Wings Over Scotland

Excellent post. Its independence that counts. Not the flavour of someones politics otherwise.

Thanks for that Dave. The campaign goes on.

aitchbee, I absolutely agree with you on this and the most important thing now is to be stronger and bolder in the arguments for Indy than has been the case through this abysmal election

There speaks a man who has given his life to the SNP and independence. I would be inclined to trust that assessment. Same Davie Hill who fought the Hamilton 67 by election?

The position of Peter Murrel as SNP chief exec SHOULD be questioned. Regardless of who is given as the official director of any campaign in the SNP, it’s him who’s really in charge. His strategy is a proven failure and his years of withholding support for local training of grassroots members has cost the party. His megalomaniacal control of party processes and message is hurting Nicola as much as it is the party. He was due more blame for 2014 than he got; he’ll lose us the next Indyref if he’s left in charge.

The opposition had a simple message that could not be addressed with multiple policies, no matter their merit.

People were persuaded that instaed of being given an opportunity to vote on their own future, the offer of a referendum was somehow devisive and negative. The liberals got away with saying OK for EU and not OK for Scotland, somehow this ws not challenged sufficiently.

I’d agree that the only way to address the issue is to highlight the benefits of independence, again, again, etc. Match the opposition blow for blow.

Also we need someone to front for the SNP in front of the media and to take on the media. Someon who can think on their feet and takes no prisoners!

I said before the election was even called that since the Tories were refusing to allow democracy to function in Scotland and were (appearing to) openly ignore the vote of the Scottish Parliament, the SNP could resign all their seats and stand again on a “Section 30 Order or independence” manifesto. Let’s not forget that prior to devolution, the current allocation of seats would have been considered a mandate for independence negotiations to begin. In the end, the SNP fought a hopelessly defensive campaign because the narrative was set by Davidson that ANY losses would constitute an absolute rejection of independence. The SNP struggled to get out a message that a win in this election – and win they most certainly did – was a vote for Holyrood’s supremacy on this issue. “Mrs. May has forced us into this position. We wanted to pursue a referendum as the surest way of fairly measuring the will of the people, but if the Tories insist that Westminster holds sway over all in this country then we will beat them there.” I think that would have been enough to galvanise the SNP support and prevent leakage of pro-indy voters to Labour. The Tory bounce was nothing but a chunk of No voters screaming in terror.

If another election does happen soon, I urge the party to follow that line or something similar. In the meantime, I disagree that Robertson and Salmond should be in a think tank. Robertson should be appointed as the chair of a reconstituted Yes Scotland and Salmond should be somewhere in the background, campaigning and strategising. The Unionists have been campaigning hard since 19/9/14 and we’ve not really campaigned for independence at all. We’ve told ourselves that the demographics were on our side and with 56 MPs at Westminster we couldn’t be ignored. That’s not enough. There needs to be an active pro-indy campaign going on ALL the time. It shouldn’t be the SNP doing it though. Their line should be “this is what Holyrood and WM voters supported and we will always back democracy.” Then they should get on with fixing some of the problems, particularly in education, that are losing them support. The newly redundant people like Salmond, Robertson, Nicholson and Kerevan have a lot to offer as campaigners and thinkers. Let them do the heavy lifting on indy (along with the likes of Robin McAlpine, Pat Kane, some Green reps and whoever else is qualified and willing) so that it becomes ever harder to equate independence with the SNP. They’re one important element of a wider and deeper campaign but they can’t do it alone.

I agree entirely, Nicola’s clique is entirely socialist and those of us who are more conservative are being driven away by their monopoly of the party. The issues raised by voters are only emotional props to justify voting for unionist parties. I also agree that Nicola is an impressive leader who I believe is capable of leading all strands within the party.

I agree wih most of this analysis.However,it is likely that leave voters in the EU referendum and voter fatigue also played a part in the result.I think that to keep pro independence people who want out of the EU onside,there is a need to emphasise that the SNP are arguing for Scotland’s right to make its own decisions,rather than telling people what to decide.I suspect that when Brexit” kicks in” voters will understand the implications more clearly.I do agree that there is a need to organise a team to plan the future strategy for promoting independence.Angus Robertson and Alec S almond should be members of that team.

tartanfever, I don’t know where you got the impression that Angus Robertson is a tory. Angus is a true gentleman, he was a great MP, the best of them all, far superior to AS. He talks very well and really gave TM a run for her money. He is dignified, caring and helpful, and highly intelligent. He would be a huge loss to the snp and to the YES movement.

People rave about Tamsina – she is the real tory, she has been a member of the tory party, she has switched sides constantly just to pursue a lucrative career.

as for AS, for all his faults, we have him to thank for bringing the snp out of the dark ages and turning it into a genuine political force. For that we owe him big time, and shouldn’t be speaking about tossing him onto the rubbish heap as ‘toxic’.

Heedy
On another thread, you asked where I was – and what I had to say (although I did make a comment the morning after which I summed up the result as a “clusterf**k”).

Well, in terms of THE most important issue the country (UK) is facing, the great British electorate has contrived to produce the worst possible result in terms of our negotiating position. I voted Remain but, on the basis that “Brexit means Brexit” then, clearly, we needed to be in the best and strongest position to negotiate the best possible deal. As a result of the GE, we are now in a much weaker position and it doesn’t matter how each of us voted in the EU Ref’ or the GE (i.e. which party), we are all likely to be worse off as a result – which is very frustrating and damaging.

On the big stuff to come out of the results, across the UK, we can probably all agree that Tories and the SNP won – but lost! The Labour party lost – but won. The Lib Dems are virtually irrelevant and the situation with NI is a disaster with the DUP, with around 300k voters (supporting a party with some very odd policies), seemingly in a position now of great influence.

With regards to Brexit, over 80% of voters voted for parties supporting Brexit – but we are now in the worse possible position to get a good deal. On Scottish Independence, a big majority of voters voted for pro-Union parties – whilst confirming the SNP are the biggest party by far!

As for May and Sturgeon, both of them cocked up badly. Ms Sturgeon (as I have previously written) painted herself into a corner by demanding indyref2. She claimed that there was increasing support of a referendum – clearly there is not. After their previous stunning results in the GE, the SNP, realistically, could do no better and there was only one way their vote could go. Ms Sturgeon had started to believe her own propaganda (and/or advisors) and thought that the SNP Brexit strategy was a winner – she was clearly wrong.

Ms May had an absolutely awful campaign. Again, her advisors had obviously decided that this was a “Theresa May” election and all she had to do was hold position with a string of repeated banalities – then she would cruise home. And, whilst repeating regularly and often that Brexit was the most important issue facing the country, she produced a manifesto that managed to put her in “defence” mode and trying to explain things like the “dementia tax” to her core vote! We arrived at the situation where the Tories were introducing, effectively, huge increases in inheritance tax – with the Labour party against it! By the time she had realised that it was all going wrong, it was too late.

That’s politicians for you. The power goes to their head, they stop listening and they do stupid things. Both of them have lost huge amounts of authority and respect. Both got it wrong. Both of them have moved from unassailable – to keeping their jobs only because to change leader would make the situation worse. Hardly a vote of confidence for either of them.

