Petty vengeance?

Oily Al has resigned. I’ve never liked him and probably never will, but even so, credit where it is due. He failed and has done the honourable thing. That takes courage. He has my respect for that even though he has headed a party of spiteful nannying puritans all these years. That party won’t change, it might even get worse if Caviar Woman takes the helm.

Cameron wouldn’t have resigned if his side lost. He said so. He also made loads of impossible promises that he knew, perfectly well, his party would never let him keep.

Now? Well, now that the Cleggeron Coagulation, in cahoots with the Ed Miller Band, has seen off the kilted horde, are they magnanimous in victory? Do polar bears shit in the tropical tundra? Of course not.

‘Better Together’ Cameron now wants to stop Scottish MPs voting on English-only matters, a ridiculous paradox that has been known as the ‘West Lothian Question’ for a  long time. Cameron has never bothered to do anything about it before. That’s because it’s unsolvable.

Stopping those Scottish MPs voting on English matters would mean that in the event of a Labour government with a small majority, we would have two governments. One (Labour) in which all MPs can vote on international and whole-UK affairs and the other (probably UKIP, the way things are going) with a majority on domestic matters down south.

Then there is the ‘Barnett formula’ which is claimed to be a subsidy for Scotland. Scotland claims it is just getting back the taxes the Scots have paid into Wastemonster. I have no idea which is right and honestly, don’t care.

If the Holyrood government get their own tax collectors then there won’t be any money going south to Wastemonster so no need for this tax-moving stupidity. Simple, but it’s not going to happen. What will happen is that Wastemonster will scrap the Barnett Formula but still collect all the Scottish taxes and throw back a crumb or two.

So now that the ‘Better Together’ campaign has won, the Wastemonsters want to stop Scottish MPs voting in England and they want to stop sending tax money back to Scotland.

Both of the problems they now claim are of vital importance would have been solved overnight by a ‘Yes’ vote. All of Wastemonster campaigned for a ‘No’ vote. Yet now they act as though Scotland had voted ‘Yes’.

It’s hard not to see the sudden emergence of these ‘critical matters’ in Parliament as some sort of petty vengeance to slap down the upstarts – 45% of the voting population of Scotland.

If there is one thing worse than a sore loser, it’s a sore winner.

Cameron should take care where he treads. There are already allegations that the voting was rigged – and evidence that would seem to support those allegations.

Oily Al might have jumped too soon.


14 thoughts on “Petty vengeance?

  1. Difficult to call this one. On the one hand “rigged!” is always the first stampy-footed recourse for any pressure group whose cherished ideals have been shown to be shared by fewer people than they fervently hoped would be the case (a template established by anti-smokers, whose response to anyone who disagrees with them is “tobacco shill!”); on the other hand, our Big Three parties are clearly desperate – truly desperate – for the status quo to remain just as it is in Westminster. But why? They go to such trouble to try and pretend that they hold opposing political views, but when push comes to shove – like now – it’s strange how they all suddenly unite, with all sorts of visits, pleas and protestations for things not to change. By rights, Cameron should have been sitting back, watching from the sidelines, happily contemplating the possibility of a future rUK with no realistic prospect at all of his supposed main “opposition” party having a hope in hell of getting a majority in Westminster ever again in his – or, probably, his children’s – lifetimes. Miliband and the other Labourites I can understand getting a bit hot under the collar, for precisely the same reason, but the money-minded, business-oriented Tories shouldn’t (if they were real Tories, that is) have felt it necessary to do much more than perhaps make some vague references to “shared history” and “we like Scotland” noises to give the impression that they were bothered, but that’s it.

    To me, the whole thing stinks of people who have absolutely no political principles at all, whatever colour rosette they might wear at election time, and who in fact are merely there as front-men whilst the EU hands down all the rules and regulations for them to enforce in a manner which kids the public into thinking these rules are the result of a democratic process, just by going through the motions of what used to represent Parliamentary democracy back in the days when a democracy was what we actually had.

