SBR 18: Party Funding and other Matters of State

Hello and welcome to the 18th edition of the SBR. Lot’s of good stuff as usual and here it all is.

Mr Eugenides makes a rather good point concerning state funding of political parties and the BNP’s election campaign. Reactionary Snob expands on the issue as does Shuggy.

The differences between the English and Scottish versions of the Sun have always been a source of some amusement. McGellie thinks that the Scottish Sun should come out in support of Scottish independence. Stranger things have happened.

Still on Murdoch press, David Farrer has noticed that the Scottish section of the Times Online has been a casualty of their redesign. It is apparently a temporary absence.

The SNP have been trying to get the tolls on the Forth Road Bridge scrapped. C. Wilde has the details.

Tartan Hero is on the look out for a messiah to lead us to the promised land of environmental sustainability. Kezia Dugdale probably doesn’t think that such a leader is likely to arise from the ranks of the Greens.

Over at Scottish Political News, there’s news of an independent (small “i”) candidate who’ll be standing in Lothian. The gentleman in question has a good stab at representing his position in the comments to the post.

A new blog started up this week called SNP Tactical Voting. It probably isn’t necessary to go into too much detail as to what’ll be covered there. Interesting stuff.

But for all the interest, Mike Smithson has noticed that betting on the Scottish elections has not exactly been popular with the punters. Do your own obligatory “tight Scots” joke.

Alistair ponders the possibility of a seemingly unlikely coalition. Liberal Democrat party members may not be as hostile to Independence as their official line would suggest.

Moving away from the elections, Kirk Elder has penned a splendidly written piece on Affluenza.

As yet another attempt is made to reform the House of Lords, Holyrood Chronicles ponders the value of euphemisms.

Over at Rolled-up Trousers, Osama points out a problem with Richard Littlejohn’s attitude towards this week’s letter bombs. On a related note, I wonder if moderate motorists will now be dropping their campaign to oppose government plans on motoring? After all, when it comes to this sort of thing, “you’re either with us or against us…”

Angry Steve is angry about yellow boxes this week. Definitely one for the “Stupid Ideas of the Year” awards.

And finally, because your host was involved in a little bit of handbags this week with the U.K.’s “top political blogger”, I can’t resist including this. Be advised that no hamsters were hurt in the making of this post.

And that’s it for this week. Remember to send your nominations for next week to scottishroundup [at] gmail [dot] com when guest host Clairwil will be at the helm. See you then.

5 comments

  1. It is worth pointing out, in response to Kirk Elder, that economists also know that we are destined to be unhappy — because no matter how much we have of anything, we will always want more.

  2. So that’s why economics is known as the dismal science.

    Not all of us want more.

    Beside the Dixie Chicks won 5 grammys (grammies?). What’s not to be happy about?

  3. Hi there,

    Just to let you know; I am an independent health candidate running in Coatbridge and Chryston on the Monklands hospital issue. I think you should look at my new blog, ‘campaigning for health’ on http://www.blogger.com, because it features Black Forest Gateau, a fabulous caption competition and ‘PFI for Dummies’ a guide to our esrtwhile government’s method of bankrupting the country.And I think you should vote for me, but that would be shameless electioneering to say that, wouldn’t it?