The collapse of the governing party of the Scottish colonial administration is a direct consequence of the Union. It shows the need for Independence.
Devolution infantilises Scottish politics. The Scottish Government budget is a massive £60 billion. But that all comes through London. The Scottish Government has no effective control on the productivity of its economy.
It has extremely limited, essentially cosmetic, powers to vary fiscal policy, excluding indirect and corporate taxation. It has no power whatsoever over monetary policy. The “Scottish government” is in essence very little more than a distribution mechanism for government revenue channelled through London.
The Scottish government is not a government in any real sense of the term when it comes to the ability to run the Scottish economy. It does however have tremendous powers to manage huge sums in spending. It has a great deal of power, and extremely limited responsibility.
Of course, much spending is not really discretionary. The NHS and Education will always need vast sums. But even little droppings off the margins of £60 billion remain huge sums of money in personal terms, and the Scottish government finds itself able to deploy life changing patronage on an astonishing human scale.
The result of all this is that devolution has created a Scottish political class at Holyrood fattened on this dripping roast, and swept into heights of vainglory by the pretence that their tightly constrained body is a national parliament, when on any rational analysis it is a slightly tarted-up regional council.
It does not control the Scottish economy, it does not control Scottish foreign policy, it does not control Scottish defence policy, it is not permitted to enable democratic decisions on the future Scottish constitution.
It is not a parliament.
So here we have this “parliament”, stuffed with MSPs who are not particularly bright, and have an irresponsible role but control immense amounts of dosh to spread around. The first thing they do, of course, is feather their own nests and build little empires.
You will recall that the first crack in the SNP wall came with the resignation of their chief spin doctor, Murray Foote, for being caught in repeated lying to the media about SNP membership numbers.
I was astonished then to discover that Murray Foote was not an employee of the SNP, but of the Scottish Parliament. Apparently the Corporate Body of the Scottish Parliament (a committee of MSPs) provides money to each political party to fund the central staff “supporting” the party’s MSPs, including spin doctors.
Parties have every right to campaign at their own expense and try to persuade us to vote for them, but I object fundamentally to party spin doctors being paid by the taxpayer to spread their lies and propaganda.
Welcome to the cosy world of the Scottish political class, where everything is cushy on the gravy train of flowing money, and the public are mugs.
As the SNP leadership election campaign proceeded, I realised that there are hundreds more paid SNP staff than I realised, 95% of them toiling away night and day to bundle continuity candidate Humza over the finishing line.
As the daily flood of twitter endorsements for Humza started to reach the bottom of the barrel, endorsements were tweeted out from people billed as “activists”.
I googled one of the “activists”, Doug Daniel, and found he is in fact full-time staff – again paid for by the Scottish Parliament. He is “communications and campaigns manager” to an MSP.
Now I don’t mind the public purse paying for MSPs to have secretaries and constituency caseworkers, but why on earth should the public pay for MSPs’ campaigners?
It is not just the SNP, of course. All political parties welcome the ever burgeoning gravy train, and seize the opportunity to employ each other’s families, their friends, thrusting young careerists and, to an astonishing degree, young people they fancy.
(The confidential report Nicola Sturgeon and Leslie Evans received on sexual harassment inside the Scottish Parliament contained over 200 allegations. They buried everything except one against Alex Salmond. There have since been numerous high profile cases of harassment by MSPs).
The SNP command the lion’s share of the money as the ruling party, and the direct political class expands and expands. Why Humza needs almost twice as many ministers as Alex Salmond did, and more than twice as many SPADs, is not immediately obvious other than to provide jobs for the faithful.
But the “direct” political class pales into insignificance compared to the massive cloud of government-funded positions in Scotland’s disproportionately large “third sector”. Pop into any bistro on Byres Road in Glasgow, and you will find it replete with people from NGOs or the “creative industries”, keeping their bills to submit to some Scottish Government branch or agency or funded organisation.
Sometimes one of these figures emerges into the daylight. HIV Scotland, the “national HIV policy organisation”, were in receipt of a grant of £270,000 per year. Its chief executive was Nathan Sparling.
Sparling is a good example of the career path available to the Scottish political class. He started off his taxpayer-funded campaign as a parliamentary assistant to Angus Robertson.
Robertson and Sparling
He then became Chief Executive of HIV Scotland – from which position he was forced to resign, and has just been charged with fraud. He is of course entitled to the presumption of innocence.
HIV Scotland has stopped operating and been closed down.
The interesting thing about this is that I cannot find any reaction from anyone – not the Scottish government who were funding them, not the HIV sufferer community, not the Terence Higgins Trust – bemoaning the closure of HIV Scotland. It is as though the “national HIV policy organisation” is not missed and was not actually doing anything useful at all.
A remarkable number of those organisations being funded by the Scottish government in this way are “policy organisations”, rather than actually delivering a service. The salaries in this part of the troughocracy are better than in the direct public service, with several effectively taxpayer-funded NGO chief executives earning substantially more than MSPs.
One remarkable effect of this system is that the Scottish government is constantly holding stakeholder consultations on policy with policy NGOs funded entirely by the Scottish government to promote the policies of the Scottish government. (You probably need to read that sentence twice. I needed to write it twice.)
