Jump to content
Cold?
Local
Radar
Snow?

Scottish Politics 2011-2017


Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: Hayward’s Heath - home, Brighton/East Grinstead - work.
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and storms
  • Location: Hayward’s Heath - home, Brighton/East Grinstead - work.

    I think it's arrogant to take either view. It is arrogant for the YES side to say we'll keep using it "end of" but it's equally arrogant for the NO side or the rUK to stamp their foot and say "no you won't, end of". It's going to need some negotiation and a lot of head scratching, plus a lot of weighing up of how the debt is handled if Scotland isn't using the pound.

     

    I agree that it should have been given some thought before now. I would have been more comfortable if we'd had something along the lines of, "We'll continue to use the pound until everything has been worked out, but we will have our own currency as soon as is practicable".

     

    Yes, exactly. And it is extremely short sighted to say that we will work it out after the vote. That is too late for both sides if the yes vote wins and could lead to some very difficult times between a newly independent Scotland and the remainder of the UK. 

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Spotted a post you think may be an issue? Please help the team by reporting it.
    • Replies 30.9k
    • Created
    • Last Reply

    Top Posters In This Topic

    • Scottish-Irish Skier

      8874

    • mountain shadow

      1528

    • skifreak

      1435

    • frogesque

      1306

    Top Posters In This Topic

    Popular Posts

    And that ignorant, offensive, rant sums up exactly why the YES campaign failed  

    Good god. What a load of boarish spiteful bile from bad losers has been posted during the night. I actually dread to think how Scotland would be run if this is representative of how the yes vote behav

    I'm disappointed in the lack of grace shown by some across the net in accepting this No vote. A complete lack of any empathy and understanding as to why fellow Scots didn't vote Yes.   I personally

    Posted Images

    Posted
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level

    Its a mandate to negotiate independence not a menu with all items listed and priced.However currency is a minor matter when all is said and done.We will have a curency it will be Sterling.There is a certain deliberate calculated spin by no campaigners that yes should have everything priced and placed before the vote.Its just incredible nonsense.Its not a house we are selling we are creating a new nation.It has to be accepted that in negotiations some things will stay and others go.The question is not what currency do you want it starts with do you want to be a nation or not.If you can't answer yes to being a nation then nothing else really matters.Its not a leap in the dark its accepting you want change and will work to shape the new nation.

    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl
  • Weather Preferences: Freezing fog, frost, snow, sunshine.
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl

    New nation, accept change.

    Scots who prefer to remain in UK have a voice too.

    No will prevail

    This is a bit vacuous, is it not?

    2 Labour MSPs rumoured to be preparing to break from Party before vote.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level

    Heard it was one Rab! But if its two all the better.Not sure if its Darling or Murphy lol!Also expectingthe Sun to be Yes by Monday!

    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Calgary, Canada (1230m asl)
  • Weather Preferences: Wind driven falling snow
  • Location: Calgary, Canada (1230m asl)

    New nation, accept change.

    Scots who prefer to remain in UK have a voice too.

    No will prevail

     

    Maybe I'm being thick BB but what does your first line actually mean? :unknw:

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Highland Scotland
  • Location: Highland Scotland

    A few more thoughts on polls! YG where it's asked the question has continued to be out on it's own with Labour leading in Scotland for Westminster Voting Intention. The IPSOS Mori Westminster VI poll out on Friday has the SNP 11% (13% ex don't knows/ wont votes) ahead of Labour in the Scotland subset.

    In terms of Scottish Seats, Electoral Calculus predicts these figures for the May 2015 UK General Election:

     

    SNP: 40 MPs (+34)Lab: 16 MPs (-25)Con:  3 MPs (+ 2)L/D:  0 MPs (-11)
    That sort of result would on current Lib Dem poll ratings propel the SNP into the the third UK party in the House of Commons solely on Scottish representation. Constitutional implications galore, potentially holding the balance of power, potentially being invited to form a collation and govern the UK and to get the Cabinet representation without SNP MPs from Scottish Seats in English only departments of state would require the SNP to occupy the very senior Cabinet positions.

    Does the UK look sustainable in it's current constitutional format?

