Fri 3rd, Sat 4th, Sun 5th & Mon 6th April - Easter edition

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:05 pm

Hunting back on the front page of the Sindy

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:08 pm

Spacedone wrote:'French Ambassador' climbing up the Twitter trends and some 45ers screaming that "it's a filthy UNIONIST LIE!"

If it does turn out to be true (and making false claims about a foreign ambassador and an easily checked official government document would seem foolish) then there are likely to be some very angry Nats.

McBride seems fairly convinced. He would have seen enough of this stuff to know.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:12 pm

Would she really inflict five years of the Tories pulling the strings in Scotland even though there is a degree of separation?

I know they/some want independence but at what price?
There isn't a single place in the UK that hasn't suffered because of the Tories and she must know you can't trust what they say.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:13 pm

Getting meaty now
Piarais Mac Alastair ‏@piarais91 · 2m2 minutes ago
French consul general tells @GdnScotland no such views given by @NicolaSturgeon "absolutely no preference was expressed" on #GE2015 outcome

Spacedone · Post by **Spacedone** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:13 pm

Guardian's Scotland correspondent tweeting that French Consul denies the story.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:15 pm

Severin Carrell ‏@severincarrell 12m12 minutes ago
French consul general tells @GdnScotland no such views given by @NicolaSturgeon "absolutely no preference was expressed" on #GE2015 outcome

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:16 pm

So someone's going to have to produce that minute....

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:18 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Severin Carrell ‏@severincarrell 12m12 minutes ago
French consul general tells @GdnScotland no such views given by @NicolaSturgeon "absolutely no preference was expressed" on #GE2015 outcome

Spectator running with a "quote" from the leaked document:

The leaked transcript- a UK government memo – goes as follows:-

"Just had a telephone conversation with Pierre-Alain Coffinier, the French CG [consul-general]. He was keen to fill me in on some of the conversations his Ambassador had during her visit to Scotland last week. All of this was given on a confidential basis… The Ambassador….had a truncated meeting with the FM [Nicola Sturgeon, the First Minister] (FM running late after a busy Thursday…). Discussion appears to have focused mainly on the political situation, with the FM stating that she wouldn’t want a formal coalition with Labour; that the SNP would almost certainly have a large number of seats… that she’d rather see David Cameron remain as PM (and didn’t see Ed Miliband as PM material).”

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehous ... -miliband/

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:20 pm

Eric_WLothian wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:Severin Carrell ‏@severincarrell 12m12 minutes ago
French consul general tells @GdnScotland no such views given by @NicolaSturgeon "absolutely no preference was expressed" on #GE2015 outcome
Spectator running with a "quote" from the leaked document:

The leaked transcript- a UK government memo – goes as follows:-

"Just had a telephone conversation with Pierre-Alain Coffinier, the French CG [consul-general]. He was keen to fill me in on some of the conversations his Ambassador had during her visit to Scotland last week. All of this was given on a confidential basis… The Ambassador….had a truncated meeting with the FM [Nicola Sturgeon, the First Minister] (FM running late after a busy Thursday…). Discussion appears to have focused mainly on the political situation, with the FM stating that she wouldn’t want a formal coalition with Labour; that the SNP would almost certainly have a large number of seats… that she’d rather see David Cameron remain as PM (and didn’t see Ed Miliband as PM material).”
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehous ... -miliband/

The French will deny it, they have to. Doesn't mean it isn't true.

Spacedone · Post by **Spacedone** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:25 pm

Just seen an outraged SNP fan on Twitter saying "How dare they smear us with this made up ****. I'm tweeting everyone to tell them that Labour working with Tories on this."

Cognitive dissonance in action.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:33 pm

I think she can explain that as a misunderstanding, and it might well have been one.

She expected Cameron to remain PM, for instance?

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:34 pm

TechnicalEphemera wrote: The French will deny it, they have to. Doesn't mean it isn't true.

True, but it will be difficult - it's not just "a spokesperson". The French Consul-General has been directly named and presumably the author of the memo is known.

A case of 'our Consul is more truthful than your civil servant'!