One reason the Gender Recognition Reform measure has caused such political damage to the SNP is that the excessive ideological purity of the approach was continually reinforced at closed meetings between Scottish government officials and trans rights campaigning organisations funded by the Scottish government.
This kind of paid echo chamber explains how the mad, and since apparently abandoned by Humza, position of insisting that convicted rapists could self-identify and simply change sex, came to be adopted.
But my main point here is that the taxpayer is paying for swathes of trans rights campaigners. As it happens I am sympathetic in general to self-ID (though not for rapists). But I do not believe the public should be paying for this stuff.
This political-class gravy train in Scotland is massively disproportionate to the size of the country.
Gender reform is just one area where the Scottish government has wasted large amounts of money paying young activists substantial salaries to agree with them. You will find Scottish government-funded environmental groups advocating for Highly Protected Marine Areas. You will find swarms of the public funded self-righteous advocating to ban alcohol advertising.
The Scottish government estimates its grant support to the third sector at half a billion pounds.
Yes £500,000,000.
That is a stunning amount of patronage. Most of it is to excellent organisations doing very good work. But that still leaves huge scope for political patronage to policy and campaigning organisations.
Often of course third sector organisations are involved in both service delivery and policy work, including not just policy development but lobbying and campaigning. One such organisation is Rape Crisis Scotland.
Now as it happens I would support a very substantial increase indeed in government support for rape victims, though I would prefer it to be delivered via the NHS and local authorities rather than a highly politicised NGO.
I should also like to see a very large increase in resources, in personnel, training, finance and equipment, and above all priority, devoted by Police Scotland to rape cases.
Rape Crisis Scotland is almost entirely Scottish Government funded. In that circular policy making, its chief executive Sandy Brindley has played a key role in formulating and promoting Lady Dorrian’s proposals to abolish juries in sexual assault trials.
In an example of exactly the kind of highly paid circle jerk I am explaining, the official Jury Trials Working Group contains three third sector organisations funded by the Scottish government which accordingly support the abolition of juries – Rape Crisis Scotland, Women’s Aid Scotland and Victim Support Scotland.
The Scottish government do not fund any organisation that works for fair trials, so there is no NGO represented in favour of juries.
You would imagine that the highly remunerated CEO of Rape Crisis Scotland, Ms Brindley, is a lovely person motivated by humanitarian concern, given that she devotes her life to campaigning for rape victims.
And yet an Employment Tribunal recently found that the Establishment hero Ms Brindley deliberately and persistently hounded a disabled woman out of her job at Rape Crisis. This is from the Scottish Legal News on the tribunal judgment:
In its decision, the Tribunal expressed concerns at the extensive role played by Ms Brindley throughout proceedings, commenting: “While the Tribunal was mindful that the respondent was a small mainly voluntary organisation, it seemed extraordinary that the chief executive of the organisation would make a recommendation that an employee be suspended, take part in a grievance hearing concerning that employee and then be present at the disciplinary and appeal hearings concerning that same employee where the employee was suggesting that the grievance and disciplinary proceedings ought to have been combined.”
It continued: “Ms Brindley appeared unable or unwilling to understand that her presence throughout both the grievance and disciplinary processes could have a bearing on the extent to which these were conducted in an impartial manner. It was clear to the Tribunal that Ms Brindley operated an invisible hand throughout both processes and her presence was not neutral.”
Assessing the respondent’s awareness of the claimant’s disability, the Tribunal said: “The respondent appeared to be of the view that in the absence of a formal diagnosis, then they were not obliged to consider whether there were any steps they ought to take in terms of the claimant’s condition. While such a position is of course wrong in law, the Tribunal was extremely surprised that an organisation such as the respondent, whose services were focussed on supporting women who had experienced trauma would adopt such a position.”
…The Tribunal concluded: “The disciplinary hearing was not fair. Further, the presence of Ms Brindley at every stage of the proceedings reinforced the Tribunal’s view that the dismissal of the claimant was predetermined. Ms Brindley was aware of the grievance raised by the claimant and the outcome and recommendations which had been made. However, she did not raise this with the disciplinary hearing as an alternative potential outcome, which the Tribunal found very surprising.”
The Tribunal was “extremely surprised” and Ms Brindley’s behaviour was “Surprising”. That is about as tough as language ever gets from an employment tribunal, but their opinion of Ms Brindley is extremely clear. She withheld information from a disciplinary hearing, and her “invisible hand” hounded a disabled woman out of a job.
I would, incidentally, be prepared to wager a sum that the £50,000 in compensation and costs that Brindley’s appalling behaviour cost Rape Crisis Scotland, will ultimately be met by public funds. Certainly not by Brindley.
Yet Sandy Brindley remains a Duchess in the enormous realm of Scottish government-favoured, public funded NGO’s, a star in the firmament of policy lobbyists with big taxpayer-funded salaries.
With hysterical levels of hypocrisy, Brindley, who broke all procedure against her employee, is still the Scottish government’s star authority on the requirements of justice in sexual assault cases.
