Quoted for truth #83
Posted on
January 08, 2021 by
Rev. Stuart Campbell
Agreeing with Tom Gordon from the Herald is a position that we really don’t like to find ourselves in, readers. But we can’t find fault with a single word of this column.
We could quote almost any of it, and we recommend digesting the whole thing, but this is as good a passage to pick out as any:
For most of this site’s existence it was the Unionists who were denying the obvious realities staring them in the face. It’s a source of great discomfort to us that many on the Yes side are now picking up the habit too. But we are where we are.
Tom Gordon makes a valid point, this is where we are.
The SNP has lost its way I will support the SNP in May for the last time second vote will not go to them.
Every day it becomes clearer that either a new party is required or a revolution urgently needed within the SNP.
I would propose that outwaiting Johnson is akin to waiting and watching anti burglar paint drying.
I will be long gkne before he ,like the Del Monte man says yes
Vote SNP 1
Whilst holding your nose
Vote ISP 2
To confound our foes
Ambrose Burnside was a US Union general, who was replaced because of his terrible strategies. The Union then went on to win.
To all those Nicola acolytes : Loyalty cuts both ways. Nicola has never been loyal to the cause of independence.
Just a wee update on For Women Scotland.
Yesterday the lawyer for the Scottish government argued that The Equality Act sas not a reserved matter .. It most certainly is.
I await updates from this morning session.
Hope Nicola reads the Herald and this blog just
after the Trans World News.
The next election must be entirely based on Independence!
ISP have my second vote and have no doubt that after Independence
the lazy party troughers are out on their ear.
She must know her era is over when the Salmond enquiry concludes and
Covid vaccines take the emergency away.
Why wouldn’t you go 100% for I dependence now if it’s truest what you believe in?
What don’t we know?
What terrifies the SNP is if the ISP hold the balance of power in Holyrood. If they do then they will be able to force the SNP into actions that the SNP do not want to take e.g. actually going for independence rather than being a pension fund for the likes of Cozy Feet Pete
Just finished reading the full thing. As you say little to disagree with if anything. A man seeing things very clearly. Strange of the Herald not to pick this up. I can see why the SNP fans at the stablemate National didn’t want it either.
Even if economics did not prevent me renewing my subscription to The National I would not waste my money. Rarely do I see anything I want to read if I drop by. Feck all actual news unles It’s sport. Just endless vacuous comment.
That section should read
What is unsustainable is for Ms Sturgeon to ignore the wider YES movement.
As they keep reminding her.
That relying on her political opponents (Tories for the next 4 years at least) committing political suicide for her convenience is politically naive at best and pigheaded at worst.
Why would Boris agree to a S30 referendum . Over to pension Pete .
Announcing the May election as a plebiscite would flush out the gradualists and terrify the BritNats.
The latest wheeze is the need to gain the approval of ‘The International community”, which apparently sits in judgement in the validity of routes to independence.
The concept is nebulous nonsense, another bogeyman created to clamour for seeking ‘approval’.
Fact is, BJ thrives on cussedness like this; nothing he would enjoy more than pissing off the SNP
[…] Wings Over Scotland Quoted for truth #83 Agreeing with Tom Gordon from the Herald is a position that we really don’t like to […]
Read the actual column, it’s worth it.
” Can Mr Johnson again refuse her request for a Section 30 order giving Holyrood the power to hold it? Definitely. Will he? Almost certainly.
With an eye to his own political mortality, he’ll calculate he can readily doggy-paddle his way around the SNP until the end of his time in Number 10.
Grant and lose a referendum, and it’s an ignominious exit and political infamy. ”
NS and her little helpers live in a small strange world and believe in fairies when they think an S30 really will come from WM.
J.Cherry is I think starting to understand that there are other ways to skin a cat. Just do it baby..!
It is obvious and has been for ages Westminster will not ‘allow’ us to have anther vote. We must assert our independence. Westminster has positioned itself as a foreign power more clearly than ever before. This should be the SNP mantra. The growing support is great and has long since surpassed the necessary numbers for us to win. We would vote for our independence in large numbers now. The coming election must be a declaration of independence; Westminster has said it won’t change its position so we have to.
@Effiy
The rumour is she knows she’s on the outer, has her eye on a UN job in Geneva. But she needs Boris’s say so. Hence the soft soaping on Indy, the political theatre of promising to ask, puting no pressure on, expecting the answer.
She’s a fud, needs gone soonest. if we can get a Salmonite FM who isn’t afraid of Indy we might get somewhere. It is so easy to put Boris in a bind. Present him with Hobson’s choice if he declines act without him. Go for the international law option. The EU want us, EU countries want us, EFTA want us, our Auld Alliance partners want us. They’ll fall of themselves to be the first to recognise us. Isolate rUK surrounded by countries recognising us with trade weapons trained on Brexit rUK.
What scares the SNP MPs at WM is the thought of losing their places at the trough; what scares the SNP MSPs at Holyrood is the thought of some (so called) big hitters coming back up the road and taking THEIR jobs.
They’ve waited a long time to take over from Labour and have now become perfectly content being the dominant Scottish force at domestic and UK level. Can’t have anything like independence upsetting that. Yet still the deluded believe there’s a “plan”.
Nicola’s role now appears to be to retrieve the can from the long grass and place it back on the path so that Johnson can hoof it again as and when he can be bothered.
As for indyref2 this year, is there anyone who actually believes that?
I mean, seriously…anyone?
I do think there is at least one way referendum will end up being granted, but it probably needs to be spelled out in the May manifesto. That is say “If elected we will request a S30 and a legally binding, recognised referendum. If this is not forthcoming we will assume the UK has moved back to the previous position of over 50% of MPs sent to WM being all that is needed to begin independence negotiations, in place of a referendum”. They can’t deny both without setting their face against international law and demonstrating openly that there is no democratic way for Scotland – an ancient, well recognised country – to choose to leave the UK “union”. They will also know that the chance of the SNP getting less than 50% of MPs in 2024 is pretty much zero.
At the same time, this would make it impossible for them to remove devolved powers and neuter the Scottish Parliament to avoid independence – it would just make it even more certain, and it would mean all countries looking on, with respect to new trade deals etc would be well aware any deal involving Scottish resources isn’t likely to last long. Given all that, the UK government would be totally crazy not to take their one last chance of keeping the union by allowing a referendum.
You might think that Johnson’s successor can’t be any worse.
They can and will.
AYE!!! We are in a very dark place in relation to Scots Indy. The SNP and NS continue to treat us a stupid. Even a Quizzer Yoon can se it.
“Vote SNP 1
Whilst holding your nose”
No can do, sorry. Unless the SNP bites the bullet and delivers the mandate for indyref they were elected on in 2016 even if it is by transforming the Holyrood election into a plebiscite on independence, I have no valid reason to give my vote to the SNP. Not one.
I will not hold my nose to vote the SNP and endorse the actions of a woman who has done everything in her hand to thwart our right to self determination and led a government that with or without her knowledge has abused its power to stop the most committed pro-independence leader Scotland has ever seen ever reaching front line politics again. This same woman is today heading a dishonest government that has refused to abide by 2 parliamentary votes and is still dragging its heels on submitting evidence that is needed for the parliamentary inquiry.
If the SNP wants my constituency, they know what they have to do: push this dishonest individual away from the driving seat, deliver or move aside. They have 4 months.
“Vote ISP 2 To confound our foes”
No. I will be voting ISP in the list vote because they have had the backbone to announce that a vote for them is a vote for independence. That is the kind of unambiguous commitment I am seeking and that I believe Scotland deserves. I refuse to endorse cowards with my vote. Holding my nose is not part of my plan.
Mia
Fine. But don’t complain if there’s a unionist majority in the SP.
@Cath
We don’t need to wait for 2024 to use a GE in Scotland to have a mandate. It just requires ALL the SNP MPs to resign their seats en mass and dare the unionists to look on. There will be no choice but a mass of by-elections. Even if they don’t do them all on the one day we can focus and get it done.
