The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

Lord Of The Fruit Flies

Posted on September 23, 2018 by

Labour policy, Thursday morning:

Labour policy, Sunday morning:

About average, then.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. 23 09 18 12:56

    Lord Of The Fruit Flies | speymouth

339 to “Lord Of The Fruit Flies”

  1. James KC says:

    Is there actually two of him?

  2. Richard Hunter says:

    I voted Labour at the last election. Guess I wont be this time.

  3. We WILL abolish the House of Lords.

  4. Proud Cybernat says:

    LabDick, in his usual M.O., obviously doesn’t realise that the sovereignty of Scotland is a ‘Reserved Matter’ – to the people of Scotland. Not Leonard. Not Corbyn. Not WM. Not Lizzie. WE decide. That is all.

    Oh, and Germ’y – we already have a MANDATE to hold IR2 you big lump of dead wood.

  5. Muir says:

    Using a mandate of a majority ( largely composed ) of the 55 million people in England agreeing to a UK manifesto commitment to stop 5 million Scots voting on their future pretty much makes our point for us surely ? thanks Jeremy.

  6. jfngw says:

    So is this the new Labour slogan ‘England First’, because they now seem to advocate that voters in England will now dictate Scotland’s future. It pretty much has been the case since the union started but it’s good to see Labour now promising to put it in a manifesto.

    So much for their claim for democracy around the world, no less colonialist than the Tories at heart.

    Can’t see they will move anyone from SNP with this policy, maybe a few that switched to Conservatives might return.

  7. Footsoldier says:

    BBC Scotland: Scottish Labour leader Richard Leonard has said Labour will commit to opposing a second independence referendum in its next UK manifesto.

    He believes this would give Jeremy Corbyn a mandate to refuse permission for such a vote to be held.

    NB As expected HYS comments remain closed.

  8. Fergus Green says:

    Tell ye what Jeremy. Just you bide in Islington and set up your post-Brexit wee England government and we’ll take things forward our own way in Scotland,

    In a few years time you will be begging Nicola, during her 6 month tenure of the EU Presidency, for a deal so that you can keep the lights on in your sordid little utopia.

  9. Macart says:

    Just commented on last thread about this, but Labour really, REALLY, want to rethink that one and on many different levels.

    Effectively operate a veto on the voting rights of the population of a nation partner? Have they completely lost the plot?

  10. Arthur thomson says:

    Are Labour really going to be honest? Are pigs really going to fly?

    Shysters is what they are and have been for half a century at least.

    Anyone who still thinks the quiet spoken one is other than a fraud is just choosing to delude themselves.

  11. gordoz says:

    Would Keir Hardie recognize this joke of a party ??
    Sorry England …. we’ve got the clown shoe’d ‘Leonard’ managing the branch office. Dont truly know the English policies but to us voters in Scotland your whole British party is a Toxic mess, so non- discernible from the Tory Brexit shambles.

  12. Dr Jim says:

    The enemies of the state: but which state?:

    It used to be the other way round, they’d support things in the North and oppose the same thing in the south

    Of course Scotland really doesn’t get a choice one way or another because it’s England and English votes that decides everything and Scotland gets pretendy democracy but only as long as it suits the agenda of England

    They love changing terminologies on stuff, let’s not call another Brexit referendum a referendum let’s call it a *peoples votes* but let’s keep calling any Scottish vote on Independence a divisive and destructive referendum

    The SNP are indeed enemies of the state, but it’s a Labour Libdem and Tory state, the SNP are NOT the enemies of the Scottish state because they’re FOR that, so it’s got to be made very clear that it’s Labour Lib dem and Tory who are actually the enemies of the Scottish state

    Remember folks every country in the world has around 10% of it’s population who are complete and total idiots which means that England has 5.5 million of them that’s more than the entire population of Scotland and they get to outvote Scotland as often as they want because our 10% of idiots don’t even make a dent let alone every single voter in Scotland

    Nicola Sturgeon is 100% right the only way to upset England plans is to vote SNP because if you don’t then England immediatly states that you agree with every single thing they decide to do, so there’s no point complaining to them after they do it

    That’s why Scotland must be Independent so that no matter who you vote for, your voice and vote to run your country is a real and meaningful vote and not a vote lost in a pointless political England system where the system is designed for Scotland always to lose by weight of numbers

  13. galamcennalath says:

    So many variables, so many possibilities, so many outcomes.

    Few could deny that the Tories are an asset to the Indy cause. Labour remain a hurdle in various ways. If Labour were to put a commitment to oppose IndyRef2 in their manifesto that would be helpful IMO.

    Some Scots still sympathise with Labour. They are probably the folks who used to vote SNP for Holyrood and Lab for WM. Many voted Yes in 2014, SNP in 2015, but stayed at home in 2017. In a GE there might be a temptation for this group to give Corbyn a chance, particularly in the face of mad bad out-of-control Tories.

    Labour will argue (completely falsely) that they need to take SNP seats back in Scotland to achieve a majority over Tories. The truth is, there only needs to be an ‘anti Tory’ majority at WM. The SNP are in a strong position to take back Tory seats, Lab would do best to encourage this.

    However, will Labour put the integrity of the Union and UK first? Will they continue to side behind the scenes with the Tories in Scotland? Will they declare open and outright opposition to IndyRef2?

    If the answer to those is yes, then the SNP is in a stronger position to claw back seats.

    A GE is FPTP. You win by getting little more than a third of votes, 40+% in Scotland gives a landslide. If the GE has an Indy dimension to it, assisted by Red and Blue Tories, then a 2015 result can be repeated.

  14. jfngw says:

    Ian Murray MP has revealed his thinking, it’s not too impressive I’m afraid. He equates being a member of a union and working in co-operation with other countries is basically the same as being dictated to and over-ruled by another country that claims to be in an equal union.

    Either a dunderheid or an ermine seeker would be my conclusion.

  15. shug says:

    And the BBC gave both a very easy ride

    you will oppose indy ref 2 – ok then
    you may allow indyref2 – ok then

    BBC at its best and radio silence on the remainder of the MSM

    Move along nothing to see here then

  16. Donald anderson says:

    Corb the Abstainer.

  17. Inverclyder says:

    Turd, polish, glitter, clown car.

    Are UK Labour short of short of anything else?

  18. HandandShrimp says:

    Looks like the Dick and Ruth show are going to run out the same gags as the last election and make it a face off as to which of the Unionist Parties gets to march sashes and all with the DUP.

    Posted this in the last thread but it belongs here.

    It also indicates that they both think there may be yet another imminent election which will determine nothing because on current showing Corbyn will not get the keys to No 1 outright and with a no independence for Scotland clause in their manifesto he is very unlikely to get SNP/PC backing either. A serious problem if those two parties do have 45 to 50 seats.

    If there is one thing that is certain Labour seem to have a triangulation device that only works in ever decreasing circles.

  19. Gary45% says:

    Hokey Cokey politics.

  20. Bob Mack says:

    What is the lifespan of a Labour Party policy?

    What time is it just now?

  21. ScottishPsyche says:

    Leonard is saying no matter what you vote for in Scotland Labour UK knows what is best for you. It was ever thus with Labour. I pity the young voters who haven’t seen through them yet, but I fear more that they will believe them and vote accordingly.

    Labour in Scotland – full of promises it will never keep and shackling us in perpetual hock to pay for it in England and Wales. At least they are being (inadvertently) honest this time.

  22. ScottieDog says:

    @Richard Hunter
    I had alot of sympathy for Corbyn at the last GE but it has all gone

  23. defo says:

    When you consider that JCs lot are the only show in town, UK wise, as an alternative to being governed by a sack full of weasels…

    All are corrupted, all is corruption.
    Always has been.

  24. ScottishPsyche says:

    It looks like there will no difference between Tory and Scottish Labour if there is a General election which makes it easier for them to put up paper candidates if they are campaigning on the same thing.

    Better Together have become a political party.

  25. A Bruce says:

    Corbin to make a decision – any sort of decision. I don’t think so. He’s a flip flopper like so many British nationalists, e.g., Davidson, Leonard, Rennie and before them Murphy, Dugdale et al.

    Run Scotland, he couldn’t run a bath.

  26. Marko says:

    It’s good to see that Leonard is able to carry on the tradition of coming up with creative ways for Scottish Labour to haemorrhage support. Bravo.

  27. Muscleguy says:

    I expect Jeremy was trying to improve Labour’s election chances in Scotlandshire by appealing to us Yes types. But then Richard got on the phone bleating ‘SNP Baaaad’ and SLAB will now compete with the Tories for the hardcore Unionist vote instead of trying to compete with the Social Democratic SNP. Thus the SLAB troops in their trenches looking grumpily at the serried SNP tanks on their former lawn have been instructed to turn side on and fire at the Tory bunkers in the Right Wing Wasteland. Except SLAB doesn’t have the artillery or the tanks to prevail and their bullets just bounce off the reinforced Orange concrete.

    Once the Orange hordes have made the leap to voting Tory to Save The Union they will not be coming back to SLAB who might elect another Kezia who will consider voting Yes if Brexit is lost. A black flag with No Surrender on it in silver flutters fitfully in the Wasteland vapours.

  28. mogabee says:

    *You put yer left! foot in, yer left foot in and ye shake it all aboot*


  29. robertknight says:

    NEW: Labour will commit to shafting Scotland in its [insert year] manifesto.

  30. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    Here it is, Jeremy. The UN Charter detailed. There is more but I don’t think we need it

    “The right of people to self-determination is a cardinal principle in modern international law (commonly regarded as a jus cogens rule), binding, as such, on the United Nations as authoritative interpretation of the Charter’s norms. It states that a people, based on respect for the principle of equal rights and fair equality of opportunity, have the right to freely choose their sovereignty and international political status with no interference.[3]
    Article 1 in both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)[20] and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights(ICESCR)[21] reads:
    “All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. ”

    And here is James Maxton’s words.

    “Give us our parliament in Scotland. We will start with no traditions. We will start with ideals. We will start with purpose, with courage. We will start with the aim and the object that there will be 134 men and women pledged to 134 Scottish constituencies, to spend their whole brain power, their whole courage and their whole soul in making Scotland into a country in which we can take people from all the nations of the earth and say : this is our land, this is our Scotland ,these are our men, our works, our women and children: can you beat it?”

    Can it be better said?

    What a disgrace the Labour Party and its Scottish branch office has become.

    They are “collaborators” in a Tory plot to kill Scotland.
    Lets make this description stick.
    If there is to be a General Election in November let us remove every Labour MP in Scotland.

  31. Proud Cybernat says:

    “If Labour were to put a commitment to oppose IndyRef2 in their manifesto that would be helpful IMO.”

    There is only ONE UK Labour manifesto. So what I don’t get is how they can put something that is solely an issue for the people of Scotland to be voted on by the people of rUK? How the HELL can they do that? Why are they permitting the people of rUK a say on this? Do the people of Scotland get a say on the Irish Unification issue? No, we don;t. So why is Labour allowing them along with the rUK a vote on our IndyRef?

  32. ClanDonald says:

    If I were a Tory strategist in Scotland I’d be like, “What can we do to show that the Tories are the only party who can be relied on to defend the union so that we can win over all the unionist votes?”

    And right on cue, Jeremy Hold-My-Beer Corbyn comes along going “of course I’m not ruling out indyref 2…”

    The Scottish Tories must be beside themselves with glee at Corbyn’s latest gaffe. Between this and his support for Brexit, he really is Theresa’s Little Helper.

  33. ronnie anderson says:

    The Big Push, a Publishing Crowdfunding Project in …
    We need your support to be able to create and broadcast a series of 20 second iScot videos over October November and December –

    Please Share Widely ..

  34. starlaw says:

    The Labour party will grant Scotland Indy ref2 if the majority of Labour voters agree.
    Never heard such mince since Murphy came to reign over us, good old labour they will permit what they think is good for us.

    Same old, old story fooled my parents and grandparents who supported Labour time after time broken promise after broken promise, it was always the next time things would be done. sadly my forebearers had no other party and just lived in hope. Those days are past now and so are Labour in Scotlands chances. Don’t let the door hit your arse on the way out.

  35. Vestas says:

    Back to the 1800s with Rees-Mogg;

    Back to the 1950s with May;

    Back to the 1970s with Corbyn;

    Whatever gets power is fine with the LibDems.

    Great choice for unionists. They deserve what they get.

  36. PictAtRandom says:

    Maybe parallels with the situation after the first 1974 election when the Norman and Janey Buchan types were fighting tooth and nail against the devolution advised by Head Office. Seem to remember that the SNP didn’t do too badly in the subsequent election.

    But who knows what combination of symbols and policies is liable to pop up on the BritLab fruit machine?

    Anyway, it just reminds us that the defects and strains in the UK constitution have been accumulating since before the last vote on “Europe”.

  37. Craig P says:

    Why don’t they go the whole hog and make a manifesto commitment to abolish devolution. They only supported it in the first place because they believed they would be in power for ever in Scotland.

  38. Guybrush Threepwood says:

    The Labour Party supports independence and self-determination for every nation in the world – except Scotland. They are now irrelevant in Scotland as the SNP have battered them into submission and replaced them as the part of social justice.

    There are Labour politicians who argue that the EU vote was won on a pack of lies and that people have the right to change there minds. In Scotland there was also a referendum which was won on a pack of lies and people also have the right to change their minds, especially since there is a massive change in circumstances now.

    We don’t even need Westminster’s permission to hold another referendum. There is nothing stopping the Scottish Government from holding an advisory referendum. The EU vote was also advisory and it would be difficult for the UK Government to accept the outcome of one advisory referendum but not accept the result of another. Ignoring that result would also breach the Claim of Right – which under Scottish Constitutional law states that Scots have the right to decide how they are governed. It would also breach the Act of Union which states that Scots Law is equal to English Law and must be protected in all perpetuity.

    My worry with an advisory referendum is that the British Nationalist parties would boycott an advisory referendum and so too would the UK media.

    This is why the SNP should transform the next UK or Scottish Election into a de-facto Independence Referendum. The UK Parties would be forced to participate and other nations have achieved independence via elections.

    If a majority of pro-independence MP/MSPs are returned then that is a mandate for independence.

  39. Corbyn wants a free united Ireland but not a free Scotland Farage wants England in the guise of Britain to be free to rule itselfe make its own laws with no one else telling them what to do but denies Scotland the same rights ??? Aye freedom is a noble thing until it is for Scotland ???

  40. Artyhetty says:

    Watch these lying scheming troughers though. They have friends in some very high places including the UK Tory party, their arrogance should tell us something, not least to watch them like a hawk.

    A GE, attempt to take as many seats from SNP, by hook or by crook, or/and a coup at Holyrood? Stay one step ahead…they know they are finished in Scotland without Tory and LibDems and to a certain extent the Greens.

    Just a thought, crazy I know, but their arrogance should perhaps concern us.

    What would you do if you wanted rid of a government that was democratically elected in your neighbouring country? They can’t openly sanction, or go for regime change, like they do in other countries, but they could try by making it look legit.

  41. Daisy Walker says:

    O/T Mid Term Senate Elections are due in November 2018 in America, and articles indicate the Democrats appear to be rallying, and may just tip the balance in the house.

    Which means (for us in dear old Scotia) that our American cousins are going to be busy, dealing with their own shit.

    Is Crobyn going to go for the UKIP voter, in which case a ‘lets screw Scotland’ and a ‘Hmm Brexit – we want British Jobs… no detail?’ message will play well… and will result in a No Deal Brexit and keep the establishment happy.

    And will that be enough to win him the swing seats in England to get the keys to No 10. The Scottish seats being neither here nor there to the outcome.

    If he does this, it will strengthen the case and the votes for Indy.

    Or will he go for some unclear Peoples Vote on something indeterminable for Brexit – which will result in No Deal… and keep the establishment happy, coupled with empty, vague, vow type noises about some possible Indy Ref 2, Devo Max thing for Scotland at some perfect time in the future. The English voters will likely buy the Peoples Vote thing, but the Indy Ref 2 thing would not play well with their UKIp swing voters.

    Will the tories risk going into another GE with Terrible May, or put someone else in the hot seat. Does it really matter. Red Tories, Blue Tories… they all have their instructions – No Deal Brexit.

    I think they’ll back Terrible May, it will be her finest hour, we’ll all be encouraged to get our shoulders to the wheel at ‘our countries’ time of greatest need. Dam Busters will be wall to wall on the telly – thank goodness I gave mine away. United we stand, divided we fall, God Save Our Gracious Queen ( and her tax havens). Blah, blah, blah.

    Get your Poppies out folks, any minute now, the Poppy Polis will be out to check your patriotism.

    And this time, until we win, we can remember the death rate in WW1 for Scottish Regiments was 26% compared with RUk Regiments of 13%.

    Reclaim the Poppy folks and when we are Indy we can put it to one side and look after our soldiers properly.


    We Wear 2 Poppies,

    And at the going down of the sun,
    and with our Votes,
    We Remember.

    Peace and love.

  42. Jason Smoothpiece says:

    have the right to freely choose their sovereignty and international political status with no interference.

    That no interference bit that needs brought up every time the Regime or media… interferes.

    Anyway the Labour party I know no one listens to them anymore but they are often quite funny.

  43. galamcennalath says:

    Proud Cybernat says:

    So why is Labour allowing them along with the rUK a vote on our IndyRef?

    Because they would be eejits? Or, is it just too much to hope for?

    A Labour manifesto commitment to oppose IndyRef2 would be the gift of the century.

    By oppose, they would presumably mean withholding a Section 30.

    Consultative referendums can achieve an actionable outcome e.g. EURef1.

  44. Valerie says:

    Wait until you see the shambles that will emerge on the People’s Vote.

    Jezza says he will back it, if the conference vote in favour of it. This has all the hallmarks of a bugger’s muddle.

    The arrogance of Labour to deny almost half of Scotland’s voters, a referendum on Independence. They can GTF.

  45. Achnababan says:

    In a nutshell Blair!

  46. Andy MacNicol says:

    As far as I know, the Labour Party’s policy on independence has never been debated or voted on at any level within the party. Who, therefore, has decided that a referendum should be opposed? Is this something which has been handed down from on high and everybody just goes along with it? They should, of course, have a debate at one of their conferences when the motion should be put but I don’t see that happening any time soon.

  47. Mark Russell says:

    Excellent. If Labour commits to a new vote on Europe and Scottish Independence and there is a subsequent GE, this could seriously damage the SNP representation in Westminster. Opposing both makes independence far more likely. Let’s hope their position doesn’t change again..

  48. Artyhetty says:


    Sorry so soon.

    Daisy I was upset to see that our publicly funded buses, Lothian buses, had an ad on their buses for the ‘Lowland RFCA’ a huge recruitment advert, go onto their twitter you will see the ad.

    I really don’t agree with this type of ad on our buses, but they all seem to be really happy to have that connection, bizarre.

  49. Andy-B says:

    Who the hell do Corbyn and Leonard think they are. The Scottish people will decide on independence, or not for that matter.

  50. HYUFD says:

    If Labour votes for a second EU referendum this week (and Corbyn has now said he will have to accept what it decides) then Brexit may be reversed anyway if he becomes PM, polling shows Remain would definitely win if there was No Deal thus rendering the SNP excuse for indyref2 redundant.

  51. HYUFD says:

    Plus if Corbyn only became PM in another hung parliament as is likely, if the Tories opposed another official indyref as is almost certain, joined probably by the DUP, likely it would need not only the votes of almost all Labour and SNP and PC and Green MPs but also LD MPs to pass the Commons.
    Of course if Unionist parties win a majority in 2021 in the Scottish Parliament elections any second independence referendum would not get passed by Holyrood after 2021 anyway for the remainder of the Holyrood term

  52. Fred says:

    Spoke this morning to a formerly non-committed University employed acquaintance who didn’t vote at all in 2014 (politicians are all the same!) only to receive a lecture on Theresa May, the Brexit shambles & how the only solution now is Scotland in Europe! That & the sunshine made my morning! 🙂

  53. Scottish Steve says:

    But according to unionists, if this happened, this would be oh so democratic because we’re all Brits and we’re all equal with one vote.

