The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

The challenger responds

Posted on October 08, 2018 by

We felt sure that our awarding of the inaugural Thickest Politician In Scotland title this morning would be taken as the throwing down of a gauntlet, and we weren’t wrong. Because within just hours, the Prince Regent had staked his claim to the crown.

Greene – who was rejected by the voters of Cunninghame North by almost 9,000 votes but sits in Parliament anyway – is in fact supposed to serve the people of the West Scotland region as a list MSP, not the whole country, and we’re not aware of any breakdown of how Scotland’s eight list regions voted in 2014 so we have no idea how many voted No in WS. But that’s by far the least idiotic part of the tweet.

Because of course, the point of Nicola Sturgeon’s tweet was that the people she represents as First Minister aren’t getting the thing they voted for. Scotland is being dragged out of the EU against its will and it’s her job to speak for its people.

Greene points out that a smaller majority of Scots voted to stay in the UK than for the EU. But of course, Scotland is still in the UK and there is currently no process under way to change that. It’s not being forced out against its wishes, and we’re pretty sure that Jamie Greene would be screaming from the rooftops if it was.

The comparison, then, is as idiotically witless as his inability to understand even the most elementary principle of his job. Ladies and gentlemen, we have a new champion.

Print Friendly

    1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. 08 10 18 22:56

      The challenger responds | speymouth

    342 to “The challenger responds”

    1. Wee Jock poo-pong mcplop says:

      For the moment.

    2. Jason Smoothpiece says:

      The Tories and Labour of course have an issue with the quality of their politicians.

      I dont support either to be honest, as I am fairly sane, putting politics aside for a moment though how many of them would you employ?

      Could you trust any of them to put the rubbish out?

      Luckily for Labour and Tories in Scotland there is still a lot of folk who are not fully informed.

    3. Dan Huil says:

      Britnats like Greene only serve themselves. Tractors.

    4. Bobajock says:

      On the ladder there can be no lower rung than Tory. But Labour are chasing them down.

      Or perhaps it’s the bottom of a barrel that they’re scraping.

    5. Bruce L says:

      Twat! Did you see that?! THAT… was a goal!

    6. Gfaetheblock says:

      As a Tory list MSP, is is right that he represents Tory voters, who are mostly all No voters I think we can agree? I doubt many SNP voters are going to him for help.

      As FM, Sturgeon is supposed to represent that whole country.

      The distinction is quite clear. He might be a Tory numpty, but his logic is quite clear.

    7. jfngw says:

      I keep on seeing comments to avoid the zoomers on twitter, little did I realise that some of the worst are actually MSP’s. Politics certainly seems to attract a fair share of those that Theresa May would presumably describe as low skilled, where else would you attract such a high salary for such low abilities.

      Being on the Labour/Tory list is as close as you can get to having a job for life despite never being able to win a vote.

      Something needs done about the list system.

    8. Thepnr says:

      Next dimwit please!

      I hope it’s my personal favourite. Ross(I Love BoJo x)Thomson.

    9. Bob Mack says:


      By your logic he only represents Tories in his constituency?

      Try reading about democracy. Usually a member has to represent all their constituents. Too much to ask?

    10. Robert Sinclair says:

      I’ll give short odds on Ross Thomson coming along soon and saying ‘hold my pint.

    11. Capella says:

      Like his colleagues in Labour, he completely misses the point of democracy. How is it possible?
      We are still in the UK unfortunately. But another opportunity to vote will certainly change that.

    12. Welsh Sion says:

      Apologies for being O/T soon, but I hope that colleagues who were at Conference today enjoyed the speech by one of my political leaders, the newly-elected Adam Price, AM, Leader of Plaid Cymru.

      This is how it’s being reported. (Translation mine):


      Plaid Cymru’s new leader says that his party in Westminster will be willing to support SNP MPs as they call for a second referendum on Brexit.

      Adam Price addressed the SNP conference in Glasgow today (Monday, October 8).

      He says that the future that will comes in the wake of Brexit will now look like “spam and potato skin paste”, rather than “the country of milk and honey” which was promised by some.

      He also accuses the “British organization” of “spinning lies”, just as they did during the War in Iraq and the months leading up to the Brexit Referendum.

      “We have the key”

      “The old Britain is dying,” said Adam Price. “Let her die.”

      “Our plan is not to divide the island, but to re-make it a home of three free nations, not a palace owned by one.

      “We have history in our hands. The future ahead of us and we have the key.”


    13. Frank Gillougley says:

      He’s got a good set of gnashers though AND a boyband gelled quiff, however, if you look closely into eyes, there’s nothing behind them … a complete vacuum, come to think of it.

      From the Guardian link below I noticed an interesting take regarding the value of the ‘union’ pitted against the value of ‘brexit’: the quote is from the section at 17.09

      ‘It would appear that English voting tories would accept the dismantling of the union as a price worth paying for Brexit.

      Clear majorities of English Conservatives would support Scottish independence or the collapse of the NI peace process as the price of Brexit

      87% of (overwhelmingly unionist) leave voters in Northern Ireland see the collapse of the peace process as an acceptable price for Brexit …

      Nearly half (49%) of English Conservative voters do not think Scottish MPs should sit in the UK cabinet and, in worse news for David Mundell [the Scottish secretary] as the SNP gathers in Glasgow, 24% of Scottish Conservative voters agree with them’

      Support from unexpected quarters!

    14. Big Jock says:

      Just need James Kelly MSP and you will have your treble.

    15. ian murray says:

      Is there a prize for winning the award ?
      There must be.
      Can’t wait for entries from Jackson Carlaw or The Queens eleven.
      It is a shame creating a league table wasn’t possible, I mean you would spend forever adding up the stupidity points

    16. Macart says:

      Oh Jings! 😀

    17. John Moss says:

      Fab, Jamie Green is the new “Richard”. How fabulous!

    18. Iain says:

      Tomorrow is another day …

    19. Petra says:

      Nicola Sturgeon being interviewed on Scotland Tonight – STV 10.30pm. Plus a panel discussing the SNP Conference.

    20. Hamish100 says:

      Jamie Green and his local tory councillor pal have been entertained by the Israeli Embassy. Who does they represent? Not us. Right wing brexiters all.

    21. Dr Jim says:

      Scottish people aren’t British so don’t count as people

      That’s what Jamie Green’s Tweet says, and it’s the reflection of what the Brits think, England is Britain and the UK, Scotland Wales and NI are other places

      We don’t count, we’re in their way, we’re a nuisance, if only they could breed us out quicker but keep kicking the can further down the road and we’ll manage it eventually, say the Brits

      Unfortunately like vampires the Brits always have ready Scottish familiars to watch over their coffins at night in the hope of one day being given the blessing of full vampirism in the shape of a wee red ermine trimmed coat and a funny hat

      There’s a remedy for vampires, stake through the heart, garlic, fresh running water, crucifix to keep them at bay, fire, vampires have so many weaknesses, the Brits have the biggest weakness though, ARROGANCE, and that’s how we kill them

      Personally I’d rather do it the old fashioned way but we’re not allowed to do that any more

      Still, when no ones looking

      My sense of humour he he, or is it, he he

    22. galamcennalath says:

      Dangerous things, percentages!

      Who serves the 57.6% of UK voters in the 2017 GE who voted against Theresa May as PM and against a Tory government being formed?

      At Westminster NO ONE speaks for the majority. And the minority walk away with the prize.

      Last time a PM and party won an actual majority was Stanley Baldwin in 1931.

    23. Robert Peffers says:

      @Capella says: 8 October, 2018 at 9:30 pm:

      ” … Like his colleagues in Labour, he completely misses the point of democracy. How is it possible?”

      Well, at least for the time being, I’m pleased to see these people elected as that is far better than really clever opposition people elected to oppose the SG.

    24. Sinky says:

      O/T Another shocking coverage of conference by main evening BBC National TV.

      Attacked SNP on P1 assessments but failed to mention salient fact mentioned by John Swinney in his speech that many local authorities already do such assessments and Tories had it in their last SP manifesto.

      Like the Daily Mail/Express BBC fail to put issue in context.

    25. Ken500 says:

      He is supposed to support all voters in his list area or whatever. If he even knows where it is located. Looks like he could not even opererate a satNav. Really doing nothing at all. Just sitting in a seat and hanging around pocketing £60,000 plus expenses. (£100,000) Living the high live on Scottish taxpayers money. Sitting around sending abnoxious, nonsense twitter messages that make no sense at all. After being hauled in off the streets. Pathetic retoric.

      He supports sanctioning, starving and killing vulnerable people. Making people homeless on the streets. In desperation. An appalling attitude. How can people vote for that? Just another rotten apple. Rotten to the Party core.

    26. Collie says:

      The 13 Scottish Tory MPs are more concerned with what happens in England.

      They would quite happily vote against a policy put forward by the SNP, even if they knew this would improve the lives of their fellow Scots.

      Toxic Tories right enough.

    27. HandandShrimp says:

      Jamie is a list MP so he doesn’t technically have a constituency as such, unless you count the Largs and Millport wee paper which appears to be a home from home for him.

      A young conservative with a nicely ironed shirt, a Barbour jacket and little or nothing of any depth to say.

    28. Andy McAngry says:

      Jamie Green and Annie Wells, 2 sides of the same coin.
      If you ever listen to real yoons discuss Scotland, Independence or Brexit you can see why these 2 and others, represent them perfectly!!!
      Give me strength!!!

    29. Jock McDonnell says:

      @Welsh Sion

      I remember Adam Price before he went to Harvard.
      I thought it was a loss when he went to the US.
      Glad he is back, time Wales caused some trouble for Westminster.

    30. Jock McDonnell says:

      @ Sinky – aye, its was just bitchy, anything for an snpbad

    31. galamcennalath says:

      Collie says:

      The 13 Scottish Tory MPs are more concerned with what happens in England.

      It is their spiritual home, after all 😉

    32. How the feck did we end up with these numpties pocketing £1200 a week for nothing?
      An old one: give them a blank sheet of A4 paper with ‘Please Turn Over’ written in the bottom right hand corner on each side.
      That should keep them busy for days.
      Seriously I’ve recruited many in my time, but none of this lot would get by ‘Good Morning’ at a selection interview.
      There are literally 4 dozen at least who are sheer talentless dross.
      I mean, what could they do for a living if they hadn’t been handed the Golden list Ticket?
      Check out their ‘CV’s’.
      Most of them haven’t done an honest day’s work in their lives.
      They have been on the ‘politics’ gravy train since the mid wife skelped their arse and they started howling.
      My money is on Professor Two Jobs WATP Adam Tomkins, whom we sent packing in our constituency, but who got on the Hallelujah Trail by the Jobs For The Boys back door, popping up next to give us his ‘It’s The Law’ whinge,and explain why we are, and always will be, a conquered militarily occupied country, and will remain an enslaved colony of England under permanent House Arrest when England ‘takes back control’ next April.
      It’s going to get very nasty very soon now.

