The Scottish Politics Thread

[westport]

If you genuinely think that's what it's about, you've not bothered to look into it except through superficial newspaper headlines.

Wooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh

Sorry i forgot to put the smiley thingy on my comment

It's just that we've got some people who think it genuinely threatens their free speech. There's some who are treating it as if it's the start of a police state.

Serious head on, as I never take self serving politicians of any persuasion seriously, they didn't need this new bill they just have to use/amend current legislation.

[Slick]

Wooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh

Sorry i forgot to put the smiley thingy on my comment

It's just that we've got some people who think it genuinely threatens their free speech. There's some who are treating it as if it's the start of a police state.

Serious head on, as I never take self serving politicians of any persuasion seriously, they didn't need this new bill they just have to use/amend current legislation.

Keeps Humza busy, so there is that.

[TheNatalShark]

Branch/outpost of the Cabinet Office to be opened in Weegieland in 2024, supposedly 500 roles and regular hours by "senior ministers".

I'm supportive of these moves (+ Darlington) and hope it genuinely shifts attitudes and £££ away from London, not least because it should be cheaper government, but being Bojo good money is on it will be nothing more than window dressing and shifting of existing personnel not creating material local benefit for existing community (even if those numbers are lost in Glasgow). Though opens the pathway for subsequent non-circus governments to utilise appropriately.

Snow sniffer in chief to visit Weegieland next week.

https://amp.ft.com/content/8063b3c2-387 ... ssion=true

[tc27]

David Davis using Parliamentary privilege to read out all the Salmond evidence including stuff he says has being leaked to him (he's good pals with Salmond).

[fishfoodie]

David Davis using Parliamentary privilege to read out all the Salmond evidence including stuff he says has being leaked to him (he's good pals with Salmond).

That's very bad form; regardless of how you feel about the people involved.

Why didn't the Brexit Bulldog reveal in the House the name of his fellow MP accused of rape ?

Why is one in the public interest, & not the other ?

[Big D]

So a majority of the committee found Sturgeon has misled parliament.

Given the 4 SNP members will clearly have voted with their boss ( can they be whipped?) Then presumably the green wing of the SNP voted against her?

What now?

They have not included the word "deliberately" but this feels like something that should be dealt with.

[westport]

The Holyrood Inquiry has concluded that Nicola Sturgeon misled the parliamentary committee

[tc27]

Fishfoodie - I am now fan of DD but thought it was an appropriate use of Privilege (and agree with his point that it should apply in Holyrood too).

Anyway.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/poli ... y-23755659

[tc27]

If she lied she should resign as should any minister at UK or devolved level.

[Biffer]

So a majority of the committee found Sturgeon has misled parliament.

Given the 4 SNP members will clearly have voted with their boss ( can they be whipped?) Then presumably the green wing of the SNP voted against her?

What now?

They have not included the word "deliberately" but this feels like something that should be dealt with.

I take it the Conservative and red Conservative members voted entirely on the merits of the evidence without any political motivation at all?

[Caley_Red]

Won't be resigning would be my bet: authoritarians like Sturgeon always think the rules are there for others and not themeselves. Her response to the committee is straight out of the Trump playbook: deny and accuse committee of bias, at least in Trump's case US institutions held their own against his bellicose accusations and lies, suspect our own aren't going to provide quite the same fight back.

[Big D]

So a majority of the committee found Sturgeon has misled parliament.

Given the 4 SNP members will clearly have voted with their boss ( can they be whipped?) Then presumably the green wing of the SNP voted against her?

What now?

They have not included the word "deliberately" but this feels like something that should be dealt with.

I take it the Conservative and red Conservative members voted entirely on the merits of the evidence without any political motivation at all?

One would assume so as they are as bad as the other side. Which leaves the one lib dem and one green member of the Committee and perhaps the Green vote is most telling and truthful of all. Maybe it isn't but not sure what the Greens would have to gain by being politically motivated here and if they did what that motivation would be? Edit: just noticed the elected green MSP is now an independent.

This is no more than a barely bloody political nose for Sturgeon but it isn't a good look.

