Why the indy movement needs to crowdfund

Someone pointed out to me today that someone on social media has been wondering why independence publications, sites, and bloggers like myself, Bella Caledonia, Wings Over Scotland, Scotland Goes Pop, iScot magazine, Indylive etc, do fundraisers and ask for donations whereas the British nationalist representatives on social media generally don’t. Now I should point out that – donate button notwithstanding – this article is not a plea to you to give me money. It’s intended as an explanation of why the independence movement has to be a lot more public and transparent about its fundraising activities than anti-independence campaigners need to be. Anti-independence campaigners can raise money in ways denied to pro-independence campaigners, ways which are less obvious to the public, and that means that they can falsely claim a moral high ground to which they are not entitled.

There are some very simple answers to the visibility of fundraising on the part of independence supporters, and the invisibility of fundraising attempts by opponents of independence.  Partly it’s because if you support and defend the status quo, it’s because you’re already doing well out of it, and because you can rely upon the support of others who are likewise doing well from the status quo. People who are already comfortably off and who are supporting a particular constitutional stance because it creates and supports the conditions of their financial comfort don’t need to do fundraisers. Independence challenges the status quo. Independence is seen by the rich and powerful as a threat to their financial interests. That means that the rich are going to oppose independence, and will fund groups and individuals which campaign against Scottish independence.

Organisations like Scotland in Union can fundraise by asking a small number of very rich people to give it money, but the Duke of Nawbaggery or the Red White & Blue Hedgefund Management Company Ltd are highly unlikely to dig deep into their vast funds and toss a big wedge of banknotes to the independence cause. Independence campaigners rely on small donations from a large number of ordinary people, and that in turn means donations buttons and annual fundraising campaigns. It’s a lot more work to raise a large number of small donations than it is to raise a small number of large donations. You have to be a lot more open about it, you have to advertise the need more widely. This is one of the differences between being a part of a genuine grassroots movement, and being a part of an astroturfing outfit where the only grassroots thing about them is the claim they make on their website.

If you can get two large donations that run into five figures, then you don’t need to ask thousands of people to give you a couple of quid each. The independence campaign is a genuine grassroots movement. We don’t have links to big business. We don’t have links to the superwealthy. We are most definitely not a part of the establishment. The establishment controls the wealth, and the establishment will use its wealth to protect its own interests. The British establishment is going to fund anti-independence campaigners in ways that pro-independence campaigners will never have access to. When you rely on a small number of large donations, you can fundraise in quiet. When you rely on a large number of small donations, you have to fundraise in public.

Some opponents of independence may have access to other sources of funding, sources which are most definitely denied to pro-independence campaigners. In the January 2017 issue of iScot magazine the writer and broadcaster Tom Morton wrote about his decision to back Scottish independence in a future referendum although he’d been a vocal supporter of the No campaign in 2014. Discussing his previous writing in support of Scotland remaining a part of the UK, he said, “I received peculiar invitations to come to London for discussions with someone who apparently specialised in crisis PR for sensitive political situations. They’d pay me to write more pro-union blogs. I never really got to the bottom of that …”

Tom declined the opportunity to write anti-independence blogs for payment and never met with the people who offered him the “peculiar” invitation, saying in his piece for iScot that the whole thing sounded “dodgy”.  Without any shadow of a doubt the people who approached Tom Morton will have approached others who wrote or campaigned against Scottish independence. They may not have been the only group making such offers. Some opponents of independence will not have been as suspicious as Tom Morton was about accepting the invitation. They may very well still be writing and blogging in opposition to independence and for all we know may still be receiving payments for doing so.

Now, for the sake of clarity, I have no idea who any of these people might be, and am not pointing any fingers at any individuals. I don’t know who they are. I am certainly not suggesting that everyone who writes in opposition to independence on social media is in the pay of some secretive organisation, just that it is highly probable that some of them will have been approached and made offers by such a group. No doubt the usual suspects will accuse me of being a conspiracy theorist for discussing this, but the point is that it is a matter of record that shadowy groups and organisations have offered anti-independence campaigners money in order to write in opposition to independence.

