wingsoverscotland--2020-11-09--Brenda Isn’t A Sheep

Brenda Isn’t A Sheep

A reader alerted us to this .
( You can skip the first minute . )
It ’ s a book currently being given to P1 children in Scotland , via the Scottish Book Trust .
( We ’ re sure that by Christmas it ’ ll be getting read to them in class by drag queens . )
And it ’ s something that people should probably be concerned about .
You can already see where this is going , can ’ t you ?
According to the back cover blurb , the book is “ a very funny @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s also described as a “ hilarious story of a wolf in sheep ’ s clothing with a surprise twist ” .
For most of its length it runs like a variant on the traditional tale of Little Red Riding Hood , with a big bad wolf disguising itself in order to eat its prey .
In other words , like a standard sort of cautionary fable for young kids – “ Beware , there are predators out to harm you ” , depicted in a gentle , not-too-frightening way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there ARE predators , and teaching children basic safeguarding is one of the most essential acts of parenting .
So let ’ s just skip ahead to the end .
Because when Brenda wakes up from dreaming about mouth-watering roast lamb in mint sauce , there ’ s an unexpected development !
Presented with a banquet of delicious grass in mint sauce , Brenda decides not to eat the sheep after all .
After all , they ’ ve been so kind !
But it ’ s not just that – apparently overnight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Or rather , in fact , we ’ re informed that Brenda has always been a sheep all along .
We hope we don ’ t have to spell out how astonishingly irresponsible and sinister this book is .
It is itself ironically a wolf in sheep ’ s clothing , a charming and sweet delivery mechanism for the stupendously dangerous message that people who appear to be predators – and who indeed ARE predators with clearly-stated predatory intent – won ’ t harm you as long as you ’ re kind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , just play along with the lie and you won ’ t get hurt , kids .
But Brenda isn ’ t a sheep , readers .
Brenda is a wolf .
You know it and we know it and Brenda knows it .
Leopards can ’ t change their spots , wolves can ’ t change their species and neither of them can live on grass , whether it comes with mint sauce or not .
Wolves are carnivores .
If you offer a hungry one a grass pie and a cuddle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you , no matter how moving it finds the gesture .
This isn ’ t a book about “ mistaken identity ” .
It ’ s a book about the vulnerable identifying a danger entirely correctly , but being gaslit into believing it ’ s a mistake and rejecting all their natural protective instincts , brainwashed into accepting and welcoming predators into their midst .
Sound like anything we know ?
We tried to convince ourselves – as we think some reviewers may have done – that the book was actually a very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but that level of subtlety would be asking an awful lot of five-year-olds .
If Brenda had winked to camera in the last frame we ’ d just about buy it , but that doesn ’ t happen .
As it is , the book ends , but nobody ’ s living happily ever after .
Later that evening , or the next day or the day after , Brenda ’ s carnivorous wolf stomach is going to be grumbling and churning , because grass just won ’ t quell Brenda ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to have a grisly job picking up the bloody wreckage of what happens next .
Don ’ t say you weren ’ t warned .
Don ’ t say nobody told you .
Serious violent and sexual male criminals who claim to be women Two collections of violent threats from TRAs to women Things men have pretended to be to gain malign access to women and children

A reader alerted us to this. (You can skip the first minute.)
It’s a book currently being given to P1 children in Scotland, via the Scottish Book Trust. (We’re sure that by Christmas it’ll be getting read to them in class by drag queens.) And it’s something that people should probably be concerned about.
(If you’re not watching the video, click all the pics to enlarge and read the text.)
You can already see where this is going, can’t you?
According to the back cover blurb, the book is “a very funny story of mistaken identity and acceptance”. It’s also described as a “hilarious story of a wolf in sheep’s clothing with a surprise twist”. For most of its length it runs like a variant on the traditional tale of Little Red Riding Hood, with a big bad wolf disguising itself in order to eat its prey.
In other words, like a standard sort of cautionary fable for young kids – “Beware, there are predators out to harm you”, depicted in a gentle, not-too-frightening way. Because, y’know, there ARE predators, and teaching children basic safeguarding is one of the most essential acts of parenting/education.
So let’s just skip ahead to the end. Because when Brenda wakes up from dreaming about mouth-watering roast lamb in mint sauce, there’s an unexpected development!
Presented with a banquet of delicious grass in mint sauce, Brenda decides not to eat the sheep after all. After all, they’ve been so kind! But it’s not just that – apparently overnight, Brenda has literally become a sheep. Or rather, in fact, we’re informed that Brenda has always been a sheep all along.
We hope we don’t have to spell out how astonishingly irresponsible and sinister this book is. It is itself ironically a wolf in sheep’s clothing, a charming and sweet delivery mechanism for the stupendously dangerous message that people who appear to be predators – and who indeed ARE predators with clearly-stated predatory intent – won’t harm you as long as you’re kind to them. Or put another way, just play along with the lie and you won’t get hurt, kids.
(There’s also, incidentally, a familiar subtext, namely that wolves are simply better at being sheep than boring old “cis” sheep are – “the sheep think Brenda is probably the best sheep they have ever met… all the sheep want to be just like Brenda”.)
But Brenda isn’t a sheep, readers. Brenda is a wolf. You know it and we know it and Brenda knows it. Leopards can’t change their spots, wolves can’t change their species and neither of them can live on grass, whether it comes with mint sauce or not. Wolves are carnivores. If you offer a hungry one a grass pie and a cuddle it’s still going to eat you, no matter how moving it finds the gesture.
This isn’t a book about “mistaken identity”. It’s a book about the vulnerable identifying a danger entirely correctly, but being gaslit into believing it’s a mistake and rejecting all their natural protective instincts, brainwashed into accepting and welcoming predators into their midst. Sound like anything we know?
(Horrifyingly, the man reading the story is a “Safeguarding Lead” at a primary school.)
We tried to convince ourselves – as we think some reviewers may have done – that the book was actually a very clever warning about the plausibility of predators, but that level of subtlety would be asking an awful lot of five-year-olds. If Brenda had winked to camera in the last frame we’d just about buy it, but that doesn’t happen.
As it is, the book ends, but nobody’s living happily ever after. Later that evening, or the next day or the day after, Brenda’s carnivorous wolf stomach is going to be grumbling and churning, because grass just won’t quell Brenda’s craving, and someone’s going to have a grisly job picking up the bloody wreckage of what happens next.
Don’t say you weren’t warned. Don’t say nobody told you.
.
OTHER RESOURCES
Trans Crime UK
Serious violent and sexual male criminals who claim to be women
The War On Women
Pronouns Are Rohypnol
Two collections of violent threats from TRAs to women
A representative random selection of TRA quotes
Things men have pretended to be to gain malign access to women and children


wingsoverscotland--2020-11-10--The limits of accountability

The limits of accountability

The SNP has still not provided any sort of meaningful answer , either to this site or to anyone else , over the missing £600,000 from the party ’ s accounts that was supposedly “ ring-fenced ” for a future independence campaign and not under any circumstances to be spent on normal party politics .
Enquiries from members and even elected representatives have met with a wall of silence for months , so we were more than a little surprised to be forwarded a recent email exchange in which the SNP ’ s chief executive had engaged in discussion on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t even in the party .
We thought you ’ d be interested in reading it .
We ’ ll interject here to note that asking the SNP to account for a huge sum of money it appears by its own official accounts to have spent is now a “ conspiracy ” , and its own elected representatives and members with legitimate and reasonable questions about what ’ s being done with their money are “ opponents ” .
Our source wasn ’ t going to be fobbed off so vaguely , though @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interesting concession there – Murrell states that NEXT year ’ s accounts ( or rather this year ’ s , which will be published next year ) may include a separate entry identifying the ringfenced money , because he appears to acknowledge that the current approach ( which somewhat implausibly involves keeping funds a secret in case they motivate Unionists to raise their own ) is unsatisfactory .
All kinds of fascinating questions arise from that admission .
Wings first raised the issue of the ringfenced funds in January .
The SNP didn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Electoral Commission until the end of June , so it had six months to implement this transparency and set donors ’ minds at rest without asking them to wait ANOTHER year , by which time there ’ ll have been an election and the party won ’ t care what people think .
But in any event , if the money so definitely exists and can be so easily separated out and identified that the SNP knows to the nearest £1 how much it is , there ’ s no reason not to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it can be located , and how that squares with the party ’ s stated total net assets being less than half the value of the supposed referendum fund .
Murrell ’ s first two replies both arrived within 24 hours of our source ’ s emails .
At the time of writing there has been no response to their third one after 11 days .
Readers can speculate as to the reason for themselves .
For our part , we ’ ll keep investigating .

