The Cassandra Crossing
24 hours on, pretty much everyone seems to have come to the same conclusion (with the assistance of briefings from the FM himself) about Humza Yousaf’s “independence strategy” as the one Wings saw immediately yesterday, namely that he’s taken Nicola Sturgeon’s flawed version of a de-facto referendum and made it even less credible.
In as far as they’re talking about it at all, anyway.
There’s remarkably little in-depth coverage of the “special conference” in the Sundays, and that’s probably because it said so little worth reporting that there are no depths to explore. In the end a great deal of sound and fury was created in Dundee that signified next to nothing, other than a retreat.
Offscreen, Yousaf told the press corps something very different to the line he’d fed the crowd in the hall. When he was asked to clarify his carefully-vaguely-worded speech, he admitted that in fact the “new” policy was just the same as the one that’s failed for the last eight years – get elected, make demands of the UK government, and have no idea what to do when they refuse.
But where Sturgeon was at least ostensibly aiming to go in armed with a legitimate mandate from a majority of the electorate, Yousaf was setting his sights much lower.
A majority of Scottish seats is an absolute non-starter. In the 2005 UK general election, Labour won a comfortable majority of seats on 35.2% of the votes. That’s 10 points LESS than Yes got in the 2014 referendum, and we didn’t try to claim it as a victory.
We know that Westminster will say “No” regardless of the result. Both Labour and the Tories have made that absolutely clear, and we know that the chances of the SNP having any meaningful leverage at Westminster to force their hand are essentially nil. Arithmetically there’s almost no chance of them holding the balance of power, and even if they did Keir Starmer would just call their bluff and say “Go on then, vote with the Tories” – something the SNP itself has made unthinkable and closed off as a tactic.
Yousaf’s speech just has a big blank space on what to do then.
The strategy proposed by Wings in February and adopted by Ash Regan in the leadership battle had a plan for that. A majority of VOTES is a mandate that the world would take seriously. It’s a clear statement of the will of the people as set out and protected by Article 1 of the UN Charter, and an appeal over the heads of Westminster for recognition by the international community, based on a demonstrably free and fair democratic vote, having tried every other route, would be met very favourably.
But any appeal for recognition based on losing the popular vote by 2:1 would be laughed out of the global room, and rightly so. We would not have won. We would not be speaking for the people. And Humza Yousaf – who is hapless but who is not an imbecile – knows that just as well as we do and you do and everyone else does.
So his “strategy” is a cynical and deliberate insult to the 1000 or so hardy and optimistic souls who made their way to Dundee yesterday. Its only purpose – and a purpose that’s barely even disguised – is to try to con them into letting the SNP cling on to as many seats in the House Of Commons as possible for another five years, in the full knowledge that they’ll do nothing with them. As far as we’re concerned it’s nothing more than Operation Gravy Bus.
(Because anything they COULD do with, say, 25 seats is something they could have done with 56 seats in 2016, with 35 seats in 2017, or with 46 seats now, but haven’t.)
Humza Yousaf knows that if he’d said that in the hall yesterday everyone would have muttered and scratched their chins, which is why he worded his speech so evasively. He was counting on a pep-rally effect from people hearing what they wanted to hear rather than what was actually said, and on their being sceptical of the Unionist media’s analysis afterwards.
But even SNP cheerleader fanzine The National saw through it this time.
And even its hyper-loyal subscribers weren’t buying the new-recipe snake oil.
The purpose of the strategy is to fail. Yousaf knows full well that there’s ZERO chance of the fast-sinking SNP getting over 50% of the vote in 2024 – something it couldn’t even manage when it was rising like a rocket in 2015.
So it’ll fail, and the party will shrug and say “Hey, look, we tried, and now it’s time to just accept defeat and do whatever we can within the constraints of devolution”, and however many MPs it manages to save will get back to building up their pension funds, free of the tiresome burden of expectation.
Failure to achieve independence is no longer just the SNP’s fate. It is its goal.
So for independence supporters, voting SNP next year is a vote to surrender, but in truth it’s a lot worse even than that. Humza Yousaf’s “independence strategy” is the equivalent of Hitler’s infamous Nero Decree of 1945, in which he basically ordered that if he was going down, the whole of Germany was going down with him.
Independence support remains strong and can still be saved. But it’s unmistakeably clear after yesterday than not only can the SNP not deliver independence, they can be no part of it at all. The party is doomed, and the only elements of the Yes movement that can still be salvaged are those which are decoupled from it.
But the time to do that is running out fast.
Shock, horror! Useless has chosen the option that looks like he’s doing something for independence but has the least chance of achieving it, to the point that it’s probably the most damaging option for pursuing independence.
It’s almost as if he’s not a stupid as he acts and knows his decision will be the most damaging…
The SNP is like a car crash the blow softened by running into a train wreck itself cushioned by taking a direct hit from an ICBM.
Nailed it Rev.
Groundhog Day. Again.
I won’t be voting SNP. Scotland United I would vote for or the Alba Party.
But I will not give an SNP member my vote.
I spoiled my ballot at the council elections and I will spoil it again until the SNP is totally obliterated.
RIP SNP. 1934 – 2023.
What’s stopping the Holyrood parliament from calling a referendum as to whether Scotland should ask Westminster for a S30 referendum?
It’s almost the same question, but stands a better chance of getting >50%, because some unionists think that the time has come to settle the issue once more. Constantly arguing the matter, but never settling it, isn’t good for anyone.
I don’t believe there’s anything in the law to prevent Holyrood from having a referendum.
The SNP are clearly ‘not for turning’, so what now for those MP’s/MSP’s/members & voters that have clung on to an increasingly pointless hope. The only way to the UN with a mandate for independence is through a vote at an election. The SNP, while increasingly being seen as a dead end, will do all they can to continue their TINA bs and only succeed in splitting the independence vote at an election. It’s a clusterfuck. Can only really hope that ‘events dear boy, events’ leads to a real move away from the SNP. The saving grace is that there is an alternative to vote for (Alba or a coalition with others). Time to focus more on what can be done than on what can’t.
“So it’ll fail, and the party will shrug”
Worse than that it will fail and the party will say “obviously the people don’t want independence” because you can bet your bottom dollar votes for other pro indy parties, perhaps even including the Greens won’t count towards the total Yes vote. And that ignores the Yes voters that vote for Labour to get rid of the Tories!
Just to seek clarification of Stu’s proposal for 50%+ majority of GE votes..
International recognition seals the result. With that endorsement likely to be granted, when does independence become official?
The UK being forced to the table, appears to be Stu’s position.
I’d imagine that a unilateral end to the Union, would ultimately require settlement by negotiation. SNP fixated on delay (even after successful ballot result) and to spend years settling up, prior to the official independence day. this sought process may facilitate introduction of a new currency, in an orderly fashion?
In essence, does it make sense to delay unilateral introduction of ‘independence day’ (end of the Union), after the GE result, so to finalise those terms, with the UK? Is what I’m asking.
An immediate decision to split, would appear to be less desirable to all concerned.
Extract from post: “It’s a clear statement of the will of the people as set out and protected by Article 1 of the UN Charter, and an appeal over the heads of Westminster for recognition by the international community, based on a demonstrably free and fair democratic vote, having tried every other route, would be met very favourably.”
****************
1: Article 1(2) is a starting point, it was referred to in the first letter issued to the Secretary General of the United Nations in April 2021, as part of an initiative entitled the “Declaration of a Sovereign Scot”, which achieves a “clear statement of the will of the people” by inviting them to sign an individual “Declaration”, which inter alia, includes this paragraph:
“Exercising my Claim Of Right as a Sovereign Scot, I declare:
I do not consent to the terms of, nor the continuation of, the Treaty of Union established through the Acts of Union in 1707.”
*******************
Those individually signed “Declarations” have been collected at every Rally (and more) held across Scotland since 2021, and when collected are sent in batches to the Secretary General of the UN for safe-keeping (no request for his comments or response is asked for – the targets are individual UN Members) More signed “Declarations” were collected yesterday at Bannockburn, and will form part of a further batch,
*******************
With each batch issued a separate letter is issued, as above it started with Article 1(2), but as will be seen from the extracts below it has developed much further:
Extract example #1: Dated and issued to the Sec/Gen on the 24th of March 2023:
With the intention of individual contact with UN Members, I now refer to the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, both of which expand Art.1 Par. 2 of the UN Charter.
Article 1
1. 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.
2. All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic cooperation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.
3. The States Parties to the present Covenant, including those having responsibility for the administration of Non-Self Governing and Trust Territories, shall promote the realisation of the right of self-determination, and shall respect that right, in conformity with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.
I note that Paragraph 3 confirms a mandatory obligation on the Members of the United Nations to actively promote the right of self-determination, in addition to respecting it
Many may recognise that reference as appearing in the legal opinion more recently obtained by Alba – it was already included in that earlier letter (24th March 2023) to the UN as part of this inititive – and is just one example of addressing matters of important international law beyond Article 1(2).
******************
Extract example #2: Individual contact with UN Members (mentioned in the above extract):
“This letter, and its enclosures, are being issued in identical fashion to 17 Countries, each of whom share these important and common characteristics, namely their Membership of the United Nations and that history records that they chose their independence from the United Kingdom.
The enclosures are items of correspondence sent to the Secretary General of the United Nations, one item from the United Nations, and a “Specimen” copy of a document entitled “The Declaration of a Sovereign Scot.”
You will see from the correspondence that the Secretary General has been asked to retain in his safe keeping the originals of signed “Declarations”, being documents signed individually by Sovereign Scots from all across Scotland, in what will be a continuing initiative.”
****************
The 17 letters were issued earlier this month, and are the start of further such contact.