    Scottish unionists have a bizarre fetish: they enjoy being dominated by the English electorate and government. It makes them feel all warm and fuzzy and British inside.

    Makes me sick.

  54. bugger le Panda says:

    Logically Maccart, it is the extrapolation of their “oppose SNP at every step with every possible means”, doctrine

  55. call me dave says:

    Labour what are they like.

    Independence is normal no excuse needed to go for it.

    Herald and Evening Times owners report £7m pre-tax loss


    Jings! Craig Levein puts down the Sunday Nation crossword and smiles at the tv as Killie slide one into the net in the final seconds. FGS! 🙂

  56. Capella says:

    This scheme has all the hallmarks of another Neil Findlay cunning plan. But hey,it’s only Sunday afternoon. There’s plenty time for Jackie Baillie to join the competition to prodce the best vote losing plan for Scotland.

  57. Cubby says:

    I see the resident Wings drunk is spouting his pish again.

    Best to ignore the Wings drunk and hope he goes and bothers others with his crap.

    Do you try and have an intelligent conversation with a drunk in the pub – no – because it is a waste of time.

  58. dakk says:


    If this if that.

    If England would finally try to stand on it’s own two feet,then we wouldn’t have parasites like you disseminating their half truths and disinformation in order steal the assets of other countries.

  59. galamcennalath says:

    Staying in EU should not be option in any Brexit second referendum, says Unite’s McCluskey.

    I think he is missing the point of an EURef2! Those who support the idea don’t want a test of any deal or no deal, although they present if that way …. they want the electorate to return a Remain majority!

    No one actually wants an EURef2 for any other purpose than to call it all off!

  60. Petra says:

    As someone said on here already, if two wee Englishmen – ignorant nonenities, think that they can dictate the future of Scotland they’ve got another think coming. It’s bad enough that we’re having to suffer being ruled by the Tory party that we didn’t vote for who are in turn being run by a N Irish political party that we can’t vote for. A political party that’s calling the Orange Order shots.

    And if another General Election is called for and Corbyn ‘wins’ can anyone tell me how he can form a Government, say without the support of the SNP?

    Meanwhile on the Marr Show this morning he couldn’t answer any of the questions put to him about Brexit, such as what he would do about the Irish border situation. Marr in fact (honest for once) told him on a number of occasions that his proposals weren’t any different from Theresa May’s. Corbyn no doubt hoping to win a GE, hold another Referendum and just stay in the EU, even although he’s a euro-sceptic. He can see that there’s no way around the Brexit situation now other than staying in the CU and SM. Whatever way this goes it’s a no win situation for England. An out of the EU catastrophe or a remain and riots on the streets (or both).

    The BBC (Marr) in England still chuntering on about the anti-Semite carry-on in an attempt to discredit Corbyn, in support of the Tories, followed by the BBC in Scotland (Brewer) using Labour politicians, etc, in an attempt to discredit the SNP, in support of the Tories.


    The Sunday National is just choc-a-bloc with information. Don’t forget to buy it today. Better still place a request with your local newsagent.

    ‘SNP MP urges Nicola Sturgeon to plan for indyref2 in March.’

    ….”MacNeil’s intervention comes just weeks after an opinion poll by Deltapoll reported there would be majority support for Yes – when the “don’t knows” were excluded – if a referendum was held after Brexit.”

  61. CameronB Brodie says:

    Very reassuring to know JC values my human rights. Long live Ingsoc, I suppose.

    Prozac – Human Fly

  62. msean says:

    This would be conveniently stepped over if in the case of a hung parliament,unless,of course,Labour prefer the Tories like Milliband did.

    Labour looking more and more anti democratic.

    When you limit the scope of democracy to what YOU think is democracy,you basically become a dictator.Seems to be me both the left and right are good at defining democracy.

  63. galamcennalath says:

    If Labour conference passes support for EURef2 and it become Labour policy, we can be certain the Tories+DUP will try to hang on until March at all costs. They will deliver a Brexit, any Brexit.

    There will be a crunch in WM at some point. No matter the circumstances, Labour + SNP + others cannot defeat the Tories unless some of them break ranks.

    Also, with the state of Labour, some of them might even side with the Tories!

    I’m not saying a GE won’t happen, it’s just some clarity from Labour on what it might do perhaps makes an GE before Brexit less likely.

  64. No citizen of a foreign country will ‘prohibit’ the citizens of Scotland from exercising their sovereign and democratic right.
    We have already given our Parliament the mandate to hold an Idependence Referendum
    So fuck off ,Leonard, I believe is the latest diplomatic riposte from Salzburg.
    What an arrogant bunch of imperial tossers the Red Tories are.
    These people call themselves ‘socialists’?
    Now we know.
    Vote Labour vote to be a colony of England.

  65. Hamish100 says:

    HI FUD

    There’s already a pro-independence vote in the Scots Parliament. We don’t have to wait for 2021. BREXIT IS A MATERIAL CHANGE.

    You know that of course but no harm in reminding you.

    Leonards Labour joins the tories again.

  66. Petra says:


    The National Letters: Global value of Scotch whisky exports could be £25bn.’ Donald Blair, Edinburgh

    ”Bill Ramsay’s letter of Wednesday (in reply to the headline “Hands Off Our Whisky!”) is worthy of further expansion. He rightly makes the point that the average export price of a bottle of Scotch is around £3.33. This price per bottle, when multiplied by the number of bottled exported annually, is the basis for the much vaunted claim by the Scotch Whisky Association that the industry contributes “£4.37 billion pounds to the UK/Scottish economy annually”.

    This is, of course, only the first stage in the distribution chain. Before a bottle of Scotch arrives in an overseas retail shop (priced from £17 in the case of a common blend) to several hundred pounds per bottle (in the case of more exotic brands and single malts) it will likely have passed through several companies – many owned by the original multinational producers – who take a further cut of the revenue. The real global value of Scotch whisky exports is thus many times higher.

    Professor John Kay is not just any old economist. He is a visiting Professor of Economics at the London School of Economics, a Fellow of St John’s College, Oxford, a Fellow of the British Academy and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh – the city of his birth. He is a former member of the First Minister’s Council of Economic Advisers, was a weekly columnist in the Financial Times and led the Kay Review of equity markets for former UK Business Secretary Vince Cable. Not exactly the typical Trot! He estimates that the true global value of Scotch whisky exports is around £25bn. As someone who has spent 40 years working in the Scotch whisky industry, primarily in the US and Europe, I would concur with that estimate.

    Further, Professor Kay believes that only £400m of the £25bn global retail sales value of Scotch whisky (less than 2%) remains in Scotland – mainly as wages for relatively lowly-paid jobs in production facilities (adverts for production operators in 2017 quoted rates of £7.20 per hour) and local purchases of goods and services.

    It is a matter of concern, therefore, that attempts to simply “review” the economics of the Scotch whisky industry by successive annual conferences of the SNP have been repeatedly stymied by the Agenda Committee since 2011.”


    And just to add that Chivas in Paisley is closing down. Relocating to Dumbarton with many of the workers – mostly on zero hour contracts – thrown on the slag heap.

    Let’s hope that with Independence the whisky situation will change. Head Office based in Scotland, all whisky industry jobs remaining in Scotland (currently 25% in Scotland – 75% in England) and permanent contracts for all.

  67. Dan Huil says:

    At times Labour is actually more rabid in its British nationalism than the tories.

    Over the decades Labour has been given plenty chances by the Scottish electorate to make Scotland a better place for all.

    Labour has failed. Labour continues to put England’s wants above Scotland’ needs.

  68. Daisy Walker says:


    Re Lowland RFCA.

    I don’t know what to say really. An army in itself is not a bad thing, and I’ve met many a person who joined, in their teens, the TA and had a great time, learning to do all the physical activities, discipline and team work, and many an ‘old’ soldier who served and felt it gave them skills and challenges no other job would have, and even some who felt it provided them with a life/career choice that other options say via education or civvy street just wouldn’t have fitted.

    I think its our job to make sure they’re not sent to illegal wars, our job to make sure they’re not exploited, our job to ensure the other choices ARE available, and huge tracts of Scotland are not an unemployed waste land, where ‘cannon fodder’ jobs are the only option.

    And our job to let them know their countries true ‘army’ history, so deliberately airbrushed out of UKBritanias official version.

    26:13 We Wear 2 Poppies.

    Best wishes to all.

  69. Petra says:


    ‘Scots urged to put pressure on institutions funding nuclear arms.’


    ‘Stop funding Armageddon – why nuclear investment must end.’

  70. Thepnr says:

    I knew instinctively that Jim Murphy was a godsend for the SNP and support for Independence. The boy done well losing 40 of the 41 seats that Labour had held before the 2015 GE.

    We then had Kezia next up who succeeded in almost halving the Labour support in Scotland, according to the polls, before they rose again after she was replaced by Dicky Boy.

    I’ll admit I was hoping for Anas Sarwar as new leader of the Scottish Red Tories after Kezia as he would have wore that title like a glove but instead we got…Who?

    I had to look his name up, apparently he had been an MSP since 2011 which surprised me, as like most people outside of the Labour bubble I’d never heard of him. Still I suppose he was a breath of fresh air and maybe an opportunity to regain some credibility for the Red Tories in Scotland.

    Then didn’t the boy do well in 2017, he managed to send another half dozen MP’s to Westminster and get the vote up from 2015 from 24% to 27%, surely he was on a roll!

    Sadly with this latest declaration I can see that 27% vote halving and leaving them with 1 MP in Westminster and that’s if they’re very lucky and the good voters of Morningside don’t all jump over to the Ruth Davidson party.

    Sorry Dick, yer teas oot now and yer time is nearly up. Next!

  71. sandy says:

    Take an extended urination break.

  72. Ghillie says:

    Has Jeremy been told his mind has been changed?

  73. Vote Labour and be a colony of England administered for our imperial masters by Ian Murray in a butcher’s apron suit.
    They actually believe that 500 odd English MP’s can tell us what’s allowed and not.

    Roll on Independence so that we can kick the remaining Fifth Columnists out of their little sinecures.

    A thought occurs.
    When we are independent, and EU 28, and EngWaland has departed on a No Deal WTO hissy fit, and the 3,000’000 EU citizens in England and Wales are given the Windrush Treatment, will the 400,000 English born Scottish citizens who hold Brit Passports be ‘foreign nationals’, and treated to the same ‘hostile environment’ which their English cousins are imposing on Europeans, including Scots Born Down There who opt for a Scottish European Passport?
    I watched Leonard on Brewer’s Droop.
    Can anyone imagine this man running Scotland? Seriously.

  74. Orri says:

    Of course Labour will oppose indyref2. That doesn’t mean they won’t cave in to an S30 so as to ensure Westminster accepts a Yes vote.

    Remember that if they don’t say it then they allow the Tories to run up the flag as the only true unionist party.

    As to the giving a mandate. That’s stretching things more than a tad. Or simply handing the SNP victory on a plate.

    Tories simply override Holyrood. Or at least depends on how badly judged their current attempt is.

  75. jfngw says:

    The yoons are funny, they use percentages to claim you have no mandate for a referendum for a parliament which uses FPTP, a parliament were no single party has had more than 50% for some time. Holding the majority of seats in Scotland becomes irrelevant.

    They then ignore a more proportional parliament at Holyrood were the independence supporting parties hold the majority.

    I suspect even if independence parties had over 50% they would then include those that don’t vote or the dead to claim it was still not a mandate.

    There is going to be a almighty fit of pique when the referendum is announced.

  76. galamcennalath says:

    #DarkMoneyDavidson is no better a performer than the last few Labour North British Team Leaders. In fact, there are arguably more negatives associated with both her and her totally obnoxious party.

    However, somehow, the media has managed to protect and promote DMDavidson reasonably well, so far.

    For IndyRef1, the Tories hid and used Labour as a front. Yet recently the Tories themselves have been willing be the face of their Union. Must show how low an opinion of Labour the Establisment must now have.

  77. Petra says:


    ‘More than 600 anti-nuclear campaigners stage peace walk at Faslane.’


    From someone who’s been there.

    ‘David Pratt: Reflecting on decades of war in battle-scarred Afghanistan.’


  78. Marie Clark says:

    Labour eh! What are they like. A bunch of useless nobodies kidding oan that they can play grown up politics. Jeez oh.

    I must confess, I don’t think that I can get myself worked up too much about Labour or their manifesto. After all Jeremy said on Thursday that mibbies if we Scots were good, HE would Allow us to have Indyref2. Izat no offy kind o’ him. Noo, a few days later, they want tae pit it in THEIR manifesto, that we’re never ever to be allowed anither indyref. Zat right. We’ll see about that yin boys.

    In the meantime, Richard who and the rest of Labour, go and lie doon in a darkened room and gie the rest o’ us peace.

  79. david says:

    Before we get to giving consent the Scottish government will have to ask any evidence they are even planning to do that before 2021 when the mandate runs out

  80. Macart says:

    Worth reading.


    Yeah, it was always the logical destination of their tribalism, but good God. That it was even suggested… It betrays everything they should be standing for.

    They’ve just dumped on the very principle of democracy and a people’s mandate from a very great height.

  81. Macart says:

    Just to be crystal clear to the halfwit that suggested this motion?

    The Claim of Right (To which Labour and the Libdems are signatories), and the UN Charter are not serving suggestions. They aren’t just airy ideals. Nor are they only applicable on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. They are very public and solemn contracts with the populations of nations.

    Maybe worth a thought.

  82. Thepnr says:

    @Jack collatin

    “I watched Leonard on Brewer’s Droop”

    Oh No! no, no, please. I can’t take any more, hahahahahaha 🙂

  83. CameronB Brodie says:

    That Hothersall is another one who appears not to understand the principle of universal human rights, comparing Scotland’s legal right to self-determination as a child’s desire for a particular dinner. The man is either a bit thick or a bit of a fascist. I’ll accept he’s a British nationalist as the end-result is the same, compromised cognition and cultist behavior.

  84. Chick McGregor says:

    Labour’s lawyers might want run that manifesto proposal through a reputable international law firm.

    It is counter to the UN Charter and many derivative legally binding treaties to which the UK is a signatory.

  85. call me dave says:


    Thanks for the WGD linky thing. Good summation.

    So theoretically if ‘Scottish Lab’ have zero MPs at any future UKGE then any WM Labour Government darn Sarf can tell us North of the wall tough? 🙂

    Vote winner sure enough.. FGS!

    Do you hear that voters….

  86. yesindyref2 says:

    Stupid policy. They’re copying the Tories. Next we’ll see the clown saying, like Miliband, that if it meant doing a deal with the SNP MPs he wouldn’t want to be Prime Minister and Labour to be in power. Like Miliband in Cameron’s back pocket, Corbyn is in May’s handbag.

    The Tories will know this, and it increases the chance of another snap GE which the Tories could win without the DUP.

  87. CameronB Brodie says:

    It is not an insult to suggest the British nationalist’s posses cognition that is compromised, as their thoughts must remain bound within the ‘One Nation’ myth for their reality to remain intact. Subsequently, they are detached from experiential reality and prone to cultist behaviour, such as hostility to out-groups, irrational thinking and authoritarianism.

  88. Dorothy Devine says:

    you know what struck me about the bitter little ,small minded piece by Hutcheon in the Herald – not Dugdale , if it had been Ms Sturgeon it would have been ‘ Sturgeon’ , not Kezia Dugdale nor Kezia but the over familiar “Kez” > Pally are they?

    I noticed the other article on ‘Salmond” .

    My feelings for the Herald have reduced over the years from impressed to utter disgust.

  89. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    The Labour Party in Scotland in its present form must be wiped out.

    I wonder which one will realise first that he or she will be remembered in history as collaborators with the English establishment against Scotland.

    And what is more.They are stupid. Donald Dewar was a committed unionist but he would not have made a mistake like this.

    Lets go for all 59 on the single issue of independence.

  90. Thepnr says:

    I don’t think that Richard Leonard and the team around him have really thought this through. Oh well, same old, same old.

  91. Davy says:

    My wife and I was watching the Richard Leonard interview on Brewers droop “politics show” today, and after a very short time my wife barks at leonard on the TV ” for f–ks sake answer a question “.

    It appears all the previous labour leaders (Scottish branch office) suffer from the same affliction of not being capable of answering any actual questions when being interviewed on Sunday politics shows.

    I remember the like of Jim murphy, kezia and johann being guilty of the same problem !!! It makes you wonder if they have a secret interviewer who is out of sight and asking them different questions than what we hear from Gordon Brewer.

    Or maybe they suffer from “TAS”and don’t realise we can see straight through their deception.

    Note: T A S -Thick As Shit

  92. twathater says:

    As I said on a post a couple of days ago

    JEREMY JUST FU*K RIGHT OFF , and take DICKIE and the rest of your brit nat unionist imbeciles with you

    Labour the party that proves STUPIDITY is a transmittable disease within a group.

  93. yesindyref2 says:

    @Dorothy Devine
    The Herald had a real chance of becoming a real newspaper again, with the logical unbundling of the ex-Indy supporting Sunday Herald which gave it a bit of a conflict, and The National having a Sunday. Nice clear lines so that sound Scottish journalism could flourish again.

    The Herald decided not to bother.

  94. jfngw says:

    Rumours are that Labour are dropping the Red Flag from end of the conference and replacing it with something more appropriate using a flute band. This is to encourage those who they now see as their core supporters in Scotland.

  95. Petra says:

    @ CameronB Brodie says:at 5:15 pm … ”It is not an insult to suggest the British nationalist’s posses cognition that is compromised, as their thoughts must remain bound within the ‘One Nation’ myth for their reality to remain intact. Subsequently, they are detached from experiential reality and prone to cultist behaviour, such as hostility to out-groups, irrational thinking and authoritarianism.”

    Spot on Cameron. Sums it up, imo. If they’d to think outside of their box (if they had one) and their ”myths” were burst, they’d go crazy. Crazier than they are at present, that is.

  96. HYUFD says:

    Hamish100 And 63% of Scots then voted for Unionist parties at the 2017 general election after that Holyrood vote

  97. jfngw says:

    If the SNP didn’t exist, who would I vote for in Scotland. I seem to have the choice of three parties bereft of any principles and led by cretins or a well meaning show-boater. What a wilderness of talent that looks like, I think I would just waste my voting paper.

  98. Welsh Sion says:

    “Corbyn would back members on new [EU] referendum”

    Jeremy Corbyn says …

    BBC News, UK
    23 September 2018

    “Labour to block new Scottish independence vote”

    Richard Leonard says …

    BBC News, Scotland
    23 September 2018

    In my first draft of this post, I was going to invite you all to “Spot the Fud.” Then I realised the true position. BOTH of them are fuds.

  99. jfngw says:

    At least it’s going to spice up the next election in Scotland. We can play how low will they go, the Tory/Labour battleground that is wooing the OO and British Nationalist cult vote.

  100. Contrary says:

    Kind of o/t, I made a fairly long comment on the previous post, then added to it and then put that comment on the Talking Up Scotland site – and John has, in his unpredictable manner, added it to the blog as an article (the headline picture with ‘I disagree’ could have any of several meanings,,,), with zero editing, so it includes a partial comment from Dr Jim here (from further up the thread) – all fully referenced, of course – so I hope they don’t mind?

    It is always good to be reminded that every comment we make is effectively published. When I say ‘good’, I mean in a fortifying, character-building, way.

  101. CameronB Brodie says:

    I didn’t just come up with that off the top of my head, that’s post-modern critical social theory, that is. 🙂

  102. Marie Clark says:

    I think Labour have forgotten that as recently as the 4th July 2018, there was a debate in the HOC led by Ian Blackford, It was all about Scotland’s claim of Right. The usual suspects bumped their gums together, and moaned their full, but, the motion PASSED WITHOUT DIVISION.

