t it be great in today’s political climate to see Scottish MPs standing up for Scotland.
However, much as now, Westminster refused to allow Scottish skills and entrepreneurial spirit to flourish in case it had an impact on Mother England, or should I say Mother London.
I was brought up in Prestwick and was a keen plane spotter for a while. Prestwick’s fog-free reputation was well earned. I remember an occasion, perhaps in 1959/60, when Prestwick was the only airport open in Western Europe. Dozens of flights were diverted to Prestwick from all over Europe to the extent that aircraft were being parked on stands, on taxipaths and even on one of the runways. When the weather finally cleared, Prestwick had almost run out of space. What an evening for a plane spotter.
My thanks to Alycia Hayes for posting Annie Harrower-Gray’s articleand to An Stiubhart Dubh (The Black Stewart) for bringing it to my attention.
BEAT THE CENSORS Many Facebook sites are still censoring bloggers like myself who can be critical of the actions of the SNP and the Scottish Government. They are attempting to prevent bloggers from getting their message out, so we have to depend on readers sharing the blog posts. If you liked this post or others I have written, please share this and take out a free subscription by clicking the follow button on the home page or on the posts. You will then be notified by email of any new posts on the blog. Thank you.
SALVO The progress of Salvo has been the most encouraging development since 2022. It is doing sterling work educating Scots about the Claim of Right and spelling out what it means that the Scottish people are sovereign, not any Parliament. Salvo has joined with Liberation.scot to develop campaigns the results of which will be available soon.
LIBERATION.SCOT We are seeking to build up liberation.scot to at least 100,000 signatures as part of our plan to win recognition at the UN as an official liberation movement. We intend to internationalise our battle for independence and through the setting up of the Scottish National Council we will develop our arguments to win progress in the international courts. Please help by signing up at liberation.scot. The members of liberation.scot have been asked to approve their new constitution, a necessary step towards international recognition.
Here’s a response to a letter by Brian Barbour (No cash cow) printed in the Scotsman, always keen to highlight any Scot who has nothing but contempt for Scotland and happy to blame the Scottish Government for everything bad that happens, even the actions of the joint owner of a private company, known for his unionist beliefs.
By Jim Stamper
I find Brian Barbour’s perspective in his letter (Scotsman 27 November) very difficult to comprehend. He mentions failures of the SNP not setting up a Scottish energy company but doesn’t seem to question the UK Government not doing so, despite energy being a retained power. Instead UK Governments sold off all our oil and gas resources to private companies leaving us exposed to extreme energy price increases following the Russian / Ukraine conflict with very adverse resultant effects including huge inflation. He doesn’t suggest the UK Government should be taking public ownership of the Grangemouth refinery despite the UK already having insufficient refinery capacity.
He mentions the BBC being soft on Scottish Government’s underperformance yet mentions the ferries which are never out of the BBC news unlike the London underground, HS2 etc. He mentions cuts to Local Authorities finance but no mention of UK Government Economic Austerity policies imposed since 2010, specifically to reduce public spending and which directly affects funding available to the Scottish Government. These policies have reduced resources and the salary values including in education and in the NHS, resulting in strikes in England. NHS strikes would have caused huge suffering in Scotland and cost the Scottish economy millions if they hadn’t been avoided due to negotiations with the unions by the Scottish Government. Negotiations under the leadership of the Health Secretary, Michael Matheson. Not something mentioned much by the BBC. Although I’m sure I have heard Michael Matheson’s name mentioned the odd time in the BBC recently.
It is urgent we gain independence before the UK Government privatises our NHS, further damages our public services and continues to privatise our green energy and defiling our beautiful country with huge pylons to enable private companies to provide electricity to England.
BEAT THE CENSORS Many Facebook sites are still censoring bloggers like myself who can be critical of the actions of the SNP and the Scottish Government. They are attempting to prevent bloggers from getting their message out, so we have to depend on readers sharing the blog posts. If you liked this post or others I have written, please share this and take out a free subscription by clicking the follow button on the home page or on the posts. You will then be notified by email of any new posts on the blog. Thank you.