[Big D]

Won't be resigning would be my bet: authoritarians like Sturgeon always think the rules are there for others and not themeselves. Her response to the committee is straight out of the Trump playbook: deny and accuse committee of bias, at least in Trump's case US institutions held their own against his bellicose accusations and lies, suspect our own aren't going to provide quite the same fight back.

She won't resign and I am not entirely sure she should.

When I say dealt with I mean more seen through to a proper resolution but I honestly don't think it matters. It won't make a difference.

[Biffer]

Won't be resigning would be my bet: authoritarians like Sturgeon always think the rules are there for others and not themeselves. Her response to the committee is straight out of the Trump playbook: deny and accuse committee of bias, at least in Trump's case US institutions held their own against his bellicose accusations and lies, suspect our own aren't going to provide quite the same fight back.

I still struggle to understand how you can be authoritarian when you’re leading a minority government.

[Caley_Red]

Won't be resigning would be my bet: authoritarians like Sturgeon always think the rules are there for others and not themeselves. Her response to the committee is straight out of the Trump playbook: deny and accuse committee of bias, at least in Trump's case US institutions held their own against his bellicose accusations and lies, suspect our own aren't going to provide quite the same fight back.

I still struggle to understand how you can be authoritarian when you’re leading a minority government.

Her political views and historical policy making (to which I was referring) is unencumbered by the current count of her seats.

Besides, her brand of 'coercive progressivism' is shared and ably supported by the Greens who back them on virtually all their key legislative aims so Sturgeon does indeed have a de facto majority.

[westport]

So a majority of the committee found Sturgeon has misled parliament.

Given the 4 SNP members will clearly have voted with their boss ( can they be whipped?) Then presumably the green wing of the SNP voted against her?

What now?

They have not included the word "deliberately" but this feels like something that should be dealt with.

I take it the Conservative and red Conservative members voted entirely on the merits of the evidence without any political motivation at all?

According to St Nicola, the 5 were political and had made their minds up before she gave a word of evidence, whereas the 4 in her favour* came in to this with an open mind and looked at all the evidence before finding her totally innocent.

* The four open-minded and unbiased members of the Committee just happen to be SNP!

[Tichtheid]

According to St Nicola, the 5 were political and had made their minds up before she gave a word of evidence, whereas the 4 in her favour* came in to this with an open mind and looked at all the evidence before finding her totally innocent.

* The four open-minded and unbiased members of the Committee just happen to be SNP!

Well, there were calls for her resignation before she even gave evidence, there are calls now for her resignation before the report is officially published, the news yesterday was leaked.

The inquiry into whether or not she broke the ministerial code doesn't publish its decision until Tuesday.

[Biffer]

So a majority of the committee found Sturgeon has misled parliament.

Given the 4 SNP members will clearly have voted with their boss ( can they be whipped?) Then presumably the green wing of the SNP voted against her?

What now?

They have not included the word "deliberately" but this feels like something that should be dealt with.

I take it the Conservative and red Conservative members voted entirely on the merits of the evidence without any political motivation at all?

According to St Nicola, the 5 were political and had made their minds up before she gave a word of evidence, whereas the 4 in her favour* came in to this with an open mind and looked at all the evidence before finding her totally innocent.

* The four open-minded and unbiased members of the Committee just happen to be SNP!

And the point I'm making is that Big D has basically taken exactly the opposite to be true.

[Slick]

But at least we can still pretend that caring, sharing Scottish politics is a cut above the rest, ceratinly better than the bastards in Westminster.

[Biffer]

At least they're our cut throat bastards

[Slick]

At least they're our cut throat bastards

Quite.

And to be clear, I'm not differentiating between the cunts.

[Tichtheid]

But at least we can still pretend that caring, sharing Scottish politics is a cut above the rest, ceratinly better than the bastards in Westminster.

When Johnson, Patel, Raab, Hancock and Cummings (for starters) each sit through an 8 hour interview by committee to see whether they have acted legally and correctly we can start to draw an equivalence of sorts

[Slick]

But at least we can still pretend that caring, sharing Scottish politics is a cut above the rest, ceratinly better than the bastards in Westminster.

