The less-deserving pro-independence website

Wings Over Scotland


Kezia Dugdale Fact Check, Part 677

Posted on December 01, 2016 by

Here’s Kezia Dugdale at FMQs today.

Just for fun, let’s do the sums again, shall we?

As the FM pointed out, when Labour were last in power 85% of patients were treated within 18 weeks. The figures since the SNP took power are 96% within 12 weeks. But since Kezia Dugdale is apparently unable to calculate that that’s a very significant improvement, let’s concentrate on her arithmetically simpler claim that it would take her “centuries” to relate all of the other 4%’s unfortunate tales.

Now, it doesn’t actually take terribly long to say “Agnes needed a new hip, but had to wait 14 weeks for treatment rather than 12” – a few seconds tells the whole story, to all intents and purposes. But let’s imagine that Dugdale wanted to spend two minutes giving a bit of heartstring-tugging background on each case, which is still quite a long time to talk about one person’s hospital circumstances for.

There were 53,000 patients (out of a total of 1.32 million) who weren’t seen inside 12 weeks. Two minutes on each is 106,000 minutes, or 1,767 hours. If Dugdale spent just eight hours a day going through them one by one, that’d take 221 days (or 0.61 of a year), rather than “centuries”.

For it to stretch out to, say, three centuries, she’d have to present the details of each individual case to the Holyrood chamber for 16.4 hours.

To put that into some sort of perspective, it would mean that she’d have to drone on about poor Agnes’ wonky joints all the way through Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice and Captain America: Civil War and Doctor Strange and Deadpool and X-Men Apocalypse and Suicide Squad and Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them, and she’d still have to pad for another 15 minutes after that.

civilwar1

In fairness, with the exception of Deadpool, listening to The Saga Of Agnes’ Hip would be more fun than watching those movies. But it would only feel like centuries. And as we can see from the clip above, that’s something Kezia Dugdale can already achieve in under 40 seconds.

.

Some previous Kezia Dugdale Fact Checks: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]

Print Friendly

1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. 01 12 16 13:57

    Kezia Dugdale Fact Check, Part 677 | speymouth

382 to “Kezia Dugdale Fact Check, Part 677”

  1. louis.b.argyll says:

    It’s too much, I can’t listen to the wishy washy LPIS any more..and it’s not even panto season yet.

  2. louis.b.argyll says:

    Rev, how about a Kezdug advent calendar..
    ..a lie a day..keeps the nationalists at bay.

  3. Richard McIntosh says:

    Dearie dearie me!

  4. Proud Cybernat says:

    Oh Button it, Kez…

    http://imgur.com/Ofe5vmA

    (Laughter’s the best medicine, allegedly)

  5. louis.b.argyll says:

    Remember this – Scots and Unionists alike…

    The Labour Party in Scotland USED TO SEND HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS / BILLIONS BACK TO WESTMINSTER – BECAUSE THEY COULDN’T FIND ANYTHING WORTHWHILE TO SPEND IT ON.

    Do we want to return to a puppet government?

  6. Proud Cybernat says:

    Right Kez, starter for ten…

    http://imgur.com/jQyUbez

  7. Dr Jim says:

    It’s all the wee soul’s got, Aah
    I see Alex Rowley’s a man on the edge now, a thing to behold
    Did anyone notice the kind way in which the FM replied to Alex,her eyes were saying “C’mon Alex you know you want to”
    He’s hovering!

  8. Bob Mack says:

    You have forgotten the common denominator for Kezia ramblings and calculations—–she’s an idiot.

  9. dakk says:

    Lying for a living.

    Can you imagine what that would do to a body after a time ?

    Another day in the life of a professional Yoon.

  10. Scott says:

    For everyone that Kez says there are many,many more who are seen within the time and I for one have been seen before the 12 weeks also I can phone the surgery in the morning get a phone call back from Doctor and if he thinks he should see me no problem.

    A question for you all I noted today and other times that the Tank is not wearing her engagement ring as she was all over the press showing the ring at the time has there been a split.

  11. Proud Cybernat says:

    “I see Alex Rowley’s a man on the edge now, a thing to behold
    Did anyone notice the kind way in which the FM replied to Alex,her eyes were saying “C’mon Alex you know you want to”
    He’s hovering!”

    Can you just imagine it, Jim? If Rowley stepped across the floor to the SNP then we would haveL

    SNP = 64
    Unionists + Greens = 64

    Casting vote always goes to the party of government.

    Go on Alex – you know it makes sense.

  12. Doug Daniel says:

    The only conclusion to be drawn from Kezia’s line of attack is that anything less than 100% is unacceptable – and that’s clearly a ridiculous proposition.

    There will always be people who don’t get seen within the target waiting time. It’s unfortunate, but it’s just how it is.

  13. The journeyman says:

    To be fair I think she meant by bringing one case per week of FMQs.

  14. Albert Herring says:

    Kezia is absolutely correct!

    If she brought up one single case at each and every FMQ’s, it would take her 1,432 years and 16 weeks.

  15. Bob Mack says:

    I should not be laughing about poor Agnes but I cannot help but look at the nodding Labour dogs behind Kezia all feigning concern for the poor soul. Jabba looks as if she is thinking of a gammon leg and whether poor Agnes is edible.

    Meanwhile the rest of Labour would not look out of place on a car rear parcel shelf advertising Churchill insurance.

    Maybe they will get up a collection between them to send poor Agnes to a private hospital to get her hip replaced but I doubt their concern about her goes that far. Same surgeons in any case

  16. Auld Cynic says:

    I was one of those who waited longer than 12 weeks, and yes, it was “wonky knees”. My operation was cancelled the evening before it was scheduled. The lady calling apologised and gave me a new appointment four days later. The operation went ahead as rescheduled. This made it 12 weeks and 2 days. Was I a dis-satisfied customer ? Not in the least. I’m prepared to bet a reasonable proportion of the 4% are like me.

  17. Arbroath1320 says:

    WOW!

    Alex Rowley is hovering on the edge … REALLY?

    As others have said what a coup that would be if he crossed the floor to join the S.N.P. I don’t just mean a coup in the literal sense of a Labour M.S.P. crossing over to the S.N.P. but much more significantly the DEPUTY LEADER of Labour branch office stepping over.

    How would wee Kez cope?

    No doubt she’d roll up on the following Thursday to ask questions about kidnapping or some other obtuse topic. 😀

  18. HandandShrimp says:

    The SLab team abacus broken again?

    They really need to get that thing looked at.

  19. ronnie anderson says:

    @ Bob Mack Jist you gonna no state the obvious some of us like ah conundrum , an yer dain us oot o funding selling carberandum stanes tae Blis members when they fund oot lol.

  20. Artyhetty says:

    ‘Centuries’ eh. The unionists have attempted to keep Scotland in the 19/20th century. The SNP are trying to take us into the 21st century, against massive odds, ie tory and red tory policy, perpetuated by Dugdale’s party.

    Where’s that £1.3 billion that Labour, when in power at Holyrood, saw fit to send back to their masters in england back in 2006/7? Nothing to spend it on they said, utter disgrace.

    It will not take ‘centuries’ to repair the unionist damage with N.Sturgeon and her party in charge, but it will take some time.

    What has Dugdale’s party ever really done for Scotland, not much in reality, and all they can muster is SNP bad, instead of shouting down th tories’ disgusting attacks on our poorest and most vulnerable. Nothing but contempt for Slab.

  21. galamcennalath says:

    85% of patients were treated within 18 weeks versus 96% within 12 weeks, seems like a massive improvement to me!

    The only comparable figures for England I could find were …

    “85.6 per cent of people with admitted pathways (adjusted) were treated within 18 weeks of referral in September 2015, compared to 88.3 per cent a year earlier. That was the last month for which this target was applied.

    90.3 per cent of people with non-admitted pathways were treated or discharged within 18 weeks of referral in September 2016, compared to 93.7 per cent a year earlier.”

    [ http://www.nhsconfed.org/resources/key-statistics-on-the-nhs ]

    … note the target is 18 weeks !

    There’s always room for improvement, but thank Heavens we live in Scotland and have an SNP government.

    Unionists, No voters, politicians like Kezia really need to reflect on this. Do they really want Scotland to be like England, or are we better in our own path?

  22. ronnie anderson says:

    @ Hand andShrimp Aye somebody needs tae keep they’re beady ein on that.

  23. Ian Brotherhood says:

    ‘On yonder bench there sits a coup
    He’s no there noo
    He must’ve shiftit.’

  24. Iona says:

    Come on Stuart you are better than this. Point made in first paragraph, SNP figures are way better than Labour but tell that to someone waiting for an opp. It really does feel like centuries.

  25. RichTea says:

    Kezia Dugdale stars in “The Big Fact Hunt”.

  26. @Proud Cybernat

    `SNP = 64
    Unionists + Greens = 64

    Casting vote always goes to the party of government`.

    I think in the event of a tie, the Presiding Officer will have the casting vote.

  27. velofello says:

    Now that Kez has raised her concerns over the 53,000 persons waiting for treatment beyond the targeted waiting time, and having raised their plight I think she owes to all of them to study and collate each of the 53k circumstances. By her estimate she will never finish the task, centuries of work. That’s OK, better that than idle hands.

  28. Proud Cybernat says:

    “I think in the event of a tie, the Presiding Officer will have the casting vote.”

    Which must be given to the government.

  29. Adrian B says:

    kezia admitting that for her running the Scottish Health service is beyond her ability….

  30. Lenny Hartley says:

    Louis.b.argyll re labour sending money back, I think its more deceitful than that, they would be in cahoots so that Brron could announce record spending for Scotland and get all the positive propaganda from their lackeys in the men and wee Jack would slip it back announced.

  31. galamcennalath says:

    Alex Rowley is hovering on the edge

    I think he is unhappy with Labour Scottish Branch’s approach to the developing constitutional crisis which has been simmering away, but brought to a head with Brexit.

    Rowley has stated he’s not a Unionist and would like a federal UK. He must realise that isn’t a viable position, soon the choice is very likely to be hard Brexit UK, or Indy.

    While I don’t see him crossing the floor, I sense the first shoots of a pragmatic Labour grouping willing to accept that anything and everything has to be on the table.

    The Tories are arch Yoons beyond redemption. I have always held out hope that some Lab and LibDems might be willing to put their constituents and Scotland before the Union. When any possible ‘middle ground’ has been laid waste and there are only two choices left, I hope some will do the decent thing. I would be a game changer.

  32. Proud Cybernat says:

    Hmm – perhaps not as simple as I thought, Scot:

    “62. The convener has a personal vote as a committee member and also a casting vote in the event of a tie. It is entirely a matter for the discretion of the convener how to use the casting vote. There are no agreed conventions on this point. It is however recognised as good practice for a convener to explain the basis on which he or she was using the casting vote immediately before doing so.”

    Now where did I read the casting vote was always given to the Government?

  33. sassenach says:

    Scott Finalayson:- “I think in the event of a tie, the Presiding Officer will have the casting vote.”

    But I think convention dictates he must, in the event of a tied vote, vote with the Government.

  34. manandboy says:

    This is just a much rehearsed performance from a politician who behaves like a wee lassie in her early teens having a rant.
    She does appear to be unhappy, as others have also hinted at, but if true, she is unable to rise above that to do her job in a professional manner. Except no one could ever describe Kez as a professional.

  35. Murray McCallum says:

    I can sense a Scottish Labour election pledge in the making:

    “Scottish Labour pledge we will fund 1,000 NHS operating hours over and above the SNP pledge.”

    Labour built the foundations (the internal market) of undermining the NHS. The branch office in Scotland seem hell-bent on continuing this destruction by chipping away at the current improved performance, despite UKGov cuts, in Scotland.

  36. Proud Cybernat says:

    “But I think convention dictates he must, in the event of a tied vote, vote with the Government.”

    That was my understanding, Sassenach. But I found this:

    “…the convention is that the speaker [Presiding Officer] casts the tie-breaking vote in favour of the status quo.” – Wiki

    So, would the Presiding Officer then vote against any tied IndyRef#2 Bill as the status quo is the yoonyin?

  37. Stoker says:

    All together now….

    Here we go Dippy dooooo, here we go Dippy dyeeeeeee.
    Here we go Dippy dooooo, all Dippy can do is lie.

    Who’s the bulldug sittin’ right ah-hint her?
    The wan chewin’ a wasp?
    (puts ma tongue very firmly in ma cheek 😉 )

  38. louis.b.argyll says:

    C’mon Scottish voters and members and leaders of Labour..

    ..after independence you’ll (likely) be in a permanent 3 way coalition, sometimes leading, sometimes propping up, but you’ll definitely have a presence in policy and politics.

    Imagine the joy of completely removing Conservative influence on the public systems of this country.

    C’MON..C’MON C’MON C’MON C’MON..
    After thinking carefully of course.

  39. Robert Peffers says:

    @The journeyman says: 1 December, 2016 at 1:27 pm:

    ” … I think she meant by bringing one case per week of FMQs”.

    Well! Journeyman, So you claim that you think you know what Kez meant to say. and that’s much more than Kez can say for Kez doesn’t know what she thinks she meant to say.

  40. Sharny Dubs says:

    Fundemundally….
    Look out behind you!! no! no! not that side, the other side….
    Panto season indeed

  41. Macart says:

    I suspect that Labour abacus has more beads than your average one and then they give it to a slightly numerate chimp to work out the weekly sound bite.

  42. geeo says:

    What the P.O. does is irrelevent to an indyref vote.

    The Greens will vote WITH the SNP. Job done.

  43. carjamtic says:

    Is it a Secrect Santa thing ?

    (The Gift that Keeps on Giving)

    My John Lewis – Paul Hollywood Pie Funnel at £6….doesn’t seem as good now.

    ;-j

  44. geeo says:

    “Well! Journeyman, So you claim that you think you know what Kez meant to say. and that’s much more than Kez can say for Kez doesn’t know what she thinks she meant to say”.
    …….
    Actually, what kez meant to say was that she thinks what she meant to say was not to be confused with what others meant to say what she thought she meant to say….

  45. @Proud Cybernat

    Indy2,the Greens would support the SNP,

    SNP 63 Greens 6 = 69

    yoons = 59.

  46. Wullie says:

    2006/7. £1.3 to £1.5 billion sent back to their buddies in London, I’m sure they found plenty to spent it on the engerland. Wonder how many of our elderly people in Scotland starved or died of the cold. Labour don’t give a damn for any one

  47. It’s wishful thinking to believe that Alex Rowley would leave Labour to join the SNP.

  48. Proud Cybernat says:

    “Indy2,the Greens would support the SNP”

    Well, most probably. What I was looking at though was what it would need to get the IndyRef#2 Bill through Holyrood without the Greens support. They like to make great play and show of the fact that they are not the SNP’s glove puppets. Fair enough. I’d be likewise.

    But what would they demand from the SNP Government in order for the SNP to obtain their support for IndyRef#2 bill? I just do not trust the Greens. Ever.

    If it could be done without Green support, all the better as far as I am concerned. Maybe a by-election or two going the SNP’s way might be needed.

  49. gus1940 says:

    On BBC Question time when there is an SNP representative on the panel and that person brings up the subject of Scottish Politics they are immediately slapped down by Dimblebum and told that it is a program on UK Politics.

    This occurs even when the program is from Scotland.

    Can the BBC therefore explain what the justification is for a Member Of The Scottish Parliament in the form of our beloved Ruthsfuhrer being on the panel for tonight’s program which I understand is from Wakefield which was in England the last time I looked.

    I cannot recall any other occasion when a member of The Scottish Parliament appeared on the panel when the program was from England.

  50. CameronB Brodie says:

    What do you expect from a tool of colonial oppression?

    Kezia Dugdale
    Why do you continue to support ideology that denies my innate humanity? Not particularly progressive of you and actually conduct that is considered a crime by the civilised world.

    Put the master’s tools down.

    “The right to development is an inalienable human right by virtue of which every human person and all peoples are entitled to participate in, contribute to, and enjoy economic, social, cultural and political development, in which all human rights and fundamental freedoms can be fully realized.” (Article 1.1, Declaration on the Right to Development)

    “The human right to development also implies the full realization of the right of peoples to self-determination, which includes, subject to the relevant provisions of both International Covenants on Human Rights, the exercise of their inalienable right to full sovereignty over all their natural wealth and resources.” (Article 1.2)

    http://www.un.org/en/events/righttodevelopment/pdf/rtd_at_a_glance.pdf

  51. Robert Kerr says:

    @gus1940

    Bye-election soon near Wakefield?

  52. Les Wilson says:

    If Alex Rowley did turn I can hear the BBCs headlines.
    ” Evidence of mind control,Labour MSP in a trance state as he switches to the SNP”
    ” An unnamed expert says he is showing signs of mind control”

    Labour party insists on an investigation,saying “There is no other reason for this to happen, we need an answer”

    Kezie has not been seen since the announcement.

  53. Proud Cybernat says:

    Would love someone in the QT audience tonight to ask Rooth the Mooth:

    “Why should I, as an English tax payer, subsidise you and all other Scots?”

    Would love to see her squirm. And remember Rent-a-gob – try and not steal or break anything when you’re doon there slagging of your fellow Scots (as per).

  54. Andy-B says:

    Dugdale, and her floundering party,have no ideas of their own, and spend every waking minute deriding the SNP government, on behalf of their London masters – it’s a pathetic stance that is plain to see.

    O/T this is doing the rounds.

    https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/london-calling-50-000-dvds#/

  55. Proud Cybernat says:

    ”An unnamed expert says he is showing signs of mind control”

    Mind control, Les? You mean like this:

    http://imgur.com/DuDIRE3

  56. fletch49er says:

    Just watch all MPs blindly lap up that piece of non fact big style. They’re just drones, banging their desks in that smug ‘1 nil’ manner, without ever having the intelligence the were born with to realise the Northern Branch Manager has just scored another own goal

  57. Les Wilson says:

    Proud Cybernat says:
    Ha Ha, hope the BBC do not see it, otherwise….. expect it after every News.

  58. call me dave says:

    Rowley crossing the floor kinda thing… naw!

    Not in his DNA from what I know and he’s Brownie’s pal too.

    Anyhoo! I missed all the fun of FMQs but I caught the shortbread tv news while I was visiting someone. Nothing on FMQs just Hammond visiting the wasteland of the North.

    Catch up on all the cringe later. SNHS waiting time again!

    All I saw 2nd item in was the demise of the lollipop folk outside schools wie two lollipop woman on the same crossing and loads of traffic whizzing by.

    Glimpsed a Ford anglia /popular van in an old film clip. Jeez!

    Also Prince Harry celebrating Barbados’ independence from Great Britain. 🙂

    PS:
    David Davis says Britain could pay money to EU for single market access. Funny old Brexit init!

    https://archive.is/GF7gO

  59. iain says:

    Re Jack Mc Connel and the 1.3billion stolen from the Scottish people. I was in the Victoria infirmary for several weeks, there were pidgeons in the corridors

  60. orri says:

    No doubt the Mooth is on QT to be congratulated about how well her party is doing in the polls. By a weird coincidence polling took place almost simultaneous with the whole palaver over Scotrail.

  61. Conan the Librarian™ says:

    I genuinely think she’s a nice wee lassie who’s been put in an awful situation.

    Hi Jeff, can I go now?

  62. mogabee says:

    Iona

    As someone who waited longer than the 12 weeks for an op. date, it’s really not that bad being in a queue, especially having put off my op because I was a bit feart!

    Nevertheless, waiting 12 weeks and 3 days was unbearable! Admittedly I’d had a phone call a few days prior to ask which hospital I wished to go to. Oh, the angst!

    On the day I had my op. there were 55 operations carried out, efficiently with great staff.

    Not bad for a “terrible” Scottish NHS. 🙂

  63. yesindyref2 says:

    Rowley wouldn’t cross the floor, he’s Labour. The problem is that his party isn’t.

  64. Jimbo says:

    If anyone were to hear the Holyrood Unionist parties they’d think none of our public sector organisations in Scotland worked properly, when in fact they mostly outdo all the others in the UK.

    However, every time they attack these organisations, they’re not just using it as a stick to beat the Scottish government with, they’re also attacking the competence and dedication of the people in our education, police, fire, health services etc. – Then they wonder why their parties are heading for extinction.

    So every time you meet some-one employed in Scotland’s public sector, make sure to let them know that, even though we think they’re fantastic, under valued, dedicated people, Kezia/Ruth/Willie said they’re incompetents.

  65. call me dave says:

    Oh meant to mention Dr Tom on ‘Your Call’ shortbread radio on the lack of specialists and the waiting time for treatment above 12 weeks + more in certain cases, a woman was calling in before lunchtime. (I was in tuned in while in the car)

    “We need to have more specialists” says the Doc

    “That’ll be the SG Government” squeaks Kaye

    “No the Health Boards” says the Doc… “more money yes”

    “But Health is devolved” squeals Kaye

    “Aye but it’s the total amount of money you need to take into account” says the Doc “and that’s down to Westminster”

    “We’ll not go into that here” says Kaye…. 😛

    But…but Kaye you started it.

    Anyhoo! I marked the Doc up a notch.

  66. ronnie anderson says:

    @ Conan the Librarian Ah did’na ken they hud started underground Fracking in Whinchburgh I’d him the watter tested if ah wiz you . (smilies)

  67. Glamaig says:

    O/T
    From the BBC

    ‘New powers over income tax were formally devolved to the Scottish Parliament on Wednesday, with Scottish ministers able to makes changes to rates and bands from April of next year.
    And Mr Hammond said Scotland now had the “fiscal autonomy that it has long been asking for”, with the Scottish government able to raise more money if it wants to spend more.’

    So control over income tax rates and bands is ‘fiscal autonomy’? Utter bullshit.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-38163052

  68. Legerwood says:

    The figures for the patients waiting longer than 12 weeks need to be put into context. The number of people attending for outpatient appointments has actually risen over the last few years. Therefore demand is up therefore not entirely unexpected if it appears that the numbers waiting longer than 12 weeks is rising.

    O/T
    Several posters have raised the issue if Labour’s £1.5 billion return to the Treasury. I believe it is the case that the ‘SNP during its first term in office managed to get it back or at least put into a separate ‘advising’ for future use in Scotland.

  69. ronnie anderson says:

    4.31 Hiz Hiz Hiz no Him bloody eyes no engaging wie the tap piece ,see ah dont blame ma misstooks oan predictive text.

  70. ronnie anderson says:

    On yonder roadway there sits a pothole
    its filled in noo
    its cawed ah puddle
    Nth Lanarkshire Council makes ah muddle
    fae the pothole
    that became ah puddle.

    Put your inflated costings to sort the roadway To Chief Executive Civic Centre Motherwell

  71. CameronB Brodie says:

    Kezia Dugdale
    Re. the denial of inalienable human rights. Perhaps your not a fan of Hegel but how would you suggest we go about creating “systematic solutions” and what would be your “historical prognosis or prophecy” re. Scotland’s post-modern condition? The forces of rationality would suggest independence, no?