Their jobs may not be in Politics with a capital P, but I would argue that Ms Brindley and Mr Sparling are prime examples of Scotland’s sprawling, public funded political class, excrescences of the vast patronage wielded by Holyrood.
Of course it extends beyond the third sector. Failed Scottish politicians easily find eye-watering highly paid positions in Scottish universities, for which they are in no sense qualified. Wendy Alexander, Kezia Dugdale and Stephen Gethins are all clear examples.
Arts funding in Scotland and the capricious patronage behind it requires not just a separate article, but a separate book. One theatre in Aberdeen not entirely unconnected to the Aberdeen Independence Movement received more government Covid relief funding than the entire independent music festival sector.
So whatever happened in SNP finances must be seen in this much wider context of the morally shrivelled political culture of Scotland, of the limited power but excessive patronage enjoyed by Scottish governments and of the widespread use of public money for personal advantage of the political class.
The devolution system is a moral sink. Scottish Labour was massively corrupt in its years in power, with good old fashioned brown-envelope corruption all over Scottish central and local government in the Labour years. It was worse than the SNP.
But what really killed off Scottish Labour’s years of power was the recognition by the public that the Scottish Labour political class were interested in their own careers entirely, and had zero real concern for the people of Scotland.
The problem is that all those careerists nowadays flock in to the SNP rather than Labour. The interests of the Scottish political class once again take priority over the interests of the Scottish people.
It is a direct consequence of the fundamentally flawed devolution system, which confers power of patronage with no real responsibility for the economy.
The underlying fact is that Scotland produces vastly more wealth for government in London than the amount which is returned to Holyrood. But the producers are diverse, whereas the portion returned is concentrated into a single channel of distribution, creating that power of patronage and corruption.
Thus we have this strange combination of a poor and exploited nation but a sated and self-satisfied political class. This kind of devolution is precisely how to buy off any Scottish leadership and draw the sting of popular demand for Independence.
That was of course Blair’s open and admitted goal in initiating the devolution project. And it works.
Humza Yousaf has exacerbated all this by specifically excluding from his government those who have some understanding of the supply side of the economy, particularly Kate Forbes and Ivan McKee, and filling his cabinet precisely with those who are interested in nothing but how to control funding to client groups.
Devolution is a trap. Working within the financial ruination that is Westminster economic policy, with no monetary and little fiscal control, suffering from hard Brexit and Tory austerity, it is impossible properly to run proper public services.
Of course Scottish education and the Scottish NHS are in a bloody terrible state. Because of the grossly mismanaged UK economy and Tory austerity, they are bound to be in a terrible state. But devolution makes the SNP take responsibility for the disaster made elsewhere, and it ends up defending the indefensible and arguing that it is not quite as terrible as London.
Under devolution the Scottish government will always get it in the neck for problems made in London. Devolution is a trap. The Scottish political class accept it, and furiously defend it, because it feathers their nest.
The only escape for Scotland is Independence. The Scottish political class are bought off by the corruption of devolution.
This scenario is familiar to every student of imperialism and post-colonial studies. There is always a nominally nationalist governing caste of collaborators sucking at the Imperial teat. Those collaborators always claim to represent and act in the interests of their nation.
The balance of resource flows always benefits the Imperial capital and disbenefits the colony, but enough is “graciously” dispensed to the local ruling caste to keep them sweet.
Scotland is not in any way unique. It is a sad old story. The good news is that the people always triumph in the end and throw off both the local collaborating political caste and the yoke of foreign rule.
That London yoke is onerous. It has impoverished Scotland for centuries, and of course current Tory Westminster corruption is several orders of magnitude worse than anything seen in Scotland. I have every sympathy for those wondering why the houses of Michelle Mone and dozens of other senior Tories who profiteered from Covid have not been turned over by police.
Scotland’s people need to move forward quickly to Independence. That will probably entail writing off the SNP.
Realising that devolution and its advocates are not friends to Independence is a key step to progress.
————————————————
Forgive me for pointing out that my ability to provide this coverage is entirely dependent on your kind voluntary subscriptions which keep this blog going. This post is free for anybody to reproduce or republish, including in translation. You are still very welcome to read without subscribing.
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
Paypal address for one-off donations: [email protected]
Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB
Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a
Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.
Those of us who welcome the apparent downfall of NuSNP are conducting a premature victory lap.
Yes the books don’t look good, they are technically insolvent with huge legal bills looming, but delve into the bewildering realms of the Nicophants on Twitter before writing NuSNP off.
These folk are numerous and sadly deranged. A prominent booster was last night trying to promote #weloveoornicola. Seriously, these people incurable cultists. Wait ‘till Yousaf sends up the bankruptcy distress rocket, these folk will sell a kidney for the cause.
David Koresh and Jim Jones pioneered where Sturgeon followed.
Too wee? Naw.
Too puir? Naw.
Too stupid? Aye, no half.
Too corrupt?
This article is could not be written better by anyone and it is absolutely bang on the money.
GM, you know how to deliver a generous and open-hearted compliment – in this wicked world this is a much underrated ability and far rarer than this market dominated society appreciates or rewards.
