My jaw has just dropped to the floor upon reading an article in The National in which SNP MP Tommy Sheppard argues that if Kezia Dugdale defects from Labour to the SNP, she should be required to stand down and fight for re-election under her new colours. Now, for the avoidance of doubt, I do not believe for one moment that Kezia Dugdale is going to defect - I think the idea that she must be a secret SNP sympathiser because of her father and her partner is a paranoid fantasy put about by the Ian Smarts of this world. But let's say for the sake of argument that she (or more likely somebody else entirely) were to make the jump. Are we really supposed to accept that the SNP should turn down the golden chance to move closer to overall majority status at Holyrood, and to make the pro-independence majority in parliament more emphatic, just on some point of principle that no other party is signed up to? Are the SNP going to treat politics as a game of cricket when other parties would be completely ruthless if the circumstances were reversed?
At Westminster, there have been instances of Labour MPs defecting to the Tories or Liberal Democrats without a by-election, Tory MPs defecting to Labour or the Liberal Democrats without a by-election, and even one instance of a Labour MP (Dick Douglas in 1990) defecting to the SNP without a by-election. Why would we suddenly get squeamish at a time when the stakes are so much higher? If we assume that Mark McDonald can still be relied upon to informally follow the SNP whip, just one more MSP would take the party to exactly 50% of the seats in Holyrood (excluding the non-voting Presiding Officer), thus making it much harder for the opposition parties to inflict any defeats. By contrast, if Ms Dugdale or any other Labour list MSP were to simply resign, the SNP wouldn't even have a chance to win the seat in a by-election - a slavishly loyal replacement Labour MSP would simply be appointed from lower down the list, and we'd be no further forward.
I'd suggest to Tommy Sheppard that if we're going to win independence, it might be an idea not to turn our noses up at golden opportunities, especially any that may fall gift-wrapped from heaven.
If she did switch parties which I don't think will happen, she is a list MSP and there would not be a by-election. John Finnie ended up in the Greens in the last Parliament.
ReplyDeleteYes, I pointed out in the blogpost that there wouldn't be a by-election. The John Finnie precedent is interesting because he didn't take up the Green whip until being re-elected under the Green banner - he was technically an independent during the intervening period. That's a possible compromise option for others to follow.
DeleteShe could become an independent, rather than an independence, MSP.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Sheppard's proposal is a self-defeating exercise.
ReplyDeleteKeeping with the theme of defections... do you think it's likely that there are any non-SNP/non-Green MSPs that support independence (personally, if not publicly)? The problem with the independence question is that it's been fought strictly across party lines, and that really isn't helpful to the cause. The idea that "if you support independence, then you're either an SNP voter or a Green voter" isn't true (polling shows that there's at least some support for independence from people who vote for anti-independence parties -- and that's despite the party's staunch opposition to Scottish independence), so bringing onboard at least one active politician from a traditionally anti-independence party would give the movement a massive boost.
On that note, I daresay that if someone like Kezia Dugdale was sympathetic to independence, it would be more beneficial if she remained a Labour MSP -- defecting to the SNP would effectively bring us back to where we are right now.
In other circumstances that might be true, but given how tight the parliamentary arithmetic is, on balance I think it would be more useful to have one more SNP seat.
DeleteWhy, though? As an MSP, she could still vote on individual issues however she wants. If the ultimate goal is to achieve independence, then surely having a pro-independence majority in Holyrood is all that matters in terms of parliamentary arithmetic.
Delete"Why, though?"
DeleteAsk yourself that question every time the SNP government is defeated by one or two votes, or has to make a painful compromise to get legislation through. The answer is pretty straightforward. Very few of us thought at last year's election that it made no difference whether the SNP won an overall majority or not.
James, I'm afraid this is one of the very rare occasions where I have to disagree with you.
