Newsnet Main Articles

By G.A.Ponsonby
The Westminster Government has agreed to release £16 million 'Olympic Funding' to Scotland after pressure from the Scottish Government.
The money is a consequence of spending on the London Olympics since the coalition government came to power in May 2010.

The concession by the Tory / Lib Dem administration followed pressure from the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish administrations who had raised the matter as a formal dispute at the Joint Ministerial Committee.

However the refusal of the previous Labour government to transfer the consequentials in the same way means Scotland will not see the full £165 million that should have been transferred.

Today's announcement of the release of the funds was welcomed by SNP MP and Westminster Olympics spokesman Pete Wishart who said:

“16 million is a considerable sum and I am sure the Scottish Government will put it to good use.

“The failure of the previous Labour government to transfer this money has short changed Scotland by over £140 million.”

The failure by the previous Labour government to honour the ‘consequential’ Barnet formula was condemned in the House of Lords in 2009 when Lord Richard argued that Scotland should receive up to £300 million in additional funding as a consequence of what he called the “English expenditure” in the East End of London.

Mr Wishart added:

“£165 million should have come to Scotland and could have been invested in projects that would have supported jobs in our economy.  Even the House of Lords supported the SNP’s case for this money to be properly paid to Scotland.

“It is a great shame and a sign of the neglect the Labour Government showed to Scotland that their refusal to transfer the money left Scotland short.”

The question first arose in 2007 of whether the Barnett formula should be applied to regeneration and transport elements of Olympic funding.

On 14 April 2010, the Scottish Government raised the issue as a formal disagreement with the UK Government under the protocol on "Dispute avoidance and resolution" which now forms part of the Memorandum of Understanding between the UK Government and the devolved administrations.

The Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive notified the UK Government of their wish to be parties to the disagreement on 30 April 2010 and 24 June 2010 respectively.  The issue was escalated to a dispute under the protocol on 13 September 2010.

Following further consideration, administrations have agreed:

  • to reaffirm their shared commitment to the success of the 2012 Olympics and other major sporting events in the UK.
  • to reaffirm their shared commitment to the principles of good communication, close co-operation and mutual respect as the means of avoiding and resolving disputes, and to the use and benefit of the JMC's dispute-resolution protocol as set out in the Memorandum of Understanding between the UK Government and the devolved administrations.
  • the importance of learning lessons from all disputes in order to make them less likely to arise in the future. In this instance, they noted that agreement was reached in earlier discussions of this dispute that decisions on the application of the Barnett formula should "always be evidence based, be undertaken in a timely manner and in consultation with the devolved administrations". (This wording was agreed previously and is now included in HM Treasury's Statement of Funding Policy which was published alongside the UK Spending Review in autumn 2010.)
  • that there have been significant changes in public finances since this dispute first arose and that they should therefore not revisit decisions on the Olympics budget first made by the previous UK Government.
  • that the Scottish Government, the Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive will receive a one-off sum equivalent to the Barnett formula consequentials of relevant changes to Olympics funding since the present UK Government took office in May 2010. These sums amount to £30.2m, of which the Scottish Government will receive £16m, the Welsh Government £8.9m and the Northern Ireland Executive £5.4m (rounded to the nearest £100,000).
  • the importance, firstly, of reviewing thoroughly the costs and benefits of the 2012 Olympic Games and other major sporting events in the UK and, secondly, of governments co-operating on and sharing such studies.


# Saltire Groppenslosh 2011-12-22 20:54
Woo hoo hoo, what pub are we going to? Just kidding. (:D)

Good news and the money will b put to good use no doubt but why did we have to shout so hard about a Barnett consequentials item that should have been automatic and much much more.

This is precisely the reason that we need independence. We'll get ripped off every time just like the carbon levy.
# Alba4Eva 2011-12-22 22:47
Glad you mentioned the stolen £100 million...

At least we have an SNP Scottish government fighting on our side... we certainly need it against a ruthless and uncaring ToryLib Westminster mob.
# RTP 2011-12-22 21:24
However the refusal of the previous Labour government to transfer the consequentials in the same way means Scotland will not see the full £165 million that should have been transferred.

Another union dividend Scotland again screwed by Brown and co.When will we learn the only way is for independence,st op having to go begging to Westminster
# John Souter 2011-12-22 21:24
Good news?

No it isn't - it's a rip off of £149 million.
# ButeHouse 2011-12-22 23:51
Quite right John S, why can't we
be paid that money now if it's owed us within the Barnet Formula? So much for the Respect Agenda, if we ever believed that in the first place.
# Sleekit 2011-12-22 21:25
I guess we can add the £149 million to the other £1.6 Billion Jack McConnel put back to westminster.

To recap...