When Johnson, Patel, Raab, Hancock and Cummings (for starters) each sit through an 8 hour interview by committee to see whether they have acted legally and correctly we can start to draw an equivalence of sorts

And our first winner of Westminster Bingo is....

[Tichtheid]

But at least we can still pretend that caring, sharing Scottish politics is a cut above the rest, ceratinly better than the bastards in Westminster.

When Johnson, Patel, Raab, Hancock and Cummings (for starters) each sit through an 8 hour interview by committee to see whether they have acted legally and correctly we can start to draw an equivalence of sorts

And our first winner of Westminster Bingo is....

I've never been terribly good at these internet games, someone will always beat me to the smart arse one liner, but I really do think there is a huge difference in what Sturgeon is accused of doing, ie saying she first heard of the accusation against Salmond on the 2nd of April as opposed to the 28th of March, and what those mentioned have been up to.

[Slick]

When Johnson, Patel, Raab, Hancock and Cummings (for starters) each sit through an 8 hour interview by committee to see whether they have acted legally and correctly we can start to draw an equivalence of sorts

And our first winner of Westminster Bingo is....

I've never been terribly good at these internet games, someone will always beat me to the smart arse one liner, but I really do think there is a huge difference in what Sturgeon is accused of doing, ie saying she first heard of the accusation against Salmond on the 2nd of April as opposed to the 28th of March, and what those mentioned have been up to.

I think there is quite a bit more to come out with Grady, the bullying claims etc, but that wasn't really my point. They are all up to it in some way, and shouting "Westminster" at every indiscretion doesn't really help.

[Big D]

I take it the Conservative and red Conservative members voted entirely on the merits of the evidence without any political motivation at all?

According to St Nicola, the 5 were political and had made their minds up before she gave a word of evidence, whereas the 4 in her favour* came in to this with an open mind and looked at all the evidence before finding her totally innocent.

* The four open-minded and unbiased members of the Committee just happen to be SNP!

And the point I'm making is that Big D has basically taken exactly the opposite to be true.

Not really.

The Green party, or those affiliated with them have frequently backed the SNP on a wide range in matters. Given the split is apparently 5 to 4 then someone from the side of the committee that may have been seen as favourable to the Sturgeon side would have to have voted against Sturgeon. It was unlikely to have been the SNP members so it is notable the one who may have been an ally or least biased voted the other way.

As I have said I don't see this as anything other than a minor bloody nose.

[Tichtheid]

And our first winner of Westminster Bingo is....

I've never been terribly good at these internet games, someone will always beat me to the smart arse one liner, but I really do think there is a huge difference in what Sturgeon is accused of doing, ie saying she first heard of the accusation against Salmond on the 2nd of April as opposed to the 28th of March, and what those mentioned have been up to.

I think there is quite a bit more to come out with Grady, the bullying claims etc, but that wasn't really my point. They are all up to it in some way, and shouting "Westminster" at every indiscretion doesn't really help.

and my point is that Sturgeon is being held to a completely different standard to those at Westminster, it's not even the same ballpark, so when the claim comes in "so much for Holyrood being so much better than Westminster", it is ignoring the fact that the FM just sat through a public enquiry and gave evidence for eight hours on what is, in actuality, a fairly insignificant matter, whilst those I mentioned act with impunity. Labour are not too much better.

Yet it is their parties who are calling for Sturgeon's head.

It an astounding level of hypocrisy.


edit, I've been trying to find out how long Blair's testimony to the Chilcot inquiry lasted, I can't find an actual number, I don't think it totalled eight hours, but I'm open to correction on that.

[Biffer]

According to St Nicola, the 5 were political and had made their minds up before she gave a word of evidence, whereas the 4 in her favour* came in to this with an open mind and looked at all the evidence before finding her totally innocent.

* The four open-minded and unbiased members of the Committee just happen to be SNP!

And the point I'm making is that Big D has basically taken exactly the opposite to be true.

Not really.

The Green party, or those affiliated with them have frequently backed the SNP on a wide range in matters. Given the split is apparently 5 to 4 then someone from the side of the committee that may have been seen as favourable to the Sturgeon side would have to have voted against Sturgeon. It was unlikely to have been the SNP members so it is notable the one who may have been an ally or least biased voted the other way.