DeleteIn the run-up to the 2016 Scottish Parliament election, you argued that "both votes SNP" was the best way to secure a pro-independence majority in Holyrood -- because it was almost impossible for the Green vote to rise enough to produce a flood of Green MSPs, and voting SNP & Green would result in an increased number of Labour/Tory/Lib Dem MSPs. I've always agreed with your assessment in that regard. Fortunately, we ended up with a pro-independence majority in 2016, and the fact that that majority depends on two parties (instead of just one) does have its benefits in terms of independence (e.g. the SNP can't be accused of "bulldozing through" any independence-related legislation).
Of course, as a supporter of independence, I recognise that the SNP are extremely important to the independence movement. They're needed for driving forward the legislation that will eventually lead to independence... but as long as they're able to do that (and they can, provided they're the governing party with a pro-independence majority of MSPs), then the division of MSPs by party isn't terribly important. If the SNP can't pass legislation that's unrelated to independence, then that really shouldn't affect the independence movement.
Having voices that come from within other parties would surely be of greater benefit to independence than transplanting those same voices into the SNP. Opponents of independence like to portray independence as a very narrow political ideology (in 2014, it almost looked as if the SNP and the Yes campaign were one-and-the-same), which limits the potential of the Yes vote. It would be like this site billing itself as a pro-SNP blog -- it would have a smaller target-audience.
I think the idea that it's somehow advantageous for a government to be struggling to get its business through parliament is a tad difficult to sustain. We're forever being told that the SNP must do X, Y, Z to make independence more likely...well, to actually do those things it needs the votes to do them. Sometimes the votes are there, sometimes they're not. Sometimes it's Green votes the SNP end up relying on, but sometimes it's the votes of a unionist party. That's sub-optimal.
DeleteOn your latter point, this blog did used to bill itself as pro-SNP. I changed the wording on the day after the 2011 election, and that was simply because the indyref was the next thing on the horizon. But I haven't made any secret of the fact that I'm a member of the SNP.
It certainly isn't advantageous for the SNP, but my point is that it shouldn't hurt the independence movement as a whole. Support for independence shouldn't be tied to the SNP's performance in government, because independence isn't about a single political party -- on the contrary, it's about having the ability to elect *any* political party (an independent Scotland would have parties from the left, right and centre). If the SNP need to compromise... well, governments often need to compromise (especially in a PR electoral system). As long as they have enough support on issues relating to independence, then they're serving their purpose as far as I'm concerned.
DeleteI should point out that I happen to agree with a lot of SNP policies. But I'm acutely aware that SNP voters alone cannot win independence. In order to break through 50% (and hopefully get to a more comfortable 60-something per-cent), we need to find a way of gaining support from people who typically vote for other parties.
As I understand it, what you're saying is that it's not harmful for the independence movement if unionist parties are able to say X or Y only happened "due to pressure from Labour/the Conservatives". If so, I disagree with you. Your point about compromise might be stronger if there was a formal SNP/Green coalition, and the compromises were taking place within that.
DeleteOpposition parties always try to claim those kind of victories -- and when they can't (e.g. when the governing party has an absolute majority) then they complain that legislation was simply forced through. The party in power can't win either way.
DeleteLooking at the bigger picture, if Scotland is going to become independent, then we need to extend our reach beyond just SNP (and Green) voters.
It's not necessarily as simple as that. If the SNP and Greens lack majority support at the moment, that wasn't the case a couple of years ago. Sometimes support for independence runs above support for the SNP, sometimes the reverse is true. I have my doubts as to whether a more powerful Richard Leonard would make independence more likely.
DeleteHaving one or two pro-independence MSPs in the Scottish Labour party -- people with a platform to promote a "Labour"-like vision for an independent Scotland -- would provide a huge boost in the run-up to a future referendum, and I have no doubt that it would increase support for independence.
DeleteIsn't Nicola Sturgeon herself promoting a "Labour-like" (ie. social democratic) vision of an independent Scotland?