SALVO The progress of Salvo has been the most encouraging development since 2022. It is doing sterling work educating Scots about the Claim of Right and spelling out what it means that the Scottish people are sovereign, not any Parliament. Salvo has joined with Liberation.scot to develop campaigns the results of which will be available soon.
LIBERATION.SCOT We are seeking to build up liberation.scot to at least 100,000 signatures as part of our plan to win recognition at the UN as an official liberation movement. We intend to internationalise our battle for independence and through the setting up of the Scottish National Council we will develop our arguments to win progress in the international courts. Please help by signing up at liberation.scot. The members of liberation.scot have been asked to approve their new constitution, a necessary step towards international recognition.
This week brought the (excellent?) news that a second Scottish Labour MP (there are only two) had been promoted to Labour’s shadow front bench. This is the continued advancement of Michael Shanks who has come from obscurity to ministerial status in the space of just two months, and this from a man with a chequered history of party loyalty and a poor record of success in elections, having been unsuccessful in Local Authority, Scottish Parliament and UK Parliament elections.
Shanks left Labour party in May 2019 citing opposition to Brexit and antisemitism. He rejoined the party in April 2020 when Keir Starmer became leader. Strangely enough, his opposition to Brexit didn’t seem to hinder his continued membership of the party, even as the Starmer led party became more and more pro Brexit.
Here’s a comment he made at the time of his resignation, describing Labour as “a party that has a bankrupt approach to our membership of the EU and is complacent about the impact it will have on the poorest people across the UK”.
Out of the blue, he was selected to stand as a candidate in the Rutherglen and Hamilton West by-election when 3 much more experienced members who had put their names forward were barred by Labour HQ. A complaint about the selection process was made by the local CLP, but was ignored. They didn’t even get a reply. Obviously, there was some reason why the party were keen to see him selected for an election that, given the circumstances, Labour were virtually certain to win. I wonder what it was.
Shanks won Rutherglen and Hamilton West on 5th October, thanks mainly to the huge boycott by former SNP voters, disgusted at the behaviour of the party leaders and by their treatment of the previous MP, Margaret Ferrier. During his election campaign, he promised to be “his own man” and to oppose both the two-child cap and the bedroom tax, both policies Starmer has said will be retained by a future Labour Government. Were these promises made to get elected, to be dropped once in Westminster?
Many bloggers, including myself, warned that Shanks had no interest in Scotland and, once elected, would simply be another Labour stooge. Here’s a blog I published at the time of his selection as Labour candidate.
Shanks was sworn in as MP on 16th October, making his maiden speech in the Violence Reduction, Policing and Criminal Justice Bill debate on 15th November.
Does Shanks’ first month and a half show how closely he’s going to stick to the promises he made to the Rutherglen and Hamilton West electorate to get elected? Is he going to support Scotland or is he going to support Labour?
The first test of his intention was Devolution (Employment) (Scotland) debate on 17th October, the day after he was sworn in. The motion was proposed by SNP Member David Linden and was a proposal to devolve employment legislation to the Scottish Parliament. The motion was lost by 33 votes to 22, with Shanks and his colleague and now boss, Ian Murray, the Shadow Scottish Secretary, along with the rest of Labour Members, choosing to abstain. Was this was an example of the Bain Principle (Labour will never support a measure raised by the SNP) or was it was a continuation of Labour’s reluctance to give any powers to the Scottish Parliament that could make things better in Scotland. (Bear in mind that in the post 2014 referendum Smith Commission to decide what powers would be devolved to the Scottish Parliament, Labour voted against virtually all tax devolution.)
So, within 24 hours of arriving in the Commons, Shanks failed his first test, choosing to support Labour, not Scotland.