With respect to the article above, Dave McEwan wrote: “A final point. We live in a democracy. To be a Tory is a democratic right in it – not one I’m likely to exercise, but I know many normal and decent people who would describe themselves as Tories. And I know of many Tories in parts of the country we have just lost who voted SNP for decades. Whoever got the bright idea that it would be a good idea to drive them away from us and make them hate us?”

I have written many times that disrespecting people purely because of one’s views on the other person’s politics is not healthy nor likely to end well. Disagree by all means – but don’t vilify, because it only demonstrates a complete lack of thought and understanding.

I agree with everything said here, particularly ….

The SNP support and the SNP activist base marches to an independence beat. No matter whatever tactical decisions are made or what other policies are offered, unless independence is included prominently we disincentivise our campaigns.

Frankly, as an activist, I felt that activist turn out and enthusiasm has faltered somewhat.

Yes, the Corbyn effect was unexpected. Those people are probably still potential Yes voters who have gone back to the ‘old way’ of supporting Labour at WM.

Yes, there was collusion between Unionist parties in a number of target seats.

One additional point I would make is that there was a concerted campaign to ensure this election was not allowed to be about WM! It was largely media driven where Brexit and the Tories’ WM was not to be discussed. Especially the Ruth Davidson One Policy No Referendum Party, which managed to complete disconnect with London HQ!

The one exception to this ‘avoid WM’ approach was the voter driven Corbyn effect spilling over from England.

I think we should stop being so bloody nice and cuddly and fight the unionists at their own game.

Fionan says:

‘I don’t know where you got the impression that Angus Robertson is a tory. Angus is a true gentleman’

What the hell does social manners have to do with political allegiance ? Stupid comment.

Angus favours a Tory business model. He likes the City of London, he likes Big Bank influence, he wants to cut Corporation Tax, he believes in the market and it’s forces and unfiltered trade agreements that benefit corporations not people. Alex Salmond is much the same.

He may oppose Trident, and he may ask pertinent questions at PMQ’s about pensioners etc, but that is no proof whatsoever of being left wing, or even social democratic, leaning.

If indyref2 had been made a centre plank of the SNP campaign I do not think we would have lost as many seats.

We would still have lost some, because of the new UK political reality where we have a more polarized scenario on offer than we have had for decades. That inevitably puts pressure on both ends of the soft SNP support.

In addition, on the constitutional side, the effect of Ruth Davidson’s (and the BBC’s) Union support consolidation could well have been significant. Also, some hard Brexiteer SNP support will have been lost.

I would like to see polls ASAP which discover what the indy friendly demograph is like for the new ‘Tory’, ‘SLAB’ support, ditto strong Brexit support, as this would go a long way to make clear what has actually happened.

It would also be useful to know from whence that polling sample came (i.e. how they voted in 2015).

Great intellectual analysis, Dave. Clear and cogent, and I know you will feel as emotional as the rest of us.

There is no question about the carve up by the other 3 parties, backed by dark money. They looked at what worked for Leave, it always boils down to money. Scot Tories have been reported for £100k spend, which can’t be transparently seen. However, the Electoral Commission is a chocolate teapot.

Look what money has bought us. Brexit, and now this shitshow of a UK govt.

What a lot don’t understand, even on here, is that politically aware/intellectual folk like us are a very small minority. The vast majority are far too busy, or too poor and depressed to give a shit about caring to learn or pay attention.

Hence paid bombardment works. Dave has proven it here.

It’s disgusting, but these new candidates are bought and paid for, and right now, I still can’t see a path out of this.

A more prominent yes movement is needed now, with obvious leaders and strategies with a multi party involvement. This would take pressure off Nicola and wrong foot Ruth.

As for Westminster, my personal preference would be for us not to take our seats, I just can’t stomach the idea of us going along with this farce of a set up.

While I am sure we are all sorry for those SNP MPs who have lost their seats, it bears remembering that our Westminster contingent are effectively on a Kamikaze Mission anyway, i.e. they are all working to put themselves out of a job.

There are no (or should not be) any ambitions for a life-long Westminster career, so that should soften the personal blow a little.

Just tuned into Kaye, the first thing I hear is a caller stating that Alex Salmond lied about having legal advice on Europe during the first indy ref. Total silence from Kaye of course. A reminder of what we are up against.

If an IndyReferendum via the Scottish Parliament is now the chosen route for progressing indy, why does the SNP even bother contesting WM GEs? What’s the point? Sure, there is the outside chance that, on the very very odd occasion, the SNP might hold the balance of power and, as such, could possibly extract some concessions from London.

So many ifs, buts and mibbees.

Most likely is that the SNP will win a barrel-load of WM seats for precisely nought impact. SNP should get the hell away from WM. By being there we are essentially driving down the importance of our own parliament here in Scotland. We are effectively saying that our own parliament is second fiddle. Why? Why should we do that?

There’s simply no point to SNP contesting WM elections and it just wastes much of the party’s resources. SNP should concentrate wholly on Scotland and building the consensus for Indy from here.

IMHO.

Excellent piece, Dave.

Agree with pretty much every word.

The bit at the end is something a lot of us must accept too. I’d very much identify as on the working class or ‘left’ side of things and obviously, I would like to see Scotland do things which aimed at making the country a little more egalitarian.

However, *all* societies have ‘business interests’ and an independent Scotland would be no different. Where’s the sense in alienating one section of a society we know will exist from the very idea of independence?

In the run-up to 2014, I saw a lot of people saying a Yes vote would be ‘the end of the Tories’. This was always muddled thinking. It would signify that we wouldn’t have to undergo *Westminster* Tory rule again, certainly something I would consider an unalloyed good.

However, if there were no ‘business political party’ in an early independent Scotland one would have to spring up to represent the people who have that kind of concern – because that’s how political systems work.

What we have to hope is that those of a Tory persuasion who are minded to independence will co-operate with us after independence to create a society which we can be proud of and is fair to all.

But thanks again for a sparkling and insightful piece, Dave. Much needed at this time.

A young aquintance (SNP member) has many face book friends who voted for Corbyn. They were attracted by the hope he offered.
Obviously they didn’t feel they were getting a message of hope from the SNP this time round. Whereas they had voted YES for hope in the future during Indy Ref.

IMHO Jezza handled interviewers very well, with a pleasant demeanour. The guy became very likeable as the election progressed.
Our representatives need to rethink the way they handle interviews.

Corbyn turned down a last day interview from Jon Snow…… He was too busy njoying himself……. He exerted control over the media.

Your definitely right about the money spend in various target seats by the Libdems. They won the Caithness & Sutherland one. My husband had at least 6 personally addressed leaflets/letters from them. Looking forward to learning how much was spent in these seats.

Neatly done Mr Hill. 🙂

That was needed.

My own experience absolutely confirms this.

While there was always a strong Tory presence where I live, they were everywhere this time. Interesting that the previous MP before Brendan seems to have accepted his role as the third place mopper upper of what was once a strong Lib Dem seat. The Tory candidate is a councillor who from being a previous nonentity with a penchant for whining about nothing is now a rabid Unionist.

Every time the SNP are accused of being obsessed with Independence the counter argument of Slab/LibDem/Tory being absolutely and utterly consumed by the idea of preserving the Union over anything else should be thrown back at them. No policies, no vision, just stagnation and preserving the status quo.

The Unionist party (for they are one) needs to be made to defend their position which is to have polarised Scotland into 2 positions with the loss of democratic choice and the hardening of the division they supposedly despise.