As I have said I don't see this as anything other than a minor bloody nose.

You're aware it's only in the last couple of years that the Greens have overtaken the Tories in the number of budget deals they've done with the SNP, yeah?

[Big D]

And the point I'm making is that Big D has basically taken exactly the opposite to be true.

Not really.

The Green party, or those affiliated with them have frequently backed the SNP on a wide range in matters. Given the split is apparently 5 to 4 then someone from the side of the committee that may have been seen as favourable to the Sturgeon side would have to have voted against Sturgeon. It was unlikely to have been the SNP members so it is notable the one who may have been an ally or least biased voted the other way.

As I have said I don't see this as anything other than a minor bloody nose.

You're aware it's only in the last couple of years that the Greens have overtaken the Tories in the number of budget deals they've done with the SNP, yeah?

I am not sure what point you are trying to make. You seem to be agreeing that recent precedent has been for the Greens to be seen as the party willing to do deals with the SNP?

Is me saying the Green/Green leaning MSP may have been seen as least biased really that much of an issue? Or are we to assume he was also biased? In which case what is the point with any of them?

[Slick]

I've never been terribly good at these internet games, someone will always beat me to the smart arse one liner, but I really do think there is a huge difference in what Sturgeon is accused of doing, ie saying she first heard of the accusation against Salmond on the 2nd of April as opposed to the 28th of March, and what those mentioned have been up to.

I think there is quite a bit more to come out with Grady, the bullying claims etc, but that wasn't really my point. They are all up to it in some way, and shouting "Westminster" at every indiscretion doesn't really help.

and my point is that Sturgeon is being held to a completely different standard to those at Westminster, it's not even the same ballpark, so when the claim comes in "so much for Holyrood being so much better than Westminster", it is ignoring the fact that the FM just sat through a public enquiry and gave evidence for eight hours on what is, in actuality, a fairly insignificant matter, whilst those I mentioned act with impunity. Labour are not too much better.

Yet it is their parties who are calling for Sturgeon's head.

It an astounding level of hypocrisy.


edit, I've been trying to find out how long Blair's testimony to the Chilcot inquiry lasted, I can't find an actual number, I don't think it totalled eight hours, but I'm open to correction on that.

Well we are told daily that we are of a higher standard, you can’t have it both ways

I thought Blair was a couple of days but can’t remember either

[Tichtheid]

Well we are told daily that we are of a higher standard, you can’t have it both ways

I thought Blair was a couple of days but can’t remember either

What is "both ways"?


The Scottish government is being held to a much higher standard, the previous resignations are proof of that.

The investigations in to when Sturgeon heard the news of the cases being brought against Salmond, whether it was one date or a few days later, why weren't notes taken at the meeting - these are the things that are being touted as reasons for Sturgeon to resign.

Contrast with what happens in London and what is swept away until its yesterday's news and I'd say it isn't a stretch to say that the Government in Edinburgh operates at, and is held to, a much higher standard.

[Slick]

Well we are told daily that we are of a higher standard, you can’t have it both ways

I thought Blair was a couple of days but can’t remember either

What is "both ways"?


The Scottish government is being held to a much higher standard, the previous resignations are proof of that.

The investigations in to when Sturgeon heard the news of the cases being brought against Salmond, whether it was one date or a few days later, why weren't notes taken at the meeting - these are the things that are being touted as reasons for Sturgeon to resign.

Contrast with what happens in London and what is swept away until its yesterday's news and I'd say it isn't a stretch to say that the Government in Edinburgh operates at, and is held to, a much higher standard.

OK, I see. The conversation we were having was about the voting being along party lines and I was making the point that it's the same here as everywhere else and not, as we are sometimes lead to believe, us being able to rise above it all.

In saying that, I think Linda Fabiani has been pretty good throughout and called the government out when they have been at their most obstructive. Also, Murdo Fraser on the Panorama (?) programme last night came over well as being slightly independent of thought on it.

[Biffer]

Not really.

The Green party, or those affiliated with them have frequently backed the SNP on a wide range in matters. Given the split is apparently 5 to 4 then someone from the side of the committee that may have been seen as favourable to the Sturgeon side would have to have voted against Sturgeon. It was unlikely to have been the SNP members so it is notable the one who may have been an ally or least biased voted the other way.