    Certainly one of the most famous chapters of the Phenomenology of Spirit is the one on “lordship and bondage” or master and slave (“Knechtschaft” in German is not necessarily slavery, but Hegel’s bondsman has no rights and no contract with his master). Marxists (not Marx himself) understood the reversal of the master-slave relation as one of the central messages of the book. In contrast, recent Hegel-scholars have argued that the chapter is not about social practices or historical processes at all. Some claim that the social phenomena are only illustrations of the logical categories developing “behind the scene”. For others the relation between master and slave is meant to signify a relation within self-consciousness itself, namely between pure reason and the “inferior” faculties. Indeed, the young Hegel criticized Kant’s moral philosophy as demanding an internal servitude of the sensual and emotional faculties under the “tyranny” of pure practical reason….

    The abolition of slavery is accomplished as a result of the progress of reason and the consciousness of freedom. Hegel does not understand relations between capital and labour as lordship and bondage. However, he realizes the emergence of class struggles within market societies. Although necessary for the execution of individual life plans, market economies are bound to run into crises which might dissolve the loyalty of the poor to state and law. Hegel’s Philosophy of Right discusses these possibilities but offers no systematic solutions and refrains from any particular historical prognosis or prophecy. This to some extent contrasts with his view that the rational institutions of the modern state are in principle irrevocable and that the rational tendencies of history will in the end prevail.

    http://www.cambridgeblog.org/2014/05/hegel-on-the-master-slave-relation/

  72. Bob Mack says:

    Might interest you to know I have just read the Crown submission to the Supreme Court, and very interesting it is too.

    To cut to the chase, the Attorney General states thar Constitutional consequences should be avoided by the Court, and they should base their judgement entirely on law.

    However he also states that there is no basic difference between English Scottish and Irish law and backs this up with a case from the 1960’s, in which a judge ruled that English and Scottish Law and get this Burmese law were the same in basis.

    That my friends is the get out. Unless the Lord Advocate insists that this is untrue then they may well win their case.

  73. Effijy says:

    Not only are the SNP government treating more people more
    Quickly than the last Labour government but
    That are doing it during a decade of Austerity
    that Labour would not vote against.

    I think also worth pointing out tha Labour NHS Wales has an even
    Worse record than the Tories NHS England, who themselves
    Are vastly inferior to NHS Scotland.

  74. Proud Cybernat says:

    “… in which a judge ruled that English and Scottish Law and get this Burmese law were the same in basis.”

    Presumably an English judge?

    Has any Scottish judge agreed?

  75. Muscleguy says:

    @Murray McCallum

    Except it was Malcolm Chisholm as a Labour Health minister who scrapped the internal market here in Scotland.

    I’m no longer a labour voter but the facts are sacred. It wasn’t the SNP who did that.

  76. Clootie says:

    …I have to admit that when Kezia reads out the details of a patient in that drone it does feel like centuries are passing.

  77. Meg merrilees says:

    O/T
    Re QT tonight –

    Will Ruth side with the leave UK side on Brexit questions and will Dumblebore point out that she defended Remain – ON TV and wanted us to stay in the single market??? Think I will be sick listening to the cringe!

    Will she defend Scotland or stick the knife in? All bets are off. Presume she will toe the Westminster line and well and truly betray Scotland. True colours will show out from someone who wants to be the next First Minister!!!

    Maybe there’s a Wakefield by-election coming up soon?

    She’ll be playing to the English tory audience that’s for sure. Definitely a (‘tractor’).

    Mind you Nicola well and truly embarrassed Ruth this lunchtime.

  78. Robert Peffers says:

    @call me dave says: 1 December, 2016 at 4:24 pm:

    … “We need to have more specialists” says the Doc
    “That’ll be the SG Government” squeaks Kaye
    “No the Health Boards” says the Doc… “more money yes”
    “But Health is devolved” squeals Kaye
    “Aye but it’s the total amount of money you need to take into account” says the Doc “and that’s down to Westminster”
    “We’ll not go into that here” says Kaye….
    But…but Kaye you started it.”

    That’ll be just one more BBC recording posted missing.

    The BEEB has a very long history of embarrassing, (to the

    BBC), recordings that cannot be found. (AWOL=Absent With Out Leave).

  79. Dan Huil says:

    @Bob Mack 5:33pm

    Interesting. It does not bode well. But this is britnattery we are dealing with so we shouldn’t be surprised.

  80. Hamish100 says:

    Davidson will undermine Scotland. That’s the Tories way. Tories /Labour are working to overthrow the Democratically elected government. Fluffy and co , private meetings organising to undermine helped by the BBC, telegraph Mail and co. Such a pot of shit in a nation.

  81. ephemeraldeception says:

    RE: Scotland now had the “fiscal autonomy that it has long been asking for”

    Scot Gov should call their bluff, take his statement literally and act as if we now do have full fiscal autonomy.

    The fallout would open the eyes of many.

  82. manandboy says:

    Question Time these days, is more often than not a carefully orchestrated presentation of propaganda.

    The Producer of BBC’s Question Time has more than likely, chosen Ruth Davidson because she is on QT’s wanted Unionist list, but almost certainly, also for propaganda purposes, because, let’s face it, what knowledge or experience of Wakefield or England does Ms Davidson have, that is so valuable, that she travel to Wakefield, and back presumably, leaving the day job in Edinburgh, to impart to the good people of Wakefield and the viewers in the rest of England and Wales.

    Whatever the reason, the answer(s) will be available on screen during QT. For myself, I’ll be paying close attention to Ruth ; where she is seated, centrally or peripherally ; how soon David Dimbleby engages her, and how often, and how often is she interrupted. Then there’s the type and nature of the questions themselves and how many are channelled first to Ms Davidson. The audience’s response to Ruthie may also be interesting, and more besides.
    All for the purpose of seeing a little bit more of Westminster’s propaganda tactics against Scottish Independence and, incidentally, all on someone else’s telly.

  83. Robert Peffers says:

    @Legerwood says: 1 December, 2016 at 4:38 pm:

    ” … Several posters have raised the issue if Labour’s £1.5 billion return to the Treasury. I believe it is the case that the ‘SNP during its first term in office managed to get it back or at least put into a separate ‘advising’ for future use in Scotland.”

    You raise a matter that hasn’t been aired for a long time, Legerwood and I, for one, have not considered it for a very long time.

    If my memory serves me well it was indeed put into a special account for future Scottish uses but I seem to remember the SG did not get free access to the account.

    If it was to be handled by Westminster it has probably been raided by this time to spend on telling us SNP BAAD.

    Can anyone enlighten us all further?

  84. Bob Mack says:

    @Proud Cybernat,

    That is the issue. The case was on behalf of Burma oil and was heard in Edinburgh.

  85. Dan Huil says:

    @ephemeraldeception 6:15pm

    Exactly right. They should go further and act as if our independence was already regained.

  86. Bob Mack says:

    Although the Attorney General is arguing that the various devolved powers have basically the same laws this is entirely inaccurate in my view.
    The case of the runaway slave Joseph Knight during the late 18th century proves the point. This emphasised the differences in law.

    The get out of jail for the Lord Advocate is that the Act of Union is law and therefore open to debate about its purpose and usage. It may straddle the border between lawand Constitution but is relevant.

  87. gerry parker says:

    “Scotland now has the fiscal autonomy it’s been long asking for.

    Aye, and Westminster is going to get the kick up the arse it’s been long asking for!

  88. call me dave says:

    News from darn Sarf! The Guardian.

    Scotland will not get special Brexit concessions, says Philip Hammond

    https://archive.is/lPDCi

    Brexit: 1m EU citizens in Britain ‘could be at risk of deportation’

    https://archive.is/5jiHV

  89. North Chiel says:

    With regards to tonight’s propaganda channel 1830 output, it must be
    such a relief to our first minister that Glen Campbell has now taken over as ” Chief
    Brexit negotiator ” on behalf of Scotland . He instantly professed his interpretation
    of Hammond’s every word , mannerism ,body language and gestures as regards his attitude
    to various aspects of possible Brexit solutions ( within the Scottish context of solving the Brexit conundrum).
    “Take a break and have a kit Kat Glen”, you must be completely exhausted running after Hammond and his ” better together” cavalcade all day throughout ” Auld Reekie”.

  90. Scotrock says:

    Many Yoon newspapers have highlighted the 1% fall in independence. One I don’t really believe that and two did any of then report when we went above 45%?
    Serious question

  91. Legerwood says:

    Robert Peffers @ 6.20

    I found this article which includes a paragraph on the About surplus. The ‘SNP seems to have negotiated it’s return over a 4 year period. The article also gives a pretty good explanation of underspend and surpluses.
    https://thecommongreen.wordpress.com/2015/10/02/we-need-to-talk-about-budget-underspends/

    Also, please accept my apology for my reply to your post last night. I was in a foul mood and unfortunately your post Hove into view just at that time. Should not have replied to you in that way.

  92. Robert Peffers says:

    Far as I can see the Hammond claims of, “Scotland now had the “fiscal autonomy that it has long been asking for”. Is no more than the usual Westminster bombast and bloody minded arrogance.

    The word, “bombast”, is an interesting term and it comes from the, (now obsolete), meaning, “cotton or other material used to stuff garments”, i.e. padding meant to falsely pad out the wearer’s real physique.

    The bloody minded bit is that Westminster has given no autonomy whatsoever to the Scottish Government.

    Here are some synonyms of the term. “Autonomy” :-

    self-government, self-rule, home rule, self-determination, independence, sovereignty, freedom.

    Nothing that Westminster has arrogantly handed down as, “Autonomy”, comes without conditions and restrictions. Like independence, you cannot have partial independence – you either are independent or you remain dependent.

    Neither can you be partly autonomous – you either are or you are not autonomous.

    Neither fits in with a United Kingdom of two equally sovereign partner kingdoms.

    The obvious lie is that there are not two devolve kingdom’s parliaments and as there is no parliament of England the truth is that Westminster has assumed it is England’s parliament and will do exactly as it chooses and furthermore England will prevent Scotland from acting autonomously.

    The SG now has the opportunity to take this arrogant Yoon Loon at his word and act autonomously.

    Anything Westminster says in reply the SG tell Westminster that as the people of Scotland are legally sovereign they will tell the Westminster Parliament what the sovereign people have decided to do.

    That Her Majesty Elizabeth Queen of Scots, under independent Scots Law, is The Protector of the Sovereign People’s sovereignty and, as Sovereign Monarch of England, has no legal right to force upon her Sovereign Scottish people the authority she legally delegate to her English Parliament. Her Majesty must make a choice and no one can make that choice for her.

    Her Scottish job is to protect the Sovereign People of Scotland’s sovereignty but if she does not do her duty then she will cease to be our Queen of Scots and we can, under Scottish law, choose another able and willing to protect our sovereignty.

    I nominate Nicola Sturgeon for the job – Have I a seconder?

    She, Elizabeth II of England, now has a choice to make as the Scottish people have, (finally), made their position clear.

  93. Dan Huil says:

    @Scotrock 7:11pm

    The polls haven’t been very accurate in the last few elections – national and international. They’re just trying to sap our enthusiasm for independence – ain’t working.

  94. Lenny Hartley says:

    Robert Peffers – Seconded

  95. Flower of Scotland says:

    O/t

    Decided to watch “The Crown” on Netflix. It’s actually quite enjoyable. However for a series made in 2016, I wonder who advised them.

    In the series, Queen Elizabeth is called Queen of England and Queen Elizabeth the 2nd.

    We know that England thinks it’s the UK but now it says it is!

  96. call me dave says:

    @Robert Peffers

    I’ll throw down a gauntlet too! 😛

  97. Lenny Hartley says:

    Bob Mac me thinks the learned gentleman was on the Claret if he thinks Scots and English law are basically the same, I remember from Skool being edimekated that Scots law is based on Roman law , found this via Google tonight.
    http://thestudentlawyer.com/2013/06/17/the-scottish-legal-system-in-a-nutshell/

    It’s clear from above that the law in England is different from Scots law. Get the popcorn out!!

  98. Hamish100 says:

    If we have fiscal economy let’s drop vat from 20%

    . What? We can’t!

    That’s Westminster rule for you – autonomy – joke

  99. CameronB Brodie says:

    All non-Yoon No voters should be aware that British national ideology rejects Hegel, Heidegger and principles of individual liberty, in favour of utilitarian colonialism.

    How very British.

  100. Dr Jim says:

    @Robert Peffers 7.19pm

    Ooooh! I really like that (smirkily narrows eyes)

    Put her Maj in the position af having to comment on the only thing she actually has a sovereign duty to have a say on, derelection of duty if she didn’t….Ooooh!

    That would take the bend right out of Westminsters bananas

  101. Stoker says:

    WOS archive links for April 2012 now over on O/T.

  102. call me dave says:

    A guide to the Supreme Court justices

    All 11 will sit in the Article 50 case.

    They differ in in philosophy, temperament and in how they understand their role

    https://archive.is/yJYvW

  103. Robert Peffers says:

    @Legerwood says: 1 December, 2016 at 7:13 pm:

    “I found this article which includes a paragraph on the About surplus. The ‘SNP seems to have negotiated it’s return over a 4 year period. The article also gives a pretty good explanation of underspend and surpluses.
    https://thecommongreen.wordpress.com/2015/10/02/we-need-to-talk-about-budget-underspends/

    Thank you I’ll have to download and read that later. I have a mountain of paperwork to climb just now.

    “Also, please accept my apology for my reply to your post last night. I was in a foul mood and unfortunately your post Hove into view just at that time. Should not have replied to you in that way”

    No need for apology for I did take a swipe at you. I do not take offence when criticised and am a great believer in open and frank debate. If we cannot be open and frank with each other we cannot expect others to be open and frank with us.

    What’s more no one is above criticism. We must accept it, correct ourselves if we are wrong, and move on. Things move far to fast to dwell upon our little differences when there are bigger things to consider.

    I am late making reply as I have a really puzzling quirk affecting Wings. I sometimes find I cannot cut, paste or copy and then the machine reports that Wings is not responding and Windows will check it out and report, *if*, it finds a solution but it never does.

    I ran System File Checker, (sfc), and it reported it had found corrupted system files and repaired the affected files. Then tonight the fault has returned. I’ll have to do the investigation again and this time take better note of which files are getting corrupted. None of the security checks is finding anything unusual, though.

    I wonder if other wingers have suffered the same sort of thing? Could we be under attack?

  104. CameronB Brodie says:

    Kezia Dugdale
    Given that Scotland’s position within the British state is that of a subordinate, dominated, other and that my innate humanity is denied by an unwritten constitution, I have to agree with Freud and conclude that “sometimes a cigars is only a cigar”. The British state, intended as a vehicle to advance the interests of Anglo ‘protestantism’, has made little progress since the days when England controlled the global slave trade.

    The British state does not provide space for Scots to choose an authentic Scottish identity or express their innate Scottish humanity. Despite this, Scotland is forced to adopt an alien philosophy of social Darwinist austerity, by a distant, secretive, authoritarian, plutocratic regime without insight, empathy or sympathy towards Scotland.

    This is a state of 21st century slavery!

    Put the master’s tool down!

    “The right to development is an inalienable human right by virtue of which every human person and all peoples are entitled to participate in, contribute to, and enjoy economic, social, cultural and political development, in which all human rights and fundamental freedoms can be fully realized.” (Article 1.1, Declaration on the Right to Development)

    “The human right to development also implies the full realization of the right of peoples to self-determination, which includes, subject to the relevant provisions of both International Covenants on Human Rights, the exercise of their inalienable right to full sovereignty over all their natural wealth and resources.” (Article 1.2)

    http://www.un.org/en/events/righttodevelopment/pdf/rtd_at_a_glance.pdf

  105. twathater says:

    Robert Peffers,

    Robert i also second your proposal, and further i have read all your posts and your (ahem descriptions for ahem dummies ) is very illuminating, i am no history buff but your description of the Treaty as an agreement between two equal sovereign nations makes sense, I also agree strongly with the assertion that the Westminster parliament (aka English parliament ) has deliberately, willfully and forcibly sought to eradicate any belief that Scotland and the Scots are a country and a nation, unfortunately fully supported by a lying cabal of tractors.

    It’s my opinion that Scotland’s senior lawmakers and government, should be making clear that we are well aware of what has been going on and that we will no longer accept the status quo, we DEMAND that the treaty be adhered to fully, we ARE equals and failure to enact the treaty will result in the repeal of the treaty.

    We are not children who require the permission of our overseers ( sorry abusers ) to govern or manage ourselves, how dare they have the audacity to imagine that they have the right to determine whether their permission is required to allow the Scots to decide their future.

    I Robert Traquair as a sovereign Scotsman hereby give permission for Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP Scottish Government acting as agents on my behalf, to hold a referendum to determine Scotland’s future as an independent country

  106. CameronB Brodie says:

    twathater
    Seconded, though no rush. Choosing the best field of battle is as important as choosing which battles to fight. 😉

  107. CameronB Brodie says:

    Kezia Dugdale
    Your party projects a facade of ‘working-class’ Scottish authenticity, in order to maintain Scotland’s state of subjugation to English colonialism.

    Put the master’s tools down.

  108. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    So Kez in effect admits in public that she’s grossly inefficient. Who knew? =grin=

    Not that she’s in much danger of replacement because all the decaying dunces of BLiS are at least sufficiently aware to realise that none of them could do any better. They can spout the flim-flam but (just like their chums in the Ruth Davidson Party) they know very well that’s exactly what it is. But El Gordo’s representative on Earth, Alex “I’m no Unionist” Rowley, might just fancy his changes of leadership when the time seems right.

    Rowley is still far too heavily committed to his master’s “Vow2” shyste of “federalism”, so little chance of him changing sides any time soon.

    But given a gaggle of Labour soor-prune faces after next May’s local elections, who knows who might finally wake up to reality and…?

    (…or not. They all seem to have a deeply-ingrained political death-wish.)

  109. punklin says:

    Louis.b argyll at 12 55 said “and it’s not even panto season yet ”

    Oh yes it is!

  110. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Hi Robert Peffers at 7.19pm.

    You typed,
    “Her Scottish job is to protect the Sovereign People of Scotland’s sovereignty but if she does not do her duty then she will cease to be our Queen of Scots and we can, under Scottish law, choose another able and willing to protect our sovereignty”

    Has that got anything to do with the 1704 Act I referred to on 27th November? I addressed that comment to you but you never responded.

    http://wingsoverscotland.com/dont-spend-it-all-at-once/#comment-2207641

  111. Robert Louis says:

    Oh my, the UK pretendy ‘supreme’ court is going to be fun, isn’t it. In essence, we have a situation where, no matter what Nicola/Scotland will effectively win. Has that witch theresa May realised it yet?

    If the court accepts the petulant, and mildly childish outpourings from the English UK Government lawyers, then it is simply Westminster ignoring the DEMOCRATIC WISHES of Scots, and QED we would have an indy referendum, we will win. If the court disagrees with those lawyers, then the Scots parliament will vote to remain in the EU, and refuse to permit article 50 for Scotland, QED, effective independence, in all but name.

    The fact is, the so-called ‘constitution’ which London likes to refer to is nothing but conventions and ‘norms’, yet now they are trying to argue that all conventions are equal, but some (Sewel) are less equal than others.

    The most telling thing so far has been the rude nature of the UK Government submissions to the pretendy UK ‘supreme’ court. An odd approach to take,unless you don’t really have a convincing argument to make. Lallands Peat worrier has written about it, link below.

    Just another point, I like Robert Peffers suggestion that the Scot Gov take Westminster at its word, and just start acting autonomously. The reality in all of this, is their is little London can do – unless it wants to start some kind of war (literally). I’ve often felt Holyrood should just take whatever measures they deem fit, whenever. Who are these unelected clowns in London to tell Scotland what to do?

    See : http://lallandspeatworrier.blogspot.com/2016/12/a-quintessential-matter-of-political.html

  112. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    me @ 21:09,

    Oops! “chances”, not “changes”.

  113. Robert Louis says:

    Twathater at 842pm,

    QUOTE “It’s my opinion that Scotland’s senior lawmakers and government, should be making clear that we are well aware of what has been going on and that we will no longer accept the status quo, we DEMAND that the treaty be adhered to fully, we ARE equals and failure to enact the treaty will result in the repeal of the treaty.

    We are not children who require the permission of our overseers ( sorry abusers ) to govern or manage ourselves, how dare they have the audacity to imagine that they have the right to determine whether their permission is required to allow the Scots to decide their future.

    Well said. Very, very well said. I too am tired of the kowtowing and subservience to these clown in Westminster. Scotland is and always has been an EQUAL sovereign partner in the bipartite union with England. This abuse of power by England has to stop.

  114. CameronB Brodie says:

    Re. federalism. The British Commonwealth of Nations came in to existence as a result of the Balfour Declaration, drafted by Viscount Milner (Fabian). It’s major proponent was Lionel Curtis, former member of Milner’s Kindergarten in South Africa. It was intended as a federalist means to enable Britain’s continued global relevance in the 20th century. Just saying.

    Scotland is a colony that is blind to it’s own slavery, let’s be a nation again.

    ‘If Christ were to return to this world today’, the Oxford-based historian Lionel Curtis asked in 1910, ‘where would He find the principles of His teaching best followed?’ He unhesitatingly gave his own answer: in the British empire. Few even of his contemporaries shared the same degree of enthusiasm for empire. Emily Hobhouse, the exposer of Britain’s ‘methods of barbarism’ during the South African War, Agatha Harrison, the supporter and follower of Mahatma Gandhi, and Rita Hinden, secretary of the Fabian Colonial Bureau, certainly did not. Yet the fact that Curtis could pose such a question and give such an answer reminds us that, for part at least of its existence, many British people saw their empire not as something embarrassing, nor merely as the object of pride and loyalty, but as the outcome of an imperial mission, which in turn was a key element in contemporary constructions of British identity.

    http://www.oxforddnb.com/public/themes/93/93060.html

  115. twathater says:

    Watched Scot politics yesterday with Brewer salivating on all the new tax raising powers the SG have just been AWARDED ( so good of the adults to give the wee pretendy parl anything )
    my take and no doubt someone will correct me if i’m wrong

    ALL taxes from Oil and Gas go to westmonster, we are given a percentage back

    ALL taxes from rUK head office registered companies and their employees go to westmonster

    ALL exported goods supplied by Scotland yet exported via rUK are credited to westmonster with duties payable to same

    So essentially ALL positive tax raising benefits are payable to westmonster and the SG can collect the crumbs.