Thats £1,749,000,000 of Scotlands pocket money that Labour have handed back to westminster.

Those Ermine robes are expensive!!!

# cardrossian 2011-12-22 22:10
Quoting Sleekit:
To recap...

Thats £1,749,000,000 of Scotlands pocket money that Labour have handed back to westminster.

Don't forget to add the 6000 square miles of the north sea and its oilwells that Westminster stole!

I don't hear the SNP shouting about that.
# oldnat 2011-12-22 22:23
The SNP Draft Constitution is quite clear on Scottish waters and resources.

Article 1 (2) "the extent of Scotland's rights to territorial waters and natural resources beyond territorial waters shall be determined according to international law."

You do know about the 1958 UN Convention on the Continental Shelf?

Article 6 para 2 states quite clearly "Where the same continental shelf is adjacent to the territories of two adjacent States, the boundary of the continental shelf shall be determined by agreement between them. In the absence of agreement, and unless another boundary line is justified by special circumstances, the boundary shall be determined by application of the principle of equidistance from the nearest points of the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea of each State is measured."
# Alba4Eva 2011-12-22 22:59
Well said OldNat... the attempted and fictional re-drawing of the border (diagonally north-east from the land border) is purely grandstanding by Westminster and will hold no legal standing in international law post independence.
# oldnat 2011-12-22 23:07
Alas for your idea. If you take a map and measure the line which is equidistant from the coastlines of Scotland and England, you'll find that the line is roughly where the UK's 1999 ruling placed it.

That could be a new Xmas Game! Follow the 1958 Convention and draw the Scottish English Eastern Maritime Border.

For those that are sober, you can try drawing the Western Maritime Border!

Edit NB The rules require that the line has to be equidistant from the nearest point of the relevant coastline at every point along its length!
# chicmac 2011-12-22 23:10
# oldnat 2011-12-22 23:23
Once again - if it weren't for Buchan, Scotland would be a much poorer place! :-)
# Sleekit 2011-12-23 00:14
Thanks for the map.
# Angus 2011-12-23 10:16
Quoting chicmac:
Here it is:

Thanks for the map.
Yes, the Brits quietly sneeked that one, but it will not stand. I work in an area of the oil industry where we use tools to look at formation and oil production. The oil will still be around in 50 years! An Independent England will have no claim on this boudary change.
# Exile 2011-12-23 10:04
Surely logically that rule applies to the distance from coasts on opposite sides of a stretch of water, like in the case of Scotland and Norway, or Scotland and Ireland. I cannot see how it is relevant in the case of Scotland and England, when the line is drawn between two countries sharing the same coastline. Does the convention not have some other rule to apply in such cases?
# Am Fògarrach 2011-12-23 17:09
oldnat 2011-12-22 23:07 -

You are quite correct that the 1999 line is roughly where the UK's 1999 ruling placed it.. But that does not make it the legal border. The following is extracted from 'The National Borders of Scotland' published by the Scottish Democratic Alliance in July 2011. The whole doument is available at .../scotlands-national-borders.

'Scotland's constitutional North Sea border starts from the centre of the mouth of the River Tweed, the true border, and not from near Lamberton. The international law of the sea states the following in Article 15, Delimitation of the territorial sea between States with opposite or adjacent coast.

Where the coasts of two States are opposite or adjacent to each other, neither of the two States is entitled, failing agreement between them to the contrary, to extend its territorial sea beyond the median line every point of which is equidistant from the nearest points on the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial seas of each of the two States is measured. The above provision does not apply, however, where it is necessary by reason of historic title or other special circumstances to delimit the territorial seas of the two States in a way which is at variance therewith [bolding added].

Scotland certainly has “historic title” to the mouth of the River Tweed. Moreover, the sea border has been recognised by fishermen as the latitude of the border for hundreds of years – probably since the 14th century. These are obviously “special circumstances”. So the true North Sea border extends due east from the mouth of the River Tweed at latitude 55°45’53.28”N until it ends at the boundary with the Netherlands Exclusive Economic Zone.'

I really recommend that you download the document, which is fully documented and footnoted and has complete maps in colour as well as the text. You will be amazed but not surprised about how cavalierly the UK government has treated both the terrestrial and sea borders of Scotland.
# Am Fògarrach 2011-12-23 17:14
I also suggest that others who have posted or plan to post on this article see my comment above and also download the 23-page 'The National Borders of Scotland' You will also be amazed but not surprised.

Nollaig Chreideil agus Bliadhna Mhath ùr Guidh! – agus Saor Alba!
# Macart 2011-12-23 05:13
Touché! :)
# Dougthedug 2011-12-23 11:12
Quoting oldnat:
The SNP Draft Constitution is quite clear on Scottish waters and resources.

