Tuesday, 31 January 2012

Who cares where charity begins; it ends at Bute House

'Civic Scotland', the self-styled voice of a nation and drop-in cafe for the natterati  launched themselves to widespread apathy and collective 'so whats?' yesterday. Named by the First Minister and directed by his propaganda chief,  the launch was short on detail and long on platitude and was notable only for the confusion over what exactly 'civic Scotland' meant and who they imagined they represent. There were many questions they couldn't answer the main one was what are they actually for? 

The churches and STUC said they had no intention of coming to any kind of conclusion at the end of this process. The Thatcherite hard right  think tank, Reform Scotland, tried to present themselves as reasonable while smirking at the prospect of savage cuts to Scotland's public sector. 

The SCVO,  however, found themselves in a less emphatic position with their leaders contradicting each other. Alison Elliot claimed that "This is not about making the case for independence, devolution, status quo or anything in between. We do not have a fixed view about the outcome of the referendum." which was news to many after some of her colleagues admitted privately that they had already settled on DevoPlus and have a timetable (around about November) for the announcement agreed with the SNP. 

The church groups and trades unions involved should be aware with whom they are dealing: this is a front organisation some of whose members are funded and directed by Bute House.


  1. Good point, well made, and welcome.

    You pinko leftard.

    (The last bit was for Muttley's benefit; can't have him calling us a "Unionist cabal", can we?)

    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    2. A hearty slap on the back, general gufawing and whispered 'wel done old chap' from the 'Thatcherite hard right' is the least that Grahamski can expect for his work as a spokesperson for the colation of the unwilling. Is this realy what you got into politics for to be on the side of the uber right?

      Anyhoos, civic scotland gets on with it's work to open debate, discuss options and weigh up the merits of greater autonomy, acknowledging that it is indeed a spectrum of options rather than the austerity of choice offered by Cameron & Co. Some views are defined as Devo+, I'm sure others will come forward for discussions and debate, either way they will realistically need a political party to back an option and take any mandate to deliver it.

      1. Labour refuses to back a third option, major fallout from civic scotland with labour, votes lost, goodwill lost, labour are already taking a tanking, wave goodbye to a 'No' vote in 2014 as moderates vote positively for change and independence being the only change offered. Nat win

      2.Labour refuses to back a third option, major fallout from civic scotland with labour, votes lost, goodwill lost, labour are already taking a tanking, a marginal 'No' vote in a referendum in 2014 but all momentum has been lost by Labour after refusing to discuss further devolution with anyone, wave goodbye to any chance of electoral success. Nat win

      3. Labour or Lib Dems adopt a devo+ option, they may well spike nat guns but the cat will be out of the bag in terms of oil & gas revenues. Nat win

      How did you manage to get yourselves into this mess?

      Your not only standing side by side with the likes of rear admiral smee, your the tories spokesman for goodness sake. Your now aligned against civic scotland in trying to limit debate with no vision to offer yourself other than the discredited scotland bill which no one voted for.

      What a mess. Nat win.

    3. You naughty boy! This isn't a question of Labour and Tories standing together; more a question of political opinion across the spectrum opposing the SNP's crackpot schemes. I mean, you don't hear me accusing Alex Salmond of standing shoulder to shoulder with the crypto-fascist Siol nan Gaidheal and deluded trot Tommy Sheridan in his quest to rip Scotland out the UK, do you?

    4. That's because they vehemently don't agree with each other. You on the other hand fundamentally agree with the Tories to such an extent that you'd rather see Scotland rulled over and raped by Tory millionaires than vote for a better democracy that actually represents Scots wishes. You need to have a long hard look at yersel in the mirror mannie. The Tories are laughing at you behind your back, your doing their dirty work for them.

    5. This response troubles me.

      At all levels I disagree fundamentally with the conservatives but you seem to believe it is legitlmate to misrepresent me and my views.

      There is almost three years of this to go and it is going to become evermore unpleasant if the separatist side insist on continually playing the man and not the ball.

      There is always room for banter and kidding in political discourse however the tactic of the SNP recently has been to desperately shut anybody with whom they disagree out of the debate by declaring them guilty of talking Scotland down or the now infamous slur of being 'anti-Scottish'.

      Their boasts of running a positive campaign become ever more hollow with every personal attack they launch.

  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

  3. 'Civic Scotland' or is it 'Unelected' Scotland mind they have said they will not ask for a Devo-max Question.......

    Although the snp will still hear it anyway and act accordingly Democracy in the Alex Salmond method you keep on about an Independence Referendum which has only small tiny ittsy bittsy support.

    And then when you get to the possibility(well it has to legal fair and transparent the snp struggle with that) of holding one.

    He then blethers/bleats over getting a devo-max question which it seems 'NOBODY' wants to ask for...One wonders does he actually believe he can win a straight forward (Alex struggles with that concept) Question like in or out.

    And here is the snps hand picked Devo max spokesman Apparently Alex Salmonds hand is stuck up his backxxxx.......... the mind boggles

    1. I'd have thought a crypto anarchist libertarian like you would have welcomes debate and discussion, instead you seem to have taken up your usual role of boot licking Osbourne's riding boots whilst wearing a fox fur davie crockett hat. Is that a bugle I hear?

    2. I welcome debate. Salmond's stooges I can do without.

  4. Not the Messiah

    I absolutely reject that slur