    Yet we have our glorious unionist MSP’s exhorting how wonderful these super duper tax raising powers are, and if the SG want to defeat poverty all they have to do is raise the taxes of the people who are suffering. FFS i do not believe anyone could be so stupid

    Let me be clear i do not and have never objected to paying my income tax or council tax, unlike the parasitical tax evading and avoiding business owners and non dom friends of government
    I do have a massive objection to paying additional levels of tax different to the rest of the uk to stand still,whilst exporting our best tax revenues to westmonster to receive pocket money

  116. galamcennalath says:

    Philip Hammond and no special deals for Scotland.

    These people do realise this is probably their last chance to save their Union?

    If Scotland is forced out of the EEA there will be IndyRef2. By then it will be hard Brexit versus Indy and their chances of winning a NO next time are looking much slimmer.

  117. Rock says:

    Bob Mack,

    “the Attorney General states thar Constitutional consequences should be avoided by the Court, and they should base their judgement entirely on law.

    However he also states that there is no basic difference between English Scottish and Irish law and backs this up with a case from the 1960’s, in which a judge ruled that English and Scottish Law and get this Burmese law were the same in basis.”

    The Scottish Legal system is rotten to the core and the vast majority of lawyers, especially judges, are the lowest of the low.

  118. Glamaig says:

    Another twist to the Article 50 farce – December might be an interesting month

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-parliaments-38173167

    The Westminster system is crazy!

  119. harry mcaye says:

    O/T

    https://labour25.com/labour25/

    I don’t quite know what to say about this. How widely known is this?

  120. winifred mccartney says:

    Can anyone explain to me why it is the BBC News today can report and film about a new teacher on an island in Scotland and yet failed to report on Nicola Sturgeon’s address to the Irish Senate. Are we still supposed to believe that the BBC is not biased – heaven help that they should show Scotlands FM in a favourable light – they obviously could not find anything bad to say about it so decided to say nothing.

  121. dunx says:

    @ Brian doonthetoon at 9.22pm

    The act of security 1704 by the Scots parliament, was a response to the Act of Succession of the English parliament.
    With Queen Anne about to shuffle off this mortal coil without leaving any heirs, this was a constitutional crisis . Since the Scots were not going to be bound by an act of the English parliament. If this were to happen that would have been the end of the dual/joint/shared monarchy.

    The Scots parliament had also passed the Act Anent Peace and War 1703 ( in that Scotland would not be dragged into wars in Europe without that being decided by the Scots parliament and NOT by Royal prerogative!)

    One of the first acts of the ‘new’/amalgamated parliament at Westminster (after the union!) was to repeal both of these acts.
    Although technically the “amalgamated” parliament wasn’t bound by them. Nor would it have been bound by any acts of the previous English parliament.

    However it saw fit to repeal both these acts and re-affirm or re-pass another “duplicate” Act of Succession (as per the previous English act.)

    Breifly:
    Act of Security

    http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100451726

    Repeal:

    http://www.british-history.ac.uk/lords-jrnl/vol18/pp392-394

    Hope this helps.

  122. KOF says:

    @Robert Peffers 19:19

    Sorry, no second from me on that proposal.

    I would, however, whole heartedly support her for the position of Guardian of Scotland while a new monarch is found. A monarch who will actively stand up for Scotland and defend our sovereignty.

  123. Tam Jardine says:

    Doug Daniel 1:26 pm

    “The only conclusion to be drawn from Kezia’s line of attack is that anything less than 100% is unacceptable – and that’s clearly a ridiculous proposition.”

    I am not sure Kezia fully understands what a target is. It strikes me as being something to work towards and if 12 weeks for treatment is deemed as a reasonable target then 96% is very good.

    Kezia can’t be arguing that 96% is unacceptable because it would be too small an improvement in numbers required to reach 100% (and after all we know all kinds of stuff happens that will lead to treatments being cancelled due to staff illness, equipment failure or whatnot which means 100% is unachievable).

    So she must be arguing that the target of 12 weeks for treatment is not ambitious enough. Which leads us back to the previous slab target of 18 months which they could not meet.

    I thought the FMQs today was hopeless- it reminds me of the worst of Westminster with partisan attack politics and zero actual meaningful discussion. There must be a better format than this tired sideshow.

  124. Chic McGregor says:

    Next up, Madame Dis Ecosse. on QT.

    There is a reason her name does not start wit a T, not even a silent one.

  125. Chic McGregor says:

    Next up, Madame Dis Ecosse. on QT.

    There is a reason her name does not start with
    a T, not even a silent one.

  126. CameronB Brodie says:

    harry mcaye
    That’s what the Firm calls “leverage”. 😉

  127. Oops, sorry for near double post, must have inadvertently hit return during edit.

  128. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Thanx dunx!

    That puts that question to bed.

  129. Socrates MacSporran says:

    BBC National News earlier this week. Nicola Sturgeon becomes first foreign political leader to address the Irish Senate – not news, no mention.

    Tonight. New teacher found for Isle of Muck in the Inner Hebrides. Film crew and reporter despatched, two minute segment on the National News. OK, it was in the “Dead Donkey” slot at the end of the news, but, still, it was shown across the UK.

    Get to the back of the bus Scotland is clearly the BBc’s approach.

  130. Col says:

    Robert, if no one from the Scottish Government is prepared to call a spade a spade then how are the people supposed to know that the new powers amount to nothing and the whole thing has been just another huge con directed at the Scots from Westminster?

  131. Connor Mcewen says:

    Dead Parrot Dugdale in my eyes.
    Completely oot the watter, cannae find yir article on those voters who wanted indy. but wanted out of EU and vice versa .
    Something like 10% diff. but critical for Independence.
    See there https://www.facebook.com/groups/sovereignscots/permalink/1278069435599869/

  132. Big Jock says:

    I know many Yes voters who voted for Brexit. I don’t know any of them who will vote no because the SNP want to stay in Europe.

    They see Scottish independence as more important than their own political persuasion. So where are these independence supporters willing to cut off their noses to spite their faces?

    Incidently a lot of the pro indi Scottish Brexit voters have very worrying similarities to some English leave voters. I am not comfortable with closed door nationalism. However it takes all sorts to make a nation or to reach a destination.

  133. Chic McGregor says:

    Ah! Ruth, the Red Line expert.

  134. Hamish100 says:

    Question time

    Full of right wing extremists or better known as white middle aged English people. Cmon England you can’t be all like that? Ruth Davidson – trying her weasly way of not saying anything to upset the audience. It’s Corbyn’s fault. She is a disgrace to Scotland

  135. Tam Jardine says:

    Ruth Davidson on QT:

    “What we’re doing is making sure that we’ve got the negotiators in place, that we know exactly what it is that we’re asking for, we know what it is that we’re willing to give away, we know what the red lines are going to be so that we can get the best deal for all of these different sectors because people didn’t vote to make themselves intentionally poorer, they voted so that the UK Government would do what they said, get us out of the EU (now I didn’t want that but I’m a democratic and I respect it) we are leaving the EU but we want to do it with a good deal, not having France and Germany and Italy taking big chunks out of us when we leave.”

    One part of that rambling monologue stood out: “we know what we are willing to give away”. What are the UK Government willing to give away on this? To get exactly what they are asking for?

    It sounds very much like for every Nissan worker kept on or taken on (for example) some other guy is going to wind up on the scrapheap.

    Audience ready to march on EU tonight. Not comfortable viewing.

  136. ScottishPsyche says:

    Where is pantomime Ruth tonight? Where is the grimace and rhetoric about the SNP?

    She looks utterly terrified as she realises she represents the Tories who are not doing what the baying mob want in Wakefield.

  137. Meg merrilees says:

    Ruth is remarkably quiet tonight!

    What a revolting audience. The south britons really do think they are the Superior race.
    So glad that some brave people are prepared to voice the other side of the argument and full marks to Laurie Penny from the New Statesman . Heaven help the pupils of the primary school teacher at 23.20.
    Going to give up on this- it’s too depressing.

    Ruth an absolute coward!

  138. HandandShrimp says:

    Talking of checking facts I see that Jackson Curlew has shot himself in both feet over Humza’s use of trains.

    What a silly billy as an ex chancellor would have once said.

  139. Hamish100 says:

    Smiled, as Davidson tried to do the interviewers job of ” if I could bring this altogether.. ” so she can repeat what others say but plays the get out card of saying nothing! How Ruthie even school kids get taught such group tactics. The only difference is they do it better.
    Davidson is out of her comfort zone with even more right brexits baying for blood.

    Serves her right.

  140. CameronB Brodie says:

    “What we’re doing is making sure that we’ve got the negotiators in place, that we know exactly what it is that we’re asking for, we know what it is that we’re willing to give away, we know what the red lines are going to be so that we can get the best deal for all of these different sectors because people didn’t vote to make themselves intentionally poorer, they voted so that the UK Government would do what they said, get us out of the EU (now I didn’t want that but I’m a democratic and I respect it) we are leaving the EU but we want to do it with a good deal, not having France and Germany and Italy taking big chunks out of us when we leave.” – Ruth Davidson

    Total incompetence completely lacking any rational plan?

    @Ruth Davidson
    That’s all very well but what about my human rights?

    “The right to development is an inalienable human right by virtue of which every human person and all peoples are entitled to participate in, contribute to, and enjoy economic, social, cultural and political development, in which all human rights and fundamental freedoms can be fully realized.” (Article 1.1, Declaration on the Right to Development)

    “The human right to development also implies the full realization of the right of peoples to self-determination, which includes, subject to the relevant provisions of both International Covenants on Human Rights, the exercise of their inalienable right to full sovereignty over all their natural wealth and resources.” (Article 1.2)

    http://www.un.org/en/events/righttodevelopment/pdf/rtd_at_a_glance.pdf

  141. ian M says:

    I am not in favour of another monarch.
    Also if we need a chamber of sober 2nd thought it should be term limited

  142. Chic McGregor says:

    Well, I was wrong, virtually an entire programme on Brexit/Ukip/Immigration. Ruth was the token Jock, almost indistinguishable from the role Susan Calman normally fulfills. No Scottish topics at all, the nearest (approx 150 miles short) was HS2.

    Pantomime season has started early. Oh yes it has.

  143. NiallD says:

    Well that was a fun QT. Good to see Ruth the Mooth offering a hand of friendship to the SNP to heal the divide.
    Next week Nigel Farage and Louise Mensch will offer full devolution to Scotland.

    Right matron I’m ready for my medication now!

  144. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Chic McGregor:

    Oh yes it has.

    Oh no it’s not!

    (I’ve been wanting to reply with that all evening long!)

    More seriously, it’s actually high tragedy, except most people don’t realise it yet.

  145. Tonight’s QT reinforced my thought that they couldn’t afford to put Ruth on a Scottish QT anymore. She’s not up to it and has very limited political skills and a Scottish audience would destroy her. She is out of her depth now.Let’s hope she stays there but we’ve been getting a lot of Murdo who is even worse.

    That poll today was great.
    IT MEANS WE ARE WINNING. After two years (in which we have not campaigned for independence) during which the SNP,the Scottish Government,Nicola Sturgeon and the Independence theme have been attacked continuously in the most savage,unbalanced, dishonest political campaign I can ever remember by virtually all the printed media and our so called national broadcaster they can claim they may have dented independence support by about a half percent! They cannot beat us from here and they know it.

    Look out for the next phase.
    Anybody know where there is a Scottish Republican Army of nail bombers we can invent,Nigel?

    The poll also suggests that only the over 65s are now opposed to independence

  146. Dr Jim says:

    Ruth Davidson bringing the Nation together to fight the real enemy, the people who will take great chunks out of us “The Germans”
    Way to go Ruthie bring back good old English values
    We won the war, Hooraaay!!

    Loved the audience though, they hate the French they hate the Italians, the Germans, but they’re not stupid, they read stuff apparently even though they all speak different languages in the playgrounds of Wakefield

    I wonder if half of those folk could actually spell disalu
    dissaloosh disallushond,

    Not happy about stuff

  147. CameronB Brodie says:

    Scotland is a colony who’s older generations are kept blind to Scotland’s slavery. Let’s be a nation shaped through liberty not subjugation. We can still be friends with England and share cultural, cross-boarder ties, we don’t have to give up Scotland’s free-will to achieve that. It’s how the rest of the world does things.

  148. ScottishPsyche says:

    Ruth Davidson just wanted to get through that without being lynched. She did not seem to speak for anyone except herself and she really got away with not having to defend the Tories record at all. Loved the idea that there would be harmony in Scotland if it weren’t for Indyref1!

    Sometimes it seems that the Tories are happy creating Brexit turmoil as a smokescreen to get as many reprehensible domestic policies through as possible. They would be quite happy to leave government in 2020 without having done anything about Brexit.

  149. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    DMH @ 00:14:

    …but we’ve been getting a lot of Murdo who is even worse.

    Yes, but so woefully OTT that I’m wondering if he’s not actually counterproductive to the Unionist cause. After indyref1, people are a lot more clued-up about such huff-and-puff. (Not to mention his pandering to the Loyalist fringe.)

    (It’s hard to believe this is the same person who once stood against Ruthie for leadership of the ScotCons on a platform of rebuilding them as a totally-new moderate centre-right autonomous Scottish party.)

    The Robert Peffers theory of “giving the Unionists enough rope” is not in of itself enough, I believe, but it does have its merits!

  150. call me dave says:

    Ruthie flying by the seat of her UJ pants!

    Here’s some local news. You must remember this.

    Anyhoo! Seems there is no shame among some labour politicians.

    http://archive.is/rg9D0

    In other Herald news: SNP bad. Just a Hammond rehash!

    Chancellor Philip Hammond dashes Nicola Sturgeon’s hope of Scottish Brexit deal

  151. Capella says:

    @ twathater 8.42 – great comment. I’d sign that pledge (with a small correction):

    I ……… as a sovereign Scot, hereby give permission for Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP Scottish Government acting as agents on my behalf, to hold a referendum to determine Scotland’s future as an independent country.

  152. CameronB Brodie says:

    Re. Mungo Fraser. Sound, I could do with a new object of ‘interest’. 😉

    @Murdo Fraser
    Hey Mungo, better brush up on your principles of contemporary social science, lad.

  153. Dr Jim says:

    @Dave McEwan Hill

    Yep Dave it’s still us oldies holding up proceedings (excepting us oldie wingers) this demographic will not move easily until they actually notice physically their pensions dwindling and costs going up

    Telling them the triple lock pension is gone is a lie in their books until it happens, and they conveniently forget about all the free stuff because unfortunately they have convenient selective memories

    Plus the other main and more important point, there are a hell of a lot of selfish gits out there who just don’t care enough to do anything about it, so what do they do, they wait and wait while they moan and then they make the decision to do nothing but moan again

    But usually about the wrong government
    What was I saying again? Oh aye fish’s got really dear hint it, it’s that Sturgeon Wummin,….. is she still in?

  154. On UKIP overtaking Labour in England as the Workers’ Party, Ruth Davidson drew an analogy with Scotland Branch Office losing 40 of its 41 seats in Scotland at the UK GE, as an example of Labour flagging as a political entity.
    She could of course have added that we only have one Blue Tory, one lying Yellow Tory, and a Red Morningside Tory, making up the Unionist pack up here.
    To extend her argument therefore, the Tories, Labour, and Lib Dems are withered failing husks in Scotland.
    She is also agin HS2, now standing at £63 billion, and not the absolutely final including contingencies figure of £47 billion that Danny Boy Alexander was spouting when he was a bought and paid for Tory collaborator.
    She was clearly a makeweight because none of the London Tories could be arsed venturing into the darkest North of England.
    Earlier, her alter ego Kezia Dugdale demonstrated yet again what a facile little tub thumper she is, while Baillie nodded obligingly in the background.
    These two amply demonstrate the absolutely woeful calibre of Unionist politicians Up Here.
    BTW, England is now a ‘foreign’ land, if this Yorkshire audience is anything to go by.
    Their xenophobia and lemming like approach to leaving the EU,and the single market, and their denial that they will in effect be cut off socially, economically, and culturally from Europe is quite alarming.
    The ‘they need us more than we need them’ remarks were alarming.
    Davidson’s comments about the Germans and the French taking ‘chunks’ out of the UK were also telling.
    We are well out of this Union.

  155. bugsbunny says:

    Richtea at 1.56pm yesterday.

    The words you used to describe Kezia can be used to describe Ruth if you take the c from the third word and replace the h with it in the fourth word.

  156. Smallaxe says:

    bugsbunny:

    I had to look all the way back,just to see what you meant.It was worth it!

    🙂

    Peace Always

  157. geeo says:

    Lib dems win Richmond Park by election…Zac Goldsmith…egg…face…hahaha

  158. yesindyref2 says:

    @bob Mack
    An interesting overview of the Supreme Court session how it goes, and about nobody wanting to involved the ECJ of the CJEU. It doesn’t touch differences between Scots Law et al, but the interesting thing is that first the UK Gov appeal submission gets heard, then the original claimants submission and the interventions.

    Which is great as it seems to mean the whole of Wolffe’s submission will be read in to the UKSC – and hence answered possibly on a point by point basis, by the 11 Judges in their determination in January. But in any case, it does seem to get fully read in.

    https://fullfact.org/law/brexit-supreme-court/

    @BDTT / @dunx
    Thanks for that, very interesting.

  159. yesindyref2 says:

    @cmd
    Yes, the Herald’s playing a good game. I like it! I think.

    What gets me is it’s still not all inevitable, I can’t wait. Same as everyone else, I’m starting to get as ratty as a mole with toads nipping away at its (b)adgers.

  160. Macart says:

    Mr Hammond is making this awfy easy and that’s before the Supreme Court submissions.

    http://thenational.scot/news/14941701.Hammond_tells_Sturgeon_to__stop_clutching_at_straws__and__forget_special_Brexit_deal/

    In one breath ‘NO DEALS and stop clutching at straws’ and in another ‘I look forward to hearing the SGs proposals’.

    Mibbies just me, but doesn’t the former negate the need for the latter? Sit down, shut up and eat your brexit cereal.

    ‘Course oor boy is overlooking a a salient point or two. Firstly that the brexit vote has occurred at all is in direct contravention of a core indyref assurance of better together and HMG. That being ‘only by voting NO could Scots guarantee continued membership of the EU’.

    Secondly the Lord Advocate’s submission based on the Treaty and Articles of union, not to mention the Claim of Right itself may have a thing or two to add to the mere bagatelle of HMG fracturing their own indyref pledges to the Scottish electorate.

    So here’s the thing. Folks could indeed sit down, shut up and eat their Brexit cereal. Yes, they could do that.

    Or

    They could remind Her Majesty’s Government of commitments they made to the Scottish electorate. They could remind them that consistently, pre and post 2007, they have voted for pro EU parties in Scotland. They could also remind Ms May and Mr Hammond that partnerships and agreements which have been wilfully welched on by one party can be dissolved by the other at their leisure.

    Mind you, when it comes to welching on the agreements made between HMG and the Scottish electorate two years ago, Brexit is simply the straw that broke the political unions back.

    And yes by the way, we really CAN do that too. Simply vote for it when asked a simple question. Personally after this arrogance and disdain shown the Scottish electorate this week, that question couldn’t come quick enough for me.

    #welcherwatch

  161. yesindyref2 says:

    Just read Keen’s reply to the Lord Advocate’s submission. Like wow. But careful does it, there’s “supercilious and ill-tempered” in there, but it hides what I think is desperation, and could be an attempt at misdirection to the tone of it, and on to Sewell, just Sewell. Could be wrong. Anyway, new LPW article on it:

    https://lallandspeatworrier.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/a-quintessential-matter-of-political.html?showComment=1480659947350#c8039410248760070888

    This really could be the case of the millenium, 2 or 3 in fact! And all 11 judges so it’s as final as you can get – apart from the CJEU / ECJ. Now that would be a difficult political decision if the appeal was upheld, but Scots Law was ignored. Fortunately it would be Sturgeon’s to make, and she don’t do bluff.

  162. Ken500 says:

    The worm has turned. Zac Goldsmith out, The tide is finally tuning. The ‘psycho bastards’ days are numbered, even in their heartlands. Watch a changing policies from the threatened ignorant incompetents at the prospect of their lying privileges being deceased. The reason why this whole mess was started. The lying,fraudsters, crook Unionists are in total disarray. The SNP can capitalise on it. The Tories could be on the run. Labour out of the game, especially in Scotland. No wonder a bunch of criminals. Most of them should be in jail.

    The Labour Unionists did not just give back £1.3Billion, They lied cheated and wasted a £300Billion Oil fund. The McCrone Report. They started illlegal wars. Condoned banking fraud and tax evasion, They destroyed the world economy and created suffering and deprivation worldwide. To line their greedy pockets. Getting the UK into £Trillions of debt. Q

    Hammond has just increased the debt and denied Scotland Democracy, They are despicable. They blame migration for their failures when they caused the migration in Europe. They take no responsibility for it, or their other crimes.

    Vote SNP/SNP May 2017. Vote for Independence. Make Scotland a fairer, equal happier country. Let go of the Westminster lying, deceitful. totally arrogant. Ignorant incompetents. .

  163. Breeks says:

    Hammond tells Nicola to stop clutching at straws???

    What, as the UK tries to bung some money to the Germans to buy access to the free market? No special Brexit deal for Scotland, but a nod, wink, and a UK bung in a brown envelope is fine with the honourable gentleman.

  164. Ken500 says:

    Hammond could be clutching at straws on his way out. Don’t forget to slam the door on the way

    Hammond called the area around Faslane a wasteland. It would be if he got his way. He sneered and laughed at Scottish Independence and the idea of Scotland having it’s own Navy to patrol it’s shores. Another Tory liar spending £200Billion on Trident and leaving vulnerable people and pensioners to starve and due. Disgraceful. Nasty little person. Teresa May is the same. Two irreparable liars. The damage they are causing to the world economy.

  165. Sinky says:

    Someone should tell newspapers that it is not Sturgeon who has been slapped down by The Chancelllor but Scotland which despite being ostensible a partner in The Union has less clout than Nissan or City of London

  166. Free Scotland says:

    Bob Mack’s comment from 1:29 p.m. (yesterday) hits the nail on the head:

    “I should not be laughing about poor Agnes but I cannot help but look at the nodding Labour dogs behind Kezia all feigning concern for the poor soul. Jabba looks as if she is thinking of a gammon leg and whether poor Agnes is edible.

    Meanwhile the rest of Labour would not look out of place on a car rear parcel shelf advertising Churchill insurance.

    Maybe they will get up a collection between them to send poor Agnes to a private hospital to get her hip replaced but I doubt their concern about her goes that far. Same surgeons in any case.”

    Thanks, Bob. I’m still laughing.

  167. yesindyref2 says:

    So a scenario, never mind all the others!

    Scenario 1. UK Gov wins the UKSC appeal but the LCM is given statutory force (or the FM’s royal prerogative). Not great for other side presuming UK Gov wants to Brexit. So what do they do? Scotland gets IR2 in a hurry via S30, perhaps gives (LCM) consent or allows to be bypassed – or defers, considering appealing to the CJEU / ECJ, probably doesn’t lodge its papers as that freezes the UK Gov’s A50. Pity, because ECJ takes months and moths (that’s the paperwork). Meanwhile.