Boris or his advisors must know we can do that. We can quote Maggie Thatcher saying that would be enough.
@Kapelmeisrer,
I think there already is.
link to barrheadboy.com
Just listened to the Prism with Barrheadboy. He has the deputy leader of the ISP on, she used to be an SNP COUNCILLOR.
There was a lot in this Prism to make you draw breath, the fact that the COVID DEAL negotiations has in it, that the cancelling of elections may well be a possibility,. SNP singed up to this. It certainly made RODNEY draw breath & ask WHAT?
The Tories have not been hanging around, COVID has not stopped them tying the Scottish government up in knots, that’s for sure..
Then when asked what a huge majority INDY Parliament could really do. She replied that for instance, if the May Election is NOT a Plebiscite, with a huge Indy Parliament, They could force another election, infact at anytime they could force an election breaking the set terms..
She says she really feels that the ISP should have come into play a year or two ago, as everyone saw what was happening within the party. BUT they decided to get all the legal stuff in place first, Before announcing as a new Indy Party. Their manifesto will be out in a few weeks too.
She was certainly a good listen, & although I have joined the ISP anyway, had I not, I would do now, because the SNP have lost 50,000 members, those people need a place to call home in the political world. And that is why the SNP are terrified of the ISP & not the greens, or SSP. THEY are not nor ever will be the threat to the SNP that the ISP will be, because if you want INDY as your priority, then it has to be number one on your manifesto, & a Plebiscite WILL be on the ISP Manifesto..
Who says we need a referendum when there are others ways, IMO, that are better designed bring Indy home.
A Ref. is an open invitation to WM to corrupt the result. It’s playing by English rules which don’t favour Scotland.
Postal votes, media onslaught lies, 77th mob, you name it, they’ll do it. Clean or dirty they don’t care as long as they win. Finito.
Breeks, the Rev, Craig M and others have long pointed to alternative routes, think more along plebecites, courts for clarity, wield Sovereignity, disrupt WM etc.
Stand up and roar, WE WANT.. not what they want. 🙂
“Fine. But don’t complain if there’s a unionist majority in the SP”
At the present juncture and after observing what unjustifiable and complete waste of time the last 5 years under the stewardship of this lady have been in progressing Scotland’s autonomy and how they have been used instead to hand over to England MPs chunks of our autonomy, sovereignty and assets, please tell me, if the options are only a Sturgeon/Robertson government or a unionist one, what practical difference will it make?
For the life of me I cannot find a single reason to say that, judging on the events over the last 6 years, that the SG under the control of this lady has been anything other than a unionist government.
Bob Mack @12:25
Yes Bob, more than likely. But the flawed SNP in power, but with them seeing a sizable group of ISP members ready to take over the mantle of main indy party is an infinitely better scenario than a Tory/Lab/LD coalition.
Can’t even spell plebiscite properly now…
The coming Scottish elections should double up as plebiscite for independence, Johnson will never willingly offer the S30, Sturgeon knows this, and she banking on it to remain in power in Scotland, and to have the option of pointing the finger towards Westminster and saying to the masses in Scotland its not my fault we can’t have an indyref, look to Westminster and Johnson for your independence woes.
The proposed indyref nearer the end of the year is a ruse in my opinion it will never materialse, and again Sturgeon if we haven’t had the good fortune to have gotten rid of her by then, (fingers crossed we will) will again point the finger of blame at Westminster to divert her utter failure in protecting Scots from Westminster’s plans for us.
Craig Murray laid out our exit from this union, which doesn’t include permission of any sorts from Westminster or Johnson, but Sturgeon has deliberately ignored this viable route. We should’ve been an independent nation by now, and we would’ve been if it were not for Sturgeon and her clique.
Sturgeon is holding a whole nation hostage against its will, she must be removed from office, I hope she is this year.
People are getting hung up about a unionist majority in Holyrood. Well it won’t be voters fault if they just don’t vote and abstain. Its not written in law that Indy supporters have to vote SNP. They had my vote since 1982 but since 2014 the actions of the Party have been intolerable.
Typically SNP supporters were not like Unionist voters and the Party reflected ordinary views. Under the Murrells that doesn’t exist with the active pursuit of members, past Mps, Bloggers etc.
Vote SNP1 isnt a option anymore, the problem is who will take the mantle on the Constituency vote to challenge them and gain us Indy.
The SNP are further from Independence now than they have ever been. Its a sad state but not ex voters fault for their failings. Only a change of management and expulsion of certain Mps will change my mind
“Unfathomably dim” seems like an entirely accurate description of the depths of the delusional gradualists.
It’s about time the media (and indeed everyone else, including the Yes movement generally) started calling out the magical thinking of #cosyfeetPete and his chums out.
The article is quite a depressing read, TBH. There’s very little wrong with the analysis and it only highlights the horrendous position we are in – 9% of the UK population with approximately 30% of it’s resources (over 90% for some key ones), unable to move past someone’s mis-quoted remarks from over 7 years ago. Apparently the thought of our representatives having any kind of meaningful say in the governance of the UK is enough to make rational people vote for the nastiest mainstream party we’ve ever seen…
Happy Birthday indeed.
So why did Tom Gordon write this? It’s spelled out clearly and in big letters than would even give the most ardent Nicola fan pause for thought. He can’t simply be stirring things up. The more people that wake up to the fact that IndyRef2 is simply not coming then the more likely a radical and probably effective plan will be adopted.
Another thing to think about. Of all the current hierarchy in the Conservatives and Labour who might come after Johnson who among them is going to countenance losing Scotland? It’s going to be suicide for any candidate for PM. Anybody who is committed to the idea of self-determination is going to have to spend a lot of time preparing the ground so they don’t get flayed on publicly stating that perhaps Scotland should go it’s own way.
So even with the best will in the world no British PM is going agree to a referendum unless they are forced into it either by the electorate in England or the international community. The former is way more likely than the latter. only if Brexit is a success in England and a failure for everybody else will there be a groundswell of opinion to cut the beggars free.
@kapelmaster
There won’t be a unionist majority absent some political earthquake in the next 3 months which isn’t looking that likely. Electing ISP MSPs deprives britnat seat warmers of Holyrood seats. You’re actively advocating MORE unionist MSPs. A super majority of pro indy MSPs can only be a positive.
In any case, unless you support Plan B or plebiscitary elections in place of the gradualists one trick pony Gold Standard referendum, the only difference it will make electing an SNP majority government will be depriving unionists of power. That’s great in itself of course, but doesn’t get us any closer to a vote or plebiscitary elections unless the SNP change policy or leadership.
I look forward to the membership growing a pair, but I won’t be holding my breath.
It probably comes down to what’d be more calamitous – a unionist majority in Holyrood or another 5 years of the lady is not for turning.
Unionists in charge would probably vote for Holyrood’s closure in return for seats in the House of Lords; the Saint Nicola Party will likely just pull another bait and switch.
Never mind “hold your nose and vote for them”, I’d probably need a gas mask. Nowehere else to go on the constituency vote though. 🙁
It has been implied on many occasions.
Just how deeply has the SNP and the independence movement been penetrated by BritState intelligence.
Scottish independence is about as subversive an idea as you can get. UK influence, prestige down the pan if it were to succeed. Effectively, it is the equivalent of a serious ischemic attack, major trauma to the British state’s body politic.
Johnson and the rest will have been well advised to unleash the security services to mess things up.
Looks like he has managed that, with a fair bit of inside help.
Dealing with the Brits necessitates being a nasty as they are.
No room for holier than thou, moral high ground posturing.
Tom Gordon’s statement that Mr Murrell ‘Was on the way out’ is interesting. I thought the Murrells were indivisible? I still see a game changer moment coming up. I will hold on to my intention to withhold my vote for the SNP in May, until I see what happens. When the change comes it will come quickly. It is inconceivable to me that Mrs Murrell can lead the SNP into the next election.