The SNP has still not provided any sort of meaningful answer, either to this site or to anyone else, over the missing £600,000 from the party’s accounts that was supposedly “ring-fenced” for a future independence campaign and not under any circumstances to be spent on normal party politics.
Enquiries from members and even elected representatives have met with a wall of silence for months, so we were more than a little surprised to be forwarded a recent email exchange in which the SNP’s chief executive had engaged in discussion on the subject with someone who isn’t even in the party.
We thought you’d be interested in reading it.
We’ll interject here to note that asking the SNP to account for a huge sum of money it appears by its own official accounts to have spent is now a “conspiracy”, and its own elected representatives and members with legitimate and reasonable questions about what’s being done with their money are “opponents”.
Our source wasn’t going to be fobbed off so vaguely, though.
Alert readers will have spotted an interesting concession there – Murrell states that NEXT year’s accounts (or rather this year’s, which will be published next year) may include a separate entry identifying the ringfenced money, because he appears to acknowledge that the current approach (which somewhat implausibly involves keeping funds a secret in case they motivate Unionists to raise their own) is unsatisfactory.
All kinds of fascinating questions arise from that admission. Wings first raised the issue of the ringfenced funds in January. The SNP didn’t submit its accounts to the Electoral Commission until the end of June, so it had six months to implement this transparency and set donors’ minds at rest without asking them to wait ANOTHER year, by which time there’ll have been an election and the party won’t care what people think.
(Incidentally, the accounts contain a signed statement that they’ve been approved “by the Party Officers” on 26 June. According to SNP rules this is supposed to mean the NEC. But in fact the NEC had had absolutely no sight of the accounts until they were published on 27 October, the same as the rest of us. We’ve been told today by Kenny MacAskill that he’s still had no reply from Kirsten Oswald to his letters on the subject.)
But in any event, if the money so definitely exists and can be so easily separated out and identified that the SNP knows to the nearest £1 how much it is, there’s no reason not to produce a statement right now showing where it can be located, and how that squares with the party’s stated total net assets being less than half the value of the supposed referendum fund.
Our source persisted.
Murrell’s first two replies both arrived within 24 hours of our source’s emails. At the time of writing there has been no response to their third one after 11 days. Readers can speculate as to the reason for themselves.
For our part, we’ll keep investigating.


wingsoverscotland--2020-11-11--All the jolly boys and girls

All the jolly boys and girls

As more and more information fights its way past the Scottish Government ’ s bouncers into the public domain , and the First Minister ’ s continued dogged insistence that she knew nothing about the false allegations against Alex Salmond until April 2018 looks more and more ridiculous , lots of things still aren ’ t clear .
One of them , of course , is who leaked the story to Davie Clegg of the Daily Record in August of that year , when the whole thing should have been confidential and passing it to the press was an unambiguously @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s see what we know .
The timing of the leak is crucial .
We know from material given to the current Holyrood inquiry that Alex Salmond ’ s lawyers had repeatedly told the Scottish Government that their investigation into the allegations was unlawful and that the matter should instead be dealt with privately by arbitration and/or mediation .
The Scottish Government had flatly refused these suggestions and insisted on going to court where the allegations would have become public – right up until the eve of the hearing , when it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hundreds of thousands of pounds to the taxpayer .
It has steadfastly resisted disclosing its legal advice on the subject .
But one of the things we know is that Salmond was about to seek , on the morning of 24 August 2018 , to have an interim interdict issued by the Court Of Session which would have prevented the Scottish Government from issuing a statement naming Salmond .
The Scottish Government was informed of that fact at 5pm on the 23rd .
Within three hours of that notification , Davie Clegg had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it have come from ?
At this stage , very few people would have known in any major detail about the investigation .
They included the two complainers , the First Minister herself , Permanent Secretary Leslie Evans , investigating officer Judith MacKinnon , civil servant Barbara Allison , and the First Minister ’ s chief of staff Liz Lloyd , who since March 2018 had been a central liaison between Nicola Sturgeon and Salmond ’ s representative and former chief of staff Geoff Aberdein .
Ruling out Salmond and Aberdein that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a very small handful of other civil-service mandarins .
Do any of them , we wonder , have any notable connection to or relationship with Davie Clegg ?
Let ’ s have a closer peek at those photos , shall we ?
( Click to enlarge . )
The front row of the first one , from left to right , is Kezia Dugdale , Liz Lloyd , SNP MSP Jenny Gilruth , then-Tory MP Ross Thomson , and Davie Clegg .
( The tiny wee fella at the back is Dugdale ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ David Ross , and the other one is the oddly-named Lang Banks of conservation group WWF Scotland for some reason . )
All seven also appear in the second snap .
They were taken in , we believe , New York , but definitely during the International Visitor Leadership Program , an ongoing policy initiative of the US Department Of State in which “ Scottish Opinion Leaders ” – figures of influence ( or potential influence , to very generously describe Dugdale ’ s case ) are invited to spend some time over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the US government .
The two-week shindig has a notional price tag of $ 11,605 ( about £8,700 ) .
We know this because Dugdale and Gilruth declared it in Holyrood ’ s register of interests , noting that the US Embassy picked up the tab for each of them .
Given that you can get two weeks in New York in June – including flights , rather swish hotels and taxes – for as little as £900 , it must be a pretty fancy affair .
Dugdale “ became friends ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a couple of weeks before she got engaged to her then-girlfriend Louise Riddell ( it was never disclosed publicly who had proposed to who ) and only five months before dumping Riddell and buying her out of their shared Edinburgh flat with the money she made from “ I ’ m A Celebrity Get Me Out Of Here ” , then officially becoming a couple with Gilruth in early 2017 .
Persistent chatter in Scottish political circles – which this site can not confirm or refute – alleges that Clegg , who is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ friends ” on the trip .
It was never clear what Clegg was doing on the IVLP at all , or who was paying for him .
He tweeted only once about the “ exchange trip ” in the entire two weeks and the two weeks afterwards , and we ’ ve been unable to find any coverage of it or the “ food for thought ” it gave him in the Record around the time .
Dugdale didn ’ t make a single tweet about the IVLP either , nor write anything @ @ @ @ @ @ @ able to find , so we ’ re not sure why she needed to have a spokesman with her .
She stayed on in the US for a few days afterwards to help Hillary Clinton to her famous victory in the Presidential election , though , and tweeted about that .
Gilruth , however , tweeted twice about the trip , including a nice shot of the gang at the White House and revealing that they were in fact gallivanting across the whole country on Uncle Sam ’ s dime , not just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also features unexpected cameo appearances from two SNP MPs – its Westminster chief whip Patrick Grady and defence procurement spokesperson Angela Crawley ( far right ) , alongside Gilruth and Lloyd .
There was even time for a moment of apparent work , when Gilruth helpfully “ stressed the value of education ” to some US education officials who we can only assume might not have been aware of it .
Nine grand well spent there .
Once again , we ’ re not quite clear on what Davie Clegg , a Scottish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the Colorado Department Of Education , but we ’ re certain they were thrilled with his input .
And the important thing is that everyone seems to have had an absolutely splendid time together .
That ’ s Lloyd snuggled in close against Clegg on the upper left , btw .
It ’ s nice to see him still wearing a suit and tie outdoors in 36C temperatures .
He must have been sweating like a Scottish Government witness at the Salmond inquiry .
Now , we of course have to emphasise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sort of wrongdoing by anyone .
It ’ s just a happy bunch of good pals enjoying a serious and important fact-finding trip , like anyone would .
It most certainly doesn ’ t prove that Liz Lloyd – one of the vanishingly small number of people who knew the details of the Salmond investigation at that point – leaked them to Davie Clegg hours before a court interdict , to make sure that they got into the public eye and enabled the press to luridly smear and monster Salmond on the basis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could prove his innocence , conveniently serving the interests of both the newspapers and the Scottish Government .
We ’ re equally sure that there ’ s nothing sinister in the US government being so nice to so many SNP figures , and that they want nothing in return .
And we ’ re certain that the absence of any official record of Grady and Crawley ’ s trips must mean that they paid for them themselves and just happened to bump into the others while out sightseeing or something .
So to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re not sure why we even mentioned any of it , other than to perhaps show you a little about how cosily the world of politics you never hear about works .
You may as well all just carry on with your day and forget we said anything .

