Wings Over Scotland

Thanks Neale,
Like skynet, Scotland must become self aware.
As Arnie might say – “you have been colonised”

Very well explained; kudos to you and thanks again to your host who has helped me not to completely despair that we may someday see an independent Scotland though probably not in my lifetime.

The independence movement should form a single political party that unites the movement and thereafter use the regional list vote for every Holyrood election as a defacto referendum on independence. Worst case, this would displace lots of unionist list MSPs. Best case, we win our independence.

Unionists will bleat and moan that such tactics are antidemocratic but they have left us few, if any, democratic alternatives.

This tactic also allows those of us who want independence but cannot bring ourselves to vote for the SNP to express our democratic wishes.

If this tactic succeeds, it should be the pro-independence party list MSPs that lead negotiations for our independence, not the biggest party or coalition that subsequently runs Holyrood. Running the Scottish Government and negotiating the independence settlement are two completely separate tasks.

I guess Neale knew it would be defeated.However he has got the inequality shown clearly and a legal precedent to allow a people to claim the right to self determination.
The UN must now back any way forwards in this respect.

Thanks Neale.
You, Kenny and Ash Regan have worked wonders.

It’s good the SNP MPs, with a couple of notable exceptions supported this bill.

The question is, do you believe that when the treaty of union was formed that England and Scotland ceased to exist?

IF you believe that what is written within the treaty of union has standing today, then you have to ask your myself, why would anyone except the Scotland Act or ask to seek Westminster approval for the power to be devolved unless you’re where admitting that Scotland no longer existed as a country.

I don’t except I’m British and I don’t believe that when the Union formed Scotland ceased to exist, its simple end the treaty and allow England to keep all the assets including the debt and be brunt and tell our neighbour to piss off.

The Alba Party and their daft ideas, this f*cking stunt, it’s made Scotland weaker and England stronger. I’m left to wondering what next from a party who under Salmond is heading nowhere and nowhere fast, the quicker he and his prodigy Nicola Sturgeon leave the theatre by the back door the better, I feel sure well start to see progress for Scotland, both of them and their ties to the Union is what’s holding Scotland back. All we need is someone to stand up and say this simple sentence “The Union is over” and then start sending representatives around the world to start trade talks, it wouldn’t be long before our neighbour wanted to talk on our terms.

All Alba was doing was confirming that the party policy was that Scotland didn’t exist and that Westminster has all the power and the Treaty of Union was dead and buried.

Well done Neil, a good move in activation of the journey towards independence. Now the Scottish Constitutional Convention needs to be set up without further delay.We need this boost to hope to continue so that we can regain the motivation and impetus towards Indy that we had up to, and for a time after, 2014 until a certain two parties put repeated dampers on our Yes movement.

please come back here again very soon to inform us that the SCC is established, and what steps come next!

I really hope ALBA stands plenty of candidates in the next General Election, because we really need a party that is willing to campaign for independence. I’d even support an abstentionist position, to be honest.

It’s heartbreaking to see how low the SNP have fallen in less than a decade. The SNP really did replace the Labour Party in Scotland – in all the worst ways.

@Colin Dawson 12:53

“a single independence party that unites the movement”

Yes, we gave that party 9 mandates and they did nothing with them. Time to build a movement from the grassroots, and only give our votes to individuals who deserve them, not a party that takes us for granted.

The UN must now back any way forwards in this respect.

The UN won’t, and can’t, do anything. It’s an internal UK matter, just like Catalonia is an internal Spanish matter. Nobody is going to come and save us from the mess we’re in.

@AnneDon

Wants a single Independence party to do what exactly! I would presume to ask for another section 30 or maybe to go cap in hand again to Westminster for more powers.

Anne what we need is to DEFY our jailers and break ourselves free from these chains. Most country’s in the world have done it through peaceful means like marching, but the SNP leadership don’t acknowledge AUOB. Scotland’s voice could be heard without any political party what’s so ever, if these so-called leaders got behind our right to defy English rule but they won’t because its their bread and butter.

Another Indy party isn’t the answer, it’s every Individual living in Scotland that will bring about change, and it’ll never happen by the Alba or the SNP.

link to youtube.com

I like the Ella Mae Bowen version.

It’s a romantic idea but you know what Ella girl I don’t think he’s coming.

We all gotta be our own superheros

All us heros have to do at the moment is be awake.

Just including this

link to youtube.com

it came on after Ella Mae and it’s a beautiful song. I heart Marc Cohn

As for Alba they might want to emphasis that in an iScotland we could decide to have no ‘gender recognition act’ and I’m pretty sure that would increase not only the YES vote but the Alba vote.

I know I have said this before but it’s hard to get my message across when I’m being ‘redacted’ ‘red boxered’ considered irrelevant.
Not to mention being accused of ruining it for ‘the boys’.

Sometimes it’s hard to be a woman

A very clear article, with unarguable conclusions.

Some BTL comments see what has to be done, others don’t.

Ordinary Scots need to put themselves forwards for election. We’ll wait forever for the professional politicos, cos they’re not interested.

Ordinary Scots, saying vote for me for Indy.

I believe the deposit required is £500. Maybes Rev Stu should post an article outlining what has to be done to get on the WM and HR ballot papers.

All over Europe, the scunnered citizens are saying enough is enough, forming new parties, getting onto the ballots, and getting voted into power. It’s not taking them very long either.

Make it happen in Scotland too.

I’ve posted a comment that’s more suited to the gender discussion on the previous page than going off topic here.

link to wingsoverscotland.com

Christine Jardine From the Party of Jeremy Thorpe who tried to remove his secret boyfriend lover, of Cyril Smith who regularly visited boys homes for all the wrong reasons, of David Steel who said he was told about and then claimed amnesia, of Tim Fallow who resigned as party leader as he couldn’t condone gay relationships, of Liar Carmichael who wasted £1 million of public money on an enquiry before admitting he is a liar. Who Barron Rennard reported to be too touchy with lady party members but nothing so serious a large party donation couldn’t wipe away, the party who received £2.4 Million in donations from convicted fraudster Michael Brown and then refused to return it to the victims of the fraud.
Ed Davey the new leader and second chose to Jolly Hockey Sticks girl Jo Swinson who couldn’t be arsed to listen to victims of the Post Office scandal while in Government office.

Vote Lib Dem the parasite party happy to join Blue or Red Tory parties for a few ministerial posts once in a blue moon.

Should Scotland be gagged and shackled by these people who last had a majority over 100 years ago?

I don’t think they should be allowed to keep a dog.

If, (and it is A BIG IF) ALBA think they have proven beyond doubt that Westminster does not listen , or care, about the sovereign right of Scots to Independence, then surely it is incumbent on ALBA TO WITHDRAW from participation in what is ostensibly an ENGLISH Parliament in order that serious campaigning for INDEPENDENCE in Scotland can once more become a reality as opposed to an empty slogan .
#END THE UNION!!

@dasBlimp 2:36

I read your linked article.

I don’t see any evidence that the voters of Wales are being shown any money – they are actually being shown how it will decrease “in the short to medium term”. Viable – check – poorer – check.

So that’s not a formula that will work in Scotland, you’re right about that. Won’t work in Wales
either.

I am resigned that for the remaining couple of decade I have left on this earth, there will be a UK government primarily concerned with their own personal interests, and only otherwise for special interest groups that will help to entrench them, with little concern for what happens outside of London; and similarly a Scottish pretendy government, even more focused on their own self enrichment to make up for the lack of international organisation grifting opportunities on offer, substituting Edinburgh for London.