DeleteWell yes, she is. I don't think that's enough to bring over die-hard Labour voters, though (whereas voices from within the Labour party certainly could). The same argument could be made for Conservative voters; the name "Conservative and Unionist Party" rather inconveniently ties-together two ideologies... however, I'll bet there are people in Scotland who hold strong conservative values but would be open to the idea of independence (and I know, it's unlikely that we'll ever see a pro-independence Conservative MSP, but hopefully you see my point).
DeleteI think the big advantage of having independence sympathisers in other parties is that if there is a 2nd referendum, the 'Labour for Independence' group can be bigger and can feature some people that folk have actually heard of. Henry McLeish, Kezia Dugdale and Malcolm Chisholm for example (not saying that any of those three will actually come out for independence) would be a formidable campaigning force and would blunt any attempt to claim that the independence movement was just the SNP under another guise. There are still quite a few people who just vote according to party loyalty,and so having big Labour names as Yes supporters gives some Labour supporters 'permission' to vote Yes.
DeleteI completely agree, Niall. You did a much better job of articulating that point than I did!
DeleteYes, but an equally valid point is that a senior defection to the SNP could be a gateway for tribal Labour voters to come across to both the SNP and Yes. The mechanism by which people come across is less important than that they do.
DeleteThe most important thing is to get people across to Yes, and in my view we stand a better chance of achieving that goal if there are prominent pro-independence figures within different parties. If Dugdale (or any other Labour MSP) was to defect to the SNP, she would soon be written-off as just another SNP member. If, on the other hand, she encouraged people to consider independence from within the Labour party, then Labour voters would be more receptive.
DeleteI agree that the mechanism by which any given person comes across to Yes isn't especially important, but the mechanism *is* important from a strategic point of view -- for example, if we want to maximise the number of people that switch to Yes. It's surely easier to persuade someone to support independence on its own than it is to persuade that same person to support both independence *and* the SNP. Not to mention, tying support for independence to the SNP limits the potential of the Yes vote (since you're writing-off a huge chunk of the electorate, which only serves to make our job even harder).
As you've noted, the level of support for independence has often been significantly different (in either direction) to the level of support for the SNP. For some of the electorate, it's easier to persuade them from No to Yes than from Labour to SNP (and conversely easier for others to go Labour-SNP than to go No-Yes). IMO, it's more important to persuade someone to go from No to Yes than to go from Labour to the SNP.
DeleteBut if the most effective way to get someone from No to Yes (and to stay there) is to get them from Labour to SNP first...? I'm struggling to understand why there's any dispute over whether it would be a good thing if there was a senior defection from Labour to SNP. (Which there probably won't be, but hypothetically.)
DeleteThe reason there's a dispute is because, some would argue (myself included), having pro-independence voices in parties that are traditionally opposed to independence is probably going to be a more effective way of bringing people over to Yes. A senior defection to the SNP is easier for voters to write-off (subsequent public appearances/mentions of the defector will be accompanied by an SNP badge, they'll be criticised by their former party colleagues, ...etc). On the other hand, a senior figure within Labour (or any other party, for that matter) that openly supports independence gives voters another avenue to Yes. We don't want voters to think that independence is only an SNP thing, we want them to see that there are visions of independence attached to other political ideologies as well.
DeleteLet's take an extreme example: if every major party in Scotland had at least a couple of MSPs that support independence, then just about every voter would have someone promoting independence from inside their political bubble (irrespective of party allegiance). That could only be a good thing for the Yes movement.
Just to be clear: both cases (senior defection to he SNP, or having non-SNP/non-Green pro-independence MPSs) would, if anything, be beneficial to the pro-independence movement. But having pro-independence MSPs in non-SNP/non-Green parties would almost certainly be the better option if our goal is to maximise the number of voters that support independence.
Kezia Dugdale did say she would continue to fight for socialism, not sure what category of socialism, but that could be the case being in the SNP. Certainly her partner is a socialist and represents a largely socialist constituency.