    UK Gov prenegotiates with Scotland, the thing it didn’t want to do before, as it really really wants us bye-bye and anyway, it can be useful having us in the EU and it out. The EU is extra helpful as they want it all done and dusted: “Oh yes, common thingy area, nae bother”. IR2 autumn 2017, Brexit and Indy 31st March 2019.

    We can but hope.

  168. Marcia says:

    The Tories nominal majority at Westminster now down to 10. The win by the LD in one the most affluent constituencies has that rare event a revolt by the well off. If I was to have a by-election on the topic of Heathrow I would not have it in Richmond Park who are mostly anti-Brexit and the main topic of the by-election would be Brexit and not Heathrow.

    South West London seem to have a history of dumping MP’s who cause by-election and stand again for re-election. In 1982 the voters of Mitcham and Morden ousted the SDP defector from Labour Bruce Douglas-Mann who did the honourable thing and caused a by-election when he changed parties. They elected a Tory instead.

  169. yesindyref2 says:

    Putting some details on that after the YES vote. rUK doesn’t want to hang around, Brexit is more important. What it does want is Continuing UK in a hurry.

    Agreement in princple rUK v Scotland Feb 2018, PwC appointed jointly to audit accounts and calculate settlement. Meanwhile quick change to Scotland Act to give Scotland £10 billion borrowing power, to get started. ScotGov start borrowing as that starts our credit rating going (it might start next year anyway with the tax devolution). Meanwhile rUK / cUK takes charge of the debt.

    PwC preliminary range of settlement e.g. debt range £40 billion to £200 billion. An agreed preliminary and totally nominal amount of £100 billion agreed so as to set the ball rolling on interest and repayments, but without prejudice as it were. Perhaps some asset split, and asset repurchase by the rUK, and a lower debt.

    Scotland Independent.

    PwC second of three reports, range now more restricted, and Scotland starts borrowing to actually repay the debt, as otherwise the cUK’s credit rating could be affected. We can perhaps by then actually borrow cheaper, if interest rates stay down.

    Scotland thrives, and then in about 10 years time the full PwC is complete, cost £200 million split two ways, onwards and upwards, bestest of pals everafter.

    I’ll have a Guinness.

  170. galamcennalath says:

    The scale of the LibDem win in Richmond Park is probably significant. If May was to try to reinforce her pro Brexit position by calling a general election, it might not turn out as she expected.

    Firstly she might be out-Brexited by UKIP calling for a firm hard outcome.

    Secondly any party willing to be anti Brexit would rally votes from those opposing it all together.

    Although Leave won at the referendum vote, Remain voters might now be in the majority!

  171. Proud Cybernat says:

    @ yesindyRef2

    I like your positive thinking.

    More likely though is that WM, as usual, totally shafts Scotland in the courts, in Parliament and anywhere else it can shaft us. And Scotland ends up with precisely hee-haw.

    Well, there’s always the crumbs from the WM table, isn’t there?

  172. Ken500 says:

    Scotland raises £54Billion in taxes. That is what Scotland could spend, wisely without Westminster Unionist intervention. Westminster’s deficit on Scotland. Average spend – £30Billion basic, £16Billion pensions/welfare benefits, £3Billion Defence (No Trident) No £4Billion debt repayments on loans Scotland doesn’t borrow or spend. More raised in Oil & Gas sector with lower taxes when the price is low. £4Billion? Less imported untaxed, fracked US Gas or Norwegian Oil. £49Billion. With £9Billion to invest. Scotland needs control over spending.

    Scotland would be in surplus as it always has been. Without the illegal, secret interference of Westminster Unionists, Scotland could invest and expand it’s economy, with low unemployment and excellent essential services, NHS/Education. No more illegal wars causing mass migration, banking fraud or tax evasion. Costing £Trillions.

  173. call me dave says:

    As they used to say in the comics…Coo!

    First LibDem bye-election win for WM since 2006 in Dunfermline.

    That’s Rennie’s record gone. 🙂

    Too early to extrapolate which way the winds blowing yet as it was already a strong remain area but looks good.

    Prof Curtis was a bit reflective not speculating just the facts!

    Meanwhile in Scotland a new scare story for the listeners as radio,shroud waving, shortbread says Police Scotland bad… SG bad! :/

    It’s just another day.

  174. yesindyref2 says:

    @Proud Cybernat
    I’m getting to the stage I think it needs both. Optimistic, perhaps wildly so at times, and pessimistic, perhaps berserkly at times. Expect either to happen or somewhere in-between, and plan for all of them!

    @cmd
    I still say cool because i think it’s kewl to do so. Humph.

    What the LibDem thing does I think is blow the Tories chances of managing to do an early election to take advantage of their apparent big poll lead over Labour.

    Slowly but surely the noose draws its plans on their necks. Oh dear. Never mind, there’s always HMS Thunder Cloud to the rescue.

  175. Macart says:

    @Yesindyref2

    Ayup, the UK gov’s legal response is a bit on the ‘tetchy’ side. 🙂

    I agree, that does in and of itself speak volumes. I suspect there are a few nervy wigs and a lot of nervy policy wonks wondering how this is going to play out and latterly be sold to the public at this point. 🙂

  176. call me dave says:

    Not cool… just coo! Lord Snooty and pals. 🙂

    Anyhoo!

    Sarah Smith of Auntie fame in Scotland to join James Cook in America to report the news where they are.
    Shortbread web site says. Please take Glen with you Sarah.

  177. Brian Powell says:

    On Zac Goldsmith’s losing to the LibDems. The LibDems are similar to Tories, and they never had a Danny Alexander or Alistair Carmichael who turned completely against the country they were supposed to represent, sucking up to a Tory Government which was constantly rejected by Scotland.

  178. Robert Peffers says:

    @CameronB Brodie says: 2 December, 2016 at 12:24 am:

    “Scotland is a colony who’s older generations are kept blind to Scotland’s slavery.”

    Not true, CameronB. Most of those of the older generation that still vote NO are the actual hard core remnants, families and hingers oan, of the Unionist, Labour, Tory and LibDem parties that used to run Scotland and subject the rest of us to Westminster Establishment over lordship. Do you imagine they all vanished upon the SNP gaining support?

    This is why, the closer we get to Scottish Independence, the more difficult it becomes to convert that hard core of oppressors.

    You are talking as if this group of despicable people were just low intelligence, brain washed numpties. They are not for they are part of the Westminster Establishment and they do not identify themselves as Englanders but as, incongruously, , “British”, and thereby hangs the great challenge to the Scots and the People of Scotland, Scots born or not.

    There is no way those who were the backbone of the Britnats all moved to other parts of Britain when they lost their grip on running Scotland. They are still here among us and if we do not recognise the fact that they are not just voting NO to independence simply because they belong to an older generation then we fail to realise they are largely part of the oppressors who have ruled Scotland from 1707 until today.

    Yes there is still a group of those who are simply, (not to put too fine a point to it), thick as pig-shit, low intellect, brainwashed numpties. However, in the main they are the traditional actual oppressors.

    Let me quote you an example. Yesterday I noted that some Wingers had the notion that the Deputy Leader of the Labour Party in Scotland, Alex Rowley, was swithering on crossing over to the SNP. Now I’ve known Alex family since before Alex was born. He went to school with my step-son.

    The Rowley Family have been involved in local politics long before the SNP gained any recognition as a political force. Alex thus has spent his entire life steeped in the Unionist mind set of entitlement to rule over Scotland as stand-ins for the Westminster Establishment.

    This is why Labour hate the SNP so strongly, these people feel that the SNP have usurped the Labour parties inalienable right to be the rightful rulers of the people os Scotland.

    “British”, (sic), blood courses through Alex’s veins and in no way would I ever trust him, his family or his Hingers oan a single millimetre.

    Neither would I waste a precious moment of my, rapidly running out, time attempting to convert the unconvertible to the cause.

    Put it this way. If Alex Rowley ever crosses the chamber and joins the SNP then Alex will have done so in order for Alex Rowley to climb over the bodies of his erstwhile opponents in the Labour in Scotland hierarchy and not because he has, “Seen the light”.

    ” … Let’s be a nation shaped through liberty not subjugation. We can still be friends with England and share cultural, cross-boarder ties, we don’t have to give up Scotland’s free-will to achieve that. It’s how the rest of the world does things.”

    Now that I can stand 100% behind but please recognise that the enemy is not composed of those who are just old and stupid because most of those older people are not Yoons just because they are older, and perhaps stupier, but because they are the same Yoons who once were the Westminster Establishment in Scotland.

    Thereby hangs the most telling proof of that particular pudding. Have they not always fought hard among themselves as opposition Westminster parties? Yet they have always stood firmly shoulder to shoulder together to oppose Scottish independence for as long as I’ve lived, and actually been doing so before and since 1707.

    Just as yesterday we saw them stand together opposing the SNP government at Holyrood. These people are the descendants of, “The Paircel o Rogues”, who not only sold out Scotland’s birth right to the Kingdom of England but who also enthusiastically helped to engineer that disgraceful action. Mainly, mind you, because of out and out sectarianism. The sectarianism so plainly recorded in the Treaty and acts of Union.

    The Union was forged in order to make the English Protestant Monarchy forever the rulers of all the United Kingdom. It is being maintained for the very same motives today. There really is no place for religious sectarianism, (of either persuasion), in a modern, independent, Scotland.

  179. Greannach says:

    How did things get to this state for the Branch? It’s is barely credible that Kezia Dugdale could reach the dizzy heights of patrol leader in a scout troop let alone lead a once important political party.

  180. yesindyref2 says:

    @Macart
    It’s a strange one. But Keen is strongly anti-SNP, and his specialities were NOT constitutional matters, so who knows?

    Not so long to wait now to find out 🙂

  181. Capella says:

    Willie Rennie was in Richmond fighting Scottish Democracy. A little off piste in Richmond perhaps, he thinks Nicola has “no leverage” over Westminster. Whereas the Liberals:

    … can put pressure on [the UK Government] by threatening a Brexit deal referendum, with the large numbers we have in the House of Lords

    He can also call on the support of “John Major, and I hate to say it, Tony Blair.”

    According to Willie, nobody else is interested in Scotland in Europe apart from Nicola Sturgeon. Not the Scottish voters, not the Irish, not the Europeans. How she and her party get so many votes must be a mystery to Willie.

    In yesterday’s Scotsman with the usual vials of poison in the comments section.
    https://archive.is/F1pz8

  182. Macca73 says:

    I’m not sure how much longer the labour party can put up with Dugdale, She’s a total liability for them now. I’m sure people watching even the small clips can’t believe what they are looking at when they see her on the news.

    Her speeches are lame, her points are mute, her attitude is based on a total hatred of one party rather than trying to fix things and her policies are devoid of any thought!

    In other words… please keep her in place and keep backing her .. we’ll be independent before you know it with buffoons like this trying to speak the case of the union!!!

  183. Proud Cybernat says:

    Just leaked from BBC Scotland…

    http://imgur.com/a/a2zJ8

  184. Breeks says:

    @Yesindyref2

    I have misgivings about the Supreme Court Case because I very much doubt it’s going to address the constitutional issue of Scotland’s sovereignty first because it is beyond its jurisdiction, and secondly, that is not what it has been asked to do.

    I do appreciate the Lord Advocates varied submissions in his arguments, but these are addressing matters which have limited bearing on the narrow parameters which the Supreme Court will use to contain its judgement. To illustrate what I mean, it’s like expecting the court in a murder trial to deliberate on the general ethics of murder as a crime, before it actually began the trial of the accused.

    At best the Supreme Court is going to tie a flag onto issues of constitutional significance, but then sideline those issues as beyond its remit. It is only where these constitutional issues actively obstruct the Supreme Court coming to a decision which will see any deliberation or consequence.

    Said it before, but there are no matters of constitutional principle at stake here beyond the precedents set in 2011 Axa case.

    If Scotland wants the status of our sovereignty to be recognised in law, and further recognised by the international community, then the Court will have to asked to address that issue specifically. That’s a catch 22 however, because the Supreme Court has acknowledged itself inferior to Scottish sovereignty, so it is only Scotland’s Court of Session which can deliver a determination properly in law.

    The UK Supreme Court has nothing to give us. It is inferior, and thus irrelevant, to Scotland’s efforts to reassert its own sovereignty. It has been asked, and indirectly asked, whether Scotland should be consulted about Brexit. The verdict local to this issue will either be it should or should not, and that is all.

    If we want a test case to establish Scotland’s sovereignty, then we will have to bring one before Scotland’s Court of Session. It is the only way.

  185. carjamtic says:

    Greanach@ 10:47

    Hubris is one word to describe the situation,it also applies to BBC Scotland,when one reaches the point where they believe the rules don’t apply to them,they are in the danger zone of hubris.

    Similarly the Tories with Brexit and their snoopers charter,(politicians excempt of course),I look forward to the day when the voters in Scotland deliver them all,a political,broadcasting ASBO and good riddance to them.

    They have had their ‘near misses’ it is now time for the walls to come crashing down and they cannot say they weren’t warned….Scotland deserves better.

  186. Bob Mack says:

    @Breeks,

    I understand what you are saying, but there is a significant point to be made here.
    The Attorney General is stating that there is effectively little difference between Scots Law and English law, and cites an example to prove that fact.

    However the Treaty of Union itself acknowledges the difference and was thus designed to maintain that fact and status. How can the judges acknowledge the case of the Attorney General therefore which totally tries to dismiss Scots law as an irrelevance. They would be agreeing.

    The bottom line is that many laws have been passed with the approval of a predominantly Unionist Parliament, but this does not change the intrinsic fact that Scots law is preserved in the Treaty for as long as the Union lasts.

    How the judges get over that hurdle without making some decision on that fact I think is nigh impossible.

  187. Surely a very significant point on the by election result was Labour losing its deposit. Pointed out by somebody that they got less votes than they have party members in the constituency.
    Corbyn is finished. Despite my personal respect for the man his backing away from his own positions to calm the parliamentary Labour Party means he is not leading. And he can’t lead this Labour Party which cannot win any UK election from a left of centre position.

  188. yesindyref2 says:

    Found this very useful link on ONS which explains how the EU budget worked for the UK, coming up with a nett average annual contribution from the UK for 2010 – 2014 of £7.1 billion. Our straigh per capita share would be £600 million, but taken off that would be the Scottish CAP Uplift Convergence Carmichael kindly gave away to the four quarters of the UK. Which would make our nett contribution more like £300 million, or even less, quite possibly a lot less.

    None of that takes into account the value of the single market to our economy and jobs.

  189. yesindyref2 says:

    @Dave McEwan Hill
    Not really, apparently they basically didn’t campaign to allow Zac Goldsmith to get back in. Ooops.

  190. One_Scot says:

    Just saw this tweet saying ‘Statoil starts drilling 5 wells in Mariner field east of Shetland, aimed at 2018 production start’

    https://twitter.com/BBCDouglasF/status/804641808915582976

    But I’m sure it will all have ran out in a few months when IndyRef2 is called.

  191. Proud Cybernat says:

    Ruth unmasked…

    http://imgur.com/a/PzDQ6

  192. yesindyref2 says:

    @Dave
    It’s kind of an honour system, since Goldsmith resigned on a point of principle the opposition don’t stand against him/her, or stand abck and do nothing. They do similar for the Speaker’s seat. Just the two main UK parties, other parties are under no such constraint, for instance the SNP happily campaigned against the speaker who ahd a Glasgow seat whoever and whenever that was, a few years back.

  193. Clootie says:

    The Labour MPs (Rad Torres) must be so proud they have managed to undermine their leader, the party principles and party electoral chances in their drive to prove their point (New Labour in all but name)

  194. ronnie anderson says:

    Breeks 11.19 am. One of the reasons I supported Indycamp as outlined at the start to have the College of Justices give a definitive answer to Scots Sovereignty & Scots Law being tested ,but for the interventions of Idiots we would have put that to the test .

    WE would have to do that as a People, I cant see the SNP being supportive that would certainly put the cat amongst the pigeon’s .

  195. Proud Cybernat says:

    “The Attorney General is stating that there is effectively little difference between Scots Law and English law, and cites an example to prove that fact.”

    Surely there is a total fudge going on here?

    There may well be many laws in Scots law and English law that are the same or very similar. Indeed, they may even have the exact same law in the USA, Canada, Australia or anywhere else. But just because some laws may be the same in these countries does not mean that these countries laws have any jurisdiction here and vice-versa.

    Scotland and England may have laws that are identical but they remain identical within two completely SEPARATE legal systems.

    Surely?

  196. Stoker says:

    Theresa May banned from EU dinner?

    There’ll be no After Eights for her then! Oh well, just think Theresa, there are thousands struggling to get dinner in because of multicoloured Tory policies. Maybe your EU friends will send you a doggy bag.

  197. Macnakamura says:

    GMS this morning focus on police Scotland.
    Final question……. Why so reluctant to comply with FOI enquiry ?
    This from the BBC !!!

  198. call me dave says:

    Guardian take on the bye-election.

    Tory Brexit voters switched to us, say Lib Dems

    https://archive.is/0sQRg

    Electronics firm Semefab invests £1.25m in Fife site

    Semefab – which earlier this year reported a return to profitability – exports 85 per cent of its devices to Europe, the US and the Far East.

    https://archive.is/XtlCO

  199. ronnie anderson says:

    Ah wiz thinking aboot putting up ah Crowdfunder appeal to send Zak Goldsmith ah Scottish produce Food Parcel , or would it best be left until we see what his final salary amount is.

    Im wary of Wingers wie Big Blowtorches.

  200. Chic McGregor says:

    Stoker
    “Theresa May banned from EU dinner?”

    She’ll just have to make do with her English Brexit then.

    http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f390/chicmac/FullEnglishBrexit.jpg

  201. Balaaargh says:

    What Mr Peffers said.

    Alex Rowley is not only Labour, he is FIFE Labour. A more sleekit, perfidious bunch of two-faced bastards you will not find.

    Alex Rowley was election agent for mucky Brown, the boy from the manse. Everything Alex Rowley says is for the benefit of Alex Rowley. He will play the home rule card to position himself as Dugdale’s replacement by “listening to the voices of traditional Labour voters” to be conveniently forgotten after an election.

  202. ronnie anderson says:

    Wee tip ( naw no fae blue peter cabinet )

    Blue /White bin bags cut into 3″ strips & tie in ah bow & adorn ah Lamppost Saltire’s abound lol.

  203. orri says:

    The clever reference to sovereignty ignores the actual wording of the clause in the 1998 Act

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/46/section/28#section-28-8

    28 Acts of the Scottish Parliament.

    (1)Subject to section 29, the Parliament may make laws, to be known as Acts of the Scottish Parliament.

    (2)Proposed Acts of the Scottish Parliament shall be known as Bills; and a Bill shall become an Act of the Scottish Parliament when it has been passed by the Parliament and has received Royal Assent.

    (3)A Bill receives Royal Assent at the beginning of the day on which Letters Patent under the Scottish Seal signed with Her Majesty’s own hand signifying Her Assent are recorded in the Register of the Great Seal.

    (4)The date of Royal Assent shall be written on the Act of the Scottish Parliament by the Clerk, and shall form part of the Act.

    (5)The validity of an Act of the Scottish Parliament is not affected by any invalidity in the proceedings of the Parliament leading to its enactment.

    (6)Every Act of the Scottish Parliament shall be judicially noticed.

    (7)This section does not affect the power of the Parliament of the United Kingdom to make laws for Scotland.

    [F1(8)But it is recognised that the Parliament of the United Kingdom will not normally legislate with regard to devolved matters without the consent of the Scottish Parliament.]

    There’s no explicit mention that Westminster is Sovereign. The obvious point is that should Westminster actually legislate without consent then Holyrood will very swiftly reverse that legislation. It’s a game of legislative ping pong that the SNP will only be too happy to engage in. The Queen is getting on in years and forcing her to put on the big hat and scrawl her name is too much effort for May and her ilk to only have to do so again is only going to piss her of.

    Also check out clause 5.

  204. Bob Mack says:

    @Ronnie Anderson,

    Zac is the second wealthiest MP in the House of Commons £300 million net worth.
    He should be sending food parcels

  205. orri says:

    Almost forgot, the irony is that the whole sodding case is about the Government getting around Parliamentary Sovereignty by assuming that the Queen will simply do as they ask.

  206. galamcennalath says:

    Re May being excluded from EU dinner.

    Perhaps they didn’t like her wee end of dinner speech at the last one.

    Or, perhaps she chews her food with her mouth open.

  207. Proud Cybernat says:

    “(3)A Bill receives Royal Assent at the beginning of the day on which Letters Patent under the Scottish Seal signed with Her Majesty’s own hand signifying Her Assent are recorded in the Register of the Great Seal.”

    Surely the wrong appellation used here? Before James VI hot-footed it down to take the English crown, his appellation among Scots was “Your Grace”. The appellation “Your Majesty” was the somewhat more ostentatious term used for the English monarch.

    So, “Her Grace, Queen Elizabeth of Scots”.

    I can be as pedantic as the next.

  208. sandycraig says:

    Wullie Rennie says “John Major is a credible voice”.

    No on Spitting Image he wisny.

  209. Dr Jim says:

    Around 9pm last night I nipped round to my local Morrisons (I know I know) for a bottle Barrs Ginger beer (love that stuff) and piled up on the fag counter were all the papers waiting to be sent back, the thing is there were absolutely heaps and I’ve never seen that many before, they took up more than half the counter and it’s a big counter

    Now I live in Bishopbriggs, for those who don’t know that’s Johnny Nicolsons constituency and it’s a bit spam belty with lots of money (except me) and they are Express readers and Mail readers mostly (horrible intit) but those were the unsold publications that topped the heaps, and there were heaps

    Maybe folk are turning off all newspapers now for fear of them all lying and in a way that can only be a good thing and the evil cybernat plan is working

    The information’s out there you just have to let it in
    but not from a newspaper
    Because what’s the age group that reads newspapers? Buzzer sounds!!! The No Voter…..10 points Yaaay!

  210. Liz g says:

    Proud Cybernat @ 12.10
    The law in areas like this are always a total fudge.
    If it was at all clear there would be no need for judge’s.
    What the attorney general is trying to argue… I think… is that we run the law on precedent.
    The UK Court’s are allowed to draw that precedent from other closely aligned legal systems EG the US,and quote judgements in those Court’s to make their arguments.
    But only to make their arguments.
    It’s supposed to in theory help the Judge’s reach their decision.

    I personally can’t see how that claim that the legal system is too similar will work here.
    Other than inviting the Court to indirectly give the impression that it can see no difference between the the Soverenty of the two signatures of the Treaty.
    Thus setting the precedent for any future case that directly asked for a judgement on a Soverenty question.

