DoofersDad

It will be interesting to discover just what the 56 55 54 will be saying in response to Osborne's pledge to continue to pump significant extra resource in real terms into the NHS in England. These are the MPs who have decided to vote on devolved matters (like the NHS) on the dubious justification that they can protect Scotland from the indirect consequences of the Tories' spending cuts. They are from the party who, in the referendum, won loads of votes by scaring the voters into believing that remaining in the Union would result in disinvestment in and privatisation of the NHS. They are from the party which runs the Government in Scotland; a government that was criticised in an Audit Scotland report earlier this year for failing to increase spending in the NHS in real terms, for increasingly failing to meet targets and for increasingly having to resort to the private sector to bail them out. Hopefully Robertson's rabble will head North and tell Sturgeon's stooges that it is possible to commit to long term investment in the NHS by ensuring that the nation is not crippled by debt. One dreads to think what the long term future for the NHS in Scotland would have been had we voted for Independence. Crippled by debt repayments from the massive borrowing required for measures used to bribe the electorate and with the promised massive oil revenues failing to materialise, the Holyrood Government would have been forced to cut spending to the NHS. I sense that many people who voted "yes" are just beginning to wake up to the fact that they were well and truly duped by the SNP. Fortunately, enough of us voted "No" and as a result, the NHS in the UK is safe. If will be safer still if we can get a change of Government at Holyrood in the spring.

HT 0 - 0 FT 2 - 0 ICT Warren Hearts Delgardo Lloria Time 67

HT 0 - 1 FT 0 - 3 ICT Tansey Opp Griffiths Time 36 mins

Whilst it is frustrating to lose a goal at the death again, we shouldn't loose sight of the fact that the real problem this season is our failure to score. 16 goals in 15 games is not top 6 form. There is no doubt that there is some truth in what Bughtmaster says but for me, I think the greatest loss to the team through injury has been Aaron Doran. In the previous 2 seasons he has been involved in so much of our best creative football and he gives a sense of urgency to our attack. Does anyone know how close to a return he is?

If you define "success" or "best" as a percentage of games won, then Patterson, Robertson and Butcher are all ahead of Hughes.

In the same way that the All Blacks do the Hakka before a game could the Scottish team maybe do a Gay Gordons? That, in conjunction with the kits should make sure that the opposition don't get too close.

You really shouldn't be surprised, Charles. Feudal system it may be, but it is Scotland's feudal system and that makes it OK. Remember how in the referendum the pro independence lobby were bleating about how the Scottish nation was being oppressed by a Westminster government and how Scotland could only progress as a nation if it could win back its "freedom". The "freedom" they yearn for was when, rather than feeling oppressed by all the rights and freedoms that a representative democracy provides, the average Scot was living in dire conditions and obliged to do the bidding of which ever unelected, coat of arms bearing, clan chief owned the land they existed upon.

Its all gone very quiet again. This needs sorted out so that players can consider what they want to do in the knowledge of whether or not Yogi will be the manager next year.

Looks pretty certain we won't be seeing Ryan in an ICT shirt again. The Times is quoting Delia saying "We've taken him in now." Referring to his injury he says "He'll be out for about six to eight weeks, so he'll start training with us and working with the medical department now." He goes on to say "I think he will have played his last game for Inverness". If he has played his last game for us, it would be fitting if he was given the opportunity of coming on to the pitch before the game next week. It would be a goodbye from us and an introduction to the travelling Celtic support. Not only that, but it was his superb and very brave performance against Celtic at Hampden last year that was such a key contribution to us winning the Scottish Cup. Goodbye, thank you and good luck, Ryan.

Typical SNP response. A one liner making a statement with absolutely no attempt to provide any justification for it. This in response to a post which backed up the con trick allegation with a very specific example of a previous one liner being shown to be complete nonsense.