I can’t see how any of this supports the idea of Scottish Independence. Just the opposite.
Did you actually read the article? This is precisely the point it addresses, throughout, numerous times.
“The underlying fact is that Scotland produces vastly more wealth for government in London than the amount which is returned to Holyrood.”
========
Did you miss that bit Mr Droy?
Probably the best piece you’ve ever written regards Scotland. The public are 99% unaware of this and nobody is telling them.
I tend to agree – certainly true of the authors’s efforts since I became interested in the idea of Scottish Independance about six months ago – before that I tended to not read articles regarding Scottish Indendence produced by Craig Murray, thinking foolishly, that because I didn’t have a dog in the fight, the issue had little importance for me. However he got to me eventually, through the demonstration of his intimate knowledge of how “Governance” is actually done. This change in my thinking (thanks Craig) then allowed me to breathe new life into MLK’s “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”
I now realise that if a more equitable Independant Scotland emerged from the breakup of the DUK (Dis-United Kingdom – if it walks like a DUK and talks like a DUK ……) that may well be the spark that light’s the renewal and rebirth of England, in a political sense. Surely, even the most focussed of Scottish Nationalists can see that this rebirth is not only long overdue but crucial to the potential survival and indeed the flourishing of any new Scottish polity. We’re neighbours and we need to be tightly bound together by mutual respect and rational self-interest. The current rulers of the DUK would not make it easy for a reborn Scotland to make it’s way to a brighter future. Between their spite, jealousy and malevolence there is not much wriggle room. Scotland can still make it but without political change in England, it will be significantly more difficult.
Independence needs an independent parliament, not the despotism of SNP micro management.
It may be that the implosion of the SNP has been a good thing and has come just in time.
if you want independence you need an army to enforce your borders.
The army is already here – It just awaits activation.
Brian Fujisan has pointed this out, several times, if I remember correctly.
A comprehensive unmasking of a political party devoid of promise, lacking substance, missing credence and horribly detached.
Yes indeed, it’s a cosy world for the Scottish political and media class etc..
Only the gak dealers know the real madness fuelling it.
A more succinct summary of Scotland’s sorry condition could not be hoped for.
Yes the London shower would not get out of bed for the sums that the SNP is being investigated for; however it’s the the sheer tawdriness of it all that sticks in the craw – £110k kid-on “battle buses” and even £600k is small change to these people.
Smash it to bits and hope something arises from the wreck.
Here’s a post I made somewhere, probably Wings before he barred me, but at the time, I was keeping copies of my posting to prevent being misquoted, so here’s a relevant one from 2018:
“23:55 14/11/2018
I don’t believe the SNP truly want independence but they need to keep the pretence up so they keep their membership and therefore money, up. If Devo Max was offered tomorrow, they’d snap that up in a jiffy and present it as a victory.”
I’ve noticed and I’m pretty sure that loads of other people are beginning to notice that the word ‘Devolution’ is being used more and more frequently now.
I’m going to stick my neck out and say that back in 2018, I was correct. Devolution was the goal, NOT independence. It seems to be accepted now that Scotland achieved devolution. They hit their target.
Something else too: We were ALL suckered by the SNP, not just because of their money problems but I’m betting that of all independence/Yes voters, not one single person voted for devolution.
Yet, that’s what we got. Quietly snuck under the radar.
BTW, you should see my other posts from 2018. Every one is pertinent and relevant to the position that Nicola Sturgeon and the rest of the SNP find themselves in today. I was simply ahead of the game. No wonder the bard from Bath barred me!
Mist001, you’re not the only one who makes a record of notable comments from years past.
> “I was simply ahead of the game. No wonder the bard from Bath barred me!”
Is that what you’re telling people now? Bollocks! You were barred because you posted something so vile about Craig Murray that Stu Campbell banned you on the spot. Here’s what you wrote:
— Mist001 says:
31 August, 2021 at 5:35 pm
@ Rev. Stuart Campbell:
“Jesus, do you seriously think I’m printing anything Craig hasn’t asked me to print?”
Well, I did credit you with writing on your own initiative but if that’s the case and Craig Murray finds life getting more difficult inside, then he only has himself to blame.
No more fucking sympathy from me. He got himself in the jail and now he’s there, he doesn’t like the rules.
Well, tough shit.
And this was Stu’s (perfectly apt) response:
— Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
31 August, 2021 at 7:31 pm
“No more fucking sympathy from me. He got himself in the jail and now he’s there, he doesn’t like the rules.”
To be honest that’s such an astonishingly cunty attitude I’m not even bothering with a warning.
Other commenters joined in the chorus of condemnation of your cunty attitude. So it’s quite a surprise to see you showing your face (or one of them, anyway) here on Craig’s own blog, glorifying your own prescience in calling out the SNP’s devo sop to the independence movement – which, incidentally, Stu had been documenting for several years already.
I’m sure this is a problem that Craig Murray encounters far more regularly than I do. Quotes being taken completely out of context.
But you know, fill your boots.
I don’t see why it’s quite a surprise’ to find me posting here, since I’ve been visiting this site for far longer than I ever spent on Wings.