It’s not only Inde that is being sidelined. Over on the Raptor Persecution blog there is a recent posting about ten years of inaction over giving extra powers to the SSPCA. Then there are the dodged issues around grouse shooting.
A cynic might suggest the SNP is unwilling to upset the wealthy landowners.
Let’s be clear about this-
Brexit will only be good for the financial institutions
and Tax Dodgers. The one who financed Brexit.
If any international company wants to open up in the U.K.
it’s going to be in N Ireland where they can trade freely in the U.K.
If they have a fear of a unites Ireland coming soon they
would open up in South England.
They won’t be opening in Scotland as Westminster can now offer subsidies
that won’t be for the likes of us.
The Act of Union is broken with this as the guarantee of a level playing field
in trade is ripped up and binned.
Shame our MPs don’t like to mention it or do anything about it.
I’d say if the SNP don’t change drastically, and time is running out, then it is best if they lose in May.
They need to lose, have a massive blood letting, and new leadership and new strategy. This will get us to Independence much faster than a Nicola / Robertson decade.
So I won’t be voting SNP and I’d recommend other that a few good MSPs others shouldn’t either. Don’t vote SNP and let the blood letting begin
Basically, politicians will take the path of least resistance every time.
So if Boris only has to say ‘no’ to get out of ‘giving’ another indyref, he will. If the SNP want to get one, they will have to use any leverage they can use (alternative plans spring to mind!) to have Boris concerned that blocking it will ‘look bad’ AND anyway won’t stop what he wants to avoid, i.e. being Lord North for the 21st century.
On the same train, if it’s easier for the SNP not to pursue too hard/push for alternative routes, then they will not.
Here is where voters who want them to do that must use the only leverage THEY have and threaten to withhold their vote/start telling pollsters they will etc. And do so if a pledge to follow a Plan B is not forthcoming (in this case, it would be to punish them for not making May a plebiscite by not voting for them at the election).
This is the only way to make a failure to pursue Plan B more costly for the SNP than doing nothing/moaning about a Section 30.
If thinking of not voting SNP is too rich for some people, fair enough and so be it. But you are not maximising the only leverage you have and you need to remember you are something ‘distinct’ from the SNP, which is only a political party which you have put in its place in government, because you wanted them to achieve certain outcomes for you.
You are entitled to expect something in return for your vote, not least what has been pledged in manifestos past. If that’s not forthcoming and you just give them your vote again anyway, why do they need to try anymore when it’s probably easier not to?
Taken in isolation this may appear to be the case, the rather large fly in the ointment here, is that in 10 days time we are going to have an American President who openly admits he is Irish, a partisan president with a score to settle on two counts, 1st is because Johnson et al were in full support of Trump, Britian Trump has a price to pay, then there was the Patel faux pas, where she said she would starve the Irish to force an EU deal, that was a bad bad move, the EU circled the wagons to protect Ireland, alarm bells immediately started ringing in the Senate, Pelosi stating that there will be no UK US trade deal, all of that will ensure Johnson fails, the US by whatever method will ensure Britain trump falls, and the issuing of a sec 30 may very well be a price that they will have to pay.
Sturgeon knows fine well that Westminster will always see any form of an attempt for independence that isn’t first agreed upon will be seen as illegal by Westminster, and she’s pinned all her hopes on this to stop indy happening, her approach is we need Westminster’s consent.
If that is the case then we’ll never become an independent nation, however its not the case its completely wrong, we don’t need the permission of a foreign country’s government to leave this voluntary union, all we need is the consent of the Scottish public and they’ve clearly given it.
Its Sturgeon that’s blocking Scottish independence.
link to craigmurray.org.uk
Tom Halliday, this is just relying on other folk to do it again. There is no evidence, none, that Joe Biden and pals will do anything to help Scotland at all.
Tom Halliday says, 1.20pm
“Pelosi stating that there will be no UK US trade deal, all of that will ensure Johnson fails, the US by whatever method will ensure Britain trump falls, and the issuing of a sec 30 may very well be a price that they will have to pay”
————–
Boris and the rest of WM knows that to issue an S30 would be the first step to a Ref. and the probable breakup of the (English) UK.
No way are they going to do it. They’d rather bite themselves in the balls and toady up to Biden to save their own skin.
SOG
No need to be cynical it’s as plain as day, link to archive.is
“the US by whatever method will ensure Britain trump falls, and the issuing of a sec 30 may very well be a price that they will have to pay.”
Wishful thinking Tom, Ireland unlike Scotland has powerful friends in Washington DC, I recall the POTUS longest at war (his entire two terms, and they had the audacity to give him the Nobel Peace prize in 2009) Obama, urge Scots to remain in the union in 2014 after the then PM David Cameron shoved a note into his hand during a speech on something else.
Obama, the went on to say what great little independent nation Ireland had become, of course as I said Ireland has powerful friends across the pond, we don’t. Biden will not be interested in Scotland, he’ll only be interested in getting a good deal for America. Infact its a complete illusion that the Democrats and Republicans in America, are in opposition, like the Tories and Labour in the UK they roughly want the same things, the opposition ruse, is their just to fool you and me.
Whilst I don’t advocate it (I don’t think), not having the SNP in power in the next Scottish Parliament would have advantages. First, the entire leadership of the party will be out having failed to secure the same returns as last time. Second, all the “just wait, its coming soon! Westminster will gain morals any time now!” crap will be gone, and people will have to actually do something to make independence real.
I agree with Mia and Tannadice Boy….loads of people have lent the SNP their vote, only to see it go to waste. As a father to two young daughters, there’s no way I’m giving them a vote for Indy, only for them to hold it to ransom for woke rights for the science denying biology dunces. Yes, it’s a shite state of affairs, but seeing their voteshare slump is the only way to get thru to these idiots.
If, after these past few months, the widening gulf between what the ppl of Scotland obviously want, and the route (dead end), that Sturgeon intends to lead us up, combined with her total silence on anything pertaining to progress on our independence, her further silence on any attempt to quell the “dissent”, which she could manage to do in one sentence, it’s all too clear that, with Sturgeon as FM, we have been left totally at the mercy of Boris and his corrupt government.
An independent Scotland is nowhere on the horizon, it’s time to make a start on a new, better alternative to SNP, a party with one single aim, independence for our country, although this was the initial aim of SNP back in the day, Sturgeon has hijacked SNP for her own political aims, her and Murrells personal wealth and social standing.
Within SNP, we have more than a few very highly regarded SNP MP,s, 3 of whom are obviously at odds with Sturgeon, those 3 being, in no particular order, Angus MacNeil, Chris McEleny and Joanna Cherry.
Now, what I’m proposing will, almost definitely knock independence back by a margin, but, as I opine, independence isn’t happening anytime soon in any event under Sturgeons “leadership”, and as such, it could be construed as 1 step back to take 2 steps forward, or, a long road for a shortcut.
If my perception of MacNeil, McEleny and Cherry are correct, and they are not in the game simply for personal gain as Sturgeon and Murrell are, I’d propose that those 3, there may be others, should be prepared to put their political lives on the line by informing Sturgeon that, should Sturgeon NOT run the planned May elections on a mandate of independence all 3 will quit as SNP members, and join ISP, taking the votes of a great many independence supporters with them.
Crazy, eh… but not if one considers this….
Sturgeon refuses, and runs a very live risk of losing any potential majority she might enjoy, thereby very possibly losing her position as FM, and at the same time, we have witnessed the birth of a live, valid, very feasible alternative to SNP, which, if run correctly, will hold Sturgeons feet IN the fire, as opposed TO the fire.
OR
She agrees, and Scotland is independent in 2 years.
I fully understand that, at present ISP plan to run solely for the list seats, but, that is very easily overcome.
Crazy idea?
Maybe, longer term, not so crazy.
@ Effijy
Re. Oor MPs.
When one consents to exist within the constraints of a perceived box, one is boxed in, and endlessly spending one’s time hardcore whinging and grievancing in said box to the very folk that created the box one consented to exist in, is akin to pishin in the wind.