As more and more information fights its way past the Scottish Government’s bouncers into the public domain, and the First Minister’s continued dogged insistence that she knew nothing about the false allegations against Alex Salmond until April 2018 looks more and more ridiculous, lots of things still aren’t clear.
One of them, of course, is who leaked the story to Davie Clegg of the Daily Record in August of that year, when the whole thing should have been confidential and passing it to the press was an unambiguously malicious and criminal act.
(The Information Commissioner’s Office investigated the leak but were sadly unable to locate any evidence. A second investigation is currently in progress.)
So let’s see what we know.
The timing of the leak is crucial. We know from material given to the current Holyrood inquiry that Alex Salmond’s lawyers had repeatedly told the Scottish Government that their investigation into the allegations was unlawful and that the matter should instead be dealt with privately by arbitration and/or mediation.
The Scottish Government had flatly refused these suggestions and insisted on going to court where the allegations would have become public – right up until the eve of the hearing, when it suddenly conceded, at a cost of hundreds of thousands of pounds to the taxpayer. It has steadfastly resisted disclosing its legal advice on the subject.
But one of the things we know is that Salmond was about to seek, on the morning of 24 August 2018, to have an interim interdict issued by the Court Of Session which would have prevented the Scottish Government from issuing any statement naming Salmond. The Scottish Government was informed of that fact at 5pm on the 23rd.
Within three hours of that notification, Davie Clegg had the whole story.
So where could it have come from? At this stage, very few people would have known in any major detail about the investigation. They included the two complainers, the First Minister herself, Permanent Secretary Leslie Evans, investigating officer Judith MacKinnon, civil servant Barbara Allison, and finally the First Minister’s chief of staff Liz Lloyd, who since March 2018 had been a central liaison between Nicola Sturgeon and Salmond’s representative and former chief of staff Geoff Aberdein.
If we rule out Salmond and Aberdein that’s just seven people (along with a very small handful of other civil-service mandarins who’ve got no axe to grind). Do any of them, we wonder, have any notable connection to or relationship with Davie Clegg?
Hmm, what’s this?
Let’s have a closer peek at those photos, shall we? (Click to enlarge.)
The front row of the first one, from left to right, is Kezia Dugdale, Liz Lloyd, SNP MSP Jenny Gilruth, then-Tory MSP Ross Thomson, and Davie Clegg. (The tiny wee fella at the back is Dugdale’s official spokesman at the time, David Ross, and the other one is someone called Lang Banks of conservation group WWF Scotland for some reason.)
All seven also appear in the second snap.
They were taken in, we believe, New York, but definitely during the International Visitor Leadership Program, an ongoing policy initiative of the US Department Of State in which “Scottish Opinion Leaders” – figures of influence (or potential influence, to very generously describe Dugdale’s case) are invited to spend some time over in the States “exchanging information” with the US government.
The two-week shindig has a notional price tag of $11,605 (about £8,700). We know this because Dugdale and Gilruth declared it in Holyrood’s register of interests, noting that the US Embassy picked up the tab for each of them.
(Oddly, Ross Thomson declared it on his Westminster register, even though he was an MSP at the time and didn’t become a UK MP until almost a year later.)
Given that you can get two weeks in New York in June – including flights, rather swish hotels and taxes – for as little as £900, it must be a pretty fancy affair.
Dugdale “became friends” with Gilruth on the visit – a phrase the Scottish media, including Davie Clegg himself, took great care to point out meant nothing more than innocent friendship – just a couple of weeks before becoming engaged to her long-term girlfriend Louise Riddell, and five months before dumping Riddell and buying her out of their shared Edinburgh flat with the money she made from “I’m A Celebrity Get Me Out Of Here”, then officially becoming a couple with Gilruth in early 2017.
Persistent chatter in Scottish political circles – which this site cannot confirm or refute – alleges that Clegg and Lloyd also became friends on the trip.
It was never clear what Clegg was doing on the IVLP at all, or who was paying for him. He tweeted only once about the “exchange trip” in the entire two weeks and the two weeks afterwards, and we’ve been unable to find any coverage of it or the “food for thought” it gave him in the Record around the time.
(He did write one piece, about the unpopularity of Hillary Clinton, based on his time in the US, but with no mention of either the IVLP or his gang of Scottish travel buddies.)
Dugdale didn’t make a single tweet about the IVLP either, nor write anything about it that we’ve been able to find, so we’re not sure why she needed to have a spokesman with her. She stayed on in the US for a few days afterwards to help Clinton to her famous victory in the Presidential election, though, and tweeted about that.
(She went back in October just to make sure, all while still claiming a salary as MSP for the people of the Lothian region, and at one point even got to meet a cardboard cutout of her heroine. Luckily she stayed away this year.)
Gilruth, however, tweeted twice about the trip, including a nice shot of the gang at the White House and revealing that they were in fact gallivanting across the whole country on Uncle Sam’s dime, not just New York.
One of the pics also features unexpected cameo appearances from two SNP MPs – its Westminster chief whip Patrick Grady and defence procurement spokesperson Angela Crawley (far right), alongside Gilruth and Lloyd.
(We have no idea who was paying for Grady and Crawley, because neither of them declare any US trip in the Westminster register of interests from July to October 2016.)
There was even time for a moment of apparent work, when Gilruth helpfully “stressed the value of education” to some US education officials who we can only assume might not have been aware of it. Nine grand well spent there.
Once again, we’re not quite clear on what Davie Clegg, a Scottish newspaper hack, is doing exchanging information with the Colorado Department Of Education, but we’re certain they were thrilled with his input. And the important thing is that everyone seems to have had an absolutely splendid time together.
That’s Lloyd next to Clegg on the upper left, btw. It’s nice to see him still wearing a suit and tie outdoors in 36C temperatures. He must have been sweating like a Scottish Government witness at the Salmond inquiry.
Now, we of course have to emphasise that none of the above demonstrates any sort of wrongdoing by anyone. It’s just a happy bunch of good pals enjoying a free glamorous summer holiday serious and important fact-finding trip, like anyone would.
It most certainly doesn’t prove that Liz Lloyd – one of the vanishingly small number of people who knew the details of the Salmond investigation at that point – leaked them to Davie Clegg hours before a court interdict, to make sure that they got into the public eye and enabled the press to luridly smear and monster Salmond on the basis of false allegations for months before he could prove his innocence, conveniently serving the interests of both the newspapers and the Scottish Government.
We’re equally sure that there’s nothing sinister in the US government being so nice to so many SNP figures, and that they want nothing in return.
And we’re certain that the absence of any official record of Grady and Crawley’s trips must mean that they paid for them themselves and just happened to bump into the others while out sightseeing, or something like that.
[EDIT 3.26pm: Aha.]
So to be honest, readers, we’re not sure why we even mentioned any of it, other than to perhaps show you a little about how cosily the world of politics you never hear about works. You may as well all just carry on with your day and forget we said anything.


wingsoverscotland--2020-11-13--The surrender of power

The surrender of power

On 18 September 2014 , Scotland had control over its future .
Scots could choose their own path , or continue to have decisions imposed upon them .
Those of us supporting the former came close but not close enough .
As a result , Scotland exited the EU against its will , is once more under the heel of a right-wing government and now finds its Parliament under attack from London .
Yet the dream has never died and demands for the right to choose our own destiny are growing .
Scotland needs to be in the position it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ power lay with its people .
It ’ s their democratic right to decide , so why would you ever cede that power ?
Yet tragically that ’ s what ’ s being done .
The decision by the current SNP leadership that a referendum could only be held under the auspices of a Section 30 order moved power from Scotland ’ s democratically elected representatives to a Tory government that Scots had comprehensively rejected .
Irrespective of how great the mandate in Scotland or how perverse the objections may be from Westminster @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without their say so .
That ’ s simply unacceptable , and thankfully is being challenged by some in court and by many more across the Yes movement .
But other actions are occurring that are again in danger of ceding the power that the people of Scotland should possess .
Firstly , there ’ s the failure to prepare a Plan B for the coming election .
It appears that there ’ s neither to be a debate at conference , as Angus McNeill and Chris McEleny have sought , nor even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suggested .
The result of that is simply to continue with what ’ s dubbed the Boris Veto .
No matter how successful the SNP are in the Holyrood election , then it ’ s not their right but his whim that ’ ll decide .
Power that should rest with the Scottish people ’ s elected representatives has instead been given to those undermining the Scottish Parliament and damaging Scottish society and its economy .
Of course , it ’ s assumed by the SNP leadership that Boris will blink or be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a vote .
Maybe he will , but what if he doesn ’ t ?
In the latter case the challenges that Scotland and the Scots have endured so far will be like nothing as the calamitous effects of Brexit and the imposition of super-austerity take hold .
What then ?
Yet more outrage to be expressed , yet another National Assembly to be convened ?
That ’ ll scare him ?
Meanwhile the fear is that hope and faith in the possibility of change is already extinguished in many .
But suppose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
It ’ s certainly a possibility , if we believe comments from Michael Gove and John Major .
But if a referendum ’ s only to proceed under a S30 order , then as with whether there ’ s to be one at all , power over its timing and criteria are ceded to Westminster .
Those of us who ’ ve been in the movement long before 2014 and even before the establishment of the Scottish Parliament 21 years ago well remember the chicanery of 1979 and the 40 % rule @ @ @ @ @ @ @ obliged to fight knowing that the dead were already in the No camp .
Who ’ s to say that such mendacious trickery won ’ t be imposed once again ?
Both Gove and Major referred to conditions significantly different to those the Scottish people agreed to participate under in 2014 , and designed to ensure defeat from the outset .
The idea that there ’ ll be a referendum in autumn 2021 seems as fanciful as when it was argued one would take place this year .
The rhetoric denies the reality @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rumored that SNP special advisors have already been reining in its mention .
With no mandate to proceed without a Section 30 , then discussions are needed .
Even if willing , the practicalities are that by the time a new Scottish Government is formed and negotiations begin the ability to contest a referendum in the remaining seven months of the year will have passed .
That ’ s even before discussions with the Electoral Commission are entered .
Westminster will decide when they ’ re prepared to allow one .
Power that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ again have been ceded .
If the Tories say “ you can have it but only on these terms ” , then just as in 1979 the pressure to contest despite the foreknowledge of entrapment would be severe , if not irresistible .
“ You ’ ve got your referendum , now stop whimpering about the small print and get on with it ” , will be the cry .
The SNP response is to shelter behind existing legislation and past precedent .
But when has that ever proved a deterrent to this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ precious union ’ s at stake ?
Scotland ’ s future is always the Scottish people ’ s to decide .
That is a principle we must never surrender .