Absolutely agree, Rev, that the SNP is doomed. They are hoping to manage devolution, but the new laws coming our way are destined to nibble away at even that small concession. I do not believe that we can possibly, now – if ever, really – achieve independence via the ballot box. It has to be a mix.
Yes, we need the political for democratic legitimacy, but we need to acknowledge that it is the Treaty that is the problem. I hold no candle for those who believe that the Treaty is no longer extant. If it is not, neither is the UK. Both Westminster and Whitehall know perfectly well that it is extant, and if they want to argue the toss, let them do so, while we get on with the day-to-day actions that will be necessary to establish independence.
Of course it is extant, which is why we are steered away from it at every opportunity. SALVO and SSRG are doing a great job of unearthing our ancients rights, but Westminster and Whitehall will never accept them so long as the Treaty remains. We need to repudiate the Treaty on the grounds of its constant breaching by the British government, and reclaim the Claim of Right.
That will not depend on a political majority because it is a matter of constitutional law and international law. Any case put to the UN would take ages, so we have to hurry things along by a public repudiation, released to all media outlets everywhere, simultaneously. I mean the entire independence movement must do so. No more general marches for independence; march for repudiation of the Treaty specifically; and match that to the election manifestos and results later.
We have to wrest power from the SNP/Green coalition as they stand in the way of any meaningful progress, and have done so for the past eight years. No genuine independence party in the history of independence movements has so blatantly and callously used its members to fulfil an alien agenda based on Green ideological nonsense.
Yes, we will need the SNP/Greens for the GE because no other party is ready yet to stand against them, but their days are numbered. We should be using their own desperation for power against them, but, after 2024, they are either with us or agin us. The remaining dissidents and members must be made to see that they are on a sinking ship. One big name who comes over will ring many with them, will break the stasis and give the independence movement the necessary kickstart.
No more referendums. No more soft-soaping. Go for the jugular. If the SNP/Green coalition continues to resist and continues to be in the forefront of placing Scots in dire poverty and need, to sanction the squandering of our green resources on top of our oil and gas-based resources, and to pander to Westminster’s diktat, they are worse than useless: they become a real and present impediment to their duty of care to their own people. They have placed us in this precarious situation by pandering to an insane ideology that cares nothing for Scots, nothing for anyone or anything but its own nihilism. If we do not face up to that reality, we are finished or we leave it to another future generation to pick up the baton, and then, it may be too late to avoid conflict.
Totally laughable that SNP is now saying a majority of seats not votes is enough, when their WM GE manifesto policy has been that the FPTP voting system should be replaced by a properly representative one.
Fair enough for SNP to take advantage of FPTP when it buys them MP seats more cheaply than for any other party. But to claim that it’s unrepresentative and representative at the same time? Just laughable.
No professional political class that accepts Scotland’s subaltern status under the union by fixating about Section 30 is ever going to secure us our freedom. The SNP has failed and failed atrociously.
Devolution, bit by bit, turned the SNP into a self-concerned political machine. No great mystery for those with awareness of sociology and colonialism.
It’s time for the real independence movement to completely shun the bad faith SNP and get on with the business of raising the discontent of the Scottish people to unprecedented levels, and then act on that discontent with proper strategies to invoke Scotland’s right to self-determination.
I am so determined to see the total destruction of the SNP that from now on I will simply vote for whatever party in my constituency is most likely to defeat it. No more chances. Unfortuately, this means voting Tory. So be it.
Totally agree with you and said this in yesterday’s post from you. Onkh Alba and ISP give a clear and credible route for the yes movement.
Every sensible yeser including any decent folk left in SNP need to get behind either of these two parties.
SNP is finished.
@Anne 1.57pm
I get what you are saying and to be fair, the Tories in Scotland are against the GTA bill which is a plus in my view.
No matter what choices we have, we are still part of the Union regardless of whatever Unionist parties are on the Ballot paper, The only way to kill the SNP dead is to vote for an Unionist party if ALBA or any other independence supporting party like SALVO aren’t standing candidates.
Labour was a stronghold where I live and I think they will get my vote again as my votes for the SNP were just useless like the current leader.
My votes to SNP just kept my MP on the gravy train and he has done NOTHING in regards to independence, just sat quietly picking up the pay check.
By going to the UKSC and getting the final say as far as UK law goes we’ve been shown that all the years of unionists moving goalposts has been a timewasting exercise. A decoy luring nationalists in the wrong direction.
The only power Westminster will admit Holyrood has is that it allows it to have and that includes overriding any “devolved” decisions they don’t like.
The point of devolution was always to distract.
If we take Westminster at their word but factor in their lip service to supporting self determination then if the only place where the fate of the union can be decided is there it follows that those that speak for Scotland in it must be its MPs.
So we’re back to the pre-devolution situation, or never really left it, an SNP majority of MPs on a manifesto clearly stating it’s for independence, in order to obtain a mandate in Scotland.
There could be extra clauses such as speaking and voting in Scotland’s best interests but nothing else.
But to repeat. There must be a clear manifesto commitment to independence. Nothing less and nothing more. Westminster have made it clear there will be no indyref2.
Non-committal to Scotland United spells the end for SNP. No more room for doubt.
The Scottish National Party is currently a substantial hindrance to independence.
Is saving the party possible or even desirable?
The hangers on, need to make that decision now!
Re the Nero Decree, we could refer to it as a Scotch Egg policy.
Talking Heads
“We’re on the road to nowhere”
They’re utterly useless and wholly corrupt.
I’ve actually gone beyond my hatred for them for their actions since Sturgeon came to power.
I just don’t care anymore. They’re a novelty which provides occasional humour when they’re in the news.
If only we’d grasped the opportunity delivered by Alex. I don’t believe it will come again in the next 30/40 years.
So here we are. Pfffft.
I just laugh at the total ignorance of the people on both sides of the “independence” debate who are clueless about the SYSTEM that we are born into and how they think that “democracy” is real. We can get 100% voting for independence tomorrow by letting the people of this country know how fake and fraudulent the banking and financial system is – and who controls it all – and how we will set up our own peoples Central Bank and print our own debt and interest free money and also by doing this getting rid of inflation. By doing this there will be NO need for any taxes. Taxes are a massive scam brought in with the TEMPORARY Tax Act of 1842 and kept going ever since to make things worst off for the masses by keeping raising these fake taxes to pay off the FAKE debt and interest of their scam banking system.
By doing this our government would have all the money they need to do everything that is needed each year and all they have to do is to write off the cost of everything spent at the end of the year. This is how the US became a rich world power so quickly after their “independence” with their debt and interest free Greenback Dollar before they were brought back in to this scam banking system we all live under.
Of course the Mafias that own and control most of this planet control the education system that indoctrinates the masses and keeps them dumb and they also control the mainstream media as well hence why the people are unaware of any of this. Also anyone who thinks that going to the Mafia controlled UN or via their corrupt LEGAL system to gain independence is clueless as to the FACT that LEGAL has NOTHING to do with LAWFUL and is all based on fraud and deception.
Telling the people that they are going to be better off with no taxes and be free of FAKE debt and interest should get 100% voting for independence and will expose all of the political parties that try to defend this scam banking system including the so called independence parties as this is REAL independence but getting past the cognitive dissonance of the masses is going to happen first and that includes the independence supporters. It will also expose the mainstream media who are silent about this scam banking system and who always ask what currency an independent Scotland would use and who will try and defend their debt and interest and inflation creating scam which is how these Mafias control our countries and the masses via THEIR Central Bank DEBT plus INTEREST plus INFLATION as a result.
Hey Rev. Stu,
I know I’m obviously not seeing clearly, but I’m sure the text above should read -:
(Because anything they COULD do with, say, 25 seats is something they could have done with 56 seats in 2015, with 35 seats in 2017, or with 46 seats now, but haven’t.)
I’m away to let my tired eyes rest.
The SNP have declared, through their actions and their intent, to be focussed on maximising the returns of devolution. They have reached the point where they have acknowledged the need to accept the rule of Westminster and will administer our nation on their behalf.
Whoever runs the SNP now will surely be aware of this catchy sentiment:
“if he should give up what he has begun, seeking to make us or our kingdom subject to the King of England or the English, we should exert ourselves at once to drive him out as our enemy and a subverter of his own right and ours…”
Let the SNP realise that this is now them, and they have been found seeking to make us subject…
Sturgeon brought us here, partly through her lack of competence, but more directly through her promotion of mediocracy. No stronger sign of the importance of the unsung hero needs be seen than the speed at which the expansive, brilliant government of 2014 crashed and burned into the state we see today.
Most of the heroes did not die; many moved on – they will rise again.
Anyone who still thinks the SNP is of any use at all to the Scots in any way whatsoever is a self-deluded, blinkered and irredeemable idiot – that’s just an incontrovertible fact.
To paraphrase the great Mel Brooks:
Who could have imagined that the SNP would become the most hated and vilified political party in Scotland – hated and vilified by the Scots themselves?
That’s treachery for you, it really, really, really pisses-off the folk on the wrong end of it.
Choose smart not stupid; dump the SNP – you know it’s the right thing for Scotland.
Because the SNP has become nothing more than a weapon to use against us Scots, and the sooner it’s rendered ineffective the sooner we can move forward with a real and proper plan to achieve independence.
A plan not so easily hi-jacked by Westminster, perhaps.
Mike Fenwick,
I’m on the opposite side to you. I’m a unionist. But that’s fine, we can agree to disagree.
I actually admire that you are doing something practical. I don’t _think_ it will work, and I hope that it won’t work. But unlike the hundreds of other commenters here, and the Rev himself who runs this space, at least you are doing something practical.