    I remember a few folks on here commenting on the Bill of Rights passing, without the Britnats in the HOC paying a lot of attention. They were all to busy fighting amongst themselves over Brexit. Some of us did say at the time that it was likely to come back and bite them on the bum.

    Oh well Labour, carry on, let’s see how it plays out now. I see from Rev’s twitter that the likes of Cat Boyd is calling them out over this.

    Chin up folks, end game is in sight, let’s be ready when it comes.

  103. yesindyref2 says:

    I may as well post this hear as well – as that dire Hutcheon article.

    One of the things paper journalists (think paper tigers) seem to be very poor on is reading the “about” page on a website. Some extracts from Wings about page:

    “Wings Over Scotland is a Scottish political website, which focuses particularly on the media whether mainstream print and broadcast organisations or the online and social-network community as well as offering its own commentary and analysis.”

    ** *focuses particularly on the media ***

    “The site advocates Scottish independence, but is not affiliated or connected in any way to the SNP, and neither gives to or receives money from the party, nor indeed any other party.”

    *** The site advocates Scottish independence ***

    Would that all media was as open and honest about its affiliations.

    ” We have an inquiring mind, and welcome intelligent contributions from all sides of the political debate.”

    *** from all sides of the political debate ***

    Currenly there is a prolific poster who supports the Union. He /she / it has not been banned.

  104. Bill McLean says:

    PLEASE folks ignore the troll!!

  105. yesindyref2 says:

    THAT by the way is why The National is right to ahve on its masthead that it supports Independence. It makes it the only honest title in openly declaring its affiliation and bias.

  106. Cubby says:


    The relevant sentence is ” and welcomes intelligent contributions from all sides of the political debate”

    INTELLIGENT. – not rehashed misleading propaganda crap that has been churned out by the Britnat media for far too long in Scotland and the rest of the UK. Why would anyone want to read it again on Wings.

  107. velofello says:

    I watched the Marr show today, Corbyn isn’t very bright is he? Marr fielded him a couple swerved balls and he foolishly attempted to respond. As for the Brewer show and Leonard, pitiful. Then we have Ian McWhirter unhappy with Twitter, presumably because it provides the public with a means to express their opinions even if there are times when their opinions could be better expressed.

  108. Macart says:


    Yup. It would be quite refreshing and honest to see yer daily Record declare ‘Supporting Labour and the British State’. Or mibbies daily Telegraph ‘supporting the Conservative party and all things self serving’. The daily Heil ‘supporting Skeletor and the forces of evil’, that kinda thing.

    The list is endless really. 😉

  109. CameronB Brodie says:

    As with sectarianism and racism, British nationalism is concerned with the control of power and the distribution of resources. The centuries old British nationalist project has completely screwed up the Scottish sense of self. We are now a nation that is so uncertain of our own entitlement to legal rights, that we have Scottish MPs and MSP calling for the human rights of Scots to be further abused by remote politicians, mostly representing English constituencies, who are empowered by an outdated ‘constitution’.


  110. yesindyref2 says:

    Let’s face it Cubby, Independence has facts and truth on its side, all the Unionists have to play with is distortions and outright lies. It passes as “intelligent contribution” from them, it’s all they’ve got.

  111. jfngw says:

    Just remember when the unionists tells you it was a UK wide vote they forget to mention that only one Scottish MP voted to hold a EU referendum. The decision was made by MP’s in England and the result to remove Scotland was made by voters in England. Holding the vote was imposed on Scotland as well as the result to leave the EU.

    The views of the majority of Scotland’s MP’s was ignored, the views of the majority of the Scottish electorate was ignored. That is how the union works, Labour are now merely about to include it into party policy.

  112. Capella says:

    Craig Murray posts on The Guardian fabricating a false story about Julian Assange and Russian plots. Very disturbing if papers like the Guardian are simply tools of MI6.

  113. Lochside says:

    Petra, 6.07PM… Psychological terms it’s known as Cognitive Dissonance. I encountered it all the time during canvassing in the REF. Like the time I challenged two individuals at a Better Together stall in Glasgow’s West end about the theft of Scotland’s 6000 sq miles of maritime territory and the McCrone report. Both men just refused to believe me. I insisted they find out themselves by googling it, but they just turned away in confusion.

    The difference is that Unionist politicians and the MSM don’t actually suffer this mental struggle. They know the truth, and with purpose of malice, spend all their waking hours lying to these benighted BT voters in order to prevent them breaking through the walls of deception that imprison them emotionally.

  114. Glamaig says:

    Bought my first Sunday National today having been away on holiday and missed the first two editions.

    Some great articles and it feels quite retro to be reading a Sunday again (stopped buying the Sunday Herald in 2016 when I started feeling they were not on our side)

    I was going to increase my monthly sub to the SNP instead but dammit just decided to do both. Looks like they’re gonna need it soon…

  115. Iain says:

    Well now we know,
    Labour is the enemy of the Scottish people.
    Glad that’s cleared up!

  116. velofello says:

    @ Cameron B Brodie: what constitution,you mean convention surely? You posted above extracts from the UN, and these are what we must emphasise in campaigning. Useful also to enquire of the views of the passing public on our ruling politicians,May, Johnson, Fox, etc., and the potential ruler Corbyn. An opinion pin board at a campaign stall could be useful.

  117. yesindyref2 says:

    I guess we could make up our own, and Rev could do a posting of it maybe 🙂

    Kind of a Wings competition! “The views expressed are not my own”.

  118. gus1940 says:

    ‘As Mighty As Boadicea’ according to Rees Mogg talking of The Maybot’s triumph at Salzburg and her subsequent speech.

    The bullshit coming from the Brexit Loonies and their media fan club becomes more ludicrous by the day with the likes of yesterday’s Daily Heil with ‘Theresa’s Finest Hour’.

    If it wasn’t for the fact that millions of gullible brainwashed idiots seem to lap up such rubbish it would all be laughable.

  119. galamcennalath says:

    yesindyref2 says:

    Independence has facts and truth on its side, all the Unionists have to play with is distortions and outright lies.

    I believe that to be completely true.

    I’ve had people say to me, “there are always two sides”. Normally I would also say this is true.

    I eat meat, vegetarians say this is wrong. I like dogs, others say they are a waste of resources. People do hold different views.

    So what about pro-UK folks? Shouldn’t they be allowed to have different opinions too?

    The problem I have with that is so often the pro-UK side is dishonest about what they actually believe and want. The disguise their true believes because they are unpalatable. Or, individuals are quite clearly just repeating propaganda and actually believe it.

    They say they want a Union … little evidence of that.

    They say the UK stands for fairness … one of the most unequal states in Europe.

    They say the UK cares about people …. lowest state pensions in Europe.

    They say the UK and its past Empire are morally superior to others …. like fck!

    They say the UK is a democracy … not by modern European standards.

    Etc etc..

    Sad to say, actually, but as far as I can see, BritNats are so often trying defend the indefensible.

  120. CameronB Brodie says:

    They sound like good ideas though I’m no campaign organiser. I’m simply a disabled Scot who knows a bit about stuff and is totally brickin’ it over Brexit. I’m a normalist and wish to protect my civil and human rights from authoritarian nationalism that is driven by right-wing, Anglocentered, populism. 😉

  121. Bob Mack says:

    Fresh from Andrew Marr grilling Corbyn on anti semitism, we have the Scottish Labour NEC member and conference chair Andy Kerr calling a woman from the assembled to speak on a topic.

    He then remarked that “Did you just cross yourself? Maybe not them”

    What was he thinking? Your a Catholic? Labour is obviously riddled with prejudice of one type or another. A house d I video can never stand.

  122. Cubby says:

    Lochside @7.29pm

    No voters living in their own version of the movie THE MATRIX. Sad isn’t it.

  123. Dr Jim says:

    Speaking to a committed Rangers Brexit supporter today who is now a committed YES to Independence supporter because, and wait for it, he now understands that football transfers from abroad will take three months for visa applications and that’ll ruin football in Scotland “But under Sturgeon Independence means free movement of footballers from the EU and Sturgeon won’t bring in the same immigration policies as England so Rangers will still be able to bring in the lower league youngsters from there so Independence will be good for Rangers”

    So you see folk vote for stuff or against stuff for a whole lot of different reasons that have sweet FA to do with politics

  124. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

    We’ve always know here on WOS that “Labour is the enemy of the Scottish people”
    @ Iain says at 7:42 pm

    The important thing is that NOW EVERYONE ELSE IN SCOTLAND KNOWS IT TOO.

    You are either for Scotland or against her.

    There is NO UK or country of ‘Great Britain’ (and there never ever was, it was a con just like the Labour Party was and is a con on the Working Class).

    There is only Greater England and her North British Colony.

    The planets aligning nicely in our favour laddies and lassies.


  125. Scott says:

    Have you all seen this.

    One of Scotland’s main news publishers, which controls the Herald and Evening Times in Glasgow, has reported a £7m pre-tax loss for last year.
    As for Leonard waste of space.

  126. Ghillie says:

    Apparently Richard Who? hasn’t shared his cunning plan with his boss yet.

  127. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    Andy MacNicol at 1.50

    Over the years there have been several attempts to have the independence option discussed on the agenda at Labour conferences in Scotland but it has never been allowed

  128. Dr Jim says:

    Any political party who asks for your vote then refuses to allow you to speak isn’t a political party, it’s something entirely different

    Labour: the party who wants to silence you
    Tory: the party who doesn’t care what you say

    SNP: Would you like some choices with that?

    Which party do you want to sup with?..Not difficult is it?

  129. Robert Peffers says:

    @msean says: 23 September, 2018 at 3:09 pm:

    ” … When you limit the scope of democracy to what YOU think is democracy,you basically become a dictator.”

    Let’s be brutally frank, msean, You cannot have a democracy in a monarchy and the United Kingdom is a monarchy. However, even that is a corruption of the truth for the United Kingdom is just what it says it is in its title.

    It is called a united Kingdom because it is, legally, a two partner kingdom of two equally sovereign kingdoms. (They had to be two equally sovereign in order to be legally qualified to sign the Treaty).

    However, there is a couple of wee legal glitchs that still remain. The first being that one of the two component kingdoms is composed of three countries and one of them historically militarily annexed the other two and that means the two annexed countries were undemocratically forced into the Union.

    The other legal glitch being that each of the two kingdoms have very different rules of law that are incompatible with each other. The monarchy of one kingdom is a legal sovereign monarch while in the other kingdom the people are legally sovereign and those two legal systems can never be compatible.

    Anyway, it goes even deeper than that for the kingdom with the sovereign monarch has a remaining ruling aristocracy. The Lords have hereditary peers going back as far as the Anglo Saxon invasion of South Britain and have added to those Law Lords and Church lords, (Archbishops). You cannot have a democracy with an unelected upper chamber nor can you have one when there is a sovereign monarch who legally owns everything including the government.

    The United Kingdom has never been a democratic government.

  130. Cubby says:

    Dan Huil @3.23pm

    ” to put England’s wants above Scotlands needs”

    A simple definition of a British Nationalist.

  131. Ok Scottish nation, I guess the decades old aspiration for independence will have to go on hold. Some dithering old guy from Islington says we’re not getting it.

  132. galamcennalath says:

    Widespread disruption with flights grounded and holiday makers stranded …. No Deal Brexit?

    Looks like an Icelandic volcano might beat the Tories to cause chaos first …

  133. Hamish100 says:

    hi fuddy wuddy -wrong again. Nothing positive to say about independence for Scotland? No not one thing?

    ot Dave McEwan Hill- see you mentioned at length in the Sunday National over possible currency. What is your line? Personally I am content to go for a Scottish £ or even the euro.

  134. HYUFD says:

    galamcennalath Unemployment UK 4%, EU average unemployment 7%, French unemployment 9%, Italian unemployment 11%, Spanish unemployment 15%, Greek unemployment 20%

  135. Petra says:

    @ Contrary at 6:37pm …..

    Excellent article Contrary. Maybe Stu would think of posting it on here?


    @ Cameron …… “Petra I didn’t come up with that off of the top of my head….”

    I know that, but it doesn’t matter Cameron. You had wits enough, the cognitive ability, to know when and where it was appropriate to post it. A quality sadly lacking in a number of people we know of.


    @ Lochside at 7:29 …… “Unionist MP’s and the MSM don’t actually suffer from this mental struggle. They know the truth ……..”

    Like you Lochside I’ve come across many (brainwashed) people who aren’t conversant with facts and seem to be loathe to listen, have their wee bubble burst, however in the case of politicians and the MSM there’s no excuse for them, as you say they do know the truth. So what does it all boil down to in messing with people’s heads, their lives, their futures ….. a pay packet, a backhander? Whatever the case, I don’t know how they can sleep at night / live with themselves.

  136. HYUFD says:

    Robert Peffers Name the last time a monarch has refused to sign a Bill passed by the House of Commons? By convention they simply do not do so, their role is now as a ceremonial Head of State only

    The House of Lords can of course only block and delay Bills passed by the House of Commons for a year under the Parliament Act of 1949 (reducing the delay to a year from the 2 years set in the 1911 Parliament Act) before the Commons gets its way and the Bill passes anyway

  137. Achnababan says:

    Excellent pithy summation of the situation Mr Peffers

  138. CameronB Brodie says:

    You’ll give me a big head. 😉

  139. HYUFD says:

    Hamish100 Nothing positive to say about independence for Scotland? No not one thing? One positive yes, it would stop Scottish nationalists blaming every problem in Scotland on the English. However the Union is still better for both

  140. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    Hamish at 9.01

    Here is what I said about Jim Fairlie’s entirely misguided letter

    “I won’t hold my breath waiting for Jim Fairlie to understand what I actually said in the letter of mine he misquotes in today’s Sunday National. Perhaps he should read it again. At no point did I suggest I support a currency union with the UK. I take serious objection to being carelessly misquoted. I do not support a currency union with the UK. I support a fully reserved Scottish currency and an independent Scottish central bank. Other well informed people do not. But the actual fact is that a decision on our currency will be taken by a Scottish Government out of a range of options at an appropriate time. When we are independent.
    That is the point I was making. I’ll make this as easily understood as possible – by adopting one currency model in the White Paper we gave our well resourced and media powerful opposition a target which they could effectively lie about. And they did. (And the Governor of the Bank of England conceded that that is exactly what they did). They would have lied with impunity about any position on the currency we had adopted. And we then got tied down in an unnecessary argument which destroyed our momentum at a critical time and contributed significantly to the “Fear Factor” they were motoring on. Our position should have been the entirely correct one – that there is a range of currency options open to us and we will choose the best one for us when we are in the independent position to be able to do so.
    As is the case with the plethora of other issues which our opponents would love to encourage us into divisive arguments about – before we even get to the point of all these choices actually being realistic options for us to debate and make decisions about.”

  141. Fixitfox says:

    I saw a ‘Britain Elects’ poll yesterday predicting 260 WM seats for Labour; 320 for the Tories; and 51/59 Scottish seats for SNP. Puts all the drivel coming out of Labour into perspective.

  142. crazycat says:

    @ Thepnr at 3.48

    apparently [Richard Leonard] had been an MSP since 2011 which surprised me

    He hasn’t; in 2011 he stood in Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley (giving me the opportunity to not vote for him), confident of replacing Cathy Jamieson (I never voted for her, either), who had gone to Westminster in 2010. He lost to Adam Ingram as part of the great SNP surge – I was so surprised by this that I thought the replacement of red by yellow on the on-line live results map was a mistake, till I saw the figures.

    RL only became an MSP in 2016, on the list: [sic])

  143. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    HYUFD at 9.22

    Can you give us some examples of “Scottish nationalists blaming every problem in Scotland on the English”? Can’t think of any sensible Scot making such remarks but you’ve got a couple of hours before I go to bed to come up with some.

  144. Lochside says:

    Richard Cranium and Corby, just two heads of the glove puppet hydra manipulated by the City of London and the Anglo elite. Did the ‘Remembrancer’ remind them that the Scottish colony is still required to be looted fully of the new oilfields off Shetland plus all the land and its resources?

    Something has stirred these conscience lacking dupes to foist their fatuous comments on us. Another diversion away from the deliberate moves for cliff edge Brexit and flight from EU regulation of all the dirty money waiting like a fatberg to float into the coffers on the New Brit offshore empire of bent banking on the Brexit Exit?

  145. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Hamish100 @ 21:01,

    My reading of it was that the writer was complaining that the “currency union” option floated at IR1 was recommended only as a short-term measure, but the Yes campaign didn’t spell that out at the time. As if it was some kind of dastardly plot to lock us into economic slavery to England for the rest of time.

    Whereas anyone thinking about it for more than a second would realise that of course it would be a temporary measure, and that there would necessarily have to be some kind of transition period to a currency of our own.

    This line of thinking appears to parallel some of the Bella crowd, who seem to think that all such matters should be worked out in excruciatingly fine detail while we remain stuck completely within the UK, so that we can be seen to launch with a new currency on day zero. (Maybe also partly in the fond hope that Corby would finally manage to win in the meantime so we could forget about it after all.)

    Maybe somebody should have advised the nascent USA to have delayed its struggle for independence until it had carefully worked out exactly what it was going to do about a future currency. Instead they winged it for some time using Spanish silver. (Hence “quarters”, which were once literal cut-ups.) Didn’t seem to hurt them too much, then or after.

  146. Conan the Librarian says:

    The Sunday Herald moderators are really running scared. In answer to a question, I cut and pasted the above message (kill with hammers) in full to prove it was a joke not a “threat”, complete with quotation marks.

    They deleted it.

  147. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    crazycat @ 21:32,

    Ah, Cathy Jamieson. Another one-time inept NorthBritLab seeker on the golden road to London. I will never forget, when she was a member of the late-unlamented “Scottish Executive”, her increasingly confused attempt to explainerise some aspect of policy to an increasingly contemptuous Brewer. (With such provocation, even he couldn’t resist tweaking the Labourite tail at the time.)

    Maybe that explains why no NorthBritLab rep since has dared to try to explain anything on the telly. Far safer to dodge and obfuscate instead. (Not to mention slavishly aping the Ruth Davidson not Tory Party.)

    Her interview is still on YouTube somewhere, I suppose. Priceless.

    Except, that is, the thought that we could get any of those dullard no-hoper union functionaries like Dicky Who? back in charge again.

  148. Bill McLean says:

    DMH – please!!! You only validate his nuisance value by responding! Please!!!!!

  149. Thepnr says:


    Glad you’re there to keep me right 🙂 I read the Wiki entry before posting, not closely enough obviously as I missed the “coming second” LOL.

    The truth then, makes it all the more surprising that Labour have elected as leader in Scotland someone with just one years experience as an MSP. I’m not surprised now that he is unable to differentiate between what is devolved and what is reserved, when he mutters his questions at PMQ’s.

  150. Macart says:

    Apparently the current population of the the planet earth is 7.442 billion souls. They populate some 195 countries.

    193 are members of the UN and that includes the current ‘United’ Kingdom.

    Article 1:2 of the UN charter states:

    2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;

    Ladies and gentlemen? Hay gif yooz…

    Also apparently, the UN charter is a serving suggestion.

  151. Dr Jim says:

    @Fitfox 9.28pm

    I saw that poll yesterday too and SKY actually spent all of three seconds reporting it, but I guess Jeremy Corbyn saw it too that’s probably why he TRIED sooking up to the SNP with his MAYBE ALLOW Scotland some democracy, but that’s all been snookered by his own party since all of one day, it’s probably also the reason why the Tories are afraid of taking another chance at an election because if the numbers add up wrong for them, which they do they might not do it for fear of losing to Germy and handing Scotland the gift of democracy once again

    All bad for the Tories because Germy will likely give in on Northern Ireland unity vote which the SNP would jump all over immediately, so no upside for Germy and Labour either way they try to slice it

    Although two really good things for Northern Ireland and Scotland, so silver lining for us whatever the morons do

    The aftermath will be when the folk in England find out both of their governments of choice have been lying to them about Scotlands wealth all these years and it’s really England that’s skinty broke and Trident’s being ferried overland to Lake Windermere

    The Lake Windermere bit is a joke of course but they’ll have to think about where they’re going to put their big bang expensive never to be used toy, well I mean they want it so….