Far more quality (usually) here too.
I would be interested in understanding what ‘context’ would justify such an unpleasant comment.
Would you, as the author, oblige?
Me too.
Play Mist001 for me.
Strange. He seems to have disappeared completely
There’s little point in waiting for a response from Mist001, as he has announced his departure to the moderators, after trying to post a comment on the latest thread (April 24, 2023 at 6:30pm) and finding that it was queued for approval.
Mist001
April 24, 2023 at 6:33pm
“My comment is awaiting moderation. If this is how you treat people that are onside, then fuck you all and just delete my comment. I want no part of this.”
Mist001 has given ample reason to bolt the door behind him. Nonetheless, if he posts a convincing (and polite) explanation here of his uncharitable sentiments toward Craig, it will be approved in due course for all to see.
Don’t you get barred from most places Mist001, usually for general rudeness?
Apart from Wings, name one. I don’t go to ‘most places’, certainly not independence minded sites. Name one other site I’ve been barred from, big boy. You can’t. You’re making it up. Lying, just like the SNP.
If Craig Murray lets you post, that’s good enough for me. It is, after all his blog.
Let bygones be bygones and let us keep our eyes on the prize.
If there are no distractions and there are no diversions there will be no deviations.
I might not get there with you but I’ve seen the promised land.
Craig, in your opinion, could an intelligently and tightly written constitution, for examples no lobbying by commercial organisations, the criminalisation of dishonest pronouncements on any public forum by elected representatives, no second jobs etc. save democracy or is it doomed?
The American founding fathers had the right idea, separation of powers so no one individual or branch of government could get too despotic.
The SNP have done us a favour in opening our eyes to the corruption and nepotism endemic to the Scottish political class. We need a constitution that discourages that natural tendency. And maybe a better educated electorate so we don’t all go around blindly loyal in a tribal manner.
I agree, although the American consitutional model, while providing checks and balances we do not have here, is somewhat let down by a poor level of education for the masses. I would like to see basic logic, e.g. the use of syllogisms for instance, as part of the curriculum. That alone would eliminate 70% of of the nonsense contentions we routinely see in what passes as political debate.
I was often impressed at the level of political cynicism possessed by West Germans I got to know of my own age. Perhaps all of us could benefit from the compulsory education they had about manipulation of the masses.
What happened to them then? They don’t seem to have it any more – they just lap up whatever rubbish their government comes out with, same as everybody else.
“The American founding fathers had the right idea, separation of powers so no one individual or branch of government could get too despotic.”
Hmmm, that went well.
A constitution might buy you a couple of generations of (relative) honesty until the scum managed to figure out a way round it. Ultimately it will not only provide no protection but could even work against you, like any system of checks and balances. Once enough of the people running the system have been corrupted, the checks and balances work against anyone trying to fix the system.
“A constitution might buy you a couple of generations……” – a couple of generations is all we need.
In 1900 the average inner city male in Britain ( or to use the correct term, “slum dweller”) was dead by the age of thirty – now we slum dwellers live to the ripe old age of 68 years, though admittedely it has been falling for the last ten years or so (austerity and whatnot) – two steps forward one step back; if we keep our eyes fixed on what’s down the track, you never know where we might end up – a place called Equity and on the up and up?
The state and democracy are opposites.
Excellent analysis Craig. The best I’ve read about the devolution malaise.
What measures could be implemented to prevent such institutional corruption morally shrivelling an independent Scotland?
1/ No MSP to earn more than the average industrial wage or unemployment benefit.
2/ Rotation of office: representatives to serve no more than one consecutive term. Ideally service in legislatures should be like Jury service- with representatives selected from pools of qualified persons by lot.
3/ An end to the staff system- MSP’s should arrange to do their own research, make up their own speeches and attend their own meetings.
4/ An end to all government subsidies to political parties, which should be entirely dependent on membership and fund raising. All corporate donations in cash or kind should be banned.
5/ There should be mechanisms for calling MSPs to account for their actions, or failures to act. Recall should be easy, triggered by petition and public meetings.
6/ MSPs should report to meetings of constituents at least once a month.
7/The Directors of all organisations in receipt of public funds should be subject to election and recall.
Yes to that list of well-thought out measures, thank you bevin.
Clearly, ab initio, independent Scotland needs to be very radical, implementing truly revolutionary root and branch reform, and to be very aware and wary of the powers that oppose it, including the power of corruption.
Craig writes, ‘the “Scottish government” is in essence very little more than a distribution mechanism for government revenue channelled through London.’
======
In an independent Scotland not only would the quotation marks be a nonsense. The whole sentence above would be. An independent Scotland would have rather more serious business to do than channelling funds to client groups paid to say things that the Scottish government wanted to hear.
Of course, that will be no guarantee against corruption anymore than corruption is absent from any other independent country. But the entire character of a government, raising its own revenue, as opposed to “government” spending the Barnet bung, would impose an extra level of accountability, especially with a written constitution and separation of powers.
” An independent Scotland would have rather more serious business to do than channelling funds to client groups paid to say things that the Scottish government wanted to hear.”