    33. Ken500 says:

      Great to see @ Derek Bateman on twitter.. He must be getting even better. All bestie wishes all around.

      ‘Love is all around, everywhere you go’ Thanks to all the excellent staff and the great family too.

      ‘Every move you make, every step you take we are watching you’ Not in a freaky harassing way. In a good best wishes get better every day. All strength too. Getting even better too.

      Even though you delete and ban. Hope it is not an intrusion.

      Wings is even better, No unionist trolls and freedom. Thanks a billion Rev Stu. Wonderful Independista.

    34. Robert Louis says:

      A tory MSP was rushed to hospital tonight, after a brain cell was found lodged in his skull.

      An old joke, I know. Just perfect for Tory thicko MSPs though.

      And then we have the likes of Ross Thomson – a new kind of moronic.

      Just why are ‘scottish‘ Tories all so thick??

    35. Jimmock says:

      The Scottish parliamentary system is designed to prevent an SNP majority. Easy answer – an

      Independence Party that only puts up list candidates. This party does not compete with SNP on

      first past the post but stands on list for independence only. SNP does not compete on list.

      JOB DONE

    36. yesindyref2 says:

      I’ve always said the SNP should have its own opposition unit, as that way we’d get decent opposition as well as a decent Government.

    37. Ken500 says:

      In reports they mention Humza Yousaf support for Anas Sarwar getting the message of demotion by text and lack of diversity now in the Labour bench ranks. Like suggesting the change made was ‘racist’. That is not was not what he fully said. They not mention he also included. ‘That he disagreed with him on many, many’ matters and topics. Giving a totally different context to what had actually been said. Misreporting.

    38. t42 says:

      I read his tweets in the voice of Ralph Wiggum.

    39. Rick H Johnston says:

      Was impressed with new Plaid Cymru leaders speech.
      Hope he transforms Plaid the way Nicola has the SNP.

    40. Dr Jim says:

      Lesley Riddoch talking sense on STVs Scotland tonight programme saying talking about Independence for Scotland shouldn’t be a one off event it should be the normalised politics of Scotland given that half the people or more now support it

      Good words

    41. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Dr Jim @ 01:01,

      Well, in countries/states that commonly have referendums, it is usual that a referendum can be called on any issue that attracts a requisite number of signatures (typically a significant but still modest proportion) of registered citizens.

      So with massive 50% support, by that norm we have a democratic right to call an independence referendum at any d*mn time we choose.

      And we retain that right into the future for as long as we continue to command half (or even much less) of the electorate.

    42. Grant says:

      To Jamie Greene and his pals there is only the UK.
      Scotland is just part of the UK, a region.
      Time to leave.

    43. manandboy says:

      Employed only in elections to the Scottish Parliament, the List system is a cunning device to by-pass the people’s vote, so that there is BritNat Westminster representation at Holyrood, and as such is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

      Where the English Establishment is, you will always, always, always find devious and cunning treachery. Fundamentally anti-democratic, the Ruling Class is actually a cancer in the UK population.

      Why the electorate put up with it is the result of decades of British State Propaganda, which is one of, if not The, most pervasive and effective in the world.

      But, in spite of every effort by English Colonial forces, the time for Independence for Scotland has come, and all the might of Perfidious Albion cannot stop it now. The Scottish Independence genie is out of the bottle. There’s no going back.

      Hail Caesar!.

    44. Muiris says:

      Scraping the bottom of the barrel?? I think that they went through ( the bottom of the barrel) quite some time ago.

    45. Nana says:

      Constitutional Reform Group – the lords try to ensure Scotland is shackled to England forever with a drastic new bill.

      SNP MP @PeteWishart on why Labour are losing out to the Scottish National Party

      Brexit Food Shortages Could Have Serious Repercussions for Scotland’s Island Communities

    46. Nana says:

      Wednesday 10th October

      The yoon’s useful patsy, Loki is about to present a benefits Street type hit job by @BBCScotland on one of Dundee’s most deprived areas. The woman on the left was a vocal moaner about the V&A project. Scotland is shite project continues.

      UK (English) shipyards land Royal Navy contracts worth £1bn

    47. Nana says:

      The real Tory leader goes to Brussels for ‘extensive’ talks with Michel Barnier or Michelle?

      James O’Brien Frustrated with Brexit Caller

      EU’s Brexit vision plan likely to be delayed over doubts at No 10
      PM’s spokesman puts dampener on optimism of Brussels officials about talks

      Brexit: mending Humpty Dumpty

    48. Fred says:

      Sarah Smith desperately trying to be smart & out-Keunssberg the Kuenssberg, YAWN!

    49. Ken500 says:

      There is a consultation going on. To consider when is the best time to have another Indy Ref

      Considering it it best to have it in the spring or autumn file strategist purposes . In the summer people are away on holiday and in the winter Christmas and bad weather.

      Just e-Mail or write to anyone one concerned with the decision. Alex Salmond a great strategist. Political genius who has done Scotland proud, There is not a thing he does not know about Scottish/World politics. A mind of information with contacts to all the world administration of friends if Scotland. On re dial to the world leaders. Most of whom he has met.

      The improvement in the Scottish economy plans where laid by Alex Salmond. The equal investment all over Scotland. The borders railway, the Forth Bridge, the new Glasgow hospital, the Dundee V&A, the AWPR, the turbines in the Bay, the golf Development. Etc etc. All planned and expanded on his stewardship. He brought Scotland closer to Independence with his great leadership and campaign. That is why Scotland is fifty/fifty today.

      Anytime the date is decided Scotland can win it. After the consultation and the date is decided just go for it. ignore all other relative matters. Just go for it. That is what will totally improve the Scottish economy and it!s place in the world. Don’t get bogged down in other matters. Delaying tactics or faction. People are on the starting block. Just make the run. It will be enjoyable every single minute. Give people something to aim for and enjoy. Bring back the enjoyment of life. Giving people hope again.

      Just e-Mail or write your suggestion to Nicola, Keith Brown, SNP HQ, Any SNP rep. Alex Salmond can be in the YEScampaign once again. All suggestion will go to help make the decision. They could just correlate the information and decide on the majority agreed date. There is already a mandate. Let everyone’s voice be heard in the consultation. Just do it. It can then be decided if it should be earlier or later.

      Just do it. In or out of the EU (better in by far) The most important thing is to be Independent. Out of the UK Union, it is the Westminster union that drags Scotland economy done. It is the Westminster unionist Parties, totally useless incompetence which damages the UK/world economy. Their London S/E centralist policie and grotesque monstrosity schemes of no value. Trident. The illegal wars etc and corruption which damaged the Scottish economy.

      Scotland’s relationship with the EU can be easily be negotiated separately and swiftly. For an advantagous settlement without much colletoral damage. EU menbership costs Scotland nothing and brings major advantage. That could just continue on quite easily arranged.

    50. Phronesis says:

      Learning is lifelong. The YES movement it an educational community and its roots are in humanitarian ideals.
      Such a progressive and uplifting democratic family to belong to.
      The British state’s political system is stuck in its ways, tired and outdated, maladaptive, exploitative and manipulative. It has learned only to make toxic choices, that’s not a family anyone who wants a reasonable future would want to belong to.

      ‘The report says that individuals learn throughout their lives in every setting, and that their choices, motivation, and capacity for self-regulation – as well as their circumstances, particularly outside of compulsory education – influence how much and how well they learn and transfer their learning to new situations. As we age, our abilities to quickly generate and manipulate factual information begin to decline, while knowledge levels remain stable or increase. However, the brain adapts throughout life, recruiting and orchestrating its resources to compensate for declines and adapt to circumstances…
      To learn intentionally, people must want to learn and must see the value in accomplishing what is being asked of them… numerous factors and circumstances sway an individual’s desire to learn and the decision to expend effort on learning. The report concludes that motivation to learn is influenced by the multiple goals that individuals construct for themselves as result of their life and school experiences and the socio-cultural context in which learning takes place. Motivation to learn is fostered for learners of all ages when they perceive that the school or learning environment is a place where they “belong” and when the environment promotes their sense of purpose’

    51. Nana says:

      We need to talk about US trade policy and the impact on the UK, now we have a much clearer sense of where they’re going in the next few years. Let’s start with this FT story about a clause in the new NAFTA –

      British army

      Wife of Israeli prime minister goes on trial for fraud

      Trump has a rival, absolutely horrific!

    52. Macart says:

      Mornin’ Nana

      Cheers for the punt. 🙂

      I am sittin’ comfortably with a brand new mug (Ta Molly) filled to the brim and it’s time for some brekkie reading.

    53. Nana says:

      Morning Macart
      I enjoyed your post, had a chuckle at ‘meeja chooms’

      I’ve posted this link today as I may not be here for a few days.

      Wednesday 10th October

    54. Chick McGregor says:


      You are talking about countries which have what is known as direct democracy.

      The UK has indirect dictatorship with the only perceptible direction of drift being from indirect to direct.

    55. ScottieDog says:


      Good post.
      completely agree regarding list votes. You can ‘vote till you boak’ as they say but there are more British Imperialist parties and ‘independents’ on the list than those supporting independence for Scotland. Tis a minefield.

      For me I was very sceptical about some of the ‘independents’ at a recent council by-election in my area.

      Maybe YES scotland needs to be more tuned into the Scottish political process – esp if we are going to go all the way to 2021 without a referendum. There is time at the moment to get organised if that’s the case.

    56. Capella says:

      In my experience “Independents” are usually Tories who don’t stand as Tories because they correctly understand that Tories don’t poll well in Scotland. Besides, there is also an official Tory candidate.

      They usually claim that they want to “keep politics out of local government”. Shorthand for “Vote Tory and we’ll make all your decisions for you”.

    57. Ken500 says:

      There is life long learning in Scotland. The attainment level is higher for people from lower income households than is being recorded. The figures percentages is skewed by not including in the figures the mature students (from lower income households) 20/25% of students are mature students. (From lower income households?). They are not included in the equation. (Numbers) They are left out of the numbers. Skewing the result.

      The attainment figures for lower household students would be 20% (1/5) higher. An increase attainment closing the gap 25% The gap would be 20% lower. A much smaller gap in attainment of figures just based on kids going to uni straight from school. (30%) College figures for obtaining skills High number of skilled apprenticeships.