The big missing piece in the equation is somebody coming up with a practical plan, pre-Indy, however that may be achieved, for how iScotland will make its way. Finance, central bank, trade policies, and a long list of other things. I saw that Alba had said they would apply to EFTA, which is fair enough, a pointer, but honestly that’s about 1% of the detail that’s needed. A lot of people on here just want to jump straight to Indy and sort it out afterwards, but that is just being lemmings. Scotland shouldn’t rush off a cliff without a plan for the landing.
Indeed, this joke ‘strategy’, is nothing short of a cynical attempt to dupe the gullible. Win a majority, ask for permission to hold a referendum AGAIN. And, importantly, guaranteed to be refused AGAIN.
JUst what is the point of the SNP. Seriously, it has become a joke, filled to the brim with political pygmies and careerists, who have no ambition for Scotland – and who will certainly NOT fight for an end to English colonial rule.
Alba seems the most sensible option now. The SNP must be allowed to die – the sooner, the better.
Spoil your ballot.
Please don’t vote Yoon!!! Remember what Allan Bissett warned – the feckers would count that vote as a win for the Union – they won’t see it as a protest vote & my own grave concerns are that if Scotland returns a Yoon majority the feckers in both parliaments will vote through legislation that we can never, ever leave this fcking union as they grow more & more authoritarian.
It’s my understanding the fuckers also have to acknowledge & read spoiled ballots at the count so send them a message instead. Mine will be saying ‘GYTF ya deviant lying fraudulent bastards’ or similar next to the SNP box unless I have a pro indy candidate to vote for.
I wouldn’t be putting the nail in Scots coffin by sending a Yoon to WM to wreck absolute havoc on us with a Yoon PM to put us *disobedient verminomous Scots* permanently in our place & wave through all legislation to stop us holding Holyrood elections under the guise it was the will of Scots cause that’s exactly how those venemous rats will take a Yoon vote.
Was Brexshiteers lemmings?
5+ yrs & still not ironed out. Is that because most negotiations happen after the actual event?
D’oh!!!!!
Jeez! What’s the point of every plan verified & researched if we’re going fucking nowhere?!?!
The SNP ignored Alex Salmond on the Independence super majority for Holyrood.
They ignored him on the Supreme court ruling in the wrong court in the wrong country.
They’ve ignored Alex Salmond’s advice on domestic policies: GRR. The constitutional fight with Westminster Scotland can’t win nor wants. HMPAs highland clearances. Energy policy. Bottle recycling poll tax. Juryless trials. Green Free ports which are deregulation zones different from the EU they claim to want to return to.
The sold off ScotWind sea bed sites for free to foreign multinational corporations with no public stake or supply chain jobs. While we give away 33 gigawats of energy a day for free to London.
Their Calmac board ignored all the help it could get for building ferries.
They ignored Alex Salmond on picking a constitutional fight over the Stone of Destiny. Yousaf handed it over meekly.
They scheduled their pretend conference to clash with all under one banner marches because they don’t want to be part of a people’s movement for Independence.
They ignored Alex Salmond again this week on a Scotland United cross party Independence vote.
Big Eck, the most patient man in Scotland and the leader of Independence. We need your help. Because this guy Yousaf isn’t listening.
We’ll just have to wait until the SNP get battered in 2025 and 2026. While our assets are raped, plundered and given away and more Nationalists like Winnie Ewing die under the Butcher’s apron.
The SNP won’t listen to its voter base.
What do we do next?
The SNP placing themselves as being the ‘protectors of devolution’ or some other such pish is crock of horseshit – don’t let them off with that nonsense!!
We know this because when Holyrood denied (cross party) consent to WM over the power grab & the new internal single market bill they did absolutely fck all but sit back & relax as Mayhem, the biggest fail besides Sturgeon, eviscerated Holyrood from the inside out before the dullard Sturgeon had time to take a selfie.
So definitely don’t let them try paint themselves as devos protectionists. They have done better than any Yoon at destroying it – including being the first to have a section 35 issued as well as defiant GRR & DRS legislation to deliberately piss them off even more.
A vote for the SNP is a vote for deviants spending copious amounts of time over the next parliament arguing non binary pronoun bullshit no one gives a fck for other than kiddie fiddlers.
@Billy Carlin 3:38
As somebody who frequently asks to be shown the money, I could certainly be persuaded to vote for an interest-free, debt-free, tax-free Indy Scotland. Bleeding obviously we would not be in the EU, so it’s a win-win for me.
Having been indoctrinated at an early age, I am wondering if you have an explanation for how Scotland’s habitual deficit would work. I sort of assume we would pay for the extra imports for which we would have no corresponding exports by printing money. But surely, eventually the receivers of that money would have bought up everything in Scotland? It’s not as if the money would be spendable anywhere else.
Alternatively, would iScotland have to have scrupulously balanced budgets, with no imports over and above what could be financed by exports? Could that be arranged with tight import controls? For example, no Chinese Xmas tat coming in if the country needs German machine tools.
I like the sound of Scotland united, its a pity Yousless doesn’t, lets see what happen on election night in 2024. The Labour party might just hammer the SNP well beyond 30 seats, fingers crossed.
The moron was coronated into the post of leader to fail. When you watch him on TV he always looks as if he’s on a high dosage of temazepam. Even if he was granted a referendum and won could he and his colleagues be trusted not to give parts of Scotland away, hell naw.
People might say it isn’t right to call him a moron, well he needs to stop acting like one. Who’s it better to please the voters or one single MP, I don’t how many times I’ve heard he needs to clear the rubbish out of the SNP only then will we get some where and only then will the UKG take notice.
I could be wrong but I think well before the next election Humza will have to adopt Scotland united approach.
Alex Salmond needs to be returned to Holyrood.
He also should start a convention of his own & he also now needs to stand square against the SNP on a ticket for indy. (No more 2nd vote)
I just hope he gets the wonga to stand in every single constituency & win.
Can you imagine the Murrells coupon? Peter would take a good kicking that day from the poisonous dwarf LOL…
Speaking of deviants.. did you all know the latest trans fetish doing social media is to pish yerself in public? FFS!!!
This madness has to end sometime soon. How can anyone, far less presidents & parliamentarians, defend that behaviour as normal? Attention seeking freak show.
Our Independence has been shelved for God knows how long in favour of defending these dangerous retards!
*testing*
President?
There’s a possibility all 45 MPs are all going to be sacked. I can only count Joanna as a team player & can see her possibly standing as an independent.
I wonder if they & the Holyrood rebels will start smacking some heads over at team Useless? I’d doubt it until Sturgeon is forcibly removed or at least her number from Dumbzas speed dial. He hasn’t a thought in his head on strategy.
WWW. Parliament.UK. 20th October 1999.
Parliament business, publications & record.
Select Committee on privileges.
Second report,
Opinions of the Committee,
Extract,
LORD NICHOLLS of Birkenhead,
The Treaty of Union was not preceded by a formal Document signed as a Treaty of Union, on behalf of the two Countries,
The Commissioners Articles are not Binding on either Country, they area agreed propsal.
Thus the terms on which the Union took place are to be found exclusively, Not in a treatyas that expression is normanlly understood today, but enabling legislation enacted separately.
Article 22 of the Treaty of union is no longer on the parliament Statue book since the peerage Act 1963,
Section 7 repealed article 22 of the treaty of union in both the Scottish act of union and the English act of union repealed as spent, superseded or obsolete by the Statue Law revision( Scotland) Act 1964.
Article 22 was repealed in England for England by the Statue Law repeals Act 1993,
I do not consider it necessary to decide wether any such treaty, binding in international Law came into being before the union took place, Nor is it necessary to investigate wether, If there was such a Treaty.
SNAFU
Tales of the Humzaexpected.
Anybody remember that programme they used to sometimes show you at school, “Picture Box”?
Cannae remember a bloody thing about the show itself, only the opening credits. An ornate, mysterious crystal box rotating madly and forever to a sinister calliope tune.
DO DO DOO DOO DOO DOO DOO DO DOOOOOOOOOO! DO DO DO DO DOO DOO DO DO DO DOO DOOOOOOOOO!
Anyway, the noises that come out of Humza’s mouth make me think of that a wee bit.
But what is more absurd: Humza, or taking Humza seriously? Humza only pawn in game of (REDACTED). This is established.
Scottish nationalism does not need the SNP and plainly the SNP does not need Scottish nationalism.
The marks of British state subversion are all over this.
James Che at 5:11 pm.
Ok, let’s say that. Yet here we are. What are you going to do about it, and how does the ‘information’ you post help move things forward? Because if it doesn’t, perhaps you need to find a different tack.
SNP will never get my vote again.
Incidentally, I used to think that Sturgeon’s erm, erm, erm was irritating. Yousaf’s of course, of course, of course, is really starting to grate!
A great discussion over on Barrhead boy regarding free ports, a guest of the show a green councillor from Yorkshire exposes the lies and duplicity behind the fake promises of these free ports , free ports that sturgeon,youseless and Kate forbes eagerly embraced , free ports that have done nothing to benefit areas that have adopted them , free ports that have handed untrammelled power over to private companies where they legislate on planning, house building, and usage of private land, power that supercedes even the local authority , a ponzi scheme run by the WM government to financially benefit their chums YET we have sturgeon , youseless and the current Jean brodie, Kate forbes desperate to sign up and adopt a GREED DRIVEN reprehensible tory ponzi project
Time to drop this ‘Yes movement’. Yes was what the answer to the question on the 2014 ballot was wanted. So far we have no referendum question this time and we do not look likely to get one.
Take the movement away from SNPs YES business. They think they own the rights to the whole movement!
The drive for self governing & Independence out of this union is what we want & need. Plus, I’m sick of rainbow coloured YES logos!
I’ve said it before but the only feasible way I can see to Indi now is if an Indi supporting party is elected or at least holds the balance of power in the South bit of the UK.