ReplyDeleteTho I don't think K D is going to see the right thing to do.
You are supposed to serve out your term in office as an independent MP/MSP.
ReplyDeleteThere's no rule to that effect. It's just an opinion held by some.
DeleteI can understand your basic principle, James, and in general totally agree with it, but in this case I'm not sure I would welcome Kezia Dugdale into the SNP fold after her catastrophic spell as "leader" and her bizarre move to celebrity fun TV. It could well backfire on the SNP that they would adopt someone who is almost as career-oriented as Ruth Davidson.
ReplyDeleteWasn't Dugdale rejected by the SNP a few years ago, and I am sure they would reject her now. Why on earth would you accept someone who was so viciously opposed to the SNP and independence? She was vicious about the SNP even when they have actually worked at investing in the people of Scotland to begin the recovery of having had 300+ years of the British nationalist, colonial rule. That so called union has kept Scotland poor and begging. Dugdale was and is happy for that to contintue. No thanks, Kezia!
DeleteOh and I saw that someone said that we don't need to base our hopes on independence by voting for the continuation of SNPGov achievements. Well I think we do, no other party is pro independence and no other party is working for Scotland. The unionist Britnat party's are working for the London government, that is clear no matter how much they pretend otherwise. That is the one thing that people are easily fooled by, the fact that all unionist party's are just that,
unionist. They work to keep Scotland shackled to WM, so that they can keep their very well paid public service jobs and expenses, and so that WMGov and their dodgy pals can continue to siphon away Scotland's resources. It's not diffucult to work that out, but the media, especially the bbc, pipes lies into peoples' living rooms day in day out.
We are up against it that is for sure, especially now.
Given the stories about the current Ashes tour, not sure calling out cricket as such a gentlemanly sport is correct these days... :)
ReplyDeleteWe don't want that traitor Dugdale. Why we would we want or need that unionist loser? The last thing we need is unionist agents in our movement.
ReplyDeleteIronically, Ian Smart thinks she's a Nat sleeper agent within Labour.
DeleteMaybe her nat si burd is the sleeper! What they do when not sleepin is another thing.
DeleteI think she will convert to the dark side.
GWC2 just you concentrate on your Orange thugs slipping to third place you have a lot of work to do so Wee Ruthie you'd be better of spending less time on here and spend more time out campaigning at least that way you might lose some weight off your fat arse.
DeleteWhat is an Orange thug nat si bhoy?
DeleteHey Padraig Wilson I seem to recall you Nat sis are the losers. September 2014 a day that will go down in glorious history like the Boyne, Aughrim, Culloden and
DeleteD Day, the end of fascism.
State of this.
DeleteWhat is an Orange thug nat si?
Deletehttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2477639/SHAMEFUL-Fury-UK-soldiers-investigated-performing-Nazi-style-salute-Helmand.html
You know what a Orange thug is Wee Ruthie you recruited them into your Tory lot
DeleteA new Nat si kid on the block has arrived, Stewart Dredge. So what sewer were you dredged from. Read the Daily Mail then!
Delete....and then what?
DeleteI can understand the argument, it was put about regarding Carsewell and others who have moved ship and under Westminster FPTP that sort of makes sense but with list MSPs it simply doesn't.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that Kezia is going to defect but if she is pushed and declares sympathy for the aims of the SNP I could see, like John Finnie, a period od being an independent and then moving to the SNP before the next the election...even assuming that she wants to continue in politics which she might not.
I can see where all of these arguments are coming from. However, at the end of the day, principles are one of the two things that separate the SNP from the unionist parties. I engage a lot in Scottish politics, online, in hard copy and in person. In my experience and my opinion, Kezia Dugdale comes across as a craven liar and hypocrite, who's only principle is to advance her own career at all and any cost. The SNP shouldn't touch her or any of her ilk with a bargepole.