    58. Nana says:

      Anywhere but England!!
      I was out in the night with campaigners, seeing for myself the mud from a nuclear reactor in Somerset being dumped in Welsh waters, just outside Cardiff. This is a scandal. It has not been properly tested. The Labour Welsh Government is letting this happen

      Do as we want or else

    59. Greannach says:

      Have Kelly or Cole-Hamilton entered the lists yet? I daresay Briggs is keeping a low profile at the moment.

    60. Petra says:

      Great links Nana. Thanks.

      @ Nana says at 7:48 am …. ”The real Tory leader goes to Brussels for ‘extensive’ talks with Michel Barnier or Michelle?

      Warmonger, Arlene Foster, is going to Brussels to point out that:

      ‘The Irish Sea border red line is blood red.’


      Absolutely horrendous, Nana. These two links should go together. FGS Scots get off of your knees and get us out of this.

      Tory England


      Anyone with connections to the Scottish shipbuilding industry visiting the site? Another VOW broken. Scotland being booted up the backside … again. Waken up folks. Go get some medical help to get you out of your 311 year old coma.

      UK (English) shipyards land Royal Navy contracts worth £1bn

    61. ScottieDog says:

      “In my experience “Independents” are usually Tories who don’t stand as Tories because they correctly understand that Tories don’t poll well in Scotland. Besides, there is also an official Tory candidate.”

      That’s my point. At the recent by-election I believe that one of the ‘independents’ was genuinely a local issues person but the other there was very little info on. yet voting till you boak under STV meant that I positioned him above the neoliberal imperialist parties – Lib dums, tories, and yes SLAB.

      Think we are missing a trick here.

    62. Petra says:

      Nana I noticed these reports embedded in the Prof John Robertson link (9:15am) and Act of the Union Bill 2018 (9:15am).

      Well worth a read.

      Full text of the Act of the Union Bill 2018.


      Full report (2018) on research findings by Edinburgh and Cardiff Universities which exposes the truly divided nature of the so-called United Kingdom.

    63. ScottieDog says:

      We can’t necessarily game d’hond’t but we can load the bases surely?

    64. Ken500 says:

      If Westminster does not agree to another IndyRef, especially with all the promises reneged upon (VOW). If Westminster does not uphold the UN commitment to self governance and self determination. Britain will lose it’s place at the UN be expelled or suspended. With no veto rights.

      The (EU) UN will force Westminster to commit to support for another IndyRef or they will be sanctions by the UN and lose rights to membership. Westminster cannot refuse permission. Or will face international sanctions. For breaking International Law. The intenstionsl courts will uphold Scotland’s right. That is why Scotland got Devolution (as limited as possible). That is why Cameron had to agree to an IndyRef. Agee or break international with sanctions.

      Scotland has friends all over the world. In influential positions who will support upholding Scotland’s right. In the EU as well.

    65. Nana says:


      I’ve read it Petra, it was included in the link I provided on the 7th.
      The original has since been taken down
      see here error 404!

      I had saved it [just in case it vanished] 🙂

    66. Dr Jim says:

      Andy Collier ex SNP speech writer says on the radio this morning that even if Scotland becomes Independent it will be unable to join anything for a decade

      Now I don’t think he meant that quite how it sounded but as we know Brits who’ll have heard that will immediately start jumping for joy hoping that’s the next stick to beat us with

      I also believe he’s wrong anyway because Scotland would still be in whatever the UK had done until we decide differently

    67. Ken500 says:

      It’s the illegal Tory tax that has ruined the Oil industry and stopped production. Tory/LibDem/unionist Condem totally ignorance incompetence, Since 2010. A bunch of imbeciles. Parasites

      The tax 40% since Jan 2016. Ie 30% Corporation tax 10% supplementary tax. It was higher before. When the price had fallen 75% it was taxed at 62%. During that period. The producers stopped drilling and production. Uneconomical. Scotland has lost £Billions and thousands of jobs because of this total ignorant incompetence.

      The Westminster unionists haven’t got a clue. It still has to be imported. Until there can be alternative cheaper fuels in place.

      Fracked Gas in the rest of the UK is tax free, The Westminster unionists cut funding for turbines/solar/tidal. They cut a Tidal project in Swansea and CCS projects in the UK. . They are wasting £Billons on Hinkley Point. A total waste of money. It will be years late. Totally over budget and dangerous.

    68. Petra says:

      The National and Sunday National newspapers are full of data not to be found in any other newspaper. A fantastic bunch of reporters. And brilliant articles. Add to that the great front / back page spread (plus two pages inside) with photographs / coverage of the Edinburgh AUOB march in the Sunday National. Even more of course in yesterday’s National. B*gger all elsewhere. Well seeing that they are the only newspapers, of around 40 in Scotland, that are catering for around 50% of the Scots.


      David Pratt: ‘Unsung Scots heroes of the apartheid fight should be remembered.’

      ..”I mention all of this because, in sharp contrast, Scotland’s political ranks can, by and large, hold their heads high with regard to their role in opposing the apartheid regime. There are, of course, exceptions, and certain former Tory councillors in Glasgow immediately spring to mind. In the main, though, Scotland’s politicians and people stepped up to the plate when it mattered.”..


      I heard that the Indy choir was singing outside of St Giles Cathedral on Saturday. Sadly I missed it. Someone was telling me that one of the songs that they sung was ‘Freedom Come All Ye’, which had a number of people in tears.

      ‘Luke Kelly: Freedom Come All Ye. Yes Scotland.’


      The lyrics.

      Roch the wind in the clear day dawin
      Blaws the cloods heilster-gowdie ower the bay
      But there’s mair nor a roch wind blawin
      Throu the Great Glen o the warld the day
      It’s a thocht that wad gar oor rottans
      Aa thae rogues that gang gallus fresh an gey
      Tak the road an seek ither loanins
      Wi thair ill ploys tae sport an play
      Nae mair will our bonnie callants
      Merch tae war when oor braggarts crousely craw
      Nor wee weans frae pitheid an clachan
      Mourn the ships sailin doun the Broomielaw
      Broken faimlies in lands we’ve hairriet
      Will curse Scotland the Brave nae mair, nae mair
      Black an white ane-til-ither mairriet
      Mak the vile barracks o thair maisters bare
      Sae come aa ye at hame wi freedom
      Never heed whit the houdies croak for Doom
      In yer hoose aa the bairns o Adam
      Will find breid, barley-bree an paintit rooms
      When MacLean meets wi’s friens in Springburn
      Aa thae roses an geans will turn tae blume
      An the black lad frae yont Nyanga
      Dings the fell gallows o the burghers doun.

    69. Fred says:

      @ Nana, Baurheidboay excellent. Saw a couple with a wean at the march, the faither carried the wee lassie across to see the UJ contingent. “Ahm jist showin the wean the fannies!” How we all laughed!

    70. galamcennalath says:


      ” US producers are allowed to include up to 30 insect fragments in a 100-gram jar of peanut butter; as well as 11 rodent hairs in a 25-gram container of paprika; or 3 milligrams of mammalian excreta (typically rat or mouse excrement) per each pound of ginger.

      In the EU there are no allowable limits for foreign bodies in food products. “

      If England really wants to eat rat shite, then that’s their choice. Scotland mustn’t go down that road.

    71. Nana says:

      Michael Russell on now

      That’s all for now

    72. Cubby says:

      Telegraph journalistic buffoon Alan Cochrane on Sky news this morning. Keeps saying the Nationalists. Cannot bring himself to say Scottish.

      Well Cochrane I’ve news for you. You are a Nationalist. A British nationalist buffoon.

    73. Petra says:

      Strange (NOT) that it disappeared Nana, lol. Yeah we’ll need to tuck it away in our archives for safekeeping. Better still bin it because we’ll be out of this hellhole before they can draw breath.

      I replied to your Arlene Foster link earlier along with the DWP bonuses link plus the hellish link relating to the poor physically handicapped woman. No sign of it (yet).


      @ Dr Jim ….”Unable to join the EU for a decade.”

      Dr Jim I posted a link on here not so long ago that covered an EU Constitutional expert saying that the EU could basically deal with any delay by ”erasing” the words United Kingdom from treaties etc, and replacing them with the word Scotland (with a few alterations here and there). I’ll see if I can dig it out.

      Whatever the case the EU, I’m sure, will do its utmost to accommodate Scotland (oil, gas, renewable energy etc), if for no other reason than to give Westminster a boot up the backside. Additionally, getting us into the fold, will send out a clear message to other EU countries that are thinking of leaving, imo.

    74. Fred says:

      Michael Russell superb, inspiring or whit!

    75. Fred says:

      New poll shows half the English Tories think there should be no Scots in the British cabinet & that a quarter of Scottish Tories agree with them!

    76. Collie says:

      The Irish Border problem has got to be the biggest conundrum the world has ever seen.

      Not one person has been able to solve it.

      All good for Scottish Independence of course.

    77. alextone says:

      Does anyone have a link for the police scotland 100,000 estimate for the indy rally on the 6th?

      I’m fighting the good fight on other fora at the moment.

    78. Clootie says:

      EU membership (…in any form)

      Always remember that 20million (East) Germans attained full EU citizenship in under a year.
      It proves that the EU can drive issues through quickly whenever they want.
      I think Scotland (if they wanted to) could attain membership very, very quickly.

      My post is not to endorse full membership (although I still support that), but to highlight the nonsense of project fear MK2 with regard to our recognition.

      We are EU citizens who have by a significant margin voted to remain so. Why would they not welcome us if we chose to apply. We are fully aligned to all standards and legislation and have been for well over 4 decades.

    79. galamcennalath says:

      Fred says:

      there should be no Scots in the British cabinet & that a quarter of Scottish Tories agree

      Saw that. I’m not quite sure what to make of it!

      They can’t possible mean what they say. Perhaps it’s a misunderstanding and/or misinterpretation of the question?

      One possibility is that Tories from Scotland see themselves as British or English, not Scots. Therefore when the question asks ‘Scots’ they don’t think of Tory politicians from Scotland, they think of someone else.

      Or, basically, in their wee minds Scots can’t be Tories, only British and English living in the ‘Scotland region’ can be.

      On that level, perhaps they actually have a point!

    80. galamcennalath says:

      Clootie says:

      the EU can drive issues through quickly whenever they want. I think Scotland (if they wanted to) could attain membership very, very quickly.

      I agree completely. German reunification, yes. Also the EU has form in interfering in neighbouring non members.

      At one minute past midnight Brussels time on Brexit Day, the UK is no longer a member country and a new set of rules will apply.

      It is definitely in the EU’s interests to have iScotland as a full member. It’s a no brainier for them. IScotland is an exceedingly desirable asset to have with the single market. We might have our own views, but I have absolutely no doubts that iScotland would be fast tracked.