HT 0-1 FT 1-2 ICT Tansey Opp Doolan Time 32

Actually Alex, the strategy doesn't surprise me at all as I'm reasonably familiar with it. The strategy is basically to have 100% equivalent generating capacity in Scotland down to renewables by 2020. This sounds fine, but works only as long as the current single UK market works. In the event of an independent Scotland there is an assumption that this single market would still operate, but in the event that it didn't, Scotland would be vulnerable when the wind doesn't blow. The lion's share of the renewable generating capacity is wind power and the 2020 target assumes that 12.5 of a total of 14.7GW renewables capacity will be wind turbines. The total capacity from Hydro is projected to be only 1.6GW by 2020 and therefore could only replace a fraction of the wind capacity. Bear in mind also that pumped storage systems can only deliver at their capacity for a few hours before there's no water left. It is debatable whether the renewables target will be met, but even if it is, Scotland will continue to be dependent on English baseload generation when the wind is not blowing. It really is a case of "better together" as far as security of electricity supplies is concerned.

The drastic thing that has happened is that Longannet is to close early next year. That will remove a massive amount of Scotland's generating capacity and with the SNP strongly against replacing the aging nuclear stations, it is clear that Scotland will face a real problem in a few years time. It is great that the government have a positive approach to renewables but renewables are highly dependent on the weather and cannot give the guaranteed base load that nuclear and fossil fuels can. We therefore urgently need a more coordinated energy strategy. Scotland is currently a net exporter of electricity as a result of the investments by previous UK governments. The SNP's lack of a realistic energy strategy will mean we will soon be a net importer of electricity. For such an energy rich country, that really is quite shameful.

The fact that some other countries have also banned GM crops does not justify the introduction of a policy which is illiberal, reactionary and not evidence based. Nor does it justify the autocratic way in which the decision was made.

Whilst attention is focused on the SNP rabble at Westminster, the SNP government at Holyrood slip through almost unnoticed, policy which demonstrates what an illiberal, reactionary and just plain incompetent administration they are. For instance, back in August they introduced a blanket ban on GM crops against all the available evidence. Willie Rennie drew attention to this in a speech this week and it is illuminating to read what he had to say. I quote. "It is patently obvious that we should adopt an evidence-based policy on genetic engineering and biotechnologies. However, in August the Scottish Government took advantage of a new EU opt-out and introduced a blanket ban on GM crops. The Environment Secretary justified it as protecting Scotland’s “clean and green brand”. But it isn’t clear on what evidence, if any, this decision was made. The Parliament didn’t take evidence on a ban or sign up to it. It is illiberal to ban something on the basis of perception, rather than evidence. What kind of message does this send to the scientific community here in Scotland and beyond? How does this help the likes of the James Hutton and Rowett institutes – world leaders in this sector? It suggests Scotland is closed for business. The ban has been criticised by Edinburgh, Robert Gordon and Dundee universities and organisations from the Royal Society of Edinburgh to NFU Scotland. The head of the Scottish Science Advisory Council, which wasn’t consulted either, said there are “no examples of adverse consequences” and that GM crops are kinder to the environment as they reduce the need for pesticides. The last Chief Scientific Advisor for Scotland, Professor Muffy Calder, said it could have “apocalyptic” consequences, leaving key cash crops such as potatoes, soft fruits and barley – essential for our whisky – more susceptible to disease. She said the ban was based on “fear of the unknown” and some “unscrupulous articles in the very early days about potential health risks”. A damning indictment. Her predecessor, Professor Anne Glover, also said it was “not possible to equate ‘clean and green’ with anti-GM” and described Scotland’s failure to use the best available EU-approved technology as “a missed opportunity”. Far from protecting Scotland’s reputation the Scottish Government is undermining it. Just like those who questioned Isaac Newton and Charles Darwin, ministers are indulging in an anti-science philosophy. You would expect ministers to at least have consulted their current Chief Scientific Advisor. The only problem is, they haven’t had one for the last 11 months. The post has lain vacant since December 2014. That says it all." As Rennie says, "That says it all". Policy founded on discredited but popular prejudice rather than best evidence is no way to run a country.