I’m glad this vote happened and I’m glad it was in an election year. The unionist parties smell blood and will no doubt come knocking for our votes come the autumn, it might be an idea to ask them, each party having firmly rejected this perfectly reasonable proposal, what democratic mechanism would their party accept as a means for Scotland to choose to leave the Union of Kingdoms.

I see a lot of criticism of the SNP and even Alba in the comments above, and yes the SNP have lost the drive to pursue independence, and yes this bill looks a bit like a stunt, but it’s given us a clear picture of the reality of that Union. English parties and politicians think Scotland shouldn’t have the right to leave the union whether we want to or not, and even if every Scottish MP voted for something it can be resoundingly defeated by a fraction of England’s MPs. That is unforgivable and should be rammed in the face of every unionist representative begging for your support this year.

So that’s not a formula that will work in Scotland, you’re right about that. Won’t work in Wales

It won’t work in Wales for the same reason it won’t work in Scotland: Luvverly-jubberly UK tax-payer funded subsidies and benefits.

Mr Hanvey,

thank you and Mr MacAskill for your indefatigable efforts to progress Scotland’s independence and for highlighting how toxic this union is to Scotland.

Looking at your actions in Westminster and listening to your passionate speeches puts the SNP benches to shame, to the point that one finds it now impossible to see any difference at all between what the current version of the SNP and labour pursue. It looks exactly the same thing.

I have a lot of respect for ALBA’s MPs and MSP and I appreciate their hard work. I am well aware that two Alba MPs and one MSP have done far more for Scotland’s independence than the entire contingent of SNP MPs and MSPs in 9 years.

However, I have to be honest. In this particular instance, I must admit I do not understand the reason behind this bill nor the purpose of bringing it to Westminster. I understand better the purpose of Ms Regan’s bill.

I appreciate I must be completely missing the point, but the way I see it, if Scotland has a legitimate right to self-determination, which is recognised under international law, Scotland’s own constitution and the Treaty of Union through the Claim of Right, then bringing that bill before England MPs surely creates the risk of undermining that legitimate right, because it is, at all practical effects, handing over to England MPs a sovereignty over Scotland they never had in the first place.

We can be certain that the opposite will never come to being: England MPs will never bring to Holyrood a bill to ask Scotland’s MSPs if England has a right to self determination.
So why are we humiliating Scotland like this? Why are we doing what England would never be prepared to do?

It is not for England MPs to decide how frequently Scotland can have a referendum on independence either. Scotland is not their property and no England MP has been backed by a single vote in Scotland, therefore they do not represent or speak for Scotland. When to hold a referendum on independence is a matter for Scotland and Scotland only to decide.

What I can see coming from this move is an unintended delay in the progress of independence through having Scotland officially declared as a colony.

But Scotland is not a colony. There is no doubt it is being treated and exploited as such, but, legally, it is not a colony. It can terminate this exploitation overnight by repealing the Treaty of Union.

There was never a need to ask permission to England MPs to hold a referendum on independence. Scotland’s MPs could have granted that consent by vacating their seats in Westminter and agreeing to transfer their powers to Holyrood. Just like Scotland’s MPs in 1706 agreed to transfer Scotland’s powers to the parliament of Great Britain, all by themselves. England MPs do not represent Scotland’s sovereignty in the UK parliament, therefore they have not business intervening.

Alternatively, Scotland’s representatives in Westminster could have taken the route of reconvening Scotland’s parliament and repealing the treaty of union at any point of their choosing, just like in 1706 a bunch of Scotland’s MPs chose to force the union through without consent of Scotland as a whole and against the will of the majority.

The UK is not a democracy but rather a parliamentary democracy.

As far as I recall, the UK government and UK MEPs never brought a bill to Brussels to ask the EU MPs if the UK had a right to self-determination and to hold the EU referendum. Consent for the EU referendum, progress and legislation for it were not made in Brussels. They were made in Westminster.

I do not understand why the same route is not being pursued in this case. The same as the UK was in the case of the EU union, Scotland is part of a political union whose base is an international political treaty.

Despite the abuses of our partner using the treaty as its excuse, Scotland remains one of the only 2 signatories in the treaty and therefore retains the legitimate right to terminate it whenever the fundamental conditions of the treaty are violated or there is a change in circumstances. Both of these have already happened more than once or twice.

Westminster is not the treaty. Westminster is not the original entity that give birth to the treaty either. Westminster is just a by-product of the treaty. If the treaty ends, so does Westminster as the UK of Great Britain parliament. This means the treaty is above Westminster and above anything emerging from Westminster (ie, the Scotland Act, the fabricated “parliamentary sovereignty” or the English court that calls itself “UK supreme court”).

But this also means that both, Scotland and England, are above the treaty itself, and therefore the only entities that can unilaterally repeal the treaty and with it all the byproducts generated by the treaty, including Westminster as the UK parliament.

It is not acceptable that England can repeal it whenever it wishes but not Scotland. It is not acceptable that England is the only partner dictating the rules and Scotland the only one having to follow them, as we have now seen some instances where England breaches its own rules.

So who can repeal the treaty on behalf of Scotland?

I see four possibilities:

1. Holyrood as a parliament
3. The SGov as the elected executive power representing Scotland.
4. The 59 MPs and whatever number of Scotland’s hereditary peers are left in the HoLs (Great Britain or UK of Great Britain lords and ladies are post-treaty by-products)
3. A recalled convention of the estates.

The common theme of those four above is that it is for the people of Scotland and not England MPs or the crown, to decide who repeals the treaty on Scotland’s behalf.

For as long as those sitting in Holyrood and in Bute House continue to hide behind the Scotland Act, which is in itself a byproduct of Westminster, nether the parliament of Holyrood nor Bute House are Scotland’s parliament or government respectively and never will be. They are just a working branch of Westminster.

That leaves the other two entities.

From the last session in 1707 of Scotland’s and England’s last independent parliaments, MPs were sent to Westminster to form the first parliament of Great Britain. There never was a general election, neither in Scotland or England, to select the MPs who would form the first parliament of Great Britain. This was by design. The sitting MPs in the last parliaments of Scotland and England were sent to that new parliament. It is clear, therefore, that Scotland’s and England’s parliaments did not simply ceased to exist. They continued in Westminster as the parliament of Great Britain.

We are often told that the parliament of Scotland was abolished, terminated, etc. But this is not credible. If that had been the case, all the MPs in the last parliament would have ceased to be MPs and would not be possible for them to send themselves to London to represent Scotland without being re-elected in a GE.

9 years of betrayal from the SNP has irreversibly formed in me the opinion that the only reason why this union survives is that, for one reason or another, Scotland’s MPs have refused to terminate that treaty. This is despite witnessing continuous violations of the treaty and Claim of Right, and despite continue to legitimise with their presence in that parliament the continuous abuse of Scotland by Westminster.

Handing to England MPs a veto on Scotland’s independence is convenient when Scotland’s MPs do not want to take the step of terminating the treaty for fear of repercussions. But continuing to blame Westminter in such scenario is, in my view, dishonest.

I appreciate that ALBA does not have a majority in Westminster, and I have also realised that the SNP is no longer an anti-union party. Although I am sure this was never the objective, this bill has been wonderfully convenient for the careerists and devolutionists in the SNP to hide behind. Knowing England MPs would vote it down, they could safely vote in favour of the bill without running the risk of losing their seats in the gravy train. Their vote in favour of the bill will help to whitewash their deliberate prevarication for the last 9 years and brush up their faux credentials as a pro-indy party in time for the upcoming GE.

For as long as our MSPs continue to hide behind the Scotland Act, Scotland’s MPs remain as the only custodians of Scotland’s old parliament. It is therefore in their power to repeal the treaty as it was in the power of Scotland’s MPs in 1706 to ratify it.