    Edited by skifreak
    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level

    Not only that Ski Freak I believe a majority SNP at Westminster means they can declare independence even if we had lost this current referendum.The Majority Scottish Westminster SNP MPs gives them the power to declare independence.The reason being the majority of Scots would have then voted for MPs with control of their constitution in the sovereign parliament.That's why Westminster gave the temporary powers to Holyrood to make it legal.No such legal bar exists in Westminster.It would be declaring unilateral independence and its recognised in international law.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl
  • Weather Preferences: Freezing fog, frost, snow, sunshine.
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl

    Not only that Ski Freak I believe a majority SNP at Westminster means they can declare independence even if we had lost this current referendum.The Majority Scottish Westminster SNP MPs gives them the power to declare independence.The reason being the majority of Scots would have then voted for MPs with control of their constitution in the sovereign parliament.That's why Westminster gave the temporary powers to Holyrood to make it legal.No such legal bar exists in Westminster.It would be declaring unilateral independence and its recognised in international law.

    In pragmatic terms, that wouldn't happen in a billion years.

    We need to be careful that we don't cause a constitutional crisis. Leave the party, yes, but leave quietly and don't punch some one on your way out.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level

    To anyone who doubts the seriousness of the leaking of insider information on BBC about RBS.The implication is quite simple if you leak information it changes share prices before the markets open.The shares price is affected and people can purchase shares with knowledge of their likely value before it changes in the market.Its called fraud!

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level

    Rab that wasn't my point.I meant if we vote no and are still in the British state.If we vote yes that's negotiating independence.If we vote no and then SNP win the next general election then the mandate would come back into play except without needing Westminster's agreement.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE

    Not only that Ski Freak I believe a majority SNP at Westminster means they can declare independence even if we had lost this current referendum.The Majority Scottish Westminster SNP MPs gives them the power to declare independence.The reason being the majority of Scots would have then voted for MPs with control of their constitution in the sovereign parliament.That's why Westminster gave the temporary powers to Holyrood to make it legal.No such legal bar exists in Westminster.It would be declaring unilateral independence and its recognised in international law.

    Scotland doesn't currently have the powers to declare sovereignty. The referendum although viewed as decisive by Westminster does not lead to official independence until both Westminster and Holyrood pass legislation. You'll see that even the Scottish Government agrees on this matter. Scotland could call defacto independence but would be an international outcast, think of how many countries would refuse to recognise it because of their own internal issues.

     

    This issue came up during the Quebec campaign, the judgement was made that a unilateral independence would not be recognized internationally and frankly would be disastrous for Scotland both economically and politically..

     

    Sorry November but as much as you'd like this to be a Scots only matter its a bit more complicated than that.

     

    In Scotland’s Future the Scottish Government set out their view of how a transition in preparation for independence would work: “Existing constitutional arrangements in Scotland will provide the basis for the transition to independent statehood, with additional powers transferred as soon as possible after the referendum, giving the Scottish Parliament the ability to declare independent statehood for Scotland in the name of the sovereign people of Scotland ...

    Edited by nick sussex
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level

    Nick you are confusing Holyrood MSPs with Westminster MPs.Holyrood MPs have no power over the constitution but MPs do.They as a majority in Westminster from Scotland can declare independence.Its theoretical but legal.It was talked about before the Scottish Parliament was set up as a theoretical SNP victory at Westminster.The MPs have the authority MSPs don't.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Highland Scotland
  • Location: Highland Scotland

    Rab that wasn't my point.I meant if we vote no and are still in the British state.If we vote yes that's negotiating independence.If we vote no and then SNP win the next general election then the mandate would come back into play except without needing Westminster's agreement.

    If we vote yes we don't need Westminster's permission to be independent. Even arch Thatcherite Unionist Michael Forsyth agrees with that, he's made the case in the past that once there exists a Scottish Parliament it can repeal the Union with England Act dissolving the UK and constitutionally Westminster could do nothing about it. It couldn't challenge it legally because the Union would already be over and anyway the Treaty of Union would stand in the way of Westminster stopping Scotland leaving.

    One of the ironies in this situation is that for all the stuff about being 'bought and sold for English gold', the Treaty of Union was actually pretty clever, it is unique in that binds the Westminster Parliament for all time - it is the one constraint on the absolute sovereignty of the Crown in Parliament and it stops that absolute sovereignty it claims at the border!

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level

    Nick Slovenia and Croatia declared unilateral independence and so did Eire.Its not illegal and I accept theoretical but there would be no permission needed from Westminster.

    Ski I know that but we have to accept that there is a possibility of a no vote and where would Scotland be with a majority of MPs elected wanting independence and Westminster saying no you had your referendum and you lost.It would leave us with a decision to make.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Highland Scotland
  • Location: Highland Scotland

    This issue came up during the Quebec campaign, the judgement was made that a unilateral independence would not be recognized internationally and frankly would be disastrous for Scotland both economically and politically.

    The transfer of all reserved powers under either a Section 30 order of or amendment to the 1998 Scotland Act soon after a YES vote is the way forward in the white paper as you quoted, it is the reasonable, consensual route. However, the Edinburgh Agreement is binding, if Scotland votes yes it can not in the traditional sense be a UDI if Westminster plays silly beggars.