Even if someone has accepted such secret payments, they’re certainly not going to admit to taking money from some “dodgy” outfit in London, but they will condemn independence writers and bloggers for running crowdfunding campaigns. These are probably the same people who accuse pro-independence writers and campaigners of being stooges of the Kremlin. If they take a secret shilling from suspicious people, they don’t have to run crowdfunders or donation campaigns and so can condemn independence campaigners of supposedly only being in it for the money.

There is a greater need for full time pro-independence writers and campaigners on social and digital media in order to counter the anti-independence bias of the great majority of the Scottish media. Those who oppose independence have the support and backing of the great majority of the media, they do not rely on social and digital media to get their message out to anything like the same extent. There is far less of a need for full time anti-independence campaigners on social and digital media because anti-independence campaigners are already gainfully employed and well paid by the Daily Mail, the Scotsman, the Express, the Daily Record etc etc and dispiritingly etc. Those publications, and the broadcast media which takes its news agenda from them, are far more likely to offer paid writing opportunities and appearance fees to opponents of independence than to supporters of independence. When was the last time James Kelly of Scots Goes Pop or yours truly were on the telly talking about independence? Yeah. Exactly.

The visibility of fundraising efforts within the independence movement is a sign that the independence movement really is a grassroots popular movement. It means that this is a movement that ordinary people in Scotland own and control, not big business, the aristocracy, the super-rich, or shadowy “PR organisations”. The lesson here is that the only way that the independence movement can continue to grow and flourish is if ordinary people put their hands in their pockets to support it.


weegingerdug.scot

The Wee Ginger Dug has got a new domain name, thanks to Indy Poster Boy, Colin Dunn @Zarkwan. http://www.indyposterboy.scot/ You can now access this blog simply by typing www.weegingerdug.scot into the address bar of your browser, the old address continues to function, the new one redirects to the blog. The advantage of the new address is that it’s a lot easier to remember if you want to include a link to the blog in leaflets, posters, or simply to tell a friend about it. Many thanks to Colin.


gingercartoonWee Ginger Donations & Speaking engagements

You can help to support this blog with a Paypal donation. Just click the donate button.
Donate Button

Or you can donate by making a payment directly into a special bank account, or by sending a cheque or postal order. If you’d like to donate by one of these methods, please email me at weegingerbook@yahoo.com and I will send the necessary information. Please also use this email address if you would like the dug and me to come along to your local group for a talk.

Many thanks.

71 comments on “Why the indy movement needs to crowdfund

  1. Weechid says:

    If I win Euromillions this week I’ll gladly fund the whole campaign and I’ll be coming to folk like you for advice on how best to go about it. It’s the only reason I buy a ticket.

  2. Ken McDonald says:

    Paul,

    I’m working with Phantom Power on a promo video that captures most of what you’ve said.

    I posted out a few weeks again that most indy supporters bankroll unionist media outlets more than indy outlets.

    Given that the BBC alone receives £ 320 million in Scotland, it’s fair to imagine that £ 160m of that money comes from Indy licence holders. Divide by 147 quid per licence and that’s over 1 million households alone.

    Wings, being the indy totem pole attracts around £ 100k per year – and I haven’t even looked at SKY TV contributions. Whilst I’m not advocating anyone stops funding the BBC – I just want to bring to indy supporters attention that whilst the small army of bloggers are promoting a cause that resonates with them, unless they match fund alternative indy causes then they are being ‘ part of the media problem’

    If possible, would you be willing to do a small piece to camera as part of the video which will be recording in the coming weeks?

    Yours aye

    Ken

    Ken McDonald ken@iscot.scot

    >

    • Fillofficer says:

      That’s a great point ken, everyone who pays the telly tax is funding anti-independence propaganda but they can’t do withoot bake-off ffs. Just gonnae no !