But 300 years and multitude examples of treaty violations have demonstrated to us that there is no appetite from our current political representatives to end that darn treaty.

So that leaves us one option: the convention of the estates. But this means bypassing a political class who, for 300 years, and with very few exceptions, has watched while Scotland has been abused, pillaged and purposely kept underdeveloped. Despite having in their hand the key for the way out, they have refused to use it and at times assisted with the abuse. This is what unionist parties have been doing for 300 years.

If the Treaty of Union ends, so does the UK of Great Britain and so does Scotland’s commitment to the same succession line to the crown as England’s. If the Treaty ends, so do other treaties, agreements, trade deals etc where Scotland and England entered as “the UK” or as “Great Britain”.

Declaring Scotland a colony means renouncing to its legitimate right to unilaterally terminate the treaty. It means undermining its status as an equal signatory to the treaty. This is, in my view, undermining Scotland’s rights and weakening Scotland’s negotiating position. I do not think this benefits Scotland at all. It benefits England and its crown.

The route of terminating the treaty is shorter than seeking decolonisation. It could be done tomorrow, should Scotland’s MPs suddenly find the will to do so. But also, during the negotiation process, it would give Scotland a better hand. Who becomes the successor of the UK state, treaties, seats in international organisations, embassies etc, etc, are common assets in themselves that should be part of the negotiation process between Scotland and England. If Scotland chooses the route of being declared a colony, then it automatically loses the right of claim to those assets and it is left to the mercy of whatever crumbs England wishes to regurgitate back at us after swallowing whole Scotland’s most valuable assets.

We also have to account for the overall damage that the SNP have inflicted on Scotland so far by refusing to terminate that treaty. So far, since 2015, the first time Scotland voted in a majority of anti-union MPs and therefore opened the possibility of terminating the treaty, we have had 9 years of continuous ransacking of Scotland’s assets by our partner, we have been dragged out of the EU and stripped off our rights as European citizens, we have had our powers stolen, we have had a downgrade in the quality of produce available in the shelves of supermarkets, we have been flooded with English produce at the expense of Scotland’s, we have been blinded with huge UJs in supermarket packaging, we have been left shaking with the brutal increase in food and energy prices and we are watching in despair how Scotland’s native population keep contracting in its own birth country after far too many years now of higher deaths than births where the population numbers are maintained by importing migrants from elsewhere. All those are byproducts of this toxic union.

Looking through Hansard, there are countless mentions from Scotland’s MPs claiming that Scotland will only become independent when a majority of its people chooses to do so. But this is also deceiving. There was never an opportunity for the people of Scotland to vote in order to enter this union. In fact that was avoided like the plague because the crown (and its useful idiots in the parliament of Scotland) knew that if it was put to vote the union would never happen.

Politicians cannot now decree that Scotland can only leave this union or end the treaty only if a majority of those voting in Scotland is in favour. This is a parliamentary democracy after all. A majority of MPs should have been more than enough to end the darn treaty, particularly when, despite a 62% voted against Brexit, in 2016, our representatives chose to force brexit down our throats anyway.

It is not credible to demand a majority of voters for independence when the vote is being given to those who arrived in Scotland five minutes ago, undermining the vote of the natives, and when the will of the majority in 2016 was disgracefully ignored like every mandate for a referendum ever since.

I do not understand why we are wasting so much time and energy, and why our representatives are putting so many unnecessary obstacles in front of ourselves by appealing to a byproduct of the treaty of union, which is below Scotland itself and that, because it depends on the Treaty of Union for its continuous existence, has a clear vested interest in Scotland not ending the union.

I do not understand why Scotland’s representatives insist in continue to give England MPs and a byproduct of the Treaty the legitimacy to undermine Scotland’s sovereignty and its constitutional rights under the Treaty and Scotland’s own constitution.

Kate says on 19 January 2024 at 3:31 pm:
“I do believe he has opened some eyes to the fact that NO matter what a majority of Scottish MPs vote for in that English Parliament, they will always get voted down..”

Hi, Kate. I agree fully with the sentiments behind the majority of your original comment but i wonder at the part i’ve quoted above. Has he “opened some eyes”? And if so, how many? Unless he has some wider-reaching platform to announce to the public what took place then i fear this will go largely unnoticed by the wider public.

And if it goes unnoticed by the wider public, just as the “Power Grab” by Westminster did, then it hasn’t achieved very much in the grander scheme of things. Perhaps through time, via the voices on WOS etc, the message may get out eventually. But i don’t share the same confidence in the wider public getting informed any time soon.

I also note how the so-called indy-supporting newspaper, The National, has given a voice to the proven Unionist liar Christine Jardine. Do you think it will extend the same privilege to Neale Hanvey MP? Somehow i wouldn’t bet on it. But if it does i hope he puts across the points very strongly, as he has done in this article.

When discussing independence there’s little point in offering facts to those who are immune to them. It’s better to engage with those whose minds are open. I am therefore breaking a rule on this occasion only by responding to ‘das blimp’. Not with an expectation of that individual attending to it but perhaps others will find it useful.

So here goes: hark to the wisdom of Professor Murphy, eminent economist, expert on GERS, and with no axe to grind regarding the restoration of Scotland’s Self-Determination.

According to Professor Murphy it is far more likely that Scotland subsidises England than the reverse. (Of course there are additional reasons for England to grimly hang onto Scotland e.g.loss of military/ naval control of maritime north of Scotland and residual England having no place on NATO as a consequence. But anyway, Professor Murphy on Scotland’s economy and GERS in particular:

1. GERS comprises poor quality accounting intended by the U.K. Government to undermine Scotland’s economic performance.

2. Data on Scotland’s Income are inaccurate. Scotland should have its own statistical and tax authorities responsible for all taxes in Scotland and requiring separate tax return for Scottish activity. When a U.K. expense is recharged to Scotland there should be a deep justification why instead of doing a crude population proportion.

3. The data don’t withstand scrutiny.are unconvincing estimates and the method of calculation is bizarre. GERS takes two different sets of variables and inappropriately matches them: A = Govt income raised IN Scotland with B = Govt expenditure FOR Scotland. These are different.

A (INCOME) equals the amount of tax paid by Scottish taxpayers to Revenue Scotland and an estimate of tax paid to HM Revenue and Customs for the UK as a whole, which covers many variables all of which are rough estimates.

Failure of the income side is a FIX. Not all income raised in Scotland is subject to Scottish taxation. PFI income, fee, interest, service charge income is not recorded for Scotland. This income shows up as a surplus in England or Caman islands etc. depending upon where corporate profits go. Rents – if landlords in England have properties in Scotland, England is credit with the tax. Similarly companies registered in England but exporting Scottish goods have their tax credited as English income.

In summary, INCOME RAISED IN SCOTLAND IS UNDERSTATED.

B(EXPENDITURE): actual Scottish Government Spend is around 60% of what the U.K. Govt. decides has been spent on Scotland. The remaining 40% of ‘spend’ isn’t necessarily taking place in Scotland and Scotland doesn’t necessarily benefit. Examples include water and sewerage renewal for the South East of England, the new Elizabeth and Jubilee Lines in London and extensions to airports in London.

Even worse. The taxes raised by this work (the contractors paying tax etc) are not allocated towards overall Scottish income. Only the cost of the work is allocated as expenditure. A SCOTTISH DEFICIT BUILT INTO THE SYSTEM.

It is highly likely that Scotland subsidises the rest of the UK, through its’Renewables’ industries and through the oil and gas income streams which continue to provide billions of tax revenues to the U.K. Government.) Neither does Scotland benefit in other ways. Example, the new off-shore East Lothian Wind farm electricity is cabled directly to England.