      What I don’t think they will do is promote the breakup of the UK, however if a majority of Scots make it clear we want independence, then the EU ‘will be all over us’ IMO.

    81. Meg merrilees says:


      re the Cabinet make up

      I bet Mundell was one of those Scots Tories who doesn’t think there should be any Scots in the Cabinet

    82. Old Pete says:

      John Prentice very negative regarding Scottish Independence. VERY DISAPPOINTING!

    83. Dr Jim says:

      Prof Poultice does it again for the UK

      Support for the SNP for the Holyrood elections is down says Poultice but slightly up for Westminster if there’s a GE says Poultice, No referendum unless Labour wins a GE with SNP support says Poultice as he compares the SNP position to that of the DUP

      Polls haven’t moved from 45% says Poultice

      Oh this is a cracker, Boulton asked Callum Steele of the Polis Fed if the Polis in Scotland were all Scottish Nationalists, he really really asked that, and some woman from the Press Asc said the SNP were failing at almost everything, Allan Cochrane gutturaly muttered how much he hated the SNP while trying to form other words with his very own mouth, but he couldn’t manage many actual words mostly just the guttural noises

      I just heard that Lorraine Kelly’s a Britnat, is this true, I’m so disappointed if this is right, somebody say It’s not so

    84. Footsoldier says:

      “A deal to buy three key North Sea gas fields has moved closer after uncertainty created by US sanctions against Iran, delayed the process”.

      “This outcome protects a valuable British asset which, together with the Bruce and Keith fields, produces about 5% of UK offshore gas production” said Serica chief executive Mitch Flegg.

    85. Luigi says:

      Ken500 says:

      9 October, 2018 at 10:04 am

      Scotland has friends all over the world. In influential positions who will support upholding Scotland’s right. In the EU as well.

      Dr Jim says:

      9 October, 2018 at 10:10 am

      Andy Collier ex SNP speech writer says on the radio this morning that even if Scotland becomes Independent it will be unable to join anything for a decade.

      This is precisely why we need real friends, folks. NS and the SG have been working hard at this in Europe, IMO. However, we will need their public support in due course.

      I really hope that, when the time is right, that prominent EU politicians will speak out on Scotland’s behalf. We will be inundated with this type of BS, which needs to be countered. Having a few big “friends” around the world, willing to speak for us will go a long way.

      As long as they are willing to go public. Warm words behind closed doors are no use. No use at all.

      Heck, even if the BBC ignores pro-Scottish comments from EU politicians, all we have to do is circulate on SM and put the quotes in leaflets titled:

      “Scotland and the EU: What the BBC won’t tell you”.

    86. Old Pete says:

      John Curtice, silly me I am just so annoyed. SO ANGRY!

    87. gus1940 says:

      Is Collier not ex-Tory speechwriter?

    88. Meg merrilees says:

      So this is how the WM Tories work…

      Wait till the SNP Conference then early this morning, on the day of the FM’s speech, launch your counter-attack i.e. The Reformed Constitution proposal or New Act of Union. ( Thanks for archiving Nana.)

      There’s a grenade if ever I’ve read one!!!!

      This Part requires the amendment of the Scotland Act 1998 to ensure that the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government have competence in all matters except the central policy areas assigned to Parliament and Her Majesty’s Government by Part 2.

      Powers of intervention currently belonging to the Scottish Parliament to be removed; requirements to consult the Secretary of State shall be abolished; Sections 35 and 58 of the Scotland Act to be repealed…. to effectively prevent Scotland having any say on decisions about her future taken by Parliament . ( my bold letters)

      The Supreme court to remain the most senior Court of the UK; a referendum to be held on whether we want this new Act, questions to be in English and Welsh and NO OTHER LANGUAGE;

      The public authorities of each part of the United Kingdom must cooperate with each other, and with any other public authority of the United Kingdom, for any purpose connected with defence and security. hold on we might be going to war soon!!!

      Parliament will take all decisions… etc, etc, etc,

      I think they are working on the basis that Scotland voted to stay in the UK in 2014 therefore we have, in their logic, put the noose around our own necks.

      Hence, this explains why no Tories were really interested in the debate about the Claim of Right, why Mundell said Scotland is no longer a partner but is now a part of the UK; why Ruth is so glib, why T May is not listening to Scotland over Brexit.

      They think it is all over bar the shouting- Scotland is part of England and that is the real meaning of their ‘Take Back Control’ slogan.

      Dear God, I hope I’ve read all that wrong! Nicola we need out really soon.
      WM will rush this through ASAP.

      Nicola was interviewed on the R4 Today programme yesterday – expert replies as we would expect. However, today on Woman’s Hour the BBC decided to interview Sarah Smith about Nicola. It’s ok to have (t)Ruthless on a few weeks ago and the other Lib-Dem lassie who might take over from Cable but not Nicola twice in one week. They could have recorded an interview yesterday for broadcast today – an obviously busy day for Nicola.
      As to be expected Smith gave some information but not enough facts e.g. teachers want a higher pay rise than the Scottish government is offering them so they talk of strike which is embarrassing for a Government that has made Education the focus of it’s campaign.

      Perhaps if she’d said that the Scottish government is offering a 5% pay rise and the teachers want 10% folk would have more perspective but Southern listeners would imagine a government pay rise to be a paltry 1% or at most 3%… economical with the truth is the phrase i would use for Ms. Smith.

      Sorry for a long post!

    89. Iain mhor says:

      By all the auld gods, that Act of Union Bill is a piece of work. Robert Peffers will have an aneurysm and with good reason

      Pretty much Westminster as is, running things as currently, but with a devolved English Parliament. A “UK” Parliament with Supreme Sovereign power vested in a “constitutional” Monarchy and provision for a City State.
      Abolishes the Kingdoms for four devolved countries, but continues to style itself a United Kingdom Parliament. Abolishes the House of Lords by not abolishing it.
      Pretty much just EVEL and as you were, except now you don’t have your own nation and entirely subject to Westminster.
      Written in Crayon.

      Good luck.

    90. Socrates MacSporran says:

      OFF-TOPIC – but I think interesting

      I came across a link which one of my Independence-minded friends had posted on Facebook. It was a Channel 4 News interview, between Jon Snow and the rapper ‘Professor Green.’

      Green had done a programme on white working class Britain, and he admtted to misgivings when he had to do a piece on “Britain First.”

      Green said: “The funniest thing about Britain First is them walking around waving the British flag when really their country has done very, very little for them.”

      You know, up here, we could say the very same about the Orange Order. I fear what they will do, when they realise, they have been conned by the Tories and the elite they support.

    91. Bob Mack says:

      WTF? Did I just hear John Nicholson on Daily politics agree the SNP is struggling on Health and education?

      Time he was parked.

      In fact we outperform the rest of the UK on Health and our recent grades awards are higher than ever.

      Only politicians who inform themselves as we do on here should be on programmes.

      (Ps) in my daughters house and TV on.

    92. Valerie says:

      Collie @ 11.13

      Just saw this on Twitter, and it’s a great point.

      It’s not the Irish Border, it’s the British Border, they put it there with partition.

      Therefore, it’s a British problem to solve!

    93. Thepnr says:


      Thanks again for all the links. Of the hundreds I’ve read or watched I doubt I have saw anything as harrowing as the circumstances that poor disabled young woman finds herself in having to live in an upstairs flat given the difficulties she has with mobility.

      I refuse to accept that there’s “nothing we can do” which seems to be the prevailing attitude when it comes to the lives of poor souls like her. It’s truly distressing to feel powerless against this.

      We not only need radical change we should demand it. I wish more people would wake up to the reality of Brexit Britain and how the Tories governing us make life unbearable for so many disadvantaged disabled and poorer people like her.

      Booming speeches by the politicians shouting “stand on your own two feet” or “get on your bike” are made by selfish bastards who believe that you should be cast off from society if unable to be a “productive member of society”.

      Universal Credit will make it easier to get back into work, Aye so it will if you don’t find yourself dying in the street due to homelessness or being driven to suicide through despair and there’s a lot of despair out there. Many a lot worse than the poor woman covered in that clip.

      Totally raging that the UK saved the bankers and the poorest pay the price, relying on foodbanks and charity for support, it’s a disgrace and the politicians responsible should be ashamed but they won’t be, they couldn’t care less, even.

    94. Collie says:

      Dr Kim

      Re, prof Curtice

      He says the polls are stuck on 45%. But no mention of how a bad Brexit deal would affect the polls.

      Adam Bolton ends the show abruptly with him telling us support for Indy stuck on 45% as his last sound bite.

      Sky News are as biased as the BBC and ITV when it comes to Scottish Independence.

      And their Scotland reporter James Matthews is one of the most bitter BritNats you will ever come across.

    95. Collie says:

      Dr Jim of course, lol

    96. Breeks says:

      Fred says:
      9 October, 2018 at 11:04 am
      New poll shows half the English Tories think there should be no Scots in the British cabinet & that a quarter of Scottish Tories agree with them!..

      In fairness, the other half probably hasn’t met Ruth Davidson yet.

    97. Collie says:

      Valerie 12.47pm

      The unsolvable Irish Border problem will be one of the main reasons Scotland wins her Independence.

      Because it will be the main reason Treeza ends up with No Deal on Brexit, which will lead to a landslide victory for us in IndyRef2.

    98. Fred says:

      This proposed New Act of Union has Lord Menzies Campbell’s fingerprints all over it. A former clerk with the Gas Board he is best remembered for billing the public for two Georgian bedside chanty cabinets for his Edinburgh townhouse. The chanty-wrestler burst oot greetin when confronted with this revelation on the common street!

    99. Dr Jim says:

      I just found out I’m a terrorist and so are you and so are we all apparently
      They demand that we stay in the UK but if we disagree they want me and you dead, and I mean dead, if we agree to stay OK but we can’t take part in their parliament or their decisions and must stay silent and compliant

      They’re awfy angry at us, but not, if…

      Where’s a daisy when you need one

      They love us they love us not they love us they love us not

    100. Ottomanboi says:

      Scottish nationalism is an existential threat to the integrity of the British state. Within the EU the agents of British ‘deep state’ can do relatively little to curtail its influence. Outside those politico-legal confines one might conceive of a situation where to identify as such would qualify as treasonable. GCHQ…it’s all yours, do your worst type scenario.
      I have yet to meet a true Brit who did not consider that reasonable and ‘fair’.
      These are not normal times. Blackford did punch hard yesterday. Sturgeon might take her cue from that.
      However, enough words, some action please.

    101. Macart says:


      The Act of Union proposal might have a few problems.

      It needs people to vote for it in all home nations. That’d be people who’ve been conditioned from years of party and media narrative to mistrust one another. Mistrust party politics not their own. Mistrust demographics and mistrust institutions.