      • Robert Harrison says:

        That’s why I don’t pay the license fee I just use the Internet or my game consoles hence the state can’t charge me for it

    • Clive Scott says:

      Ken,
      “Whilst I’m not advocating anyone stops funding the BBC” – why not? I cannot understand why so many of the 100,000+ SNP members pay the BBC tax. Nor do I understand why SNP MP’s and MSP’s are so meek and mild when being interviewed by the BBC rather than calling them out at every opportunity for the Britnat propagandist useful idiots that they are.

      • Dan Huil says:

        Well said, Clive. I also cannot understand why some pro-indy supporters continue to pay the bbc tax. Are they worried what their neighbours might say? Chances are their neighbours are waiting for someone they know to openly say they refuse to pay the bbc tax; and chances are they will follow their neighbour’s open example.

  3. Jimbo2 says:

    Totally agree that the grassroots need to crowdfund and as you say needs to be public and transparent. I do feel that with a number of groups related to the indy movement, the latter is lacking. I have contributed to many pro-indy crowdfunders, however I continue to feel that financial transparency within some groups is missing. Most of these groups are not officially registered with any regulator e.g. OSCR. I see them doing the crowdfunders as well as bucket collections at events, but checking their websites reveals little or no information on their finances.

    I have even seen a live broadcast of a volunteer putting their hand in a donations bucket to fund their expenses for the day. This sort of thing is not on and will only provide the unionists with ammunition against the indy movement. We have to be scrupulously clean and above board.

    Each group must publish clear financial information on where its funds come from and how the funds are spent. As these groups answer to no body (e.g. OSCR) we must have clarity on who within these groups decides as to how donations are spent.. is the decision that of an individual or the group as a whole? Transparency is vital.

    • stewartb says:

      Jimbo2, you refer to OSCR. You do mean the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator?

      Are the grassroots pro-indy groups you seem to be referring to, by implication, charities? News to me!

      Is is not more often mission-driven, social media entrepreneurs and/or citizen journalists that win the continuing financial support from their ‘market’ because of judgements made on the quality and volume of their output and the trust they earn?

      OK with transparency, but if you have a problem with a particular organisation make it explicit – otherwise your comments could be taken as tarring all with a ‘distrusting’ brush!

  4. […] Wee Ginger Dug Why the indy movement needs to crowdfund Someone pointed out to me today that someone on social media has been wondering why […]

  5. Jimbo2 says:

    Call me old fashioned stewartb, but i do like to know exactly how my hard-earned cash is spent. Crowdfunding is a relatively new phenomena and is largely unregulated. Without publishing clear, transparent records, we leave ourselves very open to criticism. By the way, I have no problem with any particular organisation, I’m talking about the grassroutes movement in general.

    • hettyforindy says:

      Why would you give to a crowdfunder unless they are transparent, and it would be useful to know of any ‘ grassroutes’ movement groups, blogs, or anything else you refer to, that are pro Scottish Independence, that are not being transparent, so we can all share and treat them with caution. Thanks.

      I see no crowdfunder for pro independence writers or bloggers that are functioning illegally or using underhand practices to report on or in trying to counter the 100% anti independence movement, and their compliant media. It is though not that difficult to find backed up, factual articles online about practices being used by some unionists that appear to be less than transparent. They certainly don’t rely on anyone’s ‘hard earned cash’ to get what they want.

      This whole article is about why pro independence writers and bloggers need to crowd fund, and why the British nationalist, anti independence writers and organisations do not need to crowdfund.

      There’s really nothing valid to complain about with regard to anyone raising funds from the people they are representing who otherwise would have no voice. It’s called democracy, perhaps democracy light, but given the current UK political climate, it’s all we have.

      Keep supporting those causes, if you really want your ‘hard earned cash’ to be spent in the interests of actual democracy, for the benefit of all, and for Scottish Independence, as we all do.