    In Scots Law the people of Scotland are Sovereign, not the Westminster Parliament. SS has posted several times regarding Supreme Court rulings (which incidentally are in Scots Law infront of Scottish Judges because of the Treaty of Union's protection of the independence of Scots Law) that the court can not rule decisions of the Scottish Parliament ultra vires because the democratically elected Scottish Parliament represents the considered will of the sovereign people of Scotland.

    There is a constitutional paradox here, the Scottish Parliament can dissolve the United Kingdom, the UK Westminster Parliament can't!

    Edited by skifreak
    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE

    Nick Slovenia and Croatia declared unilateral independence and so did Eire.Its not illegal and I accept theoretical but there would be no permission needed from Westminster.

    Ski I know that but we have to accept that there is a possibility of a no vote and where would Scotland be with a majority of MPs elected wanting independence and Westminster saying no you had your referendum and you lost.It would leave us with a decision to make.

    I never said you'd need permission to declare unilateral independence but just reporting the process which the Scottish Government has stated. Officially Westminster has to pass legislation to transfer certain further powers to Holyrood. If this wasn't the case then the SG wouldn't have included it in their White Paper.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE

    The transfer of all reserved powers under a Section 30 order of the 1998 Scotland Act soon after a YES vote is the way forward in the white paper as you quoted, it is the reasonable, consensual route. However, the Edinburgh Agreement is binding, if Scotland votes yes it can not in the traditional sense be a UDI if Westminster plays silly beggars.

    There is a constitutional paradox here, the Scottish Parliament can dissolve the United Kingdom, the UK Westminster Parliament can't!

    Well I don't expect to see any drama in that respect. Westminster has clearly stated the referendum is decisive, however silly beggars isn't just the preserve of Westminster. Both parties have to be reasonable, hopefully pragmatism wins out, we can but hope!

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: @scotlandwx
  • Weather Preferences: Crystal Clear High Pressure & Blue Skies
  • Location: @scotlandwx

    There is no great media conspiracy theory. There has been fear in the markets for some time and especially so after last Monday's poll, There has also been speculation and talk of contingency plans for Banks and financial institutions relocating for a number of months. Follow the worldwide independent financial media not the Beeb, or the general press.

     

    From FE Trustnet

     

    Seven companies with significant exposure to Scotland saw more than £4bn wiped off their balance sheets when one poll had the “Yes†campaign ahead on Monday.

    These include the likes of Aberdeen Asset Management, Lloyds, Babcock, Standard Life and Royal Bank of Scotland.

     

    “Most of these companies have made back some ground since then, but a win for Alex Salmond could see these stocks fall again,â€

     

    20140911_scot_1.png

     

     

    Karyo I respect you economic knowledge, sorry, I fundamentally disagree re media bias. I may have an eschewed opinion, but where Better Together campaigners who are solid no voters are telling me personally BBC are out of order, this more than qualifies my thoughts that BBC are in breach of their own charter.

     

    AAM Chief Exec came out today supporting indy, the stock falls can be directly attributed to UKGov handling of the potential CU. Not denying the speculation, but as C of E the denial of any honesty on CU versus the maintenance of stance for campaign cost you , me everyone reading - gross misconduct really. That aside I recognise the presentation of risk and this vote is not about short term, we are told it is forever, therefore see Ireland / Iceland top 10 GDP Nations. How many small economies are in this list, ergo How may have Scotland resources?

     

    That still doesn't answer the question as to why the Yes campaign does not have a clear strategy regarding the currency that the electorate can decide upon prior to the vote. Is that because they don't know, can't decide, or even worse - any decision regarding this may make the yes vote a little more unpalatable. I certainly don't know, but would like to know this if it were critical to my country's future.

     

    The CU debate has been done over and over, it's the pound, whether in CU or sterlingisation. The associated arguments of each are intricate, the consensus being that to avoid CU would be so detrimental to both that it would mean economic suicide. 

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Bramley, Hampshire, 70m asl
  • Location: Bramley, Hampshire, 70m asl

    Not only that Ski Freak I believe a majority SNP at Westminster means they can declare independence even if we had lost this current referendum.The Majority Scottish Westminster SNP MPs gives them the power to declare independence.The reason being the majority of Scots would have then voted for MPs with control of their constitution in the sovereign parliament.That's why Westminster gave the temporary powers to Holyrood to make it legal.No such legal bar exists in Westminster.It would be declaring unilateral independence and its recognised in international law.

    The UK Government might be more than a little miffed.

