Conservatives Have No Mandate To Govern Scotland

‘Mandates, Mandates, Roll Up For Your Mandates….Plenty To Choose From’

The Conservative Party Has No Mandate In Scotland

(***Some Mandates may have extra terms and conditions!)

Short Commentary by Solon Scotland

In the wake of the UK General Election in December 2019 the term ‘mandate’ is at the very core of both Scottish and UK Politics, but as is patently clear it appears that some mandates are only deemed acceptable if they are UK Mandates?

Boris Johnson has a mandate to govern on 43% UK support. That mandate is also seen as acceptable to ‘Get Brexit Done’. NOTE HERE THAT THE MANDATE DOES NOT REQUIRE 50% SUPPORT TO BE DEEMED DEMOCRATICALLY ACCEPTED? THE LARGEST VOTE IS WHAT COUNTS!


How long can this situation go on for? ..Scotland does not vote Conservative in majority, ever! The party trades on anything from 15% up to 30% on average in Scotland in National Elections, yet it continually espouses what it demands for ‘Scoticus Torius’ and gives us UK Governments we do not vote for. Since Margaret Thatcher came to power in 1979 Scotland will have been governed by Conservatives (as part of the UK) for 28 years…(1979 – 1997 & 2010 – 2020) 9 years currently, plus 5 more years and counting for Boris Johnson.



The Conservative Government have less support in the UK than The SNP in Scotland. General Election 2019 saw The Conservative Party score 43% UK wide and the SNP score 44% support in Scotland. Over 50% of the UK do not support Boris Johnson’s Government, over 70% of Scotland do not support Boris Johnson’s Government.


Scotland is a nation in its own right, albeit currently a nation within the UK Union, but that is why you cannot simply apply UK mandates and conversely ignore Scottish mandates, ..it is an untenable position. Boris Johnson has now claimed a mandate ‘To Get Brexit Done’, he does that on less than 50% support because first past the post means that the largest party makes the rules, that is how it works,

In that case a Scottish Parliament returning an independence majority in 2016 has a mandate for a new Independence Referendum. That mandate has been confirmed in Scottish Westminster Elections in 2015, 2017 and 2019 respectively in Scottish Westminster General Elections. The SNP have won each of these elections convincingly in Scotland.

The SNP mandate is rock solid if your opinion is that Boris Johnson has a UK Govt mandate on 43% support. The SNP mandate is rock solid if your opinion is that Boris Johnson has a ‘ Get Brexit Done’ mandate on 43% support.


McCrone Report is Trending (Article By Solon Scotland)

This week the McCrone report has come to prominent news after being printed in full by The Scottish National Newspaper

‘Hushing Up’ of The McCrone Report Raises Fundamental Issues about Westminster Government in Relation to Scotland

The report was commissioned by The British Government in 1974 but it was ‘hushed up’ and unreleased in the public domain for around 30 years by successive Conservative and Labour Governments in the ‘national interest’ and because of its undoubted effect it could have on the validity of an independent Scottish economy.

This is short commentary piece on the Report by Solon Scotland (Scottish Politics News Commentator)

“The ‘hushing up’ of the McCrone Report by both Labour & Conservative Governments for around 30 years throws up fundamental questions about the very nature of Westminster Government in relation to every person in Scotland.” (Solon Scotland)

Placing aside the economic assessments in the McCrone Report (most of which profoundly boosted the valididity of a successful Scottish economy in the event of Independence) one of the most striking aspects of the report is that it was never made public and has never even now been afforded common knowledge amongst most people in Scotland – that raises fundamental questions about the nature of UK Government and Civil Service in relation to Scotland.

The report was never released in any public form because it would have been ‘bad good news’ for the United Kingdom union and economic/political structure, and ‘too good’ for the case supporting an independent Scotland. That is ultimately shocking..but not in any measure unsurprising?

Scotland in the 1970s and even into the 1980s had high levels of deprivation and poverty particularly in inner city areas like Glasgow where the highest concentration of population could be found. The British economy was also suffering as traditional industries such as mining, shipbuilding and steelworks  suffered job losses due to wordwide competition and arguable lack of investment by successive British Governments in favour of cheaper overseas supplies. At the same time conflict between unions and Government was at a highpoint to try and save these industries and jobs. The ‘stand off’ between unions and goverment in the 1970s Heath/Callaghan Labout Govts and then Margaret Thatchers’ Conservative Governments (from 1979) was one of the pre-eminent political focal points for almost two decades.