On 18 September 2014, Scotland had control over its future. Scots could choose their own path, or continue to have decisions imposed upon them. Those of us supporting the former came close but not close enough. As a result, Scotland exited the EU against its will, is once more under the heel of a right-wing government and now finds its Parliament under attack from London.
Yet the dream has never died and demands for the right to choose our own destiny are growing. Scotland needs to be in the position it held on 18 September 2014, when power lay with its people. It’s their democratic right to decide, so why would you ever cede that power?
Yet tragically that’s what’s being done.
The decision by the current SNP leadership that a referendum could only be held under the auspices of a Section 30 order moved power from Scotland’s democratically elected representatives to a Tory government that Scots had comprehensively rejected. Irrespective of how great the mandate in Scotland or how perverse the objections may be from Westminster, a vote couldn’t proceed without their say so.
That’s simply unacceptable, and thankfully is being challenged by some in court and by many more across the Yes movement. But other actions are occurring that are again in danger of ceding the power that the people of Scotland should possess.
Firstly, there’s the failure to prepare a Plan B for the coming election. It appears that there’s neither to be a debate at conference, as Angus McNeill and Chris McEleny have sought, nor even scenarios gamed, as Joanna Cherry has suggested.
The result of that is simply to continue with what’s dubbed the Boris Veto. No matter how successful the SNP are in the Holyrood election, then it’s not their right but his whim that’ll decide. Power that should rest with the Scottish people’s elected representatives has instead been given to those undermining the Scottish Parliament and damaging Scottish society and its economy.
Of course, it’s assumed by the SNP leadership that Boris will blink or be shamed, or somehow forced to concede a vote. Maybe he will, but what if he doesn’t?
In the latter case the challenges that Scotland and the Scots have endured so far will be like nothing as the calamitous effects of Brexit and the imposition of super-austerity take hold. What then? Yet more outrage to be expressed, yet another National Assembly to be convened? That’ll scare him? Meanwhile the fear is that hope and faith in the possibility of change is already extinguished in many.
But suppose the Tories do accede to a referendum? It’s certainly a possibility, if we believe comments from Michael Gove and John Major. But if a referendum’s only to proceed under a S30 order, then as with whether there’s to be one at all, power over its timing and criteria are ceded to Westminster.
Those of us who’ve been in the movement long before 2014 and even before the establishment of the Scottish Parliament 21 years ago well remember the chicanery of 1979 and the 40% rule – a referendum that the SNP were obliged to fight knowing that the dead were already in the No camp.
Who’s to say that such mendacious trickery won’t be imposed once again? Both Gove and Major referred to conditions significantly different to those the Scottish people agreed to participate under in 2014, and designed to ensure defeat from the outset.
The idea that there’ll be a referendum in autumn 2021 seems as fanciful as when it was argued one would take place this year. The rhetoric denies the reality, which is why it’s rumored that SNP special advisors have already been reining in its mention.
With no mandate to proceed without a Section 30, then discussions are needed. Even if willing, the practicalities are that by the time a new Scottish Government is formed and negotiations begin the ability to contest a referendum in the remaining seven months of the year will have passed. That’s even before discussions with the Electoral Commission are entered. Westminster will decide when they’re prepared to allow one. Power that rightly belongs to the Scottish people will again have been ceded.
If the Tories say “you can have it but only on these terms”, then just as in 1979 the pressure to contest despite the foreknowledge of entrapment would be severe, if not irresistible. “You’ve got your referendum, now stop whimpering about the small print and get on with it”, will be the cry.
The SNP response is to shelter behind existing legislation and past precedent. But when has that ever proved a deterrent to this Tory government, let alone when their precious union’s at stake?
Scotland’s future is always the Scottish people’s to decide. That is a principle we must never surrender.


The generations game

`` There 's no limit to what a man can do , or where he can go , if he @ @ @ @ @ gets the credit . ''

Wings Over Scotland is a (mainly) Scottish political media digest and monitor, which also offers its own commentary. (More)


Mushroom food

We were going to write something about today ’ s Sunday National front page lead story , but it would @ @ @ @ @ rant , so instead we ’ ll let you make your own judgement on this @

We were going to write a post about today’s Sunday National front page lead story, but it would just have been an angry rant, so instead we’ll let our readers make their own judgements on how convinced they are by this bloviating guff:
Try to keep it clean, folks.


Taking the wheel

Some years ago , a friend of mine was on a car journey along the motorway , with their brother driving .
The night before there had been a storm and high winds .
The bad weather had continued into the morning before easing , but the wind was still strong .
They were chatting in the car and as they continued to chat , my friend noticed that further along , a motorway stanchion that holds the lights had fallen across their path .
It was blocking two of the three lanes , including the one that they were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to chat as if it wasn ’ t there .
The obstacle drew nearer and nearer .
Finally my friend said to his brother , “ Aren ’ t you going to drive round that light ?
” His brother swerved and made it into the unblocked lane with feet to spare .
I asked my friend why they hadn ’ t swerved sooner .
“ Neither of us could believe it was there ” , he said .
I ’ ve thought a lot about that incident in the past few months @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disbelief about the direction in which the UK is headed .
Nobody can quite believe what they ’ re seeing as we watch the Bullingdon Club steadily go about their business of smashing up the country .
There ’ s the pantomime villain characters , each with their own gimmicks ; Boris with the mussed-up hair , Jacob Rees Mogg with the big stovepipe hat , Michael Gove with the repertoire of face-pulls ( he was an actor , you know ) .
There is something grotesque and laughable about it all .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And just because they ’ re acting , doesn ’ t mean that they don ’ t know what they ’ re doing .
Scotland is essential to the UK ’ s survival .
The value of the oil and gas resources in Scotland allows Britain to borrow money and keep its AAA rating up .
Without the £1.6 trillion collateral value of these assets , what is already a very grim picture would become even grimmer for the UK as it would struggle without this as backing .
Then there ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strategic importance of both Faslane and Scapa Flow , Europe ’ s back door into the Atlantic .
Scotland is one of the few big bargaining chips – perhaps the only one – that the UK has with Europe .
So there is no way that they want to lose Scotland in a UK breakup .
It ’ s important to understand this , to understand why particular things have been put in place .
Let ’ s go through them .
Firstly , the souping-up of the Scottish Office .
This has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where the number of staff has been considerably increased .
Secondly , the promotion of Ruth Davidson to both the Privy Council and to the Lords .
What her future role is going to be we can only guess , but at the tender age of 41 she is certainly not ready to retire yet .
Thirdly , the continuance , with the minimum of scrutiny and debate , of the Coronavirus Act .
We suspect this might have started out in life as a draft for a Brexit bill and the contingencies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cover much of the same ground – curfews , enhanced powers of arrest and detainment , ability to disperse assemblies and crowds , interruptions to food supply lines , etc This was waved through after 90 minutes ’ debate at Westminster .
It also includes powers to postpone elections .
Fourthly , the Internal Market bill .
As has rightly and extensively been identified , it is a massive power grab on devolution .
Finally – and this may or may not be connected with future events – the enshrinement of the ability @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law of the land .
We hope it ’ s a total coincidence that this has happened as political discontent rises in Wales , Scotland and Northern Ireland .
We fear it ’ s not .
Dear reader , Westminster has got its ducks in a row .
It has set up the governmental structure to take control from Holyrood .
It has put in place the contingency measures to deal with unrest/riots that might follow .
It has removed the security services ’ obligations to the law of the land , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political organisations that might organise opposition in any manner they please .
They have toppled that motorway stanchion into the path of our escape from the UK and we are hurtling towards it at 100 miles per hour Which brings us to those at the wheel , at least for the time being ; the SNP and the Greens .
In the face of this impending disaster , what avoiding action is being taken ?
We don ’ t like to say it .
For a long time we too , believed that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the last minute and go screeching round that obstacle .
However , as Brexit came closer and nothing had happened , that was when we formed the ISP .
We had to do something .
And do you know what ?
Yes , we ’ re small .
Yes , we ’ re unknowns .
Yes , we are ordinary grassroots supporters .
And maybe we weren ’ t the best people to do this .
But somebody had to do something .
Because the drivers aren ’ t listening .
Consider @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have access to the Civil Service who can help them draft bills .
They could have raised a court action to establish once and for all the Scottish Parliament ’ s powers ( or lack of ) over a referendum , instead of obstructing Martin Keatings ’ one .
They could already have referendum legislation in place , ready to go at a moment ’ s notice .
They could make the next Holyrood election a plebiscite .
They could at least have a plan for when Boris Johnson says no again , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rather than planning a casual relaxed chat about it at some unspecified point in future .
The SNP have been in power for 13 years , including half a decade since the Brexit vote .
They could certainly have got their ducks in a row by now , just as Boris has .
But none of that has happened .
Over the past few months we ’ ve continually said the same thing .
We ’ ll say it one more time .
We are running out of time .
( “ We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We can not afford to give the indy parties in power “ one more chance ” , effectively another five years in which to dither and delay and then plead for another last chance .
We have to shout in their ear and threaten to take the wheel if they don ’ t act .
Because we ’ re about to crash right into the trap that Boris Johnson and others have spent the last two years setting up .
The ISP have taken lots of brickbats and questioning of our motives .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ snake-oil salesmen and amateurs .
We ’ re not overly concerned what people call us – sticks and stones and all that – but what we are concerned about is that there are those who still believe that that trap isn ’ t there , despite all the evidence in plain sight .
Like that motorway stanchion , it can ’ t be there , because the driver continues to head towards it remorselessly .
But it is there .
And we , the grassroots , the amateurs , the Yes groups , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have to take control of that wheel before we crash .
Julie McAnulty is Deputy Leader of the Independence for Scotland Party .

Some years ago, a friend of mine was on a car journey along the motorway, with their brother driving. The night before there had been a storm and high winds. The bad weather had continued into the morning before easing, but the wind was still strong.
They were chatting in the car and as they continued to chat, my friend noticed that further along, a motorway stanchion that holds the lights had fallen across their path. It was blocking two of the three lanes, including the one that they were on. Despite that, they continued to chat as if it wasn’t there.
The obstacle drew nearer and nearer. Finally my friend said to his brother, “Aren’t you going to drive round that light?” His brother swerved and made it into the unblocked lane with feet to spare.
I asked my friend why they hadn’t swerved sooner. “Neither of us could believe it was there”, he said.
I’ve thought a lot about that incident in the past few months. There’s an air of disbelief about the direction in which the UK is headed. Nobody can quite believe what they’re seeing as we watch the Bullingdon Club steadily go about their business of smashing up the country.
There’s the pantomime villain characters, each with their own gimmicks; Boris with the mussed-up hair, Jacob Rees Mogg with the big stovepipe hat, Michael Gove with the repertoire of face-pulls (he was an actor, you know). There is something grotesque and laughable about it all. Except that it’s not funny. And just because they’re acting, doesn’t mean that they don’t know what they’re doing.
Scotland is essential to the UK’s survival. The value of the oil and gas resources in Scotland allows Britain to borrow money and keep its AAA rating up. Without the £1.6 trillion collateral value of these assets, what is already a very grim picture would become even grimmer for the UK as it would struggle without this as backing. Then there’s fisheries, energy potential and the strategic importance of both Faslane and Scapa Flow, Europe’s back door into the Atlantic.
Scotland is one of the few big bargaining chips – perhaps the only one – that the UK has with Europe. So there is no way that they want to lose Scotland in a UK breakup.
It’s important to understand this, to understand why particular things have been put in place. Let’s go through them.
Firstly, the souping-up of the Scottish Office. This has been going on for two years, where the number of staff has been considerably increased.
Secondly, the promotion of Ruth Davidson to both the Privy Council and to the Lords. What her future role is going to be we can only guess, but at the tender age of 41 she is certainly not ready to retire yet.
Thirdly, the continuance, with the minimum of scrutiny and debate, of the Coronavirus Act. We suspect this might have started out in life as a draft for a Brexit bill and the contingencies that might arise from it. They cover much of the same ground – curfews, enhanced powers of arrest and detainment, ability to disperse assemblies and crowds, interruptions to food supply lines, etc This was waved through after 90 minutes’ debate at Westminster. It also includes powers to postpone elections.
Fourthly, the Internal Market bill. As has rightly and extensively been identified, it is a massive power grab on devolution.
Finally – and this may or may not be connected with future events – the enshrinement of the ability of the security services to ignore the law of the land. We hope it’s a total coincidence that this has happened as political discontent rises in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. We fear it’s not.
Dear reader, Westminster has got its ducks in a row. It has set up the governmental structure to take control from Holyrood. It has put in place the contingency measures to deal with unrest/riots that might follow. It has removed the security services’ obligations to the law of the land, which will enable the said services to pursue political organisations that might organise opposition in any manner they please. They have toppled that motorway stanchion into the path of our escape from the UK and we are hurtling towards it at 100 miles per hour
Which brings us to those at the wheel, at least for the time being; the SNP and the Greens. In the face of this impending disaster, what avoiding action is being taken?
None.
We don’t like to say it. For a long time we too, believed that they were going to turn the wheel at the last minute and go screeching round that obstacle. However, as Brexit came closer and nothing had happened, that was when we formed the ISP. We had to do something. And do you know what? Yes, we’re small. Yes, we’re unknowns. Yes, we are ordinary grassroots supporters. And maybe we weren’t the best people to do this. But somebody had to do something. Because the drivers aren’t listening.
Consider the powers that MSPs possess. They have access to the Civil Service who can help them draft bills. They could have raised a court action to establish once and for all the Scottish Parliament’s powers (or lack of) over a referendum, instead of obstructing Martin Keatings’ one. They could already have referendum legislation in place, ready to go at a moment’s notice. They could make the next Holyrood election a plebiscite. They could at least have a plan for when Boris Johnson says no again, or debate it at conference this month rather than planning a casual relaxed chat about it at some unspecified point in future.
The SNP have been in power for 13 years, including half a decade since the Brexit vote. They could certainly have got their ducks in a row by now, just as Boris has. But none of that has happened.
Over the past few months we’ve continually said the same thing. We’ll say it one more time. We are running out of time. (“We” being the independence movement.) We cannot afford to give the indy parties in power “one more chance”, effectively another five years in which to dither and delay and then plead for another last chance.
We have to shout in their ear and threaten to take the wheel if they don’t act. Because we’re about to crash right into the trap that Boris Johnson and others have spent the last two years setting up.
The ISP have taken lots of brickbats and questioning of our motives. We’ve been accused of being snake-oil salesmen and amateurs. We’re not overly concerned what people call us – sticks and stones and all that – but what we are concerned about is that there are those who still believe that that trap isn’t there, despite all the evidence in plain sight. Like that motorway stanchion, it can’t be there, because the driver continues to head towards it remorselessly.
But it is there. And we, the grassroots, the amateurs, the Yes groups, the bloggers, the marchers – somehow have to take control of that wheel before we crash.
.
Julie McAnulty is Deputy Leader of the Independence for Scotland Party.


Almost there


wingsoverscotland--2020-11-19--The state is not her

The state is not her

One of the dumber things we see regularly posted on social media is that Yes voices should stop criticising the First Minister because her leadership is the only reason Yes is now consistently ahead in the polls and we would have no chance of winning a new referendum with someone else in charge .
This is obviously nonsense , because Nicola Sturgeon was SNP leader and FM for five years in which support moved barely a single millimetre , until COVID-19 came along .
Our current lead is due entirely to a tiny invisible virus and a giant Etonian buffoon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – we like to check .
So last week ’ s Panelbase poll which put Yes in the lead by 56-44 also had a couple of questions from us in it , including this one : And as you can see , what it found was that the replacement of Sturgeon as FM would as far as can be reasonably ascertained make absolutely no difference to the outcome of a second independence referendum .
6 % of people currently planning to vote Yes would definitely switch to No , but 5 % of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way , while 13 % of Yes voters would reconsider their position but so would 17 % of No voters .
As was the case with Alex Salmond , the FM ’ s personality is very much a double-edged sword : lots of people love her irrationally , but lots of people hate her irrationally too , and the two groups pretty much balance each other out .
To be quite honest , the fact that over a quarter of Scots are willing to at least consider changing their view one way or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the country over their opinion of a single individual politician is one that disturbs us greatly .
But then , as we already knew , the exact same proportion of Scots – 27 % – thinks the Sun sometimes revolves around the Earth , so we suppose we shouldn ’ t be surprised to confirm again that Scotland is a country of at least a million bloody idiots .

One of the dumber things we see regularly posted on social media is that Yes voices should stop criticising the First Minister because her leadership is the only reason Yes is now consistently ahead in the polls and we would have no chance of winning a new referendum with someone else in charge.
This is obviously nonsense, because Nicola Sturgeon was SNP leader and FM for five years in which support moved barely a single millimetre, until COVID-19 came along. Our current lead is due entirely to a tiny invisible virus and a giant Etonian buffoon.
But you know us, readers – we like to check.
So last week’s Panelbase poll which put Yes in the lead by 56-44 also had a couple of questions from us in it, including this one:
And as you can see, what it found was that the replacement of Sturgeon as FM would as far as can be reasonably ascertained make absolutely no difference to the outcome of a second independence referendum.
6% of people currently planning to vote Yes would definitely switch to No, but 5% of No voters would definitely switch the other way, while 13% of Yes voters would reconsider their position but so would 17% of No voters.
As was the case with Alex Salmond, the FM’s personality is very much a double-edged sword: lots of people love her irrationally, but lots of people hate her irrationally too, and the two groups pretty much balance each other out.
To be quite honest, the fact that over a quarter of Scots are willing to at least consider changing their view one way or the other on the entire future of the country over their opinion of a single individual politician is one that disturbs us greatly.
But then, as we already knew, the exact same proportion of Scots – 27% – thinks the Sun sometimes revolves around the Earth, so we suppose we shouldn’t be surprised to confirm again that Scotland is a country of at least a million bloody idiots.


Hate in numbers

The Scottish Parliament will today almost certainly pass a dangerously misleading and inaccurate motion to mark “ Transgender Day Of Remembrance ” , and in doing so will join countless other institutions across the UK captured by trans ideology to the great detriment of women ’ s rights , freedom of speech and general sanity .
So we thought we ’ d mark it with a very short fact check .
The image above is taken from the intranet of a UK police force .
It claims that 2,540 “ transgender hate crimes ” were recorded across the UK in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not sure if that figure includes the verbal abuse directed at four young London men dressed as women ( one of which penis-possessing individuals the Daily Mail described as a “ mother of four ” ) before they violently and brutally assaulted the person who offended them , breaking his eye socket , and then escaped prison because it ’ s now apparently fine to beat the living hell out of people who hurt your feelings .
According to trans pressure group Stonewall there are roughly 600,000 trans people in the UK .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ people were victims of a hate crime last year ( or put another way , 99.6 % weren ’ t ) .
The actual figure is almost certainly even lower than that because multiple crimes committed against the same person as part of the same incident are counted individually .
So we can ’ t quite work out why MSPs and MPs are claiming the figure is 41 % .
That ’ s just over 100 times the reality .
But Sultana claims that figure by including “ hate incidents ” , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ police record things that aren ’ t crimes and have no supporting evidence , purely on the say-so of the supposed victim , and keep them on people ’ s police records without their knowledge .
Almost 120,000 “ hate incidents ” were recorded by 34 UK police forces from 2014 to 2019 ( weirdly , by far the most were in South Wales for some reason ) .
There are 45 UK police forces in total , so we could reasonably pro-rata that up to around 160,000 and then divide it by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 27,000 per year .
We know that hate crimes currently run somewhere in the region of 100,000 a year in England and Wales , with Scotland proportionally slightly lower , so let ’ s round the total up to 110,000 .
And we know from the start of this post that transgender hate crimes made up 2,540 of those , which is 2.3 % , so it seems reasonable to assume that they ’ d be a similar proportion of hate incidents .
But what the heck , let ’ s double it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would mean we ’ d need to add 5 % of 27,000 to the “ crime ” figures to also cover “ incidents ” , which would be 1,350 on top of the 2,540 for a total “ transgender hate crimes or hate incidents ” of 3,890 .
That would mean that 0.65 % of trans people had suffered either a hate crime or a hate incident in the past year , not 41 % .
Holyrood motions of course have no legal effect in themselves .
But they signal the mind of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outcome of future legislation , and issuing a statement – which may well end up being a unanimous or at least unopposed one – with such staggering disregard for both reality and public opinion will be just the latest in a series of disturbing signs about the direction of Scottish politics .
And we just don ’ t know what to do about that .
Because we don ’ t know who you call when everyone in power , including all the people you ’ re trusting to lead your reason-based independence movement @ @ @ @ @

The Scottish Parliament will today almost certainly pass a dangerously misleading and inaccurate motion to mark “Transgender Day Of Remembrance”, and in doing so will join countless other institutions across the UK captured by trans ideology to the great detriment of women’s rights, freedom of speech and general sanity.
So we thought we’d mark it with a very short fact check.
The image above is taken from the intranet of a UK police force. It claims that 2,540 “transgender hate crimes” were recorded across the UK in the past year.
We’re not sure if that figure includes the verbal abuse directed at four young London men dressed as women (one of which penis-possessing individuals the Daily Mail described as a “mother of four”) before they violently and brutally assaulted the person who offended them, breaking his eye socket, and then escaped prison because it’s now apparently fine to beat the living hell out of people who hurt your feelings.
But anyway.
According to trans pressure group Stonewall there are roughly 600,000 trans people in the UK. That means that 0.4% of trans people were victims of a hate crime last year (or put another way, 99.6% weren’t). The actual figure is almost certainly even lower than that because multiple crimes committed against the same person as part of the same incident are counted individually.
So we can’t quite work out why MSPs and MPs are claiming the figure is 41%.
That’s just over 100 times the reality. But Sultana claims that figure by including “hate incidents”, a nebulous and deeply disturbing phenomenon whereby the police record things that aren’t crimes and have no supporting evidence, purely on the say-so of the supposed victim, and keep them on people’s police records without their knowledge.
Almost 120,000 “hate incidents” were recorded by 34 UK police forces from 2014 to 2019 (weirdly, by far the most were in South Wales for some reason). There are 45 UK police forces in total, so we could reasonably pro-rata that up to around 160,000 and then divide it by the six years to get very roughly 27,000 per year.
We know that hate crimes currently run somewhere in the region of 100,000 a year in England and Wales, with Scotland proportionally slightly lower, so let’s round the total up to 110,000. And we know from the start of this post that transgender hate crimes made up 2,540 of those, which is 2.3%, so it seems reasonable to assume that they’d be a similar proportion of hate incidents.
But what the heck, let’s double it and call it 5%. That would mean we’d need to add 5% of 27,000 to the “crime” figures to also cover “incidents”, which would be 1,350 on top of the 2,540 for a total “transgender hate crimes or hate incidents” of 3,890.
That would mean that 0.65% of trans people had suffered either a hate crime or a hate incident in the past year, not 41%.
(And we know that the barrier for “hate incidents” is so low as to encompass things as awful as – steel yourselves, sensitive readers – being asked “invasive questions” or believing yourself to have been subjected to non-specific “discrimination”.)
Holyrood motions of course have no legal effect in themselves. But they signal the mind of the Parliament, and so the likely outcome of future legislation, and issuing a statement – which may well end up being a unanimous or at least unopposed one – with such staggering disregard for both reality and public opinion will be just the latest in a series of disturbing signs about the direction of Scottish politics.
And we just don’t know what to do about that. Because we don’t know who you call when everyone in power – including all the people you’re trusting to lead your reason-based independence movement – has gone mad.


wingsoverscotland--2020-11-21--New military spending plans revealed

New military spending plans revealed


Any minute now

From 2016 (and another classic in the “missing words” category).
We were keen to read the article, obviously.
Zounds, the irony.


The Faction Factory

Sometimes , despite everything , you just have to laugh .
No matter how black and rueful a laugh it might be .
The “ faction ” drawing the indignation of Cosy Feet Pete at the weekend was one which expressly set out the intention of focusing the SNP on independence .
One might , in saner times , have considered that an uncontroversial aim just months before the most crucial Holyrood election in history for the Yes movement .
But the SNP is controlled by its National Executive Committee ( NEC ) , and the NEC is now – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ factions .
The 42-member body is largely made up , in the name of “ diversity and inclusion ” , of people with other agendas .
As part of the NEC voting process , each of those designated special-interest groups has just issued an “ annual report ” , and they make for revealing , and alarming , reading .
Let ’ s take , for example , that of the SNP ’ s youth wing , Young Scots for Independence .
In almost 600 words , the word “ independence ” appears @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s own name .
Its opening boast is of excluding men from its leadership .
But the group sees its main role as providing the “ conscious ” [ sic ] of the party .
We ’ re not even sure the SNP has a policy on sex work .
If it does we certainly don ’ t have a clue what it is , and we suspect that goes for most members .
( Wings doesn ’ t have a policy on it either , btw . )
But we do know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contentious subject is that “ sex work is work ” , ( and therefore presumably a valid career choice which should be considered for recommendation by school careers advisors and Job Centre staff ) and that it sees it as one of its main jobs to promote that view .
Next up is the party ’ s LGBTQQIAAP2S+ faction , Out For Independence .
Once again , the only occurrence of the word “ independence ” in their annual report is in their own name .
Otherwise the subject doesn ’ t get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , readers – they ’ ve got their priorities in order .
And we ’ ll let this paragraph pass without comment .
The Member Support Convener , apparently during an open-mic spot at a comedy club , did passingly mention independence a couple of times , but was chiefly concerned with making sure that lots of Unionist MSPs got elected next May .
In over 1100 words the BAME Convener mentioned independence an impressive three times , of which the most substantial was including it at the end of a list of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spoken on , complete with an exclamation mark to indicate how comical and remarkable it was that they ’ d remembered to discuss the topic .
Issues deemed of far greater importance were addresssing “ Scotland ’ s slavery legacy ” and “ decolonising the curriculum ” in Glasgow schools , whatever that means .
The report from the Policy Development Convener , of all people , finally remembers to mention independence seven words from the end .
While the Disabled Members Group does even better at the popular NEC game of Indy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as the very last word .
They listed their main achievements of the seismic last 12 months in Scottish politics as talks on “ Dismantling Imposter Syndrome ” and “ Exploring Equality Mechanisms ” .
The party Treasurer scored a joint win at Indy Chicken , also leaving the first mention of independence to the last word in his report .
Although our favourite line by a distance was this one : Pete “ Parliamentary Tweeter Of The Year ” Wishart ’ s own Westminster MP group also tied for Indy Chicken first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could go on , but you probably get the idea by now .
Having every single-interest pressure group represented on the NEC has quite unsurprisingly led to those groups focusing their time and efforts on their own narrow agendas , with barely a thought given to independence .
The end result – a party which has done absolutely nothing of any material impact on its supposed primary goal in the last five years – is a wholly predictable outcome of that arrangement .
The SNP is no longer in any meaningfully practical sense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hotchpotch of individual factions all piggybacking on its position of government to advance their own causes , with independence relegated to a vague afterthought at best .
This site absolutely supports the attempt by the Common Weal Group to get the SNP back on track .
Those controlling the direction of the party should have independence as their overriding aim , with everything else a matter of secondary interest .
It ’ s incredibly disturbing that that should need to be said at this critical point in history .
But we very much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week ’ s events – perhaps more than those of any other year in the 86 of the Scottish National Party – will determine whether the fight for Scotland ’ s self-determination as a thing of realistic achievability lives or dies .

Sometimes, despite everything, you just have to laugh.
No matter how black and rueful a laugh it might be.
The “faction” drawing the indignation of Cosy Feet Pete at the weekend was one which expressly set out the intention of focusing the SNP on independence. One might, in saner times, have considered that an uncontroversial aim just months before the most crucial Holyrood election in history for the Yes movement.
But the SNP is controlled by its National Executive Committee (NEC), and the NEC is now – by design – comprised almost entirely of factions. Much of the 42-member body is made up, in the name of “diversity and inclusion”, of people with other agendas.
As part of the NEC voting process, each of those designated special-interest groups has just issued an “annual report”, and they make for revealing, and alarming, reading.
Let’s take, for example, that of the SNP’s youth wing, Young Scots for Independence. In almost 600 words, the word “independence” appears only once – in the group’s own name. Its opening boast is of excluding men from its leadership.
But the group sees its main role as providing the “conscious” [sic] of the party.
We’re not even sure the SNP has a policy on sex work. If it does we certainly don’t have a clue what it is, and we suspect that goes for most members. (Wings doesn’t have a policy on it either, btw.) But we do know that the YSI position on the highly contentious subject is that “sex work is work”, (and therefore presumably a valid career choice which should be considered for recommendation by school careers advisors and Job Centre staff) and that it sees it as one of its main jobs to promote that view.
Next up is the party’s LGBTQQIAAP2S+ faction, Out For Independence. Once again, the only occurrence of the word “independence” in their annual report is in their own name. Otherwise the subject doesn’t get the slightest mention. But fear not, readers – they’ve got their priorities in order.
(As alert viewers may already have deduced from that first sentence and YSI’s inability to know what a “conscience” is, the standard of general basic literacy across all of the reports is uniformly awful.)
And we’ll let this paragraph pass without comment.
Still, one mention of independence each was one more than the Equalities Convener could muster in 500 words of waffling, content-free self-aggrandisement.
And the SNP Students group also scored a big fat zero on mentioning independence, although they did find plenty of other causes to champion.
While the Member Support Convener, apparently during an open-mic spot at a comedy club, did passingly mention independence a couple of times, although he was chiefly concerned with making sure that lots of Unionist MSPs got elected next May.
In over 1100 words the BAME Convener mentioned independence an impressive three times, of which the most substantial was including it at the end of a list of subjects the group’s members had spoken on, complete with an exclamation mark to indicate how comical and remarkable it was that they’d remembered to discuss the topic.
Issues deemed of far greater importance were addresssing “Scotland’s slavery legacy” and “decolonising the curriculum” in Glasgow schools, whatever that means.
The report from the Policy Development Convener, of all people, finally remembers to mention independence seven words from the end.
While the Disabled Members Group does even better at the popular NEC game of Indy Chicken, managing to squeeze it in as the very last word.
They listed their main achievements of the seismic last 12 months in Scottish politics as talks on “Dismantling Imposter Syndrome” and “Exploring Equality Mechanisms”.
The party Treasurer scored a joint win at Indy Chicken, also leaving the first mention of independence to the last word in his report.
Although our favourite line by a distance was this one:
Pete “Parliamentary Tweeter Of The Year” Wishart’s own Westminster MP group also tied for Indy Chicken first place with a last-word mention.
We could go on, but you probably get the idea by now. Having every single-interest pressure group represented on the NEC has quite unsurprisingly led to those groups focusing their time and efforts on their own narrow agendas, with barely a detectable thought given to independence.
(The tentative suggestion, even from their own allies, that independence should take a slightly higher priority of course resulted in a furious storm of outrage.)
The result – a party which has done absolutely nothing of any material impact on its supposed primary goal in the last five years despite near-perfect circumstances – is a wholly predictable outcome of that structure. The SNP is no longer in any meaningfully practical sense a party of independence, but a hotchpotch of individual factions who are all piggybacking on its position of government to advance their own causes, with independence relegated to a vague afterthought at best.
(This Twitter thread from last month is a thought-provoking take.)
This site absolutely supports the attempt by the Common Weal Group to get the SNP back on track. Those controlling the direction of the party should have independence as their overriding aim, with everything else a matter of secondary interest.
It’s incredibly disturbing that that should need to be said at this critical point in history. But we very much fear that it does, and next week’s events – perhaps more than those of any other year in the 86 of the Scottish National Party – will determine whether the fight for Scotland’s self-determination as a thing of realistic achievability lives or dies.


Pete’s Perfect Plan

We don ’ t mind admitting we were quivering with anticipation , readers .
We ’ ll just dive straight into it , skipping the four paragraphs of intro waffle .
Well , it would certainly be an undemocratic disgrace .
But Scotland ’ s been subject to democratic injustice for as long as we ’ ve been alive – the 40 % rule , the refused Yes vote in 1979 , endless Tory governments we rejected imposing policies Scotland didn ’ t want , the robbery of our oil revenue without the creation of an oil fund , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Commission from 56 out of Scotland ’ s 59 MPs – and Westminster has seemed able to cope with it just fine .
The UK Parliament has literally centuries of experience of ignoring “ whinging Jocks ” .
Why would something have to give this time ?
In truth our heart sank at the early mention of “ the international community ” , but let ’ s put on a brave face and hear about this “ series of measures ” .
Yeah yeah , and while we ’ re dreaming we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pony .
Now tell us about the “ series of measures ” when they don ’ t , Pete .
Blah blah blah stalling stalling stalling .
There ’ s nothing undemocratic or unconsensual about an election , including a plebiscitary one .
We ’ re almost 900 words in and there ’ s still no sign of the promised plan .
Series of measures , please .
Wait , you mean we haven ’ t already made clear that we ’ re happy to discuss a referendum with them at any time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s… interesting .
Woah , easy there , tiger !
SNP MPs declining to serve on public bill committees ?
I mean , we want independence just as much as the next website but surely there ’ s no need to go straight to the nuclear option ?
How could we possibly deprive them of the pleasure of the company of Pete Wishart in their daily deliberations over important matters of state ?
We ’ re not MONSTERS .
In so far as those things would have any effect at all – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – they ’ re all things you should already have been doing since the day of the Brexit vote .
The minute the UK made clear it was going to ride roughshod over the vote of the Scottish people , Scotland ’ s supposed champions in the House Of Commons should have been making an unholy racket .
Instead we ’ ve had a thousand scenes of Ian Blackford standing up and insisting Scotland would not be dragged out of the EU against its will , then sitting back down on his well-upholstered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ got on with doing just that .
We ’ ve had a pro-indy majority at Holyrood for 13 years and the one and only time it tried “ legislating on the edge of its devolved powers ” Westminster just slapped it down immediately and Holyrood went and sat meekly in the corner muttering under its breath .
That was two years ago and nothing similar has been tried since .
Wait , was that it ?
Are we done ?
All you ’ ve got beyond that is to go moaning to other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what we want ?
We ’ re sure they ’ ll be lavish with tea and biscuits and “ Oh , poor you ” , but they ’ re hardly going to interfere .
Especially if all we ’ ve done is have a bit of a sulk and boycott some Westminster committees .
Oh dear God above .
Would they , aye ?
Let ’ s just try to imagine for a moment how that would go .
Even if , say , France and Germany had the slightest interest in meddling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can promise you , readers , they absolutely 100 % do not – what would they do about it ?
Issue a strongly-worded statement in the European Parliament ?
The thing the UK just left because a majority of English people thought it already poked its nose into the UK ’ s business too much ?
We can all picture the Daily Mail headlines right now .
If you can think of anything more likely to completely entrench English public and political resistance to a second indyref than Brussels demanding one , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But in any event , the First Minister has insisted , over and over again , that one thing she will never , ever countenance is an “ unofficial ” referendum .
Was she lying all those times ?
Surely not ?
The only way , of course , to obtain a “ legal ” referendum without Westminster ’ s co-operation would be to go to court to try to establish its legality .
But not only has the Scottish Government unforgivably and indefensibly failed to do such a thing for four years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an attempt by someone else to do it for them .
Pete Wishart himself has been particularly vocally hostile to the idea .
So what then ?
The fact that the Scottish Government hasn ’ t attempted to establish legality in court in fact clearly shows that they haven ’ t “ tried absolutely everything ” .
Indeed , they haven ’ t even tried the single most obvious thing .
But in any event , the international community has been allowing it to stand just fine so far .
The Scottish people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ second indyref three times since the Brexit vote , it ’ s been voted for twice by the Scottish Parliament , it ’ s been formally requested twice and refused twice , and “ the international community ” has done precisely hee-haw about it .
There ’ s barely even been a mild expression of dissent .
But now Wishart thinks they ’ ll suddenly take up arms and rush to our aid ?
Yep , it looks like that ’ s the end of the “ series of measures ” .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a bit in the Commons – gosh , won ’ t that be an unprecedented novelty for the UK government ?
– and then we ’ re going to turn and make sad eyes at Europe , and that ’ s it .
That ’ s all we ’ ve got .
The international community – which stood by and did nothing while the Spanish government sent in riot police to crack the head of old ladies and put a whole raft of democratically-elected members of Parliament in jail for holding a peaceful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to save Scotland , even though Scotland ( unlike Catalonia ) was actually given a referendum just six years ago and voted No , and even though the UK isn ’ t any of Europe ’ s business any more and the EU no longer has any political leverage over it .
What consequences ?
This site has been asking fruitlessly for months for any Plan A believers to tell us what we actually have to threaten the UK government with .
It has a comfortable overall majority , and of course a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the Lib Dems oppose it too .
The Tories haven ’ t won an election in Scotland for the best part of 70 years .
They have almost no MPs there to lose , and even when they had literally none in the Thatcher/Major era it didn ’ t make them concede anything .
With zero MPs they still opposed devolution right to the bitter end and just days ago Boris Johnson said it had been a “ disaster ” .
Does it sound like they ’ re bothered what we think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our expectations for Pete Wishart ’ s Masterplan had been extremely low .
But yesterday ’ s effort dug a very deep hole and tunnelled so far under them that we didn ’ t even feel the earth tremble as it passed underneath .
His article is a gross and cynical insult to the intelligence of anyone who read it .
But worse than that , it ’ s something the SNP were and are clearly happy to be said in public by one of their senior elected representatives .
They plainly believe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supporters will still swallow it .
And that , folks , is because they think you ’ re stupid .
They think you ’ re stupid .
They think you ’ re really , really stupid .