Better use of time would be to consider thinking outside of the box at the various ways and means one could utlise to remove the illusion that it is the walls of said box.
But on 70k plus expenses a year, I guess that might be just too much of an ask for some in the box…
Scots have the power to choose the form of government that best suits their needs, and clearly the current setup is a maelstrom of undemocratic keich.
Because of this now widely recognised fact, I Self ID’d as TransFirstMinister the other day and offered to take on the roles and responsibilities for free to sort all this shit out, but support wasn’t forthcoming for such a bold move in the minds of my fellow small c conservative Scots, and thus by rejecting my proposition, they give tacit consent to continuing to exist in the current political paradigm.
When Mr Russel does get to the good old age of a 102 they’ll still say NAW. What a complete arse the Sturgeonites have made of our right to self determination and it fills me with complete dread to give then another 5yrs in office for them only to F8ck it up even more, I’d pay Alex to come back. I reckon Sturgeon will be able to sort out education before Scotland ever gets the chance to have a section 30 order. I laugh at my self for voting for Sturgeon and her cronies and i’m crying for my country.
Dave, seeing the SNP vote share drop would be on scales
that sees the Unionist vote increase.
This gives them more power to keep us shackled.
It gives their media credit to a claim independence is
dead and send some back on the Labour or Tory path
that has been a disaster for over 50 years now.
I’ll vote SNP grudgingly to prevent this if the election becomes a plebiscite
with ISP the 2nd vote.
If SNP don’t set this up it’s ISP one and two.
We cannot be foolish enough to vote for any London based Party ever again.
The treaty has been broken many times over many subjects. The problem is, we here let them do it.
We should make a serious list of all of these between us, and maybe it will come to light we are no longer in the 1707 treaty that was,
Poll tax.(taxes):
David Cameron Changing the marriage rights of the monarchy in 2011-2015.
Private rights: in Scotland, they are in the treaty:
Scots law being overridden:
Trade agreements:
Brexit vote being divided between Scotland and England:
Devolved government: and being run by civil servants at that.
Evil:
Entering the EU, as this affected trade. Along with returned subsidies:
Ok now The memory is failing, I know there are more and smaller ones. That will have to do for now,
“This is unfathomably dim.”
Just about sums up Nicola Sturgeon’s position and perhaps her intellectual capabilities.
And to those who are saying hold your nose and give the SNP your first vote – well I was told to hold my nose in December 2019 and I have regretted it ever since. I, and I am sure there are many others, will never ever vote for the SNP again as long as Nicola Sturgeon is leader.
And if you then say, oh but you’ll just be giving the Unionists a majority if you don’t give your first vote to the SNP – well as far as I am concerned the Unionists already have a majority under Nicola Sturgeon.
And I am sorry for all the good SNP folk like Joanna Cherry, but I would say to them this – you really have to do your duty and get rid of Nicola Sturgeon before you can expect, or even ask for, our vote.
Since it was Alex Salmond as SNP leader/FM who introduced the concept of requiring a S30/referendum,why do many people on here think he would likely be the person to now deny that requirement?
Has he ever even stated that he no longer believes in this strategy, or has any interest in a plan B, C or Ds?
Is he even interested in frontline politics now?
It appears Joanna Cherry has doubts about a May plebiscite being legit
“It is short sighted to view the question of how we might lawfully end a consensual union of two sovereign nations which is more than 300 years old only through the prism of devolution which has been with us for barely two decades and is not the last word on the constitutional relationship between Scotland and England”
Are we to assume then that she views only a WM election as a legitimate way to end the U.K.?
@ Effijy at 2.06
Unless they change their plan and stand in the constituencies as well as on the list, you won’t be able to vote “ISP one and two”.
If NS needs the ok from BJ to get a UN job then she’ll be concentrating on her replacement being to his benefit.
She’s already handed him a dysfunctional SNP and he’s not the kind of person to hand out rewards when he has no need to.
dakk says:
8 January, 2021 at 2:13 pm
“Since it was Alex Salmond as SNP leader/FM who introduced the concept of requiring a S30/referendum,why do many people on here think he would likely be the person to now deny that requirement?”
Salmond has stated that there are alternative paths to independence on several occasions, including about a week after the first referendum.
There’s still this unchallenged assumption that refusing to comply with the democratic mandate invoking a right all peoples have under ‘cardinal principle in international law’ is something that the UK Prime Minister can do with magical immunity from legal responsibility.
Theresa May had the excuse to indefinitely defer any response to the imperative of Scotland’s democratic mandate by simply agreeing to the phrase “now is not the time” which Nicola Sturgeon conveniently included in her presentation of the mandate. Boris doesn’t have that excuse and, instead, has used the inadmissible idiomatic expression “once in a generation” to dodge his duty.
Could each and every WM MP force a by-election on a platform of independence. Waiting until 2024 is too long
“Unionists in charge would probably vote for Holyrood’s closure in return for seats in the House of Lords”
Admittedly, Sturgeon’s version of the SNP would never contemplate voting for Holyrood’s closure but they have handed over to England MPs some of our most important powers and assets without as much as a whimper, which is what any other unionist party would have done as well.
History tells us that immediately after any drastic attempt by an English establishment party to reign in Scotland’s autonomy, using it as a testing ground for toxic policies or grasp control of Scotland’s assets is always followed by a renewed support in Scotland for self-governance and now ending the union. The poll tax, the attempt to reform Scottish law, the McCrone Report, the 1979 40% electorate nonsense, the 1997 attempt to put down the fire for independence while stealing our 6000 sq miles of territorial waters, their con act aka the vow in 2014 and the events surrounding brexit in the last 4.5 years are examples.
After their cheating with the vow in 2014 and after our unprecedented sending of 56 SNP MPs to Westminster told them their domesticated labour pet was no longer fit for purpose, it was clear that the only way to keep Scotland in the UK was by finding themselves a new pet, one that was seen by the electorate as cuddly enough.
On 8th May 2015 it was clear that the SNP was the perfect candidate to become the next English establishment favourite domesticated pet in Scotland.
An accelerated reverse gear gradualism during the last 6 years has seen this new pet putting the independence agenda on the back burner. I am sure the expectations of the British state for this new pet were surpassed when Sturgeon went the extra mile by turning off that back burner, first with the bogus S30 and more recently with her pretend inability to engage on anything other than the fight against COVID-19.
What do we think is going to happen if a proper nasty, non cuddly unionist government takes control of Holyrood and closes it down? That will lift all the smokescreen and make more clear than ever that the only route we have ever had to end the union was via a majority of nationalist MPs, whatever the flag they are sailing under at the time. It will be the end of gradualism and fundamentalism will come back with a vengeance and this time backed with over 50% of an electorate still wounded by brexit.
Do you think the English establishment wants that? I don’t. I think they will run away from it like if they were running away from the plague.
Until now they have been able to keep the indy movement on a leash with continuous and ever more unbelievable promises of jam tomorrow and the illusion of self-governance. If you remove all those promises and the illusion of self-governance that is obfuscating the view, you are immediately opening the eyes of the electorate at what is at all effects unhinged colonialism making the UK gov an even more credible decolonisation target for the UN.
I don’t think they are so stupid and I think this may be the reason why the parliamentary inquiry is not progressing at the speed any of us expected if there was any chance that the ministerial code has been broken and power abused.
It is in the English establishment interests to keep a domesticated and inoffensive SNP in power instead of removing them and put either a unionist government that will speed independence, or a more radical nationalist party that will not give sufficient time or opportunity for the English establisment to turn on its well tested bribing charms to attempt “domestication”.
It may haven not been brexit itself, but the naked subjugation of Scotland’s expressed political without remorse is imprinted in our minds now and has therefore mortally wounded the union. The choice that remains now is how painful for both partners the separation process will be, and it will be painful for both. Do they suffer equal pain or will Scotland be made suffer the most to make the process less painful for England? I think the last option is the one that has already been chosen, because if not, instead of handing control over our assets, markets and powers to England MPs so England can have a safer ride out of the EU, the SNP would have called that referendum immediately after A50 was invoked or directly ended the union in the name of a parliamentary democracy where they had been given most seats.
