Horses are highly social herd animals that prefer to live in a group. The herd here also prefer to live in a group. They are just less socialised.

Careful. I might play the victim and complain incessantly about it oldnat. Wait a minute, I’m not fragile, underhand or dishonest enough to do that. Good thing nobody else around here is. ;^)

So nothing to say about Salmond entertaining Murdoch this week at Bute House……Just one long winded whine about everyone else on this issue. Glad we got this sorted.

Leaving the rest to one side for the moment, Leveson is just a means to an end. And that end is a reformed PCC with a few recommendations on police political press relations. Statute is doubtful for much else other than establishing an independent PCC and perhaps one or two financial and legal teeth to go with it. It might/might not tighten up laws at the fringes of blagging and hacking with a Leveson act. And I’d say probably not if the investigations do the job.

Because Leveson is still a LONG WAY from the main action which always has and always will be the police investigations. Those will be absolutely brutal.

Leveson has to wait on them for a reason. If the laws don’t work and nothing much happens with the police investigations then Leveson will have virtual carte blanche. But the chances of nothing much happening are vanishingly small.

Oldnat

Yes I accept that the SNP won in 2011 without the support of any newspapers, but I think support from say the Sun will help no end.

The SNP are now a fantastic political machine and will certainly do well in the referendum.

I have heard that many SNP grassroots are not too happy with Murdoch, at least we get a different viewpoint from Murdoch’s papers as opposed to the usual Left wing unpatriotic drivel from the BBC and the Guardian.

Remember that your political news output from the BBC is different from ours to a considerable extent.

Also (despite Miliband’s protestations today) “left wing” and “right wing” are simply manifestations of one dimension of politics within a particular system. What is “left wing” in your political culture, is probably mainstream here. Of more import in Scotland is whether the BBC has an institutional bias to “Britishness”.

Come now. Ed wasn’t suggesting that Brits should be concerned for poverty the world over. Only that they should be equally concerned about poverty in Dudley and Dundee (but not in Dublin, or Durban, or Dhaka). Strangely, poverty in the non-UK bits of the world seemed to bother him less.

Such narrow nationalism is pretty despicable.

‘Oldnat Yes I accept that the SNP won in 2011 without the support of any
newspapers, but I think support from say the Sun will help no end.’

Francis, utterly shocked that no one from the SNP on this site has yet to correct you on this mistaken assumption about the SNP having no support from any newspapers in 2011. I suspect it was an oversight rather than oldnat’s immediate claim of ignorance towards all those that have the temerity to disagree with him politically. SUN

I only suggested that you matched the additional Scots definition of ignorance – not the wider use of that word to indicate lack of knowledge.

“You have some kind of social disorder. I swear.”

Explain.

Moderator : Please release Telegraph story on horsegate or explain why it was removed.

i agree the Sun came through at the end, supporting devolution but not independence. As a bulwark against the Beeb and the English media print houses.

I’m getting rather fed up with this “Johann Lamont” woman.  Not only does she spell her first name wrongly, thus misleading us into thinking that she’s a man; she also stole (presumably in a thoroughly socialist-orientated grabbing-expropriating way) a perfectly good surname belonging to a former Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Whenever I see a headline saying “Lamont” I naturally obviously logically assume it’s talking about Norman Lamont.  When I see “Johann” I naturally logically obviously assume it is supposed to mean “Johann”, not “Joanne”.

This deliberate confusion on the part of the Scottish Labour establishment (no doubt they voted for this pudding-shaped dragon specifically for the purpose of causing confusion to us normal people here in the south of England, instead of electing one of the more normally-named candidates) is a calculated and deliberate insult against all that is normal, proper, decent, logical and sensible, and is designed for the purpose of making us waste time in interpreting anything which is reported about her.

“Miliband” is a more damaged political brand than “Lamont”.  Discuss.  Use both sides of the paper.

No, I fink Lamont – cuz Milibands have only buggered up one party but Lamonts have buggered up two…

Not sure you’re right about Lamont. She may have voted No in 1979, but she was very active in support of devolution subsequent to that. Wasn’t she a member of the Constitutional Council?