  152. HYUFD says:

    Fixitfox Latest electoral calculus poll average

    Con 290

    Lab 278

    SNP 44

  153. HYUFD says:

    Dave McEwan Hill Oh just supposed lack of democracy, all poverty in Scotland, Westminster being a supposed English only Parliament, oil, every historic ill in Scottish history being England’s fault, just look back over previous threads…

  154. HYUFD says:

    Plus Brexit of course is all the fault of the English, despite the fact London for example voted Remain while Wales voted Leave

  155. galamcennalath says:

    Telegraph … “A majority of the Cabinet now supports moving towards a Canada-style trade deal with the EU following the outright rejection of Theresa May’s Chequers plan”

    That would be clarity – a long way short of CU and SM.

    I have to be honest and say that is probably the closest solution encompassing what the Leave campaign offered voters, May’s red lines, and what the EU will accept.

    It is, of course, totally unacceptable to Scotland and should hasten IndyRef2.

    It will also be unacceptable to the DUP since it will ‘divorce’ NI from the rest of the UK when, by necessity, when the accompanying backstop kicks in. Without the DUP it’s hard to see how the Tories can run with a Canada plan at WM.

    Perhaps if both Tories and the EU sign up to a ‘Canada’ plan, then May might think she could go for a snap GE with that deal in the bag, and win. Thus overcoming the DUP problem with the backstop. Yes, she might actually win.

    More popcorn on the shopping list.

  156. dakk says:

    There is a new series starting on the History zchannel called Why Does Everybody Hate The English.

    It was trailed by a fat Gammon trumpeting the English are without a doubt the greatest people in the universe.

    Tongue in cheek or not I think he gave the plot away before the series even started.

    Super England,super England,no one likes us we don’t care….

    What is it about Britnats and their conceit and seige mentality?

  157. Petra says:

    Leonard’s probably never heard of the Claim of Rights or Article 1:2 of the UN charter either, Thepnr. Reading up on them tonight, lol. Another ignoramus, like Davidson, who thought he was smart enough to be a political leader in wee Scotlandshire. He, like she, is in for a shock.

  158. Macart says:

    Mmmm, another thought occurs. Labour have formed government in the UK and Scotland. They are aware that the UK is a member of the UN? I’m sure they are also aware of Scotland’s claim of right as I posted earlier.

    They have a choice to make. Based on their reasoning behind this current idiocy.

    People before party? Or party before people?

    In their own time then.

  159. CameronB Brodie says:

    If there is one thing about this debate which really tests my patients, it’s those who, for whatever reason, are unable to appreciate the significance of Westminster controlling all the important instruments of political and economic power. Her Majesty’s government has always born responsibility for the lack of democracy that Scotland enjoys. Why does Westminster treat Scotland as it does, it’s in its nature and become habitual.


  160. HYUFD says:

    galamcennalath According to YouGov shortly after the referendum 43% of Scots would be happy with a Canada type deal with the EU, 24% opposed, not too far off the UK as a whole where 50% supported a Canada type deal with 24% opposed.

    Scots were strongly opposed to No Deal though with 48% opposed and only 25% in favour, in the UK it was closer, 32% favoured No Deal but 44% still opposed it. (pages 5-6)
    A Canada deal as you say may require a Tory majority to see off the DUP

  161. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    HYUFD at 10.32

    Is that waffle the best you can do?

  162. Meg merrilees says:


    I think part of her dilemma is that she signed up to the backstop for N Ireland last December – which effectively shafts the DUP – and Tusk has already commented that ‘ you can’t make a deal with us and then start unpicking it afterwards’ they are ‘holding her feet to the fire’ on that one by the sounds of things and she can’t wriggle out of it.

    If that’s the case then the DUP will not be happy and she’ll be out on her ear.

    Just listened to a summing up of the Labour conference tonight and they discussed the EU Referendum at length with a view to ascertaining Labour’s position on another vote.

    Some MP (for Bootle I think) said all the usual about how despite the fact the people has spoken etc.. things have changed and we need to realise that and hold a second vote. Funny that, because they don’t want to consider that argument for Scotland. No mention of their proposal for Scotland on the news just like there was no mention of Nicola’s comments on Treeza’s plan being a dead duck.

    Nicola doesn’t exist so far as the MSM are concerned – well, guess what, she does and she has more brains than the lot of them put together and despite what Scottish Tory and Labour politicians are saying, there is a change in the appetite for Indy.

    Actually heard someone quoting the figures re the EU ref of teenagers who have come of age since 2016 v oldies who have died since 2016 and apparently by January there balance will be tipped towards the younger generation , the majority of whom want to stay in the EU.

  163. stewartb says:

    There is more to the role and influence of the monarch than the formal enactment of bills AFTER they are passed in Parliament.

    QUEEN’S OR PRINCE’S CONSENT: the link below is to an official document for members of the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel which states in its introduction:

    “1.1 This pamphlet sets out some of the issues that arise when considering whether Queen’s or Prince’s consent should be signified to a bill and contains information about the signification of consent.

    1.2 OPC’s role is:
    • to consider whether Queen’s or Prince’s consent might be NEEDED FOR A BILL (my emphasis),
    • to raise the issue of whether consent is needed with the House authorities BEFORE A BILL IS INTRODUCED,
    • to keep the department and the whips informed on this issue, and
    • to consider, as the bill goes through Parliament, whether any amendments to it will alter what has been decided.”


    So the monarch and heir can have a role in giving their consent to the terms of a bill coming before Parliament PRIOR to the bill’s introduction. I have no idea how this has been exercised, how often, on what and to what effect – but do many in the general public even know this issue of prior consent exists? I didn’t until very recently.

  164. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    galamcennalath @ 22:34,

    It’s well possible that Corby Labour could support a UKGov Canada+ deal in WM, and thereby neutralise the DUP and a rump of hardline Tory discontents. (The remainder hanging together rather than hanging apart.)

    Or could the Tory Party finally fracture under the long pent-up strain, just one more of the many unintended consequences of Brexit?

    Would Labour really like to chance a UKGE that could put them in the hot seat but only with the essential assistance of the SNP? And how could that possibly work after a manifesto platform of “no IR2”?

    It’s a megaguddle with no obvious relief in sight.

    But why are we even still trying to outguess the permutations?

    High time to bail.

  165. Rock says:

    Rock (27th August 2017 – “Underneath the Goodyear blimp”):

    “Scotland was on the verge of independence immediately after the Brexit vote.

    The unionist parties were without leaders and completely lost, the SNP had 56 out of 59 MPs and 50% of the vote, the EU’s eyes were (favourably) on Scotland.

    But Nicola squandered a once in a 1000 years golden opportunity by wasting more than a year flogging a dead horse – a separate deal for Scotland which was never going to happen.

    The result: Nicola outsmarted by the collusion between Saints Theresa and Ruth on one hand, and Corbyn on the other, fall in SNP support from 50% to 37%.

    It is my prediction that there will be a “snap” Brexit and the SNP will be caught napping and unable to hold a second independence referendum.

    Or another “snap” Westminster election with the SNP again losing support.

    Despite the pretendy “sovereignty” and boasting of the clueless pompous armchair pundits posting here, Scotland is again as far away from independence as ever.

    If they succeed in neutralising the Rev. Stuart Campbell and WOS, independence will be “stone dead” for at least 620 years.”

    Challenge to the usual suspects:

    Do you have the guts to go on the record and state that there will definitely be an independence referendum before Brexit has been completed?

  166. HYUFD says:

    Meg merrilees 18 to 24s would be happy with a Canada type Deal by 41% to 32% unhappy even if not as much as over 65s who would be happy by 59% to 23% with such a deal. (p6)

    The main difference is over No Deal where 54% of 18 to 24s would be unhappy with just 22% happy, compared to 52% of over 65s who would be happy and 29% unhappy (p5)

  167. Hamish100 says:

    Jeez , all thats missing now is C. ALexander and we have 3 ducks in a row

  168. Phronesis says:

    “Truth is not born nor is it to be found inside the head of an individual person, it is born between people collectively searching for truth, in the process of their dialogic interaction.” Mikhail Bakhtin

    It is time for Scotland to start uniting people on the basis of a wanted independence referendum instead of creating more division among the precariat class, middle working class, working poor and destitute classes to prop up a failing WM political system.
    Unity, solidarity, togetherness in Scotland. Scotland has the antidote to the toxicity of the disunited, divisive, fragmented UK.

  169. Thepnr says:

    I wonder what previous leader Johann Lamont is doing nowadays apart from the day job, never hear much about her otherwise or Jim Murphy come to that.

    It’s a shame we never got to hear Jim cross swords with Nicola Sturgeon at FMQ’s which would have been a sight to behold. Here’s Jim getting welcomed to Carnoustie during his 100 day tour of the crates during his fight to save the Union.

    Speaking of FMQ’s who can forget this battle of great minds when Johann Lamont and Alex Salmond clashed in the chamber.

  170. TJenny says:

    Hamish 100 -aye, that’ll be lame ducks, then. 🙂

  171. Hamish100 says:


    We’ve tried the union . Apparently we’re a basket case as a result so it doesnt work for Scotland. Dont need nuclear weapons on the Clyde nor taken into war.Only the English union forces us to accept this. The EU does not.

  172. sassenach says:

    Not to worry, Hamish100, I’m sure we have some idiots of our own who will be along very soon to feed our pets, Rock, Fud and Coco (when he surely will appear)….!!

  173. North chiel says:

    Looks like the Tories now intend to “ drink Canada Dry” before re entering negotiations with the EU . Brexit is now looking to leave them with an almighty hangover for decades to come.

  174. Liz g says:

    Hamish 100 @ 11.37
    Mair like 3 dupes in a row….
    Still defending their so called Union…. and not a bloody credible argument between them!

  175. Effijy says:

    Hi You Unionist Fud.

    If every vote cast in Scotland on Brexit was to remain, we are still expected to be pulled of a cliff edge by idiots in country next door-England.

    For you trying to include the blame on Wales you can negate their vote against N.Ireland’s remain.

    Haul Your Unionist Flag Down.

    England are to blame full stop.

  176. HYUFD says:

    Hamish A basketcase? Scotland has 4.5% unemployment compared to 9% in France, 11% in Italy, 15% in Spain and 20% unemployment in Greece.

    France of course is in the EU and also has nuclear weapons

  177. HYUFD says:

    Effijy As even you have stated Wales voted Leave, London for example voted Remain.

    As I posted earlier more Scots would support a Canada style FTA with the EU than would oppose one, it is No Deal Scots oppose but a plurality of voters across the UK oppose No Deal too

  178. Robert Peffers says:

    @HYUFD says: 23 September, 2018 at 9:17 pm:

    ” … Robert Peffers Name the last time a monarch has refused to sign a Bill passed by the House of Commons? By convention they simply do not do so, their role is now as a ceremonial Head of State only.”

    Are you really as thick in the head as you invariably give the impression of being? Just what has that got to do with anything I have been indicating in my arguments?

    Do you honestly not understand the legal implications of the monarch of the Kingdom of England being legally Sovereign under English Law?

    Do you honestly not know the 1688 history of the country of England or the reason the rebellious parliamentarians of the Kingdom of England deposed their sitting monarch then skipped over 50 royals in the direct line of descent to offer the crowns of England, Wales and Ireland to a foreign minor royal.

    It would have been far more simple to have done, as was fairly common practice in the English kingdom, and cut off his head and declared The Kingdom of England a republic?

    Your off on a tangent of idiocy — again.

    ” … The House of Lords can of course only block and delay Bills passed by the House of Commons for a year under the Parliament Act of 1949 (reducing the delay to a year from the 2 years set in the 1911 Parliament Act) before the Commons gets its way and the Bill passes anyway.”

    Which has nothing whatsoever to do with what the points being made. The Monarchy of the Kingdom of England was made legally sovereign by the English Glorious Revolution but the two joint monarchs were then made to legally delegate their Divine Right to rule, (a.k.a. their sovereignty), to the revolting English aristocracy who were the unelected, (hereditary), parliamentarians. They were hereditary Lords and not MPs chosen by the enfranchised people of the kingdom.

    The purpose being to legally transfer what, under English Law, belonged to the monarch they shared with the Kingdom of Scotland to the English aristocracy – The Lords who sat in the Westminster parliament. The Glorious Revolution changed the rule of law of the Kingdom of England but left it legally still the Divine Right of Kings with everything and everyone being still legally the possessions of the Crown.

    It thus became legally a Constitutional Monarchy but effectively made the Lords at Westminster sovereign.

    Oh! Go and do your own bloody research – try starting with, “The Triennial Act of 1694”, and note that this was passed in 1694 – that is 6 years after the Glorious Revolution and well before the 1706/7 Treaty of Union.

    I’ll also tell you what not to even dream of doing:

    Do not even try to Google for when the first Elected Members of a Parliament of the Kingdom of England were elected to Westminster.

    They just do not want you to know that. You will find that search engines do not know the difference between England, The Kingdom of England, Britain, Great Britain, Great Britain and Ireland, Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

    Its a bit like attempting to find out the difference between the City of London, London City and Greater England – or who the person who is never mentioned that sits near and higher than the speaker in the House of commons is and is also able to attend, (without invitation), the sittings of the House of Lords. All this going on in plain site and yet you cannot find out what or why or who these people are.

    When they do not want you to know that it is for good reasons – ask yourself whose reasons.

  179. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    With Westminster voting support for the Scottish Claim of Right on 4th July Richard Leonard’s stupidity today is actually monumental.

  180. Thepnr says:

    If by some miracle Westminster manages to get some kind of watered down Chequers plan or a Canada type deal to put before Parliament for a vote, then I hope the SNP make it clear that they will not accept any deal that does not include as a minimum, access to the Single Market and Customs Union.

    This has been the SNP position all along and should therefore not be a problem for them in sticking to that.

    The tricky bit might be when asked to support a second EU referendum, with the alternative being No Deal. I think they have to remain consistent and that their stance should be, the people of Scotland will be allowed their say on the future relationship with the UK before even considering a second referendum on the EU.

    Westminster can make their decision on the EU without the help of the SNP who’s job it is to allow the Scottish people a chance to determine their own future and that must be their only concern when it comes to a second vote of any kind.

    The only second vote Scotland is interested in is for Independence.

  181. Famous15 says:

    Whenever I hear Richard Leonard make pronouncements I feel as protective as was my grannie was of me. ‘The wee soull” I want to make sure he is wearing his mittens as well as his scarf and then I remember this bastard is shitting on Scotland.

    That noise is the spirit of my grannie tutting at my language but fuckit Labour is taking the piss.

    I am all grown up now and I just hope that the peoples of Scotland can see what I see and enough is enough.Independence is the only sane answer.

  182. Cubby says:


    Happy to go on the record that you will still be going on with your boring same old crap long after Scotland is independent like some bot that has got stuck on repeat.

    Rock = boring boring Britnat.

    At least the other Britnats vary the pish they spout on Wings.

  183. K1 says:

    Having looked over that ‘pamphlet’ Stewartb @11.01pm, this has been in effect since ever there was a Westminster parliament.

    This relates to any Bills that affect either the Royal Perogative or the Interests of the ‘Queen’s and Prince’s’. To the extent that if any Bill may have any effect on the properties and lands of the Crown, the Queen/Prince is informed prior to the Bill’s introduction of what those effects may constitute. This is just once arena of where Consent is Signified, but the areas are broad and cover many different BIll’s. ‘Consent’ means in essence whether that Bill may proceed through the stages of the Houses, this would include any amendments that any given Bill may gather in it’s progress too.

    We don’t get detail in that link about ‘why’ the Queen may ‘signify’ consent nor why not, neither with the Prince (Charles at the mo) either. But we do get some examples of Bill’s that are placed before the Palace and from what I can gather the Queen and Prince Charles are pretty much informed of any Bill that pertains to or may affect the Crown, which actually takes in vast swathes UK legislation.

    I’ll give some broad examples from the ‘pamphlet’ that may help enlighten a little of how this ‘ceremonial’ Head of State’, really does have a great deal of input on many Bill’s that pass through the HoC’s and HoL’s before going through the legislative processes in both Houses.

    Fascinating stuff really:

    Personal interests

    2.24 An example of the personal interests of the Crown is anything that affects the Queen personally (whether as an individual or as landlord or employer) and is not covered by any of the other categories for which consent is required. For example, the abolition of the coroner of the Queen’s household by the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 required consent on the basis that it affected the Queen’s personal interests.

    2.25 Anything affecting the Royal Palaces where the Queen and her family reside may be an example of something affecting the personal interests of the Crown. These palaces (for example, Buckingham Palace, St James’ Palace and Windsor Castle)are retained as royal residences at the disposal of the monarch and are held by the Queen on trust as monarch for future monarchs.


    The Duchy of Cornwall
    The Duchy

    3.2 The Duchy of Cornwall was created in 1337 by Edward III for his son, Prince Edward. A charter ensured that each future Duke of Cornwall would be the eldest surviving son of the monarch and the heir to the throne. So the current Prince of Wales is also Duke of Cornwall.

    3.3 Where there is no Duke of Cornwall, the Duchy reverts to the Crown.23 That would
    include a case where the heir to the throne is female24. Given this reversionary interest that the Crown has in the Duchy of Cornwall, a bill affecting the hereditary revenues, personal
    property or interests25 of the Duchy requires Queen’s consent.

    3.4 The Duchy currently owns land across 23 counties (including commercial property in London). It is also the harbour authority for the Isles of Scilly.

    When is Prince’s consent required because of a bill’s effect on the Duchy?

    3.5 Prince’s consent is required, as well as Queen’s consent, for provisions that expressly mention the Duchy or otherwise have a special application to it.26

    3.6 Provisions that merely affect the Duchy in the same way as other Crown land do not
    generally need Prince’s consent as well as Queen’s consent27, on the basis that, in such cases, Queen’s consent is taken to include consent on behalf of the Prince of Wales.


    Informing the Palace of further developments

    The Palace should be kept informed by the department of any developments subsequent to their original approach which fall outside the terms of the original consent. Thus, for example, new consent issues might arise after the Palace has given its original consent and before the bill is introduced and the Palace should be kept informed of these. Similarly, once the bill has been introduced, the Palace should be kept informed of any subsequent amendments that raise further issues of consent.

    Obtaining consent

    6.1 The department sponsoring a bill is responsible for writing to the Palace at an early stage before the introduction of the bill to obtain Queen’s or Prince’s consent if it is required. The Palace must be given as much time as possible and never fewer than 14 days. The PBL Secretariat has template letters for Bill teams who need to seek either consent.

    6.2 OPC should give the department early warning of the need for Queen’s or Prince’s consent (in so far as it is feasible to do so before all the provisions of the bill are drafted and before the House authorities have been approached on the question).

    6.3 Sometimes it will be clear at an early stage that consent is required and what the form of consent should be. Other times, it will be clear that no consent is required. But sometimes it will not be clear either way.

    6.4 In that case, the department must do what it can with what information it has. It is preferable not to bother the Palace unnecessarily and, if an approach is made too early, it increases the risk that other issues will arise that will require the department to go back to the Palace again. On the other hand, it is important to give the Palace as much early warning as possible and to meet the requirement that an approach is made giving at least the minimum 14 days’ notice required.

    6.5 On obtaining consent generally, see also Chapter 18 of the Guide to Making Legislation.


    Queen’s speech

    7.11 The fact that a bill affecting the Crown has been mentioned in the Queen’s speech does not exempt it from the need for Queen’s consent.53


    A.35 Queen’s consent was required for the Agriculture (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 1962 because it amended the Agricultural Holdings Act 1948 which applied to land owned by the Crown or Duchies. No Prince’s consent was required, as the Prince of Wales was not of age.