The question for me is who gave Sturgeon the right to use Scotland as England’s crash helmet and what is she and the MPs and MSPs supporting the use of Scotland as England’s crash helmet getting out of it?
kapelmeister says:
8 January, 2021 at 12:21 pm
Mia
Fine. But don’t complain if there’s a unionist majority in the SP.
I disagree Kapelmeister. Mia is the voter and the one with the conscience and the principle. It’s the SNP which needs to register the frustration and anger people are feeling now, and start making motions to address that exasperation, or else suffer the wrath of it in May, or whenever. The warning bells couldn’t be any clearer. Let the blame lie squarely upon the hubris of the SNP for causing this level of exasperation, and for leaving it to fester. They have nobody to blame but themselves.
Will they do something? Sadly, I fear not. People have been waiting for ‘the strategy’ to become clear for five years, but people are expecting it to come from Sturgeon’s coterie of chums, who seem wholly incapable of formulating anything at all which even resembles a strategy, – even when Scotland is standing in front of an open goal which the whole country can see, except the flatlining SNP ‘strategists’.
I fear the people are in line for yet another insipid disappointment to add to the litany of insipid disappointments we’ve had to endure under the eternal Winter of Nicola Sturgeon.
There are a lot of people here today urging us not to vote SNP in May and some actively encouraging a win for the Unionists to “clear out” the current leadership.
Let me put this to such people.
If you were a Unionist and found yourself in the majority at Holyrood, what would you do? Obviously. You would immediately close the Scottish Parliament or neuter any possibility of Independence for ever.
Those who advocate such a foolish proposal are incapable of seeing the clear consequences of such a move, unless they are actually Unionist moles. That’s a good possibility as the Independence movement must have U.K. agents lurking within its ranks.
The SNP are far from perfect. We know that. But they still have committed Independence supporters within its ranks and for now it is the ONLY way or independence.
I recall being in a communist Country and a fella explaining to me that they had a one Party system under their regime.
I said that it was the same in the West, we just pretend by having two parties who take turns at delivering the same. US, Oz, UK, etc etc.
It’s the same in Scotland, we have the SNP on one side and a gaggle of unionist parties on the other. Both under British rule. Both happy with the arrangement. I just cant believe it took me so long to see it.
At one point I was actually handing over my own hard earned money to the SNP – membership and local MP campaign funds – what an Idiot right enough.
« On 5 October 1999, when pressed for her current views on the prospect of a European union, Margaret Thatcher remarked, ‘All the problems in my lifetime have come from Continental Europe, all the solutions have come from the English-speaking world’. Despite its evident falsehood, this statement expresses a deep truth: namely, that for many inhabitants of the English-speaking world, and indeed for some living outside it, there is a real divide between their world and the societies, languages, political systems, traditions, and geography of Continental Europe. British politics, especially but by no means exclusively on the right, is defined in terms of the distinction between ‘Europhobes’ and ‘Europhiles’, known to their opponents as ‘Eurosceptics’ and ‘Eurofanatics’ respectively. That is, there is a cultural distinction, some would say a divide – perhaps even an abyss – between the ‘Continental’ and whatever opposes it, what Baroness Thatcher, in tones deliberately reminiscent of Winston Churchill, calls ‘the English-speaking world »
from CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY a very short introduction by Simon CRITCHLEY.
“If you were a Unionist and found yourself in the majority at Holyrood, what would you do?”
Run for the hills
“The question for me is who gave Sturgeon the right to use Scotland as England’s crash helmet and what is she and the MPs and MSPs supporting the use of Scotland as England’s crash helmet getting out of it?”
Mia.
I’d have thought that it was pretty obvious what they’re getting out of it. Sturgeon and her MSP’s get to remain in government, and all the benefits that comes with it, as do the SNP MP’s at Westminster. The status quo is the goal for Sturgeon, it suits her down to a tee.
She has the added escape route that she can always point the finger of blame towards Johnson and Westminster, when things aren’t going too well for her, and when things are really tough for her she can wheel out independence to the masses, and recoup her popularity.
Now tell me why would she and her MSP’s and MP,s (though not all of them I might add) want to upset that sweet deal by actually holding an indyref.
I agree I will vote SNP at the election but my second vote will without doubt go to ISP. As an added bonus if you want a majority vote in Scotland pay the public. Call it furlough , call it what ever you want. USA does it so why not here. SNP,s last kind gesture. Slightly better than a baby box it will help everyone including pregnant mums this time as well as the infirm and the severe disabled.
That’s what I regard as a government kindness. If they care about the voters give them what they need now! Stop spending our tax money in courts.
Fireproofjim
I don’t think a ‘unionist’ SG would vote to close Holyrood, that would be turkeys voting for Christmas, but let’s say your right….wouldn’t that be democracy?
If traditional SNP voters decide not to vote in May (and I know many who will be doing exactly that – as it stands), then surely a Unionist Parliament would be what Scotland votes for – what’s wrong with that? – aren’t we the ones always banging on about democracy and the right to change minds….
and please, stop with the pre-meditated mud slinging (…you must be too stupid or a unionist mole), it’s beneath you.
We’re not going anywhere in the next Parliament, so best focus on 2025 and get a real independence party underway.
“Dave McDave says:
8 January, 2021 at 1:44 pm
I agree with Mia and Tannadice Boy….loads of people have lent the SNP their vote, only to see it go to waste. As a father to two young daughters, there’s no way I’m giving them a vote for Indy, only for them to hold it to ransom for woke rights for the science denying biology dunces. Yes, it’s a shite state of affairs, but seeing their voteshare slump is the only way to get thru to these idiots.”
I agree with every word. Please write to keith brown msp as he’s in charge of the manifesto for May. I only want thing on it – independence. He must make it a de facto referendum i.e. if we gain a majority for indy then negotiations begin in May 2021 to dissolve the UK treaty and to rejoin europe. A win-win for Scotland.
The genderwoowoo must be dropped (and because trust has been lost) it must be booted to f*** for at least five years. Then the genderwoowoo party can campaign for it.
Hamza useless must publicly drop the stasi bill. Apologise and I think resign from the government.
Failing this they are in for a big shock in May.
@Fireproofjim
The britnats have neither the support nor the political cojones to close down Holyrood, despite the fervid imaginings of some rabid British nationalists – and apparently some Yessers who really ought to know better.
In any case, why would they bother to do so when the devolutionary assembly we have, dominated by an etiolated bunch of pseudo-nationalists who think we have to ask permission to even exercise our self determination, serves as a useful whipping boy?
It’s entirely possible the Yes movement has been infiltrated: look to Northern Ireland for recent examples. However, it’s considerably more likely that the assets are entrenched in the party dripping unctuous words of caution and Gold Standard gradualism in to the ear of the leadership, or that they are behind the gender-woo extremists eating the bureaucracy from within, than that they are recruited from random cybernats or pro-indy bloggers.
The SNP are no more the only engine for independence than a referendum is the sole feasible route. Unless and until gradualism within the party is defeated, it makes little difference whether the SNP win a majority or not, because they have precisely zero chance of delivering a vote unless they change policy.
The percentage of the vote they get in May 2021, or the number of seats, is immaterial if they have already accepted that we need Westminster’s permission.
No amount of bloviating from SNP loyalists and their fellow travellers about the need for a majority, or the presence of unionists moles in the movement, or the imaginary dangers of “splitting” the pro-indy vote will make their faith based position more objectively true.
800 people a day being admitted to London hospitals, the hospitals cannot cope with the influx of patients.
link to msn.com
“Sturgeon and her MSP’s get to remain in government, and all the benefits that comes with it, as do the SNP MP’s at Westminster”
Realistically, the SNP have less than 4 years left to prove they are a nationalist party. They have failed at stopping brexit already, in my view deliberately. If they now fail at delivering independence too and allow the subjugation of Scotland, there will be no longer any valid reason for any yes supporter to continue voting for them.