4. The Financial Crisis was not created in Scotland. By then, Halifax BOS was an English bank. Ditto RBS. The banking crisis was a London-created crisis. It created massive deficits in the whole UK, far more than in Scotland.

5. Scotland’s Choices Post Independence

£3.4 billon Defence Costs annually are allocated to Scotland but only half of this is spent within Scotland and that includes nuclear spend that an independent Scotland would be unlikely to incur. The remaining 50% is used to employ people, pay for goods and services in England, which creates a ‘positive ripple’ effect on the English economy. None of the additional benefits (taxation paid by local companies) is credited to Scotland. Scotland is only attributed responsibility for the debt.

6.Scotland’s Responsibility for U.K. Debt Post Independence?

Scotland has no legal responsibility for the U.K. ‘s debt. How much Debt Interest expenditure should be passed on to Scotland which did not incur the debt in the first place. Scotland ran an official annual surplus until 2010. How much debt was raised before that time? Anyway the UK has never paid any of its debt since 1690.

Finally, back when I was an SNP member I couldn’t understand why Sturgeon et al didn’t challenge GERS. Or why they didn’t focus on educating the Scottish people about the enormous latent wealth and potential of their country which was being asset-stripped by its colonial masters.

Well, ah ken noo!

John C says “the UN won’t, and can’t, it’s an internal UK matter.
You don’t get it as many here say there I no UK now and JK is the Greater England project and has been since Canerons English votes Bill.
Effectively Westminster is an English parliament.
Nearest bill now proves that and makes a grave error.
The only way for Scotalnd to gain independence is by declaration after we have a majority of real Independence MSPs and/or MPs .
England will never grant as any route to secede its obvious now.

The argument that Hanvey in some way confirmed or bolstered Westminster’s authority over us with his self-determination bill might have rhetorical value but it falls apart almost immediately if you take it seriously; the fact is nothing has changed, Westminster’s authority over us is exactly as it was before, and nobody anywhere is celebrating or even referring to Westminster’s enhanced authority.

In short, no harm done.

Did it do any good? Probably very little but it might serve our interests some day to say we tried to achieve our ends through conventional constitutional channels and were repeatedly blocked.

The biggest barrier to progress on Indy remains the SNP, though, not Westminster.

I see nothing wrong with what Kenny & Neale did.

Now if testing the ‘Self Id’ bill & the ‘right to a referendum bill’ in an English Parliament & the English Court then that’s a whole different story.

There also the bonkers SNP-Green alliance party’s bonkers bottle return scheme & probably lots of other mad stuff.

I’ve kinda switched off from politics lately.

It’s all too mental.

Ah there’s Humza returning to the supreme court with his self-id bill Emma’s Conversion Therapy Bill.

Look nothing can be achieve at Westminster by Scottish MPs representing Scotland especially anything to advance the indy cause.

We have MPs from Scotland at Westminster who endorse the status quo, these MPs belong to branch offices in Scotland their HQ’s are in London, this MUST stop these parties need to register as Scottish parties and have no funding from their English counterparts.

Also those MPs that we elect in Scotland to go to Westminster must return back to Scotland, Scotland MUST NOT send any politicians to a foreign parliament.

If we want independence we must go low tech, by going back to knocking on doors and speaking to people and telling them the REAL benefits of an independent Scotland, we CAN’T compete with the UK media machine which all but blanks out anything positive to do with Scottish independence. No we need to get out their like it was before the internet and actually point out what’s going on, only by informing folk face to face can you answer their questions and allay their fears.

The big problem that we need to solve is the SNP at Holyrood which currently isn’t interested in independence and we’ve still got almost three years of their governance left, and it looks like they’ll get back in again with doing a deal with whoever keeps them in power.

Again only by speaking to people face to face can we explain the current situation and show how we can change it for the better, it will take years to get the messages out that independence will be good for Scots and that there’s absolutely no benefits to Scots by staying in the union.

We also must get it across between now and the next Holyrood elections that the SNP ARE NOT the indy movement, the people of Scotland are, the current SNP are doing their best to damage the indy cause, we MUST get out there and talk to the swithering and undecided and put their fears to rest, we have nearly three years to get round Scotland and talk to as many people as possible.

Here here.

Time to read out the vietnam whatsapp group messages and name the alphabet women. Let’s take our country back.

The movement owes Neale a debt of gratitude for exposing British nationalist hypocrisy about when, how often and on what terms independence referendums are held. Following the recent Supreme Court decision, and the defeat of this proposed Bill, it is now quite clear that the doctrine of parliamentary supremacy means that Westminster will never willingly agree that the current devolutionary parliament in Holyrood is able to assert the rights of the Scottish people should prevail over what the union parliament decides.

Now that has been established beyond any reasonable doubt, we can give up any presumption that unionists, whether Scottish or English, can be trusted to honour the 2014 precedent and grant another Edinburgh Agreement.

The referendum route to independence is dead.

The alternative can only be plebiscitary elections, fought on an explicit platform that when the movement (i.e. all parties signed up to the plebiscitary platform). achieves 50% + 1 of the vote in any future General Election, it will be taken as an automatic mandate for independence.

If it makes Neale and others feel better, they can go ahead and start arranging for a new convention but that’s not what will deliver independence, however much it gives some a warm and fuzzy feeling. The days of Canon Kenyon Wright’s Scottish Constitutional Convention are far behind us: we have a parliament in Edinburgh now. What we don’t have is parties with the political balls to put achieving independence front and centre.

Plebiscitary elections are in the gift of those controlling Holyrood, who are elected by the Scottish people. If popular sovereignty means anything, then all we need is a party or coalition which makes such elections happen.

Cunning plans for indy, conventions, assemblies and endless angels dancing on constitutional pin heads are a pointless distraction. Actions, not words.

Thanks Neale, appreciated. Keep going.

While we’re dreaming, I’d like a castle and eyes that shoot deadly laser beams.

I love the way the folk demanding that the whole movement come together as one are oftentimes the ones to the fore denouncing anyone who disagrees with them as *tractors. As if the current indy movement where still back in the sunlight uplands of 2012-14, rather than where it is today: the political equivalent of a bar room brawl.

The thing is, we don’t all need to be joined at the hip, or even like one another that much, or even at all. All we need to agree on is that a majority in plebiscitary elections is quite enough for de facto independence. The rest is, to use a Victorian phrase, pecksniffian.

Thanks Neale…….I only wish we had others in the SNP fighting as hard as you do. I wonder why so many of the TransCult Devolution Party give up on Independence the moment they arrive in London.

@Stoker 3:16

Stand yourself.

Or get somebody who thinks very much as you do, to stand for you.

It’s no more complicated than that.

Repeat in every constituency.

I’m conflicted over the reason this is such a cognitive hurdle to overcome.

Is it a manifestation of the Scottish cringe? Politicians are “special people”, and ordinary Scots aren’t worthy?

Is it a tacit, unacknowledged acceptance that us Scots are just not going to vote for anything other than the status quo? In which case, find yourself a new hobby – this one’s a waste of your life.

The ordinary, working Scots who built the Labour Party from nothing, and voted members of their local communities and industries into power weren’t hindered by these concerns. And that’s why I refuse to accept it can’t be done again.

REV STU at 1252pm,

Exactly. Neale, from the ALBA party by his actions has clearly demonstrated (and had documented in Hansard) just what a shoddy piece of undemocratic, anti-Scotland, pro-England nonsense this so-called ‘union’ with England truly is.

So what will the SNP do about it now??? I’ll tell you, sweet f*** all. Excuse after excuse after excuse from the SNP, the do-nothing party.