    But having said that I also can’t see how and under what circumstances a Court could rule on Soverenty anyway.
    Mainly because it would be a bit of a paradox to hold that Soverenty was subject to a Court ruling.
    I would have said it should work the other way around
    IE. Holyrood with the support of the Scottish MPs dose something “Sovereign” the people support it and the Court of Session rule it legal.
    Job done… Westminster have no where to go ( other than the use of force ) Soverenty is established.

    I am saying that because I see Soverenty as a Political decision first, not a legal one.
    Much the same way as Westminster are trying to argue that the word… Normally..in the Scotland Act is not for the court’s to decide,but rather for the politicians.
    Although I did notice that they haven’t said which politicians,cause the Holyrood one’s had to approve that act as well.
    Once they have decided what it’s ment to mean,the Court’s will then apply it.
    Hope I am making some sense here!!!

  211. Robert Kerr says:

    Annent the English/Scots law similarities it should be remembered that there is a 98.8% similarity between human and chimp DNA.

    http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/permanent-exhibitions/human-origins-and-cultural-halls/anne-and-bernard-spitzer-hall-of-human-origins/understanding-our-past/dna-comparing-humans-and-chimps.

    The devil is always in the detail!

  212. ronnie anderson says:

    @ Bob Mack Ah canny see that happening any time soon hiz names Goldsmith an its no goldplated Goldsmith 24 carrot , he kin eat cake if he likes carrots . lol

  213. The Man in the Jar says:

    Seeing how its quite quiet here’s a wee OT to keep yourselves amused.

    Some Icelandic cartoons 😀

    http://9gag.com/gag/adqvXG9?ref=mfsidebar

  214. galamcennalath says:

    O/T Good article ..

    “People’s concerns over immigration are being fueled by a corrupt media and lazy politicians who cannot account for their own failings. It is easier to claim that there is too much demand than admit you failed to meet supply.”

    http://evolvepolitics.com/michael-rosen-absolutely-nails-britains-obsession-immigration-complete-utter-nonsense/

  215. DerekM says:

    “The Attorney General is stating that there is effectively little difference between Scots Law and English law, and cites an example to prove that fact.”

    You know he is kind of right about that in the same way that French or Irish law has effectively little difference to English or Scots law.

    The law is the law after all,the problem arises when you get some eejit who think the laws of England are applicable in other countries the clue is in the name English law,and for the hard of thinking yoon that means the laws of the country England not the UK or Britain and definitely not Scotland.

    Though they would just love to hold English law over us and do away with Scots law it is one of those things that has kept the Scottish free identity alive and in so doing is a threat to English domination over the countries of these islands and their insane quest to create a fictitious British “one” nation.

  216. Sinky says:

    UK government boasts that “The Vow” was a gigantic con-trick

    Next week at the Supreme Court, Westminster is trying curb the powers of the Scottish Parliament and has submitted the following to the Appeal judges

    “The legal irrelevance of the Sewel convention is expressly accepted”

    “the convention does not purport to prescribe an absolute rule. Its content is only that “Westminster would not normally legislate” (emphasis added). Whether circumstances are ‘normal’ is a quintessential matter of political judgment for the Westminster Parliament and not the courts. There are no judicial standards by which to measure such a question…” More at:

    http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/uk-government-boasts-that-vow-was.html

    So much for the strongest devolved parliament in the world as regularly quoted by Mundell and his side kick Ian Murray.

    This is the sort of stuff that should be all over the print and broadcasting media but not in North Britain.

  217. orri says:

    The buffoon cites a case that took place prior to devolution when control of UK and Scots law was in the same hands.

  218. call me dave says:

    Lord Wallace: Holyrood may have Brexit legal role

    Don’t get your hopes up. >:(

    https://archive.is/Xb2tH

  219. Dan Huil says:

    So Hammond says there will be no brexit deal for Scotland. So Scotland will have to obey Westminster. Aye right. Even britnats like Hammond know if Scotland is prevented from staying in the single market in particular and the EU in general Nicola Sturgeon and the Scottish parliament [SNP and Greens] has every right to call IndyRef2. Indeed Holyrood should not bother with IndyRef2 and just have a straight vote on ending the union with England. Constitutional crisis? Too bloody true. The more constitutional crises the better. Time for Holyrood to get angry.

  220. CameronB Brodie says:

    The Scottish and English legal systems are tools of colonial oppression. Submission to their depiction of reality is to accept the bondage of medievalists. Step out of your slavery and in to the post-modern age, ffs Scotland.

    The Acts of Union institutionalised Scotland’s slavery.

    Put the master’s tools down!

    “The right to development is an inalienable human right by virtue of which every human person and all peoples are entitled to participate in, contribute to, and enjoy economic, social, cultural and political development, in which all human rights and fundamental freedoms can be fully realized.” (Article 1.1, Declaration on the Right to Development)

    “The human right to development also implies the full realization of the right of peoples to self-determination, which includes, subject to the relevant provisions of both International Covenants on Human Rights, the exercise of their inalienable right to full sovereignty over all their natural wealth and resources.” (Article 1.2)

    http://www.un.org/en/events/righttodevelopment/pdf/rtd_at_a_glance.pdf

  221. mike d says:

    I think the sg should call Westminsters bluff,spend their budget on things that matter,then when the money runs out blame Westminster for shortchanging Scotland.that will open some eyes. And when the lying yoons try to retort with fiscal incompetence. I don’t think many will be taken in with their lies.

  222. gus1940 says:

    RE last night’s QT I thought that Mussolini was killed in 1945.

  223. Brian Powell says:

    call me dave

    Ironic that lord Wallace belongs to a Party that has caved into Brexit now looking to the only Party that has stood steadily against the Tories and Brexit.

    When Brexit happens to England and Wales I’m sure the LibDems will claim they have softened the Tory approach, just as they claimed when in coalition with them. However all they claimed to have modified was gone within 6 months of the 2010 GE.

  224. Flower of Scotland says:

    While it’s quiet on here…….

    Went to see the superb film “A United Kingdom” Its about a black African King marrying a white girl and their subsequent fight with the British State to regain their Independence. It’s now called Botswana.

    There was a row in front of me with about six 70-80 year old women. They clapped and cheered at the end.

    The experience was very uplifting. Hopefully they were yessers!

  225. Robert Peffers says:

    @Capella says: 2 December, 2016 at 10:56 am:

    “Willie Rennie was in Richmond fighting Scottish Democracy. A little off piste in Richmond perhaps, he thinks Nicola has “no leverage” over Westminster. Whereas the Liberals:

    I was rushing to catch up as I’m having internet connection problems and I misread that post, Capella. I thought you had said, “Willie Rennie was in Richmond fighting Scottish Democracy. A little half-pissed – or was it you who made a typo?
    ;-))

  226. manandboy says:

    So Phillip Hammond comes, or is sent, to Scotland to tell Nicola to ‘stop clutching at straws’. The irony of course is that by saying this, Hammond is himself clutching at straws. His WISH and HOPE is that Nicola and the Yes movement give up and just accept Brexit á la May.
    The reason is because the British Establishment branch of international neoliberalism has a plan. Same as the previous plan, but a few name changes. The 1% get the money, the tax paying masses get sfa.

    Here in the UK, this means that the Conservative party plans to stay in power, and wealth, whatever comes, and if that means becoming an extreme right wing fascist party, deporting millions of EU citizens back to continental Europe, and, shafting the 17 million brexit voters, while intensifying austerity, then so be it. But here’s the key idea – they do not want any opposition, stiff or otherwise. And right now the plan is to destroy the confidence of the anticipated opposition – especially the SNP – by saying its hopeless, give up, it’s impossible, stop clutching at straws.

    This tactic is as old as the hills, and it has worked a treat in England’s favour in the past. But that is in the past. The world is changing and no one has given the UK an opt-out clause.
    Anger is fuelling a desire for change across so many countries as a result of austerity, industrial scale tax avoidance/evasion, and casino banking – with no one being held responsible and being sent to jail.
    Brexit,Trump, Hollande, who’s next? The British Establishment?

  227. Robert Peffers says:

    @Macca73 says: 2 December, 2016 at 11:08 am@

    … In other words… please keep her in place and keep backing her .. we’ll be independent before you know it with buffoons like this trying to speak the case of the union!!!

    What case for the In Union would that be, Macca73?

    I’ve been looking for such a case for nigh on 80 years and I haven’t heard, seen or read any viable case for the union in all those years. What is more I have been well aware for even longer than that of a very good case against the Union and the case keeps getting better as we speak.

  228. Chic McGregor says:

    When Tories say “We have to confront an ideology which thinks we should take money away from hard working people and give it to those who don’t.”

    All they gotta do is look in the mirror.

  229. starlaw says:

    manandboy

    Well said. I’m fed up listening to the BUM’s rattling on about the polls not moving. I don’t believe them or their polls this is propaganda full steam ahead from a panic struck Westminster. Before indi1 I posted about Westminsters secret department. The Ministry of Disinformation . This is now the busiest department in Westminster

  230. Snode1965 says:

    Orri,
    Great post regarding the 1998 Act.
    For me the most significant part is no.5, every Act of the Scottish Parliament shall be judicially noticed, as the opposite opinion is the crux of the Westminster defence.

  231. Dr Jim says:

    The case for the Union

    Basbados just celebrated it’s Independence from the Union and the Royal Family sent Prince Harry to mark the occasion
    Over 60 other countries fought and died to get out of the United Kingdom of England and don’t want to come back

    Case closed

  232. galamcennalath says:

    Anyone else feel uneasy that the Tories are making IndyRef2 more likely, but that doesn’t seem to worry them?

    What makes them confident enough to carry on kicking Scotland and her government?

    Do they thing they can stop IndyRef2? Or win it? Or is the Union not as high on their priorities as Brexit?

    I feel quite optimistic about the way events are unfolding, however I can’t understand why the Tories seem so blazé in their dealings with Scotland.

  233. Robert Peffers says:

    @Breeks says: 2 December, 2016 at 11:19 am:

    ” … I have misgivings about the Supreme Court Case because I very much doubt it’s going to address the constitutional issue of Scotland’s sovereignty first because it is beyond its jurisdiction, and secondly, that is not what it has been asked to do.”

    The Supreme Court of England doesn’t have any jurisdiction under Scottish law.

    There is no doubt that the bipartite Treaty of Union that gave birth to the United Kingdom was very, very clear that the legal systems of both Kingdoms was independent in perpetuity.

    That being so the only way that a Westminster Parliament can claim it has jurisdiction over Scottish law is by ignoring the Treaty of Union.

    If it ignores the Treaty of Union then the Kingdom of Scotland is not part of a United Kingdom and, as there were/are only two kingdoms in Britain there cannot be a United Kingdom.

    To make that absolutely crystal clear, Westminster is without doubt actually the parliament of the Country of England – if it is not then perhaps someone may care to explain just where is the parliament of the Country of England?

    The Westminster one runs England directly under English Law. It funds only England directly with United Kingdom funding and it decides what every other country in the Union gets by way of a block grant from Westminster that runs England directly and even imposes EVEL upon everyone else.

    If it looks like an English Parliament, acts like an English Parliament, is funded as an English parliament and devolves English powers to the rest of us then by de-duck-tion it probably is an English Parliament.

    Joking aside, the Treaty of Union says that the two legal system are independent of each other and thus there can be no common supreme court as Scots lawyers are not able to practice English law and English lawyers cannot practice Scots Law.

    In effect the Treaty of Union no longer exists as Scotland and England have long ceased to be equally sovereign partners and if there is no treaty now then Scotland is already free and we should just walk away and leave the Parliament of England to get on with running it own country.

  234. Dan Huil says:

    Someone has just told me Boris Johnson was on TV this morning quoting [embarrassingly] Robert Burns?!

  235. CameronB Brodie says:

    Chic McGregor @ 2:20pm
    You’ll appreciate that defining anything in nature is a precise task Chic, unless you are happy to place your faith in per-conceived notions and ideology. Without a connection between public policy and ‘nature’ (real-life circumstances), there’s no hope of achieving a sustainable, inclusive future. Social Darwinist minds simply fail to grasp this scientific principle, or they are incapable of caring as they lack human empathy. The same applies to ideological BritNats.

    ABSTRACT
    This paper presents a historical examination of the influence of the Darwinian metaphor ‘the struggle for existence’ on a variety of scientific theories which
    inform our current understanding of the prospects for sustainable development.

    The first part of the paper traces the use of the metaphor of struggle through two distinct avenues of thought relevant to the search for sustainable development. One of these avenues leads to the biophysical critique of conventional development popularised by ‘ecological economists’ such as Georgescu-Roegen and Daly. This critique suggests that modern economic systems have gone astray by failing to respect the biological and physical limits to development and that they should be adapted to make them more like ecological systems. The other avenue leads to the modern insights of evolutionary psychology. These latter insights suggest that in certain key respects, the economic system (and actors within it) are already behaving more or less like an ecological system, driven as they are by evolutionary imperatives.

    Consequently, this second avenue appears to offer far bleaker prospects for achieving sustainable development than the first. However, the final part of the paper re-examines the historical roots of the metaphor itself, and suggests a number of ways in which a critical response to those historical roots might influence our understanding of the prospects for sustainable development.

    http://jayhanson.us/_Biology/SustainabilityAndTheStruggleForExistence.pdf

    * paragraph breaks added

  236. Meg merrilees says:

    Liz g 1.00pm

    You do make sense.

    Re the possible shafting by the Westmonster gov if they interpret ‘normally’ against us – can we not reply with (Article 19 of the Treaty ?) the section about the UK gov cannot legislate if that will affect the’ private rights and evident utility’ of the people of Scotland. I think this is part of the Lord Advocates specific argument.

  237. Clapper57 says:

    If ever there was proof that Corbyn supporters would turn against us who want INDY then the last two days are indeed proof.

    I read certain high profile twitter accounts of Corbyn supporters who relish outing the hypocrisy of both the media and Red / Blue Tories.

    However their Tweets on Corbyn absence at vote on Blair in HOC were conspicuously absent in fact nada was tweeted in relation to this debate …..hmm wonder why….and this after previously their constant outpouring at how toxic Blair has been to Labour party.Also NOTHING on WASPI tweeted either !!!

    Today they also tweet NOTHING about sanctions debate in HOC and this after months of relentless naming and shaming of Tories who voted to cut money from Benefits and ESA cuts. Could it perhaps be because of the shamefully low attendance of Labour on benches.

    Or perhaps because the above was introduced by SNP MP’s.

    Perhaps they should look in the mirror and realise it not only those they seek to shame that are hypocrites but that they too are willing to play politics when it suits them also.

    I am naive I know, but many things they have tweeted have been spot on however if they too start playing the same MSM Omission game then they are really no better than those they seek to shame.

    Party first seems to be the message. I have now lost respect for their pseudo socialist messages because when push comes to shove they are proving to be just as bad as those they seek to condemn.

  238. Stoker says:

    Chic McGregor wrote at 12:37 pm

    “Theresa May banned from EU dinner? She’ll just have to make do with her English Brexit then.”
    http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f390/chicmac/FullEnglishBrexit.jpg

    Aye, bit fit aboot the eggs? Ah bet they’re Scottish Free Range!
    😉

  239. CameronB Brodie says:

    P.S. Britain is turning in to a playground for ‘economic eugenicists’.

  240. Dr Jim says:

    What’s the first thing England has ever done when a country became Independent from it…Establish Trade then called it the Commonwealth
    There is no country England won’t trade with out of spite so this nonsense of lots of trade with England might be somehow jeopardised is baloney of the highest order otherwise we still wouldn’t be talking to America, coz they had a really big fight with them didn’t they

    Also most of the trade done isn’t with England it’s through England which is a bit different from the way the opposition paints it

    One last thing Patrick Harvie says he supports Independence well I’m afraid that’s just not enough
    While The opposition shrieks their collective heads of on a daily basis about NO to another referendum Patrick remains very quiet on the subject and I would suggest if he wants to make Holyrood the bolder place he’s always banging on about along with his Green issues that the Tories have torn holes in, he perhaps aught to start taking some of the responsibility for the constitutional side of the argument and take a bit more active part instead of leaving it all to the First Minister to do the lot herself

    Otherwise what’s the point of calling yourself a political party if all you’re going to do is be a Save the planet protester, folk do that for a hell of a lot less money than Patrick Harvie and co and don’t get a seat in Parliament to do it

  241. CameronB Brodie says:

    Re. Patrick Harvie. He risks being perceived as playing party politics at a time of crisis for his nation a.k.a. wanking his ego.

    @ Patrick Harvie
    Why is Scottish independence not the Green’s TOP manifesto commitment? You do understand the principles of sustainability?

  242. geeo says:

    Andrew Neil on Daily Politic programme trips up and STATES “we had NO IDEA that, in the end, Scotland would have been allowed to use Sterling or not”.

    Funny that, because that was not the BBC line during the indyref….!!

    Around the 15 minute mark.

  243. Chic McGregor says:

    Stoker,

    That piccie was labelled for the Brexit campaign and ‘Full English’ really meant ‘Full British’ because that is what a morning fry up was mainly called, even here in Scotland.

    There were never signs that said ‘Full British Breakfast’.

    Now we know the result. it is almost literally appropriate.

    And, I notice a lot more places up here now have ‘Full Scottish Breakfast’ instead these days.

    Unlike most other agri-products, egg production per capita is pretty similar in England and Scotland.

  244. Greannach says:

    Blow for Sturgeon as SNP fail to take Richmond seat!

  245. call me dave says:

    Revealed – Theresa May’s Brexit strategy.

    Mrs May’s plan seems to be to leave the EU, but opt back into European laws on a sector-by-sector basis

    https://archive.is/127gr

    Fraser Nelson: We need a Zac’s law:

    MPs who trigger a by-election should not be allowed to stand again

    https://archive.is/qHYXb

  246. Valerie says:

    That’s Mhairi Blacks Bill about sanctions been talked out.

    How disgusting.

    Jeering at Angus Robertson wishing the House a good St Andrews day. Two SNP Bills filibustered out.

    If we don’t get out, this is simply the tip of the iceberg.

    Wouldn’t surprise me in the least if they trialled work camps up here, if there is a second No vote, they could bus Scots into Lincolnshire to replace the migrant workers, and call it retraining.

    I’m definitely considering my options in the event of not taking our Independence.

  247. frogesque says:

    Keep reading this thread as Kezia Dugdale Fat Check.

    Never mind.

    Everyone got their popcorn in for the SC next week?

  248. Robert Peffers says:

    @orri says: 2 December, 2016 at 12:45 pm:

    “Almost forgot, the irony is that the whole sodding case is about the Government getting around Parliamentary Sovereignty by assuming that the Queen will simply do as they ask.”

    You’re not getting this sovereignty thing Orri, are you?

    Just take a moment to think about it and consider the facts.

    In 1603 the Kingdom of England claimed there was a Union of the Crowns and English history still teaches that 1603 was a Union of the Crowns. Yet in fact the two Kingdoms remained independent with their own parliaments. So there was no union of the crowns. In fact The Stewart monarchs spent their reigns trying to form a United Kingdom and failed. If they were legally in a union of the crowns why did the English parliament need a Treaty of Union in 1707 if the two were already united?

    The true legal position was that James VI inherited the crown of England and thus became James I of England but was never designated James I of Great Britain.
    He was legally James I of England & James VI of Scotland.

    For the very good reason that under Scots Law, (not Devine Right), he was not legally sovereign and thus could not use divine right to annex the three country Kingdom of England to Scotland. Conversely as Sovereign monarch of England he could not annex Scotland to England as again he had not Scottish sovereignty in the first place and the Scots, who were legally sovereign have never, over 300 years later agreed to give away their sovereignty. In fact have made several Claims of Right.

    Then, in 1688 the Kingdoms of England parliament had their, “Glorious Revolution”, against their sovereign monarch and they deposed him but had not the legal jurisdiction to depose him as non-sovereign Monarch of the Kingdom of Scotland.

    Then the English Parliament invited King Billy & Queen Mary of Orange to ascend the throne of the Kingdom of England but they had no legal claim to set them up as monarchs of Scotland and that kicked off the Jacobite uprisings that were to bridge the actual Treaty of Union.

    Yet the Englanders still claim the Jacobites were rebelling against the Monarchy of the still independent Kingdom of England.

    So, in 1688 the three country Kingdom of England became a Constitutional Monarchy as King Billy and Queen Mary were only getting the crown if they legally delegated their royal divine right to the parliament of England.

    But when, exactly, in your view, did the Kingdom of Scotland become part of their constitutional Monarchy?

    There isn’t a single word about that important event in the treaty of union and in fact the English army was still fighting the Scottish Jacobites nearly 40 years after the Treaty was signed.

    So Westminster is retrospectively applying the English Kingdom’s legislation that applies only to the monarch of the Kingdom of England upon the sovereign people of Scotland yet Westminster signed the Treaty of Union that states the two legal systems are forever independent?

    You do see the legal problem don’t you?

  249. CameronB Brodie says:

    Just as their Victorian predecessors, modern-day social Darwinist minds look to new sciences to provide bogus justifications for a contemporary eugenicist appreciation of society. Modernist solutions have no potential to assist the inclusion of the poor. Without such inclusion, all hope for a sustainable future is futile.

    Privilege shapes minds to a “right-minded” conceit that ‘there is no alternative’. Funny that.

    What Is Evolutionary Psychology?

    Our bodies evolved over eons, slowly calibrating to the African savanna on which 98 percent of our ancestors lived and died. So, too, did our brains. Evolutionary psychology postulates that the mind is shaped by pressure to survive and reproduce. We jealously guard romantic partners and cherish our closest relatives above all others, lest we fail to pass on our genes. We easily acquire language, which is critical for cooperation and hence survival. Evolutionary psychology acknowledges these forces but stresses the ultimate (and largely unconscious) gene’s eye view of behavior.

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/basics/evolutionary-psychology

    @David Toffance
    Of course, you are aware of this FAN-BOY? Perhaps you can explain to Scotland when you are next on the BBC?

  250. CameronB Brodie says:

    Funny that.

    No, not in the slightest. “Right-ninded-ness” sows the seeds of “habitus” and “structural violence”, thus establishing an environment and social system of inter-generational social exclusion and poverty.

    That’s your Tory mindset that is.

    There is no sustainable future for Scotland within the UK.

  251. ScottishPsyche says:

    In the unlikelihood of a Slab MP from days of yore putting forward a private member’s bill like Mhairi Black’s, would if have been talked out in this way? Maybe.

    Even if Labour give support it is done with such little dignity or honour – witness Ian Austin the other day. Like some here, I was prepared to give Jeremy Corbyn a chance but he is as much a part of a Westminster clique as anyone.

    No matter how reasonable and how much the SNP play along with the game that is Westminster, they are being told where their place is. They are outsiders and by extension so are everyone who supports them. I have never felt so disconnected and distant from rUK in my life. I am being made to feel as Anne McLaughlin says, utterly powerless. I can vote all I like but they hold all the cards.