Article 1 (2) "the extent of Scotland's rights to territorial waters and natural resources beyond territorial waters shall be determined according to international law."

You do know about the 1958 UN Convention on the Continental Shelf?

Article 6 para 2 states quite clearly "Where the same continental shelf is adjacent to the territories of two adjacent States, the boundary of the continental shelf shall be determined by agreement between them. In the absence of agreement, and unless another boundary line is justified by special circumstances, the boundary shall be determined by application of the principle of equidistance from the nearest points of the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea of each State is measured."

As far as I'm aware under the United Nation Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) the principle of equidistance only applies to the 12 mile extent of the territorial sea.

The 200 mile continental shelf boundary is drawn up by negotiation.
# Alx1 2011-12-23 12:07
Also don't forget the £100 million+ of carbon tax we still haven't got.
# ButeHouse 2011-12-22 23:53
Yes Sleekit, can you imagine that plonker giving money back. It doesn't bear thinking about. What a grovelling, miserable little pup he was. As if there was nothing needing done in Scotland with that money? No wonder Labour is on the way out. VOTE YES.
# Sleekit 2011-12-23 00:19
How much was that Edinburgh Royal Infirmary PFI Hospital again?

What else could have been funded?

Lets see if we can add up projects to £1.75 Billion to see what could have been
# Sleekit 2011-12-22 21:26

Why the Scots want independence
# Early Ball 2011-12-22 21:48
Or what Jordan Henderson cost Liverpool
# bringiton 2011-12-22 21:55
He should stick to the day job.
# cokynutjoe 2011-12-22 23:09
Allan Massie, a sheep in sheep's clothing.
# Edna Caine 2011-12-22 23:37
Sleekit - thank you for providing me with reference to this article. I can't be bothered commenting on it directly so I'll have a rant here instead.

From the article -
"The rise of Scottish nationalism puzzles many in England, especially those ... and also those millions south of the border who claim Scottish ancestry, often proudly." Bollox - I and my family, to the third generation, always proudly claim Scottish ancestry and would vote for the SNP and Scottish Independence if we were not disenfranchised by residence in England.

"Take the kilt, for example" [and subsequent ignorant burbling about Harry Lauder, weddings and rugby matches] - Bollox - I often wear my kilt to neighbours' parties or other social occasions in the village. My friends treat it as being akin to people of Asian or African origin wearing appropriate dress, or others wearing DJs. Massie thinks this is a new phenomenon, no way.

And the daftest comment of all -
"Shopping centres in Scotland are just like shopping centres in England". Bollox - show me a shopping centre here where I can get mealy pudding, smokies or lorne sausage, Massie!
# Macart 2011-12-23 05:33
Wow! What can you say about that? The comments section was filled with the usual Independence recruitment drive types, whinging jocks/subsidy junkies, spongers comments et al, but the premis of the article was complete pants. Apparently we want to assert our difference to England because we are so similar!!??!! Whit?

Here's me thinking its because I neither trust nor believe in the direction of Westminster and Londoncentric power or the inherent democratic deficiency in the treaty of union. But no, its because I'm so much like my next door neighbour that I'm having a middleaged moment and rebelling thoughtlessly.

Silly me! :0D
# pa_broon74 2011-12-23 11:52
Some proper numpties in the comments there.

The entire piece is based on a false premise, I don't want independence from the English, I want independence from Westminster, something I suspect many English people also want.
# nchanter 2011-12-24 12:04
Quoting pa_broon74:
Some proper numpties in the comments there.

The entire piece is based on a false premise, I don't want independence from the English, I want independence from Westminster, something I suspect many English people also want.

Westminster is all that is corrupt in our society and has exploited all that it could to create more wealth for the already wealthy. It shouts of human rights and laughs at those being bombed and killed. The dogs in the street know just how corrupt they are yet still elect them, how can this be. O?T A suggestion for Maggies last day on earth. On an ebb tide, two pallets, two bags of peat, 1 gallon of red diesel, MOT (maggie on top) as always, cast off from the butt(with luck should see her on her way to her beloved USA not to forget the flaming arrows for the red stuff. just a thought.
# Hirta 2011-12-22 21:37
£16m - is that it?
# shackled to a corpse 2011-12-22 21:39
Quoting Hirta:
£16m - is that it?

Aye - £3 each
# Stevie Cosmic 2011-12-23 11:40

That's the funniest thing I've heard in ages.