Why would it? Westmister is quite happy to fund fake charities to tell them what they want to hear.
“Why would it? Westmister (SIC) is quite happy to fund fake charities to tell them what they want to hear.”
=======
True.
I’d already spotted that Achilles heel in my own chariot!
– “Of course, that will be no guarantee against corruption anymore than corruption is absent from any other independent country”
But real powers exercised by a real government accountable to a real parliament, drawing greater scrutiny by real media (not just here) can only be an improvement on Craig’s quotation marks that nail the shamelessly corrupt state of business under the Murgeons.
“Arts funding in Scotland and the capricious patronage behind it requires not just a separate article, but a separate book”
It is this reticence to challenge the arts mafia and instead jump into the idpol sandpit with the snp for a pagger over toilets and drag queens that saddens me.
What a losing strategy it is.
The last three paragraphs say it all for me. Greed affects us all in one way or another … and the establishment know it. They are guilty of it themselves. There has always been a view that devolution was never acceptable as a stepping stone. I cannot recall it being articulated quite like this – but the principle seemed to me to be that it was a longer and more fraught road than a simple independence or nothing approach.
History will be our judge. Future generations will be our jury. May we live long enough to see us achieve our aim.
Keep up the good work Mr Murray – there are few with the integrity and energy of spirit to fight the good fight on so many worthy fronts.
I wouldn’t mind the greed if the greedy weren’t on sale for such paltry sums.
At last somebody has put together all of the glimpses we have been getting of this ridiculous gravy train which the SNP sits atop of. it became clear over the last few years in the so-called trans debate, in which SNP-funded organisations were ‘consulted’, wrote policy and then approved the legislative plans. Which then allowed the glib Sturgeon clique to claim that these ‘rights’ groups approved of the proposals, so democratic consultation and debate had taken place. Meanwhile women’s groups and campaigners were frozen out, not consulted and told they were ‘out of step’ with these tiny ‘approved’ ‘charities’ and rights groups.
It is farcical, smoke and mirrors, which of course was crowned by the same set of people setting up Salmond, and now going for jury-free trials, the same people who put Craig in jail for disagreeing with them and practicing journalism they didnt like.
Well done Craig, for putting this together; it has needed saying for a long time. The established media of course are not keen to rock the boat, since a significant amount them dine at the same table. The small size of Scotland has bred a caste of middle-class spongers who are mediocre in their abilities and with no interest in good governance, accountability or justice – and who all know each other. Sturgeon and Murrell presided over this cosy corrupt charade of government, using it shamelessly to prop up their regime and line all of their nests.
We need a colossal clear out and reset, and turning off the taps of patronage whose only goal is to preserve the elite. Scottish people should be very angry, but who in the mainstream will tell them?
If a certain well-funded group decides to infiltrate a party, what can it do to prevent it happening? That is the question that should be asked. If another country’s billionaires decide that your institutions are ripe for the picking, what can you do to prevent it happening? Nothing. Unless you have people in government who are not susceptible to corruption or mass propaganda. Germany underwent a total takeover of moderate, democratic institutions in the 1930s, the Soviet Union much earlier, albeit it was scarcely democratic, although ambitious for that. Fascism and totalitarianism are always with us. Those countries were susceptible to corruption and propaganda and naked nepotism, just as Scotland is.
The far left and the far right always spark off each other and end up by enabling each other at any given time in history. The SNP allowed itself to be taken over, and despite warning, did absolutely nothing about it. We are little more than a cipher for outside interests that do not have our best interests at heart. If we could get away from always blaming the UKG and/or the British State, both on which will never look to Scotland’s best interests, and start accepting that, and looking at the bigger picture, we might be able to do something about the mess we are in. We are far too ready to be deflected from independence, to sell our resources short and castigate those who try to warn us of the reality of our situation. The SNPG, since 2014, has consistently shot itself in the foot. No one else did this – we did. What everyone else was doing was measuring us up for delivery to the lowest bidder. There are many ways for global corporatist interests to behave like parasites, but we do not have to invite them with a cheery smile like we did with the ‘trans’ lobby which has infiltrated everywhere. ‘Just be kind’ betrayed our own interests because this has nothing to do with ‘human rights’, but everything to do with infiltration of our democratic institutions, led, at the bottom level, by social and sexual terrorists who, themselves, probably have little idea of what they are enabling. The hard left never learns any lessons and the hard right always takes advantage of stupidity, venality and lack of vigilance. We have all three in spades.
Some of this is, of course, related to how England is imploding as well, but in a wholly different way because ‘our’ national identity means that we (speaking as an English person!) cannot recognise it. Scotland – and Wales – have a coherent ‘independence’ movement in a way that English regions simply do not, but we are all suffering from the slow-motion collapse of Westminster (when the ‘official opposition’ party seems content to propose policies that are only slightly less right-wing than the government because they know England has no choice.)
Scurra: the ‘collapse’ of the UK may happen overnight or it may take a long time, but collapse it will. In the end, all four parts must be better off apart and ploughing their own furrows, England included. None has much of a chance otherwise of becoming a prosperous nation while still within the UK which is dying on its feet. There is nothing to stop us from forming loose, and perhaps, short-lived, multiple alliances with each other on a variety of issues as the Scandis do, and if that is in our best interests.