Right now the only sliver of possibility is the greens taking a substantial number of English seats (yes I know don’t bother…) which is actually a slim possability as Starmer totaly rubs the actual Left up the wrong way.
Yea so many of you are totally anti green for obvious reasons BUT… priorities.
At a social event last night, completely unsolicited, a guy said: ‘I’ve always voted SNP, but I won’t be voting for them again. And Indy isn’t going to happen.’ The dream is over, for him at least.. SNP definitely losing core supporters to Labour.
@5.17 one liner
FUBAR
60% settled lead for indy and its a breeze; irresistible referendum and done.
Westminster could not resist
Everything else has all the reality of the stories a 14 year old boy with a copy of Hustler imagines.Great ending that cannot happen.
So rather than come up with these easily flogged half baked schemes…
Put together offers that can be supported by all.
It really is back to a long game and needs talent, commitment and nae grifters. Good government for all.
@John Main 4:37pm
You are talking in your indoctrination re deficits etc. If you print your own debt and interest free money without inflation then you can make anything that you need and then you can trade with other countries for things you cannot get here. If every country did this it would be better for all of the people. There is also the FACT that we need to stop making and buying CRAP we do not need for the sake of this planet and the people and all living things on it.
People do not need to slog their guts out for 40 hours a week just to survive – they have been indoctrinated and brainwashed by advertising into wanting all of the crap of the day and to keep replacing things with new or to try and outdo their neighbour’s and friends etc. They could just work a few hours a day to put a roof over their head and feed and heat themselves etc in a debt and interest free system – they could actually have free energy in that system that is hidden from us just now and as I said before running our cars etc on water with no pollution but this scam system has been created to keep us as slaves working hard all hours so that you do not have the time to sit down realize this and how we are just here to be ripped off and robbed by these Mafias that created this scam system. We could all be working together to create things like the people who create the alternative operating systems, software etc do.
By the way Hitlers Germany actually escaped from this scam system and they arrested and jailed the bankers and took over their banks and created a very successful economy based on debt and interest and inflation free money and they managed to successfully trade with other countries for things that they needed – Mussolini started to do the same. Of course the indoctrinated and brainwashed are now going haywire with their cognitive dissonance because they have been fed lies and propaganda ever since WW2 that has been put out to steer them away from the FACT that these countries were taken out – as was Japan – because of their successful debt and interest and inflation free economies because the Mafias that own and control most of this planet did not want the dumb masses in all of the other countries waking up and starting to question why their corrupt governments were not doing the same. The Allies were drowning in debt at the end of the war while Germany and Japan had no debt and Italy only had debt from when they changed over to fighting with the Allies.
Hitler and his party were warning the world what was going on back then – including about the scam banking system – and what they were saying is EXACTLY what is going on today but you have to go and really search for his speeches and videos etc exposing the TRUTH re WW2 etc because they are blocked and shadow-banned on Youtube etc and anything that demonizes and lies about it all is allowed. Until the people start to educate themselves out of their brainwashing then nothing will change and these Mafias will succeed in their plan they are trying to bring in just now such as their replacement for this scam banking system – their digital currency and digital identity social credit system with NO cash where they are going to tell you what you can and cannot buy and if you do not do as you are told or go against the “party” that will be their One World Communist Government that they are deliberately destroying our economies to bring in your social credit account will be switched off.
twathater says:
25 June, 2023 at 6:03 pm
A great discussion over on Barrhead boy regarding free ports…
Agreed. Excellent discussion.
The point that’s a bit of a slow burner is that a Green free port has little to do with being green, free, or a port that handles any freight.
It’s all an umbrella designed to cover the deregulation process which was the real object of Brexit.
The kick in the teeth is Scotland really needs it’s Ports modernised and functional, there’s a gold mine but it’s passing us by. It isn’t going to happen in the Union which ran the Ports down, stole them from the nation, and sold them off for short term profit which Scotland never saw.
The only reason you need a Free Port is to attract trade that is wary of “ordinary” Port costs or regulations, but of course, it’s not just a Port. What did they say? 70% of Edinburgh is within the Free Port jurisdiction?
Why?
If Scotland embraces this ideology, Scotland will be that much further away from EU convergence criteria and steaming away in the opposite direction…
I’m sure I’m going to regret commenting on this but if people are going to make contributions outside of the current political situation, then they should be accurate when they bring a subject up and not continue misleading others whether deliberately or due to constant confirmation bias. Further, a basic respect for others requires accuracy because not everyone who might be misled has the time to waste researching the claims of those who DO have time to waste and DO waste it.
So James Che…you must be fully aware that you are not providing the full quotes from a single opinion of one of nine members of what was then a recently re-established Committee FOR Privileges within the now defunct Standards and Privileges Committee.
The issue before the Privileges Committee related to changes the Labour Party were making to the membership of the House of Lords when they were proposing to remove ALL hereditary peers, eventually allowing ninety or so to remain.
Lord Nicholls is not even addressing the existence of any 1707 Treaty as you imply, he is saying in plain English that for the Committee’s present purposes he doesn’t even need to consider the status of the 1707 Treaty because the applicable section brought up by Lord Gray in 1999 was repealed from both of the 1706 enabling treaties. He is saying that the question of the Treaty before the Committee is a non-question. If anything were to be breached, it would be in the 1706 legislation enabling the Treaty.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199899/ldselect/ldprivi/108i/10806.htm
The background point LN is addressing is whether the Treaty still exists in international law or whether the union of two countries into one superseding polity means that the actual Treaty is now ‘spent’ and is no longer justiciable in a court of law today (1999). Again LN is saying these issues do not affect how he sees the proposed Labour legislation. This is where your conveniently doctored quote originates. The full quote is:
I do not consider it is necessary to decide whether any such treaty, binding in international law, came into being
before the union took place. Nor is it necessary to investigate whether, if there were such a treaty (i.e. one binding in international law, added by PhilM), there still subsists any treaty right or obligation which is currently justiciable, either under international law or domestic law.
LN then goes on to imply that the Committee don’t need to address any notion of breaches of the terms of the Treaty, those found in the 1706 acts, because anything remotely like a breach would be a matter for the House (i.e. the full legislature), not a Committee made up of nine lords.
So once again, anyone at all interested in this kind of thing is potentially going to be misled by a BTL contributor who doesn’t understand very much of any of the historical context and almost nothing of the legal side of these questions.
Some of these types of issues came up at the time of the 2014 referendum and if I can find the article I’ll post it later.
You need to give up your fruitless quest James Che. I have no doubt is she hasn’t already that Sara Salyers will say much the same thing.
James Che: all treaties are international in nature because they are between states. All treaties require to be translated into the domestic law of the partnership states, ergo we had the Acts of Union. The Treaty stands alone and is still extant. Secondary legislation (the Acts) cannot supersede primary legislation (the Treaty). We would require to repeal the Acts, but only after we have repudiated the Treaty. Until that is understood, we will be stuck where we are. Have been saying this for about thirty years or more.
Repudiating the Treaty does not mean that we would be throwing away our assets within the UK; on the contrary, it would afford us a negotiating position in defence of our assets and resources. The Treaty Articles were actually carried into the Acts and became the basis of the British constitution thereafter, and Scotland retained all of her rights under the Treaty. You can argue it how you like, but that Treaty stands today, and the British government has breached it illegally, illegitimately, unlawfully and in ultra vires actions.
Please, folks, do not be fooled into believing that the Treaty either no longer exists or is impregnable. Westminster and Whitehall would want you to believe that, that devolution supersedes the Treaty. It is simply nonsense. Devolution itself is unlawful under the Treaty because England did not devolve at the same time, and acted in an ultra vires fashion, no matter that devolution was sought. The very fact that David Cameron commissioned a putative subsumption Report before the 2014 referendum, in fear that we would invoke the Treaty (by breaking it) and remain in the EU even if England voted for getting out, is evidence of that. The Treaty gives us a unique negotiating and high-ranking chess piece.
Geri: spot on. Do not not vote even if you feel ill at the thought of voting SNP. Spoil your ballot paper with some damning but intelligent remark on why you are doing so. That way, it will have to be counted as a spoiled ballot. These are also seen by the parties. We need to have an alternative independence candidate in every constituency by 2026. I agree that we need Alex Salmond back, under whatever title is deemed suitable, but we need him back and we need his acumen. He knows that we are not where we were, and new tactics and strategies are essential.
A Scot Abroad: nah, most independent countries started off with a rudimentary outline – central bank, currency, constitution, etc. – because detailed plans are virtually impossible until after independence, and all levers of power are in the hands of the country that has taken its independence. No one is claiming that we have a panacea. Panaceas are few and far between, are they not? The 1707 started off with a massive debt – England’s, which Scotland agreed to pay – and the Treaty Articles outlined an agreement that could be expanded upon, but with certain fundamental rights accruing. The Equivalent, payable to Scotland was to ameliorate higher taxation after the Union, to partly-compensate the shareholders in The Company of Scotland (Darien), but, mainly, to off-set the English National Debt repayment. By the way, there are those with ideas and those who put ideas into practice; both are essential.
Mike Fenwick: great stuff. Well done.
We all know how to move things forward. Alba. Simple .short and sweet. Now we need to convince others.
I listened to that Prism show podcast on the free ports. You learn something every day. 70 per cent Edinburgh is a free port now.
They’ve given away our country.
In the name of the wee man. What is it with people moving from the snp to labour, don’t get me wrong I will never vote for the snp but labour from the frying pan to a blast furnace. na Im going the salvo.scot liberation.scot route. political parties and politicians are the scourge of Scotland they are all and I mean all lying self serving you know what’s
Dave says:
25 June, 2023 at 6:45 pm
… a guy said: ‘I’ve always voted SNP, but I won’t be voting for them again. And Indy isn’t going to happen.’ The dream is over, for him at least.