I shouldn't be laughing, but what else can you do?
# ianbeag 2011-12-22 22:57

Why the Scots should want independence I posted earlier on another newsnet thread a link which should be given wider exposure This is the Legatum Prosperity Index covering most of the countries of the world
Summarising it shows that the UK is placed at Nr 13 in the world league but for those who argue that we are too wee the table shows that of the top twelve countries 7 have a population not dissimilar to Scotland, the exceptions being Australia, Canada, The Netherlands and Sweden. The GDP per capita in Norway with under 5 million is so far ahead of every other nation that it it unlikely ever to be matched. The salutatory lesson to Mr Murphy and Mr Foulkes after their campaign to denigrate both of these is that Iceland and Ireland still rank comfortably ahead of the mighty UK.
# chicmac 2011-12-23 00:17
The European purchasing power and population table.

Note 'yellow' countries are traditional Western Democracies, Eastern Bloc or Asian peripheral nations (Blue) are still, of course, playing catchup from their past.

Note also the 4 small traditional democracies who are not doing so well are all inordinately exposed to tourism as an income source which has suffered most as Europe tightens its belt.

The 5 'big' traditionally Western Democracy countries languish in the lower half of the 20 countries in the yellow group.

Certainly nothing there to dispel the '5 Million is best' theory which has held currency since the 60s (Hudson Institute, Kahn et al).
# creag an tuirc 2011-12-23 00:55
Hi chicmac. I found this document from 2007, someone obtained it using the FOI. They requested what the GDP per capita for Scotland would be seperate from the UK with oil. I thought these figures may help you project Scotland and RUKs place on the current list, so we can see where we really stand.

Now I've did some calculations (they may be wrong) as they seemed to not want to give a clear answer to the request i.e. They didn't show the rest of the UK without oil and they only showed Scotland with a % of oil etc.

My calculations.

UK with oil 26700
Scotland without oil 25600

Scotland with 90% oil 31000

Scotland with 100% oil 37000 moving up to 2nd place.

UK without oil 20700 moving down to 16th place.
# Sleekit 2011-12-23 00:20
Wholeheartedly agreed ianbeag
# J Wil 2011-12-23 00:25
I would be interested to know what rules prevent the rest of the money being transfered to Scotland, or is it just an arbitrary refusal?

It is almost unbelievable that Brown could deprive Scotland of this money.
You just wonder what kind of person he is. He tried to put himself over as a highly moralistic, son of the manse, bragging about his moral compass, and yet he can do this even to his own country.

You have to consider that the money would have converted to jobs and an easing of deprivation, it is a huge loss.

Brown is exposed as scheming, conniving and devious, but whats new? Every foundation stone of this union, when it is turned over, reveals corruption of one sort or another.
# Exile 2011-12-23 10:10
Brown's country is the 'United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland', known colloquially as the southeast of England. Brown himself is from a fantasy region called 'North Britain'. What else can you expect from such a fantasist?
# Ken500 2011-12-23 08:14
And the rest

Scottish Budget cut by £1.3Billion a year
£2Billion tax increased on to the Oil tax revenues by 11% now 61% costing 150,000 jobs in Scotland. To subsidise tax avoidance by Multinationals in the City of London, and illegal wars based on a lie.
# Ken500 2011-12-23 08:20
Olympics£10Billion and rising. Scotland paying towards it by deductions to the Block Grant. (Sleekit). No Scottish companies benefiting from massive regeneration in London. Public money being used to build massive stadiums for private football clubs. Illegal.

New train line etc. While the train line in Scotland from the central belt to the North is not even electrified. Train journey take twice as long (pro rata) with old rolling stock.
# Ken500 2011-12-23 08:32
Total tax take in the UK this year nearly £700Billion .Westminster has £700Billion to spend. Scottish block Grant £27/28Billion (Plus £16Billion ?). Scottish Oil & Gas tax revenues this year £13.5Billion .(9% of the UK population).
Some years Westminster was getting the equivalent of £40Billion from Scottish Oil Tax revenues. The North/South divide. The further North the poorer. Westminster (historical) economic policy - unemployment in Scotland is a price worth paying for jobs and prosperity in the south. Along with a Chairman of the BOE. Scotland pays (pro rata) for the debt of the South. The North/South divide. The unequal Union.
# Alx1 2011-12-23 12:14
Ken as Westminster won't release any true figures for Scotland's tax revenue, we can only assume that we contribute around 9% of that £700 billion and that's not counting NI and VAT amongst a raft of other revenues.
We should start to use these figures to dispell their myths.
# Ken500 2011-12-23 08:41
Commonwealth Games paid for from the Scottish 'Grant' (or pittance).

Olympics VAT free. Scotland £Millions of added security costs for the Olympic Games coming from the Scottish budget.

Plus £Billions for Trident which will never be used. There are already 5 redundant, rusty, rotting hulks at Rosyth. Scotland is anti-nuclear.
# Ken500 2011-12-23 08:54
The North East of Scotland would be Thatcherites what a total, total insult. The North East of Scotland is a SNP stronghold which had returns Alex Salmond as an MP and MSP for the last 30+ years.