    A.36 Queen’s consent was given for the bill for the Animal Welfare Act 2006, largely because of the powers of inspectors to enter onto land owned by the Crown Estate and the Duchies; there is an exemption for land forming part of the Queen’s private estate.

    A.4 Bona vacantia is ownerless property that passes to the Crown54: for example, undistributed property on an intestacy or property disclaimed under a will where there is no residuary beneficiary. Certain trust property might also end up as bona vacantia.

    A.7 Section 51 of the Companies (Audit, Investigations and Community Enterprise) Act 2004 enables the Regulator of Community Interest Companies to apply to the court for an order under section 1029 of the Companies Act 2006. Queen’s and Prince’s consent was required because of the increased possibility of an order being made under that section and the Crown or Duchies having to return property to the resurrected company56.

    A.8 On the bill for the Charities Act 2006, Queen’s and Prince’s consent was required at third reading because changes to the cy-pres jurisdiction might have reduced the amount of bona vacantia to which the Crown or Duchy was entitled.


    It’s very clear from some of those examples above that the Head of State has an incredible amount of influence and input into how Bill’s are created in Westminister.

    They have nothing less than Veto power on any Bill that may harm their financial and property interests and the UK government assists them in this process by informing them of anything that may indeed affect those very interests before the Bill is even introduced into the Houses.

    It’s pretty clear, the Bill will be adjusted before then if there is a ‘negative’ effect on the Royals’ estates and assets (the Crown). Else why the show and tell afore proceeding with legislation?

    Look we all know this is the case and always has been, it’s not news. They are like the Rememberencer in Hoc, unelected Lobbyists, with the further advantage of literally having initial input to writing the Laws and exempting themselves from any ill effects or losses in the process.

    Robert Peffers is correct:

    ‘The Glorious Revolution changed the rule of law of the Kingdom of England but left it legally still the Divine Right of Kings with everything and everyone being still legally the possessions of the Crown.’

    This pamphlet acts as a kind of ‘proof’ of that statement. (I’ve tinyurled it):

  184. Dr Jim says:

    A town in England and a principality called Wales in two other places other than the country of Scotland voted for something and that’s got to do with Scotland what exactly
    China votes for stuff is Scotland to consider that too you imbecilic utter fucking pratt

    Not one person on this website is ever going to change their minds about Independence, not one, so your intention is what exactly, to show us the error of our ways by arrogantly talking great mounds of garbage we don’t care about

    Independence for Scotland is a principle of freedom of choice, freedom of choice, do you get that, England offers NO freedom of choice to anyone, never has never will so take your England and your fascist xenophobic politically voting country and stick it, we don’t want it, it’s that simple, we don’t like what England is and is becoming even worse at, the marriage is over stop stalking us like a jealous lover still wanting to keep the record player we bought, it’s ours and we’re taking back control to run our country the way we see fit, not the way you and your lunatic asylum sees fit

    Scotlands people will decide Scotlands future and the more you troll the more you remind us why we can’t stand any more of what you are

    So rather than putting anyone off Independence your predictable behaviour actually encourages it, so I suppose in one way ….Gee Thanks!

  185. yesindyref2 says:

    This is why I personally am quite pleased to have a Unionist make their arguments in Wings. Because we can see how they have to use a quite distorted – and 2 year old – Yougov survey question to try to make some sort of point. This particualr one about the Canadian free trade deal – called CETA. Which implies the UK could actually agree this with the EU-27. From elsewhere:

    CETA is a major new business deal that was negotiated in secret between the EU and Canada over five years from 2009 to 2014.” and from the EU itself “entered into force provisionally on 21 September 2017” (

    Now, if the Tories continue to rattle blunt spears at the EU-27 and call them names, it’s going to be a no-deal. And in that case some future UK Government will take about the same period of time – 8 years. Starting say in 2021 at the earliest, that’s 2029 such a UKETA would be implemented.

    From 2019 (no transition either with a no-deal), that’s 10 years with no trade agreement with the EU, WTO if it still exists and the UK can vary its agreement with WTO (it would need renegotiating). And I doubt the EU-27 would be remotely interested in talking about a UKETA straight after a spoilt Tory brat Brexit.

    Now, as far as “Britain” in the YouGov question is concerned, there are a few points to make:

    1). The Northern Irish would be a little upset as “Britain” does not include them

    2). Britain can make no deals, it is not a State, and has no government. The UK does, however.

    3). Faced with a stark choice between “no deal” and UKETA, I’d take UKETA for the rUK.

    4). The clue is in my number 3 “rUK”. Because a UKETA rather than SM and CU triggers Indy Ref 2, hopefully it will be a YES, and we’ll be offski, and personally I’d prefer to see the rUK with a UKETA with the EU than nothing at all.

    What a more honest person would point out is that in the 2106 EU referendum, 62% voted for the UK to REMAIN in the EU, rather than use a scurvy survey question to try to make a point.

    But as I said eksewhere, that’s the only way Unionists can argue their case, with distortion and outright lies.

  186. Dr Jim says:

    I see the Labour party are blaming the SNP for their own anti Catholic remarks…oh yes!

    Apparently the Scottish government don’t clamp down enough on anti Catholic “crimes* and because the delegate made an anti catholic remark he couldn’t help it because he’s Scottish and the SNP haven’t done enough to make him stop

    I swear to all that’s holy that’s what they’re saying

  187. yesindyref2 says:

    Good God, I just looked at that ancient 2 year old YouGov survey which ahd 33% don’t knows in Scotland, before closing the tab – it not only doesn’t include NI in its survey, it lumps Wales in with the Midlands! How disrespectful can you get, at least Scotland gets our own column.

  188. CameronB Brodie says:

    So the Queen and her sprogs get to dictate which Bills can an can’t come before Parliament. Inside Parliament, the Remembrancer, one of the Corporation of the City of London’s Chief Officers, is protecting the City’s interests. If your not part of the Elite, your little people with indeterminate human rights status.


  189. yesindyref2 says:

    Won’t be long before they forget the ” / Wales bit in “Midlands / Wales”, and just call it “HS2 dorms”.

  190. Ghillie says:

    Dear Dr Jim, I particularly like your post @ 1.42 am 🙂

  191. Cactus says:

    “We’d obviously decide at the time” (said he, JC)

    Fast-forward to ‘the time‘… FFWD

    – Nicola Sturgeon of Scotland informs (to PM JC):
    “Due to a material change in circumstances, we will be holding a Scottish independence referendum on the XX/XX/XX. Would you care to participate in our referendum or not Prime Minister…”
    – PM JC replies to the First Minister of HOME, in one of two ways…
    1) Ok.

    SOoooo when is ‘the time’ Scotland?

    Have a good think about that eh.

    Now trending on the wireless.

    ‘iAye’ is in the air. 🙂

  192. Nana says:

    Sir David Edwards: Brexit will throw Scots law into shadow


    Is Corbyn walking into brexit trap set by Theresa May?

  193. Nana says:

    The Ministry of Defence figures have sparked fears that thousands of troops with mental health issues are self-medicating with booze

    Welfare spending for UK’s poorest shrinks by £37bn

  194. big g says:

    summed up easily:- two minds. two faced. forked tongue!

  195. Nana says:

    Chequers is a red herring

    Brexit: a state of chaos

    Ahead of the release of the latest IEA offering on trade and Brexit let’s briefly talk economic studies, and why any reputable economic model will find trade deals doesn’t replace a loss of trade with the EU – 1/

  196. Robert Louis says:

    K1 at 0135am,

    A very interesting post. Those things I did not know. However, what would be interesting is finding out the legality of Charles Windsor taking it upon himself to call himself ‘Prince and great steward of Scotland, since such a title was declared within Scots law, as being a title for the first born male heir of a King of Scots.

    The relevant paragraph is in the leaflet you linked to, on the very last page.

    Two problems from what I can see; Firstly, Lizzie Windsor, Charles mother, is NOT a King. Secondly, Lizzie, I recall, stood in the English House of Lords and gave a speech many years ago, making a point against Scottish independence by stating that ‘she cannot forget she was crowned Queen of the United Kingdom’.

    How can it be, that a Scottish title, explicitly set out in Scots law, relating to a King of Scots, somehow be taken by an English monarch on a whim. Of course they, in the document and elsewhere cite the so-called ‘union of the crowns’, but as we all know their never was such a thing.

    Mind, I find all of these pretendy ‘Scottishy’ titles the English Royal family give themselves in Scotland (but only when in Scotland) to be highly disrespectful and utterly, utterly patronising to Scots. Until such times as Lizzie actually puts the Scottish crown on her head (she never has), she and her sprogs are no monarchs or Princes of Scotland.

  197. HYUFD says:

    Robert Louis She did not call herself Queen of England either but the Queen is a direct descendant of Mary Queen of Scots and James VIth of Scotland and 1st of England so she of course is. She might once have called herself Queen of the UK, which is entirely accurate as neither England or Scotland are independent countries and she is also Head of State in Wales and Northern Ireland

  198. Shinty says:

    @ Robert Louis

    seems an appropriate time to post this again

    Betty arriving off the train with her handbag. (proof also, she never had the Scottish crown placed on her head.

  199. HYUFD says:

    Robert Peffers As since the Civil War and the Glorious Revolution no monarch has blocked a Bill or prevented a Bill going forward. The Lords no longer even has many aristocrats, most hereditary peers were scrapped in 1999 and most Lords are academics, lawyers, businesspeople, ex MPs etc of course the elected Commons has supremacy over the unelected Lords anyway after a year

  200. starlaw says:

    Queen a direct descendent of Mary Queen of Scots… Prove it

  201. HYUFD says:

    K1 So in half a century you cannot find any Bills the monarch affected which affect most people, all you can find is a handful related to the Crown Estate.

  202. HYUFD says:

    Dr Jim I as a diehard Unionist could of course not care less if a diehard Nationalist like you cannot take a different view. The majority of Scots voted 55% for the Union in 2014

  203. HYUFD says:

    Yeaindyref2 That Yougov poll had more Scots backing a CETA deal than opposing it and set out clearly what it was and remains as relevant now as it was then, it was taken after the EU referendum. We will be in a transition period and in the SM and CU while much of it was negotiated. Plus to get it a backstop would have been agreed to avoid a hard border in Ireland which most Northern Irish voters want.

  204. Robert Kerr says:


    Glad the Pathe news item is now on UTube.

    I posted link to the actual news site here on WoS a few years ago.

    My understanding is that she was advised NOT to even touch the Crown.


    Note also the comment on the audio script about “her loyal subjects”

    We are not subjects. We are sovereign people.

  205. Les Wilson says:

    I guess that we should in no way surprised that the Unionist Labour party intend to block any Scottish Indy referendum.
    Hmmm, well it ok for Corbyn to say it is fine for other nations, but no democracy for Scotland. Utterly shameful stuff.

    Well shame on them, and the other Unionist parties. We are to be held hostage forever it seems. Well I suggest that is, until our assets are completely depleted, then it may be different.

    We see how the Labour party truly is just, part of the English colonial system and even if they have no seats in Scotland they will push to contain Scotland by any means.

    If nothing else it really shows the Westminster intent from which we really must escape, thankfully we do not really need their approval, it is for the Scottish people to decide.

    They cannot hide now that the Union is truly poison for Scotland, as it really has been since inception.
    No amount of words can now hide their bad intentions. There is now the only the one avenue for us, and that is the only one they are really afraid of, that is a YES vote on Indy.

  206. Robert Louis says:

    Shinty at 0830am,

    Great link shinty – I just wish a few more people in Scotland could see how our crown and monarchy were insulted by her.

    Yes, my old Grannie used to tell me, that it isn’t really reported now, but at the time, Royal supporters in Scotland were really excited she was coming up, but were really angry when she was handed the Scottish crown on a freaking cushion, and was dressed like she was away out to Woolworths. Many Royal friendly Scots were really hacked off by her behaviour. Apparently, she was advised not to wear or even touch the Scottish crown or give proper credence to it, as the English establishment were worried it would give proper recognition to Scotland and the Scottish monarchy, and might encourage independence supporters.

    Such is the ways of our English colonial queen. Just a point, just as a quirk of the passage of generations, many people are related to old members of the Scottish monarchy (the same in other countries). It doesn’t give them the right to insult entire countries though, or claim titles for themselves.

    Until Lizzie Windsor, or should I say correctly, Lizzie Saxe-Coburg Gotha, puts the Scottish crown on her head, she is no queen up here. Holding a cushion for 13 seconds doesn’t cut it. You either respect a crown or you do not. Lizzie claims the crown but does not and never has respected it.

    Her descendant might like to take note. (Although hopefully we’ll be independent by then, and an independent Scotland will put them and their ilk straight on a few things, if they want to be monarch up here.

  207. frogesque says:

    Royal titles, ancient precedents, wtf?

    We are Scots and in a new free and emergent Scotland we will forge our own precedents.

    Charlie can call his’sel whatever he damned well pleases. I could do the same by deed poll if I chose. However, Camilla will never, ever be my Queen and does Scotland really want another King Billy?

  208. Robert Louis says:

    Robert Kerr,

    Exactly, she does have subjects in England, but in Scotland their is no such thing, and NEVER has been.

  209. Hamish100 says:

    When you take the trouble to read fud / rock it just reinforces my will as no doubt the majority on WoS to support and to bring Independence to Scotland.

    Why? The best people to govern Scotland reside in Scotland.
    The wishes of the peoples of Scotland are more social democratic, less phobic than some of the leading tory and liebour politicians based in Westminster.
    Westminster puts others first (even the DUP) over the wishes of Scotland
    To remove nuclear weapons from our shores and for us to decide if there is a need to send our armed forces to war. The brit union forbids this.
    This is about the future of our children and children’s children.

    I suspect early next year we will have this opportunity.

  210. Robert Louis says:

    Auld Highlander at 0832,

    Oh no, not more Scottish gas. We’d better give it all to England for free, since oil and gas are (we keep getting told) bad for Scotland. Other countries reap the benefits of oil and gas, but for Scotland, it MUST be handed to England. Such is the nature of colonial exploitation of Scotland’s assets.

  211. Hamish100 says:

    Robert Louis

    -yip more gas, still plenty of oil, agriculture, fisheries, tourism, technology, research (medical, space IT), universities and colleges, finance as examples.

    Such a basket case. How we need May, Rees-Mogg, Johnson, Gove, Corbyn and their like to run our nation.

    We are a basket case says Leonard Davidson (I luv PR), Rennie. Such is the quality and duplicity of the BritNationalists.

  212. GrahamB says:

    O/T “Tory MSP in sex probe” (Miles Briggs), will this get the same treatment as the Alex Salmond case?
    Apologies for the DR link, maybe some kind reader can archive it.

  213. galamcennalath says:

    Nana says

    Brexit: a state of chaos

    While the MSM is tottering between continuing to thrash that dead donkey that is Chequers, or report that the Tories now want to flip to a very hard Brexit in the form of ‘Canada’, this article covers the only sensible option for Brexit (if there must be a Brexit). A tailored EEA/EFTA ‘Norway’ solution is where WM should be heading. Though it’s doubtful English Nationalism will allow the Tories to go in that direction.

    Paradoxically IMO, such a soft Brexit needn’t harm the case for Scottish self determination. It might remove the panic to have IndyRef2 as soon as possible. Given a Transition Period and an EEA solution at the end of it, IndyRef2 could occur in a calmer manner, but still well within the TP. All the best reasons for Indy and most of the threats of continued Union remain even with an EEA Brexit.

    No matter what, attacks on and sidelining of Scotland will continue. Devolution will continue to be ineffectual at an economic level. Scotland will continue to be rulered in a colonial manner. There will be no plan to dump WMDs. Indy is needed whether Brexit is bad, or worse.

  214. Brent crude (Scottish type) oil now over $80 a barrel,

    43 billion barrels of oil taken from Scottish waters since start of oil drilling,

    average price over the years is $54.24 dollars a barrel,

    simple arithmetic 43billion x £54.24 =

    in dollars


    There is also Scottish Gas.

  215. mr thms says:

    What has the two referendum results achieved? The Scotland Act 2016 gave Scotland powers a future independent country would need to have in place. It conveniently put the Sewel Convention into statute. Anticipating the result of the EU referendum and a hint that the two are connected. After two years of parliamentary debates and votes, Westminster has an EU Withdrawal Act, Wales has an EU Continuity Act, and Scotland will follow suit with its own EU Continuity Act. So all set for the next phase. Expect Scotland to receive powers from the EU and more powers from Westminster, such as VAT. It will get to a stage where unionism is hanging on by a thread with the only reserved powers being defence and foreign affairs. Everything else will have been devolved.

  216. sorry,slight correction,

    Brent crude (Scottish type) oil now over $80 a barrel,

    43 billion barrels of oil taken from Scottish waters since start of oil drilling,

    average price over the years is $54.24 dollars a barrel,

    simple arithmetic 43billion x $54.24 =

    in dollars


    There is also Scottish Gas.

  217. Hamish100 says:

    RE Allegations,

    No doubt MSM AND bbc will devote the same attention to a current sitting MSP?

    NAW——- I see another diversionary Davidson press release. Has anyone heard shes having a baby, ahhhhhhhhh. No other news required. Brexit? who cares? she’s havin a wee baby ….ahhhhhh

    PS Nae harm to the wee yin to be.

  218. Shinty says:

    @ Robert Louis/Robert Kerr,

    re: stushie on Betty’s visit to Scotland in 1953.

    I wasn’t born then and therefore don’t remember my parent’s thoughts on the matter.
    However, I do remember as a child watching the launch at the Clyde (on TV) of the QE 2. My mother was pure ragin’, what an insult that was to Scotland and the Clyde workers.

    The thing is England and Britnats have been insulting Scotland for over 300 years and continues to do so today. Nothing will change until Scotland is independent, only then will Scotland get the respect it deserves.

  219. jfngw says:

    Looks like we need a claim of right vote in Holyrood also. Time we found out those in the Scottish parliament that don’t actually believe Scotland is a country.

  220. jfngw says:

    Looks like we may need a Offensive Behaviour at Party Conference Act, only James Kelly MSP will back it obviously.

  221. Just to rub it in. Leo just could not answer a question on GMS today. It was a two Ronnie’s sketch, where he answered another question. Then still on a GMS report, his manifesto rejects indy2 while Jeremy Cricket suggested a few days ago that he might concede if ‘asked’. They’re mad I tell ye, maaaad! Acknowledgements to Mr Fraser.

  222. HandandShrimp says:

    Another new gas field west of Shetland. This one has 1 trillion cubic feet.

    I guess that is us really screwed and impoverished now. Why do they keep looking for this stuff?

  223. Stan Wilson says:

    Hi Yea Fud, Rock and C. Alexander have inspired me so much I have just gone out and raised a 5ft x 3ft Saltire on a flag pole and attached it to my shed. Along with my neighbour, 2 large Saltires are flying where all those traveling on the main Aberdeen railway line can see and be inspired, as I have been. Thanks also to Maybot who is fighting so hard for our Independence although she and her paid trolls may not acknowledge the fact.

  224. Daisy Walker says:

    Thanks for the links Nana. Very good as always.

    One of the links – sorry can’t recall which one – finds the whole ‘Brexit is because of the Tax Havens’ theory unlikely due to the amount of damage the loss of currency passport rights will cause to the City of London.

    I wondered at this too for a while – yet another of those things – where nothing (at face value) makes sense about Brexit.

    If however you look a wee bit back in history, then perhaps it puts it into perspective.

    The Trusts that the Tax Havens have nourished since William the Conquerer have concealed the true extent of the establishments wealth and therefore power. It is intrinsic to the way Britain, and (lets not be naive) the world is run.

    The Spice Trade – a common sailor on a spice ship would intend to bring back a smallish bag of spice (no room for a big bag on these boats) and would sell it for around £50,000 in todays money. At the time, nutmeg sold for more than gold. Scale that up for the owners of the merchant ships and it is astronomical amounts.

    Then add in the profits from :

    The Slave Trade.

    The Opium Trade to China.

    Colonies, whole continents of wealth – stripped and shipped, and then concealed in Tax havens.