    And therein lies the rub. Cameron, Clegg and even Miliband didn’t really personally give two hoots which way the vote went. But the EU did, because if the UK were to split, some very, very awkward situations would arise about (a) Scotland’s membership, (b) the membership of a UK which no longer exists in the form in which it joined, (c) the possibility that a successful vote for Scottish independence would lead to greater calls for a referendum on the EU for the rUK, (d) the number of UKIP MPs forming a higher percentage of overall MPs than would be the case if the Scottish vote were included in the next General Election and (e) the possibility of other “breakaway” states making the same bid for freedom. So the EU did what the EU always does – it got its little caretaker-minions rushing round on its behalf doing their utmost to keep things exactly as they are, i.e. exactly as the EU likes it, with all its puppets firmly under control.

    And if it was necessary to rig votes in order to achieve this, then I for one certainly wouldn’t put that past the EU, or their minions, for one second.


  2. Colour me sceptical at that video but … really?

    Hmm, now who were the ‘guilty’ counters? Who hand-picked and hired those counters? Where were the supposed impartial election observers? How come this only came out, without an appeal, afterwards? And who was doing this ‘purely accidentally there’ filming?

    I could remind you about the ‘slight manipulations’ Mr. Fish arranged about who could vote (Hmm, let’s ban all the Scot’s in England who might vote no, let’s let all those nice tame foreign benefit recipients vote and … oh, I know let’s get a bunch of teenagers either still living with mom/dad, at school or college and thus without even the slightest clue, or skin in the game, what they’re voting on the vote too. if that wasn’t fraudulent than nothing is – and yet he still lost).

    Me? My cynicism may be leaking but since Fish and his lot arranged all this (including the count – they were ‘Scottish’ people counting not English and/or EU), I find it just a tad difficult to believe his picked people would allow this. On the other hand I can see a sting being set up just in case it was a bit ‘too close to call’.

    Remember all the claims of the NO bunch apparently being mean to YES people? Well, so far I’ve only seen actual evidence (and a lot of it) of the YES bunch doing the attacking, threatening and vandalising (not to mention breaking election law). So that begs the question, which side is most likely to act fraudulently? (remember your average YES campaigner was also most likely a member of the SWP and the ilk).

    Just my opinion – hoepfully the truth will out eventually since they’re on camera.


    • The trouble is, most of the vote-rigging allegations (including ‘yes’ in the ‘no’ pile’ and the three fire alarms) were in Dundee. Which returned a ‘Yes’ vote.

      So if ‘No’ were rigging in Dundee, it didn’t work. So who was doing the rigging, if there really was any?


      • The very idea that the Three Stooges… iDave, Mr Ed, the talking horse’s Arse, and the Boy Clegg could have pulled off a conspiracy to rig the Referendum is beyond ludicrous. They almost lost it by being smug gits and ignoring it.

        As for Wee Eck (ex Maoist apparently… no such thing exists in my book. If you had that much shit for brains to start with, no road to Damascus conversion is possible.) he asked the wrong people the question. He made very sure the rest of the Union didn’t get a vote, but if he’d just asked the English they’d have voted 3 to 1 for telling the Scots to fuck off and live in their Somewhere Over the Rainbow Socialist Utopia if they want to. Just don’t count on England for any more handouts.


  3. At the count there are usually tellers sitting/standing opposite each person count the voting forms. From my experience standing in local elections the big parties keep a very close eye on making sure their votes go in the right pile. Sure it’s possible mistakes can be made and it’s also possible votes are intentionally put on the wrong pile, but not enough to make much of a difference.
    The video is suspect simply because if a yes person saw this happen he could have a recount simply by showing the officials what has just happened. Are they really saying a yes campaigner took a video of this and said nothing to anyone?
    Also the No pile with a yes “on top” of one of the piles? Hmmm Surely if someone was going to rigg the vote you don’t put the wrong pile right at the front do you? Maybe at the back, or cover it with a single no slip to hide it. It smells more of a Yes campaign to give doubt to the result if the result didn’t go their way.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I don’t find the photographic evidence at all convincing. Having attended counts at EU parliamentary, Westminster and local government elections as a candidate in the first two and as a scrutiniser in the last case, the claimed sort of manipulation on any significant scale is – to put it mildly – unlikely. I did once spot and challenge a few ballot papers going into the wrong pile but it was IMHO a simple error.