Sorry Dave, but I have less and less time for those lazy wet lettuce types.
I hear them loud and clear giving up on the SNP, that makes sense. But giving up on Independence is just a cop out.
Tell that guy to get his arse over to the SALVO website, do some reading, sign up to Liberation.Scot, and get apprised of both the Scotland United campaign strategy, and SALVO’s plan to seek an ICJ, advisory ruling via the UN, which would actually go a long way towards delivering Independence.
It’s doable, and deliverable, but for the time being, the SNP are being complete Prima Dona arseholes about pretty much everything, and fkg up everything they touch. Their latest wheeze is now to out march AUOB marches… AUOB probably being the last friend they’ve got left in the “real” Independence Movement.
What’s next? An SNP gang of bikers to fight on the beach with the YES bikers?
The SNP are like the fkg Borg, assimilating every good idea they can pinch from somebody else and claim it as theirs.
@Breeks 7:10
Diverging from EU convergence criteria is not the slam dunk argument you believe it to be.
I would ask just why it is you believe the ancient and unique culture, laws and customs of Scotland need to be warped to match the EU. Cos that is what you wish to happen. No way is the EU going to warp to match us. As I wrote, I would ask that, but you won’t answer. You learned “Scotland Independent In Europe” 30 years ago and have no intention of learning anything new.
The more divergent Scotland is from the EU, the happier I will be. If nothing else, it will mean that any future iScitland will have to make a genuine effort to be independent. No way will her tractorous politicians be in a position to betray 3 centuries of Indy dreams by immediately handing us over to Brussels.
If the SNP’s goals is to hold on to some of their Westminster seats for the short money, they would be best advised to keep Yousaf out of the media’s spotlight for as much as possible as he is a one-man disaster zone.
https://archive.is/oW2ou
Whatever you say about Sturgeon, you can’t deny her that she was a communicator. The same can’t be said about Yousaf.
Jeezo, you don’t half read some mince on here.
Edinburgh is 264 square kilometres (102 square miles).
The Freeport area, covering Grangemouth, Rosyth, Leith, Burntisland and Edinburgh Airport is 550 hectares, that’s 5.5 square kilometres.
Collect evidence before going off on one is always a good policy.
It is quite clear now. If you vote SNP now you are either a complete imbecile or you wear Women’s clothing but are not a Woman.
Re spoiled ballots, the last few I have drawn a line through all of the candidates and written None Of The Above under this. This is counted as a protest vote rather than a spoiled ballot.
Linked below is a good summation and informed opinion of the issues James Che constantly addresses to little avail. I read this article again a few months ago and bearing in mind what was quoted above by JC, it appears either the mysterious SNP politician mentioned a few articles back or James Che himself is well aware of the 2014 debate as discussed in this article.
The refrain of ASA about 300-year old guff is also addressed indirectly by the substance of the linked article. It needn’t be the overriding concern of every Indy activist but each one should at least familiarise themselves with it if we are taking the Scottish position on sovereignty absolutely seriously.
https://www.lawscot.org.uk/members/journal/issues/vol-59-issue-07/the-union-and-the-law-revisited/
PhilM
The extract conversation was to do with taxes and taxation,
The conversation in the committee became side tracked as to What was legal to doin Scotland that was not being done in England,
Hence a conversation materealised with regard to how much the treaty of union had been altered by repal,
which articles had to stay as fundamental to a/the treaty if it exists,
I was not included or was a party in this conversation at Westminster ( been as I am not in Westminster Committee, however that is what is on record.
From CM’s twitter…
(Am I living in a parallel universe.)
“Last time in London, an activist told me that Home Office leased hotel from which 76 child asylum seekers simply vanished is owned by Nicholas van Hoogstraten (if young, google him).
I couldn’t stand it up. Unbelievable. But today Guardian linking his name.
https://theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/25/child-migrants-to-be-sent-back-to-hotel-where-136-vanished
.”
Britain = totally run by paedos.
It is amusing to see how many Scots or unionists as they are sometimes referred to, hang on to, and want the treaty of union to be oh so ever true and all above board,
Never questioning, never wanting to investigate, always ready to shut down the reports from records
Alway ready to protect the union, interesting indeed.which one are you?
The decendent’s of the old ones that sold Scotland and are still selling Scotland?
If you close your eyes and ears there is no more for you to learn,… and nobody able to educate such closed minds when they do not wish to learn.
Lorna Campbell.
If you re read what I wrote you will see this was not my conversation on the debate of the treaty of union,
You will see it is a “extract” from a conversation by Lord Nicholl, of Birkenhead,
I am not confused over the issue, but many politicians in Westminster are and have been for many years,
This is why I posted Lord Nicholl’s debate “extract”and will post other conversation debates from Westminster from other politicians debates over the next week or two,
It appears that in Westminster some politicians in Westminster over the years, have had their doubts as to the validity of the treaty of the union,
So rather than posting my opinion on the subject,
I will post theirs.
Rev wrote:
“As far as we’re concerned it’s nothing more than Operation Gravy Bus.(Because anything they COULD do with, say, 25 seats is something they could have done with 56 seats in 2016, with 35 seats in 2017, or with 46 seats now, but haven’t.) Humza Yousaf knows that if he’d said that in the hall yesterday everyone would have muttered and scratched their chins, which is why he worded his speech so evasively.”
Humza Yousaf is a fraud. And the SNP under him are FUD’s, Federalists, Unionists and Devolutionists. If their aim is to work within devolution then we will be given nothing because Westminster will rightly see the SNP, and therefore indy, as a non-threatening busted flush. And that’s when the Unionists will really go to town on Scotland and our resources. Sturgeon & Murrell have to be held accountable for this sorry-arsed state of affairs. They have let Scotland be shat on all over while lining their own pockets.
PhilM
It is not the legislation of the labour party that I was crawing anyones attention to,
So not to be misconstrued for future.
I am referencing conversation held that draw in debates on the way that politicians in Westminster perceive the Status of the treaty of union,
There are many instances of these discussions over the treaty of the union held in Westminster, they inevitably start with Statues, legislation and new laws that are being passed or have been passed,
Throughout these many conversations over the “decades a pattern develops in those varied debates in Westminster of a unsure tenable position with regards the status of wether Scotland and England are in a treaty,
Lord Nicholl presumes we are,
But then he also makes the error that Queen Anne was Queen of Scotland, instead of Queen of Scots,
Wind and fart of no consequence.
The SNP is collapsing electorally. Their next conference will be in a phone box. The SNP have sold out mandate after mandate. They have also in the Scottish Government delivered bad, rotten corrupt governance.
Their time has passed. They are spent. And no one of sane mind can think otherwise.
If you choose to travel only one road to you destination and that road is blocked delibarately,
You have come to a standstill
This is a repeat of the Snp.
If you search for many alternative side roads before you start your way is never blocked,
One road one, one blockage and your at a dead end yet again, that is a SNP policy.
Stoker – you hit the nail on the head!
Yesterday’s “Meeting” just showed us that Yousaf loves being First Minister but has given no thought as to the cause of Independence. Martin Geisler tore him to shreds on “The Sunday Show”.
It’s becoming more obvious by the day that Humza is a puppet and his advisers are winning! Whoever his “Advisers” are (and we all have thoughts on this!) I hope he, and his family, are enjoying living in Bute House, because I doubt if he’ll be living there for much longer.
However, how much they try, Humza’s “advisers” cannot quell the Scottish peoples’ wish for Independence – we don’t need the pathetic SNP, which has turned into a political party I no longer recognise. It is the people of Scotland who will control Scotland’s future!So many SNP MPs no longer listen to the people who voted for them – they seem deaf and blind and too eager to get back to Westminster and join the “Gravy Train”. They may wish they had listened yo us come the next GE!
James Che
I’ve never studied it cause it bores me rigid & I’ve never had the time so kudos to all those who do like yourself & Salvo etc…
Anyhoo, I’ve heard the same, re – it was never enacted & that it was no more than a wish list full of wishful thinking that never came into being as events unfolded as a distraction.
(Slavery, enlightenment, Industrial revolution etc) I think it may have been Tom Devine during an indyref debate where he discussed the Act of Union bite size.
Scots wanted to abolish it completely soon after as it was completely incompatible with Scots law & were about to but along came distractions, baubles, titles & wealth in the shape of world events. The usual shite. But more modern version (since oil discovery – who’d have thunk it!) The fantasy has been rewritten in England’s favour to mean it was written in blood & has to last forever & ever like it was written by Christ the king!
Braveheart may be fiction but that part was completely right! Scots shafting Scotland for English scraps. Exact same shiny shite of Greed & position as what happens today.
Scotland is cursed with idiot *outsiders* in positions in parliament who don’t even fcking recognise Scotland is a Nation & we are NOT subject to English rule & they are not our superior.
It’s not immediately apparent where this confusion is coming from but your confusion is 100%.
Your extract comes from a source that you yourself linked to which has precisely 0% to do with taxes. How you managed to get that impression can only be explained by deliberately dicking people about. Either provide a relevant quote about taxes and a link to back up what you say or stop wasting everybody’s time. Surely you have something better to do with your day?
Anyway, here is the text of the reference and its terms within which the committee’s report was progressed and finalised.
ORDERED TO REPORT
1. That the Committee have met and have considered the reference of the House of 27 July which was in the following terms: “whether the House of Lords Bill (as amended on Report) would, if enacted, breach the provisions of the Treaty of Union between England and Scotland”.
So nothing to do with taxes, nobody was side tracked, and your attendance was neither here nor there. Neither voters nor citizens have any influence over a committee on parliamentary privileges.
So with the actual text in front of us, your explanation of the origin of your extract is truly bizarre. It would be like saying Alex Salmond and Alistair Darling turned up at the Royal Conservatoire on August 5th 2014 to discuss podiums in front of an eager audience but got sidetracked into a debate on Scottish independence.