    India estimates, if it were to get compensation for all the wealth taken (forget about the crown jewels, they’re actually small potatoes compared to the rest) it would be in the region of £600 Trillion.

    And lets not forget, Africa, the Middle East, Malasia (the rubber trade paid for the set up of the NHS initially).

    All that money and wealth.

    By comparison Scotland’s oil over the last 40 years – £2 and a bit Trillion.

    More recently 2 World Wars swelled the coffers considerably. War being the biggest scam known to man.

    If you see it from the above perspective, and if you came from one of the families born into that accumulated wealth, then the neoliberal tax practices of the current day would seem fair game and the fact that they threaten first world economies, just part and parcel of the fun.

    The EU Tax Avoidance Legislation threatens (at the very least their anonymity, and the amounts stashed) the fundamental core structure of the institutes of power in Britain, right to the very top.

    By comparison, the city of London’s income through passporting is desirable (is it about £12 billion a year?), but again, its small potatoes compared to the bigger picture.

    Scotland the Cash Cow, is actually, in this scenario, pretty much the petty cash box to fund things initially.

    The selling off of national assets – water, NHS, etc that’s the sweetie money for the ‘bit players’ (milionaires to you and me).

    Anyways. that’s my theory, so far its fitting the No Deal Brexit. Be nice if I’m totally wrong on this.

    O/T MacDonald has ruled that labour will offer up only Deal or No Deal, not a ‘lets call the whole thing off cause its stupid’ vote. The left cheek of the establishment erse does its duty once again.

    Best wishes to all.

  225. I don’t see Labour in Scotland ever supporting a second Scottish independence referendum far less independence.

    As for the claim of right was simply a ploy used by Labour to get itself off a constitutional hook.

    Meanwhile Shadow Labour Chancellor John McDonnell has said a new Brexit referendum should not include remain option.

    So those people in Scotland who voted no in 2014 and believe that we are better governed from Westminster, have a choice a to who drives them off a Brexit cliff edge, Theresa May and Jacob Rees Mogg or Jeremey Corbyn and John McDonnell

  226. Daisy Walker says:


    In the American system one billion is 1,000,000,000 and a trillion is 1,000,000,000,000

    so one trillion is one thousand times one billion.

    In the British system one billion is 1,000,000,000,000 and one trillion is

    1,000,000,000,000,000,000 so one trillion is one million times one billion

    Wonder if the Tory bozo’s will factor that into their fabled trade deal with America, doh.

  227. galamcennalath says:

    Sounds like Labour are trying to out-UKIP the Tories … conference chatter about EURef2 suggests no Remain option.

    A Remain option was the vote winner for Labour, if they don’t go with that then the Tories will win a GE. If England is presented with two Brexit supporting parties, they will go with Tories.

    Somehow, that’s what we’ve come to expect from Labour … snatching a defeat from the jaws of victory.

  228. Petra says:

    Thanks for the links Nana. A semblance of normality on an Independence site, the only one of a type in the UK, that’s been taken over by a British Nationalist. Winning on all counts including bringing out the worst in a number of people. 10 out of 10 to him (her).


    BBC reporting from the Labour Party Conference. Main aim is for a General Election to be held, of course, and if they win for another EU Referendum to be held. That Referendum will not relate to remaining / leaving the EU. The Labour Party has accepted that the UK will leave the EU. The EU vote will relate, only, to the type of deal the majority want. Problem being, mind you, do we actually have two “deals” to choose from other than Chequers and No deal? No mention so far of Leonard’s doo-lally suggestion for the London based Labour Party manifesto. Looks as though Corbyn’s IQ level is a couple of points higher than Leonard’s. That and the fact that he has a legal team at his disposal.

  229. Fred says:

    The present so-called Royal dynasty are usurpers, there are scores of folk on the continent with a better claim to plank their arses on the British throne than Lizzie Windsor, aka Saxe Coburg-Gotha, but should really be Schleswig-Holstein Sonderburg-Glucksburg, Prince Phillip’s real name, he was no more a Battenburg/Mountbatten than I am! Prince Albert’s father was either his uncle Leopold or his mother’s Jewish doctor so that treble-barrelled moniker could be a fantasy. The usurper George Guelph aka George I, murdered, or had murdered, his wife’s lover, a big Swedish count & had him buried hurriedly under the floor of their Schloss. He didn’t bring her to England when he won the British lottery, just too many skeletons, & this Adams Family have ruled over us ever since. Two of them were Nazi’s before the war, Kent’s plane hit a hill in Caithness in strange circumstances & Windsor should have been shot afterwards.

    I have the programme & annual for the Braemar Gathering of 1932 & the royal portraits therein are all bordered with swastika’s. Maybe the printer just fancied the design! 🙂

  230. Chick McGregor says:

    Never mind offensive behaviour they should bring in an offensive existence act. 🙂

  231. GrahamB says:

    Miles Briggs: Some kind person has archived this to avoid supplying clickbait to the DR –

  232. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Hi Daisy Walker.

    RE: million, trillion, etc.

    A million is a 1 followed by six zeros.
    A billion (“bi” denoting 2) is a million to the power of 2, ie a million times a million.
    A trillion (“tri” denoring 3) is a million to the power of 3, ie a million times a million times a million.

    It all became confused when the US started referring to a thousand million as a billion. I have a theory that this confusion is deliberate so that ‘the ordinary people’ lose understanding of monetary value.

    For example, the Scottish ‘block grant’ is usually described as being around £30 billion. It is actually around £30 thousand million. Which sounds more?

    These two pages may help to explain:-

  233. Valerie says:

    Haha, as I predicted yesterday, on this thread 🙂

    This People’s Vote thing is turning into a wee subset shitshow, to the main Tory shitshow. Folk raging on Twitter, there will be no Remain option. A vote on a shit Deal, or a shittier Deal.

    Labour, for the few, not the many.

    Why after two years, of Corbyn acting as May’s Bodyguard, they expect him to oppose her now, is utterly baffling.

  234. Dr Jim says:

    Hey Murdo fud

    You obviously do care what a diehard Independence supporter like me thinks or you wouldn’t be trolling this site every day of the week to put forward your opinions that nobody on this site actually welcomes because every single person on this site agrees with me

    Independence of a people is an inalienable right and the United Nations to which the UK is a signatory agrees with that, if Scotland were say Nottinghamshire you might have a point but it’s not and you don’t you’re just a creepy wee British Nationalist troll using the typical arrogance of your breed to shout down what you think is more important than my and my country’s right to choose

    Your country has done nothing but that to many countries in its history and none of it has ever ended well, England is is country locked into a no choice political system designed for the people of that country to lose no matter what choice they make thus have the English political wealthy classes moulded the system to work in that fashion

    Today England offers its people two choices extreme right wing Naziism or extreme left wing Stalinism, the people of England can pick one of those and suffer the same outcome if they choose but Scotland doesn’t that’s why the SNP have been chosen in Scotland a centre left moderate party that serves the people not the other way round

    So I say to you once again there is nothing for you here and your attempts at disruption are doomed to fail, many have tried it before and the result is always the same more loathing from the people you’re trying to convince but be our guest keep trolling you’re message to Scotland because it is successful but not in the way you think or hope

  235. Ian Dick says:

    Richard Leonard, disrespects the Claim of Right signatories of Labour MPs that included the late Tony Benn, Robin Cook and former Prime MinisterGordon Brown and Chancellor Alistair Darling. What Richard has stated by revealing Labour under no circumstances would allow the people of Scotland to choose between Scotland regaining its independence or remaining part of the political union of the United Kingdom.
    He may not come from Scotland or understand the what being Scottish means, but he should understand democracy and understand the Claim of Right. It saddens me that Labour are attempting to out Tory the Tories. Maybe 2nd place is their ultimate goal in Scotland.
    Hail Alba

    Claim of Right 1989 – Wikipedia
    A Claim of Right for Scotland was a document crafted by the Campaign for a Scottish Assembly in 1988, declaring the sovereignty of the Scottish people. It was signed by all then-serving Labour and Liberal Democrat MPs, with the exception of Tam Dalyell (Labour),[1] a strident opponent of devolution..

  236. Marie Clark says:

    Well said Dr Jim, I agree completely.

  237. Thepnr says:

    If by some miracle Westminster manages to get some kind of watered down Chequers plan or a Canada type deal to put before Parliament for a vote, then I hope the SNP make it clear that they will not accept any deal that does not include as a minimum, access to the Single Market and Customs Union.

    This has been the SNP position all along and should not be a problem for them in sticking to that.

    The tricky bit might be when asked to support a second EU referendum, with the alternative being No Deal. I think they have to remain consistent and that their stance should be the people of Scotland will be allowed their say on the future relationship with the UK before even considering a second referendum on the EU.

    Westminster can make their decision on the EU without the help of the SNP who’s job it is to allow the Scottish people a chance to determine their own future and that must be their only concern when it comes to a second vote of any kind.

    The only second vote Scotland is interested in is for Independence.

  238. Jack Murphy says:

    OT. Apologies if this has already been posted. BREXIT.

    “SCOTTISH Brexit secretary Michael Russell has demanded Theresa May apologise after her government was caught “pleading with the EU to do nothing to help Scotland.”……..” [!] 🙁

    The National:

  239. Dr Jim says:

    Please excuse my grammarising mistakes today folks I just had my free at the point of use Scottish NHS excellent best in the British Isles treatment and my co-ordination’s a bit sludgy

    It usually clears up by teatime

  240. Greannach says:

    In a weird way, Labour’s behaviour is impressive. To see a once major political party deliberately doing away with itself isn’t something countries see very often.

    Corbyn would never consider himself as a colonialist, just like Anthony Wedgewood Been would never have thought of himself as a landowning artistocrat.

    In fact I’m sure I saw Corbyn at a rally in Islington last week demanding the extradition of the Shah of Iran.

  241. Meg merrilees says:

    Accidentally heard (t)Ruthless on Woman’s Hour this morning R4 10.00 -10.15 approx.

    Yes, the same woman who won’t give interviews to GMS.
    It’s 5 weeks and 3 days till the birth apparently – mark your diaries. NO GE that day!

    3 guesses who mentioned the constitution first?

    Within about the first few minutes – after the baby/pregnany bit, she came straight out with her frustration at always discussing “the sodding constitution” instead of discussing government.
    As soon as she drew breath, Jane Garvey apologised to listeners for the swearing.

    ‘Oh!’ says Ruth, JG teased her then by saying, come on Ruth, you used to work at the BBC as a Broadcaster you know what’s allowed.

    Jane Garvey has gone up in my estimation she actually asked her ‘how can you support the R@pe Clause?’ And, came out for Remain and now you seem to support Brexit – you must have some principles…. to which she eventually replied that ‘ she is fighting hard to get the best possible deal for the whole UK’

    When asking about a 2nd ref on the EU scenario

    ‘JG: “Will Boris Johnson be the next PM?”
    Ruth : “No”
    JG: Why not
    R: Because the front runner never becomes PM in the Conservative Party

    Maybe that’s why ‘oor Ruthie’ is protesting SO MUCH that she doesn’t want to be PM.

    She wouldn’t last two minutes in a real interview. JG had the kid gloves off but was still pretty tame with her although there were a couple of ‘tense’ moments where Ms. Davidson had to choose her words very carefully and ultimately didn’t really give anything away.

    Apparently she is addressing the Spectator this evening at a do in London, Fraser Nelson invited her along.

    Labour managing to confuse everyone this morning, possibly just blown their best chance to get elected by standing up for a second vote.

    Why does nobody remind all these ‘ the people have spoken’ pundits that the EU referendum was purely advisory NOT binding. Surely the prime duty of an MP is to make the best choice for your country and constituents not jump off a cliff face because your leader is deaf, proud and stupid.

    And of course, NO mention on the BBC of the labour proposal to refuse Scotland a 2nd referendum – maybe that is the real reason they are not coming out for a second vote as that would set a precedent.

    Huge gas reserve off the coast of Shetland this morning and it will be easy to access… oil and gas industry is finished in the UK -maybe; in Scotland – AYE RIGHT!
    Will that be the field that Cameron visited ‘incognito’ four years and a couple of weeks ago then?

  242. Hamish100 says:


    Just a wee reminder that there are the Scots Crown Jewels and the lesser and more recent English Crown Jewels.

    Guess which ones are better? correct, not the English ones!

  243. HYUFD says:

    Dr Jim If anyone is arrogant it is you in refusing to accept the 2014 referendum vote where Scots voted 55% to 45% to stay in the UK. You may be driven by anti English hysteria (though of course the Scots played a big part in the British Empire too) but I am a Unionist not a Nationalist unlike you. English nationalists from the English Democrats etc are your English equivalents

  244. Robert Peffers says:

    @HYUFD says: 24 September, 2018 at 8:36 am:

    ” … Robert Peffers As since the Civil War and the Glorious Revolution no monarch has blocked a Bill or prevented a Bill going forward.”

    You still don’t understand what legal sovereignty means. Thus you are either deliberately trolling or are just too thick to understand the subject.

    In either case you are not worth the bother of attempting to debate with. Few British/English Nationalist are and few will ever understand what is really going on around them – you have just exhibited that in full.

  245. HYUFD says:

    Thepnr More Scots support a Canada deal than oppose it based on the Yougov poll I posted above

  246. Petra says:

    Amazing don’t you think that people in Scotland, UK in general, have been duped, by British National politicians and the MSM, into believing that we’re a bunch of beggared scroungers. Anyone who can’t see that we, with 5million of a population, could be the richest country, or in the top five, in the World needs their head looked at.

    Posted already, but just a wee reminder to anyone who’s passing through.

    …. “commercialised quickly and at low cost ….”

  247. Dr Jim says:

    @Murdo fud

    Couldn’t help yourself could you bringing in the anti English trope
    My mother was English I am half English half my family are English you racist Twat
    You’re not a Unionist you’re a nasty British Nationalist (did I spell nasty correctly)

    You have no case you have no traction you have nothing to sell we want

    If you desire insults, yes I would insult your kind all day and smile while I do it until your kind do what you always do and I’m sure that’ll be coming along shortly

  248. ronnie anderson says:

    Ah wunner if Betty the 2nd would submit tae ah DNA test .

  249. Stravaiger says:

    @Daisy Walker

    I agree with your analysis of Brexit. I think you have it spot on.

  250. Hamish100 says:

    fud – no they don’t and we ain’t in Canada- which is an ex-dominion of the Empire and is now independent.

    ot with Davidson off to speak with the other fud Fraser Nelson (its that his real accent? like a nasally constricted morningside) is she spending more time in Londinium than her constituency?

    did anyone hear she’s expecting? ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

  251. Dr Jim says:

    Democracy: The offer of choice as decided by a people

    Choice is not a one time offer and to say it is is not democracy that’s dictatorship
    Every few years depending on the country you live in the people of that country choose to decide on matters pertaining to that country that’s one form of democracy

    Other forms of democracy take the shape of deciding the new bowling club captain or a family deciding roast beef or chicken for dinner in a collective but each of these smaller democracies follows the same principle of a collective making a decision whether on todays dinner or which TV to buy, but the chicken might not be good so tomorrow we’ll have something else, or the TV might break so the family must buy a new one

    Just think of it as Scotland needs a new TV because the old one broke right in the middle of eating bad tasting chicken

    The British Nationalist usurps and distorts the meaning of democracy to facilitate dictatorship by changing the very definition of the word

  252. HandandShrimp says:


    1 in 200 men in the world are descendants of Genghis Khan but that doesn’t they should rampage across Asia.

  253. Chick McGregor says:

    OT Brent Crude has gone through the $80 mark.

  254. Robert Peffers says:

    @HYUFD says: 24 September, 2018 at 12:54 pm:

    ” … Pithie

    More claptrap. In 1688 the Parliament of England deposed their legitimate Monarchy – skipped over 50 royals in the direct decent and invited a minor foreign royal to assume the crowns of England, Wales & Ireland. That means the direct royal line, (and they are all interconnected), was not followed.

    This is your usual closed mind bullshit. Not a single point you have claimed on this website has ever stood up to even cursory examination. The only fact that matters is that The United Kingdom is a legal agreement between only two equally sovereign kingdoms.

    It remains a kingdom and has never been a country. When the legally sovereign people of Scotland decide the union is over it legally is over – which is why every Westminster English unionist party is against indyref2 and tries to convince us they have a right to refuse that choice to the Scots – except when it came to the crunch they stepped back from contesting the Scottish claim of legal sovereignty of the people of Scotland in the Supreme court.

    The inalienable right to the people’s self-determination is ensconced in all World bodies – The UN and the World Court among them, and Westminster is signed up to all of them.

    Get out of that English nationalists!

  255. Thepnr says:

    @Dr Jim

    I believe this is the guy that is calling you anti-English, or is there more than one Tory with that username? (file is a pdf)

    There’s a HYUFD that has posted more than 45,000 times on the political betting website in just 5 years, our HYUFD won’t be long in making that up on Wings either going by recent output.

    You’ve all read his posts, he has nothing to offer to the debate, he will NEVER accept that he is wrong, it us that are wrong. You’re wasting your time addressing this troll, for that is surely what he is.

  256. starlaw says:

    Ronnie Anderson 1-13

    Betty twa would not submit to a DNA test. This is an insult to the one and only Queen who ever ruled a democracy, all the rest reigned over Monarchies. If you care to take a dictionary look up first ‘Monarch’ then look up ‘Dictator’ I don’t think you will be surprised.

  257. laukat says:

    I know it sounds a bit mad but I think another general election may be the only way forward for the Tories and in particular May.

    Brexit is now completely stuck on the Northern Ireland issue. Bear in mind that N Ireland is required before a trading relationship can be looked at it will need to be dealt with it and it will need to be dealt with on EU terms (i.e. some sort of border in the sea)

    The problem with N Ireland for the Tories isn’t N Ireland but the effect it has on parliamentary arithmetic. They’ve already shown they would have signed up to a border in the sea but then changed their mind when the DUP said it wasn’t acceptable.

    So for the Tories the question they must be pondering is could another General Election make them less reliant on the DUP and therefore able to agree a backstop? For that to occur all that is required is a gain of 10 seats for Tories.

    Apart from a ‘no deal’ and that ‘no deal’ would remain in place until N Ireland is resolved, it would appear to be the only other way forward.

    It might get more attractive if Trump loses the midterm elections and impeachment comes into view as their great free trade deals seem largely dependent on their best pal Donald.

  258. susan says:

    Spot on the pnr: I just scroll past it’s posts and sorry to say, most of those replying to it.

  259. starlaw says:

    HIFUD 12-55

    That proves nothing . . . Prove James V1 was the son of Mary Queen of Scots

  260. Liz g says:

    Thepnr @ 12.17
    Mibbi a People Vote doesn’t have to be that much of a problem, if the Scottish Government run an …In or out the UK vote at the same time in Scotland….
    If the UK vote is only about a deal… then Scotland could have a completely different campaign and two ballot papers.
    One for instructing Westminster on deal or no deal
    And the second one for instructing Holyrood to leave the Union..
    Media coverage might be a problem but other that that I can’t see why not!

  261. Daisy Walker says:


    Thank you, its been a long thought process to get to this point of view. I wish it was different, but I don’t see anything else that fits the events.

    Just over a year ago I spent ages trying to work out what Westminster was planning, trying to see it from their position.

    I had my sums (such as they are) wrong. I assumed Scotland was the major cash cow, instead of coming in at no. 2 compared to the Tax Stash.

    At that time, I thought they would leave it to the last minute, show up Brexit for the disaster it is, and put forward an additional Brexit Ref to cancel the whole thing, with or without another Indy Ref at the same time, to confuse or scunner the Scottish public.

    The way the ‘peoples vote’ is going, they’re definitely trying to use it to split the Scottish vote, but the main priority appears to be, to give the public in England a bone to chew, which will waste time and achieve nothing but a hard brexit.