ReplyDeleteThis is all just speculation, but I agree that someone so free of principle as Kezia Dugdale would be best avoided. Let her stay with her principles-free pals in the British Nationalist Labour Party.
DeletePointless taking about this as with Kezia only a list MSP she can be sacked legally by her party and the next one on Labours list would simply take her place!
ReplyDeleteNope, that's simply not true. Labour can't sack her as an MSP. If she defected to another party there would be absolutely nothing Labour could do about it.
DeleteAnd there's no such thing as "only a list MSP". List members have equal status to constituency members.
Tommy Sheppard is in the wrong party. He is a socialist and how he ended up with the Nat si Tartan Tories is a mystery. Maybe he is a Labour mole.
ReplyDeleteWhy do you make out you are a Socialist Wee Ruthie? We all know you are a Tory bastard! How's the Diet going?
DeleteFirst time the word bastard has been used paddie me bhoy Wilson.
DeleteWhat else would you expect from an inbred who owes its existence to a gang bang before DNA was invented.
State of this snivelling Tory shill.
DeleteMP defections don't trigger a by-election because they've supposedly been elected on an individual basis, not a party one. How true that is in practice is of course questionable.
ReplyDeleteBut with list MSPs, it seems pretty clear: in both theory and practice, electors have voted not for them personally, but for their party. So if they switch, the next person on the list should replace them. The precedent at Holyrood doesn't comply with that, but it's the most democratic option.
Parliament itself should clarify switching. Is it the Law that a switcher cannot be ousted or is it just accepted custom and practice amongst the members.
DeleteWhat do you care? You hate Holyrood.
DeleteI do not hate Holyrood. I detest paying tax for keeplng an unnesesary over abundance of MSP'S. I voted for a Scottish Parliament and not to get ripped off.
DeleteYou never voted for the Scottish Parliament Wee Ruthie you Tories were totally against it1
DeleteGo home Wilson before Stena raise the fares.
DeleteScreech, screech, screech...
DeleteI am home Wee Fat Ruthie in Scotland if you get on a train at either Kings Cross or Euston Station or if you can drive take the A1 that wil get you to Scotland since you don't live here yah Fanny!
Delete"in both theory and practice, electors have voted not for them personally, but for their party."
ReplyDeleteOther than John Finnie, the only precedent that we have for this is the defection of Tommy Sheridan and Rosemary Byrne from the SSP to form their own Solidarity Party in the middle of the 2003-07 parliament. While the SSP did argue that their switch meant they should stand down and the seat should go to the next person on the SSP list, Sheridan replied (with, let's be honest, some justification) that the SSP list he was elected on in Glasgow had only gotten so many votes because his name was at the top of it.
It is something of a defect in the list system that this problem arises. But if we were to accept as a general rule that switchers get replaced, imagine what that would do to how parliament operates. When faced with a troublesome or rebellious MSP elected on a list, party bosses would only have to remove the whip to eject that person from parliament, and replace them with someone more compliant. I don't think that would be a positive development for the quality of debate within parliament.
It could be the case that the 60k + for say a further two years could be a motivation for not standing again for election. In the case of Sheridan he being a socialist the money would be irrelevant! Aye.
DeleteWasn't the original precedent when Dorothy Grace Elder left the SNP in 2000 or something? As I recall, the PO at the time, David Steele, decreed pretty much by fiat that she would remain as an independent. And that's been the custom ever since.
DeleteWhat did David Steel have to do with anything? He may have clarified the legal position for people who didn't understand it, but he had no authority to say Dorothy Grace Elder had forfeited her seat by leaving the SNP, even if he'd wanted to.
DeleteWee Ruthie How dare you mention Tommy Sheridan he would squirm if he thought a rabid Tory was talking about him now away and sit on a Tank or something.
DeleteI don't think there's any possibility of this happening. Of course I have no idea about Kezia's next move, but I'd imagine she'll set out her term as a list MSP for Labour and then possibly quit politics altogether.