The very same era that saw the dismantling of uk manufacturing industry along with high levels of unemployment and uk social & economic inequality, arose at the very same time almost as the McCrone Report highlighted that the wealth from the North Sea was in essense potentailly ‘GARGANTUAN’!

That information simply could not be released in general public news since, a Scotland which voted consistantly for the socialist Labour party would have been outraged. Why would some of the money not have been used for the betterment of Scotland? …Why would it not have been used to invest in some of the traditional industries suffering, and which resulted in massive amounts of workers being laid off UK wide and heading Britian towards record unemployment levels?

Labour and Conservative governments both seem to have been complicit in ‘burying or hushing up the report’ until it was released under freedom of information around 30 years later?

It seems incredible that in the first instance the report would have been hushed up by a Labour Government because essentially the UK union and economy was more important than letting Scottish voters know about the positive economics of the report. Scotland was an absolute bastion of Labour support in the 1970s and 80s yet that was taken for granted and indeed subverted in favour of the overall uk union?

This raises fundemental questions for every single person in Scotland irrespective of party allegiance and opinion on independence. The allegation and one rightly promoted is that the facts will be hidden by inner British Government if it conflicts with the promoting the UK Union or effects the uk economy. If the economy or social circumstances of one of the four composite nations of the uk union suffers but it is seen in the interests of the overall structure, then it must be followed that UK Goverment has a policy of seeing that as a justified consequence of continuing to uphold the union?

That essentially means that whether you are Conservative, Labour, SNP, Green or Lib Dem in Scotland your economic and social needs are secondary and even if their is potential for say Scotland to benefit from a prticular plan, then it may be ‘shafted’ as they say, because that would affect the overall power structure!

A secondary point also here is that there would undoubtedly be many many socialist Labour supporting Scots in the 1970s and 80s who would have wanted some action in relation to this report in the 1970’s and 80s (even if it wasnt for full scottish independence)…yet the Labour Party leadership decided that this was not in UK Labour and UK Union interest? ….that is shocking and many will argue is a symptom of why Labour now finds itself as runner up in Scotlands Political map?

A new generation has grown up in Scotland since the 1990s who do not simply follow the automatic previous Labour/Socialism model, and a large section of the previous generation to that one have now lost all support for the Westminster establishment and they will never return to it. The only question is whether these two groups will continue to rule the Scottish Political landscape in its present form or will they be joined by even a significany minority of 2014 no voters to put Scotland first irrespective of party allegiance?

Background & Links:

“The McCrone report is a document on the Scottish economy written and researched in 1974 on behalf of the British Government. It was composed by Professor Gavin McCrone employed at the Scottish Office. The document gave a highly favourable projection for the economy of an independent Scotland with a “chronic surplus to a quite embarrassing degree and its currency would become the hardest in Europe”. This led successive iterations of the British government to classify the McCrone report as “secret”. This was so to avoid fuelling independence sentiment in Scotland. The report became public in 2005 when new freedom of information legislation came into effect.”

Introduction from Wikipedia:

Read the full Report on our website:

Although the report was commissioned in 1974 it allegedly only came to public knowldge in 2005 when the SNP obtained several UK Government papers under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. The full provisions of the Act came into force on 1 January 2005.

Brexit Deadlock; Rule Britannia rhetoric is making the waves bigger?

Opinion Piece – Solon Scotland – Political Commentator

Watching ‘The Brexit Never Ending Negotiating Story’, it never ceases to astonish how many of those in power who support Brexit (and presumably well educated) resort to hyperbole of Rule Britannia, Lead The World, We Won the War blah blah blah, over actual facts and common sense?

The latest classic we have is Conservative Brexit MP Mark Francois who is quoting the war and not bowing down to Germans…yes this is an exact quote. “My father was a D-Day veteran, he never submitted to bullying by any German. Neither will his son”. https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1088814152037138435

How many times will we hear Government ministers like Liam Fox claim that leaving the EU will lead to a brave new world of the UK leading the economic world and securing new trade deals? That is rhetoric from the days of the Commonwealth and British Empire from hundreds of years ago. It is gone but they choose to promote that as a way of glorifying the GREAT BRITAIN project. THIS IS HISTORY NOT MODERN DAY FACT. We live in a world of Globalization where we are one of the many, not the leader of the many. If you want to get really harsh about British History, the British Empire and Commonwealth was built on the oppression of the indigenous people in countries all over the world. It was based on class and race ideas of supremacy. It has also been whitewashed from being promoted in mainstream British History. Affluent Scots also played a role in that, but as in the 1707 Act of Union ordinary people had little power, with money and privilege leading the way. ….and yes these two areas are another whole debate ripe for great twitter insulting and abuse!!!

