Tuesday, November 5, 2013

Things the No campaign say that don't actually make sense, no. 5921

I see that the ever-reliable Duncan Hothersall has offered a measure of support for Ian "Ah'll gie ye a doin' after ah bayonet ye" Davidson's extraordinary call for a clause to be placed in an MoD contract that would automatically make thousands of shipyard workers redundant if the Labour/Tory "Popular Front" don't get the referendum result they want -

"I said explicitly the decision is not going to be based solely on #indyref, it is just one consideration."

"It [the referendum] has to be a factor. It's part of reality."

Now I suppose this would be the basis of Davidson's defence for his comments (albeit a man who believes in bayonetting the victims may well feel that attack is the best form of defence) - the referendum is a factor in the MoD's consideration anyway, so putting in the mass redundancy blackmail clause might make the contract more likely to be delivered in the first place. But, in the immortal words of Lieutenant Columbo, there's just one thing I don't understand here, sir. We've heard repeatedly that the MoD have made no contingency plans whatsoever for removing Trident from the Clyde in the event of independence, on the grounds that they anticipate a No vote next year. But if they're so astonishingly arrogant as to take the Scottish people for granted in that way when it suits them, how can they possibly justify even taking into account the possibility of a Yes vote when they weigh up whether or not to award this contract?

As ever, answers on a postcard. Duncan may be able to assist you...but somehow I doubt it.

No comments:

Post a Comment