  6. Roger White says:

    As a blogger of the opposing stripe (I prefer pro-union rather than anti-independence you won’t be surprised to know) may I comment on one aspect of this subject? In doing so I assume we saw the same tweet that seems to have kicked off online discussion on the subject. If I read that correctly, the comment was specifically about blogs rather than substantial websites or publications. The act of writing a blog doesn’t in itself require anything more than time, a point of view and (hopefully) access to reliable information. I have no problem with anyone seeking funds online. But I do think that in many cases there is a lack of transparency about (a) what purpose money is sought for (b) how much was raised and (c) how it was used. If you trust someone (although not everyone uses their own name online) fair enough. But when I looked at a range of pro-indy online fundraisers I was able to identify not only some good practice but also some that fell into the bad and plain ugly categories. I won’t link to the article as I doubt if you’d want such overt promotion of an opposing viewpoint here but I’m sure anyone who wants to can find it. The idea floating around social media today, and which you have contributed to, that same pro-union blogs are funded by large and sometimes secretive organisations, may give comfort to conspiracy theorists but I’d say to you as I said bluntly to one of them ‘Put up or shut up’. And while I wouldn’t impugn the excellent Tom Morton’s experience four years ago, something a bit more concrete and recent than that please.

    • Roger White says:

      Oops ‘some pro-union blogs …’

      • Gordon Brewer will be inviting you onto his show to argue this strong case for ‘transparency’, Roger. He won’t be inviting Paul,or Sam, or Stu or Derek, or Grouse Beater, or…..even unschooled in the ways of media manipulation, me, on to a show near you any time soon now.
        Never in modern history has an Independence Movement been attacked by such an insuperable level of Establishment Firepower and access to unlimited funds to stifle the democratic process.
        I admire your pluck, if nothing else.

        I wonder who won the week’s skiing with a handmaiden thrown in at the Brit Nat fundraising auction held by the Better Together Filthy Rich?

        “the bad and plain ugly categories2. Really, Mr White, really?

        • “the bad and plain ugly categories.”
          As regulars know, my ire increases in direct relation to the number of my ‘ypographical terrors’.
          Not all rich folk are zoomer yooners. But thanks for you (a),(b), and (c) thoughts.
          I feel no compunction to ‘put up or shut up’.
          We don’t have the wealth of the Bank of England behind us. You do.

        • Deelsdugs says:

          Brilliant Jack!

    • weegingerdug says:

      I didn’t see the original tweet as I no longer engage with twitter. I was told that there was a discussion on social media about funding, and thought that it was a reasonable question which merited a reasonable reply. That’s what I have tried to do here.

      Mentioning Tom Morton’s experience is perfectly valid. It happened. It constitutes evidence that some rather dubious organisations have offered to pay for anti-independence blogs and together with the funding issues of SiU it demonstrates that the anti-independence movement is nothing like as grassroots as it would like the rest of us to believe. Demanding more recent evidence is frankly somewhat disingenuous of you when you won’t engage with the evidence which has been presented and which you don’t seem to deny.

    • Andy Anderson says:

      Thanks for you view Roger. Nice to hear an opposing view.

    • Ian says:

      Something a bit more concrete and recent? How about the difficulties of Scotland in Union, the origins of their funding for 2016 GE and their failure to publicly report large campaign donations which breached rules? Is that concrete and recent enough for you?

      There is irony in you saying that 2014 is so far back in time that you can dismiss any evidence from it as belonging to the distant past. But maybe you are actually right in that respect at least, 2014 is indeed a long time ago, it is almost feels as if a generation has passed.

  7. Macart says:

    So why does the indy movement crowd fund and more particularly it’s writers and sites? That’s easy.

    Because it’s all we have in way of a voice.

    Let’s be crystal clear here. We don’t have the powers of a central government which retains control over broadcast media and its own publicly funded state broadcaster. Last I looked, media barons with access to over 97% of print media weren’t queuing up with cheque book in hand either to support/provide a representative platform. Last, but by no means least, the political establishment, aristocracy, corporate heads and assorted well publicised notables weren’t on bestest terms with either the current Scottish government or the indy support. Y’know, the kind of folk you’d find on your average SiU go to list for a tap.