    What does it take to wake up those holding us back?

  252. orri says:

    @Robert

    Oh sod of.

    I get it.

    I also get that in the case of the rUK they don’t use their version of the Royal Prerogative themselves they ASK the Queen to do so. That’s the fucking point about it being in the FM’s powers on devolved issues. Parliament can’t pass laws without them being finalised via Royal Assent. Refusal to do so is a Royal Prerogative. That means that Nicola Sturgeon can advise the Queen that she should withhold Royal Assent in cases where devolved powers are involved. Which in turn means that unless Westminster abide by the Sewel Convention they may find that they’ve got a rather messy Constitutional Crisis on their hands. Ironically by not specifying exactly which parts of the Royal Prerogative are in the remit of Holyrood the Scotland Act may very well give us control of a portion of that in her capacity of Queen of England.

    As to you Constitutional Monarchy bit, Scotland has been one since 1320, if not before. That’s why our royal standard bearer has the heraldic joke of a golden collar in the shape of crown and a gold chain. Something that is missing from the “british” lion.

  253. CameronB brodie says:

    @Murdo Fraser
    Re. Evolutionary Psychology. Got an informed opinion Mungo?

  254. Chic McGregor says:

    CameronB

    Good paper there from Tim Jackson. It summarizes well the main lines of thinking, none of which I agree with.

  255. Phil Robertson says:

    Like many posting on this site, you seem to have a problem with figures of speech. Try looking up “hyperbole”.

  256. Proud Cybernat says:

    “The UK is the most economically divided country in Europe.” – Bank of England.

    Who knew?

  257. CameronB Brodie says:

    Chic McGregor
    Thanks Chic, just doing what I can to slay the beast of ideology.

  258. Phydaux says:

    I understand that Kezia Dugdale and her fellow Unionist MSPs will stick to the master plan of SNP badness ad infinitum.What you see is what you get…i.e. public servants treating the people of Scotland with contempt.

    I understand that the rigged Opinion Polls is another weapon they use to try and influence our thoughts.Opinion Polls are increasingly discredited and no longer believed.

    I understand that another weapon they use is political censorship…I.e. the news blackout of Nicola’s trip to Dublin and the banning of the Saltire on public buildings.Anything which doesn’t fit in with their master plan will be ignored… create an information void.Thing is, the desire for truth within everyone is increasingly helped by WOS and other sources of alternative media.The MSM is choking itself to death.

    To understand something is to be liberated from it, as someone once said ( can’t remember who but it stuck in my mind ).Now that I understand this, none of their weapons of choice concerns me.I will keep my desires and wishes steadily fixed on the things which do concern me…i.e. our right to self governance and freedom from the ” psycho bastards ” who destroy people’s lives.

    Indy ref2/Independence is on its way.I hope we have the benefit of hindsight, the increasing insight into their dirty tricks and the foresight to envisage a better future for one another.

    I noticed that Barbados, who celebrated their 50th year of Independence, got their freedom on oor St.Andrew’s Day 30th November!

  259. Gary45% says:

    Proud Cybernat,
    The UK is funded by Scotland, the southern part admittedly makes cars etc but they are not UK companies. The “City” produces SFA, apart from money laundering and greed.
    It is going to be a riot watching the masses taking their businesses back to the EU, sit back and laugh, because I will.
    I would rather be a Joey Remoan than a racist ar*ehole.
    The big concern is Maggie May calling for an election early next year, because I reckon Engerland will either vote UTIT or LIEDUM, we could even have coalition???, then the Tories can sit back and watch the implosion, then in five years get voted in again, or am I being paranoid?
    Indy Ref2 Can’t come quick enough.

  260. call me dave says:

    Stakes are high as UK and Scottish Government QCs prepare for major constitutional battle (wont fully archive)

    https://archive.is/hEekb

    For those unable to get into the court, the proceedings will be live-streamed so anyone with an Internet access can watch the legal drama unfold.

    The online service has been “upgraded” so the site does not crash. Some 300,000 people will be able to watch proceedings at any one time.

    Given the importance of the case, more than 80 journalists from home and abroad have accredited; the highest number since the supreme court heard Wikileaks founder Julian Assange’s 2012 appeal against the validity of a European Arrest Warrant raised in Sweden. A media suite has also been established in the court building.

    The key ruling by the 11 judges is due early January.

  261. Robert Peffers says:

    @Liz g says: 2 December, 2016 at 1:00 pm

    “The law in areas like this are always a total fudge.
    If it was at all clear there would be no need for judge’s.”

    All law is total fudge, Liz g.

    “What the attorney general is trying to argue… I think… is that we run the law on precedent.”

    Not quite, Liz g, but damned close. The precedent thing is that once a judgement has already been made it establishes the precedent that then becomes the law. It must first be a point of law accepted by a senior judge.

    ” … But having said that I also can’t see how and under what circumstances a Court could rule on Soverenty anyway.”

    It cannot rule on actual sovereignty itself as under the law sovereignty is a God Given gift and thus only God can gift it. The thing about God is that the law is based upon the acceptance that there actually is a God.

    If we are taken to court the case is, “The Crown vs Joe or Josephine public and, “The Crown”, is sovereign as chosen by God by birth to a monarch. That is the Royal person is directly chosen by God’s as God’s appointed representative on Earth. Remember that to give evidence you are required to swear by God while holding a bible.

    ” … Mainly because it would be a bit of a paradox to hold that Soverenty was subject to a Court ruling.
    I would have said it should work the other way around”

    Exactly, but mainly because the courts cannot question the will of God. Which comes right back down to the papal precedent of conferring God’s sovereignty upon the People of Scotland by accepting that The Bruce could be thrown out by the people of Scotland for only those representing God have that power, (sovereignty).

    So just how are the judges on the Supreme court going to fudge that one? It is exactly what I have been preaching for many years. If the two Kingdoms that signed the Treaty are indeed sovereign then the precedent is that the monarch that wears both crowns is in the eyes of the law only sovereign in one kingdom and the guardian of the people’s sovereignty of the other and thus never the twain shall meet.

    There is also legal precedent under English law that a sovereign cannot give away the Kingdom’s sovereignty. Now think of that for a moment – If the law says that the sovereignty goes along with the kingdom and cannot be given away by the person chosen by God to hold that sovereignty then the sovereignty cannot have been given to a person if it remains the property of the kingdom.

    In other words the sovereignty rests with the kingdom but God chooses who wields it and his choice for Scotland was the people of Scotland.
    IE. Holyrood with the support of the Scottish MPs dose something “Sovereign” the people support it and the Court of Session rule it legal.
    Job done… Westminster have no where to go ( other than the use of force ) Soverenty is established.
    I am saying that because I see Soverenty as a Political decision first, not a legal one.
    Much the same way as Westminster are trying to argue that the word… Normally..in the Scotland Act is not for the court’s to decide,but rather for the politicians.
    Although I did notice that they haven’t said which politicians,cause the Holyrood one’s had to approve that act as well.
    Once they have decided what it’s ment to mean,the Court’s will then apply it.
    Hope I am making some sense here!!!

  262. Liz g says:

    Meg Merrilees @ 2.59
    Thanks Meg it was nice of you to say so.

    I think the article 18 bit only means that the government can’t legislate but parliament still can,which really only helps to get the issue before parliament.
    We are still stuck by having to go along with how Westminster vote.

    But the interpretation of the word Normally is an interesting one.
    If Holyrood decided to get that one in a Court,its actually Fluffys own words (which will be in Hansard) that could potentially lose it for them.
    Westminster seem to be saying…..That the politicians will decide what normally is ment to mean.
    And that they have decided that it’s to mean UNUSUAL circumstances and Brexit fall’s into that category.

    What they are I think forgetting is that the Holyrood politicians also signed that act and they can interpret the word Normally to mean an Emergency situation where Westminster needed to act and there simply wasn’t time to consult with Holyrood.
    Westminster also forgot that they are subject to the Supreme Court when disputes arise,about how the law that’s been written is to be interpreted.

    When the government (Fluffy) was asked specifically to remove the word Normally,by Scottish MP’s as it was a veto for Westminster to overrule Holyrood if Holyrood were to disagree.

    Fluffy replied more than once.
    This word was not there to act as a veto,and he could not even imagine any circumstances in which there would be a situation where Westminster would need to override Holyrood.

    What he was implying was this was a simple fail safe should there be a dramatic event and Westminster needed to act,and it wouldn’t be practical to consult with Holyrood.
    (A Lockerbie type thing… where the army had to close a road,something like that!!!)
    So that’s exactly what Holyrood can say that they signed up to.
    There is plenty of time to seek consent.
    In fact there may even be a precedent somewhere….as in a doctor won’t NORMALLY operate without seeking consent but sometimes they are allowed to if there isn’t time to get it.
    Or even in the law’s that allows a teacher on a school trip to give medical consent via a form the parents sign.
    I personally hope Holyrood take that one all the way to Europe because the best evidence of how the word Normally was ment to be used is from that debate and Fluffy himself

  263. CameronB Brodie says:

    OT. I see Farage (as in garage) posting pics of him standing in front of Lindisfarne(?). Is he suggesting that he is a defender of Christianity? Is he a neo-fascist attempting to make Christianity central to his dog whistle repertoire? He is up the Donald, after all.

  264. Dr Jim says:

    Opec change their policy putting oil prices up good for Westminster Baad for the motorist, but it might go down again, good for the motorist Baad for Westminster

    More oil and bigger finds being drilled in Scotland always Baad no matter what
    Except for one strange thing, when the oil price halved Scotlands GDP only fell by 1% so why do they keep trying to tell us that without oil we can’t be Independent when we don’t have the revenue from it anyway

    Logically if we were Independent and did get the revenue no matter whether it went up or down we’d be a major sight better off than we now are BUT the Yookay of England are the big losers because it seems to be their economy that’s most affected not Scotlands

    If the deluded unbelievers can’t see that then they don’t want to

  265. galamcennalath says:

    Ruth Davidson on Twitter …

    “Appropriating the patron saint to pass the hat around for a partisan cause. I’ll say again – the SNP is not Scotland. ”

    … says the woman heading the Greater England (North) branch office of the de facto English Nationalist Party.

    I understand conservation (small ‘c’) politics and policies, though I neither subscribe to or summary them. However, I have no doubt there is a place on the Scottish political spectrum for such ideas.

    The BIG problem we have is that place is occupied by a foreign political entity i.e. the English Nationalist Party aka Conservatives.

  266. galamcennalath says:

    Solidarity from Brussels!

    “To celebrate St Andrew’s Day, Belgium’s much-loved Mannekin Pis statue in Brussels has been decked out in a custom kilt outfit”

    http://www.alynsmith.eu/belgium_s_mannekin_pis_is_a_true_scotsman

  267. Proud Cybernat says:

    Ruth Davidson – Leader of the NSP.

  268. Dan Huil says:

    This is a comment from the National website which I think you might find interesting.

    From Marga:

    Hammond may not have the last word. Here’s a comment from an independentist Catalan MEP, Ramon Tremosa, in an interview with a normally reliable electronic newspaper, Vilaweb, about a forthcoming book, which I translate literally from Catalan:

    “In the first Council meeting after Brexit the possibility of accepting an independent Scotland was discussed. And 27 countries said yes, and only one refused. That afternoon, a very nervous Rajoy stated that Scotland would leave along with the rest of the United Kingdom and that there would be no exception. But Rajoy can’t mark the position of the rest of the states. He has no force against the interest of the other 27. If Scotland forces a second referendum and wins, the EU will be quick to accept it. Remember that just after the Brexit vote, Nicola Sturgeon held a round of meetings in Brussels with all the top European authorities.”

    http://www.vilaweb.cat/noticies/ramon-tremosa-i-aleix-sarri-aqui-pensem-que-anem-molt-lents-a-brussel%c2%b7les-consideren-que-anem-molt-de-pressa-entrevista/

    Can’t vouch for the accuracy of this report, but it is interesting. As are his comments about Brexit and current EU, but that’s apart.

  269. Les Wilson says:

    We can get EU updates by email as they happen, from Alyn Smith.
    Here
    http://www.alynsmith.eu/stay_informed

  270. CameronB Brodie says:

    Scotland will achieve it’s emancipation DESPITE our legal system, which will hopefully come under rigorous scrutiny and robust overhaul following independence, so as to ensure it respects human rights. It apparently fails to do so at present.

    The law must be in accordance with a written constitution built around the “Right to Development”, IMHO. Otherwise, Scots will continue to lack protection from the rule-of-law, leaving themselves open to further abuse of their inalienable human rights. The intensity of this abuse can only be expectedto intensify, over time.

    “The right to development is an inalienable human right by virtue of which every human person and all peoples are entitled to participate in, contribute to, and enjoy economic, social, cultural and political development, in which all human rights and fundamental freedoms can be fully realized.” (Article 1.1, Declaration on the Right to Development)

    “The human right to development also implies the full realization of the right of peoples to self-determination, which includes, subject to the relevant provisions of both International Covenants on Human Rights, the exercise of their inalienable right to full sovereignty over all their natural wealth and resources.” (Article 1.2)

    http://www.un.org/en/events/righttodevelopment/pdf/rtd_at_a_glance.pdf

  271. CameornB Brodie says:

    OT. Hundred of thousands, if not millions, of innocent civilians have died violent, unnatural deaths as a result of British Labour and Tony Blair’s ‘War of Terror’?

    Is that evil demagogue being pimped again?

    ROLL ON INDYREF2

  272. John H. says:

    galamcennalath says:
    2 December, 2016 at 2:49 pm

    “Anyone else feel uneasy that the Tories are making IndyRef2 more likely, but that doesn’t seem to worry them?

    What makes them confident enough to carry on kicking Scotland and her government?”

    Tha’ts been bothering me too. Are they confident that whatever they did last time will work again? We will have to be vigilant, we are dealing with cunning, unprincipled liars

  273. Fireproofjim says:

    Wonderful results from Police Scotland. Only 80 slight errors in responding to 3,500,000 emergency calls (one in 22,000). Only two of which resulted in a bad outcome. A great result.
    Or, as BBC Reporting Scotland puts it. ” a catalogue of errors ” in their leading report.
    Just another day in the SNP BAAD campaign by the BBC Unionists.

  274. call me dave says:

    BETRAYAL OF THE ENGLISH:
    Scottish MPs STILL rule England after Cameron ‘sold voters a pup’

    DAVID CAMERON’S flagship pledge to give English voters a voice against meddling Nicola Sturgeon was a barefaced “lie” and not worth the paper it was written on, experts concluded today in a damning assessment of his legacy.

    https://archive.is/tPHES

  275. Orri says:

    Not sure it is ever The Crown versus … In Scotland.
    The cases I’ve found are HMA which means Her Majestie’s Advocate. There’s also the case of McCormick v The Lord Advocate. The last one was the case that not only stated Parliamentary Sovereignty didn’t exist as a concept in Scots Law but also that calling herself QE2 was simply an exercise or Royal Prerogative with no legal implications. As such the title of a judge in a criminal case in Scotland is one of the Justiciary of Scotland vs the accused. There are no Crown Courts in Scotland.

  276. CameronB Brodie says:

    Fireproofjim
    It’s not just an attack on the democratically elected government of Scotland, the BBC aims to undermine Scotland’s self-confidence and resilience. They aim to squash opposition to colonial rule from London.

    I’d burn them to the ground but their increasingly unhinged bias is probably a more effect means of destroying their reason for existence.

    They stand below Queen then HMG, in the hierarchy of Britain’s Yoon Establishment. They are the enemy of free-thinking Scots.

  277. Macart says:

    @CameronB Brodie

    Yeah,I’ve seen what passes for ‘Christian spirit’ in certain demographics of the better together/brexit camp and I’m not impressed.

    From the ‘obey your queen’ types right through to the ‘throw the immigrants into the sea’ brigade. Real right white Christians. Odd right enough considering the founder was pacifist who taught brotherly love and was, y’know, a furriner. His religious ‘zealotry’ came in the form of feeding refugess, healing the injured and infirm, preaching peace, love and understanding. Oh and even in his day, standing up for the marginalised, the poor and the ‘outsiders’ in society.

    Mind you radical concepts such as tolerance, charity, care, love and hope may be a step too far for some folk. I’d say their knowledge of the Christian faith extends only so far as the first line of a national anthem, the rest being a little too practical for them.

  278. CameronB Brodie says:

    P.S. There can be no other explanation as I am sure the BBC are capable of employing people who understand psychology and shit.

  279. Liz g says:

    John H @ 7.10 & galamcennalath
    I think it has crossed all our minds that they are overconfident when dealing with us.
    But it might just be that they are listening to Ruthie ect.
    They are always sayin Scotland doesn’t want another referendum and there’s no support for it.
    Plus the Whitehall crew are busy with Brexit.
    They do tend to believe their own propaganda.
    But I lean more towards they know we are going and are just trying to do what damage they can first and delay it as long as possible.
    Mainly because they seem to be setting the English public up to believe us going would be the best thing really,as we are just holding them back.
    But the really scary part is that they could also be setting the English public up to accept that Scotland needs pulled into line and Holyrood curbed.

  280. Artyhetty says:

    Re; John H@7.10pm

    Might they be confident of vic(Tory) what with the trump on their side. The most likely thought process, if we can say thought regards these unionists, is that when they do sign Art.50, that will also be the end of the Scottish Parliament as we know it?

    I was at an event this after, and they talked about ‘when brexit happened’, as in last June. It hasn’t even begun, these environmental, charitable organisations don’t have a scooby, when brexit really kicks in, they can forget about animal welfare, food and environmental and safety, because once written out of law, and it won’t take long, it will not be written back in by UKnotsoOK.

  281. Rock says:

    twathater,

    “I Robert Traquair as a sovereign Scotsman hereby give permission for Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP Scottish Government acting as agents on my behalf, to hold a referendum to determine Scotland’s future as an independent country”

    As you are not “sovereign” in practice, you have no means of initiating a referendum or getting rid of the monarch.

    You are powerless to demand a referendum or an election, even with a trillion signatures.

    All you have is the right to vote, given to you by Westminster.

    If and when you are offered one, you can vote on it, but there is no obligation on a political party to keep its manifesto promises, although we are lucky to have the SNP.

    Your “sovereignty” is not worth the paper it was written on, otherwise Scotland wouldn’t still be a colony of England after more than 300 years.

  282. sassenach says:

    Have we all completed the James Kelly MSP survey on railways???

    https://t.co/A4P3yWF9By

  283. Rock says:

    The twats in the UK Supreme Court will make full (mis)use of Scotland to help the UK establishment delay and eventually prevent Brexit without conceding anything to Scotland.

    There will be no pronouncement that the Scots are “sovereign”.

  284. Liz g says:

    Oh and I forgot to say that this time around they will also have access to all the internet activity of the yes movement.
    Does anyone know if the Holyrood MSPS are exempt as well as the Westminster one’s?

  285. CameronB Brodie says:

    Macart
    I could get all anthropological but that risks putting some noses out.

    I’m waiting for GRAPH-BOY to pop his head into my cross-hairs, as I’ve got a cracking leasson in post-modern thought lined up for the lad. I’m sure it will be appropriate to whatever nonsense he spouts as it is based on quantum physics, even though I didn’t manage to get a Higher in physics.

    I might ask Mugo to join the conversation. 😉

  286. CameronB Brodie says:

    Oops, Mungo.

  287. Rock says:

    geeo,

    “Lib dems win Richmond Park by election…Zac Goldsmith…egg…face…hahaha”

    The Greens had stood aside to help the Lib Dem candidate.

    If they had stood aside in Mundell’s constituency, the SNP would have unseated the Tory viceroy of Scotland.

    They had no chance of winning but deliberately hindered the SNP, cheered on by The National.

  288. Macart says:

    @CameronB Brodie

    Almost feel sorry for the poor soul. Hell, when you go all in depth political and existential philosophies on a raj I need an Oxford dictionary and a thesaurus just to translate the bigger wurdz. 🙂

  289. Artyhetty says:

    Liz g@7.46

    “But the really scary part is that they could also be setting the English public up to accept that Scotland needs pulled into line and Holyrood curbed”.

    That is a possibility for sure. My famille and friends in NE england do, and have commented that Scotland is too big for her boots, and also at the same time, an insignficant back water regards the EU and globally.

    Not only do those south of the border really, absolutely believe that they subsidise Scotland to live in luxury, re tuition fees, prescrition charges etc, they also believe that Scotland takes the oil money and wastes it! The reason for the overt, contempt shown recently towards our SNP MP’s in the HoC’s, is to ridicule,humiliate, and utterly undermine the fact that they are even there and exist.

    Once you have people en masse believing that a thing is right, no matter how wrong or dangerous,
    you have the go ahead to do what you want, even if by force.

    Scary indeed.

  290. Stoker says:

    WOS archive links for April/May 2012 now over on O/T.

  291. Rock says:

    Breeks,

    “If Scotland wants the status of our sovereignty to be recognised in law, and further recognised by the international community, then the Court will have to asked to address that issue specifically. That’s a catch 22 however, because the Supreme Court has acknowledged itself inferior to Scottish sovereignty, so it is only Scotland’s Court of Session which can deliver a determination properly in law.”

    What are we waiting for then?

    Why can’t Robert Peffers explain how we, the “sovereign” “plebs” of Scotland, can approach Scotland’s Court of Session?

  292. galamcennalath says:

    Liz g says:

    they know we are going and are just trying to do what damage they can first and delay it as long as possible.

    OR

    they could also be setting the English public up to accept that Scotland needs pulled into line and Holyrood curbed.

    Yes, those would seem to be the likely possibilities. Either that they ungraciously accept the situation, or they intend to act completely undemocratically to preserve their Union.

    Thing is, if they torpedo the democratic process again, it only means there will be another rerun when the next constitutional crisis arises. We are not going away.

    John H. says:

    We will have to be vigilant, we are dealing with cunning, unprincipled liars

    Indeed. I just hope Nicola and the SG are fully geared up to expect the unexpected.

  293. Macart says:

    @Liz g

    This wee piece was written for a comic book can you believe? I came across the quote on Wilderness of peace in one of Taranaich’s posts recently and it stuck. My only excuse for thieving it was that Taranaich felt, much as I do, that it is more than appropriate given where we’re at today.

    ‘Doesn’t matter what the press says. Doesn’t matter what the politicians or the mobs say. Doesn’t matter if the whole country decides that something wrong is something right. This nation was founded on one principle above all else: the requirement that we stand up for what we believe, no matter the odds or the consequences. When the mob and the press and the whole world tell you to move, your job is to plant yourself like a tree beside the river of truth, and tell the whole world — No, you move.’(ends)

    Doesn’t matter how many big cannon they have on their side. It doesn’t matter if they have the weight of the state, the entirety of the press in their pocket and the corporate world on a chain.