But Dave, we do not live in a democracy. The principle of democracy is holed below the water line while one side in a legitimate constitutional debate is denied even a neutral broadcasting platform to put forward its agenda, and the other side is free to perform eye watering contortions and paradoxes on policy without even rudimentary challenge or condemnation. It can lie at will with self righteous impunity. That is not democracy, that is subjugation by propaganda.

Everybody knows the 2014 Referendum was a con, with a godlike Gordon Brown promising all sorts of vows, Fiscal Autonomy and other “inducements” to stay in the Union, bare faced lies about pensions, and being kicked out of Europe, and he was catapulted into the referendum narrative in flagrant violation of the Purdah restrictions by a BritNat Media on all out attack mode to defeat Independence. A splendid point I remember from Wee Ginger Dug, we’ll respect the result of 2014 when the Unionists respect the vows and promises they made to win it.

I don’t contest the result of the 2014 vote. They won. But I’ll be damned if I’m going to call it democracy.

Think back to Nigel Farage coming to Scotland, running away to hide in a pub from an “SNP lynch mob”. It was British media fabricated bullshit, but the BBC smeared the SNP, raised the profile of an erstwhile wholly irrelevant UKIP footprint in Scotland to the extent that Scotland suffered the humiliation of returning a UKIP MEP to Brussels.

Now we have another election we actually won, but we are told that we’ve lost, and that winning 13 seats of 59 is a stunning victory for the Tories. Every time Scotland turns on a TV we are stepping through the looking glass and entering a fanciful Wonderland as finely crafted as any other BBC fictional production.

SNP, Nicola Sturgeon, for the love of Scotland, please, please, recognise the parlous state of our dysfunctional broadcasting network throughout Scotland, and given its biased and malevolent influence over votes and elections we have had to date, and the seminal referendum we are about to have, recognise that we have a state of emergency in political news and broadcasting.

I call on you to secure a Judicial Review from the Court of Session to underwrite and declare that that legitimate the nature of constitutional sovereignty in Scotland rests with the people. Then, I call upon you to cite such sovereignty as the more than adequate mandate you require to instigate an emergency broadcasting network to provide an objective, dispassionate, and apolitical narrative of the vital constitutional issues and the dangers which will damage Scotland if we lose our place in Europe.

Take the powers you need from our Scottish constitutional sovereignty and invite our European brothers to lend us a delegation of their political and constitutional Press agencies, bring them to a facility we provide for them in Edinburgh or Glasgow, and let us form a European coalition of broadcast media which Scotland can access through its television set, and thus we might shepherd home the constitutional alterations and appropriate public awareness we require to secure Scotland’s right to remain in Europe, and end the political affiliation with England before it suffers such calamitous injury on Scotland’s interests.

We do not need to silence the BBC or suppress it. Let it rage in impotence that it cannot suppress the truth.

Another warning too, while you’re on. If we continue to dawdle over Brexit, and remain passive if not catatonic in expecting the dangers of Brexit to reveal themselves, then not only do we allow the BBC the freedom to sugarcoat the perils of Brexit and turn black into white, but we further compromise our interests by allowing a possible resurgence of Remainer and soft Brexit rhetoric which would on outer appearance weaken the constitutional necessity of Scottish Independence. We know however that a soft Brexit is not something in the UK’s capacity to deliver, just as Remainer aspirations are vocal but disorganised and uncoordinated. This is a futile dynamic, but could leach support and urgency from the ScotRef campaign.

If we want Independence, and Independence in Europe, then only a bold, confident, and meaningful initiative can make this secure. Put an end to this “wait and see” pregnant inaction. We know enough already to move ourselves into a much stronger constitutional position, and we have everything to lose if we do not do so.

Just a comment on the leaflets in Argyll and Bute. Over the course of 2 weeks I had:-

One leaflet from Labour
Two letters in the post from RD
Lost count of the LibDem flyers, definitely in the late teens, sometimes 2 folded up together.

I could have papered my hall with Wee Willie Wanks face!!!

Kaye just starting a phone in promoting Ruth Davidson and the Tories. Get calling

The problem of running a government whilst trying to win independence is possibly being exposed as extremely difficult. The policies adopted will attract some and repel others, you cannot have policies that satisfy both left and right wing views. Also the longer you are in government the more ammunition your opponent has since things will go wrong and no party is infallible.

The SNP therefore has to make the case for an independent Scotland, not just be a competent government. In fact being a competent government may not help them if many believe they are doing a good job so why should we change it.

They have to accept and promote that the choice after independence is not just themselves but all the other parties. This seems obvious but I have seen numerous comments, not on wings, about perpetual SNP rule after independence. As numerous people have said in the past, this is about independence not the SNP, they are a vehicle and should be judged on their policies after independence.

I forgot something
Anybody heard anything about eh that other country eh I’m trying to remember their name, somewhere on the West coast of England eh, Oh Aye, Wales
See how they’ve been relegated to a complete non entity village in all this drivel, they must just love being dismissed altogether
Don’t worry though Wales if the dummies keep doing what they’re doing Scotland will be just as meaningless as you

“So true. I would count myself as a disincentivised member of the party right now, who was delighted to go on the big march in Glasgow but this time round couldn’t be bothered sticking turgid leaflets through the doors locally and haven’t been to a branch meeting for ages.”

Aye, why bother doing the boring stuff that needs to be done when we could all just fanny about waving flags instead?

Why are we even bothering contesting elections at all? All we need to do to win independence is march through Glasgow a few times.

Tories are only interested in one thing, the opportunity to enrich themselves to the exclusion of others. If we are to debase our goals to make it seem appealing to them then we have already lost. The goal for an independent nation was to create a place where Tories would be an anathema, because the nation would enshrine in it’s constitution the rights of citizens to be protected from the exploitation by private interests through which the Tory vampires thrive from. If we are only wanting to create our own nation for our own sharks to feed in then I want no part of it.

The static position of the polls with respect to independence has maybe discouraged the SNP leadership. The impression I have is they are becalmed, waiting for polls to move before firing up the indywagon again. At least in public: behind the scenes there has been some work around addressing some of 2014’s weaknesses, Andrew Wilson’s paper on de-emphasising oil revenues for example – but you’d only know that if you went looking for it.

So effectively there has been no Yes campaign since 2014. But the No campaigning from the press has never stopped. On top of that, the unionists, with a large amount of non-Scottish money behind them, have regained the IT initiative that the SNP had back in 2007 with Activate.

And despite all that, the polls have remained static.

I did think after 2014 that maybe we just have to endure a generation of crap, let the Tories do their worst, decimate the Scottish economy and emasculate our democracy, the BBC laughing in our faces, before the Scottish electorate began to get the message.

But no. We need to simplify and refocus. Provide compelling stories in easily disseminated formats (why aren’t there shareable infographics on the SNP website?). Provide media training and training in handling objections for all elected members. Provide unionist meme rebuttals for everyone. And above all we need to get facts in the faces of unionist voters. Here’s a benchmark that is worth polling. How many punters have ever even heard of the McCrone report? Instead they all ‘know’ that Scotland is subsidised by England… an idea that is insidious, all-pervasive, and false.

I’ve not posted here for some time however this election has driven me to get involved again. Two voters ‘ views:

One former Labour, now Green voter who has always hated both the Tories and the SNP, but supports independence. Was so disgusted by Ruth Davidson and the apparent rise of the Tories he decided to tactically vote SNP for the first time ever. However he caught an SNP party political broadcast just a few days before, and actually phoned me to complain about it (no idea why, I’m not a member of the SNP). He thought it was lazy, complacent, a bit too “tartan”, told him nothing about why it would be a good idea to vote SNP, and altogether had made him change his mind about voting for them.

I persuaded him to look at the MP’s record in the last parliament rather than go by a PPB, and he did reluctantly vote SNP, but complained bitterly that they had done nothing to deserve it. (MP still lost his seat).

I’m not SNP (I have no idea what I am, to be honest) but I will vote SNP until independence is achieved. But I was rather alarmed at the change of tone in the leaflets I received this time round. I found them quite negative, very Tory-bashing, and seemed to focus on keeping the Tories out rather than what the SNP could do for me. The tone was more like a Tory or Labour SNP-bashing leaflet in reverse, full of unionist-like negativity rather than the positivity I’ve come to expect from the SNP. They all made for quite despondent reading. It didn’t change my vote in any way – nothing will – but it did make wonder if it would turn others off.

I do think a new strategy is needed. Something that is more forceful and hard-hitting in getting the message over, without descending into the negativity that my ex-MP employed. And we really need some kind of mainstream media support. There are still plenty people in Scotland who have no idea how much good the SNP have done, and the media are quite happy not to educate them.

The SNP still won by a sizeable, competent majority. In any case.

The political process in Scotland is being undermined by Unionist activity. . Threatening Democracy. A backlash is entirely forseeable.

Get your points Dave,

Crucially..this was a snap election, with the Tories narrow appeal having strategic advantage.

The SNP’s ‘campaigning’ style and strategies had to go with the flow, to a large extent, with most voters not being engaged deeply enough to identify spin vs truth.

Why no big rally? Because TV makes it so bloody boring all the time, never mind the bias.

Scotland already has a ‘corbyn’, we’ve already had our youth engage..AND maybe ignored them a little at branch level.

The future must be a positive destination, getting there can be frustrating, 300 years in the waiting.

Ps..we got a Lib Dems leaflet ON SATURDAY, two days after the election.

I really don’t think it’s either fair or helpful to castigate Nicola Sturgeon for leading a party which contrary to media BS has just won a resounding election victory.

Jeremy Corbyn ran a very successful election campaign, but he did it almost single handed because a significant portion of the PLP a) didn’t think he had any credibility with the electorate and b)they don’t support his socialist left of centre philosophy.

The Labour Party still contains a large rump of Blairite MPs (Thatcher’s children) who really don’t belong in a left leaning party. Labour cannot and will not implement the Corbyn vision.

Theresa May’s Conservative party is similarly split in twain . Who knows what sort of Brexit she could deliver or even what she would have on her shopping list. The election victory she hoped for would have clarified for her what her negotiating strategy would look like.

The Lib Dems have always presented no more than a confusing home for the ‘don’t know’ middle class pinkish intellectual vote.

Nicola Sturgeon leads the only party in the UK that has any coherence. The SNP is not easily pinned to left or right. Its perceived leftward leaning is reflective of the fact that Scots are more social-ist and communitarian than their English brethren.

If you suspect she has feet of clay don’t idolise her, but feet of clay are a small price to pay for a party leader who has sentient organic matter from the neck up.

Totally agree on the need for political education.

In particular people need to understand what devolution is and can never deliver.

People don’t understand the difference between devolution and sovereignty. Our Parliament is devolved, it is not sovereign.

The NE has seen an economic downturn which the SG cannot really mitigate. Yet the complaint in the NE, ‘they’ve been in power ten years and have done nothing’ is allowed to go unchallenged and unanswered.

It’s the Tory trap. Turn off the money tap and watch the SG fail, and eventually, collapse. People will cease to see any point in it if the money comes from London and is controlled by London.

we have a very volatile electorate at the moment, most people were focused on brexit and didnt want this ge, they also thought that adding indyref2 into the mix was a step too far.

on a brighter note, the brexit negs start in 8 days, at which point all of the waffle
(lol at corbyn yesterday saying he wanted free access to the single market)
will end.

once people know what brexit means, and they will, very soon, their focus will be on the damage that leaving the single market will be doing to the uk economy.

then the offer of an indyref2 will be more appealing

Agree wholeheartedly with the post of “Breeks”, would definitely strengthen the “Yes” campaign’s stance and agenda. Anything that allows wider dissemination of the honest facts must be good for any cause or party and show the blatantly biased MSM that they are not untouchable.

I think the SNP need to get on with building a better Scotland. Sharing that vision and making sure that the Scottish electorate understand the difference between devolved and Westminster driven policy. Sit back and watch the Brexit negotiations progress and never ever take the option of Indyref2 off the table until they are sure that Brexit has not diminished Scotland’s prosperity. If it does, as seems likely, Indyref2 must be our exit option.

Col says:
12 June, 2017 at 10:44 am
“Breeks, with the BBC in Scotland’s approval ratings below 50% we should just come out and say that we demand our own broadcasting ability. They clearly only cater for the unionist half of the country.
It’s a broadcasting deficit and along with the democratic one we suffer has to be fixed somehow.”

Yes Col. But if we want broadcasting capacity to exist in time to inform the public in good time for Brexit analysis and ScotRef campaigning, it’s has got to start now.

As for the BBC being required to mend their errant ways, I wouldn’t trust them as far as I could spit, but a trial run and inevitable betrayal would waste valuable time revealing itself. Besides, the two ideas are not incompatible. The one does not preclude the other. Let the BBC zip up its flies and catch up if it likes. I won’t be watching, but good luck to them.

That’s why I say EU Press. Get a few of their outside broadcast vehicles parked up in Edinburgh and Glasgow running bulletins and domestic news about Brexit negotiations and a pro-Eu campaign we are pushing for Scotland. Air the Jouney to Yes clips. London Calling. FMQ’s and a post FMQ debriefing. Host new debates. Analyse the material issues of Brexit and Independence, but do it properly, objectively, and from the perspective that people might learn enough to form their own conclusions.

Being “foreign” but European, it might be easier to detect interference, but add a European dimension to any resistance from Westminster. If equipment is being seized, it won’t be “British” property.

Supposing it took 6 months to organise, that could leave it with less than a year to actually operate and build an audience, but it could be an immense year.

But picture yourself in late 2018, the summer is over, and curtain is closing on the Brexit drama. The UK will soon be out. Do you feel comfortable that Scotland’s voting population will have a good grasp of what Independence in Europe actually means before signing on the dotted line to leave or stay? Or do you think we’ll be better prepared and informed by the BBC’s bullshit narrative that we should all be pulling together behind the Union Jack and not pandering to divisive hatefests introduced by separatist cranks and tyrannical egotists like Wee Jimmie Krankie?

I know which briefing I’d find more informative…

Street Andrew @ 10:56am:

I think this is an important point.

Corbyn was not asked anywhere like as often as I would have expected how he would do most of what he proposed with the majority of the PLP biding their time to stick a knife in his back. This does kind of suggest that interviewers decided to soft-pedal on that one thing….because someone somewhere decided he was acceptable now because they’d worked out he’d be hamstrung.

It’s important also to note that most of the best people we have promoting independence have been found after decades of effort in that direction.

Corbynism is not new (in the sense that it’s the revival of ‘old’ Labour) but it could take him and his ilk some time to ensure they have capable people en masse at the top of the UK Labour party with that vision…..if, in fact, they ever achieve that at all. I think one reason your Coopers etc have decided to get back into the tent is to prevent this.

negative campaign leaflets?????

aye right, next time we should knit them out of wool and plaster them with fluffy bunnies

Mearns leader article on the Liberal Democrat choice of candidate for WAK.

The 25 year old, from Banchory, works in the Westhill office for North East MSP Mike Rumbles as a caseworker – helping constituents and communities raise and resolve local issues.
link to archive.is

He may be a perfectly nice chap. But it does look as if the Liberals are not trying very hard. He stood in the 2016 Holyrood elections and came 4th in Aberdeen South and North Kincardine.

Over in Argyll and Bute it was the Liberals who were given a clear run. In WAK it is the Tories. A remarkable stroke of luck for them.

just to back up mail shots

I’ve lived in my property 25 years

1st personal mail shot I’ve ever received

from the tory party

No. Can’t even begin to agree with Dave – or in fact many of the commenters here, bar Tartanfever with whom I do agree. Last Thursday was a reality check – and the SNP can’t be all things to all people, left, right and centre, and still be the core of a successful independence movement. Surely it was obvious (with hindsight!) when a sizeable number of 2014 Yes voters then voted No to the EU, but the SNP focused on joining the EU after independence? So they then voted SNP anyway? No. Hence the reduced vote. sorry, but the SNP will have to decide left or right. And to the person here who regards the SNP and Sturgeon as socialist?? I mean – how can I vote for a party that someone like this also votes for. I mean, come on.

There is now no time for an indi-ref before the 2012 Scot Govt election, if the SNP continue to accept it requires the UK Govt’s permission. It was never going to happen anyway. That was just bait for YES supporters to back the SNP.

YES supporters like myself watched the SNP refuse co-operation with other YES supporters like the Greens, close down the YES campaign. Make it: it’s the SNP way or the highway.

It worked spectacularly well for them – in the short term.

Now, people like myself, see the SNP full of empty posturing but failing to establish Scottish Sovereignty within the Union, by establishing we don’t need permission from WM Govt to hold referendums.

Don’t need UK permission to be part of talks affecting Scotland. It’s our right as equal partners in the Union.

If, the UK rejects those reforms, then they aren’t respecting Scottish sovereignty, so the Scottish Govt should refuse to recognise UK sovereignty in Scottish matters.

They could debate and vote on this in Holyrood. I asked the Scottish Parliament and they confirm any topic can be debated and voted on.

The SNP have been complacent. Acquiescent to the UK Govt. Scared to do anything when Scottish sovereignty has been rejected. Scared to talk independence. No wonder people won’t vote for them as much now.

They just wanted votes as the anti-Tory Party. Corbyn’s Labour now fulfils that role. The SNP should be the party for Scottish sovereignty and Scottish independence, if they won’t do that, then what’s the point? It’s like Labour without socialism: a party with no core values, a waste of space.

I am bloody sick of unionists saying the SNP should wait until the next Holyrood election to “seek a mandate” for indyref2.

They are ALREADY trying to ignore and DENY the current democratic mandate the SNP have.

Why on earth would they suddenly decide that a mandate in 2021 was any more legitimate than the one already in place ????

They want to delay until 2021 for one reason and one reason only.

They hope the SNP fail to win that election.

They hope that there is not a pro indy majority.

Any Yes minded people who want to walk into that unionist agenda are, frankly, fucking arseholes.

Flower of Scotland says:
Sorry Dave but I agree with Breeks@10.14
We need to do something about broadcasting and the media in general. The BBC and STV are another Unionist party. Even wee Catalonia has its own TV stations and radio stations.

————–
while i agree, im not sure we can set up such broadcast media in the time we have, (indyref2 spring or autumn next year)

we can try, but on limited funds, realistically, bbc bias is what we will face during indyref2

Meant ‘not respected’ second last para, in my last comment there.

It’s laughable to suggest that people like Salmond, Robertson etc are jettisoned because they’re “toxic”. The opposition tries to render them toxic because they’re so effective.

Ewen says:

12 June, 2017 at 9:43 am

I think we should stop being so bloody nice and cuddly and fight the unionists at their own game.

I agree with this and at the same time get angry with BBC they are the enemy as far as I am concerned I know people will say sour grapes because we lost many seats.
I would like some SNP MSP or MP accuse the likes of Robertson Brewer and the Bird of being Unionist ask them a direct question who they vote for.

Ha Ha – BBC Live website 11.41

I am announcing my candidacy for UKIP Leader this time to stop Entryists Diletantes and Single issue loonies i have had enough

David Coburn MEP. This should be fun.

link to bbc.co.uk

geeo@11.37 am

Spot on.

yesterday saw Gordon Brewer ask about limited impact from SNP Mps now the numbers reduced in Westnminster.

What impact have they ever had even when 56 turned up.
They made it a little harder for folk to get the seats they wanted, that was it, basically hee-haw.

Westminster is playing the opponents game on the opponents ground. It makes no sense to take part in a rigged game, only one outcome..SNP lose.

Reject Westminster and concentrate on attacking Unionist parties here ( yes cite their leaders actions in London byt all means) but forget about arguing there and that includes Nicola down there today making noises about “fairness in Northern Ireland talks”..leave that to Sinn Fein for now at least..lets direct our fire, this shotgun approach has only resulted in us getting sore feet!

SUPPORT RUTH DAVIDSON.

If she puts Scotlands interests first and can get a soft Brexit then INDEYREF2 is off the table.

SUPPORT KEZIA DUGDALE.

If she puts Scotlands interests first and can get a soft Brexit then INDEYREF2 is off the table.

The focus for the SNP is what is best for Scotland.

The Unionists are lying and actually manipulating the electoral process. Threatening democracy. A criminal offence as some of them will find out in the backlash. The vote turnout was lower than before re in some areas. Voter fatigue etc. People’s – voter’s remorse at the outcome will now play a part. Inducing a higher turnout in future?

The result show the Indy Ref support Is still unaffected. Independence support will increase as expected because of a continuing Tory/Unionist administration at Westminster? The Unionist shambles as reported. Indy support among non voters. GE average 50%ish turnout. No 16/17 year olds etc. Higher remainder support for Indy etc. IndyRef turn out 85%+ much higher.

Gotta laugh at all these articles appearing in the press saying it will now be a “soft” Brexit.

1. In the customs union (and thus the single market) = UK not able to do trade deals with 3rd party countries + free movevement of people stays

2. In the single market only (like Norway) = Big yearly payment for access + free movement of people stays

Neither of these two positions are supported by the leadership of the two main parties who got 82.4% of the popular vote. In addition, a significant minority of the public in England and Wales will never accept free movement of people. Will this large body of people quietly accept what for them would be a reversal of brexit?

People calling for another election now that Cornyn is ahead in the polls should be careful what they wish for. Somebody else quite recently called an election based on their polling results and it didn’t go quite how they expected. I suspect there was lots of tactical voting for Labour last week in an attempt to stop a hard brexit. Those folks didn’t vote for Corbyn’s manifesto and they’re about to find out that the “hard” and “soft” brexit terms are meaningless. There’s only one kind of brexit possible and there won’t be anything soft about it.

Even if there was some mass capitulation/feeling of remorse on the part of the public they can forget about the idea that the UK will be able to reverse Brexit and become an EU member again. No one wants that. The EU 27 would (quite rightly) screw the UK for every last concession imaginable in that scenario. Besides, the EU is moving on apace with its plans for its own defence in response to Trump’s pronouncements on NATO. No, the EU is not the same beast it was on 23rd June 2016.

In my view the SNP group at Westminster should abstain if there’s a call for another election. I think Hestletine’s right. Natural attrition of the DUP/Tory government through by-election losses will eventually give the SNP mps real power. We may not get an indyref for years but we can squeeze them for more (substantive) powers for our parliament in Edinburgh. Softly, softly catchy monkey.

Meanwhile in Scotland, as I said before the election that’s just gone, supporters of independence are in charge at Hollyrood and, if the time and the mood is right they can and should organise that 2nd indyref. Everything depends on how badly and how quickly the economy suffers from Brexit. Alternatively, and perhaps this would add legitamacy, the SNP could turn the next Hollyrood election in 2021 into a referendum by standing on a manifesto with only one sentence in it, “Vote for the SNP and we will declare independence for Scotland”.

I think the SNP government have not completely miscalculated Brexit but they just jumped too soon. They bought into the idea that the economy would go south quickly. They didn’t anticipate that the UK gov would take so bloody long to deliver the Art 50 letter. The UK economy is big and like the Titanic it’ll take a long time to sink. But once it starts to go down it’ll be damn near impossible to stop it. We must wait.

Right now, and for the foreseeable future, we have a Tory Westminster government that 82% of Scots didn’t want and we’re leaving the EU which 62% of Scots didn’t want. It was ever thus.

Excellent article DMH, thank you!

There’s nobody enjoys the Rev’s work more than i but it is always refreshing to read good articles from other contributors. It also makes it very clear that, in the way of talent, WOS is oozing!

There is one small correction to your article i’d like to make for my own pleasure, you wrote; ” But I know if I value the organisation I belong to and fight for I don’t take my concerns to the papers. I go to the party. People who go to the media are not our friends.”

Correction; ” But I know if I value the organisation I belong to and fight for I don’t take my concerns to the media. I go to the party. People who go to the enemy are not our friends.”

Are you reading this Mr.MacAskill
__________

In other news: Some reports are circulating that the DUP don’t want policy influence, they want financial support. Very dangerous situation if true.
__________

OH, and lest we forget, the SNP now has a triple-lock-mandate.

OT Big dilemma for the British Bulwarking Corporation in Scotland is do they now switch their propaganda effort back to SLAB?

Hope they get it wrong for the third time in a row.

I am surprised how much traffic there is on this post on this and on Facebook but encouraged.

We must factor in the short term that the SNP had to react to an election called which I am now absolutely sure was planned by our opponents some time ago and we must not to overreact or be hypercritical of the SNP.

What I suspect we did to an extent was what is often done in politics almost subconsciously at short notice – we tried to make our message suit a target audience rather than make a target audience move to our message.

The fact is that every person that we persuade of the need of independence will want a referendum and that is the key.

I also feel very strongly the huge or in fact vast expenditure on the unionist target seats should be followed up with great vigour to establish a massive London funded plot against Scotland of the sort of funding no organisation in Scotland could match.

bjsalba @ 12:18pm:

Wrong.

I am not talking about ‘Tories’ as multinationals or even their politicians.

If that was all ‘Tories’ were they’d get about 3000 votes in all of Scotland or something.

I am talking about people who are small and medium business owners or are of that mindset where they are not default lefties. Some people of that bent vote Tory, and their support and votes for indy would help.

You may say that you wouldn’t hold out much hope that they’d co-operate for a better Scotland. But some avowed Conservatives (think M Fry) have clearly indicated they do not like the direction UK society is taking. That’s a positive start.

And please do not infer things I didn’t write in future….I am not stupid and know how the Conservative party itself is funded.

It is to be hoped that when The GE Expenses for the seats into which the Bad Guys poured money are published that they are examined with a fine toothcomb.

Im gonna admit something here.

I don’t understand what Brexit has to do with Independence.

If some see it as a means to an end, then youre wrong.

If some see it as a fork in the road that needs assessing before progressing, then youre wrong.

Independence is the only goal in itself. It doesn’t matter what trade deals exist, it doesn’t matter what economic levers exist. Only Independence in itself matters.
the rest shall follow.

Economics and monetary advantage is exactly how the Lords back in 1700s got us in this mess in the first place.

We must sell Independence ABOVE Brexit.

Make it about the bigger picture, do not reduce it to “You’ll have shorter passport queues and cheaper melons!”. That’s the small stuff that Unionists are banking we concentrate on.

Simplistic I know, but in the end, I believe its binary( and as someone noted before..the calls to end indyref2 from unionists are just the start..it wont end at “for next few years”…they see binary in the same way only in reverse) and everything else is fluff and procrastination. For every Brexit that passes there will be another economic reason arising to just wait.

No nation ever voted for Independence for a few shillings. We must win hearts not wallets.

We have to go big or go home.

We must absolutely NOT wait until 2021 for IndyRef2. Now is the time. While Westminster is tied up with negotiating with the EU, then it won’t have so much time to concentrate on scuppering our referendum

Sturgeon has had an incredibly tough hand to play since the Brexit vote. She’s had to balance people being fed up with politics and no real demand for a 2nd referendum too soon (even among many SNP and Yes voters) with trying to ensure Scotland has a voice in the Brexit process and leave open a chance to escape via a second referendum before it happens. I think she played that tough hand very well and tried to find that balance. But with the unionist tactic of making the election all about nothing but a 2nd indyref (a disgrace, considering what this election was really about – trying to crush opposition to May and Brexit) that hand was made much harder, and I think it was a mistake, in hindsight, to try to play independence down while it was clearly being made an issue.

Also, I think meekly allowing the debate to be played out mainly on devolved issues was a mistake. The SNP should have been hammering home that this election is about Westminster, about Brexit, about empowering May, about Trident etc. The public in Scotland are hideously unaware of what powers are devolved and what are reserved, and many believe we have far more power than we do. Campaigns still need to be about educating people on that, and debates need to be used to do that as well.

I think now, given that tactic that’s being used, the only thing to do is step up and fight back. We’re basically in an independence campaign, whether we want to be or not, and the only way to deal with that is to fight an independence campaign. The Tories have probably reached the peak they can reach with out and out unionism now. Corbyn could still quite easily pull a lot of left wing voters, especially ones who’s key aim is change rather than independence. So the big question if there’s another election soon will be where all those 2015 SNP voters who didn’t vote this time round will go. Will they go with Labour in the belief it can now form a UK government; or can they be re-energised by the SNP? If they’re to be re-energised by the SNP, that has to be around the constitution. It doesn’t have to be independence entirely, it could be around genuine constitutional change, which only the SNP is willing to fight for. That’s the one thing it really does have in its armoury: all 3 Westminster parties are unionist to the core, and a vote for Labour is just another “unionist vote” in Scotland.

I agree entirely, we shouldn’t be fighting Tories and Labour anymore, we should be fighting unionism and fighting for constitutional change. Any party which isn’t for some kind of constitutional change in the UK can’t possibly be considered genuinely progressive, and the polls in Scotland have always shown a majority for real powers to be in Scotland. So we all need to be educating people about how many powers are reserved, the SNP campaigning as the only party that isn’t out and out unionist and supports constitutional change (including ending the HoL, Trident etc, which Labour don’t support). At the moment all 3 WM unionist parties are fighting an anti-independence campaign and the independence side isn’t even being defended.

@Desimond

Well said. I have wasted my time reading a large number of comments on WoS in the last several days. I almost gave up on this post=mortem on the GE.

Brexit soft hard or none is ONLY an excuse.

Only Independence matters. The SNP have betrayed the YES cause. Have they been successfully infiltrated and neutered by the Establishment? Looks like that.

I AWAIT THE CALL TO ARMS.

As a point here, there are YES supporters voted Labour, there are YES supporters even voted Tory, and probably some who voted LibDem.

This means as someone pointed out in a previous thread, that Labour for instance now has Indy supporters back in its ranks. And perhaps even in the Tories and LibDems.

Good.

@colin alexander
I used to be the top upvoted poster in the Herald, but speaking to the converted using the mantra doesn’t win over people to YES. I’m critical, and put different points of view, empathise with NO voters, so I probably get half the upvotes I used to.

Good. It means I’m doing what I want to do – upsetting the apple-cart a little.

Independence is not a popularity contest, it’s about Indy, not ourselves. I like it when “unionists” agree with me, it’s finding common ground, and moving on from there.

@Schrodingers Cat … 9-42am

“…it was treezas rejection of Nicola’s offer in the 1st place that put Indyref2 on the table”

No it wasn’t.The SNP manifesto for the 2016 Holyrood Election included the clause…’In the event of a MATERIAL CHANGE in circumstances such as Scotland being removed (as part of the UK) from the EU…etc.,

These events have come to pass and so this clause has been enacted resulting in #Scotref being ‘back on the table’ and with a Mandate from The Scottish Parliament secured..is still the case.

Colin Alexander @ 2.16
Are you seriously suggesting that the yes movement trust Corbin and his labour party to deliver Independence ?
I don’t even know where to start with that.
I thought we all knew better by now.
Eh that’ll be a Naw far me then.

If anything they will have Corbin win the next Election and the Scots will be lead to Believe in Labour all over again.
And told there’s no need for this independance nonsense anymore.
The “Stolen” Labour seats have been returned for Westminster,and Holyrood will be fixed shortly.

OT

I’m far too old to have been aware of this

link to archive.is

Good post Dave. Thanks for that and then we’re back to a number of people on here castigating Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP. Unbelievable. Unbelievable when you take into account how hard she and her team have worked on our behalf. I nearly choked in fact when I read derogatory comments on here about Alex Salmond and Angus Robertson.

We lost seats because it was a General Election not a Referendum. Many people who voted for Corbyn will go on to vote for Independence. We lost seats due to tactical voting, the use of dark money, the Corbyn surge (straight Labour / Tory battle) and more than anything the MSM propaganda machine. As one example I was watching the news earlier today and when it came to a reporter voicing what Nicola Sturgeon had to say in London not one sound emanated from his moving lips. Hellish, eh? No doubt they’ll all be having a laugh about that.

Many people in Scotland voted for the Tories. How do they feel now in relation to the Tory alliance with the DUP? How do they feel about the DUP’s demands for Farage being part of the team (if that’s the case?). How do they feel about Gove being reinstated? How will they feel as time goes on and they see our fisheries and agricultural sectors being sold down the swanny? How will Labour voters feel about politicians in NIreland calling the shots for us? How will people feel when Orange Order marches become a weekly / monthly event?

Sein Fein holds all constituencies across the border. Their popular vote plus SDLP votes and ‘neutral’ parties who supported remain supersedes the Unionist votes by around 15,000 already. Let’s see how this is going to pan out.

Meanwhile let’s all support Nicola Sturgeon. She’s a brilliant politician who should carry on with her plans with full backing from all of us.

@yesindyref2

Thanks for that.

Blair’s Labour thought Holyrood would end the desire for Scottish self-determination. It didn’t. It has increased it.

It made the desire for independence stronger.

If the majority clearly support independence, then aye go for it.
Till then, I don’t see why it has to be all or nothing.

Like a Bridge Too Far or The Battle of the Bulge. Critics warned that a better strategy was making an advance that can safely be achieved and held, instead of overreaching.

The SNP’s only strategy since 2014 has been digging in and holding position, then going for a mad do-or-die charge ( indy-ref 2).

There could be progress by strengthening Holyrood further, well beyond Smith’s crumbs.

Establishing Scotland is sovereign in the Union – it could be attempted without harming the future chance of independence for Scotland.

WE decide what powers are devolved or retained – not WM. We can veto WM decisions about Scotland, instead of WM vetoing our decisions at Holyrood.

If WM find it unacceptable then they can kick us out of the Union.

That position may find support well over 50%. It would be progress for those who believe in Scottish sovereignty.

Screaming F*****g fifth columnist or ("Tractor" - Ed) to those who say an independence vote should be delayed until it appears the majority would vote YES, does nothing to encourage support for independence.

Screaming abuse at someone who says the SNP are getting it wrong, does not help anyone.

Going into despair or constantly analysing losing seats at WM, that served no purpose anyway, is a waste of time too.

We already knew from Wikileaks, the UK state and right-wing element conspire. Interesting to read it’s still happening, but nobody is surprised.

Independence is their common enemy.

The right-wing British establishment hate Corbyn even more. That’s why I’m saying we should support him. Their enemy could be our ally.

If there is one thing that scares the right-wing establishment more than YES, it’s socialism in England. And the worst horror of all:

A socialist Labour leader in England that appears to respect Scotland’s right to self-determination – and is popular with the people.

colin alexander says:
12 June, 2017 at 1:52 pm
Breeks1:02 pm

“If Scotland establishes sovereignty. There is no need to beg for the right to hold referendums. We can decide what powers we need at Holyrood, instead of getting told what we are getting – or more often not getting”.

Yes and No Colin. If we assert our Sovereignty in that way, it’s an arbitrary and de facto UDI, and it becomes a non democratic initiative which flies in the face of the 2014 Referendum democratic result. It would thus be considered undemocratic, and would sew a vociferous rejection both locally and internationally, leading to civil unrest and probably bloodshed. Furthermore, when you seize such control in order to hold a referendum, is it not then redundant to have a referendum about seizing control?

The assertion of sovereignty which I describe is the careful preamble of making sure of the ground beneath our feet before we challenge anything. Get it writing, and signed by a lawyer, and then we keep it in our pocket until the time is right.

What I propose is in essence a very limited “UDI” which is very narrow and exclusive to broadcasting. It does not test the Act of Union to its destruction, and does nothing to impinge upon the BBC continuing to broadcast its propaganda, it simply allows our own broadcasting to co-exist, (and in my head it becomes justified given the clear and unambiguous dereliction of impartiality which the BBC is guilty of). It is also a reasonable expectation that Scotland should properly have its own broadcasting, and while its hardly democratic to seize control of broadcasting, it is hardly democratic to abuse broadcasting to pump out propaganda. If and when Scottish broadcasting was challenged in law, I can see a reasonable chance of winning the case.