    So much power, wealth and access. A media almost totally onside in what purports to be a 21st century western democracy. Yet in that democracy almost half a nation would be denied representation, given a voice, a platform to be heard.

    Without crowdfunding, the indy movement would have NO voice whatsoever. Which I’d guess would suit those folks and institutions above just peachy. They’re not exactly big on dissenting voices apparently.

  8. Andy Anderson says:

    I agree with all you say Paul. My only very minor whinge is about a few comments that mention wealth with respect to funding pro independence and pro unionist groups.

    Regarding Scotland in the Union and the recent publicity about the funding of that group you are 100% correct. However I know a couple of very pro unionist people who contribute to there cause and they are not wealthy, comfortable I suppose you would say. Likewise I know a good few pro independence supporters who are modestly well off compared to most, who support people like your good self, and others. I am one of them.

    I fully appreciate Paul why people categorise income levels with politics, generally it is usually true, but you run the risk, albeit a small one of alienating a few. The indy movement is a broad church of political views and should not be categorised to left (poor) and right (wealthy).

    I see nothing wrong with crowdfunding, it is a great way for people to attract funds that in the past would be have been hard to get due to the difficulty of advertising your cause. It is also open and above board, but as it is web based you need to take care for fraud.

    Sorry to everyone, I have the winning ticket for the lottery tomorrow.

    • wm says:

      I take your point Andy about some reasonably well off people who contribute to pro unionist causes, but I think Paul’s point is that these unionist organisations don’t need these donations as they are funded by the 10% of the population who own 70% of the wealth. That does not mean they won’t accept the mugs money, after all that is where they got their wealth in the first place.

    • Cubby says:

      I agree with your comment that there is a broad church of people supporting independence. We should steer well away from alienating anyone who supports independence. No racism no sectarianism no sexism no football stuff. Just decent people wanting independence for Scotland.

  9. Robert Graham says:

    Now who would start to raise doubts and question crowdfunding for Indy supporting websites , let’s say sow a few seeds of doubt as to where the cash is going and how its spent , records and transparency oh f/k off and resorting to the charity commision ha ha , my answer to these obvious tossers is i dont give a monkeys if Paul or any other interesting blogger i might contribute to goes out on the randan and has a good piss up i can see the work he is doing .and so far he aint let anyone down , next times sheets will be called for and maybe a time clock perhaps
    The ones pushing this trip are as has been quoted by the shite shovellers themselves when they call for transparency they are very transparent , now piss off you have been rumbled .

  10. Geacher says:

    “When was the last time……………………….or yours truly were on the telly talking about independence? Yeah. Exactly.”
    Maybe if you wrote with same degree of factual accuracy as Hague, Lovatt, Whyte etc then you might. Y’know if you didn’t riddle your writings with such gaffes as the “VAT on shortbread bought in Edinburgh” or the fictitious “export duty on whisky” or the “Corporation tax/Head Office” nonsense then you might, one day. But I doubt it.
    Also all the guys that I have mentioned above have jobs. Most of the Indy bloggers I have come across don’t.

    • Robert Graham says:

      eh silly me but who exactly are you referring to ? , i can see yer having a wee rant but who is it directed at ? also who the f/k are Hugue- Lovatt & White is that a legal practice possibly , exactly how many indy bloggers do you personally know ? , I realise replying to some people who post on here is akin to having a conversation with a answering machine in the end as utterly pointless .

      • geacher says:

        Well I quoted WGD at the very start of my post, so……. How many indy bloggers do I personally know? Not one, but the ones that I follow are apparently all full time bloggers who are available (at a cost) to give talks to your local Indy group…..that buffoon Peter A Bell is currently trying to get enough gigs for a tour of the North.
        WGD is saying in this blog that only the rich (who are Noers, obviously) can afford to blog without crowdfunding whilst the poor downtrodden indybloggers have to crowdfund, blissfully unaware it seems that the three guys I have mentioned above all have full time jobs. Oh, WGD reference to ” Red White & Blue Hedgefund Management Company Ltd ” is a reference to Neil Lovatt BTW.
        I have seen Paul live, and very entertaining he is too, but like his written stuff, he is long on style, very sadly short on fact and substance.