    They are in the wrong and what matters is that someone needs to stand up and say so. 🙂

  294. CameronB Brodie says:

    Macart
    Sorry mate. I’m not using big words simply to impress, I LOVE kicking the shit out of habitus and them’s ma tools. I ditched the master’s when at secondary school.

    Speaking of tools. 🙂

    @Gerry Hassan
    How you doing? I’m no even jogging yet.

  295. Glamaig says:

    On BBC News tonight, it said there will be Manuel in Fawlty Towers shown tonight in honour of the actor who has died. Viewers in Scotland can see it tomorrow night.

    I was then treated to an extended piece about the soon to be triumphant England rugby team.

    Such are the inconsequential little ways which give us the subliminal message that we are at the back of the queue.

  296. Liz g says:

    Artyhety @ 8.05
    Snap… I have family in Bristol & Portsmouth and they all think like that.
    As well as people whom I recently met from Chesterfield.
    They all say “we don’t mean you” when they see I am not chortling along with their remarks.
    And funnily enough they are otherwise very nice people.
    So the propaganda definitely seems to be working.
    Only one cousin out of at least 40-50 people said they would feel sad if Scotland left and genuinely asked why I wanted to.

  297. Liz g says:

    Macart @ 8.15
    And I am not going to stop saying it Macart until this wrong is put right.

  298. Glamaig says:

    Anyone think the EU will oblige with this, or will they play hardball? I cant imagine Theresa’s ‘hand’ contains more than two’s and jokers.

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-banks-trade-exclusive-idUKKBN13R1XK

  299. Macart says:

    @CameronB Brodie

    😀 LOL

    Don’t be sorry. You have a talent and breadth of knowledge in those areas I truly envy. I fair enjoy reading through those posts and I dare say I’m not the only one.

    That’s what makes wings a great place to visit. So much knowledge and expertise in so many fields.

    Its an education most days of the week. 😉

  300. Hamish100 says:

    Tommy Shephard on Any Q’s Radio 4 doing well. Shout you down rent a brexit mob in the audience though. Is UKIP Representative completely stupid, under the influence or both?

  301. Tackety Beets says:

    Maybe it’s me being sensitive?

    STV News @ 6 . Andrea Brymer states “Drilling has started on the Stat Oil Mariner Field in the UK North Sea……”

  302. Glamaig says:

    Tackety Beets says:
    2 December, 2016 at 8:28 pm
    Maybe it’s me being sensitive?

    STV News @ 6 . Andrea Brymer states “Drilling has started on the Stat Oil Mariner Field in the UK North Sea……”

    More subliminal stuff going on, probably. Unnecessary use of the word UK. Were you treated to a glimpse of a Union Jack too?

  303. Artyhetty says:

    Re;tackety beets@8.28

    Nah, no oil in Scottish mariime waters. Really? No oil company starts drilling unless they know it is down there, technology an all. Well, if we do have new oil fields, all the better for Indy#2! The Ukipers want us to be independent as well, win win!

  304. yesindyref2 says:

    @galamcennalath
    Interesting that Hammond chose to visit Scotland and deliver his “snub” to the media in Scotland, the day before the European Green Party with 50 members including the 2 SNP MEPs, had its conference in Glasgow.

    Either Westminster is thick as two short planks, or it has a plan. Or both!

  305. One_Scot says:

    Ever since I was around eleven years old learning about the Jacobites, William Wallace and Robert the Bruce combined with Maggie stealing my milk, I have wanted Scotland to be an Independent country, but I did not think it would ever happen.

    Now, at this point in time, I believe it to be a certainty. What a difference a life time makes.

  306. mr thms says:

    Note sure if this has already been posted.

    It is in regard to submissions to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom that are being heard on Monday.

    This submission is by Aiden O’Neill QC and Peter Sellar Advocate, and it is a very interesting read.

    http://www.supremecourt.uk/docs/independent-workers-union-great-britain.pdf

    “WRITTEN INTERVENTION FOR THE INDEPENDENT WORKERS UNION OF GREAT BRITAIN (IWGB)”

  307. yesindyref2 says:

    Talking about the Commonwealth, which Independent Scotland would be part of, here’s a very interesting speech given before the EU Referendum by Swire who was then Minister of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-eu-and-the-commonwealth-the-uks-place-in-both–2

    With Brexit, the UK (as it would still be called when we allowed it to be the continuing UK for a price), could set up a fully-fledged and unrestricted Commonwealth Free Trade Area, while Indepedent Scotland in the EU could be the EU portal. Run on an axis within a Common Trade Area within the former but continuing UK.

    An interesting possibility, considering the EU might sympathise with our “4 times the trade to the rUK as we do to the EU” position (yes I know, we import more from the rUK than they we export to them and etc.).

  308. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    galamcennalath, Liz g,

    I tend to subscribe to the “cock-up” theory of history rather than the “conspiracy” one, so my reading of the situation is that UKGov are such a right old guddle over Brexit, supreme court case and all, and being permanently tone deaf to Scotland’s interests anyway, they are simply in denial. Nothing more.

    They just don’t want to handle another vocanic vent of complexities on top of the huge volcano of complexities that is Brexit already.

    There.is.no.plan. They are merely floundering, desperately trying to put out fires wherever they appear.

    To put it another way, as someone on the radio was mentioning recently in the context of crew reaction to an aircraft in trouble, with warning lights going off all over the place, there is a recognised phenomenon known as “the startle effect”: the crew freeze because information overload prevents them from understanding what the essential problems are that need to be tackled first.

    UKGov are so overloaded with Brexit problems already that for them a Scottish dimension just needs to be suppressed. What they can’t see from their self-obsessed viewpoint is that such a reaction directly undermines what they were assuring the Scots during indyref1. It loosens their grip on the Scottish dimension, maybe even to the point of losing it entirely.

    It’s just another example of what Liz g very nicely pointed out [for which a big thanks!], that Fluffy’s “assurances” about “normally” in WM are going to come back to haunt him and his chums in the SC proceedings, if the law is properly upheld.

    Don’t forget there is historical precedent for disastrous self-defeating English myopia: the 13 American colonies in 1776.

  309. Chic McGregor says:

    Macart,

    Originally spoken by Captain America, but in the Civil War movie by a female character.

  310. Sinky says:

    After Ruth Davidson, BBC Have I got news for you has another right wing nutter on tonight in shape of Ukip’s Susanne Evens .

    When did a genuine radical SNP rep last get airtime?

  311. yesindyref2 says:

    Ouch. I can’t get my head around this. XVIII of the Act of Union, similar to the Treaty of Union, guarantees free trade between Scotland and England (roughly speaking). So what if instead of repealing the Acts of Union, they are AMENDED, as is the Treaty of Union, so that while Scotland is Independent, free trade is maintained by treaty / act?

    What does the EU make of this, does it mean there could be a free trade area within the UK, which the EU would honour as it’s a pre-existing treaty? Similar perhaps to the one between Liechtenstein and Switzerland (though Switzerland is in the EEA)?

    “‘That the Laws concerning Regulation of Trade, Customs, and such Excises, to which Scotland is, by virtue of this Treaty, to be liable, be the same in Scotland, from and after the Union, as in England; “

    A lot of possibilities in RealPolitik.

  312. yesindyref2 says:

    ” within the UK” should be ” within the former UK”.

  313. CameronB Brodie says:

    yesindyref2
    If the EU is able to resist TTiP then that could be a way of enforcing EU standards on what would probably become an increasingly de-regulated* UK. How the Economic Freedom Fighters would squeal. 🙂

    * LACKING THE RULE-OF-LAW.

  314. yesindyref2 says:

    @CameronB Brodie
    Enforce and also help. The UK / rUK / cUK would have to be able to meet EU standards to import into it. I can kind of see a free trade hub around the border, stretching east to west. Good for the North of England as well.

  315. Macart says:

    @Chic McGregor

    Cool.

    Pop culture writing has moved on a bit from when I last had the habit. 🙂

  316. yesindyref2 says:

    @mr thms
    Yes, it’s great, it covers the parts the Lord Advocate doesn’t really want to argue fully, though he touches on it. I like this bit:

    but yet have to be reconciled if this union polity is to survive“.

    A perfect storm. One kind of hopes the UKSC fails to reconcile it all …

    Anyone remember the film Baby Boom “what’s that noise”?

    That’s my leg.

  317. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Ah, synchronicity. After my previous posting @ 21:16, I took a look at the latest blog by WGD. It’s on essentially the same theme:

    They’re [UKGov] playing a high risk game because they want everything, and if they can’t have everything they’ll risk having nothing. They’d rather run the risk of losing Scotland for good than fulfil the promises and commitments that they made to the voters of this country during the last independence referendum campaign.

    A return to the high-stakes gamble of indyref1.

    See:

    http://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/2016/12/01/the-sour-tory-milk-of-human-unkindness/

    Always worth catching up on, of course.

  318. Sinky says:

    BBC TV “national news” states that Rail fares going up by 2.3% in New Year.

    No clarification that this only refers to England and Wales or that Scottish Government has capped any increase to 1.8%

    No wonder the SNP is struggling to get the facts out.

    Where do we complain? Although the damage is done.

  319. ronnie anderson says:

    Anybody have links to London’s Calling video .

  320. John Young says:

    OT a twitter exchange worth a look. twitter.com/ArthurStramash/status/804457260776882177/photo/1?utm_source=fb&utm_medium=fb&utm_campaign=petermccue1&utm_content=804613295177134080

  321. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    mr thms @ 20:54,

    Many thanks for that interesting link. I haven’t a clue who the IWGB are, but they have some damn fine lawyers, it seems. Who are properly clued-up on the Scottish dimension. Whatever the SC decides about Scotland in particular should be of great interest, but in any case I just can’t see UKGov’s appeal surviving that all-guns-blazing legal broadside.

    I particularly liked the part:

    The Appellant’s [UKGov] position is, in effect, that the Divine Right theory of James VI and I survived the constitutional upheavals of the 17th century, the Glorious Revolution and the Treaty of Union and/or was given new life by the UK signing the Treaty of Rome.

    Sassy. Brilliant!

  322. The IWGB appears to be a small independent union established in 2012, its members being workers in lower paid employment such as delivery drivers, couriers, security personnel etc., and which has many members working here from EU countries.

    Aidan O’Neill is a high profile QC in Scotland and England) whose knowledge of all things EU is greatly lauded. Which rather begs the question as to how a small union could afford his services. Has another body perhaps paid for them to give impetus to the Scottish case?

    In any event, his submission is well worth reading as he appears to demolish the Appellant’s submission.

  323. Liz g says:

    Mr thms @ 8.54
    Thank you very much for that link it certainly was an interesting read.
    Wonder how well that’s going to go down,espeically since it’s not the Bad SNP that’s sayin it.

  324. Lenny Hartley says:

    Visiting a friend, just watching recording of hignfy that ukip wummin Suzanne Evans actually said that Europe will have to have free trade with the UK as they (Europe) are totally dependent on the
    U.K trade. I kid you not delusional or what?

    Ronnie I have London calling don’t know how I can get the link to U, don’t want to post it public as it was for people who contributed to the crowd fund.

  325. BBC news leads with hyperbolic account of 80 mishandled phone calls to police in 2016. Police Scotland point out that this represents one in every twenty two thousand five hundred (1 in 22,5000).

    If this was not so serious it would be hilarious.

  326. CameronB Brodie says:

    @BBC Scotland
    Looks like Scotland has woken up to “Media Representation Theory” and how mass-media is used to shape behaviour. Feel the cold grip of time on your ideological throat?.

    Stuart Hall – Representation Theory Media Studies
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALBJQC2CF9k

    @Severin Carrell
    There’s a good deal of environmental psychology theory and semiotic theory adding to this understanding, you might want to take a look fanny-bawz. I’m not sure if your HSBC boss will allow you though, whats the chances?

  327. galamcennalath says:

    Liz g says:

    …it certainly was an interesting read.
    Wonder how well that’s going to go down

    The South British secessionists are not going to like it at all!

    That document holds back no punches.

  328. Capella says:

    @ sassenach – is that James Kelly Scotrail survey a joke?

    Which routes do you regularly travel on?
    Glasgow to Edinburgh
    Glasgow suburban routes
    Glasgow to Central Scotland
    Glasgow to West coast (Ayr, Inverclyde, Stranraer)
    Glasgow to Aberdeen/Highlands
    Glasgow to Fife/East coast
    Other:

    Does he live in Glasgow by any chance?

    The Scottish Government have been called upon to freeze fares for 2017. Do you support this proposal?
    Yes
    No

    Would anyone answer “No”?

    Deary me.
    https://t.co/A4P3yWF9By

  329. Macart,
    “Pop culture writing has moved on a bit from when I last had the habit. ”

    Indeed, and Scots writers like Grant Morrison and Mark Millar figure prominently.

    Mark Millar in fact, wrote the original Civil War series on which the movie screenplays were based.

  330. Ian Brotherhood says:

    @CamB –

    Hey mister,

    It’s all good stuff. Have you ever checked-out the Glasgow Media Group?

    Greg Philo, John Elridge and David Miller are the main names I recall, they had a series of great publications dating from around the time of the Miners’ Strike.

    They seemed to push beyond the Birmingham School, really challenged a lot of post-modernist stuff that was en vogue in the 90’s. I think you’d enjoy a lot of it. Sorry, don;t have any links to hand, but I daresay you’ve already encountered them.

    Hope you’re well bud.

    🙂

  331. Liz g says:

    galamcennalath @ 11.43
    Aye…..Do ye think they mibbi be a tad upset then.
    Aw…wee shame that so it is..
    Seriously though that Lawyer is impressive.
    I had only ever heard of about 4 of those cases he mentioned.
    And if he ever gives up his day job.
    Then I vote for him to be invited to be one of the author’s of our Constution.
    And after that to design how Scottish history is taught in Schools.

  332. yesindyref2 says:

    Aidan O’Neill was one who supported the idea that Scottish citizens would have rights to remain EU citizens after Scotland’s Independence after Indy Ref 1, even if Scotland couldn’t just remain a member state in our own right – much as David Edwards argued. He did something similar in about June of this year – perhaps angling after being involved. I don’t mean that in a tawdry kind of money-grabbing role, some people just want to be involved, and he’s very highly respected as a QC.

    But he’s also one in 2012 argued that the Scottish Government would NOT have the right to hold a Referendum in its own right, which was disappointing, and I thought at the time, curiously enough, that he seemed to have little knowldege of the very things he’s using to argue his case this time – Acts of Union, Claim of Right, and others.

    I wonder if he’s changed his mind about that right of the ScotGov to hold a referendum without Westminster’s “permission”, and also whether there’s a case that, having held that Indy Ref 2 without a S30 Order, it would not only hold up in court but, because of our different Sovereignty position, be effectively binding, not consultative. This is obviously of great importance potentially, in a few months or even weeks.

    It’s all very interesting, and my leg is still jigging up and down.

  333. CameronB Brodie says:

    Ian Brotherhood
    As well as can be expected mate, living under a system of colonial oppression. Yourself? 🙂

    Thanks for the tip, I’ll definitely take a look. This sort of knowledge will undo the modernist ‘logic’ of British nationalism. As that weakens, more and more non-ideological No voters* will cross the floor. I’m pretty sure of that.

    @Scotland In Union
    You’re wasting your money guys and gals, the cat’s already out of the bag.

    * i.e. a non-yoon No voter.

  334. manandboy says:

    To whom is Scotland wise to listen to – our Westminster Unionist enemies, or, our EU friends.

  335. ScottishPsyche says:

    Thought I recognised his name. From his page at Matrix Chambers:

    The Christian Institute & Ors v The Lord Advocate (Scotland) [2016] UKSC 51

    ‘Aidan O’Neill QC who acted for the successful appellants before the UKSC and throughout this case said “The constitutional duty which is placed on the court under the devolution statutes is to police the boundaries placed on the legislative competence of the devolved legislatures’.

    He certainly takes on controversial cases.

  336. Liz g says:

    Yesindyre2 @ 9.20
    RE..Just amending the Treaty of the Union to a trade Treaty.

    Well em No then again No and absolutely not…..LOL

    Firstly… while I see what you are saying about trade and looking at the best way to try and protect it.
    I am struggling to care about business
    Sick to the back teeth of population’s getting told they have to accept shitty terms and conditions so Business will be pleased.. IMHO it’s a con.
    We will be a (in theory) new country,there will be money to be made.
    So business will turn up to make it,we should be concentrating on how we will regulate them. EG.. Saudi Arabia doesn’t accommodate BP
    I don’t think we need to be yet another country in thrall to business.

    Secondly…. Westminster,England,RUK,Britain what ever is known as has trashed it’s international reputation.
    And continues to make it worse.
    Therefore I don’t think it would be good for Scotland to have any hint that there’s still a Union with them.
    And I think that’s exactly what they would claim.

    Thirdly…When our representatives are negotiating how to divvy thing’s up.
    There shouldn’t be a risk that “business” interests are in the mix.
    That’s partly what got us into. this bloody Union in the first place.

    Fourth… One of our aggressive bigger neighbours main reason for military intervention in other countries is”To protect British interests abroad” we should always be aware of that in whatever trading arrangements are made .
    And that they do it for their “friends and allies ” too

    But mainly because I am hoping that enough of us will argue that our Constution will explicitly prevent any future Parliament’s ever signing up to another parliamentry Union.
    And that any changes to the Constution itself has the toughest criteria that we can think of for doing so.
    Which ultimately has a vote from us… The Sovereign’s…on it.
    One of the best things about small countries is that it’s an easy thing to consult the people.

    Well you did ask!!!!

  337. CameronB Brodie says:

    Ian Brotherhood
    The GMG’ve got a decent links page as well. 🙂

    How’s this for a set of links.

    British imperialism and British Zionism are largely responsible for the existence of the state of Israel. The Fabian Society, represented by Viscount Milner, being instrumental in this ‘achievements’.

    BLiS___d fought side-by-side with Tories the English National Party to ensure Scots did not vote to secure access to their inalienable human rights.

    Scots and Palestinians are both denied inalienable human rights, though Palestinians have a much tougher experience of this.

    Scots would probably have obtained access to their “Right to Development”, if BLiS___d had not been in bed with the Tories English National Party.

    @Kezia Dugdale
    Is it not about time for you to step into the 21st century?

    Greg Philo – ‘Do the Media Aid Israel?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnJEYVxLXbY

    P.S. I’ve posted this Israeli PR advice in OT.

  338. Breeks says:

    @Yesindyref2 9:20

    I’ve said that for a long time. If Westminster had any brains, it would recognise the only practicable “soft” Brexit would be to indulge Scotland’s independence, on the basis that existing trade would be a de facto access to the single market with Scotland remaining in the EU but being a buffer zone so to speak for U.K. Trade with Europe. Holding pen status vs Buffer zone status? Yeah, that’s doable I think…

    So far so good.

    The big problem however is the UK’s crippling debt, interest rates and inflation following Brexit, and a bleak outlook for growth and productivity. It is possible the U.K. simply couldn’t afford to countenance losing Scotland’s assets and resources without risking a complete economic collapse. That’s the real deal breaker I think.

    Nevertheless, the U.K. by its own hand, is stuck between the devil and the deep blue sea, however the game changer for Westminster might arise if and when Scotland’s independence looks fully inevitable, and our resources are slipping out of their grasp regardless of what Westminster does. However, if Westminster waits until then, then with Indy by definition all but inevitable, then why would Scotland trouble itself to help a begrudging rUK which was prepared to help neither itself nor Scotland when help was needed?

    Make it work, and everybody gets what they want. England gets some access to Europe, Europe keeps rUK trade but loses UK arrogance and interference with EU policy, and Scotland gets Indy, but Independence fully endorsed and embraced by rUK, not decisive and ill tempered, and a lucrative buffer zone status for a large volume of trade.

    To my mind, there’s a deal to be made there, and perhaps even a good deal By comparison with the complete mess which Brexit currently looks like.

    It is even possible that a generous lease on Faslane could be a sweetener, albeit a controversial one. But as a transitional arrangement, one massive compromise would surely warrant a reciprocal concession of equal magnitude. However, I’m not at all persuaded that Scotland would be under any such pressure to compromise at all, but if helping England survive Brexit and the breakup of the UK was to earn respect and a constructive mature relationship between two sovereign neighbours, I would keep my options open.

    There are difficult choices facing Theresa May, and very few of them have a constructive outlook. And to look at it all from a different perspective, what has Westminster to gain by being sullen and difficult?

  339. Ian Brotherhood says:

    @CamB –

    Aye, it’s all there, eh?

    The indy movement needs to consider why the work of GMU et al has been ignored.

    More importantly, perhaps, are the worrying questions which arise when we view footage of Prof John Robertson giving evidence to the SG’s Committee regarding MSM coverage of the indyref campaign. No-one was there to support him.

    We’ve covered this material many times since it happened, and I’m not going to dig-out the links. Anyone interested enough can do it for themselves.

    Point is – Robertson was hung out to dry at the very moment when he most needed support from his peers.

    Everyone involved with any aspect of media/politics/academia at that time KNEW what was happening. But on the day? No-one was there to support the man.

    It’s all there on YT for anyone who can be bothered looking or it. That footage stands as damming testimony against an ‘academic’ community which utterly neglected one of its own members when he most needed visible support.

    Sometimes, academics say the most meaningful things when they remain silent, eh?

    🙂

  340. Liz g says:

    Breeks @ 1.04
    Faselane…. controversial really?
    Seriously though…
    I am not doing this and settling for me and everyone I care about to still live in the blast zone of Trident.
    It has to go.
    And I am also wondering…
    Has the British ever left a military base apart from Hong Kong?
    Lease ran out my arse… they couldn’t take on China!
    England should not ever again have a military base in Scotland.
    And we need that port for our Navy…..why should we take the next best option.

  341. Liz g says:

    Ian Brotherhood @ 1.23
    Totally agree Ian..but to be fair the Dean/Rector of his own Uni did stand up for him.
    I would love to see an interview with him,to find out what kind of pressure he was put under.
    And if the Uni paid a price?

  342. Ian Brotherhood says:

    Ach, okay then, here’s the link…

    To me, John Robertson is a total fucking hero.

    The BBC tried to end his career.

    Seriously – for readers not familiar with this story – BBC Scotland tried to fuck a man’s life up entirely for no other reason than he was doing his job.

    His job was to analyse what the BBC was doing. They didnt like his findings, ergo, his career had to be ended.

    This is not melodrama.

    This is fact.

    And it is here, recorded forever.

    Caution: If you start watching this, you will will end up watching it all, and if you watch it all? You will end up helping organise the next big PQ rally.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuQexAg19Iw

  343. Liz g says:

    Ian Brotherhood
    Thanks

  344. yesindyref2 says:

    @Liz g
    Oh that’s easy, something like this, that O’Neill and Wolffe can polish up:

    “That the Laws concerning Regulation of Trade, Customs, and such Excises, to which Scotland is and England are, by virtue of this Treaty, to be liable, be compatible in Scotland, from and after the termination of the Union, as and in England”

    Doddle!