Thatcher was rejected in Scotland for devastating the Scottish economy, her policies in Westminster led to the present crisis, with Scotland paying the highest price once again.

The North East would NEVER vote Tory. That is why there are so many Tories masquerading as LiBDems. The closet Tory Party destroying the economy if the UK
# ianbeag 2011-12-23 10:00
Since you mention Mrs Thatcher - have you seen the latest e-petition going the rounds?
# Ken500 2011-12-23 08:55
Telegraph nonsense
# Ken500 2011-12-23 08:56
Destroying the economy of the UK
# UpSpake 2011-12-23 09:12
The bully boys down south think the game is all theirs and the rules are for them to make up as they go along.
For way too long the inadequate politicians in Scotland have allowed these bully boys to get away with it. No more.
Scotland voted for an SNP majority government, despite all the rules the bully boys created to prevent that happening.
Now the position is reversing, we have good politicians arguing our case and our case is not only a good one, it is a right one which destroys the rules the bully boys put in place.
The end game is underway but the bully boys cannot accept it. They invent new rules every day to protect the game and hold on tight to the ball we gave them in the first place.
No worries, we will rise above all this petty meanness, it's childish and churlish but they have always known where the real wealth lay so lying about it, creating false myths and overlaying it with daily obfuscation, suited their game plan. They will loose the game and we will walk away with not only the ball but the goalposts and the corner flags as well.
That will be a great day !.
# Exile 2011-12-23 10:11
Independence now!
# clootie 2011-12-23 09:13
The value of the article is the exposure of Labour - pass it on!
# Old Smokey 2011-12-23 09:50
Call Kaye this morning discussing the Independence Referendum
Kaye as usual trying to manipulate the debate
Interestingly all Ive heard so far is the majority want Independence, some want to go for it now, most are happy to go along with the Scottish Government
Not quite what Kaye had in mind I think
This follows the GMS interview this morning with Tory lord Forsyth - a guy thats a one man arguement for Independence
# Angus 2011-12-23 10:13
Didnt the Labour party keep £259,000,000 of cash in the the UK treasury that came from the EU for poverty relief in the Highlands and Islands several years back?

This was kept very low keyed and I only heard about it on a radio programme at 1am, on Radio Scotland, where a Labour MSP stated that we dont want people outside the UK thinking the Highlands and Islands need poverty relief!
# eric black 2011-12-23 10:16
Call Kaye did not go according to plan this morning.

She and BBC Scotland were even called out as arch unionists. It was a pleasure to listen too.

Kaye was gobsmacked when she was called out for what she is. Apparently she is just an ordinary punter rather than a labour place-women.

Superb stuff
# Exile 2011-12-23 10:18
Wake up and smell the coffee, Kaye. Tae see yirsel as ithers see ye....indeed.
# balbeggie 2011-12-23 10:30
Sounds interesting, what happened?
# rog_rocks 2011-12-23 11:26
Basically a man called in and asked Kaye why it is that she repeatedly asked callers re the independence referendum why don’t we have it now, “why don’t we just get on with it” and not once asked anyone why don’t we just wait and do what the Scottish government wanted to do and that he felt that she and BBC Scotland were on the Unionist side.
She sounded “caught out” and stammered out that she was just a punter and she was only doing it from a broadcasting point of view and that as her guests were all nationalist eg Margo, who were far more knowledgeable on the subject than her , it was just her job to ask the opposite point of view of what they were saying. She seemed to cut him off as quickly as she could, I guess questions will be asked about how he managed to slip through the BBC bias filter. Heads may roll!
I want to listen to it again when it comes out on the i-player too.

Well done that man!
# Thee Forsaken One 2011-12-23 10:33
I'd like to know when that was said so I can listen to it and laugh on the iPlayer.
# pa_broon74 2011-12-23 11:34
The guy was called Ian, he was on at about 9:50.

She did sound caught out but she did recover quite well. She was obviously a bit rattled though, possibly offended by the idea because she apologised just before the news at 10am for being 'a bit ratty'.
# shackled to a corpse 2011-12-23 11:41
Its not available on iplayer yet - maybe its still being edited.
# shackled to a corpse 2011-12-23 12:04
available now
# Massacre1965 2011-12-23 12:09
It was a great discussion culminating with Kaye meekly saying I was just following orders. Well done to all who got on air and gave a spirited view of a yes vote for independence.
# Massacre1965 2011-12-23 12:14
BBC iPlayer call the programme "Kaye asks: have you been let down by deliveries this Christmas?"