Back in the present however, the UK is leaving the EU – that is a fact as long as the current Conservative Government is in power. The question is how it finally manages that leaving process, the exact date it occurs and what form the future deal and relationship with the EU takes.

As it stands, based on what exists now as fact, the Government say the UK is leaving with or without a deal. (That is not to say that brexit couldnt collapse or that a change of government/government policy is impossible. Economic implosion could even yet affect brexit since we are still in a ‘phoney war’. (If you think the negotiation period has been a shambles, wait till you see the actual implementation period?…An extension to the leave date is also obviously a strong possibility but that is still a precursor to “we are leaving, the people have spoken”).

Why the rhetoric of a marginal 52-48% is so strong is another whole analysis! The likeliest answer to that is, it is convenient for those in power who have always wanted to break ties with the EU irrespective of economic setbacks. The other factor is undoubtedly those again in power who seek to drastically curb and control immigration from the EU.

How that solves the fact that more people arrive in the UK from outside the EU is another debate, yes on top of the other, other debates!

Migration Figures 29/11/18: https://news.sky.com/story/non-eu-migration-to-uk-highest-for-14-years-but-eu-migration-slows-11566853


Brexit will make UK worse off, government forecasts warn: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46366162

Their is no brexit without an economic loss, the worst losses are obviously under no deal.
If people in power or in the country at large believe in brexit as a retaking of power then fine if that is your reasoning, we live in a democracy, but why are the Government selling it as some kind of economic utopia – that is lies! Why are you selling it as Rule Britannia – why would the UK have more rights on the way europe and the world trades as opposed to other nations?

Lastly, from Scotlands’ postion and the Scottish Governments more aptly, the time is coming when a definitive stance on brexit must be made, otherwise the danger is brexit will rankle on in debate for years and people will become apathetic and Scotland will just sit in the backseat to wherever the driver takes us.

Scotland voted to remain in the EU. Scotland is still a country in its own right. The UK is technically not a nation, it is made up of 4 nations in a union. To use the claim that we voted as the UK means to refute the fact that Scotland is a country? It is also a country with a parliament and that parliament has a duty to serve its electorate. The democratic majority in Scotland voted to remain in the EU at massively higher numbers than in the UK as whole. if the claim is that the figure is irrelevant in a UK vote then the next step is abandoning the Scottish Parliament as meaningless?

In many peoples’ opinion in Scotland the time has passed to go along with the brexit journey further. The daily arguments and rhetoric are embarrassing and a political fiasco.

It is perhaps time for the Scottish Government to lay the cards on the table – stick or fold. The process towards a new Scottish Independence Referendum must be announced. That doesnt even necessarily mean saying straight away about the date, since the UK Government will presumably need to authorise it and will most likely stall. The Scottish Government and Parliament should however state its postion on record…if it is the postion that Scotland must remain in the EU full stop as a result of the economic effects then you have to state ‘the only way that this is possible is for independence and that is what we recommend to the Scotiish People as the elected Government of Scotland. The UK is leaving the EU and we are now powerless to stop that position as the Government of the UK have committed to Brexit’.

Whether Independence is then afforded a referendum and voted on is for future debate, that is democracy, but the process must be formally initiated, otherwise the independence position may become embroiled in the very same Brexit Never Ending Story?

There has abeen a cataclysmic change of circumstances since the 2014 indy ref – Scotland is being removed from the EU – Scotland did not vote for that position in 2014 and has reaffirmed that in subsequent elections to the Scottish and UK Parliaments.

..and one final view. It is highly probable that more than 50% of Scots believe in an Independent Scotland controlling its own affairs, but that is not the same as getting people to vote for it, that is why the figures stand at around 45-55. People need to be confident to change if they are not in the yes camp, they need to be given a reason to support it and to vote for it, they need to be given confidence.

The safety you know is the status quo, irrespective of how bad it is performing for many in the middle ground, the unknown is to choose to remove from that and that is difficult for many people, particularly older people. The Scottish Government and Parliament need to start putting parliamentary statutes in place before a referendum date such as enshrining benefits and particularly retirement pension into law in a future independent Scotland. For example if Scotland was ever independent it should be enshrined in law that The UK Retirement Pension will be a legal right at the same rate or better as it would be in the uk for the rest of a person’s life.