“She has the added escape route that she can always point the finger of blame towards Johnson and Westminster”
Not anymore. Yes supporters are showing signs of propaganda fatigue. Throwing the hot potato to the tories is not going to stick for much longer.
“recoup her popularity”
She needs to survive the parliamentary inquiry before talking about “recouping” popularity.
“Now tell me why would she and her MSP’s and MP,s (though not all of them I might add) want to upset that sweet deal by actually holding an indyref”
Because if they don’t deliver in the next 4 months, the sweet deal is not going to last.
Fireproof Jim @ 2:39pm:
It must be convenient to just posit that everyone with doubts must be ‘at it’.
People aren’t ‘at it’ just because they feel they are being strung along.
What if I just don’t think that voting SNP will get me what I want? Why should I continue to do so? What do I get from the arrangement if I am voting only for them to pursue independence quickly, and they don’t do so?
As a voter, I am not interested in helping people into well-paid jobs just for the sake of it. I want the policy promises – that’s their side of the bargain. If I doubt (based on recent failures to do so) that the bargain will be upheld, why would I bother? If vote does not turn into ‘thing done’, what is the point?
Similarly, if they won’t commit to hurrying up and getting on with it via plebiscite election, then there’s no particular obligation for me to hurry myself getting to the polling station either. This cannot be a one-sided arrangement, i.e. ‘you vote me in and then maybe I’ll bother my arse doing what I pledged, if you’re lucky’.
I am more than a bit tired of people saying ‘ohhh slow and steady’ and more or less demanding that we all accept their timeframes. I’m the voter, I’ll decide what I want, and I say hurry it up. Other voters can make their own minds up, of course, but I’ll vote for whoever pledges to give *me* what I want.
If there is a unionist majority in Holyrood, it is the fault of the abysmaly awful SNP and no one else.
In my constituency, my SNP MSP is appalling. So I should endorse this appalling individual just so there is no unionist majority?
Voting should be a positive experience. I imagine most folk on here will be voting ISP on the list vote. In the constituency, the most positive thing is to vote for a good pro-indy MSP or just a good MSP (Jo-La?) or, what I will do in my case, spoil the ballot paper (not decided yet what words I will put on it).
“The question for me is who gave Sturgeon the right to use Scotland as England’s crash helmet.”
Quite right Mia and a good way of putting it, although I would be inclined to go further. I would suggest England is holding Scotland as a human shield.
As for those who are fretting over the sanctity of Holyrood. They are all under oath to the English Crown and therefore the interests of England and her parliament will always come before Scotland. Sometimes the only way to get rid of a weed is to pull it out by the roots.
Agree, Kenny, I want to vote FOR something, not AGAINST something. The latter invariably leads to ‘we won’t do much but the others are worse so you need to vote for us’ type arguments.
Not exactly inspiring.
“Because if they don’t deliver in the next 4 months, the sweet deal is not going to last.”
Mia.
If we cannot prise the offending limpet from Bute House that is Sturgeon via the inquiry, and there’s no indyref this year or next year, then what makes you think it won’t last, I mean who else are we going to vote for, the Tories, Labour, the Lib/Dems, or the trans obsessed Greens for that matter. No I don’t think so Mia.
No the sweet deal for Sturgeon and her clique will continue until we either get shot of her, or force her down a route that doesn’t require Westminster’s permission as Craig Murray has shown we don’t need Johnson’s approval, see my link @1.23pm.
I missed this yesterday and it’s from Kenny MacKaskill in the Scotsman ,
“ Alex Salmond Inquiry: Why has no one resigned yet? “
“The biggest unanswered question from the Salmond Inquiry is why there have been no resignations. “
link to archive.vn
And from Joanna Cherry in the National today ,
“ History shows a referendum is not the only route to independence . “
link to archive.vn
If Boris agreed to indyref2 in 2020 I’d feel sick to my stomach knowing NS would be leading us into what really would be our last chance at Independence for a generation.
Worse, imagine if Nicola did make the manifesto in a plebiscite election on independence. We would all have to vote Yes / SNP thus guaranteeing her another full term to inflict upon us.
Whatever route it is very clear… NS has to be removed first otherwise it is still not going to work.
Not only that but a decent replacement is required.
It is at this point that it becomes very obvious why Alex Salmond had to be taken out the political picture. He would have been (and probably still is) the obvious choice. NS and hubby would never have been able to get away with half of this shit had he not been conveniently taken out the picture.
I am content that the Scottish NHS has performed in a
far superior manner to Tory England’s NHS pre Covid
and currently so, however, we should be demanding an
Enquiry as to why we have roughly 10 fold the death rates
of countries with similar populations such as equally oil rich
Norway and their neighbours Finland.
We have more than double the Irish rate and countries who fought
for Independence like Singapore and New Zealand have one death
for every 100 here.
There must be a reason and SNP have a duty of care to establish it as this
will arise again future.
What part did the Tories ignoring the Cygnus Exercise play?
The refusal to stop the Cheltenham festival and 10,000 Covid ridden Spanish football fans?
The Lack of emergency PPE Kit stocks?
The incapability of distributing the PPE Kit they had.
The lost Tory e-mails from the EU offering PPE?
The rejection of small U.K. PPE Kit manufacturers in favour of finding Tory suppliers or pretend ones
The need to pay a Spaniard £21 million to negate a PPE delivery,
Who frightened away foreign doctors and nurses by making them pay fees?
Did the Tory NHS pay cuts and halting study bursaries lead to a lack of recruitment?
If vaccine manufacturers say there are no shortages why do we have shortages?
Has the idiocy of Bojo’s TV guidelines failed to be understood?
Did Cummings fantasy Covid trip encourage others to break the rules?
Why have the 20,000 excess deaths in the U.K. disappeared.
Why did Gove’s daughter get Covid test before NHS Doctors?
How much money has gone to Tories under non disclosure contracts and for what at what price?
How much has been spent on track and trace with what results?
Are vaccines coming from Belgium held up with England’s Brexit?
What sums have been wasted in sub standard PPE kit stuck in English Dock Yards?
Why did English PPE manufacturers say Westminster instructed them not to supply Scotland.
Don’t use the useless team on the Salmond enquiry!
I’d like answers before May’s election as I can see the main culprit throughout this you needs identified.
Dakk. Aye it would maybe clarify some points if Alex gave his opinion on the matter. What way does he think the wind should blow?
Fireproofjim says:
8 January, 2021 at 2:39 pm
There are a lot of people here today urging us not to vote SNP in May and some actively encouraging a win for the Unionists to “clear out” the current leadership…
You’re wrong Fireproofjim, we’re not urging people not to vote SNP, we’re urging the SNP to stop fking about and make itself electable and palatable to the people who want Scottish Independence. There’s a world of difference.
“No the sweet deal for Sturgeon and her clique will continue until we either get shot of her or force her down a route”
Please do not overestimate the electorate’s patience and don’t just assume they are happy to be treated as voting fodder. That was the most lethal political mistake Labour made in Scotland and look where they are now.
“It appears Joanna Cherry has doubts about a May plebiscite being legit”
You’ve totally misunderstood her article.
Things are starting to move in the right direction.
link to twitter.com
“I do think there is at least one way referendum will end up being granted, but it probably needs to be spelled out in the May manifesto. That is say “If elected we will request a S30 and a legally binding, recognised referendum. If this is not forthcoming we will assume the UK has moved back to the previous position of over 50% of MPs sent to WM being all that is needed to begin independence negotiations, in place of a referendum”. They can’t deny both without setting their face against international law and demonstrating openly that there is no democratic way for Scotland – an ancient, well recognised country – to choose to leave the UK “union”. They will also know that the chance of the SNP getting less than 50% of MPs in 2024 is pretty much zero.”
Aye, that’s great if you’re willing to wait until 2024 to even START doing anything. But in reality the UK government, and more importantly the international community, would be totally unimpressed with a majority of MPs unless it was also won via a majority of votes.
