Charles Bannerman

I'm just trying to imagine a similar thread contributed to by Eden Court patrons outraged at the behaviour of the usherettes (or shall I appease the Serially Offended by calling them "front of house staff"?) Or "Offensive Behaviour In Theatres" legislation.

Yes I remember you well Garry. Red hair, lived in Culduthel Rd, sister called Judy, dad called John who - like mine - was involved in the Boys' Brigade? I wouldn't worry about IHE not remembering you. Part of the period we are talking about includes the 70s when IHE doesn't remember anything!

I must say I'm quite astonished at members of the second and third largest parties queueing up to become Presiding Officer, a post which entails setting aside party affiliations. In a minority government situation, this is in effect handing another seat to the SNP who might better have been left to fill the post themselves in order to deepen their minority and make them sweat a bit more. It's especially strange in a wee parliament of just 129 members - although that still gives Scotland more than twice as many MSPs per head than the corresponding MP figure at Westminster, and only to manage domestic stuff. However the small numbers and minority administrations make knife edge votes all the more likely at Holyrood so perhaps the notion of the PO being drawn from the ranks of MSPs at all isn't quite such a good idea in Scotland.

I thought I had already answered this in response to Kingsmills but never mind - here we go again. I am going to vote for what is best for the UK and especially for Scotland - where the importance of staying in the UK far exceeds any European consideration. Unfortunately it is not possible for these two issues to be considered separately because the SNP have conflated them by way of their stated intention to use any asymmetric European outcome as an excuse to call another Scottish referendum. This is despite having been decisively told where to place their single obsession little more than 18 months ago. It is hence far more important for Scots to vote for the good of their country - in a way which will help to thwart the SNP's wrecking agenda. Similarly, I voted NO in 1979 and 1997 not because I am desperately averse to some decisions being taken in Scotland but because (unlike George Robertson) I realised the dangers of offering the SNP a soapbox. If the SNP had respected the democratic will of the Scottish people as expressed in a referendum called at their request, at a time of their choosing and under their rules, then we would not be plagued with this constant tedium and could get on with our lives - whilst taking the Euro referendum at its face value. I do, however, suspect that Sturgeon has to some extent been making these bellicose noises just to appease the Mel Gibson wing of the party. Meanwhile we have another five years of them failing to give due attention to the people's real needs in order to concentrate on their "idee fixe". Presumably the next bit of excitement will be the impending latest clearout of ministerial incompetents where I would imagine that the likes of Richard Lochead and the unbelievably useless Angela Constance will join the ever lengthening list of failures such as Alex Neil, Fiona Hyslop, Stewart Stevenson, Kenny MacAskill, Michael Russell, Old Uncle Tom Cobley And All......

The chance would be a fine thing but, with the said "evil separatists" hellbent on another Scottish referendum and desperate for an asymmetric Eurovote as an excuse, it's not as simple as that. Once again, the separatists' refusal to take NO for an answer on a now long resolved question continues to undermine the political process.

I may well vote Leave but have not fully made up my mind. To me, the main political threat remains the separatist one, so voting Leave would also potentially contribute to providing the Nats with an excuse for a second bash. On the other hand, voting Leave within Scotland also helps to neutralise the Nats' grudge and grievance capacity, whilst also backing the political independence of the UK.

Schooldays 1968-74? Assuming you are not Laurie Chancellor himself, did you play at Culcabock at all with Laurie?

I'm with your main thrust but can't quite grasp the need to make the class distinction. If a law applies to everyone, then I don't see how the "working classes" (stupid term anyway since almost everyone apart from those living on benefits works) are specifically discriminated against. My main issue with this law is that it discriminates against football. Meanwhile the likes of the Orange Order - whose raison d'etre is aggressive anti-Catholicism - strut the streets with their umbrellas and bowler hats and with total impunity. On the other hand, if this legislation is merely a means of getting the Old Firm to behave themselves, then maybe it's got something to commend it. And if the claim is that this is discrimination against the OF - well let's just look on that as a a quid pro quo for the preferential treatment they get elsewhere!

Boards in general tend to be reluctant to reveal player budgets. The operating costs are in the accounts but there's no indication of what % of this is player budget. However the bottom line is - you can't spend money you don't have and there's a limit to what you earn from crowds of around 3000. I would also suggest that for a long time now what has been achieved relative to budget has been remarkable. What I would really like to see are long term "cost per point" figures for all the clubs.

I am also surprised to see the 1970s/80s date. In fact I have a recollection of my father taking about playing there with my uncle who worked at CD in the 50s.

I am more than content to live in a region of Britain which still has some convenient quasi-national features and is one of several regions of a country which has been one of the most successful in the world since it came into existence over 300 years ago. I have far more of a problem with the manner in which the Highlands are treated as a region of Scotland - especially if the break up of Britain had been achieved in 2014. I have never remotely seen the point of Scottish nationalism and its embittered obsession with turning the clock back to less happy and less prosperous days. What is completely mystifying is how the Nats can bang on about what they call "Independence" which includes this apparent desire to hand over vast swathes of sovreignty to Brussels. I see 3 possible explanations for this apparent Europhilia. You know and accept that in the event of separation you will create such a financial basket case that you'll need the help..... you are so desperate to get away from your hated betes noir "The English" that you'll jump into bed with anyone and..... you are using the European issue as a potential source of grievance en route to the only item on your agenda - another referendum.