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:36 pm

TechnicalEphemera wrote:
Eric_WLothian wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:Severin Carrell ‏@severincarrell 12m12 minutes ago
French consul general tells @GdnScotland no such views given by @NicolaSturgeon "absolutely no preference was expressed" on #GE2015 outcome
Spectator running with a "quote" from the leaked document:

The leaked transcript- a UK government memo – goes as follows:-

"Just had a telephone conversation with Pierre-Alain Coffinier, the French CG [consul-general]. He was keen to fill me in on some of the conversations his Ambassador had during her visit to Scotland last week. All of this was given on a confidential basis… The Ambassador….had a truncated meeting with the FM [Nicola Sturgeon, the First Minister] (FM running late after a busy Thursday…). Discussion appears to have focused mainly on the political situation, with the FM stating that she wouldn’t want a formal coalition with Labour; that the SNP would almost certainly have a large number of seats… that she’d rather see David Cameron remain as PM (and didn’t see Ed Miliband as PM material).”
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehous ... -miliband/
The French will deny it, they have to. Doesn't mean it isn't true.

I'm baffled and fear will remain so. I can't see this being cleared up. The information is clearly stated as being given on a confidential basis, so a French denial is automatic and tells us nothing. Sturgeon denies it but how can she prove her side? It would be an obvious stitch up if I could see who benefits. My suspicious mind is inclined towards a hoax that will somehow be pinned on Labour as a dirty rumour to ensure they're destroyed in Scotland ( I really have been running towards a conspiracy theory way of thinking lately, I really must stop!).

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:38 pm

Gemma Doyle retweeted
William Mohieddeen ‏@Mocko500 54m54 minutes ago
Unconfirmed reports that there are SNP councillors now standing outside the Renfrewshire Council buildings burning a box of Ferrero Rocher.

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:38 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:I think she can explain that as a misunderstanding, and it might well have been one.

She expected Cameron to remain PM, for instance?

Not if the quote in the Spectator is accurate:

...she’d rather see David Cameron remain as PM (and didn’t see Ed Miliband as PM material

(my underline)

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:41 pm

Denials coming in thick and fast from the SNP & the French.

Why is everybody so keen to believe the papers on this when we don't believe them at any other time ?

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:41 pm

Eric_WLothian wrote:
TechnicalEphemera wrote: The French will deny it, they have to. Doesn't mean it isn't true.
True, but it will be difficult - it's not just "a spokesperson". The French Consul-General has been directly named and presumably the author of the memo is known.

A case of 'our Consul is more truthful than your civil servant'!

The SNP have been interesting in their denial.

Their notes of the meeting contain no record....

You don't minute this stuff, it is always off the record.

However the Civil Servant note is almost certainly what they were told - off the record - by somebody. I would also suspect the Telegraph have been pretty careful here.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:44 pm

pk1 wrote:Denials coming in thick and fast from the SNP & the French.

Why is everybody so keen to believe the papers on this when we don't believe them at any other time ?

Because the Telegraph has documentation, and are carrying legal risk publishing it. Stuff we don't generally believes starts with a senior anonymous source...

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:47 pm

Oh dear...

Toby Young @toadmeister · 52s 52 seconds ago
I wouldn’t be surprised if the leaked ambassadorial memo is a Zinoviev letter cooked up by the Labour Party. If so, it will backfire badly

Berk.

Doesn't say much for the DT if they're fooled that easily.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:48 pm

: Untitled6.png (212.55 KiB) Viewed 6086 times

Oooh. No comment!

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:50 pm

Nice little hatchet job on the SNP by the BBC.

The BBC's James Cook said: "While Nicola Sturgeon may or may not have said it... there are definitely some people within the Scottish National Party for whom five years of the Tories to attack would be a better outcome than getting into bed with Labour."

Also, note the interesting wording of this statement.

However, BBC Scotland's James Cook says a source close to the first minister described Civil Service minutes of her meeting with the French ambassador as making "no mention of a discussion of Ms Sturgeon's preference for prime minister".
"The source said the minutes showed the discussion focused on the possibility of a referendum on British membership of the European Union," adds Cook.

So the meeting happened, there are notes, and I suspect some additional information was passed on. If this isn't true then we are looking at an FCO conspiracy.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:51 pm

pk1 wrote:Denials coming in thick and fast from the SNP & the French.

Why is everybody so keen to believe the papers on this when we don't believe them at any other time ?

Yes, exactly.

It looks like a gift to Labour but they were lied about this morning. They should have been far more cautious.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:51 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Oh dear...

Toby Young @toadmeister · 52s 52 seconds ago
I wouldn’t be surprised if the leaked ambassadorial memo is a Zinoviev letter cooked up by the Labour Party. If so, it will backfire badly

Berk.

