Red Tory, Blue Tory 42


The BBC is now joining in the propaganda for tactical voting against the SNP, quoting an Andrew Skinner from United Against Separation as saying: “They won’t say it publicly, but be it a Labour or a Tory area they are happy to vote the other way to keep the SNP out.” Err, you just did say it publicly, Mr Skinner, and thank you for the confirmation that the Red and Blue Tories are all in it together.

It is hardly a coincidence that the BBC did this piece to promote unionist tactical voting centred on Dundee West, just after the Guardian did exactly the same thing , not only promoting Labour/Tory tactical voting, but about the same constituency. The unionist media really are absolutely determined to try to keep my friend Chris Law out, aren’t they? No chance.

Tactical voting is not all on the unionist side. Tommy Sheridan, Carolyn Leckie and Pat Kane are among the diverse figures, not SNP members, who have called on supporters of independence to vote SNP in this FPTP election. All of those are much more substantial figures than Andrew Skinner. Yet strangely the BBC and Guardian have felt no urge to interview any of them, or discuss pro-independence tactical voting. The shameless bias of the unionist media appears to have no limits.

Michael Fallon’s comments on Miliband and Trident this week also brought a welcome reminder that the Red/Blue Tories are no different, as the Labour Party hastened to affirm their love for weapons of mass destruction and their earnest desire to spend unlimited sums on ever greater potential to destroy mankind. Thanks for the clarification.

I should however like to see clarification from the SNP. Labour and Tory can of course combine to vote Trident replacement through. If that happens with Labour in office, the SNP should make plain that would mean the withdrawal of support for that government. For the SNP to allow Labour to push Trident through with Tory support, and then the SNP revert to supporting the Labour government in office, would be a betrayal of the Scottish people. To me, there has not been absolute clarity in our response on this issue. It must be given.


42 thoughts on “Red Tory, Blue Tory

1 2
  • fred

    “Sorry, but I have to call it as I see it.”

    Alistair Carmichael did seem rather blasé.

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Republicofscotland
    11/04/2015 6:01 pm

    Well, I will try. I’ll set it out again as I see it.

    By the way, am I right in thinking that you meant that both parties HAVE strenuously denied saying anything of the sort?

    There are actually three parties to this, not two. Nicola Sturgeon, Sylvie Bermann, the French Ambassador to the UK, and Pierre Alain Coffinier, the French Consul General to Edinburgh and Glasgow. All three were present at the meeting where these comments were allegedly made.

    The memo sentence in question consists of two parts. Let’s set them out separately.

    1. Nicola Sturgeon “confessed that she’d rather see David Cameron remain as PM”.

    2. Nicola Sturgeon confessed that she “didn’t see Ed Miliband as PM material”.

    Nicola Sturgeon has denied both 1 and 2.

    The French Ambassador’s office has denied that Nicola Sturgeon expressed any personal political preference with regards the future Prime Minister.

    Pierre Alain Coffinier has denied that any preference was expressed regarding the outcome of the election.

    Both the Ambassador’s and the French CG’s position can be regarded as denying only 1.

    According to the Sunday Herald, Pierre Alain Coffinier has refused to disclose if “any” of the memo was accurate. In particular, he refused to answer a question on whether or not Sturgeon had said that Ed Miliband was not Prime Ministerial material. This is also asserted by Paul Hutcheon of the Sunday Herald on his personal blog.

    That suggests to me, assuming that the Sunday Herald and Hutcheon are reporting things correctly, that Nicola Sturgeon did in fact say that. Otherwise, why would Coffinier not give a firm denial, the same way he has for the “preference expressed” question?

    It seems that he and the French Ambassador have chosen their words with extreme care. So 1 may be false, and 2 may be true. Hence half correct, as I said.

    Craig’s original suggestion was that the whole matter was made up by the security services. If the facts are as I have stated them, I cannot agree.

    Kind regards,

    John

  • Republicofscotland

    Thanks John for that.

    According to the Sunday Herald, Pierre Alain Coffinier has refused to disclose if “any” of the memo was accurate. In particular, he refused to answer a question on whether or not Sturgeon had said that Ed Miliband was not Prime Ministerial material. This is also asserted by Paul Hutcheon of the Sunday Herald on his personal blog.

    It may suggest to you that Mr Coffinier,is withholding information but to others it could suggest discretion,and nothing more.