His next test was in the debate on a ceasefire in Gaza on 16th November, again a motion proposed by the SNP. Here, strong feelings were expressed by members of all parties (except the Tories, of course). In fact, in advance of the debate, Labour in Scotland had backed the ceasefire as did the vast majority of the Scottish public. However, Starmer had issued a three-line whip for all members to abstain, so voting for the ceasefire would have career implications for Labour members. When it came to the vote, 56 Labour MPs voted for the ceasefire, including several ministers, but neither Shanks or Murray were among the 56.
Shanks’ decision to follow the Westminster party line and go against the Scottish party and public proved to be a career enhancing move as he was promoted to the shadow front bench on 27th November, just 42 days after his arrival in the Commons and 11 days after the ceasefire vote. Probably not a record, but still seeming like surprising haste.
So, Shanks failed his second test, choosing to vote for Labour and not for Scotland.
Of course, Labour have always been against Scottish improvement. Here’s a quote from Jimmy Hood, a Labour MP at the time of the Independence referendum. “Even if the Scottish people are going to be better off economically and so on, I would still be against breaking away from the Union”. That could be rephrased as “Even if my constituents would be better off, I would still vote against it”. Even though a Scottish MP, he was more interested in the UK than in Scotland.
If and when it comes to a vote on the two-child cap or the bedroom tax, we can be almost certain that Shanks will choose to retain his recently acquired ministerial status and vote with the party line, not with the promises he made to the Rutherglen and Hamilton West electors to get elected. Instead of being his own man and campaigning to remove these hated Tory policies, he has shown himself to be just another Labour party stooge, caring about Scotland only at election time.
BEAT THE CENSORS Many Facebook sites are still censoring bloggers like myself who can be critical of the actions of the SNP and the Scottish Government. They are attempting to prevent bloggers from getting their message out, so we have to depend on readers sharing the blog posts. If you liked this post or others I have written, please share this and take out a free subscription by clicking the follow button on the home page or on the posts. You will then be notified by email of any new posts on the blog. Thank you.
SALVO The progress of Salvo has been the most encouraging development since 2022. It is doing sterling work educating Scots about the Claim of Right and spelling out what it means that the Scottish people are sovereign, not any Parliament. Salvo has joined with Liberation.scot to develop campaigns the results of which will be available soon.
LIBERATION.SCOT We are seeking to build up liberation.scot to at least 100,000 signatures as part of our plan to win recognition at the UN as an official liberation movement. We intend to internationalise our battle for independence and through the setting up of the Scottish National Council we will develop our arguments to win progress in the international courts. Please help by signing up at liberation.scot. The members of liberation.scot have been asked to approve their new constitution, a necessary step towards international recognition.
There was a time when it was said that SNP MPs were going to Westminster to find a way to lose their jobs. It was called settling up, not settling down, a phrase first coined in the early days of the election of SNP MPs and often repeated as a promise (by those seeking election) or an accusation (by those unhappy with their MP’s performance).
Of course, these days are long gone and very few (very, very few) SNP MPs are now prepared to sacrifice their position, their salary and their virtually unlimited expenses just to trigger Scottish independence. Out of the Union or still in a job, there’s really no choice, is there? When you can make all that money and all you have to sacrifice is your country’s freedom, why would you turn down the cash?
“There’s no such thing as society”. So said Margaret Thatcher, and the majority of the SNP MPs seem to be hell-bent on proving that it’s true with their obvious concentration on their own careers, their own positions, and, above all, their own incomes.
But wait. Has something unexpected happened? Have SNP MPs at last found a cause for which they are prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice, risking all that money for which virtually no work is required? It certainly seems like it.
So, what is this cause that so many MPs are prepared to put their futures on the line, prepared to bet £350k annually on a winner takes all gamble.
They’re enthusiastically supporting a three-way bet on GRRB, Hate Crimes and Jury free trials for sex crimes, and at the moment, it looks like their gamble is going to fail.