Was your mysterious SNP politician James Dornan by any chance…it would explain everything…
Yousaf is in the same mould as Sturgeon. Any motivations they may ever have had to see their country independent became subsumed by an ambitious drive to be FM. Their achievement of the highest political office in Scotland obliterated any impersonal ambitions they had for Scotland.
A rung lower down the same phenomenon has occurred with most SNP MSPs and MPs.
There is no room for even one iota of sentiment or pity, no occasion for leniency towards these scoundrels, these locusts in human form. They must be brought down so our movement can thrive again and refocus on the goal.
Geri,
As it happens I co have the time to go through all the old records, Committees, House of lords, and House of commons records,
I am a carer for my spouse so going away from home is not part of my life, when I an hour or two I sieve through all the old records. Which many unionist minded people tell us to ignore, obviously sometimes they do not wish to be reminded of hiccups or errors that may shine a opposing light on their position.
When we study the single road to a dead end that the SNP have taken us since 2014, it is not an error we would wish to repeat,
And yet that is what we are doing,
Throwing all our believe in one political party, even if it is new, if that political party is blocked or Stymied in the future, independence is set back to the beginning again,
I believe that the people have to make a bigger effort than any political party they put their faith into, and there must be more than one road available to us,
Salvo is taking one road and the SSRG, Alba is taking the political party road, marches are good for the moral of the people, but ignored by politicians and Msm especially down south,
But all roads when they have failed circle back to the treaty of union At the end of the day it is what holds us wether real or a hoax,
It is another possible road to independence.
One of the things many Scots do not know is how many of the Articles of the treaty of union have been repealed or altered, leaving most of the treaty of union unrecognisable to most Scots,
Only the basic fundamentals are left,
And they have become Colonised in of themselves by Westminster believing that Scotland parliament was extinguished,
One of the discussions often held with regards the treaty of union is wether it is still extant to the old parliament of England if it was extinguished in 1707,
The same is applied to Scotland,
As neither “parliament now extinct” can now be held liable for a breach or break of the treaty of union legally.
What was promised or ratified by the old parliaments died with those parliaments when they ceased to be.
James Che said;
“LORD NICHOLLS of Birkenhead,
The Treaty of Union was not preceded by a formal Document signed as a Treaty of Union, on behalf of the two Countries,
The Commissioners Articles are not binding on either Country, they are an agreed proposal.
Thus the terms on which the Union took place are to be found exclusively, not in a treaty as that expression is normally understood today, but enabling legislation enacted separately.
Article 22 of the Treaty of union is no longer on the parliament Statue book since the peerage Act 1963,
Section 7 repealed article 22 of the treaty of union in both the Scottish act of union and the English act of union repealed as spent, superseded or obsolete by the Statue Law revision( Scotland) Act 1964.
Article 22 was repealed in England for England by the Statue Law repeals Act 1993,
I do not consider it necessary to decide whether any such treaty, binding in international Law came into being before the union took place, nor is it necessary to investigate whether, if there was such a Treaty.”
Actually, James, the Treaty of Union was preceded by a formal Document signed as the Treaty of Union, on behalf of the two Countries; it was signed by the two sets of commissioners and by Queen Anne as monarch of both kingdoms. It wasn’t yet binding on the two kingdoms, and couldn’t be until both their parliaments ratified it, along with whatever amendments they each made to the Treaty’s terms. The signed document and its ratified equivalent were both referred to as the Treaty of Union, and it is just silly to pretend otherwise.
I see this as just another part of the English establishment’s pretence that the ratification of the Treaty transferred its authority into the ratifying Acts, and where Westminster pretends that the English Act of Union is one of its own Acts when it used to be the Parliament of England, and as such is an Act it can modify exclusively on its own authority. This is false, for two reasons, one is that Treaties gain authority from the ratifying Acts, and not the other way around, and the other is that the UK Parliament is not a mere rebadging of the old English parliament, but is a completely new entity altogether, albeit possessing features in common, and it may only amend earlier Acts of either old parliament where the Treaty itself permits it. The Treaty gives power, but it doesn’t do so indiscriminately, it also sets limits and obligations on the new Parliament’s powers.
Article 22 of the Treaty covered several matters, including the numbers of MPs and lords to sit in the new GB Parliament; so what parts of Art.22 were repealed? And where did the Union Parliament get the authority to unilaterally amend a Treaty it was never a Principal of?
Beavais:
I totally agree with you! They have forgotten their country and their voters.
However, the people of Scotland are watching them and realise what they are up to. They have treated us as “stupid”! Wait until the next GE – who will want to employ ex-SNP MPs and MSPs who didn’t support the voters of Scotland?! How are they going to word their CV’s?! They’ll all wish they had listened!
Leaving aside the SNP’s position or lack of on independence, what else do they have to offer?
The want us to vote SNP at the next UK election. We know that they won’t offer any way to get independence but what do they have to offer to fight for Scotland’s interests at Westminster regardless of whether the Tories or Labour win the next election?
Scottish MP’s have limited influence in Westminster but they can at least use Westminster procedures to get publicity both for independence and Scotland’s interests as seen by Alex Salmond in the 1988 budget and recently with SNP MP’s walking out.
If the SNP MP’s were going down there with fire in the bellies to fight Scotland’s corner by settling up rather than settling in, there could be a justification to vote for them.
However, that won’t happen because the SNP is mediocre in talent and mediocre in what they have to offer as a vision of how they will both govern in Scotland and how to make best their limited influence in Westminster.
They simply have nothing to offer, both with independence and on policies outside it.
David Hannah says: They’ve given away our country.
Yup…Freeports…15 min Cities…Privatising council jobs…Selling our assets cheap…constantly surveyed by the state! Scotland gets more and more CCTV per head.
‘Niall McCluskey, one of Scotland’s leading human rights lawyer, said councils needed to be transparent about why they were increasing the number of CCTV cameras at such a rate’. Makes you think.
The ‘reconstruction/revisionism of society, aided and abetted by our government, to the detriment of women and children, divides society unequivocally. A construct created to keep us fighting amongst ourselves and distracted.
They’ve not just given away Scotland…they’re selling us with it!
James Che
The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.
I don’t understand the convoluted tongue-twists of legal speak, and I’m still not entirely clear on how the Treaty of Union works – or if it ever really did and wasn’t just a con-trick.
But I like reading your posts on Scotland’s constitutional history and I’ve learned a lot from you already. So, I am quite happy for you to keep posting your views.
By the way, that first line of my comment is a figure called prolepsis, and it’s probably the first memorable line Shakespeare wrote. But I’ll talk about prolepsis another time.
I just thought it would be fun, for me at least, to start my comment with that line considering the subject matter.
Aye witchy. I agree. You learn so much off that Prism show. I listened to the interview with Palestinian activist.
Aparently Glasgow City Council has installed some Israeli military surveillance system which made their own soliders quit.
Why?
An accurate assessment of the situation Rev.
There are none so blind as those SNP faithful who will not see.
The SNP… Truly the Zombie party – it’s dead, but just doesn’t know it.
SNP paranoia. They installed some military industrial surveillance system to spy on Glaswegians going about their shopping.
The rat infested, vandalised streets of Glasgow City centre. With homeless people on every corner. In boarded up shop windows they’ve made beds to sleep on.
It’s horrible what’s happened to Scotland since Nicola Sturgeon took office.
I agree James…
As my Mam would say, everyone brings something the table, it all helps in the end. Unionists love it too as they’re quick to quote the bits they like so it does need much needed research & education.
I’ve said before on here that the YES movement needs to stop hitching it’s wagon to a political party because our Independence shouldn’t be reliant on the good fortunes, or lack of, of a politician & their party remaining favourable or hinged on something stupid like an idiot policy. We need to go back to basics like the convention that Sturgeon should never have disbanded.
Everyone working together & bringing all different talents & expertise.
Scotland can hold an indyref or we wouldn’t have had them before, the last convention wouldn’t have delivered devolution & Dewar wouldn’t have mentioned it in the Scotland Bill to Salmond, lest we forget the Smith Commission recommendations.
It’s pure fantasy that the SNP seem content on helping to rewrite.
I can’t even bring myself to listen to Dumbza but I take it from the silence of those who have the supreme court decision didn’t get a mention? Or was it punted yet again by Dumbza that it’s now gospel truth & the law?
If the Rutherglen by-election occurs I hope indy supporters will take the opportunity to show their disgust for Yousaf and his brand of unionism by refusing to vote for the SNP. Losing their deposit would send a powerful signal.
Beauvais…
That’s exactly why Sillars fell out with the SNP.
He said agreeing to devolution, after coming this far with the old convention, would kill Independence stone dead as it would create exactly the situation we find ourselves in now.
Greed, position & stalemate.
Everyone tried to dismiss him as nuts but alas, it has came to pass. Including Sturgeon being a total arse & waste of everyone’s time.
David Hannah
Wasn’t there something about removing Palestinian flags from football games too?
Some new law from Police Scotland?
They also stopped Palestinians meeting in Glasgow under the bullshit guise of ‘Safety’
Yvonne Ridley is spot on when she wrote about Israel interference in indy – same reason they took Corbyn out. The break up of the UK ends thier bullshit on the security council where everyone turns a blind eye to thier atrocities. They also went after Neale Hanvey & Denise Findlay to get them deselected.
Not to mention SNP jaunts out there dressed up like eejits & that other halfwit Stewart McDonald cutting about WM joining every Israeli lobbyist.
It’s all ADAF
BEGIN TRANSMISSION…
You’re comfortably ‘sleeping’ in your stasis pod when the ship you’re travelling on detects a distress signal originating from a nearby planet and decides to awaken you prematurely.
