Friday, 1 February 2013


This will be another post about politics, fair warning. Tune out now if you can't be arsed but remember, since all topics discussed here are done so with the bar set quite low, while I can't guarantee you won't be bored; you will at least be able to grasp what's going on.

The Electoral Commission have released their recommendations regarding the running of Independence referendum, it covers a number of areas most notably, the question itself, funding and ground rules for the running of the campaign. In the run up to the report being released, the 'no' side have been urging the Scottish Government to accept all aspects of the EC's recommendation, sight unseen. Unionists have been deriding the SNP's question since it was released; "do you agree Scotland should be an independent country?" They say it leads the voter to agree, its what people like to do, which I suppose is true; if you're talking about the weather or the sartorial judgement of a work colleague. Not sure about any one else, but I like to credit (most) people with a bit more sense, so for a referendum on independence; I think most folk would realise it was a wee bit more important than sock options of a morning.

The commission decided; "Should Scotland be an Independent country?" was a better question, it was clearer and wouldn't lead anyone in to deploying a decision making paradigm similar to one they might use at Greggs during lunch. The Scottish Government in a fit of reason decided to adopt this and all the rest of the Electoral Commission's recommendation, which was nice of them. It should be noted, the EC recommendations are advisory, no government or assembly need take their advice but, ours did. So, a crushing defeat for the SNP then, Salmond back peddles, Sturgeon crest-fallen and Yes Scotland in disarray?

Well not really, its not that big a change and lets be honest for the sake of a 'do you agree' or a 'should', if the Scottish Government did tell the EC thanks but no thanks, imagine the furore... Alistair Darling, putative leader of the Better Together campaign claimed the SNP climb down as a victory for democracy, common sense and Better Together yet, in terms of funding, the Electoral Commission suggested changing a £250,000 funding advantage in favour of the Unionists to a £63,000 advantage for the Yes campaign. See that £250k advantage the unionists did have? It had it because that was how the Scottish Government had arranged funding. (I dare say they weren't happy, but that was how it worked out and they were living with it.) If that's what Darling calls a victory, how does he describe a loss?

Crucially and the main point of this post, one of the other recommendations was (and do remember Tories, Lib Dems and Labour going on at length about the SNP Government having to accept the EC's report in its entirety,) one of the other recommendations was; both sides should present information (preferably of the honest and factual variety) in the run up to the referendum so voters would know what a yes or no would mean after the referendum.

Imagine then, when on the same day the EC report was released, a representative from the 'no' side (A.K.A Better Together) in the form of Ruth Davidson (Scottish Tory leader - no, she's not that busy) refused to provide any details or information. David Cameron also managed to not answer a similar question during PMQ's the same day.

So, all the while, unionist parties and Better Together have been pressing the Scottish Government to comply, but when it comes to their own responsibilities; they're not so keen.

If you are a floating voter, have doubts or just don't know who to believe, look at the information coming from Yes Scotland then compare it that coming from Better Together. All it takes is one lie, which is all it took for me, one lie then the entire unionist house of cards came tumbling down, from BBC bias to Ruth Davidson dissembling on Scotland Tonight; it really is a no brainer.

As a reward for ploughing through all that - I know politics is boring; here's a quick joke:

I went to the zoo the other day and saw a baguette in a cage.
I think it was bread in captivity.

No? Okay, what about this one:

This guy told me he is the fastest cross dresser in the world.
I said, "Really?"
She said, "Yes."

Still no? Well, there's no pleasing some people.


  1. No. It's not really boring. Just some people manage to make it so. And you're not one of them.

    But the jokes were welcome anyway...

    Bread in captivity... PAIN ful!

  2. I think boredom is one of our biggest enemies. If we can posssibly make it a wee bit less so then perhaps people might not tune out quite so readily.

    As I said, the right answer is a no brainer... Which ever way you slice it....



Thanks for comment as always and I apologise if you have to jump through any hoops to do so. Its just that, I'm still being spammed by organisations who are certain I can't get it up or when it is up its not big enough or that I don't have anyone to get it up for.

Who knew blogging could be so bad for ones self-confidence?