They’ve found out that the majority of their constituents are solidly against all three, but that hasn’t caused them to have any sort of rethink. The recent by-election in Rutherglen and Hamilton saw the SNP vote fall from 23,775 to 8,399, a fall of almost 65%, but initial reaction from the party doesn’t show any signs of a rethink either. In fact, if anything, the opposite seems to be the case. What they say their loss was due to was Margaret Ferrier, the low turnout, or tactical voting by Tories for Labour. OK, I know parties always blame someone or something else for a defeat, but when combined with no obvious effort to change what they must realise is the basic cause of the problem, it doesn’t bode well.
The only change in SNP rhetoric is the much more frequent mention of independence, though that’s not a surprise. One thing that can virtually be depended on is the party highlighting the advantages of independence as the election looms while, of course, continuing to do nothing to make independence a practical reality and then forgetting all about it once the election is over. The one time they tried to ignore independence before the election, in 2017, they lost half a million votes and 21 seats, so they haven’t repeated the mistake (or haven’t up till now). Unfortunately, they are now finding out that mere mentions of independence, combined with absolutely no effort to make it happen and further combined with a set of policies that only their payroll support is no longer going to cut it.
There have been some changes at Westminster. Steven Flynn, the Westminster leader, has been shuffling his front bench team to concentrate on the issues which he believes will stem the flow of support in next year’s UK election. However, astonishingly, he has chosen to remove all emphasis from independence in favour of today’s issues like energy prices and the cost of living, effectively blaming independence on the disaster of Rutherglen and Hamilton West. Does he not realise that the majority of SNP voters support independence? Does he not remember what happened in 2017 at a time when SNP support nationally was much higher than now? Has he not read the SNP constitution? Without independence, the SNP are just another British party content with devolution and if they no longer enthuse the independence vote, they will fail.
Support for the SNP throughout Scotland is now much lower than last year. In May, 2022, support for the SNP in a Westminster election was 44%, rising to a high of 51% in December. There’s only been one Scottish Westminster poll this month, a YouGov poll conducted between 2nd and 6th, so the Rutherglen and Hamilton West by-election would have had some impact on the outcome.
If this was the result in next year’s UK election, the SNP would lose 24 of their current 43 seats, a number they’ve already managed to reduce from 48 through a combination of independence inactivity (Neale Hanvey and Kenny MacAskill) and a desire to purge the party of anyone who wants independence (Margaret Ferrier and Angus MacNeil). Feeding the poll numbers into the Electoral Calculus’s seat predictor gives the following:
Image courtesy of Electoral Calculus
The SNP’s pursuit of Margaret Ferrier resulted in the recall petition and their virtual wipe-out in the by-election, something that wouldn’t have happened if Nicola Sturgeon hadn’t been so desperate to get rid of her that she started a witch-hunt eagerly taken up by the rest of the SNP wokies. Only the SNP’s support for her removal kept the issue in the public eye. Without that, the issue would have died following a few obligatory complaints by the opposition parties. As it was, Margaret Ferrier was punished three times for one offence, suspension from Parliament, a community service order from the court and the loss of her job, all for an offence for which virtually no members of other parties were punished.
So, is next year’s UK election going to be more of the same from the SNP? Will they tell us about all the good things that only independence can bring? Will they present the us with what remains of their stock of tired, mouldy old carrots, recycled from 2019, 2017 and 2015 and still expect us to be just as accepting as we were when the carrots were fresh? Do they really think that a lesser emphasis on independence plus the continuation of unquestioning support for highly unpopular policies aimed at destroying the rights of women and children are going to lead to electoral success?
Are all the MPs that stupid (hint, some are) or is this just part of some grand woke plan to get rid of the few remaining semi-sensible ones to guarantee a continuation of the woke dream for years to come?
Is this what the so-called leaders of the independence movement have come to?
BEAT THE CENSORS Many Facebook sites are still censoring bloggers like myself who can be critical of the actions of the SNP and the Scottish Government. They are attempting to prevent bloggers from getting their message out, so we have to depend on readers sharing the blog posts. If you liked this post or others I have written, please share this and take out a free subscription by clicking the follow button on the home page or on the posts. You will then be notified by email of any new posts on the blog. Thank you.