      It’d require the founding of a new parliament and the agreement of two houses, several legislative bodies and the peoples those bodies represent. The poll results posted by Colin Dunn give a hint of just how successful that would be. Not only that, but that same hoose on the Thames is going to have to explain to that electorate just why binding the ‘subsidy junkies’ even tighter is a good thing. They created the anti Scottish/anti Scottish government narrative mind. How they win over people they’ve conditioned to regard us as second class citizens should be good and I’d wish them luck with that, but y’know… 🙂

      I’d say the proposal itself isn’t the biggest worry, but the mindset which prompts it should worry folks a lot more.

    102. Q. says:

      These (and other such absurdities) are repeated unchallenged by the Unionist media for consumption by the hard of thinking.

    103. Ken500 says:

      Polls show people in the UK support Independence for Scotland. It is just the Westminster unionists who do not support it.

    104. H Scott says:

      I was googling to find out what time Nicola’s speech is today and landed on an ITV report which is timed as 5.45pm today and gives a report on the speech along with pictures. Is the speech not until 3pm onwards?!

    105. Valerie says:

      Collie, I’m not disagreeing with your analysis, because I’ve said for months, we are headed to No Deal.

      The British Border problem, if they accepted their responsibilities, can be solved, by remaining in the CU and SM.

      We know that’s an incompatible outcome for the extremists that hold balance within Tory party.

      Even now, intelligent commentators on Twitter, cannot grasp how utterly ruthless our colonial masters are in pursuing Brexit. It’s not been a two year fight for them, it’s a decades long fight, and any collateral damage is well worth it.

    106. Ken500 says:

      Twitter or e-Mail John Nicholson. To point out his mistake on Health and Education. To try and keep himself more informed and up to date with comment.

      Curtice always gets it wrong. His association has been censored and fined many times for poor methodogy and breaking guide lines. Still under investigation. Illegal practices and illegal donation. Corruption.Theyvare not suspend because the Electoral Commission does not do their job. They are also now under investigation and being taken to Court fir their lack of action. Corruption and fraud. They are investigating their e-Mail and lack of legitimate action. The Polls show 50/50 and they are not up to date and suspect.

    107. Ken500 says:

      The Conference is on BBC st 3pm. It is being extensively broadcast but they can switch Channels.

    108. Ken500 says:

      Different speech? Sometimes their are repeats. To fill in slots. Speeches that were given the day before.

    109. Valerie says:

      Right on cue.

      3 roles advertised as “Resilience Advisors” (that’s no doubt borrowed from Scotgov term!) following leaving EU.

      Does NOT cover Scotland or NI.

    110. gus1940 says:

      Speech 15.00 BBC2

    111. Thepnr says:

      @H Scott

      Speech scheduled for 15:15 according the SNP agenda for the conference.

    112. Dr Jim says:

      For the many not the few Ooops! except some of Labours staff workers are on *Zero hours contracts* and short 12 hour a week contracts Ooops! and have to use Food banks Ooops!

      That’s kinda for the few and not the many then intit Ooops!

      Embarrassinger and Embarrassinger

    113. Bob Mack says:

      The next time anyone asks you why we want to keep being a member of the EU when most of our trade is with the rest of the UK then remind them that many businesses in the UK with whom we currently trade may well be going out of business because of leaving the EU.

      This will affect all sectors of the economy and will cost severe loss of trade for Scotland not just in Europe,but UK wide as well.

      Mr Nicolson should have known that simple fact, but he didn’t.

    114. Fred says:

      McFadden good in todays National, Hamish MacPherson ditto. Waiting on the Big Picture!…….

    115. Daisy Walker says:

      I have to go out, so I won’t learn if the following predictions comes true till tomorrow, but…

      I bet, that 8 minutes in to the First Ministers speech the TV company will experience ‘technical difficulties’ which will continue periodically for the next 5 minutes, before failing all together.

      Any takers?

      Hope the SNP film it themselves AND GET IT ON THEIR WEBSITE THIS DATE.

      This is why they should (if they haven’t done so) also ensure Lifestream are there – they don’t let us down.

      Cheerie to all.

    116. Baldeagle58 says:

      Well, I wonder if (Mis)Reporting Scotland will mention that UK (English) shipyards land Royal Navy contracts worth £1bn

      Clyde shipbuilders STILL waiting on their promised Frigates

    117. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      O/T –

      There’s 48 hours to go and the iScot fundraiser is at 70%.

      “We plan to create a series of 20 second iScot video adverts to be broadcast on terrestrial and satellite TV over the months of October / November and December.

      You’ve seen what we have achieved working on a lean budget – help us reach out to others via the medium of Television and help us grow and expand our sphere of influence.”

      Every quid counts…

    118. Les Wilson says:

      Turned on the tv to watch the conference billed as starting at 3pm,just had to listen to BBC shite for 17 min, aaagh!

    119. galamcennalath says:

      Media … ‘Chequers’ stories abound. What is that all about?

      Does anyone think the future trade framework document will be based on the discredited and rejected ‘Chequers’?

      Given the Tory red lines, the EU will offer Canada+security+bits.

      So, claiming that UK negotiators will achieve ‘Chequers’ to be put before WM has no credibility. It must all be for propaganda purposes, but to what end?

    120. Ottomanboi says:

      Mr Mike Russel said the following:

      ‘Deciding the when can only come after agreeing on the why.
      Because the why isn’t just about grabbing a lifeboat in choppy and dangerous seas.’

      He’s referring to the drive for independence, the whys and the wherefores. Btw Mr Russel, the alternative in your scenario would appear to be drowning. It’s all a risk! Your belt and braces politics sucks!
      You would think that by now the SNP would actually know WHY? As for the WHEN plainly never heard of long term strategic planning. Again the leadership have had long enough to ponder that. Brexit was a primed weapon which they seem now to have defused.
      The people who give their vote to the SNP in the HOPE/DÒCHAS that the party leaders would know how to effectively use it can only gasp. The 100k might as well have stayed at home on Saturday.

    121. Robert Louis says:

      the FM just delivered a major GIRFUY to Westminster. 🙂

    122. One_Scot says:

      Lol, after that speech from Nicola, I think Scotland’s population may well double overnight.

    123. Macart says:

      Now that was a sales pitch if ever I heard one. 🙂

    124. Fred says:

      Superb speech.

    125. K1 says:

      Nicola’s speech hit the mark, WM can gtf. She knows the groundswell is building, she knows there is an impatience, understandable as it is…but…hold, hold, hold.

      It’s comimg…of that I’m in no doubt.

    126. Tatu3 says:

      What a brilliant speech. She definitely mentioned Independence this time ?

    127. Robert Louis says:

      Prof curtice ‘the main message from the speech; ‘we are not yet ready for independence’.

      Man, that is some kind of spin. No wonder he got a freaking knighthood from England’s queen.

    128. frogesque says:

      Did I hear Nicola right?

      And I do paraphrase, fuck Westminster and your S30, we WILL have an IRef2!

    129. Robert Louis says:


      No, you are correct. That is EXACTLY what I heard too.. 🙂

    130. frogesque says:

      @ Brian Doonthetoon: 3.09


    131. One_Scot says:

      Lol, yeah, Westminster you can give us your blessing, or you can get tae…

    132. Clootie says:

      ….that is a leader!
      🙂 🙂 🙂

    133. Bob Mack says:

      I think once we know the Brexit outcome ( especially since the DUP sound like torpedo in the outcome) then it’s definitely on folks.

      Spring 19 announcement?

    134. galamcennalath says:

      A Tweet from WoS Twitter …

      ” The SNP
      FM: These negotiations have also brought into sharp focus the difference in status between Scotland and independent members of the EU.

      Independent Ireland has received nothing but solidarity from its European partners. Westminster has shown Scotland nothing but contempt. “

      That says SOOOO much.

      Ireland is a small country in a UNION with other nations. They share many benefits. They enjoy the best international trading agreements on the planet. They are listened to. Their views are influential. And when things get bad, that UNION backs up Ireland. A wee country with a powerful friend.

      Scotland is a small country in a UNION with other nations. They are ripped off relentlessly. They are being dragged into relative isolation and having their trade sriously damaged. They are totally ignored. Their views count for nothing. And when things get bad, that UNION throws Scotland under the wheels. A wee country In the claws of a callous predator.

      Not all UNIONS are equal.

    135. Liz g says:

      Robert Louis & Forgesqu
      And also, don’t you even dare to try and sell our NHS Scotland in the meantime..

    136. Thepnr says:


      You were more or less spot on with your paraphrasing 🙂

      And now we have Tory and Labour politicians queuing up to tell us that the decision about Scotland’s future belongs, not to the people, but to Westminster.

      That they will decide if and when we can choose to be independent.

      Well, let us send this message today.

      You can oppose independence – that is your democratic right.

      But you cannot – and you will not – deny Scotland’s right to choose.

    137. Marcia says:

      Les Wilson

      I switch on BBC2 and got the same so switched off and went back the SNP website and watched from there with the bonus of subtitles for us who don’t have 100% hearing anymore.

    138. Les Wilson says:

      Well, Nicola’s speech covered a lot. A very good speech and a warning to Westminster and I am sure she ain’t kidding.
      Thought the pointing out to ENHS workers that if they are not happy down there they are welcome here was also a good move, among many good moves.

      Westminster will be spitting bullets along with the tractors embedded up here.

    139. Ken500 says:

      Why are people working for the Labour Party? To ensure people are sanctions and starved to death. Millions are killed in illegal wars. Terrible suffering. Mass migration and millions of people living in tents.

      Working for those cretins what do they expect? They are part of the problem causing the increasing use of foodbanks. Then they actually used it for publicity. They are without shame. An absolute shambles.

      It’s lies anyway. Loads of unscrupulous people works for them and are totally overpaid with public money. Some people just do it for the money. They threw money at people to canvass, Some people know some of them. Wasting borrowed public money like there is no tomorrow. On an expense account, Totally overpaid,

      Take it with another pitch of salt. A another load of nonsense. Ditto the other unionist Parties

      Multimillionaires Blair/BrownCamerin/May/Osbourne/Cable/Clegg and that is just a few of them. Troughing on public money for years destroying the world economy. Causing misery and death. Fraudsters and habitual liars. Most of them should be in jail.

    140. Robert Louis says:

      You know listening to thin Arleney woman from the bigoted hateful, homophobic DUP, today, It really struck me, the solution, as pointed out here before, really is obvious.

      Let Scotland stay in the customs union and N.Ireland. Problem solved. Scotland happy, and the DUP happy and Ireland happy. Called (I think) a win-win-win situation.