I take it from this that you now accept:- a) that the projection for oil and gas revenues which the SNP used to bribe people in the referendum was spectacularly wrong and b) that your previous statement that "Grand Theft Auto generated more income for Scotland in the last few years than oil has done at its highest price" was also spectacularly wrong.

Agreed. It doesn't quite compare with Spain's Casillas who, by keeping a clean sheet against England, has now kept a clean sheet in 100 internationals. Quite an astonishing record! Incidentally, I think it was awfully decent of the English lads to refrain from scoring in order that Casillas could reach that milestone.

The article Alex cited certainly doesn't remotely support his statement and I too would be interested to see if there is anything else forthcoming. I think a retraction rather than a citation would be more in order. Perhaps the statement came from the SNP's fantasy economics briefing document which was used in the 2015 edition of the game "Grand Theft Election"? It is certainly the kind of thing that works well with the SNP's social media one liner strategy. Scottish Government figures state that "in 2011/12 oil and gas production in Scottish waters is estimated to have generated £10.6 billion in tax revenue". A recent Telegraph article states that the entire UK games development sector contributes approximately £1 billion to the UK GDP per year - and bear in mind that in the UK tax income is approximately 40% of GDP. There is no doubting that the games industry in Scotland is very successful, but tax revenues from it are chicken feed compared to historical revenues from oil and gas production.

Aberdeen's rapid and dramatic loss of form means that the title is a good as won for Celtic. Celtic's focus will be to use the rest of the domestic season to experiment a bit with a view to finding a mix and style of play which will be more suited to Europe. Their failures in Europe this season will have been costly and they will be looking to improve on that next year. There seems little point in them buying Christie if he is not going to be part of the forward plans. Personally I would be surprised if he plays for us again this season unless he is fit before the end of December.

It's hardly a surprise that I would not follow the Tory line! They might be getting more right than the SNP at the moment, but that is not difficult and it doesn't mean that I'll vote for them. With regard to prosperity, you may recall that in the referendum the "Yes" vote was massively boosted by a campaign which targeted the poorest in our society and told them the only way they had any hope of escaping their miserable existence was to vote "Yes". They were told that in an independent Scotland a caring SNP Government would give them more money to give them a better life. I fully accept that Scotland has a diverse economy, but the leadership of the SNP clearly did not think it to be diverse enough or strong enough to pay for the bribes it offered the electorate. Instead, the SNP leadership told the electorate that their economic program would primarily be funded by oil revenues and borrowing. The level of oil revenues was predicted based on a price and a volume of production which were utterly fanciful whilst the level of borrowing suggested was such as to risk us going into spiraling debt (if anyone was ever foolish enough to lend on that scale). If Scotland's wider economy was strong enough for an independent Scotland to be more prosperous outside of the Union than within it, then the SNP would not have had to resort to such desperate measures in order to fund it's promises. I am also far from convinced that the Tory Government does want to cling on to Scotland. Of course they have to say they want Scotland to stay, but Cameron appears hell bent on making policy in a way which seems designed to alienate the Scottish electorate as much as possible. He seems determined to give the whingers plenty to whinge about. The way many Tories see it is that rUK would be economically better off without Scotland and would also be more likely to regularly return a Tory government. Cameron also completely played into the SNP's hands with the way he allowed the independence movement to determine the terms of the referendum and in the completely inept way the Tories then campaigned for Scotland to stay in the union. Just as it suits Sturgeon to have a Tory government at Westminster, so it would suit Cameron if Scotland became independent. It is just that both know that to admit it would be political suicide - and so the political silly games continue.