        • Robert Graham says:

          aye well maybe yer in the wrong place friend , tripe like yours is probably better suited to the scotsman or the other nutters rags ,

          Friend in this instance is not a term of endearment.

          As for quoting Paul please point to the exact words that make reference to him at the start of your frankly deluded rant .

          Your union is on its last legs as shown in the recent deluge of utter tripe thats being pushed , dosnt it trouble you that with 99.99% of the media behind you , we haven’t went away and are probably growing the union is over LIVE WITH IT , england will treat you the same as its treated everyone when their usefulness has ended , where will you go because they dont want you .

          • Andy Anderson says:

            Correct Robert

          • Geacher says:

            Robert… right where I said it was, right here.
            “When was the last time……………………….or yours truly were on the telly talking about independence? Yeah. Exactly.”
            And instead of broad insults, where exactly is my post “deluded”? I’ll wait.

    • Andy Anderson says:

      Have you lost the plot?

      I am retired so I suppose I am unemployed. Money as absolutely nothing to do with supporting Indy.

  11. Alan Gordon says:

    Thanks to WGD for another blog piece, and to Robert Graham for not even trying to keep the eggshells intact. Yes the indy movement needs to crowd fund but crowd funding that need also gives huge strength. The Carmichael court case, he lost his appeal and has to pay his own legal fees (£150k) the Orkney people easily met their fees of 187k, (£215k crowdfunded). Craig Murray, crowdfunded and settled out of court. Stu Wings crowdfund in place, case dropped. There could be legal reasons why cases are dropped or settled before court but one thing that cannot be denied is that having half the population (hopefully more) behind a cause financially will make our opponents think more than twice about using the courts to pick off “ring leaders”/leading voices. Of course we can expect efforts to sow rot and corrosion into the very action that the anti-independence fear.
    Roger White thank you for your input this blog. Tom Morton case, concrete and recent; we are still in the same campaign as the one leading up to 2014, SiU incorporated Nov. 2014. Therefore relevant and concrete and not conspiracy to think there would have been more, less than transparent, trysts set up. It would be naive to think that one group in London with a suitcase of fivers selected only one blogger to approach, he declined and they then said, “oh well, that’s that plan buggered. Do we have a plan B?”
    You seriously don’t think we zip up the back, do you?

  12. wm says:

    You sound a warmer and they usually know fuck all, and you have just proved it

  13. Macart says:

    Remember folks.

    If you’re not impressed with the tone/nature/ content of a comment, then walk on by. Life’s too short. 🙂

  14. Geacher says:

    Did WGD blog that “VAT on shortbread” sold in Edinburgh gets credited to England/rUK not Scotland?
    Yes
    Did he say that Corporation tax gained from profits from a Scottish retail outlet paid by a company whose HO is in rUK get credited to rUK not to Scotland?
    Yes
    Did he say that whisky exported from ports in rUK then the “export tax” got credited to rUK not Scotland?
    Yes.
    All wrong, wrong wrong.

    • wm says:

      All these statements do not say that the tax collected go to the rUK, they go to the WM government, where it is then considered UK tax, and is then devided as they see fit among the devolved governments. It is when the WM government produce their made up GERS figures, they count these tax incomes as English because the main offices for administering all these taxes, are in England, allthough the whisky ect is produced by Scotland. This means that all companies operating in Scotland with their main offices making up their accounts in England, the taxes collected are according to the GERS figures English taxes. Which makes the WM- GERS figures a load of PISH.

  15. Dan Huil says:

    Good to see rabid British nationalists getting desperate. I’d gladly pay for more of the same.