    There is absolutely no way, a handful of Protestant Northern Irish politicians, who are going against what their majority electorate voted for, could stop the English Establishment get what it wants, IF it Truly wanted it. No way on earth. They would be bought off, compromised, die off, or scared off, one way or another. Whatever it took.

    A Hard Brexit 29/3/19 means food and medical shortages, which will mean orchastrated riots in the streets, which will mean the army will be deployed, a state of emergency declared, there will be some form of ‘terrorist’ incident which will allow both the army and English Police to be deployed in Scotlan, Holyrood closed. No referendum for the sweaties ever again. One Problem solved.

    The only deal on the go at the moment, is the one we will never hear of. The one which tries to get the EU to backtrack on its tax laws. And why would they, industry is just starting its exodus from UK to mainland Europe. In the next 6 months that will become a flood. And once Britain is out, they can alter the Tax Laws to suit themselves at their leisure.

    The question is, does the EU want all of Scotland’s wonderful assets to be controlled by this same bunch of arseholes, or will they help us break the grip and do a deal with us for the future.

    And if, (please god when), we get our Indy and remain in the EU tax area, how will that affect some of our most long standing Establishment figures who own huge tracts of heiland leibensraum? Will living/owning here mean they won’t be tax exempt? That’d be a nice shake up wouldn’t it. Though I don’t think Dan Snow would like it do you?

    Keep on keeping on folks, nothing else for it. Potentially we have all of Europe on our side, don’t you think, plus a fair few folk across the globe who are rather fond of us. That plus camera phones, and internet mean its just not as easy for the old British Raj to misbehave with impunity the way it used to. Colonel Blimp must be raging about it.

  262. Lbc are reporting that labour are seen as not representing the working people I could have told them that years ago I phoned in and told the only party in the UK helping the working people were the SNP and I quoted all the things they have done we all know what they are and I stated labour was in power in Scotland for years. And never delivered any of these things and never would have needless to say I never got on,air they ask you to phone in they vet you and if they don’t like what your view is you do not get on British democracy in action suppress the truth

  263. K1 says:

    ‘HYUFD says:
    24 September, 2018 at 8:38 am
    K1 So in half a century you cannot find any Bills the monarch affected which affect most people, all you can find is a handful related to the Crown Estate.’


    2.6 The prerogative can also be seen, at least in part, as the residue of the monarch’s legal authority which has survived into modern times without being superseded by statute law or otherwise eroded. Prerogative powers often relate to the government of the country and are exercisable for the public good.

    2.7 It is not possible to give a comprehensive catalogue of prerogative powers.3 However, prerogative powers of government (whether, in practice, exercised personally by the monarch (with or without the advice of Ministers) or exercised on her behalf by Ministers, officials orother bodies) include the following powers—

    • to appoint a Prime Minister;
    • to summon or prorogue Parliament;4
    • to give or refuse Royal Assent to bills;
    • to legislate by prerogative Orders in Council (for example, in relation to certain
    parts of the civil service5) or by letters patent;
    • to exercise the prerogative of mercy (for example, to pardon convicted offenders);
    • to make treaties;
    • to wage war by any means and to make peace (including power over the control,
    organisation and disposition of the armed forces)6;
    • to recognise states;
    • to issue passports7 and to provide consular services;
    • to confer honours, decorations and peerages;
    • to make certain appointments (including royal commissions).
    2.8 The prerogative also includes powers relating to—
    • the coinage;
    • the jurisdiction of the Crown as a visitor of universities and Oxbridge colleges;
    • appeals to the Privy Council.
    2.9 There are also other prerogative rights of the Crown which are more closely associated
    with the production of revenues. These include—
    • the grant of royal charters;
    • the mining of precious metals;
    • the grant of franchises for markets;
    • the right to bona vacantia;8
    • the right to waifs9 and estrays10;
    • the right to wrecks;
    • the ownership of swans and whales.

    2.10 The revenues from these tend to be included among the hereditary revenues of the Crown and there is therefore some uncertainty as to whether they fall within the prerogative for the purposes of Queen’s or Prince’s consent. It may be that an interest-only consent is sufficient to cover these vestigial prerogatives but this is for the House authorities to decide.


    2.14 The Crown Estate is worth £12 billion15 and consists of all the land and other property, rights and interests of the Crown which are under the management of the Crown Estate Commissioners (as established under the Crown Estate Act 1956 and managed in accordance with the Crown Estate Act 1961).

    2.15 The Crown Estate includes—

    • the rural estate, consisting of about 140,000 hectares of agricultural land and forest;
    • the urban estate, including property on historic estates in London and elsewhere such as estates at Regent’s Street and St James’s (but excluding the Royal palaces);
    • the Windsor estate (including the Great Park and Ascot racecourse but excluding Windsor Castle);
    • the marine estate consisting of about 55% of the UK’s foreshore, tidal river-beds and almost all of the sea-bed within the 12 nautical miles limit (including rights to
    all minerals excluding hydrocarbons)16;
    • rights to all naturally occurring gold or silver (the Mines Royal); and
    • rights to all minerals (excluding hydrocarbons) from the UK’s continental shelf


    2.20 The private estates19 of the Queen are an example of the personal property of the Crown. Section 1 of the Crown Private Estates Act 1862 defines them for the purposes of that Act as—

    • land or other real or heritable property or estate purchased at any time by Queen Victoria or her heirs or successors out of money issued and applied for the use of the Privy Purse or out of any other money not appropriated to a public service,
    • land or other real or heritable property or estate which came to Queen Victoria or her heirs or successors (whether by gift, inheritance or otherwise) from any other
    person (unless not intended to be transferred as private estate20),
    • land or other real or heritable property or estate which belonged to, or was in trust for, Queen Victoria or her heirs or successors at the time of their accession and which was, before their accession, capable of alienation.

    2.21 Balmoral and Sandringham are private estates of the Queen.

    2.22 The private estates differ from the Crown Estate in that they can be freely disposed of
    and are not subject to the Sovereign Grant Act 2011.

    2.23 Section 8 of the Crown Private Estates Act 1862 ensures that the private estates are subject to taxes, rates, duties etc. as though they were the property of any subject of the realm but section 9 of that Act ensures that such impositions are paid out of the Privy Purse. The Queen is liable for council tax and non-domestic rates on her private estates.21


    It’s as if someone can’t understand the use of the term ‘examples’? In every sense of the term ‘Consent’, the Queen and the Prince have Veto over every aspect of Legislative Bills in the Westminster parliament and have since ever there was one.

    The examples I set out in my original post were ‘merely’ ‘examples’ from the ‘pamphlet’ under discussion. This is a continuous uninterrupted part of HM government since the forming of the parliament.

    Many of the Bills of the ‘last half a century’ are merely ‘updating’ previous Consents. Any Bill that touches on any aspect related to any ‘interests’ that the Queen and Prince has, already been ‘Consented’ prior to new legislation being introduced? There are templates for Ministers to inform the Palace no less than 14 days in advance of any Bill that requires consent before being introduced to the Houses.



  264. Cubby says:

    The FUD the Bruce Willis of Britnats.

    Pointless correcting this diddy and his crap. He will just keep spouting more crap and pish for you to correct. The end result is a load of crap and pish all over Wings.

    Yes that’s right FUD you are not a diehard unionist but an ordinary stupid BRITISH NATIONALIST.

  265. Dr Jim says:

    Scotland elected the SNP to serve as their government for two reasons, the first as being the vehicle to bring about the Independence of their country, the second which has been apparent since their original election is they are more efficient and harder working that all of their predecessors put together

    When the British Nationalist parties work together in our Holyrood parliament to constantly overturn and repeal decisions taken by our elected government which were present in the manifesto of that government on which they were elected they are preventing the democratic will and votes of the people in that choice of government

    Once again the perversion and prevention of democracy

    It’s the British Nationalist way to redefine the definitions and meanings of words, take for example Alex Salmonds expression of “A perhaps once in a generation vote” the British Nationalists throw that statement around as though one man is a God and his every word must be adhered to yet deride everything else this one man said, then attempt to use those words to dictate the actions and votes of over five million other people as though that moment in time is of historical importance but no other moment and no other opinion may be heard for all time

    Scotland has selected new managers for our team because the previous managers have run their course and our team’s losing every week, so British Nationalists………..

    You’re sacked by Scotland and no European team fancies you much either

  266. galamcennalath says:

    When did highly partisan Pressure Groups become Think Tanks? And adopt prestigious sounding names with Institute in their title?

    All just callous manipulation of the gullible, and the loyal Establishment media go along with it.

    When did the BBC last introduce someone from a ‘Think Tank’, as a representative of a right wing neo liberal pressure group?

    You can bet your last groat that if it were a representative of a pro Indy group they wouldn’t be introduced as an impartial academic!!

  267. Iain mhor says:

    Daisy @ 10:57am
    True enough by definition, though by convention the American ‘short scale’ system is now used almost universally.
    Just as well, or the UK’s debt would be truly astronomical, Not that the current estimate of anywhere between 2 & 5 trillion isn’t!
    Maybe the Tories will manage some kind of ‘lend-lease’ agreement (ha!) I doubt they’ll manage much to our benefit, the Yanks are still waiting on our books to show how their ‘Marshall Plan’ grant was invested after the war. They’ll have a long wait, since no-one has ever discovered where the money went.
    Other recipients did manage to produce the books and notably even paid the grant back (even under no obligation to do so)
    Britains so called ‘War debt’ loans to the USA was paid off in 2006 (After amassing about 22 billion debt)

    They do like to bang on about “We repaid our war debt, no-one else did’ which is frankly nonsense. No-one else had to go cap in hand for a direct loan of almost 5 billion on top of the reconstruction loans/grants under the Marshall Plan. We pissed ours away, to the best of anyones knowledge, in attempting to rebuild the war machine of empire, while everyone else demilitarized and reconstructed.

    We even decided that America’s desire we lead from the front of European reconstruction could get tae f***.
    Churchill pushed for a ‘United States of Europe though, but not with the UK in it, obviously! The nascent trade organisation centred around the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) received similar response – a great idea but Great Britain wanted nothing to do with it either – A better idea was to trade instead with Commonwealth Nations incl. Canada. But for some strange reason, that whole plan fell completely on its arse (imagine that) America reckoned we were insane and threw its lot in with Germany instead.

    Which is where, limping along, skint, we finally and grudgingly entered the European Community in the early 1970’s. It was the Tories who pushed for it, but France said GTFO (no wonder given past attitude) We eventually got in though, but no referendum was held on the matter because it was felt it would be “unconstitutional” *cough* and would violate “Parliamentary Sovereignty” (that will be the bit where the democratic will of the people should never be heard, far less acted on, it’s right there in the UK Constitution…err no hang on, there isn’t one)
    There was finally a referendum about staying in, shortly after Labour usurped the Tories. Despite Labour being split and abstaining on the Tory motion all over the shop (surprise) and even the Tory right wing opposing their own motion on a referendum on the grounds of well, I dunno, sovereignty probably – but mostly ‘we hate Johnny Foreigner’ (so no change there then) The people of the UK got their first ever referendum and Parliament ‘trembled before their decision’ ©T.Benn (ahaha)

    That’s pretty much it really. Europe got a head start of about 20-30 years after the war, the UK pissed windfall money away on warmongering and thought it was still a great empire. It had a constant love/hate relationship with Europe and kept annoying it. It believed it should really trade with the Commonwealth and Europe on its own terms and stand in its own feet(being so Great and and all) and both political parties were continually split between needing to trade with Europe or being a great Sovereign Nation bowing to no-one, not least Johnny Foreigner and arguing over whether a referendum would sort the matter out once and for all.

    At least we learned from all that nonsense…

  268. K1 says:

    Well differing opinions on the ‘troll’ issue, masel’ has already written to Rev, wee bit shot down on that score, on the basis that ‘he’s’ debating ‘independence’ related issues. Perhaps now that everyone has had a ‘dose’ it really is up to all of us to just ‘quit him’ 😉

  269. Dr Jim says:

    @Thpnr 1.50pm

    As you know I don’t normally get into these things and to be honest I don’t know why I did, you’re absolutely 100% correct of course and I will as you suggest desist and cease my scribblings at the moron

  270. Giving Goose says:

    Re laukat

    Or they lock up the DUP.

  271. Capella says:

    @ Thepnr @ susan – me too. Sometimes all the scrolling past gets a bit tedious so I go off and do somthing more interesting.

    But apart from that, there have been some excellent discussions in this thread and the previous thread. ScotLab seem to have shot themselves in what’s left of their foot again. This week’s conference will be interesting for what is kept off the agenda.

    Interesting to hear that Ruth Davidson is being promoted in London. They are welcome to her. The Tory conference will also be a joy to behold, not.

  272. Macart says:

    Reading and chatting to friends, even the odd argument and debate, is a privilege. Friendly communication is a pleasure and should be a pleasurable experience. The great thing about these forums is that it’s down to you how pleasurable an experience it is.

    We’re all different and have different views on contact. Some folk like the challenge and to challenge opposing views when they see them, especially if they feel those views are intentionally distorted to mislead or cause hurt.

    Some, like me, read a few early posts and if they believe them to be dishonest, not very interesting or badly informative, walk on by to folk they feel are the exact opposite. Give what you consider a poor commentator no more thought whatsoever and enjoy a chinwag with those friends.

    The Rev has very clear rules and he is the final arbiter of content and access to this site.

    There is no rule that says you have to have a bad time here or absolutely must read every single comment by every single person. If someone’s posting causes you any kind of discomfort?


  273. Liz g says:

    Capella,Susan and Thepnr…. Me too.
    He had a fair shake when he fist appeared and had nothing to offer that could enlighten us as to why Scots would prefer then Union,just more propaganda that’s already all over the MSM…..
    K1 @ 2.12
    Mibbi now would be a good time to post his statement of intent again??
    The short version…. LOL

  274. Robert Peffers says:

    @ronnie anderson says: 24 September, 2018 at 1:13 pm:

    ” … Ah wunner if Betty the 2nd would submit tae ah DNA test.”

    No point in her having one, Ronnie. In 1688 the still independent Parliament of England deposed their sitting monarch. This monarchy was directly descended from a marriage between the English & Scottish royals.

    Now the revolting parliament of England then skipped across over 50 in the direct line of descent and invited a minor royal to ascend the thrones of England, Wales & Ireland.

    Now, think on this, there were, in 1688, 50 branches of the royal line all with a better claim to the thrones of England, Wales & Ireland and every time any of those links produced a child that direct line of descent got bigger. There are many, many thousands of royals all with better claims than every single royal that descended from William & Mary.

    Not that it really matters for that lot of revolting English parliamentarians changed the law, (of the Kingdom of England only), by making their invite to William & Mary conditional upon them legally delegating their Divine Right of Kings (sovereignty), to the Parliament of The Kingdom of England.

    That was their mistake. For by forcing the Treaty of Union upon the Kingdom of Scotland they messed up as they put the Kingdom of England parliament into permanent recess on 30 April 1707.

    So what opened for business on 1 May 1707 was a totally new, two party, union of Kingdoms and it was not the continued Parliament of the English Kingdom and that is clearly written into the Treaty of Union.

    So since 1 May 1707 Westminster has been operating illegally as the parliament of England but called it the United Kingdom Parliament.

    Now the situation remains that as the people of Scotland are legally sovereign all it takes for the United Kingdom to end is for a majority of the legally sovereign people of Scotland to get together and declare the union is over. To that end the Scottish Legal, “Hecht Heid Yin”, claimed in the Westminster Supreme court that, “The People of Scotland are legally sovereign”, and Westminster made no efforts to contest that claim.

    In the meantime the SG has a mandate from the legally sovereign people of Scotland to call a referendum on Scottish Independence, whenever the SG chooses to use it.

    Which means Westminster has no legal way to prevent it happening. The best they can legally do is to claim they that Westminster will not recognise it as binding upon them.

    Trouble is that as Westminster is legally The United Kingdom parliament of The United Kingdom there hasn’t been a legal parliament of The Kingdom of England since 1 May 1707. So, good luck with that, Westminster.

    Having tacitly agreed the people of Scotland are legally sovereign, how do you now prove they are not legally sovereign and thus have the legal right to choose whatever they democratically choose as their sovereign right to do so.

    Then there is that wee legal argument, as Westminster is legally the United Kingdom Parliament how does it claim to equally represent both Kingdoms of the United Kingdom when they legally represent both kingdoms? Wee bit of conflict of interest there I think.

  275. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Thepnr @ 12:17,

    I would have no problem in supporting “EUref2 first” provided it was written in tablets of stone that a different result in Scotland and England automatically meant independence.

    We cannot have a repeat of 2016 in which we are dragged in a direction different from our clearly-expressed will. That’s a complete travesty of democracy and the right of self-determination.

    And it has also to be a full choice, not Labour’s half-hearted apology of a thing. They had a political open goal and they “skied” it. Extremists of the left and right, nice and cosy in the same boat together.

    This whole business has scunnered me with referendums. They can so easily be hijacked, it seems, by actors with their own hidden agendas, who can even magically change the meaning of “advisory” to “mandatory”.

    But since no such offer will be received, and things are just going to get worse, not better, as long as we remain chained to these cargo cultists, it’s high time to bail.

  276. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Greannach @ 12:27,

    Getting back to the original topic somewhat, am I the only one who thinks it more than a bit wierd that JC the Great Lefty Liberator and Man of the People can so comfortably appoint himself to the position of High Imperial Panjandrum and feel able to dictate to the people of Scotland what they can or can’t do…?

  277. K1 says:

    Lol Liz…nah, not worth the repost.

    Pretty clear by now what you and I have known from the start. It’s up tae the Rev, so far…nada.

    I think people can read what they like and ignore the rest as Macart says. Some of us enjoy a good sword fence, wi this one it’s no even any fun…doesn’t debate merely berates. Typical English Nationalist outlook, in denial and believes he’s ‘above’ the fray, so much so that he has to come on here to ‘prove’ that, lol.

    But there can be ‘offshoots’ of interesting stuff because of what he raises, like the Stewartb link regarding “Consent’ prior to Bills going through WM. That’s always interesting to see the structure of the web that constitutes the corrupt system we are governed by and it’s worth it to put it into a wider public domain for others to peruse and make their own mind up about the nature of such structures and begin questioning what they’ve been taught about the political set up they live in.

  278. K1 says:

    ‘am I the only one’



  279. Fred says:

    Indeed Starlaw, in his youth James VI was taunted as being the son of Maister Davie, as in Rizzio! 🙂 Naebody kens! Who was the faither of Elizabeth, her mither was executed for adultery!

    All this oil & gas is a bit embarrassing!

  280. jfngw says:

    My understanding of Labour’s federal proposal is it would remove Scotland as country, we would become just a UK region. If they make this federalisation based on the current countries then Scotland would be a minority player in the UK (bit like now) but with no possibility of escape, ever. We would be effectively just be handing our resources to Westminster in perpetuity.

    To remove Scotland as a country they would, in my opinion, need the authority of the people of Scotland. If the people of Scotland do not agree then it is not democracy but a regime from another country being imposed on Scotland.

    I can see the unionist cults arguments now, you voted to No in 2014, this gives the UK parliament the right to do what it wants. Which is basically the argument they’ve used on Scotland’s EU vote.

    Labour promote federalism not because they want federalism, but because it makes Scotland their (the UK not Labour, they are quite happy for Tories to govern Scotland) permanent property, it removes the threat of Scotland becoming independent.

  281. Liz g says:

    Daisy Walker @ 2.06
    RE. Scottish Land
    When we get Indy , I, and I hope others,will be pushing for a tough stance on Land Registration !
    A two year (from the day of independence) window, in which Land must be registered to A Named Person , over 16, for tax purposes.
    Nae Trusts, or anything like that, a person must be named.
    Any Land not claimed, the Title will automatically fall to the Scottish Government.
    No exceptions!
    If these people don’t want identified then they need not claim the Land.
    We as a people cannot decide how we want our land to be managed or form part of our new tax system, if we don’t even know who owns it…

    I would also suggest that Land itself should not be able to be inherited and the Scottish Government should over see the sale of Land… It should always ultimately belong to the People of Scotland and only the use of it could be purchased.
    Just like the Sovereign down south has her Land, we Sovereign Scots should have ours, all of it,, but that’s a whole other conversation

  282. Robert Peffers says:

    @HYUFD says: 23 September, 2018 at 9:11 pm:

    ” … Unemployment UK 4%, EU average unemployment 7%, French unemployment 9%, Italian unemployment 11%, Spanish unemployment 15%, Greek unemployment 20%

    And just whose statistics are being quoted in this link you so kindly provided, HYUFD?