I am free for more rambling…watch this space!!!

Why am I Called Solon Scotland you ask? That is my stage name, and Solon was a founding father of modern democracy in ancient Greece. Im no Expert on the subject though as I wasn’t there at the time!

BBC in Big Brother Enforcement Move?

News Article Opinion by Solon Scotland

BBC Steps into Dangerous Territory as Two Prominent Scottish Independence Platforms are affected by You Tube Copyright Violation Complaints.

Two pro independence on line platforms have seen their You Tube channels either shut down or suspended this weekend in an apparent copyright complaint made by the BBC that news items have been uploaded and breach BBC copyright.

This will raise alarm bells amongst small media companies and individual bloggers and social media news commentators in a move which seems destined to question BBC impartiality and raise serious questions about copyright in relation to what is effectively the state news broadcaster.

BBC will cite that in simple copyright terms that you cannot upload or reproduce or use other individuals/companies content without their authorisation, otherwise you would likely be breaching their copyright. This seems straightforward for Katy Perry’s latest single, or a photographers personal work or a journalists individual news item, but a snippet of BBC news uploaded to social media is now in the same copyright field?

In the first instance the BBC is funded by the people of the U.K. via the licence fee so some will argue their is a case for some ownership of that said content within reason and in the public interest/fair use? Yes it can’t be reproduced or uploaded for financial benefit or misuse or damage to the brand, but it is news that we all technically can claim some ownership of, and secondly we pay for it to be produced at source as licence payers.

There may be arguments that the BBC is an individual company, that it is a trademark etc., and that it is entitled to use copyright protection the same as any other individual or organisation but this is dangerous territory to simply use the copyright laws by wholesale proxy in an area which is open to dispute?

Why did the BBC not contact the accounts in question directly in the first instance to advise of a copyright infringement and ask for removal?

Was their a political motivation in the action? if so this issue will surely escalate over time with a further damaging of public confidence in both the BBC and mainstream media.

There are now questions to be asked from a political perspective and public right to know standards.

Is this a policy which has been in 100% use against any violations long term on other accounts, or have the two sites in question been targeted specifically?

If it is not a wholesale accross the board policy then someone in authority at the BBC should be asked to answer some questions about this case and their policy in general.

Has the BBC been prodded from political sources to remove the said material in question as it would be beneficial for certain groups not to have it viewable to a large audience? It is highly unlikley this would be admitted (even if true) and it is practically impossible to prove in any case without a first party statement, but the suspicions will arise and increase.

If the BBC are saying no one can now upload any news item and that this is simply copyright rules being enforced so that they can protect their brand, then they are going to be extremely busy and indeed they may find a range of wider conflict arising in terms of social media and copyright interaction. Social media and sharing in relation to copyright has massive overlaps. The action taken in this instance has done nothing for the BBC Brand reputation and has not technically protected copyright from financial deficits either. The news article in question could easily be worked around by third parties so it seems a pointless action by BBC unless it is politically motivated?

The internet is awash with shared material from third party sources, indeed many will argue that news reproduction isn’t the same ball park as blatantly using a photographers image, a bands music or a writers words….and again the key point here is that we are talking about the news media from the company that we personally fund from taxes via the government.

Another question that must be asked is, why from a public relations perspective would they not in the first instance have directly contacted the accounts in question and asked for removal of items deemed copyright infringements? By going directly to You Tube and citing a number of violations in one instance they would know that the channel in question might well be shut down or at least suspended. Where is the attempt at mitigation as a first step and which is normally made in minor copyright infringements?

Again one might ask, is this a political motivated instance, hiding behind strict copyright and You Tube rules conveniently?

If that is the case there are much bigger more serious questions at play which not only affect these two accounts, they affect news and social media in general, they affect the very nature of freedom of speech, democracy and open media.

By choosing not to contact the individuals they effectively by-passed the opportunity of mitigation for the accounts in question, and worse the You Tube accounts if completely closed could loose other valuable information on their channels.

Would this course of action work in any other area of law eg a crime, …no chance for redress or discussion…bang you are out of the game?

There is also a question of what this particular policy achieves in terms of copyright protection since it is almost unenforceable and has no financial benefit to the BBC? Minor news stories will be almost worthless within a day? Who is going to buy old news if anyone?