Northern England and the Midlands will almost certainly have to be at least semi-autonomous, otherwise London and the South-east will continue to pull them down even after independence for England. The real issue for us is not devolution, but those who put their own selfish interests ahead of the country’s by doing absolutely nothing to advance independence. Just as no country should profit from the colonisation of another, neither should any group in society be given special status at the expense of colonising another group’s rights. Scotland was quite prepared to allow female rights to be colonised by larping men while bleating, simultaneously about the UK’s colonising tactics. The hypocrisy is stark. Either colonialism is bad in all its facets or it is good in all its facets. It cannot be both at the same time. That is illogical, but, then, both the SNP and the Greens eschew logic.
A fantastic article on a subject that deserves more attention.
Devolution and Holyrood amount to a bribe; with people who might otherwise agitate for independence effectively co-opted on condition that they ignore the mass suffering of the general population (a motivating factor that is, or ought to be, at the core of the drive for independence).
As said, this model is (or was) rife in the second and third world — it’s essentially a US neo-colonial structure that is superficially democratic— but the people of the Americas and elsewhere seem to have wised-up to it which partly explains why the US is in big trouble right now.
It’s tragic that endemic poverty is a precondition for the successful functioning of this model, making it relatively easy to manipulate politicians, journalists, the professional classes, academics, and others, who know exactly what’s going on but dare not mention it out of fear of losing contracts, jobs, grants, etc.
At the level of the grassroots most people are kept in a state of ignorance to all this, their ignorance and poverty being essential to the functioning of the system as a whole which converts the inevitable misery, crime, ill health, and social problems necessitated by the system into jobs for the middle classes and other aspirational types.
For all of these reasons, I’m against devolution and hope that they dismantle Holyrood. The prospect of a more direct and honest form of colonial rule appeals to me on the basis that more people would see our vassal relationship for what it is and join in the struggle to end it.
‘For all of these reasons, I’m against devolution and hope that they dismantle Holyrood. The prospect of a more direct and honest form of colonial rule appeals to me on the basis that more people would see our vassal relationship for what it is and join in the struggle to end it.’
I doubt it. We had that for most of my lifetime and it took the election of Winnie Ewing around 1967 to open up the case for Scottish independence. Dismantling Holyrood has just been advocated by a Brexiteer in the House of Lords today. Whatever its faults Holyrood stands as a statement for the Scottish voice: remove it and you have nothing.
However if the SNP is serious about independence then all its Westminster MPs should absent themselves from that parliament. The next stage is a Holyrood election fought on the basis of secession.
Ah okay, if you’re happy to compare the political climate of the 1960s with the climate of today and assume that little has changed, I don’t have the time or inclination to argue. You might want to reflect on levels of support for independence in the 1960s, though, as compared to today’s levels.
Devolution was designed to thwart independence, not facilitate it. Holyrood in that regard — and only that regard — is functioning perfectly.
Of course, there will be no shortage of ostensibly pro-independence politicians that will agree with you and tell us that Holyrood is important, represents some sort of opportunity, it’s democracy, etc., etc.. That tells you more about the importance of jobs and making money than anything else.
The good news is we don’t need to spend any more time on this. Holyrood will remain open for the reasons suggested; it very effectively suppresses pro-independence forces.
Yo Hatz. Where have you been of late? Good to see you’re still around 🙂
How you doing, Robert… I am around but rarely take part in any chatter. Still on the Wings comments section? I haven’t been there in ages — it got to feel too much like a bunch of people perpetually moaning and I was one of them.
Defo fair and accurate to say that recollections will differ on that.
Excellent article on a galling state of affairs. You were ahead of all of them in flagging up this grotesque ScotGov corruption. Lady Dorrian journalists are only now waking up to its extent and only because knocks on doors are finally happening. None though will produce anything like this, outlining the full dimensions of the troughocracy and the ultimate reason for it. Probably because in their respectable circles it would implicate and antagonise many friends and family members.
This one’s on fire – absolutely correct, Mr Murray. One can recognize the issues in many a self-serving bureaucracy run amok without functional transparency and accountability, not just Scotland. Good call on the sexual harassment / exploitation angle also. That’s often one of the first symptoms when personal entitlement starts to run a workspace.
Now if anybody could work out exactly what to do about all this patronage, waste, bloat, dysfunctionality, then that indeed would be the most compelling argument for independence. How to run a smaller government that’s entirely focused on delivering the needs of the people? “Small Government” is usually a right-wing mantra, focused on reducing social care and support. But if it could instead be a socially progressive force, taking the key elements of government responsibility and delivering to those that really need it, while cutting out the useless hangers-on, you could be on to a winner. At the moment, the SNP seems more part of the problem than the solution, of course. If they can’t run their own finances correctly, what hope will they have running an independent country?
“If they can’t run their own finances correctly, what hope will they have running an independent country?”
=========
The great YOON fallacy rears its ugly head.
Why should it be they who run it?
