The Vow - Anything Goes - Other topics not covered elsewhere - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Recommended Posts

see excerpt below from Wings re the vow - assuming its real :

Real) email correspondence forwarded by an alert reader:

From: HARTY, Sam
Sent: 21 October 2014 16:58
To: MILIBAND, Ed
Subject: Official Copy of Vow

Dear Ed

Mr Clarke has a constituent who would like a formal copy of the Vow that was made prior to the Scottish Referendum.

Is it possible for your office to provide Tom with a copy for his constituent?

Thanking you in anticipation of your co-operation.

Regards

Sam

On behalf of

TOM CLARKE MP

And here’s the response:

From:
WILLIAMS, Angie

Sent:
28 October 2014 11:19

To:
HARTY, Sam

Subject:
RE: Official Copy of Vow

Hi Sam,

There is no official document, it was something that the Daily Record mocked up. My best suggestion would be to send them the attached. We won’t be producing anything more official.

nicknick.jpg

Hope this helps.

Angie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, duh

Of course the Record made it up. There was no actual shared vow. And what does that vow actually say? Not a great deal.

Morons bought it though. The Daily Record are responsible for fooling Scots into voting No on the premise that they might get more powers. The Labour Party are also responsible though for going along with it. Didn't hear them say anything about "oh thats just something a newspaper mocked up" at the time? the BBC reported it as gospel, obviously

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did anykunt actually believe this shit was worth anything?

If so they are a fecking mongo.

Edit to change m0r0n to mongo as the Mods think "m0r0n" is more offensive, clearly.

Edited by Parklife
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did anykunt actually believe this shit was worth anything?

If so they are a fecking mongo.

Edit to change m0r0n to mongo as the Mods think "m0r0n" is more offensive, clearly.

Nope, but exposing and publicising the bull$hit helps undermine the press and the parties for the scumbags that they are. It's not a question of people being mongos/mor0ns/m0r0ns - it's about eating away and whatever misplaced trust some people still have for the establishment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did anykunt actually believe this shit was worth anything?

If so they are a fecking mongo.

Edit to change m0r0n to mongo as the Mods think "m0r0n" is more offensive, clearly.

No parklife but I think to actually have written confirmation from one of the parties involved that it was bollox, raises potential questions about electoral fraud. not that we thought they would ever keep the vow but the fact it was peddled as a real document by many to decieve many which was obvioulsy completely false.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. The top right paragraph on the page implies that the leaders have signed it. Even if this is just authorising an electronic scan, rather than actual unique ink signature on paper (though in a 300 year crisis, you might think a real vow would merit it). There can be no doubt they must be assumed to be 'signatories' to the front page text.

2. The top right paragraph also says the test is 'in their own words'. This could still leave room that someone else drafted them before they added their signatures. But in combination it implies the document is as if written and signed by them - as if on scotland-watermarked parchment - and then scanned and printed.

3. The main text refers to extended powers but nowhere does it say what those powers are. If it means the three parties' separate devo proposals, then these clearly were not and are not agreed. If it refers to Brown's pronouncements, this could mean anything up to 'home rule... short of federalism'.

4. The main text implies the existence of (a) an agreed process, (b ) an agreed timetable. Presumably, the process and timescale can be tracked down to Brown's pronouncements endorsed by Cameron.

5. It also refers to 'principles and values'. This might might just be referring to the statements on the page itself, like sharing equitably etc. Or maybe on the earlier sentence, which sounds like a circular argument. It's not clear what they mean by honouring those 'before and after the referendum'. Could it mean a different kind of honouring, before and after? Or does it just mean they just believe in staying together for the sake of it, before and after?

6. The statement about the continuing Barnett formula and the NHS budget need more clarification. If Cameron, Miliband and Clegg signed this, it surely must mean something specific here. Even if a Record journalist drafted the text, they must have authorised it. This either means something significant, or is logically flawed, or misleading, or something else. If it is logically correct and means something, then Miliband or any of the three parties must be able to spell out what it means. If it just means that ultimately Holyrood can spend money it holds from whatever source, on any devolved power then that is not saying much. They need to confirm if that is the case. Or else, if it means proper protection of both Barnett and NHS in some way, then they must be able to tell us their agreed line on it, otherwise the Vow will be shown to be an empty promise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It says in the top right they signed a historic agreement... so did they or did they not?

Did the three of them instead perhaps all allow (through their joint silence) the Daily Retch to print utter lies with their signatures all printed at the bottom just days before the referendum in order to cheat the vote to No?

What do you ing think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The

It says in the top right they signed a historic agreement... so did they or did they not?

Did the three of them instead perhaps all allow (through their joint silence) the Daily Retch to print utter lies with their signatures all printed at the bottom just days before the referendum in order to cheat the vote to No?

What do you ing think?

The "email" by "Angie" (if true) implies the format was mocked up by the Record, but implies the message was genuine, because she's implying the front page is all there is of the Vow to be used to send to the constituent.

It implies Miliband must stand by the process and timetable (presumably Brown's) and that the Scottish Parliament is permanent, and Barnett formula will continue, and the NHS will be protected.... etc.

So, whatever 'extended powers' are agreed, it must include an order to make the Scottish Parliament permanent? That might need a little Westminster legislation...? Maybe that is the historic agreement?

Blair: power devolved is power retained

Dewar: There shall be a Scottish Parliament

The Vow: The Scottish Parliament is permanent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The Guardian catches up...

'The Vow' and the Daily Record - creative journalism or political spin?

http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2014/oct/31/daily-record-scottish-independence

It is the most outrageous interference in a democratic referendum imaginable other than outright vote rigging.

The Daily Rogue and Gordon Brown especially are beneath contempt. Modern day rogues.

I wonder who drafted the vow, who came up with the idea of vow-bombing the referendum... 7 days before the vote. To cheat it. We do not even know but I suspect someone in Labour knowing they could get the DR to splash on the front page at exactly the time needed. They are all truly disgusting. I really hope the Record goes under but the damage is done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My memory of events were the first poll giving a lead for Yes came out, people could sense the momentum and the leaders of the three main parties were visibly shitting themselves, including the Queen.

But hey ho you talk yourself into thinking it made no difference and you would have lost no matter if it makes your wallowing more enjoyable. Mibbes aye mibbes naw, we will never know one way or the other because what was done is done.

Amazed at how passive and accepting of all of this some folk are. Are we so used to getting walked over we do not notice it any more. So little outrage...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...


×
×
  • Create New...