No mention of Independence referendum - more BBC Scotland bias (nothing to do with Kaye of course)
# D_A_N 2011-12-24 12:02
Was it actually called this? I just went to call caye and it's called "when do you want an independence referendum?", either someone complained or they're watching us.
# D_A_N 2011-12-24 13:43
Right. Here's an update. I've listened to the whole of the radio broadcast. It was a little bias I'd say. But if we weren't aware of all the other bias it would not have been noticed to be honest. I've seen/heard a lot worse by the BBC. Her defence was actually quite good, although it I'm in between, she does need to go against the norm, but at the same time, not so blatantly. The BBC doesn't go so blatantly against the norm when it comes to such things as the war's we are in. But anyway, here's my point. Let's not focus on the negative like the unionists do. There is a lot of positivity to be taken from this. Nobody has pointed out the overwhelming views of the people towards independence. A whole article could easily be written on this.

It's hardly a proper survey, but most surveys are skewed anyway. I kept track of every caller. I haven't included the texts in this as they were gone through to briefly and a bit vague.

Of all the callers who were not politicians.

7 stated they wanted independence

3 were either not asked or were undecided but were clearly leaning towards independence

1 said 'he wasn't sure Scotland could survive on it's own' but genuinely didn't know how he'd vote and was open to debate.

0 were outright against independence

There are some cracking results and only represents the type of people that listen to the show, but considering the BBC would probably rather have it the other way and probably tried filtering their phone calls to balance it. It's pretty astonishing.
# creag an tuirc 2011-12-24 16:07
Hi Dan, I would have accepted Kay with an e's response if she didn't finish it off with "I'm a bit tired and grumpy today" to cover her defensive response.

I agree Dan the important thing was that the general consensus was pro-independence or undecided waiting on the issue being debated.

I particularly liked the woman asking the Tory MP what the benefits of the union were and then telling him his response was just sound-bites. Kay with an e then turned this on the woman by asking the benefits of independence and without hesitating she rattled of a few points. Kay with an e just moved on pronto. I was a bit shocked that any of these callers got on the show, maybe they thought they could show them up on air when in fact the callers seemed to be more politically aware than Kay with an e was. Interesting times lie ahead, is the sleeping giant that is Scotland slowly waking up?

Saor Alba
# D_A_N 2011-12-24 19:09
very good points mate. very good points. And yes, that woman was great :)

is scotland slowly waking up? Let's hope. It's funny, because it seems to be a movement of the people, even those who are 'not fussed about politics' and don't read the kind of information you get heree, just seem to be fed up with the drivel they hear in the media and are standing up to it.
# shackled to a corpse 2011-12-23 12:16
I'm listening now. Its cringing. within 5 mins Kaye challenged a caller who agreed with the position of the Scottish Government by saying "what are YOU waiting for", then the 1st item on the 9am news was that Holyrood might be given the power to hold the referendum!!! Thanks but no thanks - we dont need your permission.

I'm not sure my blood pressure will last to the end of the show!
# Fungus 2011-12-23 12:49
That man must have been one of these Cybernats briefed by SNP Black Ops HQ to upset Kaye. no other reason for it I'd say.
# Alba4Eva 2011-12-23 16:04
Kaye's parting shot from it all; " computers frozen in disgust at me!"

...Aye Kaye, but it wisnae causa you dear... it Wis yer chief editor!

Ps... i liked the coincidental 'ic' on the image.... Independence Campaign maybe? ... not to mention the red, white & blue livery. LOL *;0)
# X_Sticks 2011-12-23 15:54
I notice that on the iPlayer this programme has been titled:

Kaye asks: have you been let down by deliveries this Christmas?

And if you are interested in listening you can hear it here:
# george davie 2011-12-24 09:27
I've tried the link but the sound seems to be "distorted".

Anyone else having the same difficulty?
# Thee Forsaken One 2011-12-23 12:35
I listened to it. Ian perhaps came on a little too strongly but it was very obvious that Kaye was upset by what he said about her.

She was a rather patronising with the (paraphrased): "I'm always amazed by people like you who think that BBC Scotland has a capsule where presenters are programmed what to say". Ian wasn't implying that at all, he was merely implying that there was some leaning on of presenters by Editors (If they didn't already have leanings of their own). It's a classic trick to exaggerate the opponents argument to make them sound ridiculous. Thankfully, that old chestnut is starting to lose its influence in Scotland.

What Margo came out with immediately after that was very interesting, though. She pretty much destroyed all this stupidity about having the referendum as soon as possible with a simple list of questions.
# shackled to a corpse 2011-12-23 13:13
Maybe i missed something, but other than the MSP at the start, was there anyone on or any messages supporting the proposition that the referendum should be held asap? If there was one it was so memorable that I instantly forgot.