ReplyDeleteIf there's a future referendum, I think she will vote yes. Her rhetoric on Twitter for the past few months is very much less of the anti-SNP and more going for the Tories.
I've never been a huge fan of her as a political leader, but if she announced she was voting Yes in a possible future referendum, it certainly would be a bit of a coup for the Yes movement to have a Labour member.
A general question.
ReplyDeleteWhy do people respond to GWC2? All she craves is attention and the responses to her trolling get in the way of the interesting points being raised.
It's best not to encourage her.
Let her send messages to mumsnet.
I just love winding the useless bitch up and the Idiot bites every time. It really is a moron it lives in England and has never been to Glasgow and has never had a job.
DeletePadraig Wilson, you need a bit of intelligence to do a wind up.
DeleteThe Herald is saying that Knickerless wants a kultyur alliance between the Celtic parts of the UK. The ROI, Corwall, Wales and even NI. Presumably she will be marching with the OO in Belfast next year wearing her shag me shoes.
Whit. She fears English domination after Brexit! According tae you fash we are already dominated by England.
State of this.
DeleteAlcoholics need very little to make them drunk but can continue to consume vast amounts. So it's possible to get plastered very cheaply. In GWC2's case, a woman's BMI means she is more likely to be affected by alcohol than a man.
DeleteWee Fat Ruthie gie it a rest yah wee toe rag I bet you don't understand that do you wee English Ruthie? I see the SNP left you totally flummuxed with their brilliant tax proposals that means you will be a wee bit worse off eh Ruthie? Ha Ha pay mor Tax yah Bam!
DeleteJust gie her a hug
ReplyDeleteThe biggest problem, which I have yet to see anyone mention, is that Dugdaleis an idiot, who spectacularly failed as leader of the Scottish branch office of Labour becuase she is incapable of keeping a position (other than SNPbad) for more than five minutes, and was so bad at remembering or using actual facts that even her dad had to facepalm more than once.
ReplyDeleteDo I want more independence supporting MPs in the Scottish Parliament? Yes. Do I want it to rely on bottom scraping operators like Dugdale? Absolutely not. She would, in my opinion at least, be far more of a detriment than an asset to both independence and to the SNP.
Damn typos (the first one is the fault of MSI GP62 6QF laptop - for a comparatively expensive laptop it has the worst spacebar I've ever encountered. The second typo was all me!)
Delete"Dugdale is"
"because"
I think the SNP should just change the rules so anyone who does not support scotland is not allowed into holyrood
DeleteIt Scotlands government
It is no place for cap doffers and english lovers
Don't bring that nonsense here. It's fuel for Yoons.
DeleteAs much as I would love to see it happening, I just can't see her defecting, even although it seems like her career path in Labour is at a dead end.
ReplyDeleteThen again, maybe the unfolding brexit fiasco is reason enough to make the leap, despite her strident anti-indy remarks in the past
As a resident of the South of England who supports Scottish independence I can assure your contributors that every vote not cast for the SNP is taken here as a vote against the idea of independence. Only votes for the SNP have any relevance for the independence cause. I am not a member of the SNP but I consider myself a social democrat. The only election result that makes Westminster sit up and take notice is a victory for the SNP. I must stress again for those who are isolated from the Westminster bubble Vote SNP/SNP is the only way forward. Anyone who believes otherwise is deluded.
ReplyDeleteMove to Scotland Pillock.
DeleteI hope they pay you well. I'd hate to think you sold your soul to spew Tory bile for nothing...
DeleteWhat soul, what money! You jocko idiot.
DeleteYes! Got him again.
DeleteWell if she doesn't want to leave the red tory bench she should just fuck off out of scotland along with the rest of the traitors and quislings
ReplyDeleteLet's leave the references to traybakes and quizmasters to the hard of thinking, shall we? Don't stoop to the troll's level.