Your ship’s AI is programmed to alert the crew in such situations and it dutifully does so.
But the signal detected turns out not to be a distress call; it’s a warning instead.
Your ship’s name is the Nostromo and your name is Ripley.
You’ve been woken up and you now have to confront a deadly alien that has invaded your ship.
And just like in space – when you’re sitting alone reading some of the comments on WoS – no-one can hear you scream.
Well, unless your spouse is sitting in the next room – but you get my point.
This is a warning signal.
A warning signal alerting the unsuspecting to the dangers of another type of deadly alien – deadly to the Scottish independence movement at least – that has invaded your ‘ship’
Signal message reads:
…END TRANSMISSION
The reason for more CCTV will be to monitor Scotland when the English Tories go full fascist which won’t be long now with the start of the new UK wide Police & crime bill. First to go will be unapproved meetings & gatherings like AUOB.
@Geri
Over the last couple of years I got into the habit of putting faces to names and looking up who they were and who they were married to etc. When looking up people within the Labour party who were pushing the trans agenda something which kept coming up was membership of LFOI and/or Stonewall.
Sigh, yet another great big fat, juicy nothing burger from Bonnie Dundee – anyone surprised? This one’s a whopper.
“The only way to influence them (SNP) is not to vote for them” [Henry Hooper]
That’s the most sensible bit of tactical advice I have heard all weekend. However, not quite complete – I would argue taking it one crucial step further:
The only way to influence the SNP is to vote Alba (until the penny drops).
Staying at home will just won’t cut it – it will be ignored, but voting for Alba will certainly be counted (regardless of whether or not any breakthrough is achieved).
Xaracen.
Queen Anne was not Queen of the kingdom of Scotland, she was Queen of the Scots so long as they decided she was,
The territory of Scotland is not part of the treaty of the union,
That was a presumption of England, and is one of those hiccup/errors that Westminster overlooked that Union minded people wish to ignore,
You need to catch up on Sara Salyers and Salvo,
Anton.
Sound advice.
I’ve tried it myself a few times & isn’t it amazing how many of the SNP & Tory no marks came from absolutely nowhere? Lol!
Like they just arrived one day in 2015.
Not even Wiki can make shit up to rate them past one paragraph entry if at all..hmm…
“But it’s unmistakeably clear after yesterday than not only can the SNP not deliver independence, they can be no part of it at all.”
Some of us have been saying exactly that for quite a long time right here on Wings.
Where does this leave the likes of Cherry and Regan?
Galloway Lass
Dave Doogan MP was handed his arse at AUOB on Saturday.
This SNP rubbish of ‘we cannie dae anything, I want it as much as you’ isn’t going to cut it anymore. If they cannie do anything then there is absolutely no point in voting for them. As Wings has said above, what will yet another mandate to the SNP deliver us that all the others didn’t? Absolutely hee-haw that’s what.
They’ve made absolutely no effort in WM & haven’t even bothered thier arse signing Neale’s self determination bill.
Totally useless.
@Geri
Wouldn’t surprise me if they’re being cloned in a bunker in Switzerland.
Xaracen,
I will repeat what was said to PhilM and Lorna Campbell,
The quote extract I put forward was the position that was debated by Lord Nicholl, it was not to co with the original debate but shifted into the debate.
My emphasis is on the actual self doubt that many politicians in Westminster have and had in the last decades of the status of the treaty of the union between Scotland and England,
Here is why I posted a extract from one of those politicians whom was not quite sure himself, and went on to presume the rest of what he could not confirm, as many Westminster co.
I have re read your post xaracen, tomorrow I will try provide where to look for the articles of the Treaty of union that have been repealed,
It is a labouious task doing everything the old fashioned way as I do, having not learnt or been taught computers,
If iI knew what to do to copy and paste, I problably get it to you now, but not to be deterred I will provide the repeal information for you tomorrow sometime I promise.
Meanwhile it was said by Lord Nicholl in his debate, from memory. He said,
Article 22 of the treaty of the union is no longer on the parliament Statue books since 1963, when Section 7 repealed Article 22 of the treaty of the union in both the Scottish Act of Union and ithe English Act of union repealed as obsolete, spent or superceded by the Statue law revision( Scotland) Act 1964.
Article 22 was repealed in England by the Statue law (repeals) Act 1993,
Keep posting anything you find out Xaracen before I do, as many of these things go under the radar as to what we actually do know in the jumble repeals, legislation and Statues.
North code,
Prolepses??
You say you co not understand convoluted tongue- twists of legal speak,
Maybe not, maybe so.
But I can assure you you lose me when it come to understanding english and all it involves.
My education was spent being cane’d and strapped for all sorts of assorted reasons that the teacher could think of.
1 teacher in a corragated one roomed tin School in the middle of the forest, not much option Im afraid,
My father taught me to count with box of nails from his shed,
They would not get away with it nowadays I hope,
So I played truant and used to lock myself away in the toilet with a dictionary, while other members of the family knocked on the door,
Therefore I learned how to copy and memorise from a dictionary, but string a sentence together with dyslexia, no way,
It fascinates me to this day what my education prevented me from learning, there is so much I don’t know,
But then again there is a multitude of things that I have learned the hard way that not many other would ever gain qualifications in,
You soon learn how to read people, and how to read between the lines of someone posing as honest compared to real honesty.
You learn when some one is putting on a false front to the world, yet are depressed or very unhappy,
And you quickly learn who is playing independence supporter, and who is here wind people up,
Like my spouse and I said the other day we enjoy reading your posts, you are a great addition to Wings over Scotland, and I am still capable of learning new things from you, Stu, and Alf Baird, Breeks Lorna Campbell, Geri and everyone else here,
Keep posting.
Prolepsis?
While I won’t lament the collapse of the careerist troughers, chancers and pension grifters that comprise the modern SNP, we need to start building for the aftermath. Once the dust settles and the Unionists are all gloated out, the stark reality of the status quo and its failures will again be laid bare and we must capitalise on it.
If Starmer wins and becomes PM (and I remain far from convinced he will get an overall majority, when push comes to shove) it will only represent a temporary respite from the natural order of things, before the Tories inevitably regroup and return to power for their obligatory 65-70% monopoly on power. At best, Labour will only win a second or third term by being Tory-lite and Scotland’s interests will most definitely NOT be served by either party.
Yes, the SNP capitulation makes our situation look grim, but never, ever forget the reality that sticking with the status quo entails. Independence will never go away, for this reason alone. Only the people can decide whether we take that final step afterwards.
A headline from the New York Times:
As Legal Fees Mount, Trump Steers Donations Into PAC That Has Covered Them
A previously unnoticed change in Donald Trump’s online fund-raising appeals allows him to divert a sizable chunk of his 2024 contributions to a group that has spent millions to cover his legal fees.
Now, where could he have got this idea?
Geri,
I totally agree with you regards not hitching the independence to only one post, it will lead to ultimate failure.
Alba have there part to play as a political party,
Salvo and SSRG have a excellent Start,
And the marches are good for keeping the moral up of the people,
No one should be thinking that they are the only solution, or their ideas must not include new avenues,
It will be a team effort from all, while being conscious not to fall victim of being under one political party,
As we have experienced, political parties under one hood can be infiltrated similar to the Snp and actually prevent independence, or knock it back in years,
We the people must learn from past mistakes, we must not rely on only one route,
I have had a awful abusive education, but if I can still learn, then many more of us can,
Half the time in the past, we have had no idea what had happened in a legal context to Scots in Scotland,
Half of us do not know what remains of the treaty,
The other half are not sure of where we politically stand today,
The only thing most Scots are aware of is the situation in Scotland is not improving as the years go by,
I want a better education system for all the Scots that will come along after I have gone, I want a better heath NHS for all people in Scotland , a better independent Scottish currency, and I want Scots to live in a good economically green land without “extremist climate change ideology” breaking the countries back, and limiting people to 15 min cities prisons.
I want to chuck the woke trans culture as far as I can into the sea, so our children and grandchildren are safe.
I want so much for the people of Scotland and none of that will come if we sit around on our behinds planning what Scotland could be,
Independence will bring the changes we need to build a new country, Not the other way around.
Worth mentioning potential upside of such a strategy since it provides excellent leverage to Scotland United.
ie Any ongoing failure to kiss and make up in public allows* genuine indy minded candidates to stand in every constituency whose SNP majority is less than 5000 – with zero negative impact (although due consideration to the reputation of the sitting MP is encouraged regardless).
*obliges? 🙂
The Gravy Bus Party (NuSNP) aren’t interested in indy it all about returning as many as possible SNP MPs back to Westminster, come the next GE.
For us/indy to move forward we must remove the major stumbling block that’s in Scotland’s way, and that’s the current SNP. Get them out at the next GE.
Vote Alba, Join Alba.
Mac says:
25 June, 2023 at 8:36 pm
From CM’s twitter…
(Am I living in a parallel universe.)
“Last time in London, an activist told me that Home Office leased hotel from which 76 child asylum seekers simply vanished is owned by Nicholas van Hoogstraten (if young, google him).
I couldn’t stand it up. Unbelievable. But today Guardian linking his name.
https://theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/25/child-migrants-to-be-sent-back-to-hotel-where-136-vanished
.”
Britain = totally run by paedos.
Mac, while your last sentence may well be true, remember that the Home Office is gleefully bringing ashore as many bearded, wrinkled “children” as it possibly can.
Of course many quickly disappear into the black economy / organised crime when they get here. That’s the whole point of the scam the British government, and its partners in people trafficking, are running on us.
PS – Colonel Gaddafi used to warn Europe that his regime was the only thing holding back the demographic absorption of Europe into Africa. That’s why the West murdered him and ruined his country. That’s why the EU is itching to further punish Poland and Hungary, for the sin of trying to run their respective countries for the benefit of their own people.
