The Forsyth Saga

Lord Michael Forsyth in the Scottish Daily Mail on @RuthDavidsonMSP speech today: “Alex Salmond must feel that Christmas has come early.”

Ruth Davidson talking legal,political and constitutional nonsense last night on devolution to Gordon Brewer. An intellectual miasma rises from her. Alex Massie and David Torrance, right-wing contributors to right-wing Think-Scotland play crap scrabble for something intelligent to say on Ruth.

Ruth Davidson says that Tories were “on the wrong side of history”. Now all she has to say is they’re usually on the wrong side of humanity.

An angler gives the fish more line to tire it out and give an illusion of freedom, then reels it in and gaffs it. This is essentially the Tory/UK strategy on devolution. But Lord Forsyth rather inconveniently blows the gaffe on the real Tory grandees view of devolution – that it was a mistake, should never have happened and ideally should be reversed, a view shared by a large sector of the English Tory Party.

But there is need from much greater clarity from YES campaign politicians, who far from clearing the confusion in many voters minds about the distinction between devolution and independence, are deepening the fog by sloppy thinking and quotes. Devolution definition: transfer or delegation of powers to a lower level especially by central government. Indy politicians need to get a grip of terms.

Today, David Cameron, the failing PM of a failing Government, failing economy, at war with its LibDem partners AND his own party, supports Ruth on devolution !

Devolution is NOT independence – it is a grace-and-favour concession the the ruling government to a subject province, and can be clawed back piece by piece – or abandoned outright – at any time under the Scotland Act.

Comments (0)

Join the Discussion

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. Patrick S Hogg says:

    It is tantalizing to see the spent zombies of the Union reactivated after their careers died and out they are wheeled to the media circus to cast their pearls of wisdom to those of us who remain the unthinking unwashed illiterate swinish multitude who lap up the spoonfuls of truth these zombies feed us from their celebrity clouds of greatness. It’s not a case of ‘Bring out yar dead’, but wheel out the zombies of yesteryear! Let’s go the whole Hog and get Thatcher to tell us all what to think. Gruesome politics: from heads on spikes after Culloden to scare us into submission through fear, to dead zombies talking to us in the 21st century! How are we to see through all this complex intellectual fog? Finger on trembling lip……Jings, helpmabooab, which way will I vote? I’ll just read a dead sea scroll called the Daily Record and they will tell me!. mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm……….. och we had better be sympathetic to the zombies and help them keep their London jobs. We couldny put the likes of these on the bru, could we? More torture please…..

  2. steven luby says:

    Choice is what the Yes Campaign are saying,let me repeat that.Choice is what is given to the electorate in Scotland after 2014. This choice is whether you want a Lab/Lib/Con/SNP or any other political group you may wish for in Government.
    It’s not about laying down policies within a future Scottish Government,nor is it about the definition of devo-whatever and independence.
    You can argue that creating a Sterling Zone would tie Scotlands hands but Scotlands hands would be tied further if they were to create a Scottish Currency,but only at the moment. Choice would come into play for change in this matter in future years.With choice Scotland would have more direct influence in the direction the people wish to take.
    Stating that devo-whatever and independence are muddled and confused is exactly how the media and Westminster wish to keep it.Saying that the Yes Campaign must come forward and clearly state the difference between them is all well and good,but,from what platform will the Yes Campaign be given? Why attack or accuse any group of something here when they are not around to counter this claim?
    Perhaps you misunderstand the Yes Campaign and you have to remember that the SNP Policy on Independence is only one view from within the Yes Camp.
    Perhaps the mass media have a greater responsibility to educate the people of Scotland and not simply ignore.

  3. norrie hunter says:

    thought i was dreaming when Ruth came on telly last night discussing new powers for the parliament. Sorry but you cannot con us the people with this tripe. Mind you keep it going as you are a toxic brand and can only help the yes campaign.

  4. Ken MacColl says:

    Problably better to imagine that you were dreaming. How often are we expected to take such proposals from this source seriously? We have had the ringing Declaration of Perth from Ted Heath, the sincere promise of “something much more substantial than what is on offer” from Sir Alec D-H and the “line in the sand” post Calman from the present spokesperson for the Scottish Tories. The shadowy figure of Lord Forsyth, comprehensively dumped by Stirling’s electors,but elevated to rule over us, hovers like Banquo’s ghost in the background.

    Dream on!

  5. Charles Patrick O'Brien says:

    She is a career politician and not even a good “journeyman” she is only interested in her own career,for what it is.So she decides to go with the wind,no conviction or shame.Still I’m wasting my time even reading about her.Not worth the effort.

  6. thejourneyman says:

    Sorry still can’t understand what she was on about although I think Curran might be out now as well talking about some other fabulous new brand of jam due for our shelves in 2015! We can only hope that the reputations of these current “Scottish representatives” will be so badly damaged by 2015 they will have no credibility left to play a part in the exciting new future for Scotland!

  7. Robert Peffers. says:

    There are several definitions that need to be emphasized. Here’s another, United Kingdom – two or more Kingdoms in union.
    “Bipartite Agreement”, having two parts or partners.
    Treaty, a formal agreement between two, or more, states, countries OR KINGDOMS.
    Status Quo Ante – the situation before the event or action.
    So, “The Treaty of Union”, is a bipartite agreement and it has only two kingdom’s signatures on the treaty. The three country Kingdom of England and the single country Kingdom of Scotland. It is an internationally legal document and the status quo ante is that when one partner of a bipartite union leaves that union both partners return to the situation that existed before the Treaty of Union – independence – both of them.
    Oh! Nearly forgot – there is another definition that applies – hypocrisy – falsely pretending to produce virtues, beliefs, etc.

Keep our Journalism Independent

We don’t take any advertising, we don’t hide behind a pay wall and we don’t keep harassing you for crowd-funding. We’re entirely dependent on our readers to support us.

Subscribe

Don’t miss a single article. Enter your email address to subscribe for free here and receive Bella direct to your inbox.

 
Bella Caledonia