Doesn't say much for the DT if they're fooled that easily.

Labour are not that desperate, also how would they have details of the meeting and an FCO minute.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:53 pm

pk1 wrote:Denials coming in thick and fast from the SNP & the French.

Why is everybody so keen to believe the papers on this when we don't believe them at any other time ?

I did wonder out loud who we should believe - the papers/MSM or the politicians / current darling .... it is a very hard call re trust levels, no?

TE is probably right when he says the French would have to deny it anyway, even if it's true ... as McBride says it's one hell of an embarrassing leak given the timing re election and international relations protocol.

I think it's probably in the 'over to you Telegraph' phase now - they'll have to produce something tangible to back up the story and refuse to withdraw it .... They do carry a risk publishing something if it's based just on hearsay.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:53 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
pk1 wrote:Denials coming in thick and fast from the SNP & the French.

Why is everybody so keen to believe the papers on this when we don't believe them at any other time ?
Yes, exactly.

It looks like a gift to Labour but they were lied about this morning. They should have been far more cautious.

All the political parties have commented on this. The Tories kind of jumped on it to discredit EM.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:55 pm

TechnicalEphemera wrote:
pk1 wrote:Denials coming in thick and fast from the SNP & the French.

Why is everybody so keen to believe the papers on this when we don't believe them at any other time ?
Because the Telegraph has documentation, and are carrying legal risk publishing it. Stuff we don't generally believes starts with a senior anonymous source...

I find it hard to believe a politician of her standing would make such an obvious comment but sure, if the paper has the documentation and seeing as they have quoted from it, surely all they need to do is 'publish and be damned' - it would clear the entire matter up within seconds.

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:55 pm

Willow904 wrote:
Untitled6.png
Oooh. No comment!

I doubt whether that ambassador is called Pierre-Alain

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:56 pm

Noticed some of you mention Fraser Nelson, well Patrick Butler replies in his cuts blog: Food banks: no, they're not a 'popular welfare solution'

http://www.theguardian.com/society/patr ... e-solution

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 03 Apr, 2015 11:58 pm

I notice that McBride wondered whether the LibDems were behind it - they have motive (loss of seats) and they would have access to the minutes.

https://twitter.com/DPMcBride/status/584101106323697666

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 12:02 am

RogerOThornhill wrote:I notice that McBride wondered whether the LibDems were behind it - they have motive (loss of seats) and they would have access to the minutes.

https://twitter.com/DPMcBride/status/584101106323697666

It's not claimed that it's the minutes of the original meeting. It seems (from the Spectator) to be a note of a subsequent telephone conversation between the Consul and an FCO civil servant.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 12:04 am

pk1 wrote:
TechnicalEphemera wrote:
pk1 wrote:Denials coming in thick and fast from the SNP & the French.

Why is everybody so keen to believe the papers on this when we don't believe them at any other time ?
Because the Telegraph has documentation, and are carrying legal risk publishing it. Stuff we don't generally believes starts with a senior anonymous source...
I find it hard to believe a politician of her standing would make such an obvious comment but sure, if the paper has the documentation and seeing as they have quoted from it, surely all they need to do is 'publish and be damned' - it would clear the entire matter up within seconds.

It won't clear it up, it shows a memo exists that claims this was said. But that is all it will show. Both parties involved will deny it. We could be looking at some very very dirty tricks of course, remember the break-in at Milibands office. However usually you pull that sort of stunt 72 hours before an election.

The story is probably done, unless something else emerges, or Sturgeon launches legal action. I could imagine the conversation, what would be your preference ? At the time the answer probably Cameron wouldn't necessarily have been much more than an off the cuff response.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 12:55 am

Ok, here is the offending text....

• The Ambassador also had a truncated meeting with the FM (FM running late after a busy Thursday…). Discussion appears to have focused mainly on the political situation, with the FM stating that she wouldn’t want a formal coalition with Labour; that the SNP would almost certainly have a large number of seats; that she had no idea ‘what kind of mischief’ Alex Salmond would get up to; and confessed that she’d rather see David Cameron remain as PM (and didn’t see Ed Miliband as PM material). I have to admit that I’m not sure that the FM’s tongue would be quite so loose on that kind of thing in a meeting like that, so it might well be a case of something being lost in translation.

Note there is no follow up, the suggestion it was queried is either a Telegraph invention, or from a different source.

Now this is fascinating because it suggests somebody in the FCO is involved. Is this a political affiliate leaking or the long arm of the state (i.e. The pro union establishment). Of course the final paragraph could just have been bolted on by a faker, the stuff on Salmond raises by eyebrow.

But this is worrying because it implies some very dirty tricks by somebody, who knows what their agenda is.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 1:41 am

It's very serious. Westland serious.

And Scotland nicely wound up against itself.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 1:58 am

SNP supporters sending some vile tweets to Labour politicians for the heinous crime of tweeting the Telegraph.

Of course those same supporters would have resisted the urge to do the same had some dreadful report about Labour been the headline.

Not.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 2:00 am

From the sidebar on that Telegraph page with the allegations-about-Sturgeon story on it:

Vote 2015: Results Forecast
Outcome: Labour majority of 40
Labour: 345
Conservatives: 256
Liberal Democrats: 19
Ukip: 0
Others: 30
Source: YouGov/Electoral Calculus

Although I'm not sure where or when that's from as I can't see anything to match it on electoral calculus or yougov sites and the figures look generally odd

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 2:18 am

LadyCentauria wrote:From the sidebar on that Telegraph page with the allegations-about-Sturgeon story on it:

Vote 2015: Results Forecast
Outcome: Labour majority of 40
Labour: 345
Conservatives: 256
Liberal Democrats: 19
Ukip: 0
Others: 30
Source: YouGov/Electoral Calculus
Although I'm not sure where or when that's from as I can't see anything to match it on electoral calculus or yougov sites and the figures look generally odd

I don't know all the ins and outs but it's to do with the Yougov Nowcast

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/04/01/wh ... n-parties/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A 40 seat majority sounds magnificent but it's so wildly out of kilter with all others, I have no idea how to explain it - you know what they say about a single poll though so treat with caution.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 3:30 am

pk1 wrote:
LadyCentauria wrote:From the sidebar on that Telegraph page with the allegations-about-Sturgeon story on it:

Vote 2015: Results Forecast
Outcome: Labour majority of 40
Labour: 345
Conservatives: 256
Liberal Democrats: 19
Ukip: 0
Others: 30
Source: YouGov/Electoral Calculus
Although I'm not sure where or when that's from as I can't see anything to match it on electoral calculus or yougov sites and the figures look generally odd
I don't know all the ins and outs but it's to do with the Yougov Nowcast

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/04/01/wh ... n-parties/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A 40 seat majority sounds magnificent but it's so wildly out of kilter with all others, I have no idea how to explain it - you know what they say about a single poll though so treat with caution.

I'm certainly going to treat it with great caution because it does seem wildly out of kilter, as you say. I think the Sturgeon/Bermann business should be treated with the same caution – that's a very odd story, too.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 7:47 am

It doesn't really matter if it is real or not. It is true.

True in the sense that the best result for the Nats is a Tory win. The Nats want Scottish independence. All the social democratic stuff is just an add on. They are a nationalist party.

That means that the best result for them is another Tory win. That way they'll move at least two steps further towards independence.

(i) Tory rule, when nearly wiped out in Scotland, increases the hostility to the UK state.

(ii) The Tories are far more likely to give them Home Rule, in return for EVEL.

The SNP plan is to replace Labour in Scotland. As things stand, it looks as if they will be successful. That involves saying they will keep the Tories out.

Indeed, if, as seems likely, Labour and the SNP MPs together are enough for a majority, the SNP will put Miliband in office.

But, we are kidding ourselves if we think the SNP has any interest whatsoever in there being a successful government of the left of the United Kingdom. That is the last thing they want.

Rebecca · Post by **Rebecca** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 8:00 am

SpinningHugo wrote:It doesn't really matter if it is real or not. It is true.

True in the sense that the best result for the Nats is a Tory win. The Nats want Scottish independence. All the social democratic stuff is just an add on. They are a nationalist party.

That means that the best result for them is another Tory win. That way they'll move at least two steps further towards independence.

(i) Tory rule, when nearly wiped out in Scotland, increases the hostility to the UK state.

(ii) The Tories are far more likely to give them Home Rule, in return for EVEL.

The SNP plan is to replace Labour in Scotland. As things stand, it looks as if they will be successful. That involves saying they will keep the Tories out.

Indeed, if, as seems likely, Labour and the SNP MPs together are enough for a majority, the SNP will put Miliband in office.

But, we are kidding ourselves if we think the SNP has any interest whatsoever in there being a successful government of the left of the United Kingdom. That is the last thing they want.

I agree with Hugo.
Sturgeon has refused to rule out calling for another Indy ref in their 2016 manifesto.She could have easily said that would be too early,which it is.
If the Tories get in in May they'll be demanding another referendum before the cabinet is announced.And also demanding more money/powers for Scotland.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 8:18 am

Rebecca wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:It doesn't really matter if it is real or not. It is true.

True in the sense that the best result for the Nats is a Tory win. The Nats want Scottish independence. All the social democratic stuff is just an add on. They are a nationalist party.

That means that the best result for them is another Tory win. That way they'll move at least two steps further towards independence.

(i) Tory rule, when nearly wiped out in Scotland, increases the hostility to the UK state.

(ii) The Tories are far more likely to give them Home Rule, in return for EVEL.

The SNP plan is to replace Labour in Scotland. As things stand, it looks as if they will be successful. That involves saying they will keep the Tories out.

Indeed, if, as seems likely, Labour and the SNP MPs together are enough for a majority, the SNP will put Miliband in office.

But, we are kidding ourselves if we think the SNP has any interest whatsoever in there being a successful government of the left of the United Kingdom. That is the last thing they want.

I agree with Hugo.
Sturgeon has refused to rule out calling for another Indy ref in their 2016 manifesto.She could have easily said that would be too early,which it is.
If the Tories get in in May they'll be demanding another referendum before the cabinet is announced.And also demanding more money/powers for Scotland.

The Telegraph need to print further evidence, if they have any. The lack of honesty from nats that splitting the union up via a tory led government is the swiftest way to another referendum is frankly ridiculous.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 8:25 am

This Sturgeon stuff is depressing whether it is true or not.

If it isn't true then who is behind the black ops ?

Why would Labour [as the Snp will blame them] want headlines telling people that Ed isn't prime minister material ?

& looking at the French statement "absolutely no preference was expressed" on #GE2015 outcome
is in itself odd. Does Sturgeon really not have a view, surely as an SNP 'real socialist™' she should not want a Tory government.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 8:27 am

Jesus. We don't need independence from each other we need to rid ourselves (collectively) of the lying, greedy, vicious, sociopathic elite, with their digusting dark ages belief in their divine right to rule (and those that aspire to emulate them)

Morning!

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 8:29 am

& re: the French denial, don't the French have a long history of supporting the Scots to cause trouble for the English ?

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 8:29 am

This on the Tory tactic of boosting the Nats is interesting, it is written by a Tory

http://www.capx.co/the-tories-are-worki ... p-victory/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is, I think, prescient as to what May 8th will bring. Cameron will make his big appeal for a "constitutional settlement", giving the Nats full fiscal autonomy in return for EVEL.

Spacedone · Post by **Spacedone** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 8:29 am

Nick Clegg pleading with the people of Sheffield Hallam to vote for him so that Sheffield isn't turned into a one-party state.

Nick Clegg: the last thing Sheffield needs is one-party rule by Labour
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... -by-labour" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 8:31 am

NB the last line of the Sturgeon memo

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... -memo.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Spacedone · Post by **Spacedone** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 8:34 am

SpinningHugo wrote:NB the last line of the Sturgeon memo

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... -memo.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The bit about being "lost in translation"? I'm fairly sure it was mentioned last night that the conversation (if this is actually a record of it) took place in English.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 8:35 am

SpinningHugo wrote:NB the last line of the Sturgeon memo

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... -memo.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

''she had no idea ‘what kind of mischief’ Alex Salmond would get up to''

That won't get the headlines, only the anti-Ed stuff.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 8:37 am

SpinningHugo wrote:This on the Tory tactic of boosting the Nats is interesting, it is written by a Tory

http://www.capx.co/the-tories-are-worki ... p-victory/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is, I think, prescient as to what May 8th will bring. Cameron will make his big appeal for a "constitutional settlement", giving the Nats full fiscal autonomy in return for EVEL.

What is the discussion among those in the know, regarding the fact that the UK government is the UK government and cannot pick and choose which bits of it vote on what? At what point do they decide that the PM can just decide everything him/herself?

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Sat 04 Apr, 2015 8:43 am

Kenny Young @Kenny_young · 11h 11 hours ago
What is the French for "Our officially minuted conversation has gotten me into terrible, terrible trouble with the people back home" ?