      Seriously, Westminster really needs to start thinking it through.

    141. Fred says:

      How dae ye spell Russell?

    142. galamcennalath says:

      Nicola said “independent” 16 times, and “independence” 13 times.

      She kept coming back to it as the best solution for Scotland.

      It really is ‘when’ not ‘if’ any more.

    143. Collie says:

      Sky News and BBC News24 couldn’t wait to pull the plug on Nicola.

      “Right, that’s they Scottish bastards finished for another year, let’s get back to all things English and American”.

      Can you feel the love ladies and gentlemen?

      No,,me neither.

    144. sandy says:

      Curtis, IMO, is getting like Patrick Harvey, full of self importance. I never did have much time for him (Curtis), even less now.
      Can anyone seriously take heed of his opinions, IF one could clearly understand with his somewhat guttural manner of speaking.

    145. Hamish100 says:

      Ottoman boyo – we can feel your hurt. We can feel an independence campaign ratcheting up. Independence or brexit

    146. Dr Jim says:

      Nothing will ever satisfy the DUP until Noah comes back and drowns everybody who’s not them and acknowledges that dinosaurs are fake and God smites all the rainbow folk and marches can happen every day

    147. Cubby says:

      Lying Britnats to the left. Lying Britnats to the Right.

      Political shows have one or two setups.

      1. No representation from the SNP so they can have a free go at the Scotgov/SNP with no response.


      2. The sole SNP representative is outnumbered by the Britnats. Lying Britnats to the left and lying Britnats to the right.

      There is not ONE political show/ news programme in Scotland never mind the UK that has a presenter/ reporter that supports independence. All Britnats. They have the cheek to call this democracy.

      It’s like the football team that always gets to play at home against an opponent who doesn’t turn up or the next week the opposition team are only allowed 9 players. Democracy and free fair media???? Your having a joke.

    148. Thepnr says:

      I think we can expect to hear more from the MSM expert talking heads, about how Independence has been kicked into the long grass and of how unlikely it is that there will be another referendum this side of 2021 blah blah waffle waffle.

      The so called “experts” will be blowing froth from their bahookies they’ll be so much wind from them and especially the “Scotland will need permission from Westminster” bullshit.

      The reality of course is that they have no better idea of when the next referendum will be than you or I, nor how any plebiscite will come about than you or I do.

      Only Nicola Sturgeon and her very closest advisers know the answer to that and they’re saying nothing until they’re ready to say it and we’ll be the first to know.

    149. Liz g says:

      Robert Louis @ 4.47
      Westminster will never agree to that Robert.
      Because it will raise the question .. is the oil and gas in the EU single market with the Scottish Government or out of the EU single market and in the control of the Westminster Government ?
      A question they wouldn’t want asked

    150. galamcennalath says:

      Dr Jim says

      marches can happen every day

      … but only the ones which have been ‘tangoed’ 🙂

    151. Dan Huil says:

      Our independence still largely depends on the arrogance, ignorance and incompetence of british nationlists. So, I’m optimistic.

    152. Highland Wifie says:

      Truly brilliant and inspiring that speech by Nicola this afternoon. Said so much without having to say too much but you can be sure the message hit home where it mattered.
      I can imagine lots of clandestine meetings to work out how to deal with the pesky Scots and their far too competent SNP leader. She’s showing us up too much, demonstrating how leaders should be, not good enough you know.
      Well get used to it Westminster. This is how you run a modern, progressive democracy. It’s getting harder to hide the truth despite the constant whinging of the other parties and the press.
      We will have an independence referendum and we will win.

    153. uno mas says:

      Nicola´s speech on youtube.

    154. Cubby says:

      Bob Mack@ 12.46pm

      Yes I heard that as well. Not easy when you have a lying Britnat to the left of you and a lying Britnat to the right of you. However, he has lost his way a bit since he lost his seat. He was much better when he was an MP.

      He dug a hole for himself as he was then pressed on what exactly had the SNP done wrong on education and health. Not a great performance by Nicholson. Mind you Alistair Darlings ex better together Labour adviser now with the Herald was bloody awful. She just kept on with the old project fear crap updated for Brexit – namely if you think it will be bad with Brexit then independence will be a lot worse. These people are the ultra doom merchants. All Rev I M Jolly.

    155. Rock says:

      “Scotland is being dragged out of the EU against its will and it’s her job to speak for its people.”

      She has left it a bit too late.

      Because she was too busy flogging a dead horse – a separate deal for Scotland which was never going to happen.

      The day after the Brexit result was announced, she should have made a rallying call to the people of Scotland to prepare for independence if they wanted to remain in the EU.

      There will soon be a No Deal Brexit and Nicola won’t dare defy Saint Theresa and hold an independence referendum before that happens.

      This is my humble opinion and I hope I am proven wrong.

    156. Ian Brotherhood says:

      I never ever see anyone I recognise at the big speeches but today I saw three, all of this parish – Betty Boop, her man Jim and Wilderness of Peace himself.

      Get framin thae screengrabs!

      Hoots all!


    157. Collie says:

      Cubby 5.08pm

      “Lying BritNat bastards to the left of me, Lying BritNat bastards to the right…”

      Did Gerry Rafferty not sing that one Cubby?

    158. sassenach says:

      Disappointed with John Nicholson, he’s almost become Anglisised (even admitted he spends most of his time down south), by allowing the other Labour woman to condemn education and health and just agreeing “there are difficulties” was a poor reply. He sounded like he had lost touch with Scots matters (heading for the dark side??).

      But doesn’t it seem strange that at these times BBC always manage to recruit a ‘friendly’ former SNP guest?

      Just before the end of the transmission, yon Coburn woman had asked him whether he might stand for WM again – I didn’t catch his reply, but on today’s showing I sincerely hope not!

    159. Liz g says:

      Highland Wifie @ 5.29
      Aye it was indeed a clever speech….
      Independence still on the table, reassurance that we are on the right track and should stay the course.
      But at the same time, gave Westminster absolutely nothing.
      May still cannot plan a GE to subvert the Indy Ref before having to go forward with Brexit!
      And this vote for a second EU ref … as far as I can see, she’s just put Corbin on the spot for it now!!
      He is the one that has to choose to agree with it or not!
      And all this at no cost to Scotland, Indy ref 2, or the SNP…

    160. Ken500 says:

      The reason Scotland got a Holyrood Gov (with extremely limited powers deliberately to keep control) was because people in Scotland -a convention appealed to the EU/UN. The convention made representation. It was acknowledged that scotland has less democracy than some of the recently Independent – self determined – Eastern European states. Released from USSR dominance. Blair had to agree to more democractic status for Scotland. Or Britain would not have been complying with the EU/UN human fights ideals of self determination/independence. Rights ensured in UN Law to aspired for all their members,

      The UN would have sanctioned Blair. Britain could have been been out of the UN. Lost status.

      That still apply if May etc do not agree Britain will be expelled from the UN. They would be breaking UN Law. They could be sanction and lose UNmembership and the priveileges. Lose the veto vote.

      May et al have to agree another IndyRef. The way the Westminster Gov treats Scotland is illegal breaking International Law. Denying Democracy, right and principles. They are acting illegally. Even breaking the VOW they are acting illegally. It is not legitimate for Gov to break they word and lie. Renege on promises. That is unprofessional conduct. They take oaths to support professional conduct and the Law.

      Iraq, Lockerbie and Dunblane kept secret under the Official Secrets Act for 100 years. Totally illegally. Not open democractic Gov.

    161. Thepnr says:

      Ian Brotherhood

      Wilderness of Peace himself. You missed his mum then she was right next to him 🙂

    162. gus1940 says:

      When are the britnats and their fan club going to admit that Nicola has been saying ever since the EUREF that Indyref2 will not take place until we know the terms of whatever Brexit deal is known.

      Is it not a fact that because we have to get the OK from Perfidia Central to hold Indyref2 is the best argument we have for Indy?

    163. Cubby says:

      Starting to like the fact that the FM is keeping the Britnats guessing re the independence referendum. It must be pissing them off not knowing if she will call indyref2 next week or next month or whatever.

      I heard independence/independent all the time in her speech. The word oil was never mentioned. Only in a Britnat media controlled Scotland could having an abundance of oil and gas be turned into a problem.

    164. OT someone said that if we ever have ind., ref., 2. The Brit Nats will try to bring in the Dunkirk spirit well part of that spirit was for Churchill to abandon the Highland Division just like Wolfe at Quebec send in the highlanders No great mischief if they fall also place all our nuclear weapons in Scotland so it’s. Still no great mischief if they fall ??? That’s what they think of us but the thing that baffles me most is why we allow them to do this to us time after time ??? I personly feel guilty for letting this go on and on and maybe the reason I feel guilty is because I am

    165. Ottomanboi says:

      Pragmatic Prudence Sturgeon takes a pin to the independence ballon. Now you see it, now you don’t. But we can still imagine and HOPE.
      All those grey heads in the hall breath a collective sigh of relief. Yer pension’s safe wi the SNP.
      An entire younger generation sold down the river.

    166. Cubby says:


      Yep that’s where I got the inspiration for that description. Well spotted.

    167. Ken500 says:

      Nicola and Co will do exactly what is right for success.

      May has to agree to IndyRef2 or break International Law. Britain would be throw out of the UN lose privileges and the veto. Out in the wilderness. Not that she will be there for much longer. The poison chalice. The absolute total and utter shambles. They could not make a bigger mess. They will have to call a GE and leave someone else to clear up their mess. A Westminster tradition.

      People in Britain support Scottish Independence by a huge majority.

    168. Ken500 says:

      John Nicholson always was involved in media elsewhere. Studied abroad as well. He has had a house in London for years.

      Google (or what ever) Wikipedia

      He has been involved in many things. Mainly in the Media. Some political comment.

      Stop watching the BBC for sanity. Unless absolutely necessary. Jo Coburn is terrible. Totally out of touch. London centric. It is embarrassing,

    169. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Thepnr –

      If his mum had a magnificent beard I’d surely have noticed her too!


    170. sassenach says:

      Did anyone else watching the politics shows with yon Coburn wifie think she was going to explode when she couldn’t get any of her guests to ‘name the ref date’? She seemed to have no other question in her armoury, pair wee soal.

      She is fast becoming deranged over this ( as are many other Britnats!!) – Nicola really did turn the screw again today.

    171. Frank Gillougley says:

      I listened intently to the whole speech. There were many images/ideas that came to mind sitting there ‘actively’ listening. Initially, I do confess to feeling a bit disappointed at the end as there was no ‘when’ statement, but since then I have thought, what an absolutely mature political speech. One that will reverberate for a time and noted by other countries.