As I have said I don't see this as anything other than a minor bloody nose.

You're aware it's only in the last couple of years that the Greens have overtaken the Tories in the number of budget deals they've done with the SNP, yeah?

I am not sure what point you are trying to make. You seem to be agreeing that recent precedent has been for the Greens to be seen as the party willing to do deals with the SNP?

Is me saying the Green/Green leaning MSP may have been seen as least biased really that much of an issue? Or are we to assume he was also biased? In which case what is the point with any of them?

I think that the whole committee was a politically biased shitshow tbh, with leaning in both direction. The former Green MSP has fallen out with the party leadership and left the party, so who knows where his bias would lie?

[Big D]

You're aware it's only in the last couple of years that the Greens have overtaken the Tories in the number of budget deals they've done with the SNP, yeah?

I am not sure what point you are trying to make. You seem to be agreeing that recent precedent has been for the Greens to be seen as the party willing to do deals with the SNP?

Is me saying the Green/Green leaning MSP may have been seen as least biased really that much of an issue? Or are we to assume he was also biased? In which case what is the point with any of them?

I think that the whole committee was a politically biased shitshow tbh, with leaning in both direction. The former Green MSP has fallen out with the party leadership and left the party, so who knows where his bias would lie?

It is clear there are leanings, hence why I don't believe she should resign on the back of the committee findings as I have said. I do think it is interesting that the Green/ex Green MSP who left the party over a very specific issue voted against the party he will have regularly sided with either through free will or a whipped vote. When two sides are so entrenched I usually look to the party/people who are least likely to have a bias.

In any case at this point it is a bloody nose rather than fatal blow. If the independent review goes against Sturgeon then the noise will grow.

[Biffer]

I am not sure what point you are trying to make. You seem to be agreeing that recent precedent has been for the Greens to be seen as the party willing to do deals with the SNP?

Is me saying the Green/Green leaning MSP may have been seen as least biased really that much of an issue? Or are we to assume he was also biased? In which case what is the point with any of them?

I think that the whole committee was a politically biased shitshow tbh, with leaning in both direction. The former Green MSP has fallen out with the party leadership and left the party, so who knows where his bias would lie?

It is clear there are leanings, hence why I don't believe she should resign on the back of the committee findings as I have said. I do think it is interesting that the Green/ex Green MSP who left the party over a very specific issue voted against the party he will have regularly sided with either through free will or a whipped vote. When two sides are so entrenched I usually look to the party/people who are least likely to have a bias.

In any case at this point it is a bloody nose rather than fatal blow. If the independent review goes against Sturgeon then the noise will grow.

I think regardless of the reports she will say she puts herself before the Scottish people for them to decide. Timing works nicely for her in that regard.

[Jasonstry]

According to the response to a FOI request published by Wings, Nicola will only treat the report of the Hamilton enquiry as advisory. Not sure if the link will work but here I go...
https://wingsoverscotland.com/wp-conten ... nsfoi1.jpg

[tc27]

I find the fetishisation of Sturgeon giving evidence to the committee really odd - the whole SNp and much of the independence movement really is based on a weird cult of personality around her

[Slick]

I find the fetishisation of Sturgeon giving evidence to the committee really odd - the whole SNp and much of the independence movement really is based on a weird cult of personality around her

You should live here!

[tc27]

I find the fetishisation of Sturgeon giving evidence to the committee really odd - the whole SNp and much of the independence movement really is based on a weird cult of personality around her

You should live here!

Yeah I mean half the questions were slow balls from the SNP members - only Ballie and Fraser gave her a hard time a she simply plead serial memory loss.

But yeah all the issues around this melt away because she could talk for 8 hours without saying anything...and of course this proves that Scottish politics operates on a higher plane than Westminster..Wha's Like Us etc.

[Biffer]

I find the fetishisation of Sturgeon giving evidence to the committee really odd - the whole SNp and much of the independence movement really is based on a weird cult of personality around her

That's odd, because seven years ago we were repeatedly told it was a weird personality cult around Alec Salmond.