Perhaps an eye-opener for BBC Northern Colonies.
# pa_broon74 2011-12-23 13:42
I've noticed this with Call Kaye, they seem to finding it more difficult to get callers on who aren't at least open to the idea of Independence or fully behind it.

Obviously in between the obligatory frothing OAP's venting off about something-or-other.

# Alba4Eva 2011-12-24 11:30
Leave the OAP's alone... one of the best caller's was an 80+ yo lady who hoped that she would see the day of a free Scotland. *;0)

There was a guy on Shackled, who did the whole "uncertainty, call it now etc"...

...with this whole uncertain thing, we need to start questioning the 'no' position more. The most uncertain thing is that; at present, those who would vote 'no' would do so in a blind leap of faith, as they have no clue what they are voting for! Is it FFA? Is it Calman... and what is Calman? Is it an end to Devolution even? What is the option being offered instead of independence?
# Jester 2011-12-23 10:17
That's not even enough to buy ONE English Premiership footballer. Crumbs for us again.
# Dougthedug 2011-12-23 10:18
There's a good article here by Alan Trench on how the Labour Party stiffed Scotland (and Northern Ireland and Wales) out of any Barnett consequentials which should have come from the Olympic regeneration spend in London.

The current Lib-Dems/Tories were not in any hurry to give the devolved governments in the UK the money they were owed either.

# Thee Forsaken One 2011-12-23 10:27
I was about to link this. I'm glad I checked down the posts before doing so.

It's an excellent post on an excellent blog. I really recommend people should read it often. Makes some excellent points without being overly partisan.

I wouldn't say the post digs at the ConDems too much. It's more of a dig at the intransigence of the UK Treasury as well as how their attitude to any administration except Westminster makes the case for being rid of them even stronger.
# Wee-Scamp 2011-12-23 10:51
OT....... Must be great to have an industrially patriotic national oil company!
# Wave Machine 2011-12-23 11:07
Go out and buy yourself a copy of the Independent's "i" paper. At 20p it won't break the bank.

Mary Dejevsky has an article on page 13 where she basically says that independence will be good for England. Not a bad article.

I would encourage all contributors to enter debates on English blogs and online media articles to talk up the advantages of independence for England. If the English start to really embrace independence then the combined pressure from two directions will be very difficult to counter.

Remember that there is a democratic deficit in England, where ordinary voters do not have proper representation.

Scots MPs voting on English matters is just one example. Independence for Scotland has a benefit to England, it results in English independence. Tell them the good news. Loudly!
# Exile 2011-12-23 11:11
Just out of interest, Wave Machine, but what's an "i" paper? Genuine question.
# Holebender 2011-12-23 17:17
It's a cut-down version of the Independent which they give the snappy title "i".
# pa_broon74 2011-12-23 17:23

If you put a small 'i' in front of something it sells really well.

# Lupus Incomitatus 2011-12-23 11:22
Seems like the non English governments and Assemblies grouped together to pressure London into handing out the Barnett formula consequentials for all our money siphoned off for the London 2012 Olympic Games.

The original Labour Government deliberately declared it to be the UK Olympics in London to spoil the Barnett Consequentials and the claim was for over £330 millions to be returned. The settlement announced was £33 millions only for Scotland and less for Wales and N Ireland. The Treasury just said no and just f8ck off.

So we now know HM T's position over what Devo Max will be ; SFA.

Be prepared.

This is an analysis by a Devolution Academic, Alan Trench. You may have seen him on TV

He is scrupulously objective and I find his analysis suggests HMT have just given His Eckness another Xmas present, the London Gov's negotiation hymn sheet.

# Boydy 2011-12-23 11:34
The rings are back!

It says "The rings would be visible from Edinburgh, West Lothian, Fife and East Lothian as well as from planes"
# Clanky 2011-12-23 11:50
Haha, I know where we can put our first KEEP LONDON RULE banner then!

Seriously though, I don't find myself getting worked up about this one, it sounds fair enough putting rings on a sports facility. :)
# scottish_skier 2011-12-23 11:59
Wow, the Labour party (Adam Montgomery I understand is Labour) really want us to see the benefits of the union.

Look, as part of the UK, we'll give you some shiny rings. You can stare up at them from miles around in awe of how wonderful London is and lucky you are to have it rule you. I mean come on, Edinburgh could never hold an olympics - too wee and too poor a provincial capital....

Sorry, being grumpy, but this is just a stupid, pointless idea; much better causes needing cash than this. It's the summer olympics too FGS.
# art1001 2011-12-23 11:55
I must admit to being totally uninterested in this whole Olympics thing (apart from the Winter Olympic Ice Hockey competition). It just seems a bit naff and embarrassing when the London meeja, Beckham et al start droning on about how wonderful it all is.