      She stressed our internationalist outlook (reminding me of John McLean’s dictum: Glasgow will not be dictated to by Moscow!) She never used the word ‘London’ once! She mentioned the SNP offices being established abroad (forerunners of embassies?)

      She spelled out the SNP’s and Scotland’s domestic values for a society that cares for its people and its success in government a reason for independence. Hence the phrase, making hope possible (a reality) and the main example for me given was Housing First. As it says on the tin,, a roof first, then multiple support offered.

      Then to Europe and I thought that was brave indeed, taking Churchill’s battle of Britain saying and turning the Tories’ cannon around and firing on them. That was a veritable hit, for me. She then talked about the stark differences between Ireland and its partners and how Scotland had been treated by WM.

      And as to the UK, she said there will be no denial of our right to choose when to hold a further referendum. The last two years have shown why and it will be. But, the public have still to be persuaded. Independence will have to be shown to be a logical attractive alternative.

      This to me was fair enough, especially when the full panoply of the Britnat media will be railed against the movement for independence and some, when the time comes. Yes, the tide is still to be turned and the Tories will partly do it for us. The longer they go on the better it’ll be for the movement and independence will have been proven by a Scottish government to be a far more attractive generational proposal. And as to when? When the time comes and it will! (after all, who shows their hand playing cards?) No one.

      As Nicola said,

      Believe in this (by government)
      Work for this (by persuasion of the naysayers)
      Together we are going to make this happen (by passion and work)

      Solid, solid stuff.

      I believe.

    172. CameronB Brodie says:

      As the topic is hard-of-thinking Tories, here’s something from a few years back that I wasn’t aware of, but which might be worth keeping an eye out for. Goes for LibDums as well, IMHO, shy Tories. 😉

      We’re a Small Island
      The Greening of Intolerance


      Far-right groups in Britain are increasingly using environmental and social justice concerns — expansion of housing, wildlife protection, urbanisation, unemployment, indigenous peoples’ rights — to argue against immigration. This is part of a political strategy adopted by the far-right in recent years to make their racist ideas and goals seem more respectable. As a result, far-right groups often seem, from a superficial point of view, to be saying the same thing as progressive environmentalists. Whether they like it or not, environmentalists are drawn into debates on immigration, refugees and asylum seekers.

      Because racism is a political strategy for dividing people from each other and for blocking attempts to live with difference, countering these statements with various facts will have limited success. Rather than distinguishing between “environmental” or “social justice” issues and those related to “immigration”, far-sighted environmentalists are linking up with a broad range of people and movements who have to deal with racism every day as a matter of strategy, process and structure.

      This presentation was given at the London offices of Friends of the Earth (England and

    173. Petra says:

      I didn’t manage to follow what was going on / said at the Conference today, but STV News just broadcast bits and pieces of Nicola’s speech, including the hands off of our SNHS. BRILLIANT. That’ll put the wind up the Scots who don’t have a clue as to what’s going on. The thought of losing our SNHS to Trump via Westminster is THE game-changer, imo.

      I see that we’ve still got people on here griping about Nicola and the SNP, in line with the BBC / Unionist newspapers. What about giving us all a break for one day at least?

    174. Thepnr says:


      Pragmatic Prudence Sturgeon takes a pin to the independence ballon.

      Your balloon is maybe burst, mine certainly isn’t. What is it you have never understood about “clarity over Brexit”?

      Anyone in the mood of swanning off having given up on Independence should feel free to do just that.

      Fair-weather Independence support wouldn’t be winning much anyway, they are greatly outnumbered by those that will stick it through until the end. The end of the Union that is.

    175. Haggishunter says:

      I got a leaflet through the door from another dimwit, Liam Kerr, another Tory list.
      Leaflet was ful of photos of himself;
      Liam at a zebra crossing
      Liam in an aeroplane
      Liam with a motorbike helmet
      Liam in a shop etc

      Then there was a questionnaire, with no free post envelope, asking what is bad about the Scottish government and what they should be doing, so I completed it with the reply;
      Open up the port in Rosyth to allow free trade with the EU
      Get rid of nukes from Scottish soil
      Make it illegal for the Brit media to tell lies
      Ban sectarianism
      Start a Scottish oil fund

    176. Macart says:


      Thought I spotted Al and his mum right enough.

    177. yesindyref2 says:

      I just saw the summary in The National, not the speech yet, but it looks like exactly what we expected, and hoped for. Same as it always was, the Ref date is dependent on the terms of Brexit. I agree with comments above, Sturgeon is turning the screw on the Unionists, getting them jumping in all directions and contradicting themselves and each other into a total state of oblivion and self-contemptibility. Yay! They hopping mad.

      Doesn’t stop the suspicious among us keeping up the pressure all the same, there’s blind trust and informed trust, both seem to come to the same conclusion at the moment – it’s going fine, and Indy Ref 2 won’t be long now.

    178. Petra says:

      ‘House of Lords wants to reform the Act of Union to ‘save the UK.’

      ‘In a clear case of the unelected in pursuit of the impossible, a group of Lords and other politicians will today bring forward a Bill to strengthen the Union by reforming it.

      Saying they want a new Act of Union to “save the UK” the Constitution Reform Group will today publish a Bill aiming “to rebalance and stabilise the constitutional relationships between the four nations of the United Kingdom: England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.”

      The Constitution Reform Group (CRG) certainly jumped its own gun – the text of their launch document and Bill was freely available on the web yesterday despite being dated October 9.

      The National can therefore reveal that the Bill “proposes a constitutional relationship in which the peoples of the UK agree which centrally controlled policy areas should reside in Westminster, and agree the devolved powers to be controlled in the assemblies and parliaments of Holyrood, Cardiff and Stormont.”

      Funnily enough, the suggested “centrally controlled policy areas” are much the same as the powers reserved to Westminster at present – defence, national security, foreign policy, human rights and indirect taxation such as VAT.

      According to the Bill, membership of the European Union and the European Economic Area would still be “centrally controlled.” And yes, you’ve guessed it, so will immigration.

      The CRG say the new Act of Union will also contain options for the governance of England, including a directly elected English parliament sitting in the House of Commons, or a nationwide expansion of regional devolution similar to that seen recently in Manchester.

      Intriguingly the Group, which numbers several Lords such as the Marquess of Salisbury, Lord Menzies Campbell and Lord Peter Hain, also suggests the abolition of the House of Lords and its replacement by an elected chamber.

      The Scottish Government was not consulted over the Group’s new Act of Union, and the party does not nominate anyone for the Lords.

      MP Tommy Sheppard, SNP spokesperson on the chamber, said: “This is a Unionist stunt but at least it does show that they themselves know what thin ice they are skating on in terms of the constitutional arrangements for the island of Great Britain. The archaic 18th century constitution is no longer fit for purpose – the dogs in the street could tell you that. Good luck to them but clearly by far the best way to reform the British constitution would be to allow democratic self-government for the independent countries on this island and allow them to work together as equal partners rather than being subservient to the wishes of the largest partner. The fact they are using the Lords as a platform just highlights the inadequacy of the current constitution.”

    179. ronnie anderson says:

      ! Oh ER Mrs Sturgeon git that Crystal Baw polished up or employ ah Brahamms Seer muppets need tae know the date of Independence day , either that or Tanning Tommy will implement the mandate so he wull.

      Fekers will be jumping aboot like cats on ah hot tinned roof waiting on Nicola announcing the date of the referendem , btw SNP Baad & after today SNP Baader.

    180. Macart says:


      Yes. Yes they will be hopping mad.

      Good. 😉

    181. Wee bud says:

      Never heard the FMs speech due to work but was delighted to see that student nurses bursaries rising while being ditched down south.

      As a single parent of a girl who has just started her nursing degree this news has been greeted with delight in a student digs in Edinburgh..

    182. Petra says:

      ‘Swinney hits out at ‘SNP-bad politics’ of P1 tests.’

      ..”The sight of Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Tories – the Tories most of all – suddenly discovering that they vehemently oppose P1 assessments after decades of delivering these assessments themselves in councils across the land is jaw dropping. It is easily the worst example of the tribal, SNP-bad politics of the unionist parties I have seen in years. These parties have no right to play politics with the education of children and young people in Scotland.”…


      ‘Free bagpipes for hundreds of young people in Scotland.’

      ”A Scottish schools charity has announced plans to set up the biggest free bagpipe loan scheme in the world. To encourage young people to learn Scotland’s national instrument, the Scottish Schools Pipes and Drums Trust will loan 500 sets of bagpipes out for up to three years at a time. Already, more than 160 sets costing about £700 each are being played in schools from Orkney to the Borders…

      ”Duncan added that a lot of the work was focused on schools in disadvantaged areas where the cost of pipes is a challenge to parents.”..

    183. yesindyref2 says:

      I’m enjoying many unionist activist posts in the forums these days, they’re great campaigners for Indy. It’s barely possible I even upvote the odd one or two …

    184. Thepnr says:

      Nicola Sturgeon made clear today in her speech that Westminster won’t determine if or when there will be another referendum.

      It’s clear that she and her government alone will determine that when the time is right. It’s plain for all to see that Westminster hate being dictated too and want to call the shots.

      That’s tough and the strain is showing on the faces of their media lackeys who are doing their upmost to use this in an attempt to disillusion and dissuade supporters of Independence by telling us “it’s all off until after 2021”.

      Well they can piss off with their propaganda, nobodies in the mood for their pathetic patter.

    185. CameronB Brodie says:

      re. Migration Watch. I think I posted a paper by them and suggested folk pay attention to the tone of analysis, compared to other analysis I posted of Scotland’s immigration needs. I wasn’t aware their politics were as far right as that though. There you go, eh.

    186. Welsh Sion says:

      Apparently the UK Leader of UKIP wants to have ANOTHER Referendum in Wales with the option of abolishing our National Assembly.

      Is he in favour of a 2nd Independence Referendum in Scotland and a 2nd Brexit Referendum?

      Answers on the back of a postage stamp, please.

    187. Valerie says:

      @ Petra

      agree with all your recent posts about laying off Nicola. We all have these thoughts, are impatient, worried etc., but it’s simply not necessary to decry the best politician in the UK.

      Nicola does know what she is doing, and these are mercurial choppy waters. Westminster WILL be planning on how to stymie Nicola.

      It was a great speech. Enough caring for her citizens, and poking fun at her opponents.

      She especially made clear, these benefits ONLY happen here, under SNP, and that has to happen much more.

    188. Petra says:

      ‘Scotland’s libraries welcome millions in investment since March 2017.’


      ‘Why Tory cuts to public libraries must be resisted.’