    It wouldn’t be, perchance, be the United Kingdom, “Office Of National Statistics”?

    In fact it has to be the ONS figures No one else has access to UK Treasury figures. That’ll be the same statistics they use to compile the GERS Figures that, for just two examples, call the entire Oil & Gas revenue as belonging to the United Kingdom’s, “Extra-Regio Territory”, where the term Extra-Regio is defined as meaning, “Unable to be identified as from a particular region of the United Kingdom. Yet the United Kingdom is a bipartite union of two kingdoms and the oil & gas revenue comes from the up to 98% Sottish territorial waters. Scotland is not a region of the UK but is a fully legal partner in the United Kingdom.

    Then we have the same ONS that recorded the Her Majesty’s Treasury of having gathered every penny of that revenue as belonging to the UK then, “Estimate”, that Scotland be credited, (for only statistical Estimates), with having earned only a 8.4% share of that revenue of population ratio grounds and not on 98% geographic grounds.

    Then we have their other nice little English earner. This is the method that Westminster uses to approportion the United Kingdom’s four countries exports. Not as you wold expect as exports from where the produce or products are made or produced, but from where the goods leave the United Kingdom. They think of the centuries that Westminster has been shutting down the ports and airports of non-English countries while using United Kingdom funding to expand English infrastructure.

    Among which is Heathrow and the Chunnel and rail, road and air links between the English infrastructure linking things throughout England. Note that all countries in the UK are paying for English infrastructure because only England, having no elected as such parliament, is funded directly as the United Kingdom by United Kingdom Ministries via UK treasury funding. While Scotland, Wales and N. Ireland get what pocket money Westminster decides to allocate to them as a Barnett Formula Block Grant. Note that the recent Forth Crossing had to be funded, not as a United Kingdom infrastructure project but from the Scottish Block Grant. So do tell – what funds the London Cross-Rail? Who paid for the New London Sewerage System Where does the cash come from for the High Speed Rail network?

    So awa ye gan, HYUFD, we Scots on Wings know the real truth and that means either you imagine we all zip up back and you will getaway with spouting pish or you really are as much of a fool as you make out to be.

    One thing for sure – no one believes you on this forum but yourself and what you achieve here by spouting crap is you offer us the chance to expose the truth. You are thus helping the cause of Scottish Independence.

  283. Liz g says:

    jfngw @ 3.15
    A federal UK is no more deliverable than the Vow was.
    The Treaty of Union always gets in the way.
    The Vow couldn’t ever make the Scottish Parliament permanent because Westminster cannot make ANY permanent laws, or dilute its powers.
    A Federation would not be compatible with the Treaty, so to achieve Federlism theTreaty of Union would need to be ended, then Scotland and England would need to sign up to this Federation.
    They will never be the ones to end that Treaty because they cannot be sure Scotland would then join the Federation.
    The Treaty of Union is THEE foundling document of the UK Parliament and the UK Parliament ends if the Treaty does.
    So unless and until Labour are talking Treaty they are no really talking about Federalism, they are talking about the impression of Federalisation.
    The answer to them or the question for them should always be…
    Will the Treaty of the Union still be in place then ?
    Are you talking about dissolving the Treaty of the Union to get a Federation?
    That needs answered before talking about “what a UK Federation would look like”
    Saves wasting everyone’s time really, because Labour are never going to be suggesting the Treaty needs to go!

  284. Legerwood says:

    Robert Peffers @ 2.31pm
    “”…In 1688 the still independent Parliament of England deposed their sitting monarch. This monarchy was directly descended from a marriage between the English & Scottish royals.

    Now the revolting parliament of England then skipped across over 50 in the direct line of descent and invited a minor royal to ascend the thrones of England, Wales & Ireland.””


    Your history is more than a bit confused here.

    When James VIA and II was deposed he was succeeded by his eldest daughter by his first wife, Anne Hyde. Therefore it was a succession in the direct line. No one, but no one was passed over. Mary was the direct heir.

    Mary was married to her first cousin, William of Orange and it was Mary who insisted William should be given the title of king, rather than Prince Consort and rule with her but she was Queen Regnant not Queen consort.

  285. Liz g says:

    Ledgerwood @ 4.25
    How could she be the direct heir if James had a son?
    (I’m not disputing the bloodline)

  286. crazycat says:

    @ Legerwood at 4.25

    Thank you – I have been waiting for someone to point that out. I usually read threads some time after they are posted and don’t want to duplicate; if no-one had said it, I was planning to, but you have expressed it better than I probably would have.

    It is also the case that, as the son of the sister of Charles II and James VII & II, William of Orange was the closest legitimate male outwith the direct line, until the birth of Mary Stuart’s half-brother, variously referred to as James VIII & III or the Old Pretender.

    Arguing that anyone else had a better claim requires a return to lines of descent that diverged much earlier, and is thus not consistent with describing James VII & II as the “rightful monarch”.

  287. crazycat says:

    @ Liz g

    Mary was the heir presumptive until the birth of her (much younger) half-brother, at which point he acquired that status; that was a major reason for the ousting of James VII & II, since both he and his son were Catholics.

    That doesn’t make it true that there were 50 people with better claims, though (unless all the Stuarts are to be regarded as usurpers, and even then I’m struggling to work out who these people were; James VI became Elizabeth Tudor’s heir and successor because there were not deemed to be better candidates).

  288. Tam fae somewhere says:

    What’s the story re not touching the Scottish crown?

    Never heard of this before!

  289. Gary says:

    Corbyn has ALWAYS said that he has no problem with a referendum. Labour has ALWAYS said the opposite.

    So, who runs Labour, Corbyn or the PLP??

  290. Legerwood says:

    Liz g says:
    24 September, 2018 at 6:00 pm
    Ledgerwood @ 4.25
    How could she be the direct heir if James had a son?
    (I’m not disputing the bloodline)””
    Mary was a protestant, her half brother was a Roman Catholic and became in time the Old Pretender. His son was Bonnie Prince Charlie.

  291. HYUFD says:

    Dr Jim And I am part Welsh and part French through Huguenot ancestry, so what, there is nothing nasty about wanting to keep the UK

  292. HYUFD says:

    RobertPeffers As Ledgerwood correctly points out James IInd was succeeded by his eldest daughter Mary, who was in turn succeeded by another of James’ daughters, Anne.

    The Scottish people of course voted 55% for the Union in the 2014 referendum. Dr Jim There was no rejection of Britain then.

  293. HYUFD says:

    K1 The royal prerogrative is now exercised by the PM and Cabinet, there has been no instance in the last century of the Monarch rather than the PM deciding to go to War, make a Treaty, issue peerages, call a general election etc. The powers are all taken by the PM which the Monarch follows.

    The Crown Estates are self sustaining and profitable and have little impact on most peoples everyday lives

  294. HYUFD says:

    Robert Peffers Check here then for further unemployment figures.
    There are plenty of thriving ports such as Aberdeen and airports such as Glasgow, none of which ‘shut down’ by the UK government. Even the SNP did not vote against Heathrow expansion as it would create extra landing slots from Heathrow to Scotland

  295. Thepnr says:

    Hey Simon have you found your dream girl yet?

  296. yesindyref2 says:

    @HYUFD says: “Yeaindyref2 That Yougov poll had more Scots backing a CETA deal than opposing it and set out clearly what it was and remains as relevant now as it was then, it was taken after the EU referendum. We will be in a transition period and in the SM and CU while much of it was negotiated. Plus to get it a backstop would have been agreed to avoid a hard border in Ireland which most Northern Irish voters want.

    This is a classic example of a Unionist series of assertions that can not be backed up.

    1. Where in the Yougov poll does it set out clearly what it was, to show that anyone giving an opinion had a single clue to what they were approving? 33% also said they don’t know, a high percentage..

    2. The poll is from 2016, since then a lot has happened, exccept with progress towards a Brexit deal. The poll is TWO YEARS OUR OF DATE.

    3. “We will be in a transistion deal”. Please give a link to the official UK or EU webpage that says this has been agreed. It hasn’t.

    4. “and in the SM and CU while much of it was negotiated”. Please give a link to the official UK or EU webpage that says this has been agreed. It hasn’t.

    5. “would have been agreed to avoid a hard border in Ireland which most Northern Irish voters want”. Please give a link to the official UK or EU webpage that says this has been agreed. It hasn’t.

    Fact check: none, just an old oput of date opinion poll.
    Conclusion: usual fact-free Unionist assertion, a classic example of the species.

  297. yesindyref2 says:

    Yeah, I know, it’s difficult not to correct such incorrect or way out of date assertions. A prime example of what Better Together advocates spurted out last time though. GIGO – Garbage In Garbage Out.

  298. Meg merrilees says:

    Sorry – posted this on the wrong thread a while ago – here it is in its correct place.

    Meg merrilees says:
    24 September, 2018 at 7:45 pm

    Not so long ago, there was an article in The Times around the time that William and Catherine were getting the rights of heredity changed in case their first child was a girl. It was pointed out that such a daughter, if born could become Queen – so long as she wasn’t Catholic or married to a Catholic – so that bit is still law. I’m sure the DUP approve of that anomaly.

    The Times article pointed out that there currently, about 3,000 people who have more right to the throne of England than the current incumbent but who are excluded owing to their Catholic religion.

    The link below is the biography of the Duchessa Maria Fitz-James of Spain or to be precise:

    María del Rosario Cayetana Paloma Alfonsa Victoria Eugenia Fernanda Teresa Francisca de Paula Lourdes Antonia Josefa Fausta Rita Castor Dorotea Santa Esperanza Fitz-James Stuart, Silva, Falcó y Gurtubay, 18th Duchess of Alba, GE, OIC, OSH, DOA, OAX, OSG, OPC (28 March 1926 – 20 November 2014), was head of the House of Alba and the third woman to hold the dukedom of Alba in her own right.

    She apparently held more titles than any other aristocrat alive and had they met, Queen Elizabeth – the current Queen would have had to curtsey to her.

    The Duchessa died very recently, a direct descendant paternally from James ll. Her previous two husbands had predeceased her and she wanted to marry a civil servant for her third marriage, aged 84 – which her children and King Juan Carlos opposed SO – she gave away her wealth and gave her children their inheritance – several castles- and got married.

    It’s worth looking at the Wiki article because it shows her AMAZING coat of arms which includes the Lion Rampant and a list of the 45 + titles she held.
    It seems that she was also linked with the Spencer family and when William ascends the English throne it will consolidate the familial claim the the throne of the England.

    Curiously, if I remember correctly, Duke and Duchess of Alba was a title ‘they’ mentioned for Harry and Meghan along with the Duke of Cumberland….,_18th_Duchess_of_Alba

  299. Thepnr says:

    @Macart 2:23

    Class as always 🙂

  300. Liz g says:

    Ledgerwood @ 7.20
    Yes… but with all due respect.. that’s not what I’m asking!
    If there was a live male heir, how could Mary claim/ be offered the Crown…
    As in how (if you have the information) did the Westminster Parliament get around that one?

  301. Chick McGregor says:

    Thepnr, Macart

    Yeah, but I think the Rev is a very, very smart cookie.

    Sometimes I get the suspicion that he leaves the more obvious trolls dangling out there a while because he knows rebuttal of their nonsense is usefully informative, especially to more recent visitors. 😉

  302. HYUFD says:

    ThePNR She is Russian not that that is any of your business

  303. HYUFD says:

    Yesindyref2 The poll set out precisely what a Canada Deal was ie a deal on goods but not financial services but free of EU regulation and regains control of our borders, those terms remain the same then as they are now and 43% of Scots would be happy with such a Canada Deal to only 24% opposed.

    Most likely it would require a new general election to get a Tory majority not reliant on the DUP to get the backstop agreed to avoid a hard border in Ireland but once that is agreed the EU are quite clear there could be a transition period in which the UK stays in the single market and customs union while the Canada style FTA is negotiated for GB

  304. yesindyref2 says:

    No it didn’t. For instance it says NOTHING about non-tariff tariffs, and if you don’t know what that means good luck to you. Here’s all it says:

    Imagine Britain left the EU on these terms:
    Britain leaves the EU and instead agrees a free
    trade deal with the EU, like Canada. Britain can
    export goods to the EU without paying tariffs,
    but the deal does not include services, so does
    not allow British industries like financial
    services to export freely to the EU. Britain has
    full control over our borders and immigration,
    does not have to follow any EU regulations and
    does not have to contribute any money to the
    Do you think this outcome would be good or bad
    for Britain?

    How many times do you have to be told that was 2 years ago, nobody would know what a “Canada deal” would mean though it sounds cool, and 33% didn’t know. And a lot has changed since them so it is not current.

    Unionists eh, distortion and ancient history is all they’ve got.

    Through a Glass, Darkly.

  305. HYUFD says:

    Yes it does ‘Britain can export goods to the EU without paying tariffs but the deal does not include services, so does not allow British industries like financial services to export freely to the EU.’

    How many times do you have to be told the terms of a Canada deal are the same then as they are now and a plurality of Scots supported a Canada deal on those terms

  306. HYUFD says:

    As we already mirror EU goods and products standards and will still do so quality check non tariff tariffs not an issue

  307. yesindyref2 says:

    How many times do you have to be told you really don’t have a single solitary clue. Keep up with the current news, old chap. And do try to find out about how exports work, I export both in the SM / CU of the EU, and the States.

  308. yesindyref2 says:

    Just thought I’d drop this here, and if anyone thinks the UK would get as “good” a deal as Canada didn’t get, they’ve not been watchingt May & Co the last 2 years, not with 20/20 vision anyway.

    For the benefit of the clueless, click the link for the comic.

  309. HYUFD says:

    So what as I said a Canada Deal avoids tariffs on goods while still leaving us free from ECJ jurisdiction and regaining control of our borders

  310. yesindyref2 says:

    Dear God, it seriously is not a great deal for the UK compared to membership of the EU, and only marginally better than WTO if the Yanks don’t destroy WTO.

    In addition it seems CETA is not home and dry. You should read this, since it seems you’re not keeping up with the news – Italy may not ratify, and as you probably don’t realise, new treaties have to be unanimous. Which would mean of course that if Scotland was a member of the EU, that’s small insignificant Scotland with a mere population of 5.4 million, refused to ratify it, the treaty would be as dead as the Chequers duck. Pass the orange.

    I used to be fairly optimistic for the UK out of the EU, now? It’s sheer and utter madness, and not helped by the lunatics in charge of the asylum at Westminster.

  311. HYUFD says:

    It will ratify, Lega Nord and 5* and the populist Italian government are rocking the boat over everything from the Euro to immigration but in the end do not overturn it all. A Canada style Deal avoids WTO while still respecting the Leave vote and has support from voters across the UK

  312. yesindyref2 says:

    I’m going to leave you to it Dave, for one simple reason, I feel kind of sorry for you. You’re a Remain voter coming to terms with the UK leaving the EU, and putting a brave face on it. Stiff upper lip and all that good stuff. In Essex you can’t escape short of emigrating (you could move to Independent Scotland, some have already in hope).

    Whereas in Scotland we can escape with Independence, and even if not in the EU would be way likely, having voted 62% Remain and having a Government and FM that gets on well with the EU, to have a better relationship with the EU than the Government of the rUK, whether in the EU, EFTA / EEA, or even with a SETA of our own!

  313. HYUFD says:

    In the circumstance of No Deal Brexit Scotland may well vote for independence but the UK, even England, polling suggests would vote for Remain over No Deal so No Deal is unlikely to last for long. With a Deal Scotland is more likely to stay in the UK anyway

  314. Thepnr says:

    @HYUFD says:
    at 11:42 pm

    “ThePNR She is Russian not that that is any of your business”

    Ta Simon, I appreciate you confirming who you are. Hope it all works out for you, have a good day 🙂

  315. K1 says:

    Ah just checked out your comment upthread Thpnr:

    Seems you hit the nail on the heid.

  316. HYUFD says:

    Thepnr This website is quite clear on basic details it publishes and personal details it does not. I would be wary as a third party trawling over the internet and how much of a person’s personal details you process and publish without their express consent, especially with GDPR now part of UK law

  317. Macart says:


    Agreed. 🙂

    Just lettin’ folks know there’s more than one way to enjoy a visit.

  318. Thepnr says:

    What’s your objection Simon?

    You’re a wanna be Tory councillor in England that see’s it as fair game to plant your arse on an Independence supporting website and troll the locals.

    Everything you make public online, including your posts on this website is no longer personal information. It’s not like you sent me a letter now is it.

    You offered all the information about you online freely for all the public including potential Tory supporters in Epping to view. That includes in excess of 45,000 posts on the Political Blogging website. If you don’t want them read then don’t post them.

    I’d be suspicious of any wanna be politician that had something to hide though I’m sure you don’t or am I wrong?

  319. HYUFD says:

    Thepnr Everything I post is of course public and nothing I have said is anything I am particularly concerned by. However my mail and personal details are made quite clear will not be published above the posting area on this website and the instructions are also quite clear not to sign your comments. By personally identifying the personal details of posters (and hopefully I am only the exception) GDPR is being breached as personal data is being processed and disclosed without the express consent of the poster as well as the terms and conditions of this website.

  320. Thepnr says:

    GDPR! Hahahahahahaha, please stop.

    Simon you really are a fanny so you are, but funny though 🙂

  321. yesindyref2 says:

    Simon, if that is your name, seriously, don’t try to use the big scary GDPR which applies to organisations, not individuals. I’ve been the data controller since ooh, a lot of years for my business, and am registered with the ICO for a £35 annual fee. After I self-assessed GDPR compliance to see if it was any different from previously in the way it affects my business which handles personal data (information), it was a simple case of adding “GDPR compliant” in the appropriate places on my websites.

    Here’s a starter guide for you about organisations:

    and here’s how it affects you (your rights) as an individual:

    I hope that makes it easier for you to get a grip of it.

  322. yesindyref2 says:

    … websites … and any relevant literature, e.g. leaflets.

  323. HYUFD says:

    yesindyref2 Anybody who handles personal data under GDPR becomes the data controller of it. They can then only lawfully process it either with the express consent of the person whose data it is or on the grounds of a clear lawful basis eg a legitimate interest or to process a contract etc

  324. HYUFD says:

    Processing carried out by individuals purely for personal/household activities it is true is not exempt from GDPR. However posting personal details on a website without that persons consent is not processing for personal/household activities

  325. Thepnr says:

    Simon are you drunk again?

  326. yesindyref2 says:

    Simon, Jings, you talk a load of crap. Not even in organisations are data PROCESSORS all data CONTROLLERS, and that was the least crappiest thing what you writ.

  327. HYUFD says:

    Yesindyref2 The data controller is the person who determines the purpose and manner in which personal data is processed, in this case Wings Over Scotland or whoever else Thepnr got the data from, it is true data processors can then actually process that data but the data controller still retains liability for ensuring no data breaches by those processors.
    Everything else I said was entirely true, personal data has been processed and released not purely for personal and household purposes without the express consent of the data subject potentially in breach of GDPR

  328. yesindyref2 says:

    The data controller is the person who determines the purpose and manner in which personal data is processed

    If this is information in the public domain, then the data controller is the person who decided to release the information into the public domain which, in this case, appears to be YOU. You should report yourself to the ICO for a data breach.

  329. HYUFD says:

    My name attached to the email address required for posting on this website was stated not to be published

  330. yesindyref2 says:

    What a dick, it wasn’t published.

Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.

↑ Top