The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

An Auld Sang

Posted on August 13, 2020 by

Chilling indeed, 1992 Sunday Times. Chilling indeed.

Print Friendly

    1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. 13 08 20 12:56

      An Auld Sang | speymouth

    69 to “An Auld Sang”

    1. aulbea1 says:

      Nicola really, really needs to put down the fiddle before we are all engulfed.

    2. schrodingers cat says:

      on cue

      the spectator has an article today (i wont link) calling for bojo to shut down holyrood

    3. Polly says:

      1992? Nothing changes or rather it can take a while for thoughts to bubble away before percolating down. We know it’s going to get ugly, I just wish I thought we had some safe hands to guide things.

    4. Socrates MacSporran says:

      The Speaker of the House of |Commons said, in around 1707: “We have catched Scotland and now we must bind her fast.”

      That attitude has never gone away from the Palace of Westminster; they are not going to suddenly do an about face on what has been their position for 313 years.

      Any suggestions of a new Act of Union will be just that, they will manage to hide any such serious proposals, which I don’t think there are, in one of the many mazes of Westminster procrastination.

      Even if they were in any way serious, the Westminster plan would not be good for Holyrood – England as the UK is one of the most-centralised legislatures in the world.

      However, if the current opinion poll trends hold up and, we do have an SNP absolute majority at Holyrood next May, I think it more-likely, Westminster will gerrymander some means of shutting down Holyrood, rather than looking at greater Scottish devolution. And, they will never, until the oil runs out, even consider letting us have a vote on Independence.

      With an 80-seat majority until 2024, BoJo or his successor can continue to hold Scotland fast and ignore our Independence calls.

      And, even if, come the 2024 UK General Election, Labour wins back many of the seats they lost in 2020, the chances are, they will still need SNP support to govern.

      If that support is at the cost of a Section 30 order, with a good chance of Scotland voting yes to Independence, Labour might then be facing being a minority government, once Scotland leaves.

      We are held fast indeed, and it is up to us to cut ourselves free, by means other than a Section 30 order.

    5. Ken McColl says:

      Can find references to it online, but can’t find scripts. And links to play resellers are dead.

    6. katherine hamilton says:

      Scary stuff, right enough. Even more scary, how the hell do you find this stuff?

    7. Breeks says:

      Be in no doubt, THE reason they want a new Union is to permanently kill off Scotland’s sovereign constitution and remove popular sovereignty from the people of Scotland so they become subjects of a sovereign Parliament and constitutionally indistinguishable from the people of England.

      The SNP in Holyrood are half way there in helping them do it, because Nicola Sturgeon arbitrarily stuck two fingers up to Scottish Popular Sovereignty in 2016, and Scotland was unconstitutionally subjugated and dragged out of Europe as a direct result. Her capitulation on 31st January should be regarded as a National disgrace.

      Who can blame Westminster for riding it’s luck when the “Scottish Government” is so constitutionally inept, and giving them the green light?

    8. Johnny says:

      Interesting that the reviewer has no qualms about stating there had been ‘cultural and political colonialism’.

    9. Ron Maclean says:

      Why doesn’t the Scottish Government pass an Act of Union?

    10. Sharny Dubs says:

      Who will lead us out of this marriage of pain!

    11. defo says:

      Since Scotland was described to English MP’S as “the bride” in the Union Sharmy, and it’s been nothing but abuse since, ethnic cleansing and genocide before the honeymoon was even over, we need a refuge.

    12. Sharny Dubs says:


      Yeah we the people need to stand up and tell them to go F themselves and take all our children with us.

    13. robertknight says:

      “A chilling thought” indeed. Straight out the Catalan/Spanish playbook.

    14. Jill Sharpe says:

      Well well well – never thought I’d see my theatre company mentioned on Wings.

    15. iain mhor says:

      Of course, there is the patently obvious fact; that for there to be a ‘New Act of Union’ it is effectively a renegotiation of the Treaty of Union.
      For both, there have to be independent ‘Persons’ (Parliament & Government) to enter into such negotiations. Neither England nor Scotland meet the criteria (even their very existence is moot)

      The great irony is; that where a ‘New Act of Union’ could ever conceivably be brought to some farcical fruition, Scotland would require an S30 to even enter negotiation and subsequently pass an Act in any form, as it is currently, entirely and explicitly, a reserved matter.

      Of course we must always bear in mind that there are two Unions: The Crown of England’s writ does not run here. As Mr Peffers, late of this parish, would remind us – it is merely suffered de-facto to run.

      Alternatively, when no Crown’s writ runs here; the severing of Parliamentary Sovereignty (whether English, or Scots) would be, if not an immediate death blow to any Treaty of Union (or Consequent Acts) it would most certainly be a wound which would not whiten.

      Of course, should Scotland be ‘granted’ the requisite S30 (bwahaha) negotiating a New Treaty and Act of Union, would place both Scotland and the Crowns in that quantum realm, where Scotland was Sovereign and the Crowns powerless.
      Perhaps they should be careful what they wish for.

      As a matter of interest; what is the ratio of republicanism to independence – anything in a pending Wings Poll?
      The last was prior to the referendum as far as I know.
      (50% in favour of retention if I recall) there has been a fair bit of water under the bridge since then.

    16. James Che. says:

      Why do we the Scottish people not just end the Treaty of the Union as we have the right” to chose whom governs us” . At the moment, before it’s to late.
      In appears that everyone could withdraw there snp membership and support immediately until this was done, after all, here in Scotland we all claim the reason we want independence is so we can have our politicians closer to the people and hold their feet to the fire, let us do that instead of moaning all the time, if we do not do it we are no better than them, just as weak willed and spineless as them.
      It is up to US to show the snp that they are there by our support and are only there by our support.
      If they don’t and won’t listen to the voices of the Scottish people and have in fact ignored us in the past. Let us remind them why their there, put all our voices together and also write to them as en
      Until we the people speak, independence will not happen.

    17. Do Bojo and his kind think we are just going. To meekly accept all these shackles they want to puT on us ???well I for one will not and if they force us to violence so be it on their headshand as for all these English workers and their families comiNg in to vote no to ScottiSh,freedom I would advise Bojo go home and think again

    18. Dogbiscuit says:

      ‘Tony Heller ‘ for what’s going on in the real world . Shocking.

    19. MightyS says:

      Agree with Breeks (11.43am) I’m utterly astounded at the sheer mismanagement and neglect of duty from the FM. She’s had gifts of weedy opposition parties and unending support heaped upon her for the past 5 yrs and is still doing absolutely nothing with it.

      I’m sick of reading the apologist tweets insisting she’s still got a ‘cunning plan’ and ‘there’s a global pandemic on!’ What’s the bloody point in arguing with them.

      And now, the NEC has blocked experienced MP’s and attempted to hoof one MSP out of his seat so that they can get their woke backsides into them. No need to be vetted by the NEC – they ARE the NEC. How branches are going to be able to choose a competent candidate who wants independence first and foremost from a list of ONE Trans activist , I’ll never know. And then, when Wokey McWokeface starts campaigning and folk start asking ‘that’ question on the doorstep – the SNP are gonna lose that constituency.

      So. We’re back at the start. Somewhere around 20 yrs ago when the SNP were sniggered at as a ‘fringe’ irritant. We can do the next 5 yrs politically, or we can do it in the civil sense.
      Scots have power. If we could just throw off the massive cringe we’re all carrying around, we’d be able to use it.

    20. Bob Mack says:


      Looks like Turkey and Greece might be set for a “square go” over drilling for oil and gas in disputed szters. Deserves called up.

      EU not happy.

    21. Ian Foulds says:

      Ron Maclean says:
      13 August, 2020 at 11:45 am
      Why doesn’t the Scottish Government pass an Act of Union

      or even an Act Cancelling the Union?

    22. jfngw says:

      @James che

      You need to have some confirmation that is the will of the Scottish people. At this point there has never been a vote that confirms that is what the majority of those in Scotland want. No referendum, no election has returned a majority for independence in voting terms. People can’t claim the people are sovereign then decide the parliament is sovereign when the vote doesn’t match what they want.

    23. Ottomanboi says:

      What the Unionist cult expects, even of our heroes.
      Know thy subordinate place.
      Do not crawl to this, except to sink your teeth deeply into it and disable it.
      There is a word, a proper name beginning with Q which would designate all those having truck with novelties such as modern ‘Acts of Union’.
      The ‘eponym’ met a well deserved end.