    I await Jeremy Heywoods inquiry into the matter,though,if I recall,he wasn’t too keen to inquire into the Treasury scandal.

  • Habbabkuk (la vita è bella)

    RepublicOfIdiocy

    Give up, laddie. Spencer-Davis has administered a good* and well-deserved caning, just get over it. 🙂

    * in the sense of enjoyable (for me, not you)

  • SheenaJ

    Were the British Government involved in adding extra postal votes at the referendum? A very interesting study done by volunteers in Argyll and Bute http://static.ow.ly/docs/DSF_DDR_315_3bs5.doc I know that in Edinburgh the proportion of No to Yes postal votes was staggering compared with the normal votes.

  • Republicofscotland

    Elsewhere, Labour seem to have toned down the argument that “a vote for the SNP is a vote for the Tories” since the disastrous smear campaign of last weekend. The “secret memo” claiming that Nicola Sturgeon had said she wanted David Cameron as PM has been thoroughly discredited. The affair rebounded on Labour for having rushed to judgement.

    John Spencer.

    It would appear,going by the above article by Iain MacWhirter of the Sunday Herald,believes the memo to be less than geniune.

  • Phil

    “I should however like to see clarification from the SNP. Labour and Tory can of course combine to vote Trident replacement through. If that happens with Labour in office, the SNP should make plain that would mean the withdrawal of support for that government.”

    Am I missing something here? Why are you asking this question and why has no one replied? Maybe I have missed some news but the last I heard:

    Surely there is clarification – it’s just not what you want to hear. Sturgeon is being perfectly clear that whereas it once was, trident renewal “would not stop SNP backing other Labour policies”.

    The SNP are pro NATO and backtracking on trident.

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/06/nicola-sturgeon-trident-snp-general-election-labour

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Republicofscotland
    12/04/2015 2:34pm

    “John Spencer.

    It would appear,going by the above article by Iain MacWhirter of the Sunday Herald,believes the memo to be less than geniune.”

    ——————————

    And perhaps he is right. But Iain MacWhirter does not speak for me, and until I read that the French Ambassador and the French Consul General have denied that Nicola Sturgeon said at that meeting that Ed Miliband was not Prime Ministerial material – and Pierre-Alain Coffinier has had that specific question put to him and has refused to answer it – I will continue to believe that there is some measure of authenticity behind the memo. It’s not a big deal to me – the moment they say so, I’ll be happy to change my opinion.

    Notice also what MacWhirter says. To use my previous nomenclature, he denies point 1 and says nothing about point 2. The claim that Nicola Sturgeon said she wanted David Cameron as PM has been discredited.

    I agree with that.

    Kind regards,

    John

  • Republicofscotland

    According to the Sunday Herald, Pierre Alain Coffinier has refused to disclose if “any” of the memo was accurate. In particular, he refused to answer a question on whether or not Sturgeon had said that Ed Miliband was not Prime Ministerial material. This is also asserted by Paul Hutcheon of the Sunday Herald on his personal blog.
    ____________________________

    John Spencer-Davis.

    I quite agree with you John, form your own opinion,my last post directed to you,was merely to inform you,of how fickle the Sunday Herald can be,taking your above quote,regarding the newspaper as a example.

    Then combining it with,this weeks edition,and Iain MacWhirter’s take on it.

    The fact that the allegations have strenuously been denied,will, neither be here nor there for some parties,who have been Cicero-esque,in their attempts to retrieve the unretrievable.

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Republicofscotland
    12/04/2015 6:27 pm

    Oh, I see! Yes, thank you for that.

    But, you know, newspaper reports are written by different human beings with different opinions and who have done different amounts of research on things. If everyone on the same newspaper thought exactly the same thing, well then I would be a lot more worried!

    Kind regards,

    John

  • Ba'al Zevul

    Were the British Government involved in adding extra postal votes at the referendum? A very interesting study done by volunteers in Argyll and Bute http://static.ow.ly/docs/DSF_DDR_315_3bs5.doc I know that in Edinburgh the proportion of No to Yes postal votes was staggering compared with the normal votes.

    Deserves a wider public – this was well researched. Absent any response whatever by the usual suspects it looks as if these anomalies cannot be explained innocently. However, the last section is weak, both as to the assessment of probable voting intention and sample size, no doubt for very practical reasons. Now the possible methodology of the alleged fraud is better understood, it might be possible to prepare better to demonstrate its existence next time.

1 2

Comments are closed.