SALVO The progress of Salvo has been the most encouraging development since 2022. It is doing sterling work educating Scots about the Claim of Right and spelling out what it means that the Scottish people are sovereign, not any Parliament. Salvo has joined with Liberation.scot to develop campaigns the results of which will be available soon.
LIBERATION.SCOT We are seeking to build up liberation.scot to at least 100,000 signatures as part of our plan to win recognition at the UN as an official liberation movement. We intend to internationalise our battle for independence and through the setting up of the Scottish National Council we will develop our arguments to win progress in the international courts. Please help by signing up at liberation.scot. The members of liberation.scot have been asked to approve their new constitution, a necessary step towards international recognition.
What should be the more important to the Scottish Government? Saving the planet or saving Scotland?
Recent activity of the Scottish Government (or should I say the Scottish Green Government) has concentrated on bringing forward legislation that, at least according to Lorna Slater and Patrick Harvie, will make Scotland a fairer place, reduce Scotland’s impact on our planet, hasten the advent of net zero and show the rest of the world how to do it. But whatever happens, we have to be first. It just won’t be the same if we’re not world leading.
So, what’s the plan? Though plan might be the wrong word as there’s not been a great deal of planning so far. We’ve had the GRR Bill debacle, the HPMA Bill debacle, the DRS Bill debacle and now the Great Heat Pump Saga debacle. All these Scottish Green initiatives were characterised by only being discussed with people and groups who agreed with the government and not being interested in taking into account opposing ideas or suggestions.
Were the government shocked to learn that most women weren’t keen on the idea of men with lippy and a wig invading their safe spaces and waving their willies? If only they had been asked.
Were the government shocked to learn that many crofters and others living in places where fishing would be banned by HPMA depended on fishing for their survival? If only they had been asked.
Were the government shocked to learn that many people weren’t keen on replacing a recycling system where local authorities came along and collected bottles, jars, cans and other recyclable material and replacing it with a privatised one which only dealt with bottles and cans and where individuals were responsible for taking stuff back to a recycling centre that could be many miles away and which resulted the cost of purchase for some items increasing by over 100%? If only they had been asked.
Were the government shocked to learn that many people were distinctly unhappy about being told they would quite soon have to replace their gas boiler with a heat pump, in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis at a cost of (apparently) anything up to £50,000-£60,000? If only they had been asked.
As no government estimate of cost (or anything else) is forthcoming (of course, that needs planning), we have to rely on unsubstantiated stories in the media describing the experience of various individuals.
These stories tell us that air source heat pumps are unsuitable for the Scottish climate, not just because they apparently don’t produce as much heat as a gas boiler and therefore need a modified central heating system with larger radiators, but mainly because the cost of the electricity needed to run them is horrendously expensive in Scotland, three times the cost of gas.
We now have the utterly ludicrous situation that Harvie, who appears to be acting on his own in this, is now making it virtually impossible to install one common form of green energy, solar panels, because of his desire for every residence in Scotland to convert to heat pumps.
These fiascos are perfect examples of the actions of Scotland’s Green infused government.
The Scottish Green Government’s new policy introduction goes something like this. Think of an idea. Announce it. Then (if you can be bothered) investigate the practicality of introducing it. But, on no account speak to anyone affected by the policy unless you know they’ll agree with you, even if you have to pay them to agree.
But is there a point to all this (small g) green activity?
Let’s revisit the original question. What should be the more important to the Scottish Government? Saving the planet or saving Scotland?
Will these proposals save the planet or even contribute to saving the planet in any meaningful way? Much has already been said about the DRS, so let’s look at the Greens latest wheeze, the heat pump.
Let’s take it as correct that all countries should reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases to prevent catastrophic climate change, even though there’s a substantial body of opinion against that view.