Thousands of people on social media will also be using and sharing the almost same material daily even if they are not necessarily uploading it. The items the BBC cited as violations could easily be uploaded on proxy servers, untraceable websites, random you tube accounts (and then shared to another you tube account in a playlist). You Tube, Facebook & Twitter accounts can be created with simply an email address…anyone could have BBC videos in playlists on a You Tube channel without uploading them to that account directly – they could be displayed from a secondary account for example?

The same videos could also easily be displayed by anyone on a Twitter account using just a url address and thereby they are not technically uploading the video. That method is used widespread on Twitter by indivduals and media people alike. Videos can be displayed almost as embedded in a tweet simply via a linking method, so what is it that the BBC is aiming for here?

Serious questions need to be asked and guidelines need to be framewoked for us all!
Reproducing and interacting with news on social media isn’t generally about deliberatley violating copyright laws, its about social interaction and discussion.

On a wider scale many may start to ask if social media will come under threat from those groups in power who wish to diminish its freedom for the masses to question the old hierarchical order?

Producing news media as the state funded broadcaster and then saying you dont want it replicated full stop might well have George Orwell drafting a follow up!

By Solon Scotland (Street Commentator)

Scotrail is in crisis….according to the mainstream media that is!

Editorial Post – Article Date: (23.11.16)

Scotrail is in crisis?….well at least according to the mainstream media it is!

The actual statistical facts don’t support a sudden monumental crisis which merited the blanket coverage but let’s look at how major media in Scotland portrayed the events.

What merits a crisis for a start? Is it figures and data? …Well no, in this instance (and many others) it seems, it’s the mainstream media who decide what a crisis is. The actual facts would appear to be less relevant than the story angle or the headline!

For logical analysis, a Scotrail crisis would be if service statistics were suddenly plummeting and affecting people getting to work on time or being able to travel at the time when they want?

The statistical facts quoted and available on Network Rail don’t back up any recent major deterioration meriting the mass used language of  ‘crisis’. A major single train breakdown did happen on Wednesday 16th November which had a knock on effect that day, but that was a one off unforeseeable incident. That isn’t a crisis surely?

Most of the mainstream reporting since that event supported the reasoning that we have a serious rail crisis on our hands. Ask yourself this though, where was the crisis on Tuesday 15th November? Did it just mysteriously mushroom in one day on the Wednesday? Did numerous trains break down and numerous events unfold or was it one event with a knock on effect.

Even general analysis of the figures confirm that Scotrail performances in many areas exceed those in England and Wales levels regularly, so how is there not a rail crisis in those areas of the UK?

The train breakdown on a main line caused serious disruption to many services but that is not something unheard of. It will happen again, in countries all over the world every day, ….things break down, that’s the nature of our technology, it’s not perfect, ask Samsung, Blackberry, Apple, Microsoft etc!

A crisis would be if the service is frequently grinding to a halt and people can’t get to where they are going on time. If that were the case then it would surely have been in the news regularly before now?

Scotrail has issues and problems which need addressing but there isn’t suddenly a crisis. Trains have been having delays and breakdowns since modern railways began and this is increasing due to the numbers of trains, the mass usage and increasing numbers of commuters in high population areas.

Even although figures confirm there is no sudden crisis the volume of negative media forced the Scottish Government onto the back foot simply by the sheer volume and repetitiveness of it. The facts are bypassed, It’s a story, it mushrooms and then it’s a crisis; that seems to be how the major media works for their own most beneficial effect. Scot Gov in turn had to go on the defensive and threaten Scotrail more vigorously than they would have intended and announce steps to improve services etc simply because of the weight of the story and not because of the facts.

The figures suggest there is a massive overreaction to the story to mushroom it from one incident into a giant story.

What could be the motives, could they be political, ….surely not you say, open mouthed, incredulous!

I write that with a giant slice of irony/sarcasm of course, since most will agree much of our major media is partisan to a particular ideology. (Some more than others!!) Main newspaper media has always been partisan but recently there is a large section of everyday Scots who believe BBC Scotland and STV do not report both sides equally.

In the political points scoring Game of Thrones, it is Labour/Conservative/UK Unionism/UK Mainstream Media versus Scot Gov/SNP/Independence movement …with the balance decidedly against the latter side!

Is it the case now though that our mainstream media is becoming ever more desperate to points score to secure its position and uphold its challenged major role of power?

Much of mainstream media is UK union orientated in nature as it has been established from that era, …a break from the establishment seriously affects its future and therefore it will/must do anything to uphold it. Yes, they will let you hear from both sides and claim editorial fairness for all, but analyse the headlines, the rhetoric, the balance and many will argue its massively unbalanced and in some issues such as scotrail incredibly so.