Want independence? Vote ALBA.

“There are no easy routes to find a remedy in international law for the people of Scotland to exercise their right to self-determination by secession and so seek their independence from the UK”

And that is precisely why I do not advocate “secession” of Scotland or for Scotland to seeking “independence from the UK”. What I think should be pursued is the direct repeal of the Treaty of union to END Great Britain and for Scotland to automatically recover it statehood.

Repealing the Treaty of Union will bring Scotland’s independence from the Kingdom of England, not from the UK. Repealing the treaty reverts the process of union in law. “Seceding” seeks to create a new route.

Seeking secession from the UK is effectively demoting Scotland to the status of what Catalonia is, a region, putting it at a huge disadvantage and at the mercy of the Kingdom of England.

Personally, I think that is silly. It only makes sense if you have a decent treaty partner and you wish at all costs to preserve the union and the UK as a state for political/economic reasons (retention of treaties, seats in international organisations, etc), and if there is a big advantage for Scotland if the Kingdom of England to remain as the continuator state of the UK.

I would have no problem whatsoever with that IF (if in capital letters) the representatives of the kingdom of England had acted as a partner rather than a self-entitled bully abusing power, just because they control the UK parliament and can continue siphoning from Scotland’s assets.

I would have been happy with that route if the sending of 56 anti-union to Westminster and our countless mandates for an indyref had been respected, and if our vote to remain in the EU had been respected rather than having brexit and its consequences forced down our throats against our will.

But that is all water down the bridge now. 9 years have passed since 2015 and things have not got better but worse. I do not see Scotland having much to lose by ending the treaty, to be frank. It stands to lose much more by remaining in this union a minute longer than it needs to be and certainly stands to lose it all by remaining until the self-entitled representatives of the Kingdom of England decide Scotland is no longer of use so they can spit it out. We all know when that is going to be: when they have ransacked and pillaged every valuable asset Scotland had and left Scotland as barren land.

Ending the treaty puts Scotland in control of its own destiny. Going cap in hand to Westminster like our representatives have been doing for the last 9 years to ask permission for secession, effectively treating Scotland as if it was a region of the UK of Great Britain, gives the legitimacy to Westminster to say no.

I appreciate the treaty does not have a defined exit route, but it is subjected to the fundamental principles of international law of pacta sunt servanda (agreements must be kept) and Clausula rebus sic stantibus (a treaty becomes inapplicable due to a change in circumstances).

Those principles predate the Vienna Convention of the Law of Treaties and mean that every single breach of any of the fundamental conditions of the treaty is an exit door and therefore an opportunity. They also mean that any fundamental change in the circumstances gives also a door to exit the treaty. We have had those aplenty. What we have lacked is MPs with the backbone to end the darn treaty.

Recent examples:

1. sending 56 anti-union MPs to Westminster – that is the first time in 300 years of union history
2. the EU ref result proving Scotland and England were pursuing diametrically opposed political paths – Among the reasons for Czechoslovakia to break up in two were differences in economic development and political aspirations. The same applies to Scotland and England
3. every single time the majority of Scotland’s MPs vote against something in Westminster while the majority of England MPs vote in favour (or viceversa) demostrate a change in circumstances – the two nations are pursuing different outcomes.
4 Actually, the voting down of Mr Hanvey’s bill is another change in circumstances. Thatcher told us that if Scotland wanted to leave the UK no English political party would ever oppose. Well, the material circumstances have now changed. England parties have opposed.

There is a very good reason as to why the political fraud Sturgeon included the specific words “a material change in circumstances” in the SNP manifesto for the 2016 Holyrood election with regards a referendum, and also in the publication from 2019 “Scotland’s right to choose: putting Scotland’s future in Scotland’s hands”.

This document starts with the subtitle “Material change of circumstances” and follows with “There are two aspects of events since 2014 that amount to the material change in circumstances that justifies the people of Scotland again considering their place in the UK”.

There is a good reason as to why she kept repeating them often in the aftermath of the EU referendum. Those specific words are recognised in international law as a reason to end a treaty.

Inch’Allah” is a song composed and sung in French by Salvatore Adamo in 1967. The lyrics were written by Adamo as a peace song in the context of the Six-Day War between Israel and the Arab States. The song was banned in virtually all Arab countries for what they perceived as its pro-Israel sentiments and the mentioning of Jerusalem as a Jewish city after it fell under Israeli control during the war.

I never knew that!

I don’t even know who were the good guys back in 1967.

Ignorance is bliss.

“we know that a majority of Scotland’s MPs can end the ‘conditional’ power of a UK parliament to legislate for Scotland. But Scotland’s MPs are refusing to do so, too petrified of the outcome it seems. In such circumstances our own MP’s inaction and deceit serves to cement our colonial captive status and continued exploitation.”

Bang on Alf, basically that’s what it boils down to Scottish MPs putting their own self-interests ahead of that of an entire nations.

Breeks and Mia are both brilliant. Especially the first time you read them. But years later reading them you feel it is ineffectual rhetoric. And that is true of everything I have ever written and it seems this website.

Nothing changes for the better, it only gets worse. We have no power. Sorry for being gloomy but that is how it looks.

If it wasn’t already clear it surely must be now
Non recognition of Westminster by abstention is the only way forward
Alba if they are to mean anything, change anything need to divorce themselves from the idea that Scotland has a voice at Westminster and set up at home, a parliament in internal exile if you like.
Parliamentary democracy will not free Scotland
We will do it
How remains to be seen

Opengrupenfhurer Sturgeon’s Gold Command. Not do secret plan. Genocide of the elderly… We’ve all lost loved ones to the plague. That she sent into the homes. On her orders.

Opengrupenfhurer Sturgeon. Show us the whatsapp messages.

Read out the alphabetties WhatsApp Neale Hanvey. Liberate Scotland. We can’t have an Independent Scotland built on corruption now can we Neale?

We need the powers or parliamentary privilege devolved to Scotland before we get 5 years of labour.

Tell the truth Neale. Bring this house of cards down now. What a disgrace today that HERR Sturgeon has deleted every fucking secret gold command whatsapp message. She’s a disgrace Neale.

Where’s MI5 when you need them?

David Hannah
Ignored
says:
19 January, 2024 at 9:38 pm

It is very sinister Ruby. I don’t know how you archive.

It’s all very simple. Are you on a phone?

I can’t help you if you are on a phone.

Take a chance and post direct links if you want. The worst that can happen to you is folk will ignore you and/or call you names and shout.

Ach it’s fine it happens to me all the time.

There are articles which are behind a paywall and then the archive thingy is handy cos it gets you behind the paywall.

This is it the old archive thingy:

link to archive.is

go there put your link in the box and wait.

It’ll archive and and the link you see in the browser is the archived link.

Sorted!

Nae bother if you need more help. I can pontificate for Scotland on all sorts of issues.

Want any tips on how to make soup the easy way?

PS There are a lot more than you who can’t archive and not only that they can’t even post links.

Ever seen John Main post a link?

I agree with all Mia says as she puts it clearly we have had so many situations arising over the last 10 years which MPs with a backbone as independents would have walked out declaring the union is ended as a material change has happened which dissolves the so called partnership.
But we need rid of this SNP before we can move in any way towards achieving the change.

I’ve been looking at this name Mridul. Trying to figure out how to pronounce it.

How could I have missed it

It’s Mr Idul Wadhwa.

Count a typo have caused HR at the Rape Crisis Centre to think they were interviewing a woman.

We knew all this already.