We don’t mind admitting we were quivering with anticipation, readers.
So let’s go.
We’ll just dive straight into it, skipping the four paragraphs of intro waffle.
Well, it would certainly be an undemocratic disgrace. But Scotland’s been subject to democratic injustice for as long as we’ve been alive – the 40% rule, the refused Yes vote in 1979, endless Tory governments we rejected imposing policies Scotland didn’t want, the robbery of our oil revenue without the creation of an oil fund, the blocking of every proposal to the Smith Commission from 56 out of Scotland’s 59 MPs – and Westminster has seemed able to cope with it just fine.
The UK Parliament has literally centuries of experience of ignoring “whinging Jocks”. Why would something have to give this time?
In truth our heart sank at the early mention of “the international community”, but let’s put on a brave face and hear about this “series of measures”.
Yeah yeah, and while we’re dreaming we’d like a magic castle and a pony. Now tell us about the “series of measures” when they don’t, Pete.
Blah blah blah stalling stalling stalling. There’s nothing undemocratic or unconsensual about an election, including a plebiscitary one. We’re almost 900 words in and there’s still no sign of the promised plan. Series of measures, please.
Wait, are you telling us we haven’t already made clear that we’re happy to discuss a referendum with them at any time for the last four years? That’s… interesting.
SERIES. OF. MEASURES. PLEASE.
Woah, easy there now, tiger! SNP MPs declining to serve on public bill committees? I mean, we want independence just as much as the next website but surely there’s no need to go straight to the nuclear option? How could we possibly deprive them of the pleasure of the company of Pete Wishart in their daily deliberations over important matters of state? We’re not MONSTERS.
In so far as those things would have any effect at all – which of course they wouldn’t – they’re all things you should already have been doing since the day of the Brexit vote. The minute the UK made clear it was going to ride roughshod over the vote of the Scottish people, Scotland’s supposed champions in the House Of Commons should have been making an unholy racket.
Instead we’ve had a thousand scenes of Ian Blackford standing up and loudly insisting Scotland would not be dragged out of the EU against its will, then sitting back down on his well-upholstered rear and doing nothing as the Tories got on with doing just that.
We’ve had a pro-indy majority at Holyrood for 13 years and the one and only time it tried “legislating on the edge of its devolved powers” Westminster just slapped it down immediately and Holyrood went and sat meekly in the corner muttering under its breath. That was two years ago and nothing similar has been tried since.
Wait, was that it? Are we done? All you’ve got beyond that is to go moaning to other countries that England won’t do what we want? We’re sure they’ll be lavish with tea and biscuits and “Oh, poor you”, but they’re hardly going to interfere. Especially if all we’ve done is have a bit of a sulk and boycott some Westminster committees.
Oh dear God above. Would they, aye?
Let’s just try to imagine for a moment how that would go. Even if, say, France and Germany had the slightest interest in meddling in internal UK politics – which we can promise you, readers, they absolutely 100% do not – what would they do about it?
Issue a strongly-worded statement in the European Parliament? The thing the UK just left because a majority of English people thought it already poked its nose into the UK’s business too much? We can all picture the Daily Mail headlines right now. If you can think of anything more likely to completely entrench English public and political resistance to a second indyref than Brussels demanding one, we’d love to hear it.
But in any event, the First Minister has insisted, over and over again, that one thing she will never, ever countenance is an “unofficial” referendum.
Was she lying all those times? Surely not?
The only route, of course, to obtaining a “legal” referendum without Westminster’s co-operation would be to go to court to try to establish its legality. But not only has the Scottish Government unforgivably and indefensibly failed to do such a thing for four years, it’s been actively opposing an attempt by someone else to do it for them. Pete Wishart himself has been particularly vocally hostile to the idea.
So what then?
The fact that the Scottish Government hasn’t attempted to establish legality in court in fact clearly shows that they haven’t “tried absolutely everything”. Indeed, they haven’t even tried the single most obvious thing. But in any event, the international community has been allowing it to stand just fine so far.
The Scottish people have voted for the party demanding a second indyref three times since the Brexit vote, it’s been voted for twice by the Scottish Parliament, it’s been formally requested twice and refused twice, and “the international community” has done precisely hee-haw about it. There’s barely been so much as a mild expression of dissent. But now Wishart thinks they’ll suddenly take up arms and rush to our aid?
Yep, it looks like that’s the end of the “series of measures”. We’re going to gripe and grumble a bit in the Commons – gosh, won’t that be an unprecedented novelty for the UK government? – and then we’re going to turn and make sad eyes at Europe, and that’s it. That’s all we’ve got.
The international community – which stood by and did nothing while the Spanish government sent in riot police to crack the head of old ladies and put a whole raft of democratically-elected members of Parliament in jail for holding a peaceful vote – is apparently going to rush to save Scotland, even though Scotland (unlike Catalonia) was actually given a referendum just six years ago and voted No, and even though the UK isn’t any of Europe’s business any more and the EU no longer has any political leverage over it.
What consequences? This site has been asking fruitlessly for months for any Plan A believers to tell us what we actually have to threaten the UK government with.
It has a comfortable overall majority, and of course a 12-to-1 mega-majority against independence, since Labour and the Lib Dems oppose it too. The Tories haven’t won an election in Scotland for the best part of 70 years. They have almost no MPs there to lose, and even when they had literally none after the Thatcher/Major era it didn’t make them concede anything. With zero MPs they still opposed devolution right to the bitter end and just days ago Boris Johnson said it had been a “disaster”.
(The alert among us will also recall Ruth Davidson’s ill-fated attempt to draw a “line in the sand” under that devolution almost a decade ago.)
Does it sound like they’re bothered what we think?
If we’re honest, our expectations for Pete Wishart’s Masterplan had been extremely low. But yesterday’s effort dug a very deep hole and tunnelled so far under them that we didn’t even feel the earth tremble as it passed underneath. His article is a gross and cynical insult to the intelligence of anyone who read it.
(He did, of course, delete all critical replies.)
But worse than that, it’s something the SNP were and are clearly happy to be said in public by one of their senior elected representatives. They plainly believe that at least a percentage of their supporters will still swallow it.
And that, folks, is because they think you’re stupid. They think you’re stupid. They think you’re really, really stupid.


The day job

We ’ ve just been alerted to a new FOI response .
It pretty much speaks for itself .
For what we keep being told is still the SNP ’ s entire reason for existence , the party had delegated just seven members of Scottish Government staff to work , part-time , on the update of the case for independence that it promised in 2019 to produce .
By its own admission it had done no work on the subject for the four previous years .
There are 18,200 people working in Scotland ’ s devolved civil service .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spare just seven of them to devote SOME of their time to working towards the SNP ’ s ostensible primary goal , because there ’ s a bug going around that 1.7 % of the population has caught , over 96 % of whom have survived it .
We ’ re not entirely sure how much civil service manpower is taken up on a day-to-day basis by COVID-19 .
It doesn ’ t seem to us like there ’ s all that much to be done about it administratively – things like furlough @ @ @ @ @ @ @ service , and the actual work of upholding legislative restrictions and dealing with sick people are the domains of the police and NHS Scotland .
Yet apparently it ’ s occupying every last minute of every single day for every minister , MSP and government employee in the land .
This site produced a 72-page book on the case for independence from scratch in a week , in our spare time from running the site .
But apparently the entire might of the Scottish Government and the Scottish civil service can ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in five years , and it isn ’ t even trying to .
Yet still we ’ re expected to believe that the SNP is preparing to hold an independence referendum next year .
They really do think your heads button up the back , folks .

We’ve just been alerted to a new FOI response. It pretty much speaks for itself.
But it’s worth pondering the numbers.
For what we keep being told is still the SNP’s entire reason for existence, the party had delegated just seven members of Scottish Government staff to work, part-time, on the update of the case for independence that it promised in 2019 to produce. By its own admission it had done no work on the subject for the four previous years.
There are 18,200 people working in Scotland’s devolved civil service. But apparently it’s not possible to spare just seven of them to devote SOME of their time to working towards the SNP’s ostensible primary goal, because there’s a bug going around that 1.7% of the population has caught, over 96% of whom have survived it.
(The real survival rate will be far higher than 96%, because many people get the virus without even knowing it. The 96% only includes those who’ve had a positive test.)
We’re not entirely sure how much civil service manpower is taken up on a day-to-day basis by COVID-19. It doesn’t seem to us like there’s all that much to be done about it administratively – things like furlough payments are handled by the UK civil service, and the actual work of upholding legislative restrictions and dealing with sick people are the domains of the police and NHS Scotland.
Yet apparently it’s occupying every last minute of every single day for every minister, MSP and government employee in the land.
This site produced a 72-page book on the case for independence from scratch in a week, in our spare time from running the site. But apparently the entire might of the Scottish Government and the Scottish civil service can’t revise the White Paper a little bit in five years, and it isn’t even trying to.
Yet still we’re expected to believe that the SNP is preparing to hold an independence referendum next year. They really do think your heads button up the back, folks.