    24. Papko says:

      The EU will welcome Scotland with open arms, The Germans in particular are desperate to get their hands on our renewable potential.
      Scotland’s fresh a air and water are also valuable resources which will prove powerful bargaining chips when the FM handles negotiations and all the Germans have to offer is performance cars by Audi, BMW and Mercedes.

    25. Stu hutch says:

      Would I be right in saying they can change the act of union any time they wanted
      .its the treaty of union they cant mess with as that’s an international agreement ?.think this is just the english press putting any crap out to upset the natives has no legal authority outside common law so international law trumps that..but brings animosity to the snp.they have broken the treaty of union many times lately.but the snp seem ok with like to say I’m confident in the way the snp are dealing with it.but I’m not.

    26. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Socrates MacSporran says:
      13 August, 2020 at 11:24 am

      The Speaker of the House of Commons said, in around 1707: “We have catched Scotland and now we must bind her fast.”

      Your entire comment hits the nail!

    27. Stuart MacKay says:

      Blair Paterson

      Do Bojo and his kind think we are just going to meekly accept all these shackles they want to put on us?

      Well it’s kind of looking that way right now. Maybe Cummings is thinking it’s better to grab the thistle by the, er, horns but in reality what’s the most likely reaction – Blackford standing up in Westminster lamenting that Scotland won’t annexed against her wishes?

      It’s going to take a lot of pain to trigger civil unrest if a new treaty was stream-rollered through.

    28. Dan says:

      I notice the list of current SNP Councillors putting themselves forward as SNP MSP Candidates for next year is growing.
      Obviously it’s early days and they may not make it through the selection process.
      Holding two jobs is far from ideal, so if they are elected and stood down from their Councillor roles this would mean a load of bi-elections which due to the voting system may be difficult for SNP to hold, and thus weaken any balance of power within Councils.

    29. ahundredthidiot says:

      Papko @ 13:13

      Maybe watch Planet of the Humans on Netflix before backing renewables, or any sort of green energy for that matter.

      but we do have oil and the Germans are very interested in that, given their massive reliance on Russian gas.

      And then there’s water – liquid gold of the future and one of the main reasons England will cling on with all she’s got. Us and Wales both.

    30. Beaker says:

      @Dan says:
      13 August, 2020 at 1:32 pm
      “Holding two jobs is far from ideal, so if they are elected and stood down from their Councillor roles this would mean a load of bi-elections which due to the voting system may be difficult for SNP to hold, and thus weaken any balance of power within Councils.”

      With all the infighting going on they are losing control as it is. They seem to be more interested in power rather than focusing on their communities. It’s not just the SNP; all the parties are at it. Private Eye has a regular section on councils which is an eye opener.

      @Bob Mack says:
      13 August, 2020 at 12:47 pm
      To paraphrase Hamish in Braveheart “Turkey and Greece couldn’t agree about the colour of shite!”
      Turkey has a lunatic in power, and Greece is not exactly a corruption free zone.

    31. stonefree says:

      @Dan 1:32 pm
      I’d suggest it’s a bit more sordid than that

    32. Breeks says:

      jfngw says:
      13 August, 2020 at 1:07 pm

      ….People can’t claim the people are sovereign then decide the parliament is sovereign when the vote doesn’t match what they want.

      That’s not correct. Scotland might choose to stay in the Union or end it, with both possible mandates being sovereign edicts. In 2014 it was the sovereign will of Scotland to stay in the Union. It was not an abdication of sovereignty.

      In 2016 however, it was the sovereign will of Scotland to stay in Europe, and the SNP’s abandonment of that mandate, subsequent capitulation, and Scotland’s ultimate subjugation through Brexit, very much was an abdication of sovereignty by the Scottish Government, which by the way, didn’t even boast a democratic mandate. That failure by our “government” in my opinion is grounds for impeachment.

      Democracy is making a choice. Sovereignty is having the authority to choose, and thus sovereignty is a prerequisite to making a choice, and as a principle, transcends any choice that is made. Choices are ephemeral and can be changed. Sovereignty is an absolute condition that is obdurate and unalterable.

      The SNP are pissing Scotland’s sacred Constitutional Sovereignty up against the wall and using some despicable interpretations of ephemeral democracy as a smokescreen while they’re doing it.

    33. bittie45 says:

      Chilling, agreed. A recent btl comment linked to the Scottish Fabian Society’s proposal to permanently end any chance of independence by impossible conditions placed on any electorate. For ever.