The world total of greenhouse gas emissions in 2021 was 54,593 Megatonnes (million tonnes). In the same year, Scottish emissions were about 41.6 Megatonnes and, like most Western countries, are reducing, mainly thanks to the Western trend of outsourcing manufacturing to China and other Far Eastern countries. 41 million tonnes sounds like a lot, but putting it in context, Scottish emissions represent three quarters of one tenth of 1 percent of the global total (0.076%), which could be described as a drop in the ocean (or a puff in the air?).
Looking at the longer-term trends, in 2015 (the first year of the Sturgeon era), Scottish emissions were 48.1 Megatonnes, so the 2021 figure shows a reduction of 14% (average 2.3%/year) over that period and a 49.2% drop from 81.9 Megatonnes in 1990 (average 1.6%/year), so as you can see the reduction in emissions is accelerating without the drastic intervention proposed by the Scottish Green Government.
The three biggest greenhouse gas emitters are China (25% of 2021 levels), USA (11%) and India (7%). China’s emissions have shown a 12.8% increase since 2015 to the 2021 figure of 13,710 Megatonnes. Should China maintain that level of increase, it would result in a daily increase of 789 tonnes. Or, to put it another way, should Scotland miraculously reduce its emissions to zero by tomorrow, it would take China about 53 days to replace the Scottish figure.
So, the Green Government proposals would result in a 53 day reduction in world emissions. It would also result in a vast amount of money (£ billions) being spent by Scottish householders on upgrading their heating systems and if they’re spending all their money on heat pumps, they’re certainly not spending on anything else. Is all the financial pain to the Scottish people and the knock-on negative impact on the Scottish economy inherent in the Government proposals justified by the virtually zero impact on world emissions?
Surely, for any right-thinking person, the answer is no.
The Scottish Green Government proposals will not save the planet or even contribute in any meaningful way to saving the planet, but they will wreck the Scottish economy and put hundreds of thousands of Scottish households into debt.
SALVO The progress of Salvo has been the most encouraging development since 2022. It is doing sterling work educating Scots about the Claim of Right and spelling out what it means that the Scottish people are sovereign, not any Parliament. Salvo has joined with Liberation.scot to develop campaigns the results of which will be available soon.
LIBERATION.SCOT We are seeking to build up liberation.scot to at least 100,000 signatures as part of our plan to win recognition at the UN as an official liberation movement. We intend to internationalise our battle for independence and through the setting up of the Scottish National Council we will develop our arguments to win progress in the international courts. Please help by signing up at liberation.scot. The members of liberation.scot have been asked to approve their new constitution, a necessary step towards international recognition.
BEAT THE CENSORS Many Facebook sites are still censoring bloggers like myself who can be critical of the actions of the SNP and the Scottish Government. They are attempting to prevent bloggers from getting their message out, so we have to depend on readers sharing the blog posts. If you liked this post or others I have written, please share this and take out a free subscription by clicking the follow button on the home page or on the posts. You will then be notified by email of any new posts on the blog. Thank you.
After a thoroughly nasty set of campaigns from her opponents, the recall petition for Margaret Ferrier has succeeded, with the two major parties in Scotland (with loads of help from the media) managing to persuade just over 14% of the electorate to sign. Commons rules meant Margaret was not permitted to put her case before the recall was officially announced, but by that time Labour had already been campaigning for about 2 months. Margaret immediately leaves the Commons and will likely be succeeded in a by-election sometime later this year by a numpty from the Labour party, whose only contribution to the Rutherglen and Hamilton constituency will be his smirking appearance at the post-election photoshoot. You can be sure that he was only picked (over 4 real local candidates) because he agreed to do what he was told by his London bosses.
The recall petition was ‘cleverly’ arranged to conclude while Parliament was on holiday, so maximising the disruption as the by-election can’t be arranged until the Commons returns in September. It means that Rutherglen and Hamilton West will be without representation for some months, so constituents, please make sure you have no problems needing support from your MP until after the by-election and even then, hope that the MP has a team who have some clue and can be bothered to make the effort, though, as we’re talking Labour, that’s far from guaranteed.