    In this referendum, the manipulation was in the extension of the franchise – particularly to EU citizens who had no business voting in this case. The exclusion of non-resident Scottish people is debatable and the inclusion of youngsters of 16 and 17 years was a similar ploy.

    At the last election at which I voted in England, I noticed that one security precaution had been omitted. Some years ago the polling station clerks used to perforate the ballot paper with a number when they issued it. This identified the polling station at which the paper had been issued. At the close of poll, the presiding officer would lock up the perforating punches and no further papers of valid appearance could be issued. This is no longer being done here and it does open the system to the possibility of ballot stuffing which could not previously have taken place without the collusion of a senior official. Perhaps I have a suspicious mind!

    The skeleton at the feast or the elephant in the room on this occasion was our old friend the EU. The question asked about independence but that was never on offer as Mr Salmond was determined on EU membership. In 1971 the Foreign Office was well aware of what the EEC was intended to become and advised HMG as follows ( Document Ref FCO 30/1048).
    ” The transfer of major executive responsibilities to the bureaucratic Commission in Brussels will exacerbate popular feelings of alienation from Government. To counter this feeling, strengthened local and regional democratic processes within member states and effective Community economic and social policies will be essential…. There would be a major responsibility on HM Government and ON ALL POLITICAL PARTIES ( my emphasis) not to exacerbate public concern by attributing unpopular measures to the remote and unmanageable workings of the Community” . This advice was followed to the letter by all parties in the referendum campaign which was therefore to decide whether the UK would be administered as one or two subject provinces of the EU – no more, no less.

    Mr Salmond made his mark with his early campaigning on behalf of the fishermen of the East Coast of Scotland whose livelihoods had been deliberately sacrificed by the Westminster government as part of the price of joining the EEC/EU. Yet he campaigned in the referendum as the EU’s willing subject. Just across the North Sea lies Norway – outside the EU and with full sovereignty over its own waters and oil ( which the EU aspires to make a ” common resource”). Norway has exactly the same access to the EU’s Single Market as the UK as a member of the EEA ( European Economic Area). If the Yes campaign had campaigned on that platform, it would have been offering real independence – but it didn’t!


    • My objection has always been that there was never any real independence on offer. Scotland would have been an EU region, just a little sooner than the EU plan to make it one anyway.

      What interests me most is why ‘sooner’ was not seen as a good thing by the EU. Maybe they just rigidly stick to their script and are afraid to adjust it in case it all goes wrong. Or maybe they aren’t ready for all the EU countries to break up in similar fashion.

      I suspect it’s most likely that they don’t want the word ‘independence’ involved. Becoming Scotland is not the same as becoming the Scottish Region. Once the Scots realised that they weren’t independent after all, there could well have been trouble.


  5. They don’t need to rig anything they being government. What we has passed has been pure theatre.
    What knows how many ‘electors’ there are?
    What calls the election/referendum?
    What creates the referendum question/election list?
    What administers the election/referendum?
    What counts those numbered forms?
    What pronounces and verifies the results?
    What decides that all those electors who ‘don’t participate’ vote yes by acquiescence?
    What never publicises the numbers of people who haven’t applied to be electors?
    What threatens people with a fine if they do not hand over their name to the Electoral Roll?
    What wins EVERY SINGLE TIME?


First comments are moderated to keep the spambots out. Once your first comment is approved, you're in.

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

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s