You cannot credibly assert a declaration of independence on behalf of the people from, say, 46% of the vote. Absolutely nobody would take that seriously.
But even then, all you’re doing is putting off until 2024 something that we could do this May. (And you’re also allowing four years of unknown events to take place that could destroy the current polling for Yes.)
If you tell Yes supporters the day after the Holyrood election that they’re going to have to sit tight for at least another three and a half years, you’re going to get your arse kicked to John O’Groats.
Exactly breeks, its the SNP thats committing f*****g hara kiri here, not their supporters.
@Rev Stu et al
The 4 month window for something positive to happen is pretty tight. Even if the FM is somehow toppled or forced out before then – which I’m pretty doubtful will happen – I just don’t see how the May elections can now be turned into a plebiscite.
That means the only realistic alternatives in the event of another “Now is not the time!” response would be expecting the SNP to force mass bye elections for Westminster and say the results will be considered plebiscitary, or forcing an early Holyrood election and making the re-run plebiscitary.
In any case, we’re in for at least a couple of years wait.
So….about this new party…… 🙂
“Please do not overestimate the electorate’s patience and don’t just assume they are happy to be treated as voting fodder. That was the most lethal political mistake Labour made in Scotland and look where they are now.”
Mia, I’m not overestimating the electorates patience, how can I when her popularity rating are still high, and lets not forget how long Labour treated the Scottish public like fools before they finally realised it.
Unless the Holyrood election is used to resile the Treaty of Union, I’m done with holding my nose and voting SNP. December 2019 was the last time I will lend my vote to the SNP to be wasted.
Joanna Cherry again recognises an election can be used as the mandate for independence.
“The 4 month window for something positive to happen is pretty tight. Even if the FM is somehow toppled or forced out before then – which I’m pretty doubtful will happen – I just don’t see how the May elections can now be turned into a plebiscite.”
Why not? Manifestos aren’t usually published until 2-3 weeks before the vote. And it’s not like the manifesto for a plebiscitary election takes long to write.
@ Rev Stu
I salute your optimism!
Call me an auld pessimist if you will, but I’m all about the Plan B.
It would of course be delicious watching al the gradualists campaigning hard for a plebiscitary election led by our new First Minister, eh?! 🙂
Some more change, could there be more councilors joining ISP?
“The Independence for Scotland Party are pleased to announce that Roddy McCuish, depute provost of Argyll and Bute council has become a member of the party.” link to twitter.com
Just you do that.
Meanwhile…whilst the unicorns continue to prance…
…Scottish people continue to die due to SNP administration…
One jab not two; aye but, but dinnae tell them mind heh…
Takeaways to shut down.. the last lifeline of many commercial concerns..and a source of uplift to many in these dark times..”who fancies
Chinease or a curry tonight” smiles all round.. na get them tae fuck…
One wonders what plans the SNP government have in place then to feed the homeless and vurnerable in the middle a pandemic during a bitter winter..
It’s not like there is a shortage of cash is there???
Nicola Sturgeon~~~~the SNP dealer of death to Scotland’s most vurnerable citizens..again…
Agree. Rev, have you read this fantastic article from Joanna Cherry on this very issue. link to thenational.scot
As it stands, a SNP majority in the next election will make no difference. So a unionist majority is irrelevant. So what if they closed Hollyrood? Its not been of much use recently. Wasn’t that long ago it was believed a majority of SNP MPs was all that would be required to start negotiations; with Edinburgh taken out of the picture that again becomes the fallback position.
Will I lend the SNP my vote again? Certainly not the second one if there is an alternative. And if Peter Grant makes an arse of himself on Twitter again then they can kiss my first vote good bye; for as I said above, as it stands it makes no difference if hes employed or not.
There is a case for the THREAT of another wee blue book being released that highlighted the dysfunctions of the SNP hierarchy and inability of keeping their word. Given the effectiveness of the last book to influence voters, I think this would be enough to refocus the minds of MP/MSPs as to what the next election should be. Unfortunately thanks to this site, I am now at the point of questioning whether I could trust the abilities of our current crop of MSP/MPs to negotiate on my behalf against Britain.
“lets not forget how long Labour treated the Scottish public like fools before they finally realised it”
And we all learnt from it, have it still imprinted in our memories and will be watching to avoid being treated as fools again.
Why do you think the England parties insist in the “one generation thing”?
To give us enough time to forget.
The unionist would not close down the Scottish Parliament if they win in May. They are getting paid by it. In fact if you want to ensure that Holyrood makes it through this period of Tory rule then elect a unionist government. The WM Tories will relax and leave their surrogates to get on with it.
Rev Stu: ‘Aye, that’s great if you’re willing to wait until 2024 to even START doing anything. But in reality the UK government, and more importantly the international community, would be totally unimpressed with a majority of MPs unless it was also won via a majority of votes.
You cannot credibly assert a declaration of independence on behalf of the people from, say, 46% of the vote. Absolutely nobody would take that seriously.’
I thought I was reading Pete Wishart for a moment!
The SNP got 46.5% of the vote at Holyrood in 2016, not on the basis of Independence, but on a raft of issues including Brexit. With the turmoil that they are creating for themselves, what are the chances in reality, not polls, that they will equal or surpass that figure?
More importantly, why should Boris Johnson show the slightest interest in a so called plebiscite by a devolved talking shop which has been shown several times to be impotent in constitutional matters?
The UK is officially a representative democracy i.e. it elects M.Ps to represent its electorate. The popular vote does not count. No party, other than the SNP ironically, has reached 50% of the popular vote in living memory. So seats count, not votes.
Dissolution of the UK Union can only occur within the Westminster context. The grounds for breaches of the Unifying Act of Union are numerous and profound, with the latest being the Brexit undemocratic removal of Scotland from the EU. Scottish MPs. are all, with one exception, SNP and represent a party whose creation is/was resiling the Union. They have had the mandate since 2015 to move for dissolution. After a declaration of dissolution delivered to to Boris and his gang in the ‘Mutha’ of Parliaments, a consolidating plebiscite could and should be carried out by a properly reconstituted Convention of MPs and MSPs in Scotland with a clear Declaration of Independence and an appeal to UN for recognition.
International community can suck it up, otherwise we will remain forever prisoner to Westminster and its paid lackeys impersonating the national party in Scotland.
England imposed a 40% rule for the first Referendum for a Devolved assembly. A gerrymandered block on a victory for ‘YES’ which delayed our evolution to self government by 20 x years!
They gerrymandered via postal vote manipulation and a sunami of lies to steal the IndyRef. So why should we let our Constitutional weapon that existed until 2000, until AS decided to gamble on Referenda , be de-commissioned by playing by bogus British rules?
They butchered Ireland, our Celtic cousins, not just in blood, but in territory. One hundred years ago, they carved 6 x counties out of the country, dividing it, to keep their cold dead imperial hands around its throats. One hundred years later that grip is being slowly unlocked. Don’t doubt similar tactics are in the offing, the longer we delay..Shetland, Orkney, the Borders and D&G..areas that have been ‘planted’ by economic design and leave us vulnerable to the old Brit tactic of divide and rule.
@Lochside
You’re just plain wrong sorry.
Self determination does NOT depend on the permission of the “metropolitan” state or larger entity that a smaller entity or people is attempting to secede from. If it did, hardly any of the current UN would EVER have attained statehood.
Not even the UK government believes this, as it demonstrated in its evidence to the ICJ WRT to Kosovar independence.
The only ones capable of exercising self determination are the Scottish people. International recognition is the next step. That can be easier or harder depending on the circumstances.
The international community simply won’t accept Scots self determination unless it is clearly backed by a majority of those who vote in a clear mandate for independence.
Everything else is detail. Anyone telling you anything different is selling you a pup.
Effigy…. I always like your posts but your reply to me upthread reads just like a re-worded “Wheesht for indy” and myself (and many others by the sounds of it) aren’t willing to do that. I wish we had a “3 strikes and out” rule for our televised Covid compere….