DeleteWee Fat Ruthie AKA GWC Arse, is more at home in Belfast along with all the other Orange Jay Walkers. Mass Debt, Out of The E.U a big Shiny Carrier with No planes, Inflation rising, Wages cut, the Worst Pensions in the Western World, Waiting times at record Highs in his Englandshire Hospitals, Standing room only on the Wreck of a Rail network, Millions having to use Foodbanks, Hundreds of thousands having to live in Deathtrap Tower Blocks but hey it can march up and down the Highway that he would be kicked of if his Chief parasite was ever to use it all is well init's pea brain world that's GWC Arse for you.
ReplyDeleteTory voters are nothing more then flag loving idiots
DeleteThey have no place in a free scotland
Scottish nat sis to ban the Union flag being flown at Ibrox.
DeleteState of this disgusting homophobe.
DeleteThe new passport will have GB on it and a photo of the Queen or King.Padraig Wilson probably will qualify for a paddie passport with Gerry Adams on it.
ReplyDeleteAway and Boil your Fascist Heid you Tory Moron. Whats wrong does your wee Bowler hat boys not want you over for Christmas? What a idiot you are now go and get a job or Score your Heroin man! You have to be in work to be Working Class Idiot!
ReplyDeleteThere are nae parades oan in Belfast during Xmas you Nat si Tartan Tory bum bhoy...I will leave it tae ra glorious 12th...Now go and troll Kelvin Way.
DeleteSnivelling Britnat DUPuppet.
DeleteGWC2 is a total Fud It has never ever been to Scotland I think that is what is wrong with her! She has to breathe in polluted English air or that poisonous Ulster Crap! Saor Alba you Fanny!
ReplyDeletePadraig Alousious Wilson fae Ballybunyen went tae his priest tae complain aboot a sore erse and dukes. The holy father said nae worry son I can fix it. Wee padraig went hame and telt his da it was a miracle I am cured. His da said what happened? I don't know said we Padraig the holy fadder was behind me with his hauns on ma shooders. Thats fine son the holy fadder has done this for all us men in the village.
DeleteGet back under your rock before daylight burns you.
DeleteYou can form the former EU erselickers club along with your fellow Labour, Greens, Libs and Tories once out of the EU. Some Nationalists you crawlers are. At least there are some Nat sis in your movement with bottle.
DeleteState of this Tory shill.
DeleteState of you Nat si Tartan Tory whose mob backed Thatcher.
DeleteEvidence? Links? No, just the same old Vile Nats '79 bollocks...
DeleteAnd your top donator made a fortune from Tory privatisation... Hide yer heid in shame nat si bhoy... What about the promise from the nat sis about topping up welfare payments! and eradicating foodbanks! The rich are quaking in their boots under the nat si Tartan Tory scum.
DeleteEvidence? Links? No? Didn't think so.
DeleteForget about the links and get yourself a slab of Lorne sausage and stick it up yer erse sideways.
DeleteWhat you do in your own time is your own business...
DeleteMein Gott the Jocko fascists hiv gon quiet. Brexit imminent and the baws in yer court and who tae crawl tae next...?...Will it be the herman and the frogs or just Scottish Independence...Oh Scottish Independence thought you nat sis had abandoned that...
ReplyDeleteWe could sell the EU tins with shooortbreid, better than being pally with our ENGLISH Neighbour.
Poor Tarquin. Must be fuming about Nicola stealing his skiing holiday. Won't someone please think about the entitled?
DeleteHide trolls with this browser bookmarklet: http://bit.ly/sgp-trolls. Works on baith desktop and mobile browsers.
ReplyDeleteHide Nat sis in the local desktap brewery where they are in deep sorrow having all those devolved powers and not knowing what tae dae wi them since being tellt whit tae dae by the EU.
DeleteDUPuppet strikes again. What an embarrassment you are to the Unionist cause.
Delete