The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


A modest proposition

Posted on July 28, 2015 by

Alert readers can’t have failed to notice the media working itself up into a particularly dopey froth this week over the subject of a second independence referendum. First the press, short of actual news in the political silly season, pumped up Alex Salmond stating the bleeding obvious into some kind of hold-the-front-page revelation.

(Salmond has said, like, forever that he believes Scotland will be independent in his lifetime. That can only happen through a referendum. It therefore stands to reason that he must believe a second referendum is inevitable. Him saying so, for the 500th time, in response to a direct question is about as far from “news” as it’s possible to get.)

polling

Then today all the papers reported David Cameron ruling out any possibility of another one while he’s Prime Minister, as if it was any of his business to do so.

(Should the SNP stand on a manifesto commitment to another referendum, and win a majority on that platform, it’d be not only an affront to democracy but politically idiotic to block it. Even those Scots opposed to independence, or to another referendum, still want their country’s democratic will respected.)

Luckily, there’s an easy solution to the problem.

It’s strangely irrational for Unionists to be constantly screaming, as they are, about how there mustn’t be another referendum for a “generation” or a “lifetime”. After all, they’re also constantly banging on about how “overwhelming” last year’s victory was, and if you’ve got an “overwhelming” lead why would you be scared of another vote?

So instead of sounding like they’re in a perpetual state of panic about it, Unionists with enough brain cells to start a fire if you rubbed them together ought to confidently do the exact opposite: propose an independence referendum every year.

It’s a simple enough plan. There’s no need for a referendum to have any significant costs. There’s an election pretty much every May now, whether it’s for Westminster, Holyrood, the European Parliament or local councils – all you need to do is print an extra ballot paper every time with the referendum question on it, just like when the 2011 AV referendum in Scotland piggybacked on the Holyrood election.

(After all, there’s no need to go through all the arguments at length again – we’ve just had three years of that, and the constitutional question still dominates all Scottish political discourse anyway, so hardly anyone would notice any difference.)

There’s nothing for Unionists to fear, what with the overwhelming settled will of the Scottish people, the oil price collapse, the many and vast economic black holes, the continuing uncertainty over the price of a stamp and so on. They’d win handsomely every time, dispiriting independence supporters more and more with each successive defeat until even Alex Salmond would probably give up.

Soon the SNP would be positively begging for there NOT to be any more referendums, because they’d need a new leader every 12 months and would quickly find their talent pool degraded to the Nat equivalent of, well, Kezia Dugdale.

Like an adolescent being made to smoke an entire pack of cigarettes in one go, they’d become pathologically averse to the whole idea. Rather than staggering towards a slow, prolonged death, the Union would never have been stronger.

Nobody tell them, eh?

Print Friendly

    3 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. 28 07 15 16:17

      A modest proposition | Speymouth

    2. 30 07 15 09:52

      A modest proposition | Politics Scotland | Sco...

    3. 30 07 15 22:42

      There is no failure except in no longer trying | A Wilderness of Peace

    303 to “A modest proposition”

    1. Jim Thomson says:

      FGS Stuart!

      I’ve little enough time to spare without having to spend a couple of weeks every year watching postal ballots being opened and then attending the count(s).

      Have a heart guv’nor.

    2. Steve Bowers says:

      And as a bonus, cockers could write a sequel every year about how he thwarted Salmond

    3. Richard says:

      Interested to see just what is in the SNP’s manifesto. But one thing that should definitely be is a pledge to hold a referendum on DevoMax as soon as possible after a majority next May. That way we legally get the FULL commitment of “The Vow” not some watered down Scotland Bill!

    4. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “That way we legally get the FULL commitment of “The Vow””

      Referendums aren’t legally binding.

    5. G says:

      I think the snp should include the option of an indyref if there was exceptional circumstances just to keep the door open but I think there’s work to be fond to get the 45 ( if it still even is 45) consistently @ 55. No point in having another ref if it’s not looking very likely to return a yes

    6. Macart says:

      Zackly!

      What’s to fear, if the union is in such a healthy state? 🙂

    7. david agnew says:

      It was pretty obvious they did not plan for the consequences of a NO vote. They genuinely did not think they would need one. There would be no need to reconcile yes voters to being British. It would be fait accompli. The yes vote would be too small and there would be no need to offer them anything. 55/45 is not overwhelming. It’s no more a resounding endorsement of union that it would be a resounding vote for independence had the score been reversed. Its 5% away form being a 50/50 split. In constitutional terms Scotland was practically split down the middle. This is exactly the result they didn’t want. One that left the proposal still on the table and impossible to ignore.

      The ball was in their court and it was up to them to make all that rhetoric about “best of both worlds” and “Better together” mean something. They really needed to do something to win over YES voters. A real need to reconcile people who voted YES with remaining British. In that they utterly failed. They chose instead to act as if they had won by a larger margin. This was a mistake. Its similar to the mistake Thatcher made back in 78. A marginal win (albeit a win of a technicality) leading them to believe that the yes camp could marginalised, shouted down and ignored. Get over it they screamed, you lost, give it up, be grateful for what you have etc etc. All delivered with a sneering tone that seems ill advised given the actual split of the vote. Their mouths were writing cheques their politics couldn’t cash.

      It was obvious what was going to happen next. By May 7th British politics had failed in Scotland.

      The only real significant achievement of Better together was to transform a party that only held 1/5th of the popular vote in 2010, into one that now holds 50%. But to listen to them…they still talk and act like people who had won a greater victory in 2014 and 2015.

      The level of antagonism being displayed by Westminster to Scotland, is simply making it more impossible to remain in the Union. The SNP might not be ready for another referendum but events are making it inevitable.

    8. breeks says:

      Indy Ref 2 risks putting the cart before the horse unless the state monopoly on broadcast propaganda has been addressed.
      Until that happens, the Unionists will control and manipulate the news agenda and Scotland will be twice blighted all over again, deluged with unionist propaganda and starved of constructive articulate debate about the real issues on sovereign nationhood.

    9. Stoker says:

      Well said, Rev!

      And while they’re at it, c’mon SNP, get it put permanently into the Holyrood manifestos. Make it known – a vote for the SNP at Holyrood is a personal declaration of support for Scottish independence.

      Do that and witness the stench of excrement coming from London.
      🙂

    10. JillP says:

      Devo Max that will allow EVEL in House of Commons. Put both outcomes on the ballot paper and Cameron can’t complain.

      Devo Max, which would prevent any bills seen by Tories as England only, would be win-win.

      59 Scottish MPs who would have to still be given full WM pay, would not have their votes counted on FULLY devolved issues. They can’t make them second class MPs or the Acts of Union would be breeched seriously.They would be there to vote on reserved issues only.

      What’s not to like?

    11. Helena Brown says:

      Well I keep telling our Unionist friends that we only need to win the vote once, they need to win it every time. I hope I am not speaking out of turn and frightening the poor wee souls.

    12. Clootie says:

      It would save “Better Together” a fortune. They could just re-use the NO postal votes over and over. When I say Better Together I mean Labour, the experts in vote rigging. They only acted on behalf of the Tories (again).

      Coalition with the LibDems and Better Together with Labour. You have to admire the cunning of the Tories in letting their “unionist partners” take the backlash.

      …of course neither should have got into bed with the Tories in the first place.

    13. Claire McGhee says:

      Poor Wendy Alexander. She really does start to look like the brains of the family. When she challenged the SNP to “bring it on” at a time when it was obvious to everyone that a referendum at that time would have been disastrous for them, and brother dear gave her a very public skelping, this gave the SNP the opportunity they had been waiting for to build credibility without having to deal with the constitutional problems. No wonder she left politics in the huff.

      Now, when the establishment should be pulling out all the stops to goad and bully the SNP into pushing for another referendum they really don’t want, they again do the opposite, pushing them to deny that they’re after one any time soon.

      Maybe it’s time for Wendy to make her comeback.

    14. Karmanaut says:

      Cameron is such a comedian. “Ruling out another referendum.” LOL.

      He can move to Scotland if he likes, and vote No, and his vote will count just as much as anybody else’s. But that’s where his rights stop.

    15. Macart says:

      Personally, I’m soooo looking forward to Cameron’s next love bombing of our electorate. Y’know with the tear in eye and the wee catch in his voice just like last time? How he reconciles that with EVEL and the demonisation of all things Scottish in the past ten months… oh and lest we forget the highlight of his stand up anti Scottish electoral campaign. The bill boards, the sound bites, the media avalanche of Tartan doom and chaos descending upon Westminster.

      It should be one helluva performance. 😀

    16. Taranaich says:

      So on the one hand we have Peat Worrier and others saying we shouldn’t rush a second referendum before we know we can win, making a significant point of noting the apparent lack of introspection into where Yes went wrong. Now we have the proposition that we have a referendum every year.

      There will never be an optimal time for a referendum. Westminster will stop at nothing to crush the cause of Scottish independence: each moment we let up to regroup in the name of caution is more time for them to keep Project Fear going strong while we lack an official Yes Scotland campaign.

      What, you think they’re going to go easy on us? You think they’ll just ease up until we’re ready? Wait until we stand up to defend ourselves before they kick us? No. We have to keep fighting as long as we have this momentum. We cannot simpy trust that those 56 MPs are there to stay. We need to take our forces and go forward.

      Not only do we have to keep what we have, we must keep pushing, and we need to build on the momentum we’ve got. Keep promoting independence. Keep a second referendum as an option. If Westminster were truly worried, then they wouldn’t have David Cameron come out and say he’d rule it out. The longer we leave it, the more time we give New Labour time to regroup in Scotland, the more time we give the establishment to continue its machinations, the more time we risk our best and brightest burning out or passing away.

      Time is what lost us the referendum: time is our greatest enemy now.

      Keep fighting, damn you.

    17. SOG says:

      It’s a bit harsh on that unfortunate bank: being told by the BBC to threaten to move south every year is going to lose it some custom.

    18. heedtracker says:

      There should be an SNP commitment to the next and last ref but this time they need the devo max option, with YES or NO. Its only fair and The Vow fraud’s only going to weaken Scotland as its designed to do

      Devo Max could win and within a decade, Scotland is free of English control.

    19. McDuff says:

      The problem is that come the next referendum the Unionists will insist on a Devo/max/Federal question on the ballot paper which will be very attractive to a ( God knows why) large section of the population and thus could scupper independence for a very long time, and allowing more migration of people from the south who will always be no voters. Scotland has been designated the overspill for an overpopulated England and it seems nigh on unstoppable.

    20. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Now we have the proposition that we have a referendum every year.”

      Everyone DOES get that this piece isn’t a serious proposal, right?

      *sadface*

    21. Joemcg says:

      There can be only one reason they are touching cloth. They know there is a good chance they will lose next time. They have played all their cards. The fear emanating is stinking the place out.

    22. Paula Rose says:

      Are we envisaging a question along the lines of –

      “Are you happy to remain in the UK?”

      That way we can do some classy No posters and such-like.

    23. Dr Jim says:

      One question….IN…or…OUT

      None of this some more sweeties now and a few later if we’re good
      That’s what they offered in their panic and they’re still lying and trying to avoid it

      Tory Labour no difference it’s all Whitehall and Westminster and those who would be our Kings and Rulers

      And no more more being polite and defending our position
      It’s time they were made to defend their position
      Call them the liars that they are

    24. Derek Henry says:

      The 2016 manifesto should have a Home Rule referendum front and centre.

      We would win that easily by a landslide.

      Then we are only 2 small powers away from full independence.

      If we ran another independence referendum we would lose it again as the silent majority is still there.

      Last years referendum should have been a home rule one it was rushed and they could not answer the currency question.

      It was a huge mistake because certain people want to see it happen in their lifetimes and they are getting on a bit.

      We would have won a home rule referendum and nearly be indpendent by now.

    25. Bill McDermott says:

      I am bound to say that BBC Scotland remains in its unionist mode. The network reports that the recent sizeable lift in the quarterly GDP figures was largely fuelled by NS oil and gas production. That will be Alastair’s oil production closing down by 2018!

      BBC Scotland news led on the bin lorry – no trace of the oil and gas figures.

    26. sensibledave says:

      Maybe Westminster might be more comfortable if they knew that the majority in the UK were behind Scottish Independence. Indyref2 could be a UK wide vote with the result being legally binding. 😉

    27. Taranaich says:

      Everyone DOES get that this piece isn’t a serious proposal, right?

      I just think it’s funny following Peat Worrier’s “Beware, Beware” post with what is essentially the polar opposite. 🙂

    28. heedtracker says:

      Local hard core right wing unionist UKOK stuff, Press and Journal has page 12 headline “Sturgeon told to ‘clear up’ whether new referendum in offing” and huge front page “You’ve got a licence to drill…North Sea future looks bright” although only under UKOK rule with that lot of far right britnats.

    29. sensibledave says:

      Rev 3.54

      … a little too subtle for some Rev.

    30. The Man in the Jar says:

      “Bring it on” ASAP!

      Devo Max / FFA are just dead end streets and a UKOK distraction. Strike while the iron is still hot. If we had another referendum just who could the unionists use to rally their support? Darling, Brown, Cameron? Dont make me laugh. They are at their weakest right now. If we wait till we are confident of winning then it might never happen.

    31. Iain More says:

      There must be something in the SNP manifesto that holds out the promise of Indy.

      Firstly on the Referendum 2 well something needs to be done not just about the Brit Nat State Broadcasters and I include STV in that and not just the BBC. I have myself now put money towards Indy TV. As they say don’t complain about the media but become the media.

      Secondly something needs to be done about the voting system. I will now never ever believe that the first Referendum wasn’t rigged. You can drive a coach and horses through the Brit Postal and Proxy voting system. As things stand at the moment we will never ever win a second referendum.

      Oh and it didn’t escape my attention that Brit Economic Growth is allegedly up thanks largely due to a rise in Oil and Gas Production. The volatility is just killing me. Disreporting Jackie didn’t follow the lead of its BBC London masters on that one. Meanwhile it appears that redundancies and cost cutting in the sector is still going on and what is more they are absolutely necessary according to Disreporting Jackie and the rest of the Media. As long as one barrel of oil can squeezed from Scotland we will never get a fair referendum.

      Mind you they aren’t just eyeing up oil because sooner or later they will be getting more and more thirsty for our water. It is only a matter of time.

    32. Joemcg says:

      Dr Jim-that’s a great point. Yes were constantly trying to justify the split. We should definitely go on the attack and ask why we should remain using all the reasons why that’s a bad idea,and you could fill a book. A blue book!

    33. DerekM says:

      LOL is this some of that reverse psychology stuff Rev,well every time we tell them what they should do they ignore us,so lets tell them what they should not do and they might do it lol

      If i was Nicola i would be having 2 a year until we either won it they got so fed up of us they fling us out.

      All this talk about being doomed if we lose a second indyref is nonsense,we have a 3rd and a 4th in fact we take the onions into their worst nightmare a neverendum.

      They still dont get it do they its not the SNP running the show,we just let them participate and to their credit they listened to us and for that we rewarded them at the ballot box.

    34. Fmooney says:

      I found it funny!

    35. mogabee says:

      Total secret…mum’s the word ????

    36. heedtracker says:

      sensibledave says:
      28 July, 2015 at 4:09 pm
      Rev 3.54

      … a little too subtle for some Rev.

      What do you think sensible, are you scared? This time tell us from the view point of the blue tory activist in England with a lot of UKOK knowledge stuff you clearly posses.

    37. Joe says:

      Steve Bowers says:

      28 July, 2015 at 3:10 pm

      And as a bonus, cockers could write a sequel every year about how he thwarted Salmond

      “Salmond! My parts in his downfalls”

    38. Wp says:

      When the majority of Scots want independence then surely they should have it. Whenever the majority of polls show that is he case then that’s it. We do it. Or is that too simple?

    39. starlaw says:

      agreed start asking ‘give us three good reasons to remain ‘and we are not interested in bombs’ win at Holyrood next year, then take control of the councils the following year, the path to indy 2 is then wide open.
      A yes campaign would be able to gain permission to use the lamp posts and council controlled halls a much stronger position to be in than indy 1

    40. Lesley-Anne says:

      Now that Dave “I’m a teapot” Cameron has opened his ungodly mouth again and spewed another load of **** out perhaps a second referendum A.S.A.P. might not be such a bad idea. After all the First Viceroy of Scotland, after his *ahem* awesome display of complete awesomeness on Friday, has confirmed to the Hootsmon that he has no contingency plans for a second referendum. 😀

      A second ref as soon as possible would proove that Cameron is not respected in Scotland ( yes I know we know that already but apparently the media don’t) but it would also catch the wee numpty (apologies to numpties everywhere) on the hop as a result. The net result would, in my view, be mass PANIC within the Tories, both BLUE and the remains of the RED, in London. 😀

      THE Scottish Secretary has said there are no contingency plans for the possibility of a further referendum on independence after next year’s Holyrood elections.

      https://archive.is/NwRxu

    41. Juteman says:

      The postal vote situation must be tightened up the next time. A doctors certificate must be proof that you can’t attend on the day, and a letter from your employer if you will be out the country.
      If you choose to go on holiday for the most important vote you can make, tough titty.
      All postal votes must be counter signed by a responsible witness.
      Last but not least, postal votes must be held in a secure facilith in the local area. No shipping them elsewhere to be ‘verified’.

    42. Juteman says:

      Re my last post.
      I would do away with postal votes.
      A local official should visit each voter, and have them deposit their vote in person into a sealed ballot box, in front of at least one other witness.

    43. Robert Kerr says:

      @Juteman

      Postal votes indeed! This part of the UK is very lax. Google postal votes in N. Ireland.

      The way to counter ongoing project fear is to point out to all that that is what it is.

      Soon everyone will know it when it is tried on. Defused!

    44. galamcennalath says:

      DevoMax needs buried once and for all. So long as it exists as an apparent halfway house there will be a group of Scots who will want it.

      We have just had a referendum which finally amounted to DevoMax versus Independence. Scotland opted for DevoMax, WM has no intentions of delivering.

      We need to arrive at a situation where DevoMax is totally off the table.

      We need to focus minds on a simple choice, Tory rule under DevoFA versus Independence.

      Anyway, DevoMax and negotiations to achieve it have too many drawbacks.