      …”It is hardly surprising, therefore, that the Tories want to minimize the opportunity people have for accessing narratives that run counter to the prevailing neoliberal orthodoxy and the promotion of greed and selfish individualism that’s concomitant to the demise of the public library. The extent of the library closure scandal throughout the UK was highlighted by Jeremy Corbyn in 2016. The opposition Labour leader cited Freedom of Information (FOI) figures indicating that since 2010, 575 council-run public libraries have either been closed, transferred to community groups or outsourced, a trend that is set to continue into 2019.

      Drastic cuts of this nature clearly contravene the 1964 Museums and Public Libraries Act which was introduced in order to ensure council’s didn’t renege on their duty to encourage use of library services. The Act legally requires local authorities to provide comprehensive and efficient library services.”…

    189. Robert Peffers says:

      I keep saying it but somehow it never gets remembered by some Wingers.

      The Name of the union is. “The United Kingdom”, and there are only two kingdoms with their signatures and seals on the Treaty of Union that created it.

      Scotland is both a country and a kingdom England is a country and a three country kingdom. To be able to sign the Treaty of
      Union the signatories must both be legally sovereign.

      Wales is a Principality that was part of the Kingdom of England for 432 years before the treaty of Union and Ireland was a kingdom that was an integral part of the Kingdom of England for 165 years before the treaty of Union. In both cases these were not united with the Kingdom of England because all of those former monarchies were under the old rule of Law of, “Divine Right of Kings”, under which a monarch defeating another monarch took over the other’s kingdom and the defeated monarch owed allegiance to the winner.

      Scotland was thus the only other Kingdom to the Kingdom of England in the British Isles and Scotland won the war of independence but as Scotland had stopped Divine Right of Kings in 1320 by the Declaration of Arbroath then Robert Bruce was not a sovereign monarch and although having defeated England could not invoke Divine Right of Kings so the two Kingdoms remained independent.

      In 1603 there was a personal, (For James Sixth), Union of the Crowns but the two kingdoms remained independent. Which was why England illegally engineered the Treaty of Union of 1706/7.

      There is absolutely no doubt that the United Kingdom is exactly that – Two equally Sovereign Kingdoms in a bipartite United Kingdom. It remains a Kingdom and not a country but does indeed contain four distinct countries.

      In all bipartite union of equals both partners have equal right to terminate the union.

      That is what Nicola was telling Westminster – Westminster is NOT legally sovereign over Scotland and neither is the Queen of Scots. Thus, if there is a majority of the legally Sovereign People of Scotland who say the two partner United Kingdom is over they it legally is over and there is nothing that Westminster can LEGALLY do to stop it.

      They can claim the United Kingdom is a four country union all they want but that doesn’t make it so and international courts couldn’t even show otherwise.

      What is more. all the EU needs to do is state that the United Kingdom is a bipartite kingdom that has split up and the English bit of it has exited as it voted to do but the Scottish part of it will remain as Scots voted to remain EU citizens and Scotland will be the legacy member state for the EU is pledged to look after it citizens – it did after all make the rule that all member state citizens held EU citizenship.

      And if the other EU member states don’t like it then Scotland will threaten to take her natural resources elsewhere. A North Sea Basin Common Market for example with the Scandinavian countries, among the member states. Europe could find itself a good deal smaller if it does not accommodate Scots and Scotland.

    190. ahundredthidiot says:

      The people HE serves voted 100% to stay in the UK

    191. Robert Peffers says:

      Now I may be jumping the gun a bit here but could it be the SG has decided to work a real flanker over Westminster?

      Nicola’s speech contained more than a few things the SNP DG has just gone ahead and implemented. I cannot recall them specifically seeking Westminster permissions for any of them.

      Could this and her defiant speech be daring Westminster to stop the new innovations? It wouldn’t be a bad strategy at this time when the Westminster Mafia are up to their ears in difficult negotiations and at the same time attempting to prevent the Tory Party stopping singing from the same songbook while Arlene sings the descant?

      Independence by just taking it a bit at a time.

    192. jfngw says:

      Imagine the state Scotland would be in if we had had a Lab/LibDem government in Scotland for the last eleven years, it is just too much of a nightmare to consider.

      Still waiting for M74 completion, no new Forth crossing, M8 still not complete, still using dilapidated schools, no new QE hospital, bedroom tax, university fees, prescription charges. We would have become the the country competing with Wales for the worst performing services.

      We would probably have also voted for Brexit, after all if the why would we be different without the SNP alternative.

      The only thing we would have more of is ex MSP’s in the House of Lords, in reward for not spending Scotland’s block grant and being good British Nationalists.

    193. Robert Peffers says:

      For anyone who missed it here is the FM’s speech on YouTube:-

    194. Andy-B says:

      Well hollow object do ring the loudest, Greene is no exception.

    195. Valerie says:

      @ Robert Peffers 7.29pm

      I particularly thought that too, especially at the part where she reeled off all the Business hubs operational, and Paris to open soon.

      That really made me grin. It fits very much with what Craig Murray said about international recognition. You start acting like a fully independent country.

      It sends a massive goodwill message and statement of intent to the EU. Paris!!!

    196. Rock says:

      “Greene – who was rejected by the voters of Cunninghame North by almost 9,000 votes but sits in Parliament anyway”

      Should Scotland have the Westminster style “First past the post” voting system instead of Proportional Representation?

      Would there ever have been an SNP government without “rejected” SNP MSPs “sitting in Parliament anyway”?

      Like it or not, the likes of Greene are there to represent their party as a whole in Scotland.

      I agree totally with the Rev. Stuart Campbell on almost all of his postings but totally disagree with him when he so often indirectly attacks the Proportional Representation system, which in my humble opinion, is a reasonably fair system, certainly much fairer than the Westminster system.

    197. Robert Kerr says:


      We have already the statement of intent from Paris.

      The new Consulate General in Edinburgh.

      Go and have a look.

      Its impressive!

    198. yesindyref2 says:

      @RP / @Valerie
      Shhhhh! 🙂

    199. Hamish100 says:

      rock– nae harm son but ye talk shite.

      Greene is to represent all the electorate he just prefers wee free trips to Israel with his MSP pal who doubles up as uni lecturer and some more tory shysters. Anyway enough of your diversion.

      We are gearing up for a referendum on Independence in 2019. Have ordered your Sunday National yet?

    200. Valerie says:

      @ Robert Kerr

      Thanks, I missed that. Very impressive. Very significant.

    201. Petra says:

      @ Valerie says at 7:13 pm …. ”Petra agree with all your recent posts about laying off Nicola. We all have these thoughts, are impatient, worried etc., but it’s simply not necessary to decry the best politician in the UK. Nicola does know what she is doing, and these are mercurial choppy waters. Westminster WILL be planning on how to stymie Nicola. It was a great speech. Enough caring for her citizens, and poking fun at her opponents. She especially made clear, these benefits ONLY happen here, under SNP, and that has to happen much more.”

      The thing is Valerie if we want to read about how Baad Nicola / the SNP is on a daily basis we should forget about visiting Wings and just start buying the Daily Mail, the Express etc, etc. You know the MSM that everyone complains about? The crew that are at the forefront of attempting to stymie our chances of getting our Independence. Food for thought?

      I’m not some kind of a sheeple that agrees with everything the SNP do or say, but I’m not going to come on to the most influential pro-Independence site in the UK and start outlining my (few) gripes about the ONLY political party that’s going to free Scotland from the shackles of Westminster. Talk about playing into the hands of our opponents …. or in some cases on here more than likely working on behalf of our opponents.

      Nicola Sturgeon is absolutely surrounded by enemies such as Westminster politicians, the extensive Westminster network in general, the MSM, most if not all political parties at Holyrood, some of the Local Authorities, the Unions in Scotland and thousands of ordinary Scottish (and rUK) Unionist Joe Soaps. That just about covers everyone so who’s left? Us? If we’re not going to support her who will? And to be honest if I were in her position, getting death threats on a daily basis and then popping in to visit this site (her supporters) there would be times that I would feel like throwing in the bl**dy towel. Then again that’s what some on here will be hoping for.

      Imo, she’s the best politician in the UK by far and is doing an amazing job, especially under the circumstances, and from what I can see she’s totally worn out working 24×7 on OUR behalf. She’ll also be aware of issues that we don’t have a clue about and well, basically, as I see it is carrying an overwhelming burden on her shoulders. Responsible for freeing a country that’s been in the clutches of Westminster for over 300 years or botching up our chances of gaining our Independence for years to come: or forever more. Make a move too soon or leave it too late and lose what’ll probably be our last shot at this: With her ”moves”, of course, being based on the ever changing actions of a bunch of bi-polar narcissists sitting in London. How easy is that?

      Meanwhile we’ve got people sitting in the comfort of their own home, tapping away at their keyboards with NOTHING like the worries that she has, the responsibilities that she carries, who wouldn’t swop places with her if they were offered a million bucks, pontificating about where she went wrong, where she’s going wrong and when she should have done what. High time that certain people on here got real and started showing her some support (instead of trying to discredit her and drag her down), the very least that we can do to show our gratitude, especially as we enter the end game. That is of course if they are Independence supporters at all.

    202. Ken500 says:

      The Hond’t system is a total farce. Put in to keep the SNP out of Office and let a lot of complete numpties in. That no one wants but can’t get rid. It didn’t work. The SNP are so popular they got an absolute majority. Inspite of the restriction . That was never supposed to happen. The Greens got in by getting second votes from SNP voters. On the question of Independence. In elections They are the most unpopular Party with the most unpopular policies. A limited pressure group. Then renege on certain support.

      Some people do not understand the system and think they have to vote for another Party second vote. They do not have to. They can vote for only SNP candidates to try and obtain an outright majority. To achieve Indepence.

      The unionists get three lots of funding. Three candidates by comparison then illegally gang up together to try and keep the SNP out. To try and ruin the Scottish economy for spite. BT are not a registered political Party. The reason the SNP can do so well is because they are funded by their members. Not big business, banks or Trade unions who try to interfere. The SNP have the freedom to make the right, fair choice.

      Warmonger murderer Blair tried to stitch up the Scottish economy. With as little powers as possible, Dirty liar. Blair cannot walk the streets without massive protection. Stuck in a prism of his own. Despised.

      Blair taking Billions out of Scotland ilegally to pay for his filthy wards. Keeping it under the counter with separate accounts. Courtesy of vacant coupon Brown. Who cannot count or read a balance sheet. The best advice anyone could get costing Billion ignoring every ounce. Contributing to the Banking crash. He thought keeping interest rates at 5% would stop boom and bust. While people were borrowing up to hilt against their mortgages. The illegal Wars causing the worst migration crisis in Europe since the IIWar. Leaving millions living in tents. Syria four million displaced. While vulnerable people in Britain are starