Next permanent Scotland manager

[coprolite]

1 hour ago, Bodie said:

This is arrant nonsense I'm afraid. The English had already embarked on their programme of empire building and colonialism long before thoughts of Darien or Union had entered the grubby minds of the Scots elite. The two biggest drivers of this, the English (later British) East India Company and the Hudson Bay Company were exclusively English concerns. Scots were certainly over represented in certain theatres and more than willing passengers on the 'journey' but Empire has and was always driven by London.

Fair enough, but I don't think it's a particularly popular view in middle England tbh.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/apr/04/pupils-benefits-empire-ignorance-royals-caribbean-windrush

 

Empire building and colonialism was started by the English government /state through private enterprises, but it was still pretty much nascent and mainly a New World (except a scattering of small colonies) concern before the Act of Union. 

Most of the bad stuff that we know about happened after. 

Describing Scots as passengers (willing or otherwise) in an endeavour driven exclusively by "London" is as much wishful thinking as the trolling you replied to. 

I wish that Scots and Scotland hadn't been a major part of it too, but we were. 

[Jacksgranda]

6 hours ago, 101 said:

Robertson bowing out so the most capable candidate left is Kate Forbes, I didn't realise Ian Blackford went to the same church as her and he was fairly liberal. I would also hope that the executive committee who dictate policy can continue work with banning conversation therapy etc.

How does that work then - you just keep talking to them?

"You are not a homosexual, you are not a homosexual..."

[Melanius Mullarkey]

1 hour ago, carpetmonster said:

 

Is that Spency? 

[carpetmonster]

2 minutes ago, Melanius Mullarkay said:

Is that Spency? 

Behind the wall? Probably 

[Melanius Mullarkey]

7 minutes ago, carpetmonster said:

Behind the wall? Probably 

DAB Glorytadger.

[carpetmonster]

1 minute ago, Melanius Mullarkay said:

DAB Glorytadger.

It’s no coincidence that ‘Jim Spence’ is an anagram of ‘Penis em CJ’, which is also what he responded with when asked what he most liked on telly; further clarifying he meant the bloke off Eggheads. 

[Salt n Vinegar]

Is there a group of Lego figures set representing the gang of boaby and divot inspectors to be stationed outside toilets or changing rooms? Failure in the marketing department if not.

[sophia]

6 hours ago, Elric said:

Forbes is on Maternity Leave - will she be prepared to put the hours required into the role and miss out on the early years of her child?

I'm enjoying this thread and I think Ms Forbes might just be the person with the skills to carry the few percent who aren't as radical as some of us would like.

Just in case it is missed and in the interests of transparency, I'm very happy to quote the attached example of misogyny. If required, i might make a list of to add to @Elric and @The_Kincardine

[carpetmonster]

4 minutes ago, Salt n Vinegar said:

Is there a group of Lego figures set representing the gang of boaby and divot inspectors to be stationed outside toilets or changing rooms? Failure in the marketing department if not.

 

[The_Kincardine]

1 hour ago, Bodie said:

This is arrant nonsense I'm afraid. The English had already embarked on their programme of empire building and colonialism long before thoughts of Darien or Union had entered the grubby minds of the Scots elite. The two biggest drivers of this, the English (later British) East India Company and the Hudson Bay Company were exclusively English concerns. Scots were certainly over represented in certain theatres and more than willing passengers on the 'journey' but Empire has and was always driven by London.

How can you, as an Edinburger who has walked up and down Dundas Street many times, say this since said street is named after the most influential member of the (English) East India Company in its history?  A man, under whose patronage, Scots came to dominate the Company to the extent that, at its peak, about 1/3rd of the East India Company's writers were Scots?  

Like England, our involvement in both the North American fur trade and in trading in India and the Far East predated Darien, with the Scottish East India Company established in the early 17th C.  But of course, 1707 made it much easier for us with one writer stating, It would be almost impossible to overemphasize the pre-eminent position which Scots of every stripe, Highlander, Lowlander and Islander, attained during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries in the North American fur trade.

In India we dominated - pound for pound -  the EIC as I said and in China we became significant 'hongs' with Jardine Mathieson still being a massive global company as is HSBC, also established by Scots.  Not to mention our role in the Opium Wars and in establishing tea plantations in India - using plants stolen (by a Scottish botanist) from China.  One of the earliest recorded examples of industrial espionage.

Books and monographs have been written about this shite yet you dismiss it as 'arrant nonsense'?  Not a surprise since, in my experience, the less you know about Scotland the more likely you are to be a Nat.

[Mark Connolly]

49 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said:

How does that work then - you just keep talking to them?

"You are not a homosexual, you are not a homosexual..."

[Salt n Vinegar]

In controversial times like these, perhaps we should take heed of the persuasive line of reasoning used in the discussion between Jim, Humphrey and Bernard... 

"Sir Humphrey: The only way to understand the Press is to remember that they pander to their readers' prejudices.

Hacker: Don't tell me about the press. I know exactly who reads the papers: The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country; The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country; The Times is read by the people who actually do run the country; The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country; The Financial Times is read by people who own the country; The Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country; and The Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is.

Sir Humphrey: Oh and Prime Minister, what about the people who read The Sun?

Bernard: Sun readers don't care who runs the country as long as she's got big tits."

A lesson for all of us there, I think. 

[Dunning1874]

That's Forbes now explicitly said she would have voted against GRR, and also that she would be "loath to challenge" the S35 Order.

Quite apart from personal views of GRR, you can hardly open your tenure as an SNP First Minister by accepting that Westminster has a right to veto legislation passed by a two thirds majority of Holyrood if they happen not to like it, just because you also disagree with the legislation.

This is about whether you believe in protecting the existing powers of the Scottish Parliament under devolution or not, before eventually getting to adding to them via independence: if you don't you've no business even being an elected representative of an independence supporting party, never mind leading it.

Edited February 20, 2023 by Dunning1874

[The_Kincardine]

I like Forbes.  Shame she became so misguided that she became a Nat.   Shame, too, that she can't pronounce 'harassment' - would turn me off as a  voter.  Here's her getting her retaliation in first:

 

[renton]

5 minutes ago, Dunning1874 said:

That's Forbes now explicitly said she would have voted against GRR, and also that she would be "loath to challenge" the S35 Order.

Quite apart from personal views of GRR, you can hardly open your tenure as an SNP First Minister by accepting that Westminster has a right to veto legislation passed by a two thirds majority of Holyrood if they happen not to like it, just because you also disagree with the legislation.

This is about whether you believe in protecting the existing powers of the Scottish Parliament under devolution or not, before eventually getting to adding to them via independence: if you don't you've no business even being an elected representative of an independence supporting party, never mind leading it.

Aye, that was a bit of a fucking leap out of the window for her, 4 hours in to it.

[Eddie Hitler]

7 minutes ago, Dunning1874 said:

That's Forbes now explicitly said she would have voted against GRR, and also that she would be "loath to challenge" the S35 Order.

Quite apart from personal views of GRR, you can hardly open your tenure as an SNP First Minister by accepting that Westminster has a right to veto legislation passed by a two thirds majority of Holyrood if they happen not to like it, just because you also disagree with the legislation.

This is about whether you believe in protecting the existing powers of the Scottish Parliament under devolution or not, before eventually getting to adding to them via independence: if you don't you've no business even being an elected representative of an independence supporting party, never mind leading it.

Is this what's happening or is there some chance that a S35 challenge could fail and that they have had legal advice to this effect (which would, presumably, mean that they didn't agree that it was about existing powers of the Scottish Parliament at all)?

They have charged into quite a few legal battles they ultimately couldn't win. Once bitten and all that?

[Salt n Vinegar]

2 minutes ago, renton said:

Aye, that was a bit of a fucking leap out of the window for her, 4 hours in to it.

Pity. I think that she has knackered her campaign. Being First Minister isn't the same as being just a party member. Maybe some political inexperience on show. 

Putting aside the rights or wrongs of the gender issue, or the influence of "faith" on politics, she is setting herself against the clearly expressed cross-party will of the Parliament. Advantage Yousaf.

[Trogdor]

I had mentioned a few days ago that Mandy Rhodes (who edits the Holyrood magazine) had mentioned that the challenge to Section 35 would be quietly binned by the SG. With party figures thinking it was a mistake to fight it in the courts. Forbes position will now test that assertion.

I'm not convinced party members will accept that tbh. This is going to test the support of the GRR in the party and could get quite messy. 

Edit - I just read what she said and it's not explicity opposed to the GRR:

Quote

“I don’t think that we should challenge the Section 35 in court because I think the public want us to focus on things like the NHS, on making the case for independence, on the cost of living crisis, not on another court challenge, but I would engage with the UK Government to look at how we amend the bill further,” 

Edited February 20, 2023 by Trogdor

[ScotiaNostra]

6 minutes ago, Trogdor said:

I had mentioned a few days ago that Mandy Rhodes (who edits the Holyrood magazine) had mentioned that the challenge to Section 35 would be quietly binned by the SG. With party figures thinking it was a mistake to fight it in the courts. Forbes position will now test that assertion.

I'm not convinced party members will accept that tbh. This is going to test the support of the GRR in the party and could get quite messy. 

Edit - I just read what she said and it's not explicity opposed to the GRR:

sounds fair enough the quote you posted from her, you can see the logic there

[Trogdor]

7 minutes ago, ScotiaNostra said:

sounds fair enough the quote you posted from her, you can see the logic there

I was quoting from ITV but she has also given an interview with the BBC where it seems she went a bit further and said she wouldn't have voted for it, in its current form:

Quote

SNP leadership contender Kate Forbes has told BBC Scotland she has “significant concerns” about self-identification and would not have voted for the Scottish government’s bill in its current form.

Ms Forbes, who was on maternity leave when the vote took place in December, says people she has spoken to want to focus on the NHS, the cost of living crisis and making the case for independence.

The UK government has said it will block legislation that aims to make it easier for people in Scotland to change their legally recognised sex.

Ms Forbes says she would be "loath to challenge" that decision.

But she adds: "I understand the principle here which is that the UK government should not overturn Scottish legislation.

"That is an important principle which I hold to.

"But I think on this, seek legal advice and recognise it is not a priority right now for the people of Scotland, who are focused on other things.”