The SNP is uninterested in independence *check*

England will never allow Scotland to leave *check*

A sovereign nation doesn’t need permission. It doesn’t need debates. It certainly doesn’t need a section 30.

Heads up..

Holyrood will be closed.
That will come next because those Pesky Scots must not hold democratic elections or have opinions so don’t be shocked when it happens.

Holyrood is also a branch office. It has zero standing in the grand scheme of international laws. It’s the bastard Westminster that is the seat of power, the treaty resides there & the only way to break it is to do as Thatcher said, send a majority & then immediately remove Scotland from Westminster. Do not collect a seat, do not size up office space, do not look the agenda.

The moment you swear an oath to another sovereign & take your seat – you are not there for Scotland. You are there giving that place legitimacy & they know it.

Remove yourselves & there is no UK parliament.

A sovereign people return home & declare independence.

A democratic event has already taken place. It’s over.

This constant cap in hand & *asking* for what we already own is really jarring now. We don’t need trump cards & gotchas..we already own them. We just need the balls to use them.

We’ve tried asking nicely.
We’ve tried giving it time.
We’ve even tried 5 PMs.
We’ve been dragged out the EU & we’ve been denied democracy. That isn’t how democracy works.

The time for asking is over.
As an equal signatory to the Union, no one sought our permission to end our treaty with the EU so why are we continually asking our abusive neighbour like wer are serfs?

It is Scottish leaders who lack balls. They have mandates but lack the gumption to use them.

This is in danger now of just having people walk away.

10 years of bullshit & it looks like it’s just going to continue.

So what do Alba plan to do if you win a mandate? Just have the SNP pass the begging bowl?

Nice to have ALBA as a tonic to the rainbow warriors and troughing charlatans in the SNP.

While Yousless ponders dropping “National” from SNP, why not end the pretence once and for all and drop “Scottish” whilst he’s at it.

I’d like to propose North British Unionist as an alternative name for the Scottish National Party.

NBU could equally stand for No Bloody Use, which sums them up nicely.

wathater
Ignored says:
20 January, 2024 at 3:54 am
I agree that it was wrong to give WM the chance to rule on anything to do with Scotland, BUT it has been done now and it has highlighted that there NEVER was any equal union

HOWEVER the bigger question now for Mr Neale Hanvey is WHAT NEXT,If you do not have an answer for us Neale ALL you are doing is what the scum snp have been doing for 10 years, broken promise after broken promise and that certainly won’t garner any trust…

To borrow a phrase from the Highlander movie; there can be only one. There is a fundamental incompatibility between Scotland’s Constitutional Sovereignty, and London rule. What is more open to question, is how many of those espousing Scottish Independence do not actually believe in its legitimacy,.in law. This “hope” needs converted into belief.

Meanwhile, the longer our politicians play the “UK” game, but lose that game, the more precedents are set which bolster UK legitimacy, and then need to be reversed.

For example, Brexit was such a golden opportunity for us; Michel Barnier was telegraphing the benchmark requirement that Brexit had to be both lawful and constitutional before the final Brexit Agreement could be ratified. He put OUR sovereign Constitution front and centre before the whole of Europe, yet Scotland, via Sturgeon’s corrupt regime, didn’t utter a squeak. Our reward? Subjugation and Brexit.

Had the Claim of Right been cited as a constitutional anomaly in 2016, even without formal clarification ( clarification which could only have gone Scotland’s way), then it becomes very hard to see how Brexit could have been finalised. Ever.

That didn’t happen, as we all know. Brexit is now a precedent, where Scotland’s democratic and sovereign will was subjugated, yet riots and ructions, came there none… None whatsoever.

Scotland will NEVER again find itself blessed with such a golden opportunity to collapse this farce of a Union, and that profound and debilitating weakness in Scottish Government will sink Scotland’s interests again and again, and yet again until the Scottish people have constitutional leverage over our elected assemblies and representatives.

It’s a bit glib saying it, but it’s true. The First Nation which needs to recognise Scotland’s sovereign legitimacy is Scotland itself.

That being said however, by itself, it isn’t enough.

Before Scotland can end this Union, we need to have a “what next” proposal which is both cohesive and redoubtable, and recognised by our own and other nations as watertight and credible. What actually happens on Day 1 of Independence, what meaningful changes occur, and what happens if or when Westminster refuses to relinquish control? We need a new Wee Blue Book that’s a lot heavier than the last.

In other words, we still need to do all the things the SNP studiously hasn’t been doing these past 10 years… actually preparing for Independence.

Furthermore, we need to reconcile our differences across our Movement. Not withstanding the wreckage of the SNP, ardent Independentists such as Roddy McLeod Barrheadboy, ALBA, and indeed SALVO, indeed all of us, MUST be on the same page.

We must structure our Independence Movement like a fully integrated, combined forces Task Force. Where a Military strike force requires it’s Air Force, Navy, and Army to work together in coordinated mutual support, so we need our Independence Movement to have our Constitutional element working hand-in-glove with our political element, and our grassroots land-army fully committed to the plan and confident of victory.

For all that cry for unity, having the SNP on board gives me the dry heave.

The last vital component in that military metaphor by the way, is the fulsome support of Allies, and a diligent and just UN Resolution to deliver.

Independence is in tatters right now because we trusted our dream to imbeciles in the SNP who couldn’t secure Independence if it was handed to them on a plate, (as it was, in 2016). The word “imbecile” is a kindness, because I believe certain individuals are much, much, worse than merely incompetent.

That people like Neale Hanvey are engineering “problems” with Westminster rule is a good thing, because the time is approaching which ALL of Westminster rule must go, and a lot of people need to wake up and smell the coffee. “Their” political chicanery will never deliver benefit to Scotland. It will always deliver the reverse. It will NEVER deliver Independence, it will ALWAYS frustrate it.

Holyrood, and even a limp bus load of 56 SNP MP’s delivers precisely ZERO threat to Westminster rule. We, the Scottish people. need to wrestle control away from Whitehall, then engineer and codify an alternative manifestation of Scottish Government… COMPLETELY alternative.

Heads up people. This alternative manifestation of Scottish Government exists, but so far, only in rudimentary form… It is your Liberation Movement which yet needs to combine with a modern interpretation of a Convention of the Estates, and thereafter challenge Westminster’s professed sovereignty with a 2024 invocation of the Claim of Right; not to remove a King as in 1689, but to remove and expel a foreign government usurping Scottish Sovereignty and plundering Scotland’s wealth and resources.

We have so very much to do, such mechanisms to build, tools and friendships to forge, yet here we sit, idle and ncapacitated, and hostage to the vagrancies of a rogue Wokist agenda which commandeers all of our attention and shepherds Scotland further and further away from sovereign Independence.

We need leadership. We need structure. Those of trying to make progress need your support and encouragement. The path will become clearer, the further we step away from the catastrophic Sturgeon era. Take comfort too that Yousaf won’t last a decade, but we must be better focussed. Yousaf is a small bit player in a Mickey Mouse Assembly, ensnared and codified by Westminster and the colonial Scotland Act.

The best parallel I can come up with is the French Provisional Consultative Assembly of 1944, which set itself up as the alternative and indeed legitimate Government of France. It was the mechanism and process used to depose the former Vichy Government. To quote Wiki it was …” a governmental organ of Free France that operated under the aegis of the French Committee of National Liberation (CFLN) and that represented the resistance movements, political parties, and territories that were engaged against Germany in the Second World War alongside the Allies.

Hmmm…. representation assembled from resistance movements, political parties, and territories engaged against Germany.