      I’ve heard from various podcasts (Indylive Radio, Lesley Riddoch, Indycar, Broadcasting Scotland) pretty disturbing stuff and would be interested if anyone else can verify.

      Apparently not just a proposal, but actually passed (and classified confidential under Boris’ Henry VIII powers) is a US / UK trade deal giving favour to the US.

      Also going through the House of Lords is an agricultural bill which gives control to Westminster of the giving of farming and crofting grants and subsidies, removing it from the Devolved powers. Apparently even the Lords aren’t happy with this legislative assault on Scotland.

      Also being drafted is the UK Internal Market Bill in which any Scottish legislation passed would be scrutinized and potentially overturned by an unelected Westminster body ANYTHING which was deemed to be against the UK’s interests. And apart from opening the way for a TTIP-like trade deal where the whole of the UK’s economy is made available to be picked over by the US corporations, this is leaving Scotland in a position much worse of than BEFORE devolution!

      It would appear that we are already too late to do anything, that the indy boat has sailed and is disappearing over the horizon.

    34. Republicofscotland says:

      Well if Westminster succeeds in the power grab, of powers coming back from the EU it will in my opinion effectively negate much of Holyrood’s devolved powers in those areas, and in the process, downgrade our quality of life.

      Westminster won’t care which route is successful in emasculating Holyrood as long as it is successful. We’re going to be in a whole heap of trouble after the 31st of December this year.

    35. Ron Maclean says:

      @Ian Foulds 12:55pm

      Either would do as a positive act. Trying to pass an Act of Union incorporating a Scottish Constitution would publicise our current predicament. For example we can’t close our borders to protect the health of the Scottish people, our rights are under threat, we can’t have a referendum if Boris Johnson says no, and so on.

    36. Graf Midgehunter says:

      Any attempts by the HofL/WM to propose a new Act of Union are hot air and bluff, designed to give the impression that WM rules and can alone “kill off” the surge for independence which threatens their “British” nationalism.

      The crux of the problem for WM/Scotland is the TofU which outlines in 25 Articles the agreement to merge the two independent Kingdoms of Scotland and England.

      It’s of no consequence whether the two Kingdoms are next to each other or thousands of miles apart, it’s an international treaty which is still valid and in use until one or both of the original signaturies terminates the agreement.

      The two separate Acts of Union (Scotland and England) served as the debate (Bill) and ratification (Act) of the Treaty and how it was to be implemented.

      A “new” AofU is not and can’t be a renegotiation of the Treaty of Union. They are both separate entities, albeit of the same topic.

      “The great irony is; that where a ‘New Act of Union’ could ever conceivably be brought to some farcical fruition, Scotland would require an S30 to even enter negotiation and subsequently pass an Act in any form, as it is currently, entirely and explicitly, a reserved matter.”

      An S30 has got nothing whatsoever to do with a requirement for negotiation.

    37. iain mhor says:

      @Ron & Ian 12:55pm

      For reasons – if you’re new to a this, you’d need to go all the way square one and read – all the way to the history of the Treaty of Union and well before. I recommend a potted history of the English Civil War and the Covenanters specifically.

      However; recently, its been decided everything revolves around the Scotland Act(s) whereby everything it contains is reserved to Westminster & the ‘Crown’

      By convention, there are some things Holyrood has been allowed (competencies to act) but there are many clauses in the ‘Scotland Act 1998’ which can render the entire act (and any action of the Scottish Parliament) null and void at the whim of Westminster (or the ‘Crown’ in Parliament.
      It is an empty ‘Act’

      The UK is Government ‘by convention’ (Both Westminster & Holyrood) Scotland has many ways to become independent.
      Scotlands MP’s and MSP’s have decided to abide by the convention that the Scotland Act(s) are legitimate and binding; up to and incuding the convention of the non-existent UK ‘Constitution’ – from where the Scotland Act(s) arise and from where Westminster draws its ‘Sovereign Power’
      The Westminster Parliament does not abide by ‘convention’ (either legislative, or constitutional) it abides by whatever it choses.

      Scotland is currently utilising Marquess of Qeensbury rules in an MMA contest. But at least we will get the ‘Fair Play’ medal. Posthumously.

    38. jfngw says:


      The 2016 result throws up many issues, if we didn’t leave then we in effect force England & Wales to remain as is was fairly clear the EU was unlikely to just let Scotland become a member. It may have been accommodating but they were in essence against countries splitting. They may not be as reluctant now.

      The 2016 vote was clearly not a vote for independence, many Yes voters wanted to leave the EU and many No voters wanted to remain. It is not actually guaranteed a referendum on independence would have been won, at the time, by the Yes side if rejoining was on the cards. One thing I don’t want is a referendum we could lose by slitting the yes vote on a side issue, and that is one of the reasons this fixation on hate crimes and GRA needs to be ditch just now.

      I believe there has been quit a swing in opinion now, even those that don’t like the EU surely see it as being a better option than being held hostage by a hostile state.

      I agree Scotland has a right to choose whenever it wants, I’m not referencing any constitutional history as I don’t know it well enough but on purely democracy. If we return a parliament that has the choice of independence as the majority then it has a right to ask the question.

    39. jfngw says:

      splitting, not slitting.

    40. jfngw says:

      Also countries splitting, should be member states splitting, just lazy writing by me there.

    41. johnj says:

      The B’stards never learn. There were 4 Irish home Rule bills before the the Irish Free State was established. The bloodshed and strife which the English establishment caused to hang on to its Hegemony is still with us, and they would quite happily do it all again.

    42. Ottomanboi says:

      Of course the answer to such acts of neo colonialism is to fight back. I’m sorry to say it but the older nationalists I meet do not appear to have the stomach for the fight.
      The Scotch whinge is becoming as tiresome as the Scotch cringe.
      Leadership ought to be pro active. Waiting for your nose to bloodied by the enemy and then possibly act, is not good practice.
      Scots seems to be corralled in a pen which few within possess the determination and resolve to quit. A sorry plight but one of local origin.

    43. CameronB Brodie says:

      “And, they will never, until the oil runs out, even consider letting us have a vote on Independence.”

      England is already in dire need of water, which Scotland will never be short of. 🙁

      Global Public Health
      An International Journal for Research, Policy and Practice
      Volume 14, 2019 – Issue 4: Special Issue: Analysing power and politics in health policies and systems; Guest Editors: Radhika Gore and Richard Parker

      What do human rights bring to discussions of power and politics in health policy and systems?

    44. Ron Maclean says:

      @iain mhor

      I don’t think the Covenanters are going to help us now. If we want independence we have to help ourselves. The limitations of the Scotland Act are well known. We have to challenge it. Unfortunately we seem to be stuck with people who know why we can’t do things but not why we can.

    45. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Breeks.

      Your mentions of “impeachment”.

      As far as I’m aware, impeachment is not a feature of Scots Law.
      If you stick…

      “impeach “Scots Law”

      into Google, many of the hits are about the Bill Clinton impeachment.

      “Misconception of the Scots “not proven” concept has occasionally inspired legal decision or commentary in other countries. In February 1999, United States Senator Arlen Specter voted against conviction in the impeachment trial of Bill Clinton, citing the concept of the “not proven” as a basis for his decision.”

      Impeachment in the UK appears to be a prerogative of the UK parliament.

      “Impeachment is a process in which the parliament of the United Kingdom may prosecute and try individuals, normally holders of public office, for high treason or other crimes and misdemeanours.”
      “The procedure for impeachment was described in the first edition of Erskine May thus: any member of the House of Commons with proof of an individual’s crimes could charge them of said crime and move for their impeachment. If the House of Commons voted to impeach, the mover would be ordered to go to the Bar of the House of Lords to impeach them “in the name of the House of Commons, and of all the commons of the United Kingdom” and “to acquaint them that this house will, in due time, exhibit particular articles against him, and make good the same.” “

      Info from:-

    46. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Sorry – forgot the link for the first part of the quote.

    47. Brian Doonthetoon says:


      the first quote…

    48. Famous15 says:

      “I come to bury Ceasar, not to praise him”

      Johann Lamont is genetically incapable etc.

    49. Ottomanboi says:

      johnj 15:07
      The civil war weakened Ireland for generations, effectively giving England, until the launch of the punt, the economic levers of control. Turning the ‘anger’ and frustration inward is what colonial powers do when faced with independence movements. Muddying the waters by encouraging factionalism is the oldest trick in the imperialist book. The bloody partition of India comes to mind.
      Whatever the frustrations the nature and intent of the real foe should never be forgotten.
      Scotland is the keystone in their hackneyed empire…although the London architects would never admit to the fact.

    50. jfngw says:

      How do I know network rail is reserved and under WM control, it’s simple there has been no demand for anyone to resign by the media.

    51. CameronB Brodie says:

      Scotland is definitely the keystone in their hackneyed empire…as our domestication enabled England, in the guise of Britain, to turn her eye to the colonisation of the rest of the world. Who cares that social and cultural rights can’t be separated from public health? Certainly not British nationalists.

      Globalization and Health volume 12, Article number: 84 (2016)
      Global constitutionalism, applied to global health governance: uncovering legitimacy deficits and suggesting remedies

    52. kapelmeister says:

      Cummings and Johnson, the architects of the Final Scotlution.

      Meanwhile Sturgeon has rendered herself useless to protect Scotland and couldn’t do it now even if she wanted to. If currently no one in the SNP feels able to issue a formal leadership challenge then at least someone ought to put themselves forward as a stalking horse candidate.

    53. Walter Jones says:

      The rumour that Scots are a great fighting Nation were of course started by english Generals.

      They needed cannon fodder for their wars abroad when fighting to steal the land of those pesky foreigners.

      So what did they do?

      They came up with this plan to tell the Scots that they would make excellent soldiers and Infact, they told us that we are so good you could lead the charge in every battle we go in to.

      The gullable thick Scots fell for this english trick, and to this day they still believe this bullshit the British Armed Forces spin to them.

      Look at the First World War, thousands of Highlanders and other Scottish Regiments charging across no man’s land, straight to their deaths.

      But we know the real truth about Scots. We know they are gutless bastards who roll over and will accept any rule changes England puts upon them.

      Just look at our present government, or our MPs, they are world leaders at being gutless, followed closely by their core supporters, and then the population in general,,,we are just too nice,,,just too accepting of anything that is thrown at us.

      This is why we need strong leadership, we need someone to lead the charge, to inspire us to fight back,,,

      And in Sturgeon we just don’t have any of those fighting characteristics,,,none.

      That is why we need change at the top,,, before it is too late.

    54. kapelmeister says:

      Just to clarify. If no well known senior figure in the SNP feels able to challenge Sturgeon, then let an unknown with no hope of winning play the stalking horse. Failure to challenge Sturgeon now will only allow her to move to consolidate her power over the Yes movement.

      If however, a senior indy hardliner in the party does fancy their chances, great.

    55. Lochside says:

      Ron Maclean says:
      13 August, 2020 at 3:46 pm
      @iain mhor

      ‘I don’t think the Covenanters are going to help us now. If we want independence we have to help ourselves. The limitations of the Scotland Act are well known. We have to challenge it. Unfortunately we seem to be stuck with people who know why we can’t do things but not why we can.’

      They may not Ron. But history is being repeated: in the 17th century Scotland’s Covenanting philosophers, such as Samuel Rutherford, raised Scotland’s Sovereignty as the basis of their struggle to challenge both the Stewart kings and Cromwell’s ‘Protectorate’…both effectively English dictatorships.

      The mistake they made was to challenge Charles, then switch to backing Cromwell, they managed to be steam-rollered over at Dunbar, when they had the English bottled up and at their mercy, because of weak but fanatical ideologically bigoted leadership.

      A defeat that led to ultimately subjection and surrender by our ‘parliament’ a couple of generations later. History is repeating itself. Weak and woke puritans are sleep walking us into political oblivion. Where is the outrage at the’Little England’ political H.Q. inaugurated this very week by our ‘party of Independence?

      No policy on currency; no State Bank; no policy on what economy we are going to have in the new Scotland ( does the SNP even talk like this anymore?);no policy on pensions or Social Security beyond vague assurances from the Britnats from 2014…which are easily discarded. And of course no public utterances about our Sovereignty via the treaty and Act of Union, and the Claim of Right. How do they expect 97% of the non online electorate to buy into Independence post Covid with no declarations of Intent?

      If we are campaigning this year or next year ..what is the narrative?….pleeze pleeze help us stop the baddy Dom Dom and Johnson the clown cos’…what??…or more Blackford speak Brexit bullshit of ‘we shall not be moved’…until we are?

    56. Robert Louis says:

      Breeks at 0223pm,

      This is the problem. The Scottish Government have seemingly forgotten Scotland’s constitutional status. As a consequence, they did not stand up for Scotland from brexit being forced upon us. It was as you rightly state an abdication of their duty.

      Although, until 31st December, 2020, they do still have time to take action. Given the reluctance of NS to actually do ANYTHING to further Scotland’s independence, I’ll not hold my breath.

      As for a new ‘act’ of union. Well, as others have pointed out, their never ever was a single act of union, and that is the simple fact that these diddies from England always get wrong. Their were two acts, one passed by the Scottish parliament, and one passed by the English parliament. The Scottish one was passed under Scots law, the English under English law, by (at the time) two completely separate sovereign nations. Together, both countries agreed to the treaty of union, which is a treaty recognised under international law.

      Indeed it is the treaty, and that alone, which gives London any say in Scottish affairs. However, the notion that once signed, then one signatory country, England can then re-write the treaty and unilaterally replace it with its own preferential terms, is legal hogwash. It holds no substance whatsoever. Indeed if westminster decided in their stupidity to legislate in such a way, to ‘replace’ the treaty, would mean they themselves have ended the treaty of union themselves and QED, Scotland is immediately independent. I’m confident, that even England’s pretendy ‘supreme’ court’ would agree with that.

      The treaty of union is an international treaty, which may be unilaterally ended by either of the two signatories, Scotland or England.

      The only people can ever suggest a new ‘ACT’ of union, are those who have zero understanding of the existing union treaty. It is right up there with drinking hydroxychloroquine for covid 19, or believing that 5G causes COVID, in terms of stupidity.

      Of course that doesn’t mean they wouldn’t do it, I’m just saying, it is of no real concern in any legal sense.

    57. Breeks says:

      Brian Doonthetoon says:
      13 August, 2020 at 3:47 pm
      Hi Breeks.

      Your mentions of “impeachment”.

      As far as I’m aware, impeachment is not a feature of Scots Law…

      Absolutely correct Brian, but the Declaration of Arbroath declares, Yet if he should give up what he has begun, seeking to make us or our kingdom subject to the King of England or the English, we should exert ourselves at once to drive him out as our enemy and a subverter of his own right and ours, and make some other man who was well able to defend us our King.

      I think that might cover impeachment, even if there’s no set protocol for doing it. It seemed more humane and orderly than literally “driving them out as our enemy” which I think might involve an angry mob with flaming torches and pitchforks.

    58. Breeks says:

      And just add Brian,… impeachment needn’t be carried out. You would hope a Scottish Government merely threatened with impeachment would finally register that some people are deeply angered by their dereliction of Scotland’s Constitutional rights, and will bring down the Government if that is what it takes.

    59. CameronB Brodie says:

      It’s a sair fecht when a respect and support for the international legal order, can get you considered as an indy hardliner. What next, the jail for disagreeing with authoritarian English Torydum, a.k.a. English/British, right-wing and populist, constitutional majoritarianism?

      Health Policy and Planning, Volume 34, Issue 9, November 2019, Pages 635–645
      A systems perspective on the importance of global health strategy developments for accomplishing today’s Sustainable Development Goals

    60. Effijy says:

      Something is rotten in the state of Bojomark!

      It is nobler in the mind to take up arms against a sea of Toryism!

    61. Oneliner says:

      Around this time (1992), George Rosie also wrote and fronted an excellent TV documentary on the amount of economic spin off London received by way of the over-centralisation of bureaucracy within the City.

      Unfortunately I cannot recall its title and it is not listed on his IMDb page (as George Rosie II)

    62. Effijy says:

      The English parliament says you are getting a Tory government
      Again and again and although you have never given them a majority
      In Scotland for over 65 years you are have the Tories forced upon you.

      Although 62% of Scots wish to remain in the EU, a Tory Government
      With 37% of the Union vote says they don’t care what you want, you
      Get what England forces upon you.

      The greatest Commonwealth games ever held were in Glasgow.
      All requests for financial help from Westminster Central funding
      Were rejected.
      Birmingham to hold the next games gets £72 million.

      A Scottish politician said Indy ref 1 MIGHT be a once
      In a generation event.
      So the Tories count a personal comment as though it was the treaty of Arbroath,
      As if it was adopted as part of Scotland’s constitution or legislated for?

      How nice the Tories suggest anything said by a single politician must be enforced!
      That means everything in the Vow must be upheld for Scotland-
      We will have the most powerful devolved parliament on earth but now they
      Say we are so powerful the can strip and and all powers when they like.
      The promised 13 major ships for the Clyde Yards/ Lied.
      The promised 3,000 HMRC jobs would stay here- Lie- now going to Croydon.
      The promised £1 Billion Carbon capture plant in Peterhead
      and they promised a No vote would ensure Scotland remains in Europe!
      Oh and of course we will be loved as equal partners. Lol

      That’s a relief all the English Party leaders including their PM
      guaranteed these promises which, as they say must be fulfilled?

    63. CameronB Brodie says:

      HMG civil service owe their allegiance to the Crown, but how exactly does that help those living in Scotland to access their human rights?

      Scotland’s public health is already dismal for a ‘developed’ nation, with many of these deficiancies linked directly to the colonial legacies of Scotland’s peripheral economy and lack of political voice. Both of which can be linked to our constitutional subourdination to English majoritarianism, which tends to be Tory in nature, and leads to Scotland’s subsequent legal insecurity.

      Brexit will only further undermine our legal, social, and cultural robustness, so lumping Brexit on top of covid-19 constitutes ample legal cause to walk away from the yoonyawn, IMHO. Lack of noticeable effort to protect Scotland’s civic society from unconstitutional legal subjugation, really can no longer be tolerated.

      The Right to Health: Institutional Effects
      of Constitutional Provisions on Health Outcomes

      The “right to health” is increasingly enshrined in national constitutions around the world – present today in a slight majority of written constitutions. Whether this trend is good, bad, or meaningless is considerably debated. Contrary to skeptics’ worries, this study finds empirical evidence of a positive role of the right to health in the production of population health.

      Estimating the most widely promulgated theories of the economic and social determinants of health, and the role of electoral democracy, provides a foundation from which to evaluate the effect of the right to health. This study assembles and analyzes data for 144 countries between 1970 and 2010 and finds that, controlling for these factors, a constitutional right to health contributes significantly
      to wellbeing.

      Assembled quantitative and case-study evidence both support the idea that institutional environments shaped by a right to health encourage more and better delivery of health services, which in part account for positive impact on health outcomes. These results suggest that focusing research on political institutions primarily on democratic participation rights ignores important impacts of “entitlement” rights on norms and actors in health policy-making. Overall, the right to health is both an important contextual factor for health research and meaningful institutional innovation.

      Health . Development . Constitution . Law. Rights

      P.S. The above link downloads a file that needs “.pdf” added to the name.

    64. twathater says:

      Perhaps some SNP member who is aufait with the rules could answer me this , would it be possible for AS to return as an SNP member and to CHALLENGE NS for the leadership or would he have to go through the ranks , and could the SNP membership FORCE a challenge on NS to stand aside , is there some way to FORCE a vote of NO CONFIDENCE on NS because I am SICK at the thought of even LENDING my vote to this ABJECT FAILURE of a leader and party to FIGHT for our independence

    65. callmedave says:

      No reported deaths in the UK.

      Format has changed to ‘cases reported’ daily.
      Deaths will appear in some form at some future date. Honest Gov!

    66. ben madigan says:

      @ twathater
      breeks told you how to do it!!!

      “we should exert ourselves at once to drive her out as our enemy and a subverter of her own right and ours, and make some other wo/man who was well able to defend us our Leader.

    67. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Effijy at 5:44 pm.

      You typed,
      “The greatest Commonwealth games ever held were in Glasgow.”

      Have you seen this 36sec video?

      Glasgow 2014 Opening Ceremony – Team Scotland Entrance

    68. James Che. says:

      Thanks breeks and everyone else who helped clarify the Union status better than I did, as I had to go out.
      Much appreciated.

    69. stonefree says:

      @twathater at 6:09 pm
      I think he could return as a member, after that heaven knows
      What would be problem if the SNP reject his membership, all that would need is Murrell he’s unacceptable as a member , Then Murrell has a serious problem , AS is innocent, and MURREL and the SNP are in court for example civil rights/discrimination
      I would I believe need to fight the Chief Wokey and troops in the NEC
      If Salmond and others got enough members to back them
      Sadly I think Sturgeon has finished the SNP, Personally I would not return till both Murrell/Sturgeon and a few others

    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