  345. yesindyref2 says:

    @Breeks
    It all depends on what might be going on behind the scenes, while the politicians in public are doing what politicians do – saber rattle for the benefit of the media. Curiously, with an interest in defence, I suggested a few times in postings during Indy Ref 1 that Hammond would be a good go-between for talks about defence asset and responsibility splits between rUK and Scotland after a YES vote. He’s got a sense of humour, and actually seems to be quite polite. Perhaps his visit the day before the European Green conference in Glasgow had other purposes. Who knows!

  346. Liz g says:

    Yesindyref2 @ 2.31
    Given that there are some who still don’t know the NHS is Scottish,and some who are happy to re-enforce that myth.
    I still say that Treaty has to go.
    Go completely and be seen to be gone.
    What ever other arrangements are made between Scot’s and the rest on these islands it would be a mistake I think to just reword that Treaty.

    And I didn’t even say ye canny Polish a Turd.

  347. yesindyref2 says:

    @Liz g
    The problem is that with Scotland in the EU, and the rUK out if it, we might be forced to have the same deal with the rUK as all EU members have, which could involve tariffs, but more than that, the non-tariff barriers. Especially if the rUK gets a hard Brexit, no single market. Amending the Treaty of Union (and Acts) before Brexit and Independence, and perhaps again at the point of Indy could be an acceptable way around. Just an idea.

    https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/reser_e/ersd201201_e.pdf

    Probably wouldn’t work though because the UK would have had trade treaties before joining the EU (EEC), with the likes of NZ and OZ, and they went, I guess.

  348. Liz g says:

    Yesindyref2 @ 2.59
    I did and do know that you are just thinking of solutions to the issues that our Indy will throw up.
    I hope that you realise that I am not having a go I am really just saying what I think about what you have said.
    I do appreciate that people on this site will put ideas up for everyone to mull over and are willing to have what they have said discussed.
    I don’t think your plan was a bad one….just not one I could get on board with..for the reasons I gave.
    I also think that symbolism and the perception of things is important mostly because in this instance the bulk of Scot’s will only give just enough attention to the political narrative to absorb the sound bites.
    They in the early days of Indy don’t need to hear from the MSM that the Treaty of the Union has been reworked.
    The details may indeed change it to a trade deal between two independent nation’s but I can’t see it being reported that way.
    They will want an Independence celebration and an Independence day.
    Not a Change of Treaty party and a Change of Treaty bank holiday.
    Which we will also share with the RUK.

    Sorry have to go be a Mum’s Taxi….

  349. K. A. Mylchreest says:

    —————————–
    mr thms says:

    This submission is by Aiden O’Neill QC and Peter Sellar Advocate, and it is a very interesting read.

    http://www.supremecourt.uk/docs/independent-workers-union-great-britain.pdf

    “WRITTEN INTERVENTION FOR THE INDEPENDENT WORKERS UNION OF GREAT BRITAIN (IWGB)”
    ————————-

    Can I second this, there are some real gems embedded in this document. The summary and justification of Scottish Popular Sovereignty alone is excellent.

    Also I can´t resist re-quoting this :

    ——-
    That the Scots found a perfect union politically unacceptable, and the English an imperfect union intellectually incomprehensible, provides the basis for the odd mixture of the two which was set up in 1707. The English got the unitary sovereign power which they wanted, and got it in the form based upon the existing English Parliament, with an English majority in it. The Scots got their recognition as a separate sovereign state, both from the form of the Union of 1707 as an international treaty, and from the survival of Scots law and the Scottish church. It is that claim that Scotland is a sovereign nation state which is reasserted whenever the English forget that 1707 was not a ‘perfect union’ and has recently been repeated in the Claim of Right. Scotland in accepting the Union in 1707 remained a nation and as a result any sovereignty in the British parliament could not be national sovereignty.
    This has always been hard for the English to understand.
    ————-

  350. Ken500 says:

    Aidan O’Neill did not support Scottish Ibdependence. Thought it was illegal and that a Referendum should not be held. Even though he is supposed to be a Human rights lawyer he tried to stop it.

    It certainly concentrates minds when the ludicrous, msssively remunerated EU contracts work could dry up. Aidan O’Neil makes a massive remuneration from taxpayers money on EU legal matters. The Matrix chambers also contains Cherie Blair who also draws vast remuneration from dealing in EU Law. Multimillionaires tax evade.

  351. ScottieDog says:

    @Breeks
    “The big problem however is the UK’s crippling debt, interest rates and inflation following Brexit,”

    It’s not the UK’s national debt that is crippling and interest rates have gone down even with a tripling of public sector debt.
    The economy is flatlining due to the highest on record levels of private (bank created) debt. It sits around £5 trillion. This coupled with a consistent decrease in real wages is why the economy is buggered.

    The UK govt know that thy can sell bonds till the cows come home at zero interest rates. Investors know that they will always be a safe investment because the Bank of England will always be able to buy the bonds back.

    The biggest embarrassment for the tories is that they will have to spend and abandon their neoliberal fantasy economics.

  352. Breeks says:

    Agreed Liz G at 1:23, but the Faslane is there, and Scotland could make a lot of purchase over how it comes to be “not there”. I find nukes repugnant on all levels, and want them gone, but if I thought a measured and reasonable period of time to remove them held the key to Westminster cooperating with Scotland’s self determination, then yes, it becomes controversial.

    Say 5 years to be gone, and 5 years access to the free market, or perhaps 10 years… Those would run parallel to an independent Scotland finding its feet and dividing up U.K. assets. We know what Westminster wants, and needs, especially if England wants to keep its permanent seat on the UN Security Council. We might not like the deal, but Westminster could be very influential, both better and worse, over Scottish Unionists and their reaction to Indy, and that cooperation might be a bitter pill for Westminster to swallow. A little bit of give and take might suit everyone.

    @ Ian Brotherhood… I agree with Prof. Robertson. Spear point for an important issue, indeed a definitive issue of YES2014 and he was largely hung out to dry. And many people are still not listening. Correct me if I’m wrong, but Prof Robertson has a blog now which says he has left University of West Scotland, but I know little more than that.

  353. K. A. Mylchreest says:

    @ Ken500

    I know nothing of the background of the law firm involved, I simply took the arguments at their face value. After all the validity of a proposition is independent of its source. Lawyers are after all no different from whores, they do the bidding of their clients 😉

  354. yesindyref2 says:

    @Ken500: “Aidan O’Neill did not support Scottish Ibdependence. Thought it was illegal and that a Referendum should not be held. Even though he is supposed to be a Human rights lawyer he tried to stop it.

    That’s almost totally wrong Ken500. I’ve no idea whether or not he supported Independence, I never saw an opinion. He did not think a Referendum was illegal as such, what he said was that the Scottish Parliament could not hold one on its own account because constitutional matters were reserved to Westminster in the Scotland Act 1998 – which it clearly states – and he never said a referendum should not be held. He also did not try to stop it, as once the Section 30 Order was passed, it was indeed legal.

  355. Robert Louis says:

    It is really simple. The UK is a bipartite union, of Scotland and England (ostensibly the kingdoms as per the treaty). The people of Scotland voted to stay in the EU, so to ignore their wishes is to completely trample on the concept of democracy.

    Westminster likes to pig ignorantly tell itself it has such power, but it simply doesn’t. It never has, it’s just that up until recently Scotland’s representatives from Labour and Tories were just a bunch of London suck ups, who did NOT stand up for Scotland and its people.

    Now we have a Scottish Government that IS standing up for Scotland, and Westminster is astonished to find that the powers they thought they had over Scotland do NOT in reality exist.

    Getting michty sick of these unelected nobodies in England telling Scotland what it can and cannot do. We didn’t elect the London Tory Government, and we do not want it. They have just ONE MP in Scotland yet come up here telling Scots what to do, behaving like lord god almighty. Who are you London Tory Philip Hammond to come to Scotland telling what we can and cannot do??? Away with you. My message to Westminster and London Tories coming up to Scotland dictating what we can and cannot do is quite simple, NO MORE.

  356. yesindyref2 says:

    @K. A. Mylchreest

    I like this bit:

    The Scots got their recognition as a separate sovereign state, both from the form of the Union of 1707 as an international treaty, and from the survival of Scots law and the Scottish church.

    And indeed, a QC should be able to argue either side of a case. That’s their brief!

  357. yesindyref2 says:

    Most constitutional experts back in 2012, 2013, were of the opinion that Holyrood couldn’t hold a referendum on the constitution, even on devolution, the more moderate ones said if it did, it could be challenged in court. It was all UK-centric opinion, Westminster was sovereign, all that really counted was the Scotland Act 1998, and what the Act of Union had done was basically get rid of Scotland and England and create the UK. I don’t remember anyone talking about the Claim of Right, except “below the line” and perhaps this is why Sturgeon end of Jan 2012 introduced it into a – passed – motion in Holyrood.

    Some experts did say Holyrood could hold a referendum, but even they didn’t consider the 1689 Claim of Right. They did put together a paper though which was different to the majority:

    https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2012/01/31/gavin-anderson-et-al-the-independence-referendum-legality-and-the-contested-constitution-widening-the-debate/

    Gavin Anderson, Senior Lecturer, University of Glasgow
    Christine Bell, Professor of Constitutional Law, University of Edinburgh
    Sarah Craig, Lecturer, University of Glasgow
    Aileen McHarg, Senior Lecturer in Public Law, University of Glasgow
    Tom Mullen, Professor of Law, University of Glasgow
    Stephen Tierney, Professor of Constitutional Theory, University of Edinburgh
    Neil Walker, Regius Professor of Public Law and the Law of Nature and Nations, University of Edinburgh

    It just shows how things have changed, perhaps Robert Peffers has become required reading! Certainly there’s more knowledge and understanding around now than there was before. It seems this includes Aidan O’Neill.

  358. Breeks says:

    These opposing views on sovereignty are not the sane views versus the insane views. It is all a matter of perspective. IF Scotland had always had the same kind of sovereignty as England, (but don’t worry, it has not), then the sovereignties of both countries could readily be joined, where two smaller parts become one greater part. That is the modern Unionist scenario where the two former parts cease to exist, and become one entity, and that is the reason Unionists claim that Scotland needs consent to break the one sovereign entity.

    That presumption however ignores the reality that Scotland’s sovereignty is sufficiently distinct and different from English sovereignty that the two are irreconcilably dissimilar, and cannot be combined to create a single entity. Sovereignty is the watershed. Sovereignty, that is ultimate power, comes from the people in Scotland, whereas sovereignty comes from God in England. You cannot combine two “absolutes” which are not similar in any way, but in fact are diametrically opposite each other.

    Scotland’s prime case for sovereign independence swings on recognising the legitimacy of the Scottish articles of law which first formally recognised Scotland as a Nation, and then making sure that fundamental issue has not been compromised by any subsequent evolution of constitutional legislation which may or may not have any bearing on our sovereignty.

    The Westminster parliament has not structured itself to administer these two incompatible sovereignties, and it should have. To function as a legislature, it has taken an expedient shortcut and “muted” Scottish sovereignty, and then proceeded to govern the U.K. by administering sovereignty the English way, through the Divine Right of Kings.

    Our constitutional dilemma in the UK essentially boils down to Scotland having the legal rights and precedents to be a sovereign nation, but at present, these rights are suspended and Scotland has no international recognition of the rightful position. England/Westminster has the opposite problem; international recognition in spadefuls as the UK’s sovereign seat government, but a lesser known and awkward truth that the UK government has been built upon an expedient and questionable fudge, the improper and unlawful subjugation of Scotland’s sovereignty, to reconcile a matter which cannot properly be reconciled.

    In law, we win. The battleground is securing the international recognition and acceptance of Scotland the Nation as distinct from the United Kingdom, and that is a properly sovereign Scotland in all respects.

    We don’t need any referendum. The referendum even in delivering a No result is a moot mandate to do what cannot be done, unless it is suddenly possible to combine a civic, popular sovereignty with the autocratic Divine Right of Kings. The Act of Union is a fudge, always has been, and cannot be anything else, and it should never have warranted our respect or fealty.

    This whole constitutional debate is academic, but may the Lord be thankit for the Declaration of Arbroath and the subsequent Papal recognition of Scotland in the 14th Century. It did a thing that cannot be undone, permanently and for all time. It’s now time the truth came out.

  359. Breeks says:

    Just to add… it is not international recognition of any democratic opinion we require, it is recognition of the legally binding precedent. Technically, there is no referendum required.

  360. Lochside says:

    Ian B. thanks for the link to Prof Robertson’s inquisition.I’d only seen short excerpts before. He is a hero. Where were all the other Scottish academics? This country is so poorly served by our Education, Business, Religious and Legal leaders…but it was always thus. It’s down to the ordinary footsoldiers plus exemplary exceptions such as the Prof. G.a. Ponsonby and the REV to keep the flame alive.
    BTW what a pathetic amount of views so far!

  361. Robert Kerr says:

    @Breeks

    Superb statement of our situation.

    It follows on from and complements Mr Peffers historical stuff.

    Thank you both

  362. twathater says:

    Robert Kerr I agree well explained and summarised Breeks

    Robert Louis 8.13am couldn’t agree more

    Robert Peffers you and others have upset the status quo by highlighting the TRUTH

    It just shows the DEPTH of lies,and disinformation our supposed representatives are willing to subject the Scottish people to, in order to protect what they consider to be their right. It is my hope that people awaken and see the deliberate hatred these tractors have for their fellow Scots. I hope they rot in hell for what they have done

  363. Liz g says:

    Breeks @ 7.36
    Ah I see what you are saying about Faselane now.
    I just worry that Neuks aside “The British” don’t tend to get out of military bases after they have them.
    Hong Kong being the only one I have ever heard of them leaving.
    I thought it very clever of Alex Salmond to ear mark it for our use from day one.
    I also take the view that we should be aiming for some sort of Nordic model…so therefore I am not advocating a Fortress Scotland or anyone but the English Scotland ,( although I am certainly mindful of what History teaches us ) when I say there should be no military base from any other countries in Scotland.

    We also need to be aware that Trump might also think or be helped to think it’s important to keep Faselane in London’s hands,and the US establishment will want to give him some pet projects where in their views he can’t do much harm,to try to manage him.

    But I can see the sense in what you are saying about Faselane existing and how we could potentially move on regarding it.
    And I hadn’t even thought about the Reunification campaign that’s probably going to happen especially if it’s a close vote.
    I think that regardless of any deal over any issues,Westminster will always run interference with this group,and will do so for quite a few year’s.
    This is where winning well will matter.
    That one of the reasons why I say our new Constution should expressly prohibit any Parliamentary Union’s,and should put many road blocks in the path of Constutional change.

  364. Ian Brotherhood says:

    @Breeks, LizG, Lochside –

    Thanks for responses.

    Yeah, that footage is little-viewed, but priceless documentary evidence, utterly damming of the BBC generally, and BBC Scotland specifically.

    It’s hard not to draw comparisons with the McCarthy hearings in the US, and easier yet to identify the ‘baddies’. Yes, it’s true that the head of UWS told McQuarrie and his lackeys where to go, but the lack of support from fellow academics/students was shocking. There are many serious academics who now specialise in media, and a lot of them must have known what was happening. That not a single one of them found the time to just sit there and witness that session is to their everlasting shame, and they know it.

    I don’t know where John Robertson is now, but fwiw I would love to see him charged with a very senior role in advising on the establishment of whatever broadcasting service replaces the BBC in our country. It would help, at least in part, to right a truly grievous wrong. Can’t happen soon enough.

  365. Ron Maclean says:

    Professor Robertson has a website thoughtcontrolscotland.com. Should be required reading for SNP leadership. Oh well – a man can dream I suppose.

  366. Ian Brotherhood says:

    @Ron –

    Cheers for that, will check it out.

    🙂

  367. Liz g says:

    Ian Brotherhood @ 6.11
    Totally agree Ian , thanks again for the link.
    I had only ever seen clips and never the full thing.
    As to your idea of him being involving him in how we frame the future of Scottish broadcasting,a s long as he is up for it.
    It certainly sounds like a plan.
    I personally think we should go further with the media though,and have legislation around ownership.
    Something along the lines of…. only 40% can be Foreign owned,dont know if that is possible in the EU,but there is sureley a case for special status for the media.
    It is the only industry protected by the US Constution.
    Also it is generally accepted as necessary for a functional democracy,and it definitely needs to be protected from being taken over,by too few people.
    Don’t know exactly how but something needs to be done.

  368. Ian Brotherhood says:

    @LizG –

    I’m sure John Roberston has good friends and colleagues who’ve been discussing this, and probably doing so (privately) for a long time, but it’s remarkable how reluctant people are to even consider the obvious – if we go indy, the BBC is finished in Scotland. People will still be able to see Strictly and I’m A Halfwit or whatever else, so that whole side of it all is just scaremongering pish.

    What isn’t ‘pish’ is the reality that a ‘terrestrial’ broadcaster will be required. Even the edgiest MSM pundits and commentators haven’t, so far as I’m aware, openly discussed what form the ‘SBC’ or whatever-it’ll-be-called will take. I’m thinking here of people like Cosgrove, O’Neill, Kane, Riddoch etc. It’s as if even discussing it is taboo, that it’s inherently subversive or rebellious.

    The BBC has done such a great job of mythologising itself that many people – often highly intelligent decent folk – regard the BBC as quintessentially British and traditional, even though they KNOW that, in historical terms, it’s just a product of 20th century technology. (Plenty of folk in Scotland – and everywhere else for that matter – are ‘older’ than the BBC!) The ruling classes claimed it as their own, right from the start, and have never ever let it slip from their grasp because they know how powerful it is. (I know you know all this already – I’m not meaning to patronise here, just thinking out loud…)

    I don’t know how it’ll all unfold, but there’s no way we should settle for more of the same. The demise of the BBC in Scotland is inevitable, and they know it, but we shouldn’t allow the apparent cowardice of current players in the MSM to deflect us from the real task of considering what kind of broadcaster we want to replace it.

    If ‘they’ don’t want to have that discussion, fair do’s, but we can have it, and we don’t need anyone’s permission.

  369. Liz g says:

    Ian Brotherhood @ 7.09
    Aye Ian we need to be (pardon the pun) thinking outside the box.
    The only thing I could add to what you have said is that we need to be sure that it’s not just Indy supporters having all the input.
    So as to look credible…but I don’t know how we would include people who are clearly fans of the Westminster establishment?
    Tis a puzzle right enough.

  370. Croompenstein says:

    Kez what are the SNP going to do aboot this…

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-38188671

  371. K. A. Mylchreest says:

    @ yesindyref2

    The following from a comment on the paper you linked to (about the legality of Holyrood calling an IndyRef without WM´s permission), echos my own thoughts at the time :

    ¨In July 1999 the temporarily suspended session of the Scottish Parliament of March 1707 was resumed. **This was not contested by Westminster** in any shape or manner. Given the parliament of March 1707 held on behalf of the sovereign people of Scotland the right to represent their sovereignty under Scottish constitutional law and practice then in Scots Law the resumption of that parliamentary session in July 1999 must mean the people of Scotland’s sovereignty once again lies in the Scottish Parliament.¨

    When I heard that declaration, not that a new devolved institution was being established, but that the historic Scots Parliament was, in effect, revived, I wondered how such a potential bombshell could pass apparently unnoticed. Especially given the fundamental mismatch between the bases of English and Scottish sovereignty, so long disregarded by WM in the good old British spirit of muddling through 🙂

  372. Ian Brotherhood says:

    @LizG –

    I’ve enjoyed this wee discussion. We’re not ‘players’ in the grand scheme of things, but the fact that we can at least air this stuff should remind us how good it is to be an ‘ordinary’ punter who isn’t constrained by party-political and/or business-related concerns. We are ‘free’ to have these discussions, whether anyone listens to us or not, and that’s something precious.

    Personally, it wouldn’t bother me one jot if the institution of a genuinely independent Scottish broadcasting organisation involved Tories. But they’d have to be real home-grown Scottish Tories, not lackeys and proxies acting on behalf of the usual WM/City of London suspects.

  373. Fred says:

    Nah, ma auld grannie aye said that the only good Tory wiz a deid Tory!

  374. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Hi Fred.

    What think ye? The real deal, or a spoof account?

    https://twitter.com/YesTories

  375. Breeks says:

    Just for fun…

    In a parallel universe…

    In 2012, the Scottish government secured a judgement from the Court of Session which confirmed the legal legitimacy of Scottish sovereignty, which threw Scotland and Westminster into a constitutional crisis.
    To pacify the outraged Unionists, the Scottish Government called for an immediate referendum to establish whether the majority of people in Scotland wanted to retain their sovereign independence as newly recognised by the Court of Sessions judgement, or whether Scotland and England should immediately draw up a revised consensual Act of Union designed to save the UK but accommodate the new appreciation of both respective nation’s incompatible sovereignties, with a view to forming a “new” and constitutionally correct entity of the United Kingdoms.

    The referendum scheduled for 2014 sees the pro Independence lobby arguing for a fully sovereign Independent Scotland standing shoulder to shoulder with England and the other EU member states as sovereign equals. The pro Union lobby is determined to outline the positive merits of a revised Act of Union, which leaves UK government largely unaltered beyond due recognition of Scotland’s inalienably sovereign constitution amended as it stands from impracticable joint sovereignty to fully integrated shared sovereignty.

    Whichever side wins, the unalterable conclusion will see Scotland’s appropriate and legitimate sovereignty properly recognised, and the real deciding issue of the referendum will see Scotland moving forward as a new partner in Europe standing on its own two feet, or moving forward as a reformed partner in a constitutionally correct and proper United Kingdom. Whichever side wins, a 300 year old constitutional irregularity has finally be laid to rest, and should the UK survive, it will survive with a new constitution which is fully embraced by both partner states, with 300 years of ambiguity and constitutional wrangling finally at an end.

    Aye… in a parallel universe, maybe we could have had our cake and eaten it. Never mind conjecture on how the vote would have gone, just imagine how much richer and sharper in focus the debate before the actual referendum might have been…

  376. Ian Brotherhood says:

    @BDTT –

    🙂

    Soo-perb

    I’ve just ‘followed’ them.

    BTW, ‘who’ are you on The Twitter?

  377. Ian Brotherhood says:

    @Fred –

    Yer granny was wise, eh?

    🙂

  378. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Hi Ian B.

    Eh’m no’ on that Twitter an’ thah. Eh jiss keep an ee on some pages, as is my wont – an’ thah, ken, iye?

    8=)

  379. Ian Brotherhood says:

    @BDTT –

    Cool.

    🙂



Comment - new users please read this page first for commenting rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use the live preview box. Include paragraph breaks or I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.




↑ Top