  16. bedelsten says:

    I see a ranter has joined the throng. What fun.

    Moving on.

    The crowdfunding thing works in both directions – the writer has an audience and the audience has a writer – though I am not sure the writer looks at it quite like that (grins). I suspect this must seriously piss off commentators such half man half Weetabix who must prostitute himself to the overlords. supplying bile, vindictiveness and crassness on demand. It also puts the whole phalanx of msm commentators into perspective because, for some strange reason, they think their one thousand words are worth more the WGD’s. But they are just (probably) better paid bloggers whose views are as valid or not as any other blogger. The other thing that must piss off the msm is the viewing figures. WoS has more readers that Good Miserable Scotland has listeners.

    On transparency. WoS, WGD and SGP all detailed their expenses when soliciting funds. None seemed excessive – frugal might be a better description.

    Good luck with the Euromillions.

  17. diabloandco says:

    If I win then there’s a big dod coming your way Paul – though I have to warn you that the only thing I have ever won is a tin of shortbread and at the age of eight I was singularly unimpressed.

  18. chicmac says:

    Yoony cycles only have one wheel. 🙂

  19. grizebard says:

    Congrats, Paul. You have finally acquired a dumbass Yoon “follower”. Every serious blog these days has to have one. Their desperation is increasingly showing because it’s slowly dawning on them that they are on the wrong side of history. Poor things!

  20. murren59 says:

    Just made a small contribution to the wee ginger dug biscuit fund. If I had seen Keechers comments beforehand I would have doubled it…

  21. Happy Shrove Tuesday, guys. It’s Pancake Tuesday, Mardi Gras, Fat Tuesday!
    Time to confess our sins, and toss pancakes!
    Since I declare myself to be the ‘one without sin’ to whom JC referred, let me cast the first stone.
    I have nothing but contempt for anonymous zoomers talking mince.
    I will happily throw the first stone ( in parable of course) at the next middle class ProudScotBut who takes to the Ethernet and implies that she/he is not putting the needs of his English bosses over the needs of his or her fellow Scots.
    That a wee egoist like Ruth Davidson can argue that she took part in a Z list ‘Celebrity’ Bake Off to get her face on the telly during the October Recess, the corollary being that the October week was ‘holiday time’ rather than a normal working week for an MSP, speaks volumes.
    The Leader of the Blue Tories, just like her Red Labour buddy Dugdale, promotes herself above all else.
    When this Cooking For Idiots is screened, the Dead Tree Scrolls will run with it, and we’ll be subjected to photies of this ruddy rotund little carpetbagger all across the MSM.
    Meanwhile don’t have a third child if you are in a low paid job, or are facing Brexit unemployment.
    Ruth will strave your third baby.
    Let ye, who is without sin, toss the first pancake.

  22. wildaboutphotographyblog says:

    It makes you wonder if some mainstream journalists also get a wee top up to their salaries.

  23. Macart says:

    Worth reading this and there’s a lesson for Scotland’s electorate in the article t’boot.

    https://archive.is/gbecu

    and of course…

    https://www.snp.org/labour_s_backing_for_a_job_destroying_brexit_deal_is_unforgivable

    • Dave tewart says:

      Loved reading the last paragraph about Mammy, To the point.
      Wondering why Mother Theresa’s visit to sort out the NI problem isn’t in the EBC news.
      Has she told SF “Now is not the Time”?
      Thanks for the Fintan O’Toole article, really good read and like you recommend it.

  24. Macart says:

    I hear that the usual suspects are STILL banging on about the catastrophe that is Scotland’s major institutions – Education, Police Scotland, NHS, Scotrail… Huh!

    Strangely, I’ve had some recent experience with the Scotland’s NHS and I doubt I could sing their praises more highly. Literally lifesavers to whom I will never be able to repay a debt. Ditto education, vis a vis recent experience.