In headline terms in the Scotrail story and others, it’s a political point scorer or/and a media profile point scorer. It becomes a bandwagon, and those who seek to exploit it suddenly turn an incident into a major story…it’s called a ‘mass proliferation effect’ if you like….Other newspapers and media then think we better get on this story and suddenly in turn we have every main news bulletin and newspaper running the story for a week.

What’s the underlying tactic? Well, the opposition to the Scottish Government, and the mainstream media are fighting the same battle. They seek to maintain the establishment, never before have the traditional parties and the traditional media been under so much threat. The internet and growth of social media has played a massive role in that.

The established media and UK politics had for generations been essentially either Labour or Tory but the SNP and nationalist supporters have now landed on the scene to destroy that cosy two pronged alliance. In the past, pre Scottish Parliament, the SNP  was merely a minority in voting terms, it needed little addressing as there was no significant shift or challenge to the two party state. The two parties and their media supporters quite merrily toddled along in an every ending derby match. Being out of power was not a disaster because there was always next time and there was always a turn around in government eventually. Even in opposition the media had a steady stream of stories for at least one or two parliaments to challenge the opposition on every decision under the sun with the goal of securing victory next time. It was a cosy two party alliance of mutual dislike but equal requirement.

But Bang…along came the NEW BIGGER BOLDER SNP (helped by the internet explosion at the same time) and its not just a fleeting pop in the door, they’ve now consolidated to a point where they are the mainstream party of government in Scotland and they set the tone. Three elections wins in a row, three Scottish Parliamentary largest votes/seats three times in a row and the establishment has been well and truly shaken to its core. Couple that with the massive growth of the aforementioned  Internet to their media dominance, and you see why any tactics will be used to try and hold onto some semblance of power or importance.

There was a time when a party like the SNP could simply not have challenged electorally because of the UK media structure and the establishment system. It was impossible and the situation would have continued without the internet. There was always a Scottish identity but that was almost totally focused on labour in general election terms. The General Election of 2015 broke that monopoly though and has seen that previous position now destroyed, with the SNP taking 56 of 59 Scottish seats. (Previously they were between 3 to 6 MP’s maximum from 1979 – 2010 respectively). It does not look like this is a fleeting move either that will return to the pre Scottish Parliament days. The SNP electoral position has been consolidated in three Scottish Parliaments which will total 14 years in govt., and current polls say that will continue into the next parliament. It would require massive swings to change that position.

The 2014 independence referendum may not have been won but it opened up a cataclysmic reaction in terms of Scottish political interaction by the general population. Any followers of Scottish Media will see there is now a vibrant and massive debate ongoing constantly about independence and the effects of brexit. That is not going away anywhere soon. Statistical analysis of demographics will also show that the majority of people who support independence and the SNP increases significantly in the lower age groups. It stands to reason that these voters will be consolidated by new voters if following a similar pattern.

Add in the effects of Scotland voting in a major contrast to England’s Brexit and you see that the power house of media and dominant parties has been well and truly challenged in Scotland…and they don’t like it one little bit.

We have already seen many damaging and sensationalist headlines this year around brexit and the American Election. Watch out for more and increasing amounts of the same when EU Article 50 is enacted and a Scottish Independence referendum becomes inevitable.

Brexit has not even hit the running track yet, and look at the stories…you think you have seen some vitriolic language?….you haven’t seen nothing yet. When the two sides emerge from the courts and the formal course of action is enacted next year watch out for hyperbole not just in Westminster but in the media as they build up with the calvary. Add to that the Scottish angle where brexit is fuelling up the independence debate and a highly likely new referendum at some point, and you have a powder keg of media madness just ripe for exploding.

In the build up to the last referendum the established parties and media could not foresee how a yes vote could happen as it started at low levels of support. In the last few months of the Indy Ref. 2014 though, the ‘establishment’ had to pull out all the stops when the vote managed to get to around the high 40% mark. They only survived by the skin of their teeth, which potentIally means next time they will need to pull out all the stops and they wont be shy in doing so.

Could it be we are at the start of the phoney war with this Scotrail story warming us all up for the big event when brexit and Indy comes on the table for real…set up the barricades, …you think Scotrail was a crisis, you better strap yourself in because it will get very dirty!


Written By Paul Donnachie @paulairdrie