“Wasn’t she a member of the Constitutional Council?”

The Convention, you mean?  Yes, she was.  Her enthusiasm for devolution certainly seems to have severe limits, though.

Norman Lamont was born in Shetland, so that may be what you’re thinking of.  Johann Lamont’s parents were from Tiree, meaning that she’s a Gaelic-speaker.

Your obsession with Tim has been apparent for a while; but it seems you have developed one relating to me as well now. It’s not necessarily a healthy thing to be quite so focussed on two anonymous posters on an internet message board who you would not know from Adam if they walked by you in real life.

Labour dumped the 10p tax band thereby withdrawing financial support from some poor people. No doubt Ed voted for it, Balls too.

The point I was making was not about her enthusiasm for Scotland “remaining in the union” – we can take that as read.  I was talking about her lack of enthusiasm for substantially greater powers for the Scottish Parliament within the UK.

This is quite interesting: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/9119376/Spain-planning-to-breach-EU-budget-targets-warns-prime-minister-Mariano-Rajoy.html

Spain have decided to set a budget which contravenes the treaty they signed…Wednesday?

What is Merkozy going to do about it? Probably nothing at all but it is possible that the constitutionality of this week’s fix for the EZ will be tested sooner than Cameron might have wished.

Salmond has spoken of the unbreakable social union between England and Scotland. If he has spoken about a similar union between Scotland and Belgium I must have missed it. What the SNP is advocating is withdrawing, taking away, support to very vulnerable people who currently rely on it. I can’t see the harm in pointing that out. If that makes me a British nationalist (note the lower case n) in your eyes, then so be it. I am not advocating taking any financial support from anyone; you and the SNP are.

Ed isn’t lecturing anyone. He’s just pointing out an obvious flaw in the SNP’s claim that it is a progressive, centre-left party. And that is that it believes in withdrawing any Scottish support for the very vulnerable in places like the Welsh vallirs, Belfast, Liverpool and East London. I agree that he is a waste of space, but I think he’s right on this one. And my guess is that quite a few Scots agree with him.

Re your comment at 3.34am. I have released a lot of your comments that were caught in the spam trap. 

“He’s just pointing out an obvious flaw in the SNP’s claim that it is a progressive, centre-left party.”

No, he isn’t.  If Scotland became independent tomorrow, there would be a net increase in progressivism in these islands – rUK would still have a hard-right government, but Scotland would have a left-of-centre government.

It’s Miliband’s British nationalism that legitimises regressive Tory rule in Scotland.

The UK exists and has done so for hundreds of years. As Salmond says, there are unbreakable links that exist between us all. I imagine that we would both like to see the country we live in push for greater global equality and a fairer allocation of global resources. I am not convinced you do that by taking away support from folk that currently get it and undoubtedly need it, especially when everyone agrees there are strong ties that unite us all.

I will say labour will come up with a plan on scotland by mid april as they need momentum by then without waffle to avoid an even bigger gubbing than it could be in the May local elections.
They normally copy SNP policy 2 weeks out so I would not be surprised if there is something radical! At least verbally if not actually believeable.

“I imagine that we would both like to see the country we live in push for greater global equality and a fairer allocation of global resources.”

That is a very weak response.  Are you happy for pensioners in Lisbon to be on the breadline?  Do we have an obligation to them as much as we do to pensioners in London?  If not, why not?

My guess is that most Glaswegians would not give too hoots about people in Devon or Cornwall and would rather have an extra 20 quid to spend on booze and fags every week.

You may believe people care, even if it costs them personally, but if you are close to the poverty line then your views harden and become self-centred.

When it is proven people in scotland will be a grand better off each year as an independent country that will be all that is needed.
Everyone has a cost and that is more than enough. It is only self doubt that stoops people moving ahead on this issue now.

And there is precious little of an economic argument coming from london to suggest things will be worse off in Scotland in 2014 if Scotland moves on. If there was an argument then surely it would be put up by now. A big concern then.

On the other hand, if it can be shown having the oil makes you poorer then the Union argument that subsidising london helps Scotand indirectly through diffusion might hold up!