Certainly, Labour’s contribution to the campaign was a series of leaflets more notable for their lies and smears than for their policy content. For one example, see here.
At least, you can understand what drove Labour to create the opportunity, first by voting in the Commons committee to make sure that a 30 day suspension was agreed, triggering the recall petition and then conducting this nasty campaign, disguising their party self-interest in a cloak of public concern. They desperately wanted this by-election success to demonstrate that Labour are back to being a political force to be reckoned with in Scotland, even though victory, if it happens, is likely to be more to do with the expected disintegration of the SNP vote rather than any increase in Labour support.
But what’s in it for the SNP? When Nicola Sturgeon prompted this witch hunt against arguably the most hard working SNP MP, but one whose support for independence was at odds with the leadership of the current party, the SNP were riding high in the polls, with the worst of the Hate Crimes Bill, the GRRB, DRS, the offshore wind auction and the rest still to come. Could she have anticipated the backlash and the impact on SNP support or, as many have said, could she have planned it?
But now, with SNP support heading for the toilet, Sturgeon’s replacement decided to continue the persecution of Margaret Ferrier, thus really annoying the large number of constituents who previously supported the SNP, but who had no desire to get rid of Margaret. Of course, they had no voice in the recall, but will certainly make their voice heard in the by-election.
Let’s not forget that the SSP, the Scottish Socialist Party, another supposedly independence supporting party, were also campaigning for the recall, even though they had virtually nothing to gain from a by-election. Perhaps they thought they were on safe ground with no actual independence party standing to point out that the SSP, like the SNP and the Greens, are another party who seem only committed to independence when it suits them.
So we are where we are. If Margaret chooses not to stand again, the constituency will lose a hard-working MP with a proud record of backing local issues and local people. Even worse, her replacement will be either be the Labour candidate who lies about being local (unless you think Partick is part of Rutherglen) or the SNP one, said to be the laziest councillor in South Lanarkshire. Some choice!
So the good people of Rutherglen and Hamilton West have a choice to make. We don’t yet know all who’ll be standing, but the two candidates who have so far been put forward by Labour and SNP are certainly not ones I would vote for (and I have a vote).
One last general point. Are the recall rules fit for purpose? Is the tiny 10% of the constituency electorate (OK 14% in this case) really sufficient to end the career of an MP, especially when the combined might of parties attracting virtually 100% of the voting public are campaigning for the recall? Is it fair that those who oppose the recall get no voice? Is it fair that parties supporting the recall get to campaign for weeks before the recall petition is officially launched, when the MP is prohibited by Commons rules from putting her case during that time? Is it fair that parties can spend up to £10,000 each and make use of party members time, limited only by the number of members in each party, when the MP is effectively on their own? I realise you can’t expect fairness from Westminster, but surely this is just too one-sided.
BEAT THE CENSORS Many Facebook sites are still censoring bloggers like myself who can be critical of the actions of the SNP and the Scottish Government. They are attempting to prevent bloggers from getting their message out, so we have to depend on readers sharing the blog posts. If you liked this post or others I have written, please share this and take out a free subscription by clicking the follow button on the home page or on the posts. You will then be notified by email of any new posts on the blog. Thank you.
SALVO The progress of Salvo has been the most encouraging development since 2022. It is doing sterling work educating Scots about the Claim of Right and spelling out what it means that the Scottish people are sovereign, not any Parliament. Salvo has joined with Liberation.scot to develop campaigns the results of which will be available soon.
LIBERATION.SCOT We are seeking to build up liberation.scot to at least 100,000 signatures as part of our plan to win recognition at the UN as an official liberation movement. We intend to internationalise our battle for independence and through the setting up of the Scottish National Council we will develop our arguments to win progress in the international courts. Please help by signing up at liberation.scot. The members of liberation.scot have been asked to approve their new constitution, a necessary step towards international recognition.
Angry Weegie 