You made me laugh; you made me cry, you made me doubt my very existence. It was at that moment that remembered I didn’t live in Scotland. There was TV advert for a hangover cure called “Resolve” or somesuch, that featured a pair of vigorous and muscular hands emerging from the bathroom cabinet and slapping the bleary slob who has got the hangover several times, as she stares in the bathroom mirror in her self inflicted misery. Thats what reading this felt like – in a good way – a purgative, a necessary correction.
Several times I forgot what I was reading and thought it was about 10th century Byzantium . I have heard Edinburgh, both lightly and affectionatly referred to as “the third Rome” (seven hills?) but this? What’s next? Eunuchs? You’ve got the Blues and the Greens having a rammie at the Circus Maximus. You got a rapidly calcifying bureaucracy thats paid in”gold”. You’ve got “latifundia” and best of all, a cryptic unblinking inner circle, seamlessy shifting from posture to posture without even hinting at a stand-out policy or policies on independance, gender, wealth inequality, etc.
On a final note, today I received a phone call from a great-nephew in Scotland. He’s doing fine. He said the B&Q in Drumchapel had sold out of pitchforks last week – twice. He used to work there but the pay was crap but he still knows people. He’s on the Young Team now. He and his friends all seem very knowledgeable, so if they say they know whats happening in the world of DIY at the B&Q in DC, I’d be inclined to believe them.
We even have a minister for the (closed) circular economy, one who can channel 9m from its mothership , the Scottish national investment bank, to indulge the barmy pet project that is the deposit return scheme.
Poor old Edward “Longshanks” actually had to march his way north in the rain and risk life and limb to steal the riches of Scotland. Turns out he could’ve just paid off the barons with a couple of bags of gold, tell them to hire a thousand PR flaks, and be done with it.
Hate to break it to you, but that’s just what the maleus scotorum did do ?
Just as the USA has always been powered by twin mighty engines of corruption and bullshit, it’s sadly the case that the two constant factors in the history of Scotland have been the intoxicating liquor of blaming domestic malfeasance and misfortune on the English, and the ability of the English to subvert Scottish aspirations by funding hucksters and the self-seeking.
Ultimately, the independence of Scotland depends upon finding some way of beating a nearly thousand-year-long mobius scheme.
The answer seems to be to have several competing pro-independence parties. The danger of this in the past was that the pro-independence vote would be fragmented and ineffective against the unionist vote which endangers self-government as a whole. One problem with reform is the “moat” the existing parties have in terms of name recognition, identified voters and general campaign experience.
So the SNP will probably end up being frogmarched out of office to the dismay of a vast ants’ nest of troughers and highly dubious organisations. But would anybody (other than establishment journos) expect the offices to be powerhosed of filth by the likely successors? The Starmer-Mandelson clan would make SLab of old look incorruptible. No, the only true remedy is the one you have always advocated and whose rejection a decade ago the world is still scratching its head about. Nobody looking in from outside could pretend to understand why so many Scots needed to be ruled by David Cameron and other absurdly posh Englishmen. Banishing that cultural cringe has to be the first order of business. How you reach the afflicted by this stage though I do not pretend to know.
As someone who protested vehemently against self-ID, I saw how the state-funded organisations in favour were given credence and grassroots women’s groups were told by Nicola that our concerns were “not valid”. I thank “Isla Bryson” 2x convicted rapist and predatory male for illustrating why self-ID is such a danger to women and girls. I remain baffled that this Predators’ Charter was passed with crossparty support. Thank heavens for intervention by Westminster government (never thought I’d say that).
Brilliant analysis and explication of the endemic self-serving corruption in Scottish Politics, Craig.
Aye, we know “it’s no better/worse in England”; so f……g what? It’s Scotland we’re interested in, not some sliding-scale of national naffness.
Now we know what the term Circular Economy REALLY means … i.e. we’ll give money to all our pals, family members, *sympathetic* groups, who, in turn, will support all our policies, thereby keeping us in power and in a position to keep giving money to all our …………
Act as though we’re in the last days of truly awful Political Class. We better be; something has to give eventually, something that will not be *manageable*, amenable to spin, deflection or “it woz them wot dunnit” finger-pointing.
Depressing stuff but great reporting by CM. I’d been wondering how SNP functioned on such small reserves. And did someone say CM not a journalist?!
In the brave new rules-based world, journalists aren’t supposed to do that anymore.
What you have written Craig needs to be broadcast loud and clear to all independence supporters. The route to independence is unlikely to come through political parties in Scotland. The grassroots need to see this and understand it. We need to organise our own referendum without waiting for the politically corruptible MSP representatives pretending they are on our side. To be absolutely clear, there is NO REQUIREMENT for a Section 30 for a referendum to be organised by the SNP – the only benefit of the Section 30 is that it allows the spending of government funds on it.
We, the people, have the right to hold a referendum at any time, and the right crowdfunding and the right organisers would make it achievable. If the SNP won’t do it, we must do it for ourselves if independence is ever going to be achieved.
Excellent exposé of the current system and how it is exploited by those to whom we loan power. Time to ‘drain the swamp’!