      – we can’t take DM, we have to be given it
      – WM has gone to great lengths not to give anything like DM
      – WM will define what they see DM as, not Scotland
      – WM will use DM negotiations to play for more time
      – DM could be twisted into a trap to destroy Scotland
      – DM doesn’t scrap Trident, or avoid illegal wars
      – DM is complicated in a non federal UK

    45. Johnny says:

      I thought it was apparent (upon reading the headline before clicking through even) that Rev was hoping to wind up some forthing-mouthed Noes with this proposal rather than it be taken seriously (and, given the consequences he outlines, you’d have to think he didn’t want independence to think he means it!).

    46. Velofello says:

      If referendums aren’t legally binding, how about “The. Settled Will of the Scottish Nation” being applied?

      56 of 59 MPs at Westminster, and a SNP majority at Holyrood is pretty indicative of settled will?

      Add to that the Tory Dads Army of the one remaining Scots Tory MP, as the only choice to be Secretary of State for Scotland; a Tory councillor of an English county. elevated to the H of Lords to assist this one Tory MP in his duties; a Uni Prof Unionist also drafted in to assist this sole Scots Tory MP.

      A farce of a democracy in Scotland.

    47. James123 says:

      I see that that wonderful British oil has contributed to an increase in UK growth.

      Unfortunately that horrible Scottish oil is still worthless, a burden, volatile and running out. Yuch!

      So the last thing we need is another referendum. #Bettertogether

    48. Muscleguy says:

      @McDuff

      Scenario: DMScotland has every power bar defence and foreign affairs. What could possibly go wrong? Well Westminster seems addicted to blowing up brown people from the air, no matter what and are being lobbied constantly by the Military suppliers to put boots on the ground firing lots of expensive munitions (how else are they to make money? from exercises? Get real. A constant source of friction with Holyrood and Scotland. Our sons and daughters, grandchildren, nieces and nephews, brothers and sisters put in mortal peril without our say so.

      Lots of foreign affairs grit in the machinery too. How much of HMG foreign policy do you actually agree with? Me neither.

      Then you get to our ‘share’ of the requisite costs to fund the above (and the Union parliament in all its bloated monstrosity), can you see no near constant political friction. They will constantly want more than we want to give.

      Then there’s Trident and here you get to the rub of why we will never be allowed proper DevoMax. If you recall Holyrood looked seriously at whether under transport powers (Devolved) they had the power to ban the nuclear convoys on safety grounds. Can you really see Westminster blithely giving it to them? There will be all sorts of, oh very reasonable, exemptions and exclusions. Look at the current Scotland Bill, the constitutional meanness of it, the fiscal trap of the tax powers (they cut Barnett tell us to raise the difference, again and again) and think: does that look like people who will give us true DevoMax?

    49. heedtracker says:

      Its not just worthless British oil either what saved teamGB . Scotland’s FM in China goes unreported in far right Press and Journal what tries to teamGB brain wash the whole region that produces most of the Scotch sold over,

      Its got to hurt these BBC britnats in particular, actually having to even mention Scotch or Sturgeon even.

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-33663597

      Can the UKOK lie machine get any more blatant? sure!

    50. gordoz says:

      Looking deeper into this piece –

      Was someone made to smoke a whole packet of cigarettes in their youth ? … now come on.

      (Pssssst)

    51. Your argument is completely sound. In agreement I have, accordingly, tempered my call that it should be monthly.

    52. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Was someone made to smoke a whole packet of cigarettes in their youth ? … now come on.”

      Heh. Not me, I’ve always found the things disgusting.

    53. Les Wilson says:

      I think the SNP manifesto MUST have a ref2 open option.
      No fixed date, just the option on any serious damage being done to Scotland by Tory policies, Indy ref will be triggered.

      It could be brought on because we have collectively had enough.Ie, none deliverance of the Vow, a EU exit, a big increase in poverty of all kinds for example. Anything more the try to use against our democracy. It could even be, not allowing media to be devolved. ( that is important too, right!)

      Anyway you get the idea. Only caveat must be that we answer the tricky questions, ie pensions and currency and let it sink into the population starting now.

    54. Joemcg says:

      I remember my mum telling me she got caught smoking by her dad and he made her EAT the rest of the packet! Strict in them days! Did not stop her smoking though!

    55. Dr Jim says:

      English students have to pay tuition fees for Uni

      Can we charge English folk an entry fee to come in
      Raise a bit of revenue there
      Once we get power over road signs we could divert them in like the Channel Tunnel and have tolls

      All others go free

      Disclaimer; This is by way of humour folks

      But some will say AYE is it though

    56. Paula Rose says:

      So we just explain that Independence is the same as Devo-Max but without the WMD and foreign wars – simples.

    57. Tartan Tory says:

      The story of Cameron’s rejection of another referendum is EXACTLY why I have been in a bad place since September last year.

      On the morning of 19th Sept, driving home from the count with Paula Rose on my passenger seat(!), I knew right there, that no UK PM would ever sign another Edinburgh Agreement. Doesn’t matter if we have an SNP landslide in Holyrood, Westminster, Brussels or even the UN!!

      Like it or not, without that agreement, we are stuffed.

      UDI is not an option outside of la-la-land either.

      Independence was the option last year and sadly, for whatever reason, many of my so-called ‘countrymen’ bottled it. I strongly suspect that we will never see a referendum held under the same (Edinburgh Agreement) terms again.

    58. Donald MacKenzie says:

      Given that David Muddle was so upset by what he perceived as the SNP claiming the right to say there should be another referendum, will he now take the opportunity to be equally apoplectic about David Cameron insisting that he has the right to say there will; not be another referendum?

      Mr Muddle must be very, very angry that Mr Cameron should utter such a thing. Yes?

    59. Dr Jim says:

      Capstan Full Strength when my Dad caught me

      It was like inhaling lit wet firewood

      Yer Lungs, Yer Eyes, The sickness and the sweat at the same time

      AYE those were the days (Looks back fondly)

    60. manandboy says:

      I never thought I would say this, but I’m content to have lost IndyRef. My main reason for this is that Scotland, imo, was not really ready for Independence in September 2014. Nor is it right now – though we are a lot closer to being ready than 10 months ago. And I think the country knows that.

      Until the decks are cleared of Unionist politicians at every level, how on earth can an Independent Scotland be declared. On that score, the Unionist MSP’s must be removed in May 2016, and the Unionist Local Councillors in May 2017. Not until Scotland is in control of its political structure can we begin running an Independent Scotland on a daily basis. To have active unionist politicians operating in an Independent Scotland while taking their orders from London would be insane. No, they have to be removed first at the ballot box. Then, and only then, will an Independent Scotland be ready for work on day one.

      Another reason why we were not ready is because we hadn’t done all our homework. Next time, hopefully we will, and then with a clear and credible strategy for currency, banking and pensions – and everything else, we will pass the Referendum exam with flying colours.

      We also need more time to sort out the BBC and the other Scottish media outlets. Until that happens, there can be no guarantee of a Yes result. The same goes for postal voting. Until PV is sorted, there is no point in a ballot. Scotlands dog population knows the postal vote was rigged in Indy14. To say otherwise is an insult to anyone’s intelligence.

      To win IndyRef2, I believe no-voting Labour supporters need more time to come to their senses. Specifically about joining forces with the neo-Liberal Tories; rejecting the traditional Scottish socialist philosophy; and about the Vow and all the other lies they swallowed from the Tory backed Better Together Campaign.

      Still much to do then, but why hurry. No one is more desperate to see Independence than I am, and time is against me. But for the younger generation and those who will come after, it is far better to get IndyRef2 right than to hurry it and stumble into an avoidable defeat.

      Meantime, we remain confronted by a formidable foe whose greatest weapon is that his endless lies are believed by huge numbers of people living in Scotland. Scotland remains a prized colony and its people remain merely the native population who can never be the equal of their Imperial English masters with their ethnic superiority and ruling-class mentality.

      Hasten slowly dear friends. 308 years and counting – but a short time in purgatory is preferable to an eternity in hell.

    61. msean says:

      A referendum every year. Would be good to keep the multicoloured tories on their toes between votes, Family of nations or one nation, bettertogether or anti Scottish. (delete according to election)

      Ialways wonder why in a democracy,our politicians don’t like referendums,after all,isn’t it the people who are meant to make decisions,and politicians there to put our decisions into actions? :_

    62. heedtracker says:

      I strongly suspect that we will never see a referendum held under the same (Edinburgh Agreement) terms again.

      You really think all this relentless britnat project fearing we live with is because England thought they had really tightened their grip of Scotland.

      Look at these red tory lying hypocrites. Its either deep fried mars bars or twerpy stamping on Scottish democracy or nothing at all. How long can they all hold out now?
      http://www.theguardian.com/uk/scotland

    63. Joemcg says:

      Tartan Tory-that’s a depressing post. I agree that there will probably not be another Edinburgh agreement type document but surely a PM cannot stop another vote? Can he?

    64. Diddy David Cameron says we can not have another referendum, no, not ever, stamping his Little Lord Fontelroy clad foot firmly down ….. so that is that says he, Scotland get on the austerity naughty step or I will set Nanny McFundilymundily on you, I will and you will not like it …

      In the meanwhile Scots look condescendingly over their shoulder at the spoiled wee brat of an Etonian, shaking their heads while wondering just what Osbourne has supplied Cameron to hoover up his nose this week. Noting the volatility of oil pricing is on the way upwards again.

    65. dakk says:

      Sensibledave

      England would bottle voting out their last ‘jewel in the crown colony and you know it.

      The only country more frightened of independence than Scotland is England.

      England would learn to stand on her own feet quite quickly but it wouldn’t feel the same not having another country to dominate and make her feel needed.

    66. michael diamond says:

      I think the unionists know they wont be able to rig a second referendum. And no postal votes this time!.

    67. mike cassidy says:

      There should be a commitment in the snp manifesto to support a referendum on setting up an English parliament.

      That’ll mess with their cocaine-addled brain cells!

    68. michael diamond says:

      Agree with breeks 3.35. Unless broadcasting is devolved to scotland, we will never get a fair debate from the ebc. They will lie,threaten, mislead, and scaremonger as usual. Lets get shot of these manipulating parasites!.

    69. Juteman says:

      Until the last BBC presenter is choked with the Birds left over botox, we will never be free.

    70. galamcennalath says:

      manandboy says:

      “Still much to do then, but why hurry. ….. it is far better to get IndyRef2 right than to hurry it and stumble into an avoidable defeat.”

      I believe we have entered a period of no greater that 4-5 years which will never be repeated again. Possibly never ever repeated.

      The SNP cannot expect to be this far ahead in the future. An absolute majority of Indy MSPs is essential. The system in Holyrood was designed to prevent this.

      We have Labour in its knees, but far from dead.

      We have a Tory WM government with absolutely no mandate in Scotland on an ideological right wing crusade to roll back the state.

      We have had promises of many more powers. Those promises will come to nothing. The expectation of DevoMax actually ever being delivered will shortly be killed off.

      The UK is about to have a debate about the EU where Scotland and England may take different positions.

      All experts say oil prices will recover in the next few years.

      IMO if we don’t have IndyRef2 in around 2-4 years, we will have missed our best chance, possibly ever. It may not be certain, polls initially may not have moved beyond 50:50, but we have to grab the chance. Failure to act means we may never get a chance in many decades, which is no better than failure to win.

      Go for it soon, and work our arses off for it!

    71. Tartan Tory says:

      Joemcg says:

      Tartan Tory-that’s a depressing post. I agree that there will probably not be another Edinburgh agreement type document but surely a PM cannot stop another vote? Can he?

      I am sorry Joe! It’s one of the reasons I’m not as proilific here as I once was. I find little of any ‘positivity’ to write about, but I don’t want to spoil the party.

      The PM can’t necesarilly stop another referendum, but he doesn’t have to sign-up to one, and HE WON’T. Nor will any other UK PM in the foreseable future. A unilateral referendum held by the Scottish parliament will not be accepted by Westminster, nor would it be likely to have the backing of our international friends either (outside of the likes of N.Korea).

      The only option left to us would turn Scotland into another N.Ireland, and whilst I want Independence more than anything else, I’m not prepared to sign my ‘country’ (UK Region) up to that. 🙁

    72. Dan Huil says:

      Or Holyrood could just behave as though Scotland was already independent.

    73. Jon D says:

      And, at last, here we have it…

      Since defeat in Indy Ref, but especially since the GE, The Rev has openly given rampant succour to the Labour Party, and also now, with this compliant article, to all unionists, Tories, Cameron and, by inference, his lackey, north of the border.

      Credit where it is due; WoS has indeed provided a valuable source of information for us all seeking Independence for Scotland.

      His credibility, now, however, has broken the increasingly fragile cusp of acceptance.

      Witness, further, his incessant dalliances (see Twitter – daily) with the likes of arch unionist Stephen Daisley, for example; disguised as frivolity for the ultimate purpose of obtaining himself a lucrative position and acceptance within the Establishment MSM for the further purpose of usurping the Scottish Independence movement with articles akin to this, and worse no doubt!

      Pause a while to recall that, mainly, his articles are no longer helpful towards us but towards them.

      I suggest that Stu has become frustrated / been purchased and desires greener and more lucrative pastures,
      as he now sees himself on a par with those who, he so recently, saw as Imperial Masters.

      In this world everything has its’ price. But what price Stu’s principles?

      We all readily know that this is the insidious nature of Establishment operations. Be careful.

      Be very careful.

      😉

    74. Robert Louis says:

      Those advocating that we wait some time before indy referendum 2, are missing one important aspect in all of this. To have another referendum, we will need the near impossible SNP majority at Holyrood every time. Yes, we managed it in 2011, and the polls ‘suggest’ that may happen in 2016, but after that? We really could end up waiting another 308 years.

      It is all very well, to talk of waiting to hold another referendum, but that choice might not be available again for a very, very long time.

      My opinion, is it needs to be in the manifesto 2016. If we hold another referendum, Labour (as the main group working against indy in Scotland) would be in no fit state to run ‘better together’ as they did the last time.

      People need to remember just how difficult/impossible it is to get a Holyrood majority, and realise, that after 2016, the chance of a referendum may not come again for decades.

      We need to take the chance while we can. We are much stronger, and our key opponents are much, much weaker. That, I guarantee you, will not always be the case.

      This is NOT Quebec.

    75. Thepnr says:

      There is no rush, the fact that those supporting Independence will be the ones to decide the timing of the next referendum is a big positive.

      Timing will be everything, the difference between success and failure. There is a lot to come over the next five years from this Tory government that cannot fail to move many towards supporting Independence.

      When Cameron steps down just before the next GE just think how the floodgates will open of those looking for an escape from Osborne as PM, Boris as deputy and IDS as chancellor!

      Nightmare scenario, much more powerful that Project Fear 2 could ever hope to be.

    76. louis.b.argyll says:

      The argument is won.

      The logical thing to do is play it cool.

      The establishment is self destructing.

      We have time, not a lot…but enough

      to put to good use, focus communities

      on their potential.

      RAISE THE BAR HIGH BUT DONT JUMP TOO SOON.

    77. Fireproofjim says:

      Reporting Scotland has just finished.
      Not a word about the huge increase in oil and gas production helping the GDP to a 0.7% increase.
      Not a word about Nicola in China.
      Read GA Ponsonby’s book on how the BBC stole the referendum. They are still at it.

    78. Pete Barton says:

      Have a wee read of Peter Bell’s insight into Dishface’s ‘No more referendum,I won’t allow it’ posture from the Guardian:

      http://www.scoop.it/t/politics-scotland

      Play the game,and you may just reap the rewards.

      If public opinion here points to a majority of people willing to state their preference and this is disrespected, then perhaps trigger Ref2.

    79. Breastplate says:

      I’m sorry to disagree with some on here but we don’t need a good reason to have Indy2, it can be just that we the people feel like it.
      If it’s in the SNP manifesto you can vote for it or not.

    80. Al-Stuart says:

      Hi Stuart,

      Thank you for that supremely ironic piece. Nicely put. You brighten my day every day chief.

      I would also agree with Derek Henry on this thread. A Home Rule Referendum should be front and centre of the 2016 SNP Manifesto.

      Before I get shot down by fundamentalist with rightfully principled arguments, I believe in fighting battles that can be won. Anyone analysing the figures must see this?

      Also, a Home Rule/Full-Devolution referendum is in ADDITION to an Independence Referendum.

      Best case SNP 2016 manifesto commitment…

      2017: Scottish Home Rule Referendum.

      2020: Scottish Independence Referendum.

      I am one of the many who have gone from lending my vote to the SNP in 2007, to making it permanent in 2011, and then becoming an SNP member in 2014.

      This is relevant, because it is precisely the persuasion of ordinary voters like me to the fact Scotland is best governed by the SNP that has helped bring about the SNP tipping points of 2007 (Holyrood minority), 2011 (Holyrood majority), 2014 (Referendum changing Scottish politics irrevocably) and 2015 (The 56 SNP MPs).

      It cannot be emphasised enough: we need to persuade the no-voters and undecideds.

      Gordon Wilson, SNP leader from 1979 to 1990 said in today’s National

      “The time is not yet ripe. The support for independence is falling, indeed sunk to 43%, while support for the SNP is rising. Patience is required. It would be a strategic error to commit to a referendum until you know you are going to win it”

      There is an enigma here. Scotland wants the promises in the Vow to be honoured. The evidence: We sent 56 SNP MPs down to Westminster, partly as a result of the broken promises indelibly associated with Gordon Brown and his buying off so many undecideds in his wretched Vow during the last referendum.

      Hence the proposal for TWO referenda. One within months of the Holyrood election 5th May 2016. A Full-Devolution referendum would be won.

      The second referendum for Independence 3 years later in 2020 is likely to be won, as long as the SNP repeat the brilliant strategy of 2007 minority government – run Scotland well.

      ———————–

      *Derek Henry says: 28 July, 2015 at 4:04 pm
      The 2016 manifesto should have a Home Rule referendum front and centre.

      We would win that easily by a landslide.

      Then we are only 2 small powers away from full independence.

      If we ran another independence referendum we would lose it again as the silent majority is still there.

      Last years referendum should have been a home rule one it was rushed and they could not answer the currency question.

      It was a huge mistake because certain people want to see it happen in their lifetimes and they are getting on a bit.

      We would have won a home rule referendum and nearly be independent by now.

    81. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Jon D.

      You didn’t get the tongue-in-cheek aspect of the Rev’s post then?

    82. michael diamond says:

      Just got my book this morning, by ga ponsonby on ebc bias.

    83. sensibledave says:

      @ heedtracker 4:26 pm

      You wrote: “What do you think sensible, are you scared? This time tell us from the view point of the blue tory activist in England with a lot of UKOK knowledge stuff you clearly posses”

      1. I can’t speak on behalf of “blue/Tory activists” Heedy me ol’ china – ’cause I ain’t one!

      2. I know I am wasting my time writing this next bit, but do try take this in – I don’t care whether Scotland votes for Independence or not. I really couldn’t give a fig. Got it?

      3. The Rev wrote a tongue in cheek piece – many missed the humour. The Rev then tried to help the tin foil hat brigade by explaining that he wasn’t serious. I merely pointed out that which was therefore apparent to the Rev.

    84. heedtracker says:

      C4 news teatime reportage/analysing on Labour but nothing on SLab wipe out whatsoever. Its like UKOK’s public ad funded broadcaster doesn’t think Scotland and Slab wipe out is relevant.

      Apologies if no one in Scotland is actually going to vote on Labour leader election. Back to endless C4 Big Bang Theory repeats on C4 in a minute.

    85. Grouse Beater says:

      Join the Labour Scobranch and get a free Thatcham alarm to protect against random referenda and UDI declarations.

      Or just get angry and demand your country back!

      https://grousebeater.wordpress.com/2015/07/25/the-obcenity-of-food-banks/

    86. HandandShrimp says:

      Fireproofjim

      Never watch the BBC news these days. It is just state propaganda – dull state propaganda the bastards don’t even have the courtesy to make it interesting.

    87. schrodingers cat says:

      we should keep our options open

      1. Delay the discussion until spring conference
      2. dont announce the snp manifesto until 4 weeks before the election

      3. make indyref2 conditional, conditional in the sense that the conditions are wooly, a bit like buying a house, that way, if we win a majority, nicola will retain the right to call indyref2 if and when she likes, ie is best suited
      eg, if devo max isnt forthcoming….if the unionists can define devo max as anything they like, so can we. that way if support for yes dives, we have a get out of jail free card. eg. a commitment to consult the people of scotland wrt indyref2, if we vote yes in the eu ref and england votes no.
      this may sound like sophistry, because it is, but we need to hold the cards, not westminster

    88. sensibledave says:

      dakk 6:17 pm

      Hi Dakk. Are you, Heedy, Grousey et al aware of something called the Stockholm Syndrome? I think I’ve discovered a new variant!

      In the Stockholm Syndrome the victim starts to fall in love, admire, need, rely upon, and depend upon their, captor.

      I am witnessing a phenomena, hereafter called the Stuckhome Syndrome, where people think they are being held captive – but they are not. They are asked if they want to be released – but they don’t want to go. They need to keep shouting at everyone that their conditions are awful and their shackles are too tight – but they don’t want them taken off.

      They have a deep need to be always able to blame someone for the fact that they think they are being held captive. They want their captors to stop them from leaving – otherwise they would have nothing to moan about.

    89. cearc says:

      Do we get a bank holiday for the annual Referendum Day, otherwise known as Independence Some-time-or-other Day?

      Mike Cassidy said,

      ‘There should be a commitment in the snp manifesto to support a referendum on setting up an English parliament.’

      Great idea! That would liven up the EVEL debate like a nest of hornets.

    90. Dr Jim says:

      He can Huff and he can Puff he can stamp his wee Prime Ministerial tootsies
      He can shout and ball, threaten, point his wee rotten finger at us but the one thing he Cannae Dae

      Is stop us having a vote on something if we want it

      He can try not accepting it, good luck with that one though

      The Precedent is set, we have our own elected Government by the biggest majority in the history of anywhere

      This is the guy who has put his country’s future in the EU at risk by being a big fat coward over UKIP
      This is the guy who refused to debate with Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon
      This is the guy who had to be dragged kicking and screaming to debate with Miliband and Farage for gods sake

      This is the kind of guy who doesn’t answer the door in case it’s trouble
      Do we think this guy will come to Scotland again with another stupid speech or stunt
      He’ll likely ask Murphy to go or Stairheid Curran and offer them a Kingship of West Wales and 1000 Groats each

      Instead of waiting to see what they’re going to say or do
      If our First Minister says it’s on then lets batter THEM Shitless first

      Let’s get the attitude sorted
      Who do they think they are, I know who I think they are

      They’re FUKC ALL but mouth

    91. Jock McDonnell says:

      @ Al-Stuart
      I too read Gordon Wilson’s article, he’s correct, no referendum until we can win it. He is also correct to talk about a narrative on currency now.

      As someone above said, we need the SNP or some other (unlikely) pro-indy party to get a majority just to hold a referendum. We can’t afford to fail again.

      Wilson is correct, for now, we need to develop a narrative about why independence is the right option. No formal campaign, just get the discussion going again, especially while Labour are on the ropes.
      We need all that talent that arose during indyref 1 to come back fighting. Many have had a year off – focused on all the personal stuff they neglected. Now is the time to get started again, it will make the final run in a lot easier.

    92. JLT says:

      Once again, this is just the ‘phoney war’ period as it was prior to 2014. Both camps can see what the other could potentially do, but for the moment, they are just kind of staying quiet and keeping their cards close to their chest.

      For me personally, I think the moment of truth will come when Cameron once again asks (or rather …froths, begs, pleads) for the EU to change the rules on ‘Freedom of Movement’ and ‘Human Rights’. However, considering that both policies are key pillars of the whole EU institution itself and were designed to never have a Western Europeans getting involved in bitter trade wars again (which led to armament and thus WW1), and let alone the absolute abuse of Human Rights (as seen under the Nazis in WW2), there is no danger of Cameron being given any nod at all.

      For the EU to give Cameron permission to manipulate these 2 sacrosanct policies will be deemed in itself, as a complete failure of the EU project. Such an agreement would allow Britain to twist and connive any way possible in the abuse of workers rights, trade manipulation and systematic barring of certain nationalities while in the EU.
      This would turn these 2 priceless policies into a running twisted joke by one member state, as it sticks 2 fingers up at the rest of the EU, thus tarnishing the whole EU project which would then lead to outright bitterness and anger.

      So when Cameron is told politely to ‘eff off’ in German or French, his backbenches will bellow ‘told you so!’, and thus expect him to follow through on the other promise that Britain will quit the EU.

      It is at that point, that I expect our First Minister to implement the beginnings of Referendum 2 once Cameron states his position. On top of austerity-max being in full swing and possibly EVEL being implemented …the possible EU exit would give Nicola her Westminster’s version of the ‘unholy trinity’ and therefore, give her the democratic right to begin Scotland’s possible exit from Union.

    93. One_Scot says:

      You can bet your bottom dollar if the oil price was in the opposite direction it would be headline news, trolling how Scotland could never survive as an Independent country.

      They are a shower of scumbags and that’s be being nice.

    94. Grouse Beater says:

      Dippydave: Are you aware of something called the Stockholm Syndrome?

      We’re as pig ignorant as you, so don’t waste time teaching us what you don’t know.

    95. Dan Huil says:

      An arrogant and ignorant Tory, who got all his money from mummy and daddy, tells the people of Scotland he will not allow a referendum…

    96. Jim McIntosh says:

      It will be a waste of time going for IR2 until we have a balanced media in Scotland. I think a manifesto pledge to create a proper Scottish broadcasting service would be more important, and before someone says “broadcasting isn’t devolved”, surely there are people out there bright enough to get around this.

    97. Grouse Beater says:

      Labour’s dullards insisted SNP misled with a promise we get a Garden of Eden come independence.

      The same ignorati now claim the Vow delivers that very thing. And it throws in a rainbow for free.

      All I can see is Jackie Baillie advancing towards me blocking out light from the sun.

    98. call me dave says:

      Scotland’s only Conservative MP has been reported to the UK Government and Parliament for staging a high-profile visit to a foodbank in a neighbouring constituency without giving the local MP proper notice.
      ————————————————————
      Well some of you locals did say it was the wrong face that turned up.

      But the Trussel Trust must have thought : It’s all right by me:-)

      https://archive.is/PUfhl

      PS:
      It’s all right by me.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvKrE_VxB_w

    99. maxi kerr says:

      55/45% is NOT a huge anything,in fact the independence situation is balanced on a knife edge.We were cheated as well in the referendum, but next time there will be a lot more scrutiny.

    100. Clootie says:

      Chinese channel CCTV this afternoon

      Great interview by Nicola. The interviewer was very professional and knowledgeable and Nicola was equal to the task.

      It made our media interviewers look pitiful. Obviously no coverage will appear on UK TV

    101. Grouse Beater says:

      Cameron thinks winning elections allow him to say no to any democratic request from Scotland including another referendum, but will promise Scotland anything if it is a referendum.

    102. Jon D says:

      Hi, BrianDoonthetoon, 28 July, 2015 at 7:16 pm

      “You didn’t get the tongue-in-cheek aspect of the Rev’s post then?”

      I think my little emoticon [;)] at the end of my post confirms that I did, as I always do, enjoy the Rev’s satire

    103. dakk says:

      Sensibledave

      Hi Dave

      We on Wings voted Yes.

      Its your No voters you can perhaps diagnose with those afflictions.

      And all we want is for Scotland to be independent,no more no less.

    104. galamcennalath says:

      Al-Stuart says

      “a Home Rule/Full-Devolution referendum”

      That is what we ended up with in September. Not how it started, but by the 18th that was what was on the table.

      Home Rule / DevoSuperMax / Federal UK versus Independence.

      Home Rule won.

      We have to be given Home Rule, we can’t take it. And, WM hasn’t delivered. WM will never give us Home Rule. Another Hone Rule vote would only encourage some Scots to believe it is genuinely on offer and to give WM more time to play us along.

      independence, on the other hand, is ours to take use like every other country which achieved it.

    105. Fred says:

      I would think that most of todays SNP members don’t even know who Gordon Wilson is/was, he had some very weird ideas in the past and represents nobody/nothing.

      I was never a fan of Wilson and had he been in any other party he would now be in the Lords talking shite. Courage brothers do not stumble!

    106. Dr Jim says:

      I just finished watching some arrogant BBC woman “Interview” one of the guys from the Greek Parliament in that self opinionated know it all patronising fashion the BBC love to adopt when they’re representing the Great British Imperialists
      and the poor man’s becoming exasperated with her deliberate avoidance and dismissive attitude of his position

      And it’s exactly the same attitude they use on us

      This is something I hope the Scottish Government will reject out of hand from the BBC and anybody else
      Our country is our business and we’ll decide what’s going to happen and impudent interference and downright cheek should be slapped down

      If they’re not going to be of help then they’re a hindrance so sod off and keep they’re mouths shut
      Like it or lump it absolutely no compromise

      They’ve been kicked out of every country in the world because of their duplicity and power hungry asset rapist behaviour
      Let’s hope this is the best chance to kick them out of ours

    107. De Valera says:

      @ sensibledave
      Unionists have to ask themselves, why was “The Vow” even necessary? Also all the threats and scare stories? Surely if the Union was as good as its protagonists made out, a No vote should have been a No vote, end of story.

      Scotland was bribed and threatened to remain in the Union, now of course us cynics on the pro indy side knew that the establishment had no intention of honouring its promises but the Better Together campaign was faught as a panicky rearguard action when it should never have been if the people of Scotland were so happy to be British.

    108. Grouse Beater says:

      A few soft copper tools, a stonemason’s hammer, and a simple plumb line built the pyramids, but opponents of democracy think the people of Scotland too unskilled to build their own nation.

    109. Robert Louis says:

      A devo max referendum is pointless, as at the end of the day even if a majority vote for it, it will rely upon votes from Westminster to pass the necessary legislation. We have just seen how that works. Not.

      To my mind, it is a non question, of course there will be a referendum commitment in the 2016 manifesto, otherwise no matter what happens during that entire parliamentary term, the Scottish Government will have effectively prevented themselves, regardless of circumstances, of being able to hold a referendum.

      Fact is, Westminster only listens, when the metaphorical gun of a referendum is held against its head. If it isn’t planned, then Westminster can go back to ignoring Scotland, like it did for 308 years.

      We need to keep it hanging over their heads, and keep our game plan to ourselves – which is what Nicola seems to be doing.

    110. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Richard at 3.11

      Don’t be silly, Richard.
      Devo Max is in the gift of Westminster and cannot be seized by a referendum the result of which Westminster would not be obliged to honour.

      Time for Devo Max (whatever that was) passed last year anyway.

      Independence we take.

      Getting an awful of lot of these diversionary suggestions from all over the place at the moment. Do you think some folk are trying to tricky?

    111. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Claire McGhee at 3.48

      What makes you think the SNP doesn’t want another referendum?
      Why do you think we are demanding promises that we know wont be honoured?

      What the SNP is doing is forcing Westminster to behave in a a way that makes another referendum inevitable very soon

    112. Christian Schmidt says:

      Have you been wondering what Wendy is up to as well?

      I mean, it is an interesting question, what would the independence movement look like if the other side had brains?

    113. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Taranaich at 3.51

      Thank you. Thank you. Thank you

    114. Macart says:

      @Clootie

      Twas ever thus Clootie. If you don’t have a link handy, I think I’ll google that and see if its recorded.

      Onywize, on topic (kinda). I’d have a sly fiver on four years. Just post EU referendum and pre GE. A good piece by GAP over on NS, with some solid reasoning. I don’t think he’s far of you know. 😉

    115. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      heedtracker at 3.53

      Nonsense. Can you define Devo max? Nobody has yet. It will only be gifted as a concession to stop us in our tracks if we keep fighting for and increasing the support independence and if it wins we will be tied up in arguing about incomplete powers for decades

    116. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Tartan Tory at 5.40

      we don’t need an”Edinburgh Agreement” or permission from Westminster to have as many referendums as we wish.

      We have the absolute right to decide how we are being governed and I’m surprised at how many folk seem to accept the Westminster bluff on this

    117. galamcennalath says:

      Dave McEwan Hill says:

      “Getting an awful of lot of these diversionary suggestions from all over the place at the moment. Do you think some folk are trying to tricky?”

      Indeed. As far as DevoMax is concerned we are getting close to ‘been there, exhausted that one’.

      So why all this talk of resurrecting a route which has led nowhere?

      It needs to be buried once and for all. The SNP needs to say to WM, “Vow now, or we move on to IndyRef2 when the Scottish people are ready” …. Perhaps in the manifesto for 2016 Holyrood.

    118. FairFerfochen says:

      Wot? A referendum vote every year? U R joking right?
      I’ve nearly lost all my hair and my teeth are just about ground to dust!
      I couldn’t take it, soz 🙁

    119. Tam Jardine says:

      I find it slightly strange that people are still talking about devo-max on this site: If we had a referendum on devo-max Westminster would HAVE to respect it!

      We just had effectively 2 referenda on devo-max and the result was yes in both. What would a third achieve?

      The indyref was distorted to hoodwink the public to vote for devo-max then the SNP wiped the board on a platform of holding Westminster to its word on further powers, home rule etc etc.

      We actually have less power devolved to Scotland right now than before the referendum. Wake up. Devo-max is a completely meaningless term. It’s empty. We can neither demand it nor will it ever be granted. We could beg for it but demand?

      95% of our elected representatives at Westminster were elected on a ‘more powers’ platform and it makes zero fucking difference.

      We need to stop bitching and trying to find some kind of sweet spot where the electorate on a good day with a fair wind might just tip the scales etc etc.

      We’re nearly there but there is some hard graft required by the SNP and the Yes campaign to look at where we failed and plot our path to winning.

      The currency question needs addressed as it is clear we can’t rely on England being reasonable/helpful.

      We need to build support in the international community so it is more than just Iceland and North Korea on our side. How do we do this?

      And we need to neutralise the BBC. How do we do this?

    120. Effijy says:

      “TV News at 10-

      !The UK economy grew by 0.7% mainly due to a surge in North Sea
      Oil and Gas production”

      Think what sort of increase that would have generated for Scotland alone without the Westminster Wasters taking their lions share.

      But wait, isn’t it a case that North Sea Oil and Gas is finished, the type of resource that runs out, the source of an economic
      boost that is gone forever?

      Lying, Cheating, Corrupt B*********s.

    121. @Tartan Tory @6:13

      “A unilateral referendum held by the Scottish parliament will not be accepted by Westminster, nor would it be likely to have the backing of our international friends either (outside of the likes of N.Korea).”

      That’s pure speculation, and misguided. We do not need London’s backing to determine our own future, neither in UK or International Law.

      A referendum initiated by the Scottish Government, using international ‘best practice’ for referenda, and with independent international supervision, would carry enormous moral weight. The global community would be outraged if Scots voted to secede from the UK under those circumstances, and were denied by London.

      Ongoing Westminster rule in that scenario would explicitly be an occupation, in direct breach of the Act of Union (for what that’s worth), and would remove any last pretence of democracy from the UK State. Any UK Government would be begging to agree a divorce settlement, rather than have us declare UDI with international support! Scotland stands to gain a lot more than rUK from a situation where we keep all of our assets and liabilities, and England keep theirs. I can’t think of a single country in Europe (except Spain maybe) that would warmly welcome an Independent Scotland in those circumstances.

      Hanging onto a country that had voted out would not be popular among the rUK population either. There is no parallel with NI… the status quo in Northern Ireland since 1997 is clearly defined as, in the UK “… until/unless a majority wish otherwise”.

      And wait and see what happens if the Catalan’s vote out of Spain in a referendum ‘unapproved’ by Madrid. Do you think the EU and the ECB and the UN will allow Spanish Civil War MK2 to break out? Really?

    122. typo in my previous comment: * wouldn’t warmly welcome…

    123. Grouse Beater says:

      Wot? A referendum vote every year?

      Might be great fun.

      Let’s steal the thunder of the Oxford-Cambridge boat race inflicted on us every year.

      There could be a Yes skiff and a No skiff – we set them on the widest part of the Clyde, fire the starter’s pistol, and see which can avoid the greatest number of drowned victims of poverty and bankruptcy to reach the finish line.

    124. Paula Rose says:

      One year we could have the question –

      “Do you agree that Scotland is too wee, too poor and too stupid to be an independent nation?”

    125. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Lots and lots of new names on here talking diversionary pish and evidence that some gullible people are swallowing it.

      Devo max is a no go. It is a complicated impediment, not a step to independence. If we argue for Devo max (which is not even defined and means very different things to different people) we will eventually be offered half of whatever it is.

      I suspect several people arguing it on here are aware that it is a no go and they are unionists. Why would we expect anything different? Some of course may just be stupid. Devo Max(whatever it is) is in the gift of Westminster anyway and doesn’t need a referendum. We were promised it. Remember? We are supposed to have it.

      We nearly won last year. Remember? And we are now in a better position. That is why the unionists are wetting themselves and filling up pages about Devo max.

      Here is how it is.

      if we drop our central demand for Independence or weaken it in any way we will go backwards.

      There is no “right time” that can be guaranteed for anything in politics. Anybody suggesting we should wait for the right time is talking about delaying things to the right time for the unionists.

      We cannot wait for opinion polls to identify the “right time”. We don’t own or control the polls and as was shown recently they are very often very wrong – though they don’t even break stride when they cock-up.

      Waiting for folk to die is pathetic. Changing folks minds by keeping up the effort is how you win elections. So we must keep up the effort and campaigning for independence must be continuous.

      Waiting will give our enemies lots of time to demonise Nicola in the way they demonised AS. Our support is rising. NOW is the time to strike and declare for another referendum and start the campaign again immediately.

      We wont win independence waiting for it to suddenly transpire on its own. Some folk on here seem to be suggesting this (but then some folk on here are trolls who think we are all daft).

      Gordon Wilson’s judgement is no more attractive than that of others who have been much more successful SNP leaders.

      The sooner we have the focus of another independence vote to campaign on the better. Does anybody think 100,000 people have joined the SNP for devo whatever?
      They all know what the SNP stands for and they know what they want

    126. Quoth sensibledave:
      “I can’t speak on behalf of “blue/Tory activists” Heedy me ol’ china – ’cause I ain’t one!”

      That’s it! I thought something smelt fishy… turns out it was a kipper 😉

    127. G says:

      A material change in circumstances could of course be that 60% of Scotland favour independence. Or indeed that circumstances arise that facilitate that rise in support.

      I may change my username, now that someone else is using it 🙂

    128. Democracy Reborn says:

      @ Grouse Beater

      That 8.10pm post was a belter.

      @ sensibledave

      Interesting you mention Stockholm, “me old china”. The Swedes enjoy GDP per capita 10 places higher than old Blighty (Wiki, IMF data). They are also the second most equal country in the EU (European Commission data). UK? Errr…. 3rd most unequal country in the EU (out of 28).

      Give me the Stockholm Syndrome any day.

    129. Iain More says:

      Well in the week that the Brit Nat Govt handed over I mean sold even more oil drilling licenses, the Brit Nat outpost that is STV Aberdeen took great delight in reporting more North Sea jobs to go and that the less than friendly to Scots Indy Shell will go to the three weeks on and three weeks off schedule.

    130. Graeme says:

      I’ve heard a lot of ” we can have a referendum if we like”, they can’t stop us”

      but can someone tell me just how we do that without Westminster approval and if we did and got a Yes majority wouldn’t the UK government simply dismiss it as illegal and if that happens then what?

      civil unrest, UDI ?

      the way I see it (and I could be wrong) unless we’re granted another referendum by Westminister we’re not getting out of this union peacefully, we had that chance and we blew it

      Whas like us

    131. Joemcg says:

      Dave McEwan-great post. I agree with every word. I honestly think we must have another vote during this parliamentary term or all impetus will be lost. Possibly forever.

    132. FairFerfochen says:

      Grouse Beater,

      That’s the last tuft gone and me gums have finally pushed through.

      Floatin on the Clyde would be a godsend.

    133. Still Positive. says:

      Tam Jardine @ 10.07.

      Nicola is building international support with visits to USA and China.

    134. Hoss Mackintosh says:

      @Al Stuart,

      I think Gordon Wilson is being a bit disingenuous with his 43% figure just to suit his adenga.

      James Kelly in his poll of pols reckons it is around the 47 to 48% mark and a few recent polls have been around this area so it has increased but it is not consistently over 50%.

      He has regular analysis over the last few months which can be checked out at Scot goes Pop. There is also a useful list of indy polls at the end of this wiki article…

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_independence

      So take the 43% with a pinch of salt – GW must have accidentally forgotten to discount the don’t knows?

    135. Stoker says:

      @ Tam Jardine (10.07pm).
      Perfectly put, Tam, getting tired of it myself.
      I’m not interested in diluted offerings of 2nd best and never will be.

    136. heedtracker says:

      Hi sensible, its an interesting unionist slam that, the door is there so why not take it silly sweaties etc

      “They want their captors to stop them from leaving – otherwise they would have nothing to moan about.”

      Sensible why and what was Project Fear all about and why did the BBC terrorise and lie to Scotland, if that UKOK door is really open and so on?

      You’re out of your league sensible but ofcourse you’re not, you’re as clued up as any experienced politico activist, so why not just debate like one, instead of treating WoS readers like morons?

      We’ve got a now famous fake Slovene Prof at Glasgow, savaging Scottish democracy and possible Grexit CiF sensibledave, so have at it dude, England and it’s iron grip of Scotland is expecting better from you.

    137. Grouse Beater says:

      “Do you agree Scotland is too wee, too poor and too stupid to be an independent nation?”

      The combined total that read the Mail, Record, Sun, and Sunday Post are likely too ignorant to attempt the question.

    138. gfaetheblock says:

      For those criticising postal votes, done questions.
      Is there any evidence of significant fraud at the referendum?
      Why do you assume only one side committed this fraud or of it likely that yes and no were both at it?
      Many folk use postal votes for work, childcare and other commitments, would it not be better to look at how the system can be improved than trying to make it harder for people to vote?

      As part of a professional couple with a small child, I have used my postal vote twice in the last year.

    139. Andy Nimmo says:

      Grouse Beater @ 10.17

      Ah the boat race.
      Reminds me of the time when all the European Health Services used to hold annual boat races.
      Every year, the British Health Service romped home.
      Then one year, shock, horror, the Danish Health Service had the audacity to actually go and beat the Brits.
      “This must never happen again” wailed the British management.
      They spent millions on outside consultants who eventually informwd them that the Danish Health Service had one person steering and eight rowing, while that year the Brits had four steering and only five rowing.
      Right said the bosses, these skiving rowers will need to up the ante, so we’ll stop their bonuses until they start winning again.
      Meanwhile we’ll incentivise the steerers with salary increases.
      Next year, the Danish boat skooshed in again.
      “Aargh that’s enough” squealed the management.
      “Sack these rowers, they’re blooming useless. Get replacements quick”

    140. Grouse Beater says:

      On another Referendum:

      It’s likely cheaper to Scotland’s long-term economic health, and its people, if we gave each and every No voter £50,000 from the public purse on promise they bugger off.

    141. John from Fife says:

      Off the Rev’s light hearted Topic.
      Indy Ref 2 must be in the manifesto in some guise. No Devo Max option.
      It should be at a time of the SG’s choosing so no long drawn out campaign.
      Strict control on Postal Votes.
      Address the concerns on Currency and Pensions.
      Get a fairer media !!!

    142. Paula Rose says:

      Unfortunately our friends in the South were not here during the run-up to the referendum – so they really do not understand the gulf in difference between what they experienced vis-a-vis the MSM and what we were on the receiving end of up here.

    143. Thepnr says:

      Regarding the reliability of polling data, what’s to stop us form doing it ourselves?

      A hundred volunteers gathering 10 opinions each every month or or two shouldn’t be too hard to organise. Or am I talking crap? I’m serious though and know that it would take a bit of organising and would need real expertise if it were to be done properly.

      What we may lack in cash we certainly make up for in numbers, all we need is a website and an organiser, easy eh? lol.

    144. Grouse Beater says:

      “That’s the last tuft gone and me gums have finally pushed through. Floatin on the Clyde would be a godsend.”

      🙂

      https://grousebeater.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=5334&action=edit

    145. Grouse Beater says:

      Oops! – try this link, Fairferfochan:

      http://wp.me/p4fd9j-1o2

    146. Rock says:

      The SNP’s whole point of existence is to make Scotland independent.

      Until that time, every single SNP manifesto must have a commitment to hold a referendum, in my view.

      If they win a majority, that means the electorate are happy with a referendum.

      If they don’t, they could still hold one if the Socialists and Greens co-operated.

      If the unionists got a majority, that would mean the electorate didn’t want a referendum.

      Of course if we continue to play according to Westminster rules, it would not be legally binding even if Yes won massively.

      But it is long overdue to stop playing according to Westminster rules.

    147. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Material change? Significant change?

      FFS, I’m 52 years old. By the time I first voted, Thatcher was already going full-tilt. By the time this current mob are out – post-Boris? – I’ll be 67, reflecting on an adult lifetime in which the closest I ever saw UK government even vaguely pretending to represent a hefty chunk of my generation was the Blair/Brown years.

      The only ‘material change’ we need concern ourselves with is the fact that we’re back to where we were almost four decades ago – unhinged Tories dictating our lives and futures.

      It is intolerable.

    148. Still Positive. says:

      We will have the next and final indy ref when Nicola decides we are ready to win. Before then we must get the currency question sorted: a Scottish currency using existing banknotes underwritten by a Scottish Central Bank, probably pegged to the UK pound initially. (I failed economics twice at uni so I’ll leave it to people who actually understand this to make the decisions.)

      We also have to clarify the pensions issue. Although it said in the White Paper that the Independent Scottish Government would take full responsibility for Retirement Pensions and UK Government pensions, including MOD pensions, they need to clarify how they would do this.

      I am in receipt of a UK Government Widows’ Pension as well as Retirement Pension and also a small Teachers’ Pension paid from Scottish Public Pensions Agency based in the Borders.

      All my income from the government and I still voted ‘Yes’.

    149. Rock says:

      Velofello,

      “A farce of a democracy in Scotland.”

      Where is “The Scotland-UN Committee” these days?

      Brian Doonthetoon?

    150. Taranaich says:

      Dave McEwan Hill: let me return the thank you, thank you, thank you!

      I was reading some of the replies in this thread with my mouth agape. How in God’s name has it come to the point where we’re questioning the Yes strategy on pensions, one of the few water tight certainties which even the Select Committee acknowledged would be guaranteed with independence, is being questioned? Our “strategy” failed because Project Fear lied, the media perpetuated their lies, and the lie was so big that nobody even thought to question it.

      Again, I’m not saying we should do what Yes did before – the next Yes campaign has to learn from itself – but we must keep in mind what was a flawed strategy, and what was fact obfuscated by lies.

    151. FairFerfochen says:

      Grouse Beater,

      Thanks for restoring my hopes.
      Beautifully written.

    152. Tam Jardine says:

      Still Positive

      All well and good but dinnae haud yer breath waiting for the US president’s endorsement or that of the Chinese Premier.

      We need support to come from northern European countries… our neighbours.- where was the support we needed from Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Ireland and France. France for fuck sake! The French were garrisoned about 200m from where I sit right now back in the day during the Auld Alliance, an alliance that lasted almost as long as this bleedin union.

      They didn’t have to say ‘just do it!’ but there are ways of showing support without causing an international incident, particularly when the people of Scotland were in a sense under seige.

      We are not alone but the narrative was allowed to be established that we would be some kind of pariah on the periphery of Europe. That needs to be addressed.

    153. Dr Jim says:

      Poor old Gordon Wilson gets a bit grumpy because he would like to think the SNP is still his party and he knows better He just never got on with Alex modernising everything and making it relevant

      He kinda liked the party Protesty and a wee bit Bearded and Birdwatchy with kilts and Tweed Jackets

      Some of the men wore them too (Boom Boom)

      Never mind Eh

    154. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Rock (11.22) –

      Hear hear.

    155. Grouse Beater says:

      They do not understand the gulf in difference between what they experienced vis-a-vis the MSM and what we were on the receiving end of up here.

      They witness now the shabbiness of their press in the way it tries to make Corbyn’s election seem threatening to economic and civil order.

    156. Still Positive. says:

      Taranaich @ 11.30.

      What I was saying in my last post was that the Scottish Government, of an independent Scotland, has to make it clear, to pensioners in particular, that they will assume responsibility for paying all government pensions, including retirement pensions and how they will do that.

      They need to make that perfectly clear to the over 65s in particular.

    157. Clootie says:

      Robert Louis
      06:49pm

      …couldn’t agree more. Look at the support in the 1940/1950’s for the Scottish Covenant.They achieved remarkable results against all the odds but momentum was lost for a generation.

      We need to act early. They achieved 2 Million signatures for home rule.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Covenant

      Macart
      Sorry I just caught CCTV interview by chance. I have no link but well worth seeing.

    158. Rock says:

      Dave McEwan Hill,

      “We have the absolute right to decide how we are being governed and I’m surprised at how many folk seem to accept the Westminster bluff on this”

      What has stopped us from exercising that “absolute right” for the last 308 years then?

      Are we “too stupid” or “too wee” or “too poor”?

    159. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Rock.

      You do know how to ‘Google’, don’tcha?
      You just set your fingers on the keyboard and type, whilst whistling…

      “The Scotland-UN Committee was active from July 1979 till being wound up in mid 2007, a period of 28 years, with its peak activity leading up to the reconstitution of the Scottish Parliament and Government in 1999.

      The Committee played a leading and very decisive role in the devolution process, since it was not only the source of some of the more revolutionary ideas on the Scottish political structure, but principally because its incisive international diplomatic campaign, pressed home with utter determination backed up by first-hand diplomatic expertise of a high order, was what broke the ice of three centuries and finally brought about action on the restoration of democratic government in Scotland – and also Wales.

      Without it, nothing of what followed would have happened.

      In terms of results achieved the Scotland-UN Committee is unique in the history of the Scottish home rule movement over the past 300 years.

      It is not practicable to list the entire range of material covering the 18 years of its main activity, much of which is repetitive or confidential, and most of its verbal diplomatic negotiations are unrecorded and/or still diplomatically sensitive.

      But the cross-section presented on this site gives a rounded picture of its activities, ideas, and contribution to the future government of Scotland as well as laying the foundation for independence at a future date.”

      http://www.electricscotland.com/independence/intro.htm

    160. Grouse Beater says:

      Fairferfochan: Thanks for restoring my hopes. Beautifully written.

      You’re welcome.

      Like Scotland, I am most definitely looking my age and vastly undervalued.

    161. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      BTW: the link above was the first hit when I Googled “The Scotland-UN Committee”.

      Do you know about Google? It’s a search engine that finds web sites which contain the information you may be looking for.

      Worth trying…

      8=)

    162. Still Positive. says:

      Tam Jardine @ 11.36

      Couldn’t agree more but give Nicola time.

      She will be doing the European circuit probably before the Scottish Parliament election next year.

      She is already acting, and dressing, as if she is a leader of an independent country.

    163. CameronB Brodie says:

      Dave McEwan Hill
      Devo max may or may not be an impediment to independence, but that’s what the Scots want, apparently. I have previously posted links supporting this claim, including analysis from the London School of Economics.

    164. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Still Positive at 11.42

      The UK government guaranteed the pensions of all those who have paid their NIC in the same way as it pays pensions to pensioners who have retired to Spain or Portugal or wherever.

      Our pensioners were lied to very often on phone canvasses where they were told the opposite.

      The key is to convince all Scots that we are economically viable and self supporting and issues like this disappear

    165. Breastplate says:

      Yet again I’m sorry to disagree with some folk on here.
      Let’s have a scenario where we have an Indyref2 but we lose Yes 48 no 52.
      Is anyone here seriously going to tell me that we had our chance and we blew it? I don’t think so but let me know if you do and why.
      Sorry if some people are having to strain their brains for this.

    166. Tam Jardine says:

      Still Positive

      Indeed – but we cannot leave it to Nicola alone.

      Perhaps we as individuals or as a collective should be reaching out to European governments asking what assurance they can give us that they will be neutral during the next referendum, if they are willing to send observers to monitor it and if they will support our continued membership of the EU.

      We could also ask about the circumstance whether rUK vote to leave Europe and Scotland votes to stay.

    167. Breastplate says:

      Should Scotland be an independent country?
      That is a philosophical question and should be answered as such. Anybody that treats that question in financial terms has no soul and is a selfish bastard.

    168. Tam Jardine says:

      CameronB Brodie

      There is no such thing as a mandate for Devomax a though even if every man woman and child wanted it and every single voter voted for it. The only mandate for a Westminster policy can come from Westminster.

      Devomax can only be granted by Westminster and it will not surrender control unless it has to.

      That’s why I think it’s a dead end

    169. Grouse Beater says:

      Poor old Gordon Wilson gets a bit grumpy because he would like to think the SNP is still his party and he knows better

      Ach. He’s entitled to be tetchy. He’s in the autumn of his days, fearful he won’t ever see our nation rise above the detritus that is England’s discarded self-respect.

    170. re: devo-max ref!

      I want to add my voice to the others calling this out as nonsense.

      @Al Stuart… I understand your reasoning. Yes, a devo-max referendum would return a Yes vote. Yes, in theory D-max is a stepping stone to Indy. But as others have said, it wouldn’t be worth the paper it was written on. We’re dealing with a state that will use any means at its disposal to limit devolution… didn’t you notice yet? Let’s be honest, UK gov is just doing its job, if it thwarts any real devolution that might lead to Scottish independence. Any government will seek to maintain its power base and the territorial integrity of the state.

      If that just means telling lies, stalling, brinkmanship and manipulating the media – which would be all it would take to castrate a mandate for devo-max – of course UK Gov will do so. And in the decade or so that it might take to implement devo-max, who knows what other excuse to back out or renege might be found (A war? An economic crisis? A natural disaster leading to a state of emergency?)

      Indy or Bust! I’m not a fundamentalist, it’s just realpolitik. A democratic mandate for independence must be honoured by UK government, or UK becomes an international pariah. A mostly broken promise of devo-max?… pfffh! The International community and the international media (and the rUK public) wouldn’t give a fig!

      ————–

      @Derek Henry

      Derek, I must say I’ve enjoyed and been educated by many of your recent posts and links.

      But at 4:04pm today you say:

      “The 2016 manifesto should have a Home Rule referendum front and centre. We would win that easily by a landslide. Then we are only 2 small powers away from full independence.”

      WTF? How does that square with what you’ve been spouting for weeks? ‘Home Rule’ would leave us THREE major powers short of Independence: Defence, Foreign Affairs, and CURRENCY.

      We’d be able to set our own tax rates, but not control the input money supply: which as you say over and over, would leave us potentially in a worse state than Greece. A malicious WM regime (enter Boris, with Gideon in new employ at BOE) could asset strip us back to the Stone Age, and their media would blame the foolish Scots – because in theory Holyrood would be running the economy.

      [Apart from which, many independence supporters care less for wealth than for staying out of illegal wars, and not being a dump for WMDs]

      The big flaw I see in a lot of the MMT economics I’ve read (and genuinely, thanks for the links) is that it doesn’t take into account an important aspect of what money is for in the political economy of the real world. Money is power – political power as well as spending power. As you say, China can’t do much economically with its trillions of US dollars, except buy US goods, or get US government interest on bonds. Likewise Abu Dhabi can’t do much with UK gilts, except take interest payments, or buy up Kensington and Chelsea. But politically, large foreign holders of sovereign debt or currency have got a lot of leverage. If America gets too involved in the South China Sea, there are all sorts of things the PRC can do to affect the dollar value or the interest rate on US bonds. If Britain pisses off Abu Dhabi or the big banks, they have lots of scope to cause destabilisation in the UK. (and don’t tell me about how sovereign states can print as much fiat as they want – there are lots of reasons why neither US or UK will ever openly admit to having that power, or use it much).

      MMT assumes everyone plays by the rules – which is nonsense in the real world. All ‘soft’ power (including financial power) is backed by the threat of coercion, and the same goes for political power in a ‘democracy’.

      When dear old John Hume of “Labour”‘s sister party, the SDLP, asked Blair why he was negotiating with violent Sinn Féin and not with peaceful him, Blair answered, “you don’t have any guns, John”. Governments give what they’re coerced into giving, and no more. Coercion doesn’t have to be violent, but it does need to be there. That’s politics – it’s ugly, but so it goes. A Devo-max vote in Scotland will coerce a Tory PM not one iota. A majority vote for independence cannot produce anything other than independence – and we will be in a strong position when it comes to negotiating the terms.

      Absolutely, 100%, we must attain self-determination through peaceful, democratic processes… but it’s self-sabotage to act as if those processes will be played out on a level field, with the bona fide goodwill of our opponents

    171. G says:

      @gfaetheblock

      Postal votes have been manipulated in the past, and people have gone to jail for it. The system is wide open to abuse:
      https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/04/fear-the-banana-republic-postal-ballot/

      The last we heard, Ruth Davidson was helping police with their enquiries due to being aware of their contents. John McTernan also seemed to know what was in them.

      No exit polls. Also read the report from the Argyll and Bute guys.

      Was it tampered with? I have no idea, but I will never rely on one.

    172. CameronB Brodie says:

      Dave McEwan Hill
      I’m not trying to pick a fight but as far as I’m concerned, Scottish independence has nothing to do with our economic self-sufficiency. Autarky might not be what you are trying to describe. Perhaps I’m just getting paranoid after being liked to Nazis by senior UK officials and agenda setters. 🙂

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autarky

    173. Paula Rose says:

      Always interesting how a tongue in cheek article can result in some very good debate – though we all know that humour not dour got us much of the way to where we are now.

    174. Grouse Beater says:

      Westminster, Unionists assure, guarantees we have luxury of choice, like painkiller X and painkiller Y. But Scots know they’re both just plain bloody aspirin.

      Well, that’s me off into the darkness of night in the hope I come out the other end intact when dawn breaks.

    175. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Still Positive.

      “We also have to clarify the pensions issue. Although it said in the White Paper that the Independent Scottish Government would take full responsibility for Retirement Pensions and UK Government pensions, including MOD pensions, they need to clarify how they would do this.”

      The pensions issue was the biggest red herring put forward by better together, with the collusion of the MSM. Apart from Stephen Webb’s statement to Ian Davidson at the Westminster Scottish Affairs Committee, confirming that pensions would be unaffected by independence, this letter was also available.

      I, personally, used a printout on more than one occasion, whilst campaigning with Team YES Bus, one example being the guy who thought his pension came from the National Insurance Centre in Newcastle.

      I showed him on the letter, the Dundee email address…

      http://www.thelyonyawns.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/pensionsletter.jpg

    176. CameronB Brodie says:

      Tam Jardine
      I wasn’t promoting Devo max, simply mentioning apparent public attitudes. 😉

      Anyway, how you getting on organising an Edinburgh bash? Need a hand? 🙂

    177. Breastplate says:

      Hi G
      on the subject of postal vote fraud ask yourself 2 questions when it comes to the security services.
      COULD they interfere with postal votes?
      WOULD they interfere with postal votes?

    178. @gfaetheblock

      “Is there any evidence of significant fraud at the referendum?”

      http://www.thescottishstandard.net/politics/the-postal-ballot-at-the-scottish-independence-referendum-fraud

      https://www.reddit.com/r/Scotland/comments/30sxfd/leading_proindy_think_tank_director_thinks_secret/

      https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/04/fear-the-banana-republic-postal-ballot/

      … none of this amounts to a conclusive smoking gun showing organised fraud on a scale that would have affected the overall outcome of the referendum. But something stinks, and it’s not sensibledave this time.

      Also, a couple of statisticians have shown that various features of the voting spread between postal votes and in-person votes, and the spikes for No in the postal ballot in certain areas are inconsistent with a fair ballot, and consistent with a rigged one (although again, I don’t think any of them have shown the effect to be strong enough to invalidate the overall result… yet). Sorry, I can’t find a link to the stats stuff just now. Does anybody else have them?

      “Why do you assume only one side committed this fraud or of it likely that yes and no were both at it?”

      I daresay with passions so high, there might have been a few minor cheats on either side. People registering to vote at their holiday home, or their Scottish granny’s house or whatever, or adding their dog to the electoral register.

      But when it comes to the type of major fraud that some people are suggesting happened in the postal vote, you have to ask yourself – who had both the means and the motive to do that? And who has previous form/convictions for rigging postal votes? I’ll leave that as an exercise for the reader.

    179. Thepnr says:

      I know why I want Independence. It’s simple i want a government that represents those in Scotland that voted for it.

      OK I lean to the left, in fact quite strongly to the left but I can accept a right wing party government in Scotland if the majority of the Scots electorate decide that is what they want.

      What I can no longer accept is seeing Scotland and her people being continually short changed when it comes to how the Westminster government of whatever hue decides how the UK finances are to be divied up.

      The same applies to the likes of the NE of England, it is as poor if not poorer than the most deprived areas of Scotland. It is not just Scotland that is being deprived of decent representation but large swathes of England, Wales and Northern Ireland too.

      I’m lucky, I have an option to say “no more” to this disgrace, the referendum in Scotland may have also awoken those of a left persuasion in the rUK and I believe there will be movement in that direction.

      We have been cowed for too long by the bastard media in this country and it’s time we took democracy back. Another Indy ref can’t come soon enough for me, but know what?

      It had better be a winning referendum. For that reason I’ll let those we have elected chose the when, timing will dictate the result.

    180. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Tam Jardine.

      You typed,
      “The French were garrisoned about 200m from where I sit right now back in the day during the Auld Alliance, an alliance that lasted almost as long as this bleedin union. “

      The proof of the antiquity of the Auld Alliance can be found in this song. Based on “Hey Tuttie Tatie” here’s what Wikipedia has:

      “The lyrics were written by Robert Burns in 1793, in the form of a speech given by Robert the Bruce before the Battle of Bannockburn in 1314, where Scotland maintained its sovereignty from the Kingdom of England.

      Although the lyrics are by Burns, he wrote them to the traditional Scottish tune ‘Hey Tuttie Tatie’ which, according to tradition, was played by Bruce’s army at the Battle of Bannockburn,[1] and by the Franco-Scots army at the Siege of Orleans.”

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WulAWn_N_O0

    181. David Hynds says:

      TIME, TIME, TIME
      All we need is “material change in circumstance” in manifest, this gives ref2 when needed – Smith, austerity, Vow, non-permanency of sco gov (all parties agreed that in Smith), EU, Syria, TTIP,… You name it all can be argued material change – this has the bonus of keeping the press frenzy off our backs (as we’ve seen after Alex).

      1/ Allowing the press to keep snagging lab using Corbyn
      2/ Keep kicking WM with 12bn (+20bn soon) austerity,
      3/ Educating all UK with our 56 on who we are,
      All having NO’S realise they have been lied too,
      4/ Next yr less unionists in Holyrood after elections,
      5/ Following year end of unionist rule in councils

      All is in place for least opposition and resistance when ref 2 is called.

      Just who will the state media have to interview?
      “material change in circumstance” is a stroke of genius!!!

    182. Vambomarbeleye says:

      O/Tish
      Shell has now moved to working three and three.
      Ensco has just shed 100 personnel.
      Transocean stacking another rig.
      Yea offshore is just Rosie.

    183. I’m in ranting mode tonight. Apologies in advance.

      As well as being annoyed at all the “let’s have a devo-max ref” naivety, I’m amazed by the “let’s go and ask all the neighbouring countries in Northern Europe to support an independent Scotland in advance” waffle. I know we’re all just ordinary people here… but c’mon, you don’t need a PhD in Geopolitics to know that that one won’t work.

      Scotland at the moment is a NON-country in the eyes of the world. That only changes with independence. At the moment, we’re a curiosity, a semi-autonomous region of what everyone knows as ‘England’. Sorry folks, but that’s the harsh result of a 308 year ‘Union’. Nicola can get a high profile in the US, because they found our referendum interesting, and because there’s a load of umpteenth generation proud-scots-americans with votes. Nicola can get a warm welcome in China, because the Chinese like whisky, and have an ingrained distaste for UK plc ever since the opium wars. But neither the USA nor China is going to interfere in the affairs of a “real”, existing country that they do business with, just to help one of its regions break away. They trade with, ally with, support, or make war on actual independent countries, not potential ones.

      The only way another country will back Scottish Independence in advance, is if they have some major diplomatic reason to piss off the UK government, for example to retaliate for something Britain has done to them recently. They can gain nothing from backing us, except to sour their relationship with UK.

      Who cares? As soon as we’re independent (or have voted for it), we become a country worth doing business with, we become a real player in world and european politics. And we’ll be warmly welcomed by all. Exercise: name one country that became independent by peaceful, democratic means, and wasn’t widely and immediately accepted by the general international community?

      Where are our friends? Everywhere! But they can’t say so until we become an entity that they can deal with directly.

    184. Rock says:

      Brian Doonthetoon,

      Scotland’s “absolute rights” are being decided by the Tory Viceroy against the wishes of 56 (out of 59) SNP MPs.

      Time to resurrect the “The Scotland-UN Committee”?

      To force Cameron’s hand through the Council of Europe, like apparently it forced Blair’s hand?

    185. Dr Jim says:

      Why did Cameron jump and bite so quick at Alex’s bait
      Alex has said on several occasions since the GE Independence was nearer

      Cameron’s vulnerable right now, small majority, last term in office, wants to sort out his last war to have a legacy to make him famous and no time to do it all

      And there’s all these child molesters to protect along with Her Maj the Third Reich
      It’s all too much

      Here come those pesky Jockstraps again upsetting his applecart and no competent staff to deal with them

      How is he going to fight another Referendum he can’t go to Scotland they’ll kill him this time, so with no Labour Party to do it for him and not even any Lib Dums to pitch in He’ll have to leave it to Ruthless Davidson and Wee Willie (Winky) Rennie

      Oh and God forbid, the two Geniuses Dippy and Dappy Labour

      His sole support will have to be the BBC but what’s that going to cost him, he only recently condemned them to the
      death of a thousand cuts

      What do we smell folks

    186. Rock says:

      Scunterbunnet,

      “I’ll leave that as an exercise for the reader.”

      That exercise is too easy. A harder one perhaps?

    187. CameronB Brodie says:

      Thepnr
      Foresight and timing are critical factor of success in most scenarios. But that’s basic policy formation theory, init? 😉

    188. Thepnr says:

      @CameronB Brodie

      Foresight and timing are critical factor of success in most scenarios. But that’s basic policy formation theory, init? 😉

      Yes, Cameron B I’m sure your right. I’m also sure that Alex Salmond was of the view that an outright Yes victory in 2014 was a tall order.

      Didn’t stop him going for it though and the result for the SNP in 2015 is proof that he did the right thing. The key now? Well, you can add anything into the mix.

      Me? I’ll just wait and see what develops over the next few months. Then I’ll shout from the rooftops. As should you!

    189. Democracy Reborn says:

      A second referendum would require an Act of the Scottish Parliament. By virtue of section 29 of the Scotland Act 1998, any purported Act which relates to a ‘reserved’ matter is not law. In terms of Schedule 5 of the Act, the Union between Scotland and England is a ‘reserved’ matter.

      In the past few days, Cameron has ruled out consent to a second referendum (I believe he said it would not be “legitimate”). If the Scottish Parliament nevertheless went ahead and legislated for an ‘advisory’ referendum, and there was a legal challenge to it, there is a difference of opinion as to how the courts would interpret section 29 of the 1998 Act.

      The broad view is that any referendum would be consultative and non-binding, and therefore doesn’t ‘relate’ to the Union. The narrow view is that the subject-matter of the referendum would ‘relate’ to the Union, and have implications for the rest of the UK.

      An additional historical observation (which Labour should be reminded of) : in 1994, the Labour-run Strathclyde Regional Council held a ‘consultative’ referendum on whether voters agreed with Tory proposals to take water services out of local authority control and create three new water authorities in Scotland (a precursor to privatisation). The referendum cost around half a million pounds. It was conducted by postal vote and supervised by the Electoral Reform Society. Turnout was 70%. The vote was 97% against the Tories’ proposals.

      There’s also the Localism Act 2011, which appears to give local authorities in England a wide latitude to hold ‘advisory’ referendums over subject matters which they deem important for their area. So unless I’m missing something, Manchester City Council could in theory hold a referendum on whether Scotland should be independent. But according to Dishface Dave, the Jocks can’t.

    190. “Rock says:
      29 July, 2015 at 1:53 am
      Scunterbunnet,

      “I’ll leave that as an exercise for the reader.”

      That exercise is too easy. A harder one perhaps?”

      OK, here’s a maths problem:

      A country has 59 MPs. 1 MP is from the Red Party, 1 MP is from the Blue Party, 1 MP is from the Orangey-Yellow Party, and 56 MPs are from the Yellow Party.

      The unbiased national broadcaster has a current affairs show, 220 evenings per year. Each evening, one MP is interviewed.

      Q: How many times per year will the interviewed MP be from any of these parties: Red, Blue or Orangey-Yellow?

    191. James Dow A voice from the diaspora says:

      To test the water at any given time, Scotland could have pre printed plebiscite documents ready and easily circulated and collected by the massive SNP membership
      ahead of any new referendum consideration.
      And by the way Scotland’s sovereignty is not subject to the whim of any mealy mouthed pommy arsehole. That would be you David Cameron.

    192. Gerry says:

      An exit poll would be nice if we had indy ref 2.
      The absence of one in the last referendum was worrying.

    193. CameronB Brodie says:

      Thepnr
      No worries, I’ll be there.

    194. Ken500 says:

      Cameron will be gone when Scotland has Indytwa. 2020 will be the magic year when Scotland gets Democracy. Put in a residential qualification. 2/3 years.

      If 16 year olds had voted in the GE, there would have been 59 SNP MP’s. They are the on going votes needed for a YES majority. Demographics will fulfill YES. Nicola gets the women’s vote.

      2020 is the year. Not much longer to wait.

    195. Luigi says:

      Ken500 says:
      29 July, 2015 at 7:08 am

      Cameron will be gone when Scotland has Indytwa. 2020 will be the magic year when Scotland gets Democracy. Put in a residential qualification. 2/3 years.

      If 16 year olds had voted in the GE, there would have been 59 SNP MP’s. They are the on going votes needed for a YES majority. Demographics will fulfill YES. Nicola gets the women’s vote.

      2020 vision. 🙂

      2020 is the year. Not much longer to wait.

    196. Snode1965 says:

      Ronnie Cowan MP summarises the Party’s stance on the next referendum in today’s National.

    197. AndyH says:

      I still reckon we need another four or five years of Tory austerity to soften up the no voters.

      At the same time a sizeable chunk of them will have karked it due to auld age anyway and further balanced out by young patriots becoming eligible to vote.

      There’s also possibly the chance that Imperial settlers will start to flap at all us uppity Jocks making noises and will head back to the comforts of dear old Blighty.

      The SNP just need to keep Indyref2 an option for now. They have to time it within the next ten years for sure.

      This ain’t going away. The No voter is old and British and is an ever decreasing species.

    198. Socrates MacSporran says:

      In life, so often – timing is everything.

      This is very much the case with Independence; we know it is coming, the question is – when?

      I reckon 2019 may well be the key year, but, a point which nobody has tackled is – at which point in whatever year Indyref2 is held, do we go to the polls?

      Given we are now in the so-called “silly season”, when Parliament is in recess and the political commentators of the msm are desperately seeking stories to justify their hig salaries and generous expenses, with some strange results: maybe having it is September, at the end of that silly season, wasn’t the best option last time round.

      Why not time it for a point in the year when Parliament is in-session? Thus, the London-based Unionists will be less able to trot off up north to put the Sweaties in their place. The battle for the Union will be left to Action Krankie, Dippity Dug (or whoever is holding the poisoned chalice of being SLAB leader,) Wee Willie (or successor), Haud It, Daud It and Sod It (Fluffy, Murray and Carmichael) and BBC Scotland – easier opponents than the Westminster Gang.

    199. Macart says:

      Whits awe this devo max talk?

      Devo max has had its tea and left the building the moment the FFA amendment was crushed by a house of commons vote. That along with nineteen other devolution amendments in point of fact.

      There is no and will be no devo to the max. Cameron has no intention of instituting the federal solution in any way shape or form hence EVEL rather than an English parliament. These right honorables simply wish to control the house and its votes by deciding who gets to vote on what. Does that sound like anyones idea of fair and acceptable settlement?

      The job at hand is removing ourselves at the earliest and most propitious opportunity before that axe falls. They’ve shot their ‘Home Rule’ bullet, they misled the public. In point of fact they went way beyond non delivery and road blocked anything devo that was thrown their way. Mr Mundell was given a VETO for a reason. To make sure that no SG proposal saw either red or green leather benches, end of, and when that veto comes into full effect no proposal the SG puts forward will even leave the Scotland office.

    200. Tam Jardine says:

      Scunterbunnet

      I think you have misread my waffle from last night. I indeed have a mere standard grade in modern studies rather than a PhD in geopolitics but here goes.

      I recognised that we would be unable to get governments to come out as pro Scottish independence. That much is obvious. So that’s It then zero point in lobbying for support?

      Obama came out under duress to support the union as did many European institutions and powerful Europeans under pressure from the foreign office. There were guy few voices either in support or even saying ‘it’s a decision for Scotland but if Scotland votes yes we will not cast her out of the European Union etc.’

      Maybe your right and it’s a pointless exercise but Cameron is unpopular amongst European leaders and the in-out European referendum will be decisive and unpleasant from a European perspective.

      Or let’s just go into the next indyref with an unchallenged narrative that Scotland will be cast into the wilderness, yes?

      Here’s a question – why did the French Ambassador come out in support of Nicola Sturgeon (and against the UK government line) when it was not in the interests of the UK government, France’s military allies? She could have been non-committal and not damaged the UK government.

      Surely that is impossible.

    201. Clydebuilt says:

      For the second week in a row “The Ferret” has supplied BBC Radio Scotland with it’s lead story. On both occasions making things difficult for the Scottish Government. As I understand two of the leading lights of the “BBC in Scotland’s” new best pal contribute articles to The Sunday Herald, and The Nationalist. On each occasion listeners are informed that the “F” is crowdfunding.

    202. Tam Jardine says:

      Scunterbunnet

      Mair waffle on garnering support in Europe, this time from Ronnie Cowan SNP MP in today’s national.

      “We have to talk to people in Europe and get them to understand why we will still be part of Europe. The referendum on Europe is a key platform to allow us to get that message over.”

      http://www.thenational.scot/politics/pms-diktat-on-indyref-is-playing-into-snp-hands.5737

      What’s that all about then? Surely a total waste of time, eh?

    203. frogesque says:

      DevoMax is a busted flush. There is no point in pursuing it. No way is Smith going to deliver despite any of Fluffy’s ‘reflections’. No more lies or duplicitious prevarications from Westminster.

      We stand or fall on Indy#2, probably sometime between late 2017 and May 2020. Meantime we have to win hearts and minds, settle the currency (Scots Pound will do me just fine), kill the pension lies and prove the economic case with oil as an additional bonus.

      Unless we can do that then we do not deserve our own Country. Be brave or be cowed, the choice is ours!

    204. Nana Smith says:

      Not seen Mr Peffers posting lately, hope all is well.

    205. schrodingers cat says:

      Socrates MacSporran
      In life, so often – timing is everything.

      This is very much the case with Independence; we know it is coming, the question is – when?

      very true, thats why the manifesto commitment will be worded in such a way to give nicola the power to chose when. why would you wish to tie her hands to a specific timescale?

      Macart says:
      Whits awe this devo max talk?

      gotta agree, i was never a big fan of devo max, nor the smith commission, i would never trust westminster to deliver, and make no mistake, westminster would need to agree the terms before hand

      after saying that, this shouldnt stop the snp making a manifesto “vow” 🙂 which once elected by a huge majority, would give nicola a mandate to hold a devo max referendum if she so wished, even if she couldnt or had no intention of doing so. it would give us a stick to beat westminster with 🙂

      the same manifesto comitment to an indyref2 should also be worded in a similar fashion thus giving ncola the mandate to hold or not hold an indyref2

      this would give us the cards and ability to play them if and when we chose.
      i repeat, devo max is a card that i think we couldnt play, shouldnt play, wouldnt play and wont play. But we dont know what the near future will bring and we need to keep our options open. this is how we do it

    206. Brian Powell says:

      All the demands to know about any future Independence plans directly compares with all the demands before the Referendum to know every detail of plans on the economy.

      It was simply to confuse, and prepare ‘rebuttals’, but crucially not supply any alternative scenarios or plans.

      The unionist parties got through the Ref without offering a reasoned alternative. They offer no alternative now for all the people who supported Independence.

      It is a level of shame, for the Labour Party in particular, that they haven’t begun to realise.

      Sadly those who voted No are barely recognising what they did.

    207. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      CameronB Brodie at 11.56

      You say “apparently” the Scots want Devo max.
      Indeed And that is the key. “Apparently”. Firstly what exactly is “devo max”?
      A vague generalisation that means different things to different people and very deliberately has not been defined.

      The only poll done since the Referendum asking people what they would have voted had there been a devo max on the paper showed independence slightly ahead of devo max with the status quo slightly behind.

      If devo max was defined it would lose its appeal. That’s why it remains vague. Tell Scots they don’t get oil revenues but they get to keep Trident and illegal foreigh invasions and watch the response.
      Devo max is a useless diversion and nobody here should give it a moments thought. Anything it might do independence does a lot better. All DM does is hold things up.

      I know it is time to go quickly for a second referendum.
      How do I know?
      Because our opponents are screaming no, don’t do it. You can’t. We wont allow you. Oh, I’ve wet myself.

      They poll all the time. They know

    208. caz-m says:

      Regarding the next Referendum. Some people fully supported Alex Salmond during the last Referendum, but you have to admit that Mr Salmond was a definite no-no for a large proportion of the electorate.

      So, in IndyRef2 Alex Salmond will probably be told to keep a low profile.

      Every possible reason has to be looked at as to why so many people voted No and Alex Salmond was definitely one of them.

      This is why the BBC went big on the Alex Salmond interview at the weekend, they believe he is still a big turn-off to a lot of voters.

      Just for the record, I fully supported Alex every inch of the way in the last Indy Ref and will continue to support him.

    209. AndyH @ 7.40.
      Hey Andy, this Yes voter, S.N.P member, activist, canvasser, cybernat, or whatever you like to call me, and well into my 70s, hope to be around for many years to come, and see Scotland become an independent country, not for my sake, but for my great-grandchildren.
      No doubt statistically you are correct, but I can assure you in our group there are quite a few in my age group, and without wishing to blow our own trumpet, we are extremely hard working in our cause.
      I believe this is where it is dangerous to try to categorise people, as there are always exceptions to any rule.

    210. Ghillie says:

      Oooh Stu! You are naughty! But I do like that idea!

      Paula Rose, how great would it be to see your questions on our next ballot papers!!(the ones you suggested earlier, not ones you might think up now!)

      On a more serious note, some great posts here as usual,Taranich,Dave McEwan Hill,Grouse Beater,Tam Jardine and many others…

      I grew up believing in Scotland’s Independence. And KNOWING it would come.

      I have no interest what so ever in devo max, home rule or federalisation. Westminster has proved time and again that it cannot be trusted on any level. And that is over the course of hundreds of years.

      I do believe in the people of Scotland.

      I do trust our Scottish Government lead by Nicola Sturgeon. And I am in awe of our 56 SNP MPs and how they are indeed holding many pairs of feet to the fire!!

      I trust the very savy SNP to choose the best possible wording and content for their 2016 manifesto. I sincerely hope it contains plans to call us to declare our feelings again on Independence in the light of what has recently come from Westminster,for the sake of those who were either frightened or duped into voting against this Nation’s right and ability to run it’s own affairs.

      Scotland WILL be Independent. SOON!

      When exactly and how folks? Well,that’s down to us =)

      The Independence Movement is growing, regrouping and rallying. We are getting ready. We are on our road to Independence!

      Indyref question in every election. Oh YES!!!

      (Oh jings, this is a long post!)

    211. Andrew Haddow says:

      We’ve already got Devo-Max.

      (Devo-Max: di?v?/maks/: The maximum amount of devolution permitted by Westminster).

    212. schrodingers cat says:

      @Alex Beveridge

      I have to admit that i find the statistic that 71% of over 65’s voted no curious, since it is the over 65’s who make up the largest % of the most active of all the yes and snp campaigners. so while time will take its toll on no voters, it will dispoportionally take its toll on our activists

      strange dont you think

    213. heedtracker says:

      DevoMax is a busted flush.

      Absolute nonsense. We voted for the VOW and since then all the britnats in the world have said FFA etc would be a complete disaster as there is no Scots oil revenue left and this brilliant academic for example is forever pushing some other bloke who rages away that Scots oil is rubbish and who never lies, although they are all oddly mute on the UKOK BBC economic news on how said dead and dying Scots oil has somehow dragged teamGB up, again, spooky.

      I for one welcome our imperial masters

      https://twitter.com/proftomkins
      https://twitter.com/kevverage

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33686358

      UK economic growth accelerated in the second quarter of the year, helped by a big jump in oil and gas production, official figures have shown.

    214. orri says:

      Whilst most of you might hate the potential delay to full independence that proper Devo-Max entails it really has to be considered. Greenland might be stuck in a kind of perpetual semi independent state but at least they are content and may eventually become fully independent when it best suits them. Scotland will be far better placed.

      Proper semi-autonomy, real Devo Max, is something that Cameron can’t really complain about given his insistence the referendum for real independence was dealt with first. The refusal to honour his commitment, or let’s face it inability to overcome the UK electoral system and will of the HoC, to deliver the most powerful devolved assembly, see Greenland, will completely justify the SNP in putting a referendum for exactly that in their next manifesto. The SNP helping Cameron fulfil his promise to the people of Scotland by asking the people of Scotland to back him isn’t something he can argue with unless he was telling porkies in order to win a referendum.

      Devo Max also means that Scotland will already have the majority of the infrastructure needed for full independence before the next independence referendum and that bullshiting about granting it won’t be an option. The same could be said if it’s demonstrable that it’d never be granted during a referendum on it.

    215. Jim Thomson says:

      O/T

      is this true, or is it just woolly-pully brigade hype?

      http://action.sumofus.org/a/neonics-uk/?sub=fb

    216. Flower of Scotland says:

      AndyH@7.20

      This ain’t going away. The No voter is old and British and is an ever decreasing species.

      Have you done any hard graft in your constituency because if you had, I can assure you that the majority of “grafters” are your “old” people!

      Because I am an “old” person I want Ref2 sooner rather than later and so do most “old” grafters.

    217. heedtracker says:

      Poor bees!

      Also, try googling “North Sea oil” There are literally thousands and thousands hits of everything from its all gone to it’s all going to bankrupt Scotland and all just belching out of English media, from the lying gits at the Beeb to the lovely dears at the Daily Heil.

    218. heedtracker says:

      Nope nothing from any UKOK red and blue tory britnats out there on why the UK economy’s not being dragged under by the burden of British NOT Scottish oil.

      Just same ol same ol, SNP bad and this is the real Labour world we live in that they feel they have to say stuff like the below, out loud and in public

      https://twitter.com/DrScottThinks

      Scott Arthur ?@DrScottThinks 21 hrs21 hours ago Islington, London
      Labour’s recovery shouldn’t be about right v left, or rich v poor. It is about convincing everyone that social justice is in their interest.

      Maybe Slabour dudes like not a Doctor Dr Scott really are plants, like Creepy Morphy.

    219. Alexander Mitchell says:

      Anotherreferendum seems inevitable to me,after the election result. why not include all Scots who live and work abroad. It seems totally unfair that they were not allowe to vote just because they do not have an address in Scotland.
      At some stage they will probabably retun home so their views should be taken into account.
      PROBLEM IS cAMERON IS SCARED THIS WILL UPSETTHE OUTCOME.

    220. Tartan Tory says:

      The neonicitinides / bees ‘thing’ is actually a bit sensationalist. Has Stu taught you nothing about reading past the headlines/hype?

      The UK govt have temporarilly suspended a ban on using these pesticides for a period of 120 days across 5% of ENGLANDS oil seed rape crop.

      The ban was set to end in 2016 anyway, but the govt acted under immense pressure from the NFU.

    221. Jim Thomson says:

      @Nana Smith 10:18am

      I thought that neonics HAD been banned. Ah, well, you live and learn (and then wonder how the hell you can stop such utter madness).

    222. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      caz-m at 9.20

      Are you sure you are not swallowing unionist spin? Many people said they did not like AS. Not surprising following the demonisation he suffered in the media for at least a decade.Most of these people were political eejits who used “I don’t like that Alicsammin” as an excuse when anybody asked them anything they did not understand.

      However Alex Salmond was in fact the only political leader to retain significant plus ratings at all times so those who didn’t like him were significantly outnumbered by the informed majority who recognised how good he was.

    223. Chic McGregor says:

      We must have an indy ref 2 on the manifesto, but it should be proviso-ed.

      In my view the decision to have one or not should be subject to review at the start of 2019. The review should be in regard to the actions of Westminster, promises kept or not and how Scots have been treated but also informed by public opinion.

      A referendum, should that be the decision, sometime around September 2019.

      In that way, many of the planned punishments for Scotland could be ameliorated while still retaining the pro-indy support they would otherwise lose by not having an indy ref 2 option on the cards.

      Of course, any such plan goes out the window if we lose in 2016.

    224. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Snode1965 at 7.37

      “Ronnie Cowan MP summarises the Party’s stance on the next referendum in today’s National.”

      I hope not

    225. Al-Stuart says:

      Scunterbunnet I read your point, but I think we have crossed wires.

      I am NOT suggesting we have a Full-Devolution Referendum INSTEAD of an Independence Referendum but in ADDITION to IndyRef2.

      What will happen VERY soon is a debate at SNP conference about what can, and cannot be achieved. What should and should not be included in the SNP 2016 Holyrood manifesto regarding future referenda.

      We do NOT even have a guarantee of when IndyRef2 MIGHT happen. Our leadership have been very clear on this – a meaningful event to trigger an Independence Referendum is required (Dependent upon EU exit etc). But no definitive date for IndyRef2.

      However, we DO have a…

      …legitimate case to argue for a Full-Devolution Referendum. EVERYTHING devolved to Holyrood except Foreign Affairs & Defence.

      Why do we have a Full-Devolution Referendum case?

      Precisely because the Scottish electorate were betrayed, and mightily pi$$ed off after 18th September 2014.

      We do have a right to ask the Scottish electorate to vote for the SNP on 5th May 2016 with a manifesto commitment for a Full-Devolution Referendum to be mandated and then ALL state departments TAKEN out of Westminster’s hands and placed at Holyrood (excepting Foreign Affairs & Defence).

      How can this not be clearer? The Edinburgh Agreement that gave rise to IndyRef1 guaranteed the result would be respected. If Scotland had voted for Independence back then, we WOULD have had Independence. Same will go for a Full-Devolution Referendum. Scotland is fed up waiting for Westminster to give what it promised. Instead we are taking what we vote for.

      We have been stitched up like kippers with Mundell vacillating that he will “think about comments”, meaning he will ignore Scotland with the same disrespect in the manner that ALL SNP amendments to the Scotland Bill were defeated by English Tory and Labour MPs.

      A 2017 Full-Devolution Referendum would be legally framed as the Edinburgh Agreement did for 18th September 2014.

      But with a Full-Devolution Referendum, if it is won, then Scotland is GUARANTEED all powers ceded. No ifs, buts, or kicking into the long grass.

      The key point, and this is written with respect to those of a more fundamental position, Full-Devolution CAN be won, and within 12 to 24 months. Then if the SNP government repeat the 2007 masterstroke of governing Scotland well leading to a barnstorming victory in 2011, the same can happen with the IndyRef2. We will take the no-voters and undecideds with us by good governance after an FDR win.

      What some folk seem to be oblivious to is the fact that we really need to win this. Again, all very well saying Independence or nothing but I am not ashamed to admit I was, like many, in tears on 19th September 2014 when we got nothing.

      We are only talking of 3 years between the FDR and IndyRef2 referenda. Hardly a lifetime.

      I have 2 no-voting friends and 2 undecideds that I am working to persuade as to the virtues of moving in our yes direction. I hope others on WoS are doing that with their no-voting friends too. 3 of my 4 friends WOULD vote yes for Full-Devolution, but WOULD NOT at this time vote yes for IndyRef2.

      As Stuart Campbell so precisely focussed this…

      http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-unconvinced/

      We really need to win over the Undecideds and the Unconvinced, as well as a fair lump of no-voters.

      Otherwise we are destined to witness IndyRef2 through tear-stained eyes the day after.

      I for one am not prepared to have that happen again. The only way we win something soon is FDR within the next 12 to 24 months. IndyRef2 will follow within 3 years of that….

      2017: Scottish Full-Devolution Referendum.

      2020: Scottish Independence Referendum.

      Scunterbunnet 29 July, 2015 at 12:19 am re: devo-max ref!

    226. @Jim Thomson says:at 10:06 am
      O/T

      is this true, or is it just woolly-pully brigade hype?

      http://action.sumofus.org/a/neonics-uk/?sub=fb

      Yes corporatism is alive and flourishing at any cost to the environment.

    227. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      schrodingers cat at 9.41

      I agree entirely. I can’t find this supposed huge preponderance of NO voting oldies.

      It couldn’t be found either in the most extensive canvas ever done of Scotland.

      It is all very odd. Had Scotland voted YES last year there would have been parties on every street in the country.
      Instead we got photos of distraught YES activists crying in the streets and no sign whatsoever of exultant NO voters anywhere.

      It is entirely possible that the over 65s voted majority NO. But not in a 70-30 split.
      Since then we have been deluged with divisive comment against our old folk, our English and foreign emigrants to explain a result that is very hard to explain – unless of course you believe postal voting take up of over 90% in most places and over 95% in five districts was cosher and 80% of that voted NO

      I don’t believe it

    228. Dan Huil says:

      @Dave McEwan Hill. Agreed. When the 2nd Ref takes place there must must! be measures put into place to prevent postal-vote fraud. Even if this means an independent foreign observer in evey house where someone receives a postal vote.

    229. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Al-Stuart at 10.55

      Silly. Any form of Devolution is in the gift of Westminster. That’s what the word means. It makes no sense to have a referendum on something that can’t be achieved by referendum.
      Perhaps the prize here for the suggestion providing the highest level of useful confusion in aid of the union.

    230. Grouse Beater says:

      Dave: I can’t find this supposed huge preponderance of NO voting oldies.

      Here is an extract from the analysis:

      Between them the two exercises confirm the presence of four patterns that were evident in the polls throughout most of the campaign: women, older people, those in more affluent circumstances and those who were born elsewhere in the UK were all relatively reluctant to vote Yes.” [My emphasis]

      This might assist discussion:
      http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2014/09/voted-yes-voted/

    231. sensibledave says:

      Heedy -10.32

      You wrote: “Just same ol same ol, SNP bad…. ”

      … could you just point me to any of your comments on any of these threads where you recognise, appreciate, compliment, admire, or applaud anything, or anyone, in UK politics – that isn’t SNP.

    232. heedtracker says:

      Just clocked imperial master Prof Smirky there trying to make a haha joke on latest UKOK reprobate caught behind that British state smiley face of hard core sleaze and corruption.