One of the things that really irritates me about the SNP is the way it constantly rubbishes the United Kingdom in order to convince the voter that Scotland would be better off going it's own way. It is therefore rather telling that on Armistice Day, when we pause to reflect on the sacrifices men and women have made to defend our freedoms, more economic news was released demonstrating how well the UK is doing in recovering from the global recession. Unemployment in the UK has now fallen to a 7 year low despite further massive immigration of people from other EU states seeking work. Whilst the SNP continues to peddle their negative message of gloom and doom, people from the rest of Europe want to be part of the UK and flock here to seize the opportunities available in this great country of ours. It is high time people stopped listening to the incessant whingeing and woke up to the fact being part of the UK is a pretty good thing to be.

Interesting article in The Times by Magnus Linklater regarding The Scotland Bill. He writes, "Full realisation of what all this entails came as an embarrassment to the SNP government last week, when it tried to argue that the bill would not let it reverse George Osborne's tax credit cuts, only to be forced to accept that it would. "It was a revealing moment. It suggested that ministers prefer sheltering behind excuses instead of determining how these fiscal powers can be used to best advantage. "The time has come, surely, for the SNP government to stop the buck-passing and start using its new powers. What, then, is holding it back? Could it be that taking on more powers means shouldering more of the blame when things go wrong? That taxes might have to rise and benefits cut? That UK ministers are not the only ones blamed for austerity? Maybe the view beyond the union umbrella is not as enticing as it once seemed." Linklater may only just have twigged what the SNP's game is but some of us twigged it a long time ago. In the coming months I am confident that many others will realise that the SNP are all about blaming others for their own shortcomings.

It is of note that extended Sunday opening in Scotland appears not to have created the problem feared in England, nor have the large retailers made Sunday the same as other days for the current Sunday opening hours South of the Border. Presumably if this is what they are now considering is appropriate across the country then regardless of what happens South of the Border, they will move to this in Scotland in order to balance the books. The real reason USDAW are involved is simply that the workers don't want the more unsocial hours regardless of whether they get paid more for them or not. Of course, if prolonged Sunday opening impacts so much on workers rights that the SNP feel it their moral duty to defend workers across the UK, then we can expect the SNP Government to bring in reduced opening hours in Scotland to bring Scotland into parity with the rest of the UK. The SNP have had nearly 8 years to defend workers rights and to limit the amount of Sunday working but have chosen not to do it. It is interesting you should quote the labour minister saying “We welcome that, after months of indecision and delay, the SNP have finally come to a firm position on this issue. This just goes to show that the best way to defend workers' rights and conditions is to maintain unity and work together across the UK." Clearly the SNP would not be in a position to get involved in this issue if Scotland was an independent country. It is good to see you have come round to the position that the best way of defending Scottish workers' rights is work together as part of a united state

No doubt we will have a Holyrood election thread in due course when the record of the SNP Government can be debated, but for the meantime - back on topic! The latest antics from Angus and his rabble is to oppose a bill on extending the Sunday trading hours in England (and Wales I think?) to make them more broadly in line with the hours we enjoy in Scotland. Their excuse for this unwarranted interference in an issue which is a devolved matter in Scotland is that if retailers extend hours in England they will put wages down in Scotland! Now regardless of whether there is any truth in that (and it seems hard to see any logic in it) their petty interfering only serves to illustrate an argument against independence. If they genuinely believe that decisions of trading hours in England will impact on pay rates in Scotland then they should reflect on the fact that the Scottish electorate will have absolutely no input into influencing these decisions should Scotland become independent. If trading hours in England are so closely related to pay rates in Scotland then clearly the way forward must be to retain the Union and hand back to Westminster the powers around trading hours so that these issues can applied consistently UK wide. The SNP is always bleating on about Scotland not being treated like an equal partner, so seeking to look at trading hours UK wide would be an opportunity for them, in turn, to treat the rest of the UK as equal partners. It won't happen of course. Instead, the SNP will continue to abuse it's privileged position in Westminster by interfering with things that are none of their business whilst at the same time fanning the flames of independence by finding something else to fuel a spurious sense of grievance in Scotland.

If Brora are going to win the title again this year, they just might want to improve on their penalty taking. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/34765355