    Countries declaring UDI, usually go through a lot of unpleasant upheaval.....so I wouldn't think this is a great option!!

    Or do you see a viable future as a state similar to Northern Cyprus or Crimea?

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Clayton-Le-Woods, Chorley 59m asl.
  • Weather Preferences: very cold frosty days, blizzards, very hot weather, floods, storms
  • Location: Clayton-Le-Woods, Chorley 59m asl.

    If I don't trust the banks we survived the great depression before, we could survive it again!! Supporting yes is worth it at the end.

     

    The last great depression is long time ago and last a decade. Having another great depression could last a couple of years rather than a decade. Technology has greatly improved since the last Great Depression.

    Edited by pip22
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Gilesgate Moor, Durham City
  • Location: Gilesgate Moor, Durham City

    If I don't trust the banks we survived the great depression before, we could survive it again!! Supporting yes is worth it at the end.

    I'm not sure most people with families and kids to support would agree with a "bring it on" attitude to a depression.

     

    The point is that, whilst there is an element of focusing on the negative, the YES campaign has grown rather too fond of shouting "scaremongering" at the raising of any point about possible negative consequences of independence. A little more recognition that, yes, there are dangers and genuine risks of some things really not going very well would do them no harm. The idea that none of these problems are realistic possibilities is simply head in the sand stuff.

    • Like 4
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Calgary, Canada (1230m asl)
  • Weather Preferences: Wind driven falling snow
  • Location: Calgary, Canada (1230m asl)

    I was thinking about the banking exodus which is supposed to happen after a YES vote. I wonder if anyone has actually studied how many jobs would be lost overall? We've got Standard Life, RBS & Lloyds and whoever else running off to London, but how many jobs would have to come north? For example, there will need to be a repatriation of all mortgage handling back to an iScotland, plus many banks (like the RBS) have their account handling teams and complaint handling teams based in England dealing with Scottish accounts (I know this from years of bitter experience with the RBS). These jobs aren't just call centre type low paid jobs, they will have teams of lawyers, risk assessors, etc. too. It's fine and well claiming that there will be thousands of jobs moving south, but how about a bit of balance and some study of how many jobs would come north?

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Erm, I seem to have woken up in an alternative reality this morning.

     

    WTF. Magnus Gardham? Seriously? I must be still asleep surely.

     

    Archived in case, but there in the Herald for now.

     

     

    https://archive.today/TC8va

     

    All to play for in the final days of debate
     
    Published on 13 September 2014
     
    Magnus Gardham
     
    Braveheart will not be shown on TV until after the referendum, and thank heavens for small mercies.
    Star and director Mel Gibson himself notes that the film is a "historical fantasy" and shouldn't be taken as the accurate portrayal of Wallace's life. And it isn't even as an accurate barometer for Scottish independence, it's a movie not a history lesson. And the battle today is about the future.
     
    I was glad to see Ed Miliband and David Cameron looking more and more like Matt McGinn's Two Heided Man. It might convince any Labour voters out there they would just be getting more of the same. It started with Thatcher, then the betrayal of New Labour, which brought us here in the first place.
     
    In 1979 we had the chance of change. We voted yes and not only got nothing, but our industries were forced to close and the privatisation of our services started. Electric and gas suppliers. Phone. Prison service. Bus and train services. The Royal Mail. And don't forget the 6,000sq nautical miles of Scottish waters now are under Westminster control. All done without the consultation or permission of the people of Scotland. And don't even get me started on the fracking licence for Loch Lomond that's lurking ominously in the shadows.
     
    Now we have the political parties down south asking the populace to "phone a friend", this is the new gameshow for MPs. "We want to stay millionaires", and the media are in cahoots down here , asking people to make the democratic choice for their Scottish friends by phoning them up and telling them to vote No! If this is love-bombing, I'd hate to see them bare their fangs.
     
    Better Together claiming the NHS is safe reflects the last line of Animal Farm, as they all have their snouts in the trough. "The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."
     
    Mind you, as Johann Lamont, leader of the Labour Party in Scotland, has already stated: "Scots are not genetically programmed to make political decisions."
    The UK is set to lose £1,600 billion from Scotland's larder per year. That is why they want to keep us, and keep us in our place.
     
    And Dave, it's not an election, it's a referendum. We know what a referendum is. Scotland has been talking about it for about three years more than you have. And many of us know that the result is for ever, so we can kick the "Effing Tories" as you said so patronisingly in your speech, delivered to your slavering sycophantic supporters, and not the real people in the street.
     
    It's a chance to live in a country whose politics reflect the will of the people of that country. And William Hague admitted at PMQ's that same day: "Giving Scotland more powers if it votes no is not Government policy".
    Gordon Brown says proposals, proposals, proposals. He can propose all he likes, but he can provide NOTHING. At least the timetable at my local train station tells me when the train is coming.
     
    Do these proposals also include a promise to an end to boom and bust? If not, why not ?
     
    Yet again, jam tomorrow: no idea what size of jar, no idea what flavour, but history tells us it will leave a bad taste in the mouth.
     
    How many more vulnerable people are going to commit suicide due to welfare cuts?
     
    How many more foodbanks are going to be opened?
     
    How many more people are going to have to decide this winter between heating or eating?
     
    How many more illegal wars are we going to be dragged into?
     
    How many more of us are going to just ignore it and stay in a zombified trance?
     
    How many more of us are starting to realise "It doesn't have to be like this in Scotland?"
     
    When a Westminster Government has barefaced lied and lied to us for generations, why would they expect us to believe more lies?
     
    If I was non-British living in this country I'd be upset about Better Together and Westminster's use of the term "foreigner" all the time. As if being "foreign" is an awful thing. And wanting to put borders up too. Disgraceful.
    All day on the news, Labour politicians have been saying the SNP are going to promise the world. They seem so out of touch. Every day out campaigning, speaking to people about the referendum and independence for
     
    Scotland, no-one in the Yes campaign talks about the SNP. They are not mentioned.
     
    The people of Scotland understand, what Labour cannot grasp, that this is not about one political party it is about independence for Scotland.
     
    Scotland is a country in its own right but we do not have full powers to run it ourselves. This is a democratic process and the people have the right to vote for or against staying under Westminster rule, and abide by their legislation. At least 50 per cent of the electorate in Scotland want to be Independent which shows 50 per cent plus are unhappy being part of the United Kingdom.
     
    It is not just SNP supporters but Labour, LibDems, Greens and people from all walks of life, doctors, teachers, business people and so on who want this. Let Scotland go in peace if that is what we decide. People who have felt disenfranchised for years have woken up, there has been voter registrations all over the schemes of Scotland, queues stretching around the block of people wanting to have their say. People who haven't even bothered with politics for generations, they are waking up, they are questioning WHY are we like this, is this as good as it gets? How can we change it?
     
    It is a referendum for No to lose, not for Yes to win. And No hopefully have lost it with its arrogance, cynicism, scaremongering, negativity and pure laziness.
     
    The scare stories are getting ridiculous. Next thing it will be "Asteroid hits Earth if Scotland votes for Independence" or "IS to base HQ in Drumchapel if Scotland votes Yes". We are not children, stop trying to frighten us.
    This has been the most negative, fear-driven and insulting political campaign in modern history, and should be treated with nothing other than the total contempt it so richly deserves. The Scots have long memories. And the main culprits, no matter the result, shall suffer.
     
    An entire nation has been rising to its feet before the world and your actions may make them whimper "Sorry! We can't do it!" before sitting mutely and meekly back down to be a global laughing stock.
    What effect did the Cameron /Miliband/ Clegg/Prescott jaunt to Scotland achieve for the Yes campaign on Facebook?
     
    Exactly 24 hours ago before the four horsemen of the Nawpocalypse arrived there were 263,087 followers on Yes Scotland. There were 5,333 more, at 5pm that evening, while the NO Thanks page had lost members. More people, when they find out the facts, are switching to a Yes. Inform and spread a positive message, hope always wins over fear.
     
    The rest of the UK can also look to these actions and stand up and be counted as well. We shall be there for them, Scotland will not let them stand alone if we leave the Union. They are still our friends and neighbours and we can show them the way to change is through following example.
     
    Scotland will be doing the whole of the UK a big favour by voting yes if it brings to an end the political cartel that has been governing us for the last few decades.
     
    The Saltire is now flying over 10 Downing Street (and even the flag protested!), If it's a No vote it will be folded up and put back in its box. Just like Scotland.
     
    Which form of governance do you trust more with your future?Westminster politics or one you can have a hand and a voice in shaping for yourself?
     
    If it's a Yes vote, we may have shot ourselves in the foot for a short while before we re-emerge stronger.
     
    If it's a No, the bullet will be straight through the head and fired by Westminster.

     

     

    LOL

     

    Seems it was attributed to the wrong author. Hilarious. 

     

    Who wrote it and how did that happen?

     

    EDIT. Maybe it's Ian MacWhirter's editorial in the Sunday Herald and someone accidentally uploaded it under Gardham. His face must have been a picture.

    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest
    This topic is now closed to further replies.
    ×
    ×
    • Create New...