      If youre out there Prof Tonkinski, eww, x a million

      https://twitter.com/proftomkins

      http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/07/lord-sewel-youve-made-me-proud-to-be-british/

    233. Joemcg says:

      Yes, why was there such a discrepancy between postal and ballot box votes? 70% of 800,000 is 560,000 so that’s a 320,000 lead before the actual count. Almost the no sides winning margin. Has someone been number crunching behind the scenes before the 18th?

    234. Fireproofjim says:

      OT
      Anybody got a link to Nicola’s interview on CCTV?
      I hear it was another tour- de- force.

    235. Grouse Beater says:

      I don’t like that Alicsammin” as an excuse when anybody asked them anything they did not understand.

      I believe that remark was the speaker’s way of diplomacy – to avoid them saying they thought Salmond untrustworthy. And why should they think otherwise after decades of the SNP portrayed as a lunatic, fringe party, and then Salmond as an insurgent?

      To them it was all about personality. Getting them to understand it wasn’t about him but about Scotland regaining full democracy and dignity was almost impossible, in my experience – they are fed celebrity crap day in, day out.

    236. Grouse Beater says:

      Dippydave: could you just point me to any of your comments

      Oh, Kerrist! The personification of mediocrity is back.

      No matter how you answer him on any bloody subject he will twist it around his tacky fingers to come out as, “Sturgeon’s word can’t be trusted.”

    237. Joemcg says:

      Grouse-I will never forget that day I was arguing with one of them on a BT stall it got a bit heated and he screamed at me “it’s that bliddy alicsammin, he’s brainwashed ye!!!” Purple faced eyes bulging waving BT shite paper at me. Still laugh like a donkey when I think about it!

    238. @Tam Jardine

      Sorry Tam, I was in a crabbit mood last night, and maybe overstated my case a bit.

      Yes, there’s no harm in opening dialogue with other European countries. We have to make our point of view internationally somehow… making our case to governments and media abroad wherever possible. A charm offensive can only do us good. If the local media are making positive noises about Scotland, it will be harder for governments to give in to UKOK cajolery, and be negative.

      My point was really just don’t expect foreign governments to openly declare support for our independence in advance.

    239. While I have supported independence since 1972 and have campaigned for over 30 years for it and would love to see Scotland as an independent nation tomorrow.

      I don’t think we should be in any rush to hold another referendum, let’s be patient, watch and wait as these unionist no voters suffer the devastating consequences Westminster’s austerity will have on their jobs, standard of living and public services.

      As for David Cameron he has no electoral mandate to dictate to any one here in Scotland on anything.

    240. James Barr Gardner says:

      Just a thought in regarding older voters.
      There will lots of older ex-service folk who took Lizzie’s shilling who must be torn been oath and country especially after all the cesspit disclosures, double dealing and stealing from the poorest and disabled in our society.
      It could be a turning moment for them when she is no longer with us.
      Time for a new deal, only this time with Scotland, their country, their folk, especially their grandchildren.

    241. heedtracker says:

      https://twitter.com/blairmcdougall

      And a big fat lying slob says he really weally cares about refugee children of the world, despite fact that this Labour party, the same one with this Director of Communications has created hell on earth for so many children in the middle east alone, an endless hell on earth for so many children and then this git acts like it matters to Slabour or Labour. It it matters now, why did it not matter when the all voted AYE to bombing Iraq back to the stone age… Maybe Bliar the tweester will tell his followers.

      Its hard to know where to go from here when you see the Slabour lie machine in action. Sure they’re hard at it BBC Scotland/Project Fearing the shit out of their Scotland region but then they pull this kind of world wide fraud and wonder why they are gone in Scotland.

    242. “Clydebuilt says:
      29 July, 2015 at 8:14 am
      For the second week in a row “The Ferret” has supplied BBC Radio Scotland with it’s lead story. On both occasions making things difficult for the Scottish Government. As I understand two of the leading lights of the “BBC in Scotland’s” new best pal contribute articles to The Sunday Herald, and The Nationalist. On each occasion listeners are informed that the “F” is crowdfunding.”

      Clydebuilt, you’re not the only one who spies a rat in ferret’s clothing. It seems to be a few refugee hacks from the UKOK Grauniad, sent to instill Fear, uncertainty and doubt in Scotland, and to drive the news agenda away from the constitution, and towards unionist normalcy – all under the guise of “investigative journalism”. The crowdfunding aspect is just a ruse to make them seem hip and alternative, IMHO.

      Real investigative journalism we need. The Ferret? Meh.

      Or am I being too harsh? Does anybody know otherwise?

    243. Stoker says:

      Unbelievable!
      Have you all seen this?
      Straight from a horses mouth:
      (The editor, not The Prof 🙂 )

      “The BBC Scotland editor also responded to suggestions that the Reporting Scotland item was not evidence based, saying “…evidence-based isn’t entirely how journalism works”.”
      http://newsnet.scot/2015/07/reporting-scotland-editor-turns-to-twitter-to-defend-news-values-in-spat-with-critic/

    244. Grouse Beater says:

      “It’s that bliddy alicsammin, he’s brainwashed ye!!!”

      Aye. There’s naebody like a Unionist to argue against his own best interests.

      🙂

    245. Grouse Beater says:

      James: There will lots of older ex-service folk who took Lizzie’s shilling who must be torn been oath and country especially after all the cesspit disclosures, double dealing and stealing from the poorest and disabled in our society.

      Good observation; loyalty to the regiment dishonours them.

      Worth reposting for those in the autumn of their days: http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2014/09/voted-yes-voted/

    246. Les Wilson says:

      I do not think Westminster is, as some suggest, unprepared.

      As we speak, they will have already primed their Government departments, had the treasury prepare more scares.
      Have GCHQ bugging and recording conversations, email and text conversations all in search of things they could use.

      This is how Westminster works, it is how the British state works.I have no doubt that now, and even prior, to Indy2 being mentioned they will be planning and conniving.
      We need to be aware and smarter.

    247. Jim says:

      O/T but how many times does the sun “newspaper” have to mention Sewel as “shamed Scot”.

      Is this some strange word association game, “Scottish Bad”.

    248. Eckle Fechan says:

      Late again, but here’s my thoughts from yesterday on this topic.

      The 56 need to caw canny. The etch-a-sketch hypnosis tactics of the media are plain for us to see but we’re not the target audience.

      Eck needs to keep the heid. I get the sense that every hack journo he talks to is gunning for a scoop, bin raking frantically for any sniff of a morsel that can be used as a wedge between himself and the FM. She has looked slightly more uncomfortable and stressed in recent interviews / press stills imo.

      I only hope she remains unrattled in the difficult months ahead before the 2016 strategy launch.

      The 21st Century Political Wars of Indepedence have a way to go.

    249. Grouse Beater says:

      How many times does the sun “newspaper” have to mention Sewel as “shamed Scot”.

      The hookers were English. The cocaine a foreign import- D’oh!

    250. Dr Jim says:

      Professor Smirky also seems to think all Scots are related to one another

      Growing into the job eh
      Fine Man

    251. sensibledave says:

      Grouse Beater 11:41 am

      “No matter how you answer him on any bloody subject he will twist it around his tacky fingers to come out as, “Sturgeon’s word can’t be trusted.”

      … that is, evidentially and demonstrable incorrect Grousey! Your comment was prompted by my comment to Heedy (where, factually, Ms Sturgeon didn’t feature at all) – where I was merely pointing out that his “SNP Bad” concerns paled into insignificance compared to his inability to use anything but pejorative adjectives when writing about absolutely anybody, or anything, in politics other than the SNP – and therefore his concerns about the “SNP Bad” meme are somewhat hypocritical and lacking even a smidge of self-awareness.

      Keep up Grousey.

    252. Please don’t tar all ex-service people as being royalists, I am ex-Scots Guards and have never had anytime for Royalty.

    253. schorodinges cat@9.40.
      Yep, does seem strange because while canvassing during the referendum, in our area at least, there didn’t seem to be much difference in preference between the age groups.

    254. starlaw says:

      I think the ‘ferret’ is related to the Polecat, and possibly crowd-funded by BBC and STV

    255. Dal Riata says:

      Regarding BBC Scotland’s new best friends at the Ferret, the Guardian’s one and only Severin Carrell in an article about the Ferret at the beginning of this month said the following:

      The push to set up the unit follows a steady and substantial decline in investigative reporting by Scotland’s established media, with a sharp cut in staffing, pagination and funding on many daily papers. There has been a parallel upsurge in alternative online commentary and reporting, dominated by pro-independence sites such as Bella Caledonia or the nationalist Newsnet.

      LOL! at Slevering not mentioning Wings, naughty, naught boy!

      If the Guardian, Severin Carrell and BBC Scotland are promoting and using the Ferret for their news…be suspicious, be very, very suspicious.

    256. heedtracker says:

      Awe sensible, did you swallow your well thumbed roget’s thesaurus this morn?

      “where I was merely pointing out that his “SNP Bad” concerns paled into insignificance compared to his inability to use anything but pejorative adjectives when writing about absolutely anybody, or anything, ”

      Repeat after me sensible,

      “What’s the point of any progressive liberal leftie in Scotland, hoping and praying for a Scotland free of England’s red and blue tory grip of our country, even bothering to critising SNP Scots.gov, when there are legions of paid and unpaid UKOK BetterTogether wet farts at the BBC alone and all doing nothing else but?”

      Hope that’s not too pejorative for you sensible.

    257. re: “Ah don’t like that Alic Sammin”

      There’s various things going on there. Decades of media monstering of Alex as a bogeyman is the biggest factor. (And given time, they’ll attempt the same hatchet job on Nicola.)

      Then there’s just the fact that not liking Alex is a shield against reason for a section of the population: entrenched unionists and those with a fear of taking responsibility for themselves.

      But there’s another factor that’s relevant in Scottish politics, but not in UK/WM politics. There’s a general distrust of career politicians out there, particularly if they come across as preachy, guileful, over even just too confident. Sadly, Alex fell into this bracket for a lot of folk, nearly as much as Jim Murphy did. Alex’s style of wit and articulateness works well in the UK media (despite the monstering, they’ve always seen him as a ‘real’ politician), but doesn’t work for a lot of working class Scots, particularly in the West. Sadly, many can identify with down-at-heel dullards like Jack McConnell and Johann Lamont, more than with sharp Westminster operators like Alex or Angus Robertson.

      There was an impression in the big population centres of the Clyde valley, until recently, that the SNP team consisted of tartan-clad, middle class farmers from the North East, who had romantic notions of independence – while Labour had local people: incompetent and corrupt maybe, but in tune with local issues like unemployment or housing.

      The diversity of new SNP MPs, and the presence of people like Mhairi Black, Chris Law and Tommy Sheppard has done a lot to dispel those notions – people in Glasgow and Lanarkshire etc. can now vote for MPs and MSPs who speak their language, AND are competent and untarnished by corruption.

    258. Taranaich says:

      @Still Positive: What I was saying in my last post was that the Scottish Government, of an independent Scotland, has to make it clear, to pensioners in particular, that they will assume responsibility for paying all government pensions, including retirement pensions and how they will do that.

      I understand that, and agree emphatically that we have to keep making it clear. Like Brian Doonthetoon, we kept a copy of the Pensions letter and a transcript of Stephen Webb’s statement to Ian Davidson Yes Inverclyde in one of the big blue binders. But there is a difference between communicating our position, and implying our actual position was not “clear and credible.”

      @Dave McEwan Hill: “Ronnie Cowan MP summarises the Party’s stance on the next referendum in today’s National.”

      I hope not

      The party’s stance is stated at the end: “The timing of any future referendum is a matter for the people of Scotland to decide — and not for a Tory Prime Minister to dictate.” Individual SNP members have their own views as to when they think the next referendum should be, as is their right and opinion, but as with the previous referendum, it isn’t up to them, or us. If the public don’t want an indyref, there won’t be one. If they do, then there will. 5, 10, 15 years, never – we can’t tell the public, we can only offer them the choice. That’s why we had an indyref when we did, even though we were in a far, far weaker position than we are now with only 6 MPs and 30% support when we started.

    259. Grouse Beater says:

      Dippydave: that is, evidentially and demonstrable [sic] incorrect

      And on cue …

      ‘Evidentially,’ used as an adverb, is somehow meant to impress the reader when in conjunction with ‘demonstrable’.

      The two together evidently give more intellectual weight to the crapology of the post.

    260. “‘Evidentially,’ used as an adverb, is somehow meant to impress the reader when in conjunction with ‘demonstrable’.”

      Och, lea’ the poor kipper alane Grouse Beater. It’s no’ his lexicon that irks. A polished shite smells nae sweeter.

    261. Janet says:

      Dear readers, some observations:

      1. If an unofficial referendum actually counts for something, then Catelonia is an independent state. (But it is not.)

      2. The recent GE was won handsomely by the SNP but it is neither a mandate for independence nor indyref2.

      3. Independence is a tough concept for many Scots which is why last year’s indyref failed, albeit marginally, and because the Scots didn’t back independence in sufficient numbers, not because MI5 stuffed the ballot boxes.

      4. The governor-general has ruled out indyref2 since there is no material change at the moment…

      5. Logically, the sensible option is to ask the PM for DevoMaxRef. The mandate would be an SNP landslide in the forthcoming Scottish elections. The manifesto would define the extent of DevoMax.

      6. Persons who seek indyref2 at this moment are possibly deluded or in the employ of MI5…and one or two out there are probably ripe for investigation by MI5, methinks! Let’s be careful out there! (Besides, I’m knackered. I need time to recover from last September…and I’m not the only one!)

      7. If our southern neighbours were to vote against the EU and Scots were to back the EU, then that might be the chance to trigger indyref2.

      8. “Better Together” for Europe anyone?

    262. Fireproofjim says:

      Nana Smith
      Many thanks

    263. Stoker says:

      Peter McCulloch wrote:
      “Please don’t tar all ex-service people as being royalists, I am ex-Scots Guards and have never had anytime for Royalty.”

      Well said Peter and just for the record, not all serving military personnel are UKOKers and that’s a fact. Quite a few support Scottish independence.

    264. caz-m says:

      Dave McEwan Hill

      Regarding Alex Salmond and him having a lower profile for the next Indy Ref.

      I agree that nobody has done more for Scotland to bring us to where we are at this moment in time. But as per usual, the likes of BBC Scotland will play on the fact that a large majority of Scots still don’t like him and would be a barrier for them to vote for Independence.

      I will continue to support everything he does, but I have a feeling that the strategists with the SNP will have a similar view to mine.

    265. Tam Jardine says:

      Scunterbunnet 11.44

      No bother – you were right not to expect all out support. Everyone on this thread (trolls aside) is churning over how to achieve this great task.

      Rev Stu’s piece was tongue in cheek but it stimulates plenty of debate. What did Hugh McD say – he wanted  “to erupt like avolcano, emitting not only flame , but a lot of rubbish.”

      He could have been talking about this thread.

      Well get there.

    266. Clydebuilt says:

      Indy Ref 2 is like money in a kids pocket , burning a hole in that pocket, the Kid can’t wait for the sweeties.
      I can well understand folks impatience for another referendum. However, to many people have been holding polls trying to demonstrate the level of support amongst “yessers” for another referendum. As if this is an indicator of the right time to hold that referendum. All the time piling pressure on the Scottish Government. That’s the job of the Unionest press and the BBC. I can see the headlines already “Pressure Grows on SNP To Hold a Second Referendum”
      Since the 19th Sept. Unionists have shouted “it’s settled for a generation”, because they won and have nothing to gain from another referendum. If the polls were strongly in their favour they might be tempted to go far another referendum. Clearly that is not the case.
      Events are going our way, temptation mounts. It’s a momentous decision. I’m putting my faith in the leadership that got the country to the Referendum and beyond to make the judgement call.

    267. Petra says:

      Joan McAlpines (Daily Record) ‘take’ on Cameron’s attitude towards the SNP holding a second Referendum.

      **Note the legality of the UN declaration.**

      ”My view on a second independence referendum is very firm. I don’t want one to take place until we are sure of Yes winning it.

      What should be in no doubt is our right to decide. That’s why David Cameron made a huge political error this week when he said he would not allow one to take place. He said the vote had to be “legitimate”.

      What he means is his government would consider a referendum called and organised by the Scottish Parliament to be illegitimate. He would refuse to recognise its legality.

      He insists that only the Westminster parliament dominated by English MPs, many of them Tory, can legally “allow” Scotland a vote on her own future. His high-handed dismissal exposes the unfairness at the heart of the British state.

      He talks about English votes for English laws but when it comes to an issue like the future government of Scotland, English MPs will use the superior numbers at Westminster to deny us the right just to have a referendum.

      The last referendum went ahead because Cameron reached an agreement with Alex Salmond. The Tory PM never expected the vote to be so close. A majority of people under the age of 55 voted Yes.

      Cameron’s comments to journalists this week are clearly designed to frighten the Scottish Parliament and put it in its place. But Cameron has just served to further alienate Scots – including no voters.

      The SNP should go into next year’s Scottish election with a manifesto clause underlining the moral right of the Scottish Parliament to hold a referendum at a time of its choosing.

      To paraphrase the great Irish parliamentarian of the 19th century, Charles Stewart Parnell, no man has the right to fix the boundary of a nation.. to say “Thus far shalt thou go and no further”.

      And if you prefer hard legal facts to poetry, the UN have several declarations that we can turn to.

      The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) both say: “All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.”

      David Cameron has acknowledged Scotland as a nation – so he can hardly turn round and deny us the right to self-determination as defined by the UN.

      In terms of the practicalities, they are all in place. The Scottish Parliament has the power to administer elections and gained plenty of experience of doing so with the first independence referendum.

      We could invite UN and EU observers to demonstrate our commitment to fairness. David Cameron can declare it illegal if he wants – but would he dare?

      A manifesto commitment would mean any future SNP government have a mandate from the people that recognised Holyrood’s right to call a vote. That doesn’t mean they should or would. The time must be right.

      Alex Salmond has suggested that time could come sooner than anyone thought. As he observed, the unionist parties promised Scotland “devo max” but have given us “austerity max” instead.

      But it’s a matter for the people. Yes supporters, however disappointed they might feel at last year’s vote, shouldn’t push for indyref2 simply on the basis of wishful thinking.”

    268. Taranaich says:

      1. If an unofficial referendum actually counts for something, then Catelonia is an independent state. (But it is not.)

      Scotland is not Catalonia. The UK Prime Minister signed an agreement. He would have to justify why he would consider a second referendum unofficial (really “illegal”), and it would be very difficult for him to do. Likewise, Spain is explicitly a unified country and polity: Catalonian independence runs the risk of the entire place fracturing. Scotland leaving the UK does not cause England, Wales and Northern Ireland to stop existing.

      2. The recent GE was won handsomely by the SNP but it is neither a mandate for independence nor indyref2.

      Obviously not – but in every poll I’m aware of where the question was asked, the majority of Scots think there should be another referendum within 5 or 10 years. That, I think, is a mandate for indyref2.

      3. Independence is a tough concept for many Scots which is why last year’s indyref failed, albeit marginally, and because the Scots didn’t back independence in sufficient numbers, not because MI5 stuffed the ballot boxes.

      It’s not helped when Scotland’s newspapers outright opposed independence 16-1, Scotland’s broadcasters were compromised, 500+ MPs oppose to maybe a dozen support, and so forth. The biggest reason Scots voted No appears to have been because it was too “risky” compared to the UK (I think it was the Ashcroft poll which put it at 70%). This is explicitly the tone the majority of newspapers took, especially in the final week.

      4. The governor-general has ruled out indyref2 since there is no material change at the moment…

      I’m sorry, who? David Cameron? It’s not up to him. David Mundell? Not up to him either.

      5. Logically, the sensible option is to ask the PM for DevoMaxRef. The mandate would be an SNP landslide in the forthcoming Scottish elections. The manifesto would define the extent of DevoMax.

      We already HAVE a mandate for DevoMaxRef: we elected 56 SNP MPs explicitly on that manifesto. Even though New Labour and the Lib Dems are offering a pittance, they threw around words and ideas like Federalism and Home Rule as much as anyone. That means 81.8% of the Scots electorate backed a party devoted to some variation of Devomax, be it the SNP’s definition, New Labour’s, or the Lib Dem’s.

      We even had a vote for Devomax:

      http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2015-06-15&number=12&dmp=6709

      It was rejected, because even though 56 Scottish MPs voted for it and only 1 against, more English MPs voted against it than for it. It’s getting a bit like Charlie Brown and the football: how many times are we going to take a run at the Devoball only to flip on our backs?

      6. Persons who seek indyref2 at this moment are possibly deluded or in the employ of MI5…and one or two out there are probably ripe for investigation by MI5, methinks! Let’s be careful out there! (Besides, I’m knackered. I need time to recover from last September…and I’m not the only one!)

      All I can say is, if we’re not ready for Scotland to be independent again now, then how on earth can we convince others that we ever can? We want people to believe independence would be better for Scotland through thick and thin. I’m not a fair-weather nationalist. Our argument is that Scotland could, and should, be independent as a matter of principle. If we try and time it for when the people are “ready,” it gives the impression that we don’t really believe it.

      7. If our southern neighbours were to vote against the EU and Scots were to back the EU, then that might be the chance to trigger indyref2.

      That was a more compelling argument before the Greece situation.

      8. “Better Together” for Europe anyone?

      Still think it should be In and Out rather than Yes or No.

    269. Thepnr says:

      @Taranaich

      I thought Janets post was a great one and your response equally so. Guess I’m caught in the middle.

    270. orri says:

      It might be worth considering the constitutional position of the Queen in Scots law before assuming loyalty to her and the oath they took precludes those in the armed forces from wanting independence. The Coronation Oath she took clearly commits her to reigning according to the relevant laws of the various parts of the lands reigns over.

      In Scotland she is not sovereign but simply the embodiment of the sovereignty of the people. It’s something that led to the death of at least one king and the eventual acceptance from another.

      Simply put the Scottish regiments owe allegiance to Scotland via the Queen. Technically post independence they’d become the Armed forces of Scotland.

      This also explains why SNP MPs not of a republican bent can quite honestly swear or affirm at Westminster.

    271. Thepnr says:

      @Nana Smith

      Can’t believe it has taken all this time but have finally done it. Persuading the wife has been the stumbling block.

      Your link to that article done the trick.

      Cancelled! I have cast of the shackles, I feel free at last.

    272. Onwards says:

      I wonder if the best way to go is a kind of compromise option.
      (Assuming independence isn’t ahead in the polls)

      A referendum with genuine Home Rule / Devo Max as the number 1 choice after negotiations, but with support for independence if Westminster refuses to grant that.

      It would remove the ability for any last minute compromise vows, and subsequent backtracking.

      I think that Devo-Max would soon lead to independence, and is probably the most likely way to achieve that.

    273. Nana Smith says:

      @Thepnr

      Free at last, praise be free of the beeb.

      Now to cast off Westminster!

    274. Thepnr says:

      @Nana Smith

      Now to cast off Westminster!

      Working on it. 😉

    275. skozra says:

      When the next Indy Ref happens, I do hope there’s a printed barcode on the ballot paper this time, unlike the last one where there wasn’t one to be seen.

      There was one on the ballot paper for the General Election just there though, you couldn’t miss it.

    276. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Onwards at 5.54

      The most likely way to achieve independence is to campaign for independence.
      The most likely way to put independence back for years is to campaign for devo whatever.

      What is devo max? How many years will we be negotiating what devo max is? It is entirely in the gift of Westminster and they would retain the right to amend it or even cancel it.

      If we campaign for devo whatever we will be offered something a lot less and will eventually achieve less than half of it.

      Do some people have a difficulty with the absolutely obvious political truth that you only achieve political aims by actually continually promoting them?
      As a by-product of faithfully promoting your cause and gathering support or it you force concessions as your opponents try to halt your progress.

      You go backwards when you back off.

      Many people on here are trying to persuade us to throw away our campaign for independence on the false premise that going for a half way house will take us half way there. It will not. All it does is halt our forward progress.

      Can I remind everybody – we nearly won last year and we are now in an improved position.

      It would be extremely stupid to lower our aims and I have to say that I suspect that many people suggesting we do so are not actually with us.

      Anybody on here who will spell out the advantages of devo max.
      .

    277. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Grouse Beater at 11.21

      Indeed. I don’t disagree.
      I am happy to believe that those groups voted no in a majority.
      I do not believe however they did so in the percentages we are being fed and I don’t believe it explains the substantial (over 400,000) NO majority which surely would have needed a 80% plus NO breakdown to provide that size of a majority.

    278. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      I’m with those who type that we’ve had the devomax referendum. It took place on 7th May and resulted in 56 pro-devomax MP’s representing Scotland at Westminster.

      The UK parliament subsequently voted against devomax so let that be the end of it.

      The SNP (and SSP, Greens and Solidarity?) must have the commitment, in their manifestos, to hold indyref2 “at an appropriate time” during the term of the parliament voted in next year.

      I believe that two factors have to be in the right place to make indyref2 successfully Yes.

      1. A trigger, that amounts to a material or substantial change in circumstances, eg Scotland voting to stay in the EU, rUK voting to leave.

      2. Published opinion polls or private polling by the parties, showing ‘Yes’ support at 55+% for a number of months. There’s no point in having a referendum if Yes support is sitting at 48 or 49%.

      Finally, no long campaign – a maximum of 6 months.

    279. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Scunterbunnet at 1pm

      Sorry but your synopsis fails when you compare AS rating with Jim Murphy and others.
      Alex Salmond remained at all times with a plus rating with voters.
      Jim Murphy (and all the others) registered huge minus ratings.

      I think you underestimate the average Scot and his ability to smell shite.

      I stand by my previous judgement that “I don’t like that Alicsammin” was the response of the ill informed who had no coherent argument to offer against independence but were feart of it

    280. Paula Rose says:

      I will continue to campaign for the nation called Scotland – but should Devo be on offer –

      I’ll play this…

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jadvt7CbH1o

    281. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Paula Rose.

      Don’t know if I ever showed you this; a wee thing I put together last year. You saw ‘Independence’ at the ‘YES Dundee Gathering’ on St Andrew’s Day last year and Frankie, the singer, at City Square on 9th May.

      https://sites.google.com/site/webgaffer/home/uploaded-pics-page-8/Devo-Independence.jpg

      Here’s ‘Independence’, Stand Together.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mr-7d0o3Mns

    282. Paula Rose says:

      Beedeeteetee honey – seen those lovely young boys many times, most memorably with my lovely dancing partner, the late Jim Howie of Lochee – ah happy days, he knew how to wow a lady!

    283. Rock says:

      Scunterbunnet,

      “OK, here’s a maths problem:

      A country has 59 MPs. 1 MP is from the Red Party, 1 MP is from the Blue Party, 1 MP is from the Orangey-Yellow Party, and 56 MPs are from the Yellow Party.

      The unbiased national broadcaster has a current affairs show, 220 evenings per year. Each evening, one MP is interviewed.

      Q: How many times per year will the interviewed MP be from any of these parties: Red, Blue or Orangey-Yellow?”

      Sorry Sir, I am not being cheeky, but there is a mistake in the question.

      Scotland does’t have an “unbiased national broadcaster”.

      If I may correct that to “heavily biased national broadcaster”, then the answer is 165 times.

    284. tartanpigsy says:

      @GfaetheBlock and anyone else,
      No more Postal Votes , see the work done by Dunoon/Argyle LFI they stink to high heaven and IMO were tampered with, hopefully someone else has the link.

      We do need to get 2016, AND 2017 council elections out of the way, forelock tugging unionist councils were seriously used last year to impede the referendum, and had a considerable influence/ effect on what could and couldn’t be done in lead up to September.

      Gordon Wilson does have a point, on currency at least, we MUST get this sorted out.

      The BBC need to have a mention in next years Manifesto, ie the dismantling, or neutering of that corrupt behemoth in Scottish broadcasting.

      BUT we cannot wait for some idyllic future time when everyone is on our side before we go for Indyref2. IMO 2020, preferably I’d avoid saying anything til 2019 but I’ve no idea how we do that.

    285. I know this threid is deid already. But replying to people who @’ed me anyway.

      @Rock 9:46pm … Correct! Exactly the answer I was looking for. I see a bright future for you.

      @Dave McEwan Hill 7:04 … I see Alex Salmond as a political genius, and very likeable. But the the point of view I was suggesting is based on experience, from talking with various friends, family, and colleagues over the years (mostly weejis, not many of them anti-independence in principle). When I pressed them on why they didn’t warm to him (because nothing but admiration for the man has ever occurred to me), they said things like, “he just seems a bit full of himself”. My guess is that they want their politicians to look really stressed and worried, with the weight of the world on their shoulders – and Alex seemed to be enjoying himself too much for them.

      I don’t know how many of those people voted Yes, or if they even still hold that view of AS.

    286. Onwards says:

      Dave McEwan Hill says:
      29 July, 2015 at 6:49 pm

      “How many years will we be negotiating what devo max is? It is entirely in the gift of Westminster and they would retain the right to amend it or even cancel it.”
      ———–

      That’s why I am suggesting the possibility of a future YES/NO referendum for genuine Home Rule within the UK, with permission for the Scottish Government to declare independence if negotiations are unsuccessful.

      That way, the UK government can’t just make last minute empty promises they will backtrack on.

      Whether home rule / devo max leads to independence is debatable. Personally I think it would.

      And I reckon home rule within the UK will be FAR easier to get most people to vote for.

      The option to hold a second referendum should definitely be in all future SNP manifestos though, even if it is not acted on.
      Cameron can’t realistically rule out a democratic mandate.

    287. Fred says:

      @ Scunterbunnet, that would be the “weejis” who voted YES.

    288. Al-Stuart says:

      Dave McEwan Hill,

      Please can you clarify your earlier post please? You infer I am some form of Unionist apologist**

      With respect Dave, I have paid my dues plus additional donations every month at my local SNP Branch, and am one of the 80,000 NEW members of the SNP.

      You want me to go away, just say it. But let me know what constituency gives you the authority to dismiss new SNP members that don’t fit your own agenda?

      All I am trying to do is get the blinkers off and find a way to get the no-voters and undecideds to vote YES.

      Is that not free and fair debate as headed by the title of this thread?

      Rather than do little but pay my monthly subs to the SNP, I have been trying to persuade 4 friends (2 no-voters and 2 abstainers) to vote YES to the next referendum which is hurtling towards us in the form of a 2016 Holyrood SNP Manifesto to be debated at conference in a few weeks time. A conference which 105,000 SNP members will have an influence upon. Surely it is a reasonable thing to find a way to present an SNP Manifesto that appeals to the undecideds and no-voters? Not just follow tunnel vision of the all-or-nothing-at-all position.

      As I debate with my colleagues, all four are still refusing to vote YES for Independence.

      BUT 3 would vote YES for Full-Devolution. EVERYTHING excepting Foreign Affairs and Defence.

      I find your comments that I, or this idea is “silly” to be demeaning, and your tone lacks coherent reason. As to my being some form of fifth columnist for trying to find a way to persuade NO voters and abstainers/undecideds to vote YES to something that will get Scotland away from the lethal Westminster.

      Dave, you also infer I have some sort of agenda. Absolutely correct I do.

      Last year the DWP had culpability in the death of a very good friend – Michael Moore. His crime? Being severely disabled after multiple spinal surgeries. Go check his name on http://calumslist.org/calums-list/

      You have no idea how much I want away from toxic-Tories and Westminster in whatever process I can examine that works. If that is first via Full-Devolution then so be it. What we have today are 56 valiant SNP MPs being told no, no, no, and Iain Duncan-Smith running rampant in Scotland like some twisted grotesque from a bad Dickensian nightmare. Not acceptable.

      Dave, one thing you and I possibly might agree on – and you asked me this via your reply printed in The National on 27 July 2015. You indicated the issue of evidence.

      So how about we politely ask Stuart Campbell if he might consider adding a few more questions to his next Panelbase survey to obtain some evidence? For example…

      Would you vote yes/No/Don’t Know to the following…

      Q1. Should There Be A Scottish Home Rule/Full-Devolution Referendum In 2017 (everything except Foreign Affairs & Defence)?

      Q2. How Would You Vote In A Scottish Home Rule/Full-Devolution Referendum? Yes/No/Don’t Know?

      Q3. Should There Be A Scottish Independence Referendum In 2020?

      Q4. How Would You Vote In A Scottish Home Rule/Full-Devolution Referendum? Yes/No/Don’t Know?

      My own preference is to have TWO referenda. I am NOT advocating we decline an Independence Referendum. If the Greeks can sort one out in a few weeks, then it is not beyond the wit of we Scots to propose an SNP Manifesto commitment to a Full-Devolution Referendum in 2017 AND then an Independence Referendum in 2020.

      Surely such forensic analysis of what gets us over 45% to 55% or even 65% is worth looking into?

      Best regards.

      ——————————————-

      ** Dave McEwan Hill says: 29 July, 2015 at 11:19 am

      Al-Stuart at 10.55 Silly. Any form of Devolution is in the gift of Westminster. That’s what the word means. It makes no sense to have a referendum on something that can’t be achieved by referendum.
      **Perhaps the prize here for the suggestion providing the highest level of useful confusion in aid of the union.

    289. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Al-Stuart.

      Questions 2 & 4 are identical. Also, I would disagree to the idea of tying an incoming SNP government’s hands to specific years.

      If question 4 is supposed to be about independence, then I would suggest the date (for both referendums) should be “when the government deems it appropriate”.

      Although I don’t see any point in having a referendum on FFA. That has been blown out of the water by votes in the HoC.

    290. Rock says:

      Scunterbunnet,

      “@Rock 9:46pm … Correct! Exactly the answer I was looking for. I see a bright future for you.”

      Thank you Sir:)

    291. Al-Stuart says:

      Hi Brian (at 10.22),

      Thank you for the courteous reply.

      I agree wholeheartedly with you. Both referenda questions seem very similar in the result.

      I am still trying to get my mind around why no-voters and abstaining friends will vote yes for Full-Devolution, but no for Independence.

      Maybe Stuart would consider helping us out with a wider survey of several hundred yes and no voters, rather than the micro sample of the 4 people that I am currently doing my best to reason with and persuade to vote yes.

      ——————–

      Would you vote yes/No/Don’t Know to the following…

      Q1. Should There Be A Scottish Home Rule/Full-Devolution Referendum In 2017 (everything except Foreign Affairs & Defence)?

      Q2. How Would You Vote In A Scottish Home Rule/Full-Devolution Referendum? Yes/No/Don’t Know?

      Q3. Should There Be A Scottish Independence Referendum In 2020?

      Q4. How Would You Vote In A Scottish Home Rule/Full-Devolution Referendum? Yes/No/Don’t Know?

    292. Al-Stuart says:

      Apologies, had a typo in the last post. Should have read…

      Would you vote yes/No/Don’t Know to the following…

      Q1. Should There Be A Scottish Home Rule/Full-Devolution Referendum In 2017 (everything except Foreign Affairs & Defence)?

      Q2. How Would You Vote In A Scottish Home Rule/Full-Devolution Referendum? Yes/No/Don’t Know?

      Q3. Should There Be A Scottish Independence Referendum In 2020?

      Q4. How Would You Vote In A Scottish Independence Referendum? Yes/No/Don’t Know?

    293. Al-Stuart says:

      Hi again Brian,

      The point about having a Full-Devolution Referendum is to TAKE the powers we were promised to us pre-18/9/2014, by using the democratic process that was proven, and accurately described by Alex Salmond as the gold standard which led up to the Edinburgh Agreement with the guarantee that had Scotland voted en-masse for Independence, then we would have gotten that.

      Same applies to Full-Devolution. Westminster/Better together have broken their Vow et al.

      Time to USE THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS TO TAKE WHAT WE WERE PROMISED

      —————-
      Brian Doonthetoon says: 30 July, 2015 at 10:22 pm
      Hi Al-Stuart.

      Although I don’t see any point in having a referendum on FFA. That has been blown out of the water by votes in the HoC.

    294. Paula Rose says:

      I find the argument for two referendums very persuasive and agree that neither should be fixed by date. Any suggestions as to what the wording should be to submit to conference?

    295. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Al-Stuart.

      I don’t believe we can ‘take’ devomax; devolution is awarded by Westminster, as it sees fit.

      We could get, hypothetically, 100% in a devomax referendum and Westminster could still direct us to our bikes. Devomax is an internal matter, defining how the UK is governed. It is not the concern of those outwith the UK.

      The only thing we can ‘take’ is independence, by achieving a majority in a referendum on independence, whether agreed to by Westminster or not. I can’t see the EU and UN going against ‘the settled will of the Scottish people’.



    Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.




    ↑ Top