Strike one – failure to use the 62% remain vote to end the union.
Strike 2 – failure to supply the promised indyref after the carefully inserted “material change” clause re brexit.
Strike 3 – handing Bawbag a veto he never previously had.
Strike 4 – refusing to use the well established 50% of MPs, as laid out by the Milk Snatcher or Lord Robertson or John Major (when he wasn’t busy dipping his chip in Currie!)
Strike 5 – waxing the ringfenced indy fund on hookers/heroin/lawyers (*delete as appropriate)
Strike 6 – opposing M Keatings case (which they should have pursued themselves 2 years ago)
Strike 7 – The Alec Salmond stitch up and the nefarious convolutions to conceal it.
Strike 8 – failure of the NEC to discuss/plan independence for last four years.
How many more will you put up with? I’m sure Breeks et al can add about another dozen to that list. At some point you’ve got to just say ENOUGH. We’ve been taken for mugs by the party we voted for to protect us from WM taking us for mugs. The way I see it now, it really doesn’t matter who gets a majority in HR because the odds of us getting our referendum in the next term are IDENTICAL whether it’s the Yoons or the SNP… zip, zilch, nada, nante, rien, heehaw or the square root of F-all.
Furthermore, there seems little point being the majority in a powerless parliament once the Tories have emasculated it with the new civil service hub…direct rule in all but name. If the Yoons get their way and shut HR, then it might force the SNP to grow a pair and treat EVERY WM GE as a plebiscite as that would be the only tool left available to them, and a tool they would have to wield minus all the woke shit they seem so intent on pushing on us as a caveat to independence.
Obviously, if there is a seismic shift following a swift change of upper management, combined with an unequivocal manifesto for indy, then they’ll get mine and my wife’s vote in a flash. But I’m not holding my breath. We just need to hope AS lights a fire under them when he appears at the inquiry.
That’s a good dose of realpolitik.
Challenge is then for the SNP to generate political pain for Johnson so that he changes his mind. On the present evidence they’re unlikely to do that.
Joanne Cherry needn’t worry about her short sightedness, it’s as plain as a barn door that the whole of Us are to be consulted, i.e.we who are sovereign, on the make up of our wee parliament in springtime.
Use this opportunity to hold indyref 2
Frame it whatever way you like.
2nd vote, 1st vote, additional question, who cares!
See Stu’s manifesto for further info.
This can be done, it should be done, therefore it MUST be done.
Anything else is failing the people of Scotland, when we need bold leadership the most.
Andy Ellis…sorry but where did I say Scotland was asking permission? Dissolution by Declaration is notice that the contract is now null and void.
Also…Scotland would not be ‘seceding’. Two equal partners cannot have one seceding. What would be happening is a dissolution.
The Confederate States of America seceded; Catalonia would be seceding; Scotland would be dissolving the Union. The U.K would officially cease to exist. England , Wales and N.I. could call themselves what they like, including the UK, but that entity would not be the original constituent body formed in 1707.
“ Agree. Rev, have you read this fantastic article from Joanna Cherry on this very issue.”
Christ I must have read this through a pessimistic lense. Need to wrestle the paper of the Mrs and have another look.
Does anyone ever ask the question, will the ‘United kingdom’ be recognised after a vote by Scotland to end the union.
The one thing that is guaranteed by a YES ballot for independence, the union is over. It ceases to be a ‘union’ regardless of the position of Westminster. If they refuse to recognise it, then we are effectively a colony, not a consenting member of a union.
In such circumstances will the international community recognise the United Kingdom after a successful vote to end it?
Same.
Read that today and there is no real denying that Mr Gordon hits the nail on the head.
Sadly.
I would have to say though Rev, it does appear that Mr Gordon has been reading your blog. There’s no way he came up with this on his own.
@Lochside
Apologies if you feel I misrepresented your OP, I was going on the basis of your statement:
“Dissolution of the UK Union can only occur within the Westminster context. The grounds for breaches of the Unifying Act of Union are numerous and profound, with the latest being the Brexit undemocratic removal of Scotland from the EU. Scottish MPs. are all, with one exception, SNP and represent a party whose creation is/was resiling the Union. They have had the mandate since 2015 to move for dissolution.”
The UK context is irrelevant as far as the international community is concerned, as are “angels on the head of a pin” arguments about whether its secession or dissolution of a union. The International community don’t give a shit about the Acts of Union, Claim of Right etc. The only mandate the international community will accept is a clear majority of those who vote in favour of independence in either a specific independence referendum OR plebiscitary elections clearly asking for independence as the outcome.
Nothing else will do. We had almost 49.97% of the vote in 2015 Westminster election and 56 of 59 Scottish MPs, but that wasn’t a mandate as far as the international community is concerned.
ScottieDog
I’m also suffering from pessimistitis. The Charry article is full of contradictions and ambiguity:
His concession laid the foundation for the 2014 referendum in recognising the rights of Scots to choose whether to remain part of our voluntary union with England.
then in the very next paragraph:
I am wholly in agreement with the view that we must find a legal and constitutional way to demonstrate that public opinion in Scotland has changed since the 2014 referendum in order for our independence to be internationally recognised and therefore meaningful
Maybe Breeks can solve this riddle: if the union voluntary will of the Scottish people how can it be illegal to dissolve it if they so wish. With 58% support then it’s in the bag already.
Ms Cherry appears to be walking a fine line between offering the possibility of something else but at the same time never contradicting anything said by the SNP hierarchy. This Plan B talk is no better than the Plan A talk. Deeds not words. We’re well past the words stage.
@ Stuart MacKay
I have had another read and feel a lot better about it Stuart. I did skim through it to find the ‘juicy bit’ this morning.
Firstly, remember she’s a lawyer!
Also, yes she still is delicately treading trough the leadership minefield!
She’s not committing herself but is implying that the last 20 years of constitutional set up isn’t going to be a barrier to Scotland securing independence.
Joanna Cherry will soon be making radical changes to the SNP’s approach to independence. Changes for the better.
Top-class discussion and comments on this thread. Many thanks to all participants and to Stuart of course for his leading article. Food for thought as always.
Lochside says:
“Also…Scotland would not be ‘seceding’. Two equal partners cannot have one seceding. What would be happening is a dissolution.”
Well said Lochside, that is the truth of the matter. I would just add the following:
What would be happening is a dissolution…and the United Kingdom would no longer exist.
I will repeat this for as long as it needs for you all to understand.
Exactly how power devolved is power retained, independence subject to the consent of a dominant colonial power is not independence as it depends on a concession.
Concession that can be withdrawn at any moment, ante or post.
The very same process of achieving Independence must be carried out independently to validate and secure it.
Independence is always TAKEN against active or passive resistance.
I’ve been trying to point out to hardcore Sturgeon fans on twitter that she really is bang to rights and shold have resigned before now. ‘We’ll wait to see the evidence thanks’. I point out that the evidence is out there in govt and Sturgeon statements, in Aberdein’s Salmond trial testimony.
But they will not give in, their minds are closed tight. I fear even Salmond’s evidence later this month won’t shift them. When the object of their affections falls they will wail and gnash their teeth forever and a day and regale us, or try to, about how she was the great lost leader.
Well after her rumoured stint in the UN she can come back and run for president.
Mac says:
8 January, 2021 at 3:16 pm
.. imagine if Nicola did make the manifesto in a plebiscite election on independence. We would all have to vote Yes / SNP thus guaranteeing her another full term..’
Why so? What if other pro-Independence parties made /their/ manifestos for the election a simple plebiscite? Then pro-Indy voters could vote for any they chose (on 1st or 2nd votes), and the plebiscitary indication would be maximised overall.
The SNP (reluctant to do so before) could thereby be incentivised to make their /own/ manifesto one for a plebiscite, since to not do so would be to very visibly shirk and fall behind these other parties – in principle, and also surely in practice to lose significant votes.
I propose that all pro-Indy parties make ‘plebiscite for independence’ part of their manifesto.