    I have twins (one of each) and one in particular has no troubles to seek when it comes to learning difficulty (that’s personal, so I won’t go there m’kay). The support my child has received throughout their formative early education was second to none and it has seen that child through to higher education standard where they still receive vital learning support. Now that both have moved on to higher education it’s also probably worth mentioning I have absolutely ZERO problem with paying taxes which ensures our kids receive a tuition fee free higher education. Then there’s Scotrail which, because of my location, I have some experience and use of. Nope. No complaints there either.

    Finally there’s Police Scotland. They’ve lost a couple of heid bummers and had teething problems with mergers. Yet though all that, what matters to the public is what they deliver. I’m looking oot the windae just now and I’m not seeing zombie survival mode in COD. There’s no dystopian future carnage happening near as I can tell and there aren’t any riots running amok up and doon the street. Well with crime across the board on a forty year low, I’m struggling to see the problem tbh. They do a good job under pretty trying circumstances, but then the same can be said for each of those institutions.

    Yet the political class continue to use them for a goto punchbag. Awesome plan.

    I wonder what it’s like elsewhere in the UK for these institutions? Maybe worth folk taking a look around and comparing. Could be they might even come to appreciate that there are times and places where words such as catastrophe and crisis are more appropriately applied.

  25. Arthur thomson says:

    Life being what it is, I haven’t been able to contribute to the Indy movement recently but I am sure that will change sometime soon. What I have contributed in the past was given as an expression of thanks to Indy bloggers for work they had done, not in expectation of what they would do in the future. It was a gift and I neither expect nor want an account of what it was spent on. I’m not into buying people.

  26. Robert Graham says:

    Just popped in to see if the latest interloper had started his shift yet.

    out of 10 i would give him or her a very poor 3 , definatly room for improvement there

    The subjects he or she chose to question Paul’s opinion on we’re pretty easily countered , the subjects being VAT which of course is probably for the most part reserved

    I wonder if Lying is a requirement of the people who defend this union because i dont think i have ever seen any arguments supporting the union not being littered with lies and vague misinterpretation of known facts , I wonder why they resort to these tactics ? cant they find anything to defend their position .

  27. Macart says:

    Further to my earlier comment above. What constitutes catastrophe and crisis in the real world? Y’know, outside of a political class and their pet commentators looking to dramatise the latest essenpee badness.

    War and its victims seem pretty catastrophic. Seems everywhere you look these days that you have mass migrations and misery heaped upon misery for survivors fleeing impossible conditions in search of safe haven. Yeah, I’d say that’s a humanitarian crisis.

    Recent history from India, Indonesia, Mexico and Japan could teach us a thing or two about catastrophe. Earthquake, tsunami, nuclear power stations under catastrophic failure, global warming causing extreme weather conditions going from unseasonal storms/floods all the way through to full blown hurricanes with attendant human suffering, loss of life and widespread damage. Those again would, under ANY reasonable assessment, constitute catastrophe and crisis.

    Politically? Even in our own backyard it’s fairly easy to spot when true injustice has been enacted against the population. When a Conservative government for instance, breaks/endangers existing national and international agreements in pursuit of personal agenda. When a system of government fully ignores the consequences for those in its care to pursue their own ideology regardless of cost or collateral damage to the point where they visit constitutional crisis, economic suffering and political chaos upon their own populations. I’d say that qualifies as both catastrophe and crisis.

    Mibbies their idea of crisis is different from other folks though. (shrugs)

    • Robert Graham says:

      I guess they will have to invent another word or words to ratchet up the dramatic point they are trying to get across , George whats name you know the one who apparently was qualified to hold the place of i believe it was the boss of NATO secretary general i think was the title , anyway he said something not many people had heard at the time namely if scotland votes for independence it would be a cataclysmic event of global proportions , now that seems to predict THE END OF DAYS cant be more alarming than that eh I wonder what the esteemed george is up to now i believe he was made a lord , it’s amazing how some people who exhibit so little talent progress so far , he is now on a par with the Moan person who said she would leave in the event of a YES vote , funny old world where the shite floats to the top .

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s