It’s a matter of interpretation I agree, but your use of our Sovereignty would be an all out assault on the Union. My use of our Sovereignty would be an act of defence to protect Scotland’s interests. You’re quite correct Colin, it is the same Sovereignty, it’s the same principle, but the reaction it would provoke be altogether different.

But the thing is, if you were to be successful in tucking away an affirmation of legitimacy for Scottish sovereignty, then use that constitutional device to wrestle some limited control away from Westminster, then you are quietly securing de facto recognition that Scottish sovereignty is not merely some archaic curiosity, but is a current legal principle which Westminster will have already conceded.

For there on, we still don’t need to seize control using the blunt instrument of sovereign muscle. We have merely used a little of that strength to secure a level playing field in Broadcasting, and can then hopefully augment the bare boned skeleton of Scottish sovereignty with the flesh of a democratic majority thoroughly persuaded that voting for independence is the right thing to do.

Nicola is without doubt the best person to lead the SNP. However, questions need to be asked of those advising her. The unionists have pulled on their tacketty boots. We need to pull on ours. In particular, we need to look at who we put forward for interviews. We need to see more of bruisers like Kenneth Gibson and Pete Wishart, and less of the more wishy washy characters that seem to be put forward to be outshouted by unionists and BBC liggers.

We also need to shout from the rooftops that the unionists don’t want Indyref 2 only because they know they will lose. If they were confident of winning they would be happy to hold Indyref 2 at any time. They don’t want Indyref 2 because they are chicken.

We also need to remember that the number one reason for most members joining the SNP was because we want Independence for Scotland. All other policies and views are, and will remain, secondary. The SNP have taken their eye off the ball because of the day to day management at Holyrood. Although Holyrood policies are important, they are less important than gaining Independence. The time for detailed positions on everything else is after we are free.

Liz g @ 14:37,

You and me both, Liz. As confused a suggestion as I have ever seen.

Cede your representation to another party that’s dyed-in-the-wool Unionist then ask people to believe you’re opposing Unionism. Duh.

Colin Alexander
Yer confusing me.
You said that you weren’t arguing for Corbin and his labour party to deliver Independence!
Then went on to describe the deal which ment Corbin and his Labour party deliver Independence.

Then in the next post you are saying how we establish Sovereignty and become independent that way.
Which would/wouldn’t give Corbin a role?

And just as an FYI….we already have legal Sovereignty, that’s not and never has been in dispute….
It’s political Sovereignty we don’t have in Scotland, we keep handing it to Westminster.

But Political Sovereignty is a very different beast to legal Sovereignty.
Think about it as Maritime Law,the Courts will confirm that the water’s are indeed yours,but the only way that you can practically claim the water’s is by force or agreement.

Hope that helps you frame what you are trying to say about Sovereignty.

Dave McEwan Hill is clearly passionate about his views. I’ve been at the abrupt end of them in The National, so am a little reticent at replying to him for risk of being labelled “one of them”. A non convert or whatever. I genuinely care about this, so here we go….

A couple of points that the understandable navel gazing missed a year ago and continues to be lost.

I agree with Dave McEwan Hill 100% on his view that we are not well governed from Westminster. I switched my vote back to the SNP in 2007 and it has been there every election since. With the exception of the most recent local elections in Angus where I voted for an Independent. On 8th June I would have voted Green, but there was no candidate of this flavour on the ballot, so with great reluctance I voted for Stewart Hosie.

Why this change? The SNP were brilliant and pulled a masterstroke when getting into government by one seat. THE SNP RAN THE ECONOMY WELL.

Yesterday I was speaking with a friend from Montrose – she voted SNP from 2007 for the same reason as me. On 8the June she voted for the Tory, Mrs Hair. The SNP’s Mike Weir lost his seat and my own MP Stewart Hosie was returned with a substantially decreased majority.

There are around 16% of electors such as my Montrose friend and I. We are NOT wedded to IndyRef. Good if it happens. But what ranks way above this is the fact that the SNP has lost it’s way on the economy and much else</b.

My best friend in Dundee also switched away from the SNP. I asked him why? The econonmy McStupid was the reply.

Now before any bright spark comes back with the rejoinder that the economy is not devolved, a significant part if it is. Enough to make a difference.

My Dundonian friend creates jobs. I never thought he would vote SNP, but that SNP wirtschaftswunder of 2007 persuaded him to go that way. He has donated a decent amount to the SNP over the years to boot! More recently, the fact that Stewart Hosie fails to answer his emails, whilst Graeme Dey is as much use as a chocolate teapot in helping pesuade Fiona Hyslop MSP to help with a massive cultural project that will create 40 jobs from a charity my friend helped establish in 2012 has come home to roost. Just ONE small anecdote, but all of us who inhabit the real world get thoroughly pi55ed off with politicians who get arrogant and fail to deliver.

Right now, that manifests itself with sufficient numbers of my friends and I looking to lend our votes away from the SNP – that it can be extrapolated into the electoral post mortem.

Many ordinary folk have no problem with IndyRef. They DO have a problem when MPs and MSPs fail to support economic growth projects that create jobs….

If the SNP work on getting that right, then the SNP will get the AWOL voters back, and the SNP will deserve to win IndyRef2.

“…as long as their title, and their main policies, are the maintenance of the vile union then I reserve the right to attack them at every opportunity.”

I get that POV. However, I do think it is a fair point that the SNP over-attack the domestic policies of Lib/Lab/Con parties thereby stoking resentment from the supporters of all these parties. And because the SNP (rightly or wrongly) is too closely identified with the Indy process, it will be harder for us to get Lib/Lab/Con voters to ‘lend their vote’ to a party they regard as being the ‘Indy Party’ when that is the very same party they battle with week in, week out on domestic issues.

Yes – WE know that an IndyRef is a separate question and should stand and be answered on its own merit. But many do not see it that way. By engaging in domestic policies the SNP inevitably make themselves an ‘enemy’ of these voters who support the domestic policies of the other parties. As a result our rotten media will be able to stir and manufacture dislike and even hatred among these voters towards the SNP (and by extension, to its core policy of independence).

I don’t know what the answer is. But I think with the SNP being the public ‘face’ of the Indy movement comes with a price. We all see how easy it was for the corrupt media to demonise Salmond in IndyRef1. They are trying to do the very same now with Sturgeon before IndyRef2.

Perhaps we need a separate ‘all party and none’ movement to become the public face of the indy movement. The SNP can then get on with running the country and dealing with the political process of the Indy movement i.e. dealings with WM etc. The public face of the indy movement being a-political will make it much more difficult for the media to demonise the movement – they’ll be demonising ordinary people.

Mibbee.

Al-Stuart @ 16:28,

That’s exactly the same thinking as behind the recent anti-SNP media campaign: denigrate the SNP over devolved issues and ignore the plain fact that without independence we are all just fiddling around the edges.

You may or may not have legitimate grumbles about specific MPs or MSPs or projects, which is fair enough, but the Scottish Government isn’t a cornucopia, and indyref2 is not going to come about because the SG gets ever better at mitigating the barrage of cuts bequeathed to it by London.

You seem to be swallowing the Unionist fake “bad management” line wholesale. If you expect the SG to deal with every little thing caused by the UK’s self-inflicted austerity regime, the obvious and logical conclusion of your high expectation is to give the SG full powers to act, and get us completely out of this plainly malfunctioning Union!