“60% settled lead for indy and its a breeze; irresistible referendum and done.
Westminster could not resist”
Yeah they could.
James Che, I’ve identified the main difference the repeal of Article 22 made; Among a couple of other things, A.22 specified the number of Scottish lords to be elected to the House of Lords at Westminster to be 16, and its repeal was allow any and all Scottish lords to turn up at the HoL without election.
You also said;
“Xaracen.
Queen Anne was not Queen of the kingdom of Scotland, she was Queen of the Scots so long as they decided she was,
The territory of Scotland is not part of the treaty of the union,
That was a presumption of England, and is one of those hiccup/errors that Westminster overlooked that Union minded people wish to ignore,
You need to catch up on Sara Salyers and Salvo,”
I know Queen Anne was Queen of Scots, and it was in that capacity that she signed the Treaty of Union on Scotland’s behalf, prior to its ratification, something she also did separately on behalf of England. She wore two separate crowns, and signed separately for each of them. I don’t have an issue with that.
I also know that the territory of Scotland did not feature in the Treaty of Union, and that the Union of the Crowns in 1603 did not provide the English Crown any authority over the territory of Scotland, either.
That Westminster’s English establishment conflated the English Crown’s privileges with the Scottish Crown’s in order to give their ‘Crown in Parliament’ unwarranted authority to help itself to Scotland’s territorial resources, especially to Scotland’s oil, was not an error of ignorance, but a simple grubby matter of greed and arrogance. Essentially a pseudo-legalised theft.
Westminster’s English establishment does that kind of thing a lot, and our worthless MPs never take them to task for any of it.
I am well caught up with Sara and Salvo.
James Che @26th June 1:02am
Aye, James, you and I share some similar childhood experiences no doubt about that.
I hope you don’t think I was having a dig at you, because nothing could be further from the truth.
Of course, if I wanted to, I could fathom the language of law. It would be more accurate for me to say that the way the law is expressed in words is a barrier for me. I’m unwilling to venture into that labyrinth.
I understand completely why the language of law, by necessity, is formulated and expressed as it is.
We humans, lacking the ability to communicate concepts, thoughts, and ideas directly from one mind to another, rely on the spoken and written words of language to do that job for us.
The problem is that as clever as the symbols of language are, they often fall woefully short of expressing with clarity the true meaning of our thoughts and ideas.
And because of that, misunderstanding and confusion abound in our world.
Legal-speak is, I suppose, an attempt at clearly expressing the desires, intentions and objectives that might be shared, or not, between people.
That’s a tough gig, and I take my hat off to those brave souls who are willing to face up to such challenge – I’m just not one of them.
And for that reason I rely on folk like you. Folk who are willing, and sharp enough, to wade through the texts of the law in an attempt to extrapolate and interpret the meaning that is woven through their words.
You provide a valuable service, James. It’s obvious to me that your interpretations are derived from the great effort you put into researching and analysing the constitutional laws that supposedly bind the nations of Scotland and England in some kind of union.
Of course others on here might interpret those laws differently, but to my limited knowledge that’s what the law seems to be all about – interpretation of the words used to express ideas and intentions.
And, as in any democracy, the meaning and spirit of the law is agreed by the majority who support a particular interpretation of the text.
I also read the posts of others you mention on here, and it’s evident that they, too, have sharp minds and an understanding of these legal matters that goes way beyond mine.
It’s thanks to your efforts that I now have a far, far greater understanding of the legal relationship between Scotland and England.
I for one support your interpretation of the law regarding the Treaty of Union. It seems to fit with the true nature of Scotland’s ‘partner’ in the union.
I’m glad you and your spouse enjoy my posts, and I appreciate you saying so.
You keep on posting, too. 🙂
Prolepsis
Regarding prolepsis. Prolepsis is a rhetorical figure whereby pronouns are switched about to create a more poetic kind of prose.
Pronouns are simple things. Most of us, I expect, were taught to use a noun and afterwards, when you want to refer to it, you can use a pronoun, like “it.”
A pronoun refers to the noun that appeared earlier in the sentence, or appeared earlier in the paragraph.
About pronouns they were sometimes wrong, the old teachers; because you can use a pronoun before saying what it refers to.
It’s perfectly natural, prolepsis. We use it all the time when speaking, we just don’t usually write it down.
It’s as if the rules we were taught as children reach out from deep in our minds and stop us writing, or typing.
It takes a bit of effort to unlearn the rules. When we do, the effect can be remarkable.
After all:
That’s one of the most famous first lines in twentieth-century poetry. You just need to see what it would look like without the prolepsis to know why: Your mum and dad, they fuck you up.
Or, You’re fucked up by your mum and dad.
Nope, those alternatives just don’t work.
But with the help of prolepsis you can turn something you might confide to a pal over a mug of mead in the pub into a famous line from a famous poem.
The enigmatic prolepsis always gives you a good line, especially a first one.
So, prolepsis. Now you know.
Well,
This is the fag-end of a thread, so there’s no hope of it being read, possibly good for all concerned but I was way too scunnert to do anything before now.
I paid my tenner, I got the train… and I was more engaged by the small unionist protest outside thank I was with anything in the hall (which, by my calculation) had about 1,100 there at best – and I had a long time to count bodies!).
Pete Wishart may have been “reinvigorated” by it all (as a comment that probably speaks for itself) and I’m not sure such vigour even lasted much into the night with him as the supposed plan became undone faster than a street-walker’s bra.
Highlights? There were a few…. but it’s unlikely to have made the papers or the loyalists blogs/twitters etc.
The guy who’s shouted at Jamie Hepburn to do-one as it was supposed to be a members input session. Lesley Riddoch, who as you all know I like, getting to say the SNP need to address the elephant in the room and accept its obligation to work with other parties for Indy whether they like them or not (before having to leave immediately because the SNP can’t even organise a conference discussion anymore). Gordon what’s-his-face from Business for Scotland who stated much the same (albeit that many will have been distracted by his community engagement pitch before). Humza, yes Humza, but only because he bottled it by not walking up the middle of the aisles towards the TV cameras after his speech (as is always done) and just running along the from row of family and friends instead. And all the attendees who instantly saw through his trite offerings and refused to give the glorious leader his standing ovation (and there were a few – which may explain his lack of confidence at the walkabout set-piece.’
I’m still an SNP member, and I’m still going to stay a member. We need people inside to try and rescue the party from itself more than ever. The delight of our system is that I can say with confidence is that I’m just not sure they’re going to be getting my vote at the moment, and they’ll never know.
Today the front page of the National newspaper carries a picture of the First Minister and the headline “Win and we will start preparing to get out of the union”.
Humza Yousaf knows that this is nonsense because it is impossible – the powers that be at Westminster will not allow us to ‘get out of the union’. He knows it is nonsense, we know he knows that it is nonsense, he knows that we know he knows it is nonsense, but he also knows that he has to keep up this pretence in order to keep up the morale of the troops and secure the jobs of himself and his colleagues for another term in Parliament.
James Che: it is essential to have the Treaty ‘sound’ in law in order to build a case for its breaching. If there is no Treaty, there can be no UK because the Treaty specifically created the foundations of the UK state. That Acts did not because they could not, being secondary legislation. How does that make me a Unionist? I have no desire to preserve the Treaty, quite the opposite, but anyone who believes that Westminster and Whitehall do not believe that the Treaty of Union is still in existence, is deluded. Westminster and Whitehall know it is still in existence or the subsumption theory would have been totally unnecessary. Read Professors Walker and Campbell to see a legally and constitutionally faultless dismembering of Professors’ Crawford and Boyle Report, commissioned by David Cameron before 2014. The repudiation of the Treaty could have been done years ago, but wasn’t.
Professors Walker and Campbell argue very comprehensively for the continued existence of the Treaty and that Scotland was an equal partner which has been abused by Westminster and Whitehall at every turn. They were refuting Crawford and Boyle’s subsumption theory by bringing, in my opinion and arrived at separately, from both the legal and political ends, incontrovertible evidence that the Treaty was, a) a treaty; b) an international treaty; and, c) a partnership, with Scotland retaining most of her ancient rights. That, however, is not my argument. My argument is that Scotland was and should be now, an equal partner, with an equal voice, had the Treaty worked as it was intended to work, but, essentially, England has behaved with such disdain and arrogance, breaching the Treaty Articles with impunity because successive Scottish governments have been acquiescent and compliant. They have cheated us and lied to us for over 300 years. Yes, some Articles have fallen into desuetude because they are outmoded, but the body of the Treaty remains intact.
The EU, on which I agree with John Main to a great extent, is no longer, I think, compatible with an independent Scotland because it is morphing into a super-state rather than a supra-organization. However, the UK has withdrawn from the Treaties (most of them, albeit some EU legislation, mainly social and some legal, may be worth keeping). If the UK can withdraw from a Treaty, so can we. The age of the Treaty makes no difference. The EU is morphing into a super-state (more apparent now that we are out of it) but the UK did not have to go along with that. Neither do we have to go along with a UK state that is morphing into a colonial overlord by refusing us a voice on our own future. That is the point. If we repudiate the Treaty, the UK is no more. Will they invade us to keep us supine? Well, they might. Or they might not. What it would do is shock them to the soles of their boots – and legally and constitutionally. The ballot box can come later in a ratifying referendum or an election. If we lost that? I do not believe we would.
@A Scot Abroad says:
“It’s almost the same question, but stands a better chance of getting >50%, because some unionists think that the time has come to settle the issue once more. Constantly arguing the matter, but never settling it, isn’t good for anyone”.
Didn’t that happen in 2014? How many settling , “once more”, does the SNP need? Scotland seems only to have needed the once.