Ok. Let’s call these interest groups “Estates”, and suddenly the Provisional Consultative Assembly of 1944 setting itself up as an alternative to the collaborationist Vichy Government sounds quite a lot like a Scottish style Convention of the Estates setting itself up as the alternative to the collaborationist Holyrood Assembly which espouses the fallacy of Westminster parliamentary sovereignty in Scotland.

What was their mandate? What was their franchise? Well, in a state of constitutional emergency, they chose Legitimacy over illegitimacy as their starting point. That is why the Claim of Right and precedence of Scotland’s Constitutional Sovereignty is absolutely vital. Prove and establish in law the illegitimacy of London rule, and we have both our trigger and our justification to act.

Westminster’s English establishment has never ever treated the two kingdoms of the Union as equals!

The two sovereign kingdoms that negotiated, agreed, signed, and ratified the Treaty of Union were and still are exactly equal in sovereign authority, because nothing in the Treaty demoted, abolished, or transferred either of those sovereignties. Both being sovereign means neither is obliged to submit to any authority of the other, and that makes their authorities within the Union exactly equal.

That’s a given; there is NO valid argument against it.

But the English establishment that runs Westminster has always insisted that England’s far more numerous MPs are fully entitled to outvote Scotland’s MPs on any matter of the joint governance of the Union, despite the equality of their authorities, because obviously that’s just simple straightforward democracy in action, and what could be fairer? And they did so on no better basis than;

A, well, it’s a vote, so obviously it’s democratic, init, and,

B, it’s democratic so obviously it’s fair, init, so the Scots shouldn’t be complaining about it, they should just accept it, because it’s democracy, init, after all. Obviously.

But it isn’t fair, it isn’t democratic, it isn’t legitimate, and it isn’t even relevant, because it doesn’t reflect the actual constitutional basis of the Union, and thus the Union has never been what Westminster claims it to be.

Westminster’s voting system presumes that the two bodies of MPs,

(that represent the two entirely different sovereign kingdoms, countries, nations, territories, and peoples in the Union, with both kingdoms being foreign to each other, and neither being subservient to any authority of the other because of those two separate and equal sovereignties, AND where one of those two bodies of MPs outnumbers the other ten times over),

can, despite all of the above, be treated perfectly legitimately, democratically and fairly, as a single body in a simple flat majority vote for the purpose of deciding what their ‘joint’ decision was on any matter debated in their shared parliament.

Westminster’s presumption is obviously entirely bogus! The Treaty says nothing about how the Union’s joint decisions should be made by the two bodies of MPs within its new shared parliament, and presumptions of simple flat majority voting are only presumptions; not being stated in either the Treaty itself nor either Act of ratification, then no such presumptions can have any legal or constitutional standing. Non-existent clauses in a Treaty cannot be deemed agreed and cannot be empowered by any ratification that doesn’t include those clauses.

If it wasn’t in the fine print, it can’t apply!

As currently in use, the system above is nothing more than a majoritarian scam by England’s establishment. The scam ignores both kingdoms’ sovereignties altogether by falsely claiming that democratic authority is superior to sovereign authority, effectively substituting England’s sovereignty, which is exactly equal with Scotland’s, with England’s huge numerical superiority of MPs instead, thereby enabling them to ‘legitimately’ outvote Scotland’s far smaller number of MPs, and the acceptance of this scam by Scotland’s MPs thus provides England with far greater power in the Union’s shared parliament than its equal sovereignty would ever have entitled it to.

England’s half of the Union can always outvote the Scottish half of the Union, but Scotland’s half of the Union can almost never outvote the English half of the Union, and never on their own. They may only do so if almost a full half of England’s MPs vote with them!

This is how Scotland’s democratic deficit is imposed, and it is imposed, not agreed, and it fundamentally and systemically deprives Scotland’s representation of the ability to carry out their formal purpose, which is to promote and defend the interests of the entire Scottish half of the Union within the Union’s shared parliament. England’s representation suffers no such deprivation; their ability to promote and defend England’s interests are greatly enhanced, to Scotland’s great and obvious detriment.

But that deficit isn’t the only one;

Scotland’s MPs can never form the government of the United Kingdom. Only England’s MPs can do that. Why? Because only they can acheive an absolute seat majority in the House of Commons, while Scotland’s MPs will never be able to do so. Even within a coalition government with another party, they’d still be completely outnumbered by the English MPs in that coalition! And that is undoubtedly a major deficit that applies only to the Scottish half of the Union.

And yet another deficit arises from this;

The MPs representing the Scottish half of the Union have great difficulty in introducing and passing legislation in the Union’s parliament, compared to the English half of the Union.

Private Members Bills and Ten-minute-rule Bills are a poor substitute for not being the party of government in the Union. This is because by far the most reliable way to introduce and pass new legislation in Westminster is to BE the party of government.

This is yet another deficit that never applies to England’s MPs. They can outvote the MPs of the other half of the Union, but will almost never be outvoted themselves unless they mostly do it to themselves; they can pass legislation over the Union by themselves, needing no approval by the other half of the Union; and they are the only half of the Union that can form a Union government; and the only half of the Union that can fairly reliably make new Union legislation.

Sovereign Scotland is the other half of the Union, and it’s been more than 316 years;

When does Scotland’s half of the Union get to govern the UK?

When does Scotland’s half of the Union get to pass Union legislation on their own?

When does Scotland’s half of the Union even get to shout ‘Thou shalt not!’ to the other half of the Union and have it mean something?

When does Scotland’s half of the Union even get to shout anything to the other half of the Union and have it mean something?

When is England’s half of the Union going to recognise the actual sovereignty of Scotland’s half of the Union?

When is Scotland’s half of the Union going to understand it doesn’t have to put up with the constant abuse and damage it suffers from England’s half of the Union?

When is Scotland’s half of the Union going to end the Union?

Ooops error

Two lawyers were paid mega-bucks by the UK Gov to tell us there is no such country as Scotland everyone just dismissed that as rubbish yet when a lawyer tells us Scotland is not a colony we accept that as fact. I find that very weird.

Xaracen
NotIgnored
says:

A, well, it’s a vote, so obviously it’s democratic, init, and,

Brilliant Xaracen.

They have been clever in making this colony look like a free & equal country within a Union.

No idea what they were thinking when they announced that Scotland was no longer a country that it ceased to exist in 1707 and became Lesser England

They must have been really desperate back then in 2014.

@Ruby;
“Xaracen
NotIgnored”

😀

As an exile I read this blog a lot.

Scotland walked into the independence referendum without a plan in much the same way The UK had no plan to deal with the Brexit result. I did read the SNP report cover to cover. It touched on many topics but there was no substance, no concrete and workable plan of action. So maybe it was just as well that the nation voted against.

I look at the way the Scottish Government has been ruining my beloved country and weep. I can no longer imagine returning.

The Scottish Government has unbelievable power. During Covid I used to look at Sturgeon on TV and think- it’s already a separate country, they can do anything they want. There is even a separate income tax rate.

The power given to the Scottish Government has been wasted. Is there a single thing they have improved?

If only the Scottish Government had focused on using the powers they have to improve the lot of the Scottish people. What if they had done that? Imagine an improved Scotland compared to England. Surely that would not have been difficult given the total incompetence of Westminster?

The people of Scotland would be crying out for independence if they had a Government that was superior to that in Westminster. Instead they have something worse so I imagine that the independence issue has slid further down the scale.

I get it that it’s an emotive topic and why wouldn’t Scot’s want to be proud of their own independent country? But I think you are going about it in the wrong way. Stop asking stupid questions in Westminster . I resent my taxpayer money being spent on Scottish MPs who just make a fool of themselves in Westminster. Although I enjoy Penny Mordant’s role as hammer of the Scots, I’d still rather my country was not ridiculed in that way.