I find this issue quite bizarre. This is a referendum within the constitutional entity of the UK, of which Scotland is hence no more than a region or subdivision. It therefore shouldn't matter a hoot what the breakdown is within that region compared with the rest of the UK. For instance if south west England voted IN and the rest of the UK voted OUT, I wouldn't expect any minority pressure group down there to start shouting for a further referendum on secession. This is just the SNP searching for a grievance as an excuse to pursue their sole policy. Indeed why didn't they start shouting for "independence" for Glasgow and Dundee after Sep 2014? Quite frankly, as a Scot as much as any of them, I am getting rather embarrassed at their perpetual Whingeing Jockery which is making us a laughing stock in the eyes of the rest of the world. It would be far better if this minority government would shut up and try instead to rectify some of the domestic chaos they have created.

And what about that Israeli guy - Goldstein? Finkelstein? Had about 3 different ways of spelling his name?

You mean you used to collect them, you sad Jaggie!!!!!

I suppose that also qualifies them as "Scotland Minded".

Brilliant! You should set up a new pro-UK website called "Yngwies Over Scotland". If I could presume to add to your masterful analogy, I also wonder how many of their supporters spend many of their waking hours hanging aimlessly about outside their HQ, draped in SNP regalia, desperately hoping that Wee Nicola or some of "the players" might emerge.

Interesting that, in the face of the SNP's unprecedented campaign of vilification against them, lasting for years, the Tories have made a significant breakthrough here, including Ruth Davidson unseating the Nats. A couple of other thoughts. Much, for some reason, has been made of the "large" turnout..... of 50odd%. But compared with 71 in the General "Westmonster" Election, this perhaps again reflects relative public perceptions. Then add to this the poll which tells us that separation is only the 11th highest priority issue with Scottish voters. And in the absence of an overall majority, if the SNP want even to get Holyrood to vote to have a second bash, they will need the support of their Green chums, who will presumably exact a price...maybe even demand closing down the North Sea oil industry!!! :-)

It's The Weegies Wot Won It!! Looks like the SNP's Retreat From Moscow has begun though!

It may be a response to the recession, but in recent years the world seems to have been going through a bizarre phase of political eccentricity resulting in some very strange mass voting trends. There have been various consequences including, for instance, the emergence of Donald Trump as likely Republican nominee and the rise of the SNP, both of which are atributable to this same global glitch. One thing is certain, though - sanity will return to the world of politics and the SNP - well a few of them at any rate - know this. As a result they need to keep pursuing their requirement for a one-off moment of carastrophic political judgement with permanent consequences before the malaise wears off and normality returns. Their problem is that they need a) to find an excuse for a second referendum and b) before the stark realities of the demise of oil finally penetrate their support plus c) at a time when they feel pretty sure of winning because a second set of advice on where to place their separation obsession would be terminal.

So there's obviously no chance at all of ICT affording a bike each for them?

I define austerity in part as crap council services because the SNP have for years imposed a Council Tax freeze in the hope that lots of people will blame Westminster for infrequently emptied bins and holes in the road. But I define REAL austerity as the kind of shortages and grim standards of living that our parents and grandparents suffered post war. Worse still, the desperate poverty which prevailed before that in an era when current benefit levels could only be dreamt of.

Don't worry about it Alex. Red dots in this section are rites of passage. If any of my posts fails to get at least one, I start worrying that I haven't been abrasive enough!

Prompted by TBB's post above, I have just traced this incident in Robert Preece's official history of the Academy, where Evan Barron's work is referred to. It would appear to have been a dispute between MacDonnell of Glengarry and MacKintosh of Raigmore about the appointment of a Latin master and it got badly out of hand. However what did strike me as somewhat “familiar” was that the two sides of the dispute both recruited new school directors (a directorship could be bought) in advance of the vote on who should get the job. Now this is perhaps not a concept familiar to a contributor by the name of Tichy Black's Back, but the scenario is incredibly similar to one which unfolded in Rose Street, just 200 yards away from the Old Academy, in December 1993 where similarly increased numbers of Caley members held a second vote on the merger. Indeed, the fourth and last occasion when this artificially extended forum met was actually in the hall of the former “Midmills” Royal Academy a few months later. But there the similarity ends. £50 to buy a Royal Academy directorship in 1820 was a far, far greater sum than £20 in 1993 to buy a Caley season ticket!

I had mercifully neither thought nor heard of the execrable Reverend Whinge for long enough until Oddquine mentioned him there. Is he still down there peddling his twisted bile from England, which would surely remain a comfortable refuge for him should his desire for the economic Apocalypse which is separation ever descend upon the rest of us up here in Skintland? Yup the ultimate hypocrite, the Reverend Whinge. Makes it his life's mission to impose on other people a political outcome which he himself chooses to avoid. Oh, by the way I perhaps shouldn't dismiss ALL politicians as unprincipled. It seems that some do have principles which they stick to. This afternoon, on the Distributor Road, I spotted this plethora of Green Party placards progressing towards me. Closer examination revealed that they were all, seven or eight of them, either on the body of, or on the bodywork of the bike ridden by a classically bearded Green Party activist. Only a photo, which I don't unfortunately have, could convey how ridiculous this looked but fair play to the guy for making his contribution to saving the planet!

You know, when an election like this comes along, it always makes me think of a certain quote from George Orwell's Animal Farm - except for "animals" read "politicians" and for "equal" read "disingenuous self-seeking chancers".