It is like 24hr a day natdom on here.

JK..southam tends to pontificate somewhat, it is usually pompous and all encompaasing, and sometimes a little muffled, like he is talking through a horses ar*e

Richard : I disagree with Southam, but he’s a serious and constructive contributor, which is more than can be said for some.

“What legitimises a UK government is the consent of the British people to be governed by it.
That issue, for Scotland at least, will be decided in the referendum. ”
Quite.  And Miliband is asking the people of Scotland to continue to legitimise Tory rule, instead of opting for the progressive alternative.

Through the European Union we do. That is why there is convergence funding. The money which stout burghers of Munich pay is (in theory) helping Cornish businesses.

 “Ed isn’t lecturing anyone.”

Of course he is.

Pretending scotland would suddenly have less concern for the poor if it became independent is ludicrous given his own parties gross failure to tackle income inequality.

Are you saying the Irish don’t care about the poor?

If “keep the cuts” Ed is too inept to get elected or put in policies for rUK that tackle income inequality then the scottish public or SNP can hardly be blamed for his ineffectualness.

If he wants to tackle income inequality in Welsh valleys, Belfast, Liverpool and East London then what’s stopping him? Will keeping the cuts be a bold move in that direction?

Are you seriously saying the SNP and scotland has to do little Eds job for him? I know he’s a bit of  joke but his reliance and insistance that scotland to tackle income inequality because he can’t isn’t going to be a winner here nor does it say much for his own limited abilities.

It is not being actively moderated and is a disqus issue. It has been released upthread.

new thread

“it’s progressive to make vilnerable pensioners in Swansea and Belfast poorer than they are at the moment.”

But the SNP isn’t proposing to make them poorer.  But it’s up to you in the rest of the UK to start embracing progressive politics if you care about pensioners.  At the moment, all you’re doing is dragging us down in the regressive Tory tide.  Why should Scottish pensioners have to suffer for British nationalism?

Good morning, everyone.

Mr. Kelly, that is a juvenile argument. Using it you might as well argue for Yorkshire to become a separate nation, or for individual poorer streets in well-to-do areas or the odd leafy suburb in poor constituencies to declare independence.

It’s just seeking a petty political advantage along the left-right divide.

Progressive is the most stupid and over-used term in politics. It might as well be goodyniceness for all it adds to debate.

Last but not least, we don’t have so-called Tory rule, we have a coalition and it was ‘legitimised’ by the electorate at the General Election.

I don’t understand the argument [apparently EdM's] that tackling poverty in Cornwall is something dependent on the Union.

Or why residents of Dundee are particularly bothered about pensioners in Carlisle.

How a government addresses the needs of its citizens is defined by its residents – if a load of them decide to be part of another country, that responsibility moves with them.

We have a lot of common ties but EdM’s argument reminds me of the Citizenship test, which has nothing in it about culture, just process/facts.

“It’s just a matter of fact that the SNP believes in withdrawing Scottish financial support for vulnerable people in the UK who do not live in Scotland.”

There’s no financial support for vulnerable people to withdraw.  Because we’ve had right-of-centre governments in the UK for thirty-three years, the Scottish subsidy has largely gone to the better-off.

 To be honest, everything’s so far down the crapper down here that nobody’s talking about anything beyond 2015!

My question is more in response to the idea that Scots would vote or it if they could be proven to be made ‘immediately richer’ by independence.

Scotland, being smaller in population and currently in sheer industrial and revenue terms, probably has to be even more caustious in its approach to future planning than the rump UK. Because oil would therefore be such a large part of the overall revenue stream at the point of independence, then the way that early revenue is used will be crucial to the future prosperity of the independent Scotland.

Plus, like it is here in rural England, fuel will be a massive issue for Scots post independence, and also presents a huge opportunity for Scotland. The current prices set by London are ludicrous and are stifling the rural economy. Scotland’s rural space is much larger by percentage than England’s, so for Scots to stifle themselves with the heavy fuel duty post independence might not be particularly popular or even sensible. But all this reduces immediate revenue. Lots of issues, but also lots of opportunities to define Scotlands future economic structure.