Instead of spending so much time and energy on arguing about Independence use the huge powers you already have and start sorting out the problems. Prove to the people that you are better at running the country than Westminster is and that should not be difficult given the state of that place. Do that and you will gain and deserve the independence you crave. And I might be tempted to return.

God bless Scotland the place of my birth and may you unite and demonstrate to the world that Scotland is a great example of a caring democracy full of intelligent and hardworking people. Show the way Scotland and stop fighting among yourselves.

lol @ Ruby

Not only does he know what you’ve been doing, he purports to know the shape of your “erse”.

Be very afraid.

How many people on here can’t do links far less archived links?

I won’t be pontificating on links or archived links.

I know how to do them.

Someone very smart on here even taught me how to access the comments on The Times, Telegraph etc but I’ve lost my notes.

I know it involved downloading a browser I think it was ‘Brave’ but the rest has gone no doubt been shredded by ‘CleanMyMac’ That ‘CleanMyMac’ doesn’t like the clutter I on the other hand feel insecure without it.

This is an appeal to the very clever clogs to re-up the info.

Thanks in advance. Not sure how much I want to read the comments on The Times & Telegraph but it’s always good to know I can.

Cheers for the advice.

Don’t worry Hatuey the women’s intuition thingy protects me.
It never fails!

My ‘supercreepdar’ is in good working order.

What isn’t in good working order is my time management plan.

I’m in one of those situations where I’ve got such an overwhelming amount of stuff to do I’ve frozen and I’m stuck in my Herman Miller chair.

Any tips?

Still I’m having fun and learning lots.

Sometimes I feel tempted to get myself back on the naughty step although I think it’s almost impossible now that we’ve got the ignore button.

@Rob 11.42am

Scotland walked into the independence referendum without a plan in much the same way The UK had no plan to deal with the Brexit result. I did read the SNP report cover to cover. It touched on many topics but there was no substance, no concrete and workable plan of action.

That simply isn’t true. There was a plan: from memory it ran to 600 pages or more. True, a lot of British nationalists and Scottish unionists rubbished it, but you didn’t have to believe in independence to see that there were concrete plans. What there wasn’t, and never could be, was any guarantee that every i would be dotted and every t crossed.

What many unionists demanded were absolute guarantees that they would be no worse off economically, or even would be better off if we became independent. Obviously that was impossible. Some of those may have been sincere and could have been swayed, but many were never persuadable, and never will be.

Of course the Yes campaign could and should have done better on providing information on and plausible alternatives in relation to certain things, particularly the currency, pensions and EU membership.

However, as we now see with the benefit of hindsight, it would be a brave person who would argue that given all that has happened since Scots would be worse off today if they’d voted for independence in 2014. There’s little doubt that we’d be in the EU, or at the very least in the single market, and have be well down the road of establishing the kind of society most Scots would be proud of, rather than being shackled to the decaying corpse of Empire v0.2 as at present.

If only the Scottish Government had focused on using the powers they have to improve the lot of the Scottish people. What if they had done that? Imagine an improved Scotland compared to England. Surely that would not have been difficult given the total incompetence of Westminster?

Yes and no. The oft heard demand from unionists that the Scottish government “do something” with the powers it has is a trap. Without power over all – or virtually all – the economic levers available, the Scottish government can’t do what it really wants because it only controls a small part of its expenditure and is still in hoc to a deeply dysfunctional Westminster system, and to macro economic policies, priorities and spending that it has little of no influence over.

The total incompetence of Westminster parties, the fact New Nu Labour present little real change to the Tories, and the fact that brexit and Trussonomics have holed the argument of westminster’s economic competence / broad shoulders below the water line, don’t suggest that the “Better Together” arguments are stronger now than in 2014: rather the reverse surely?

Do that and you will gain and deserve the independence you crave. And I might be tempted to return.

If you’re not going to return, your views, whilst interesting don’t amount to much. You are of course entitled to them and to publicise them, but in the end only those who are here get a say (and even then there are plenty who would limit who does get a say to those they regard as “pure” enough).

I didn’t get a vote in 2014 because I was still in England. Part of my decision to come home was in hope that things would change for the better, and that we wouldn’t fail next time. It may not be happening fast enough, but I’m still hopeful it will happen>

I don’t want a Scottish Government that tries to make the current system work better, or which tries to leverage more powers from the unwilling grasp of the failing British nationalist experiment: I want a government that prioritises real independence, not devolution, dev-max, home rule or any other variety of milquetoast nationalism.

We don’t all have to get on, or stand shoulder to shoulder and agree on a plethora of detailed policy positions. Independence will be hard: there are no guarantees everything will be better, just as there are no guarantees staying in the union is risk free.

@Andy Ellis 3:07

You can’t logically argue that Scotland needs control of all, or nearly all, the economic levers available, when you are claiming there’s little doubt we would be in the EU.

Ask the Greeks to explain.

If iScotland ever does join the EU, we’ll be trussed up like a turkey, simply because the calibre of people who fecked over the bottle deposit scheme, and gave away our wind revenues, are congenitally incapable of negotiating anything like an advantageous accession agreement with the bureaucratic Brussels behemoth.

How can you not see that by telling Brussels straight that we are joining anyway, with no further democratic input or decision from us so-called Sovereign Scots, that the SNP/Greens have preauthorised and empowered Brussels to give us the worst possible deal?

Think it through.

@John Main 6.19pm

You can’t logically argue that Scotland needs control of all, or nearly all, the economic levers available, when you are claiming there’s little doubt we would be in the EU.

Of course I can, because it’s what all the members of the EU believe, and the hundreds of millions of people in the member states who support it. There’s no real comparison between the position of Scotland within the UK and an independent Scotland in the EU.

I doubt you’ll ever be persuaded otherwise, but in any case, it’s an argument you and those like you have comprehensively lost with respect to the Scottish electorate. Evidence suggests that Scots are even more in favour of the EU now than at the time of the Leave vote.

As for Greece, although I agree they were shabbily treated, Scotland isn’t Greece.

How can you not see that by telling Brussels straight that we are joining anyway, with no further democratic input or decision from us so-called Sovereign Scots, that the SNP/Greens have preauthorised and empowered Brussels to give us the worst possible deal?

I’m not, and that’s not what will happen. We will have to apply, be accepted and then join. There’s absolutely no reason to think it will be a difficult process: the EU have zero reason to do anything else but make it as easy as possible. Scots voters will decide, either via a referendum, or by voting for parties which have it as part of their platform.

No party interested in power will be anti-EU: it’ll be the domain of the cranks at either extreme of the political spectrum. Good luck with that!

At the heart of our problems are the ‘troughers’, the MSPs and WM lot who are not interested, in any way, in the lives of us proles. They are the Animal Farm pigs, resplendent in their perceived status, and determined to keep collecting their fat salaries, along with golden pensions, as long as they are able.
Without a clear out, and replacement with honest, truly patriotic, folk to represent us, independence is just away with the fairies.

@John Main 7.40pm

What the current Scottish Government thinks and what happens post independence are two very different things. If the Scottish people in their wisdom think joining the EU is a bad idea, then doubtless they will ensure it doesn’t happen. You being butt hurt that your eurosceptic views are about as popular of those of the usual suspects about Country 404 and their hard ons for Uncle Vlad doesn’t help.

You asserting that something there is clear polling evidence to support just makes it pretty clear who is the one arguing in bad faith.

Your personal euroscepticism is just wish fulfillment on your part.

Someone tell those who depend on The Daily Mail for their information that being in the biggest free market in the world makes a lot of sense when you have vast energy and other resources to sell, not to mention a potentially massive tourism sector, whisky, and other produce.