Its all part of the London's 'bread and circuses', post imperial delusion of grandeur I suppose. As the last bit of their empire we are being sucked dry to pay for it.
# Wave Machine 2011-12-23 13:35

It's the Independent daily briefing, it's called the "i".
# Stevie Cosmic 2011-12-23 14:27
Is this the article?

Leaves me cold, as all south centric media does.
# Ken500 2011-12-23 15:36
Next week it will be SNP eats children
# scottish_skier 2011-12-23 19:02
Quoting Ken500:
Next week it will be SNP eats children

I think you're being a little over the top. I'm sure it would only be:

"SNP accused of eating children" ;-)
# Ken500 2011-12-23 15:37
Kaye defends Gordon

Works for Channel 5. The Wright Stuff.

Let's all be friends together, it bring in the big cheque.
# cokynutjoe 2011-12-23 16:21
Kaye has to watch her step, she was in trouble enough over her Boris Johnston remarks.
# Wave Machine 2011-12-23 20:38
Stevie Cosmic;

Yes, that is the peice.

It doesn't leave me cold, in fact it gives me hope.

The English deserve better as do we and it's all grist for the mill.

We should embrace any sentiments that talk about independence, regardless of what direction they come from, it all leads to to the same goal in the end.
# Islegard 2011-12-23 21:34
O/T more Scotland Bill shenanigans in the House of Lards this time regarding the Supreme Court:-
# Lupus Incomitatus 2011-12-23 21:50
I am no lawyer but I think that McClusky is trying to return power back to Scotland?

Can someone barrack room lawyer read it and comment please?
# Richardmci 2011-12-23 23:46
O/T, Some-thing's afoot check out the link...

Spread the word!
# Macart 2011-12-24 09:30
Holey Moley, its true they actually exist!
# tartanfever 2011-12-24 09:32
Mac, it'll be put down to pesky cybernats pretending to be Labour supporters again.
# Macart 2011-12-24 09:40
Seriously though TF its good news. We're all aware of Labour voting friends and neighbours who are behind the independence vote 100%. This is what Labour leadership north british can't get to grips with.

The fact that Labour voting independence action groups are forming is an excellent cross party step forward.

We're gonnae dae it! :0)
# Ard Righ 2011-12-23 23:46
The crumbs, the crumbs, the mouldy crumbs sent back to Scotland.
All from our stolen cake.....
# Albamac 2011-12-24 09:05
but related to London elites and Englishmen in kilts.

Looks like somebody's no' too pleased!
# Caadfael 2011-12-24 12:54
Seems we may have more union benefits to come!
A dirty tricks dept just warming up?
Thanks for the heads up Albamac!
# jjmac 2011-12-24 11:04
Olympic Rings? Stick them on the white cliffs of Dover or maybe in Belgium, France or somewhere close to London.
Oh, we could maybe put them on Westminster owned property in Faslane.
# doe 2011-12-24 11:51
O/T some nice comments here
# GrassyKnollington 2011-12-24 12:31
Gotta love The Grauniad. Like Ed ( the wrong Milliband ), they view Scotland as a distant place that used to be useful to Labour and have been so focused on the state of the union across the pond that they've only just woken up to the constitutional crisis in their own backyard.

My favourite Grauniad contributor is poor Severin Carrell who like Hans Brinker, has his finger desperately lodged in the dyke.

The imminent deluge of Scottish nationalism is never far away but he's plugging away like a trooper. His latest effort ( sans comments ) where he allows Johann Lamont to paint Salmond as a domineering bully who was "brutal" to Wendy Alexander is a classic of its kind.

Like Kaye Adams, I'm certain Severin's no unionist or even fan of the Labour Party but merely doing his job as a journalist.
# rodmac 2011-12-24 12:05
O/T Just to wish everyone a lovely Christmas..We have had our Labour Christmas present early with their Leadership election, so I am not expecting much better gifts this Christmas.

Am now off to prepare myself for some over indulgence thanks to the generosity of the English Tax payers...Slainte!

# Arraniki 2011-12-24 12:19
Help! I am unable to read the FM's message!
What is the problem?
# John Souter 2011-12-24 16:26
Just a thought re the Olympics.

!0,000 troops in London, air cover and a battle ship on the Thames.

Could this not be the cover for a wee exercise on civil control when the monoliths of the City give in to their well deserved collapse?
# UpSpake 2011-12-24 19:28
Yes John, but the way the bankers are going, we have still to hear the extent of the Christmas bonuses, they may be toppled long before the London Olympics.
They are London's Olympics, not the UK's, not England's or Scotland's, they belong to London as will the outcome bbe entirely theirs.

You must be logged-in in order to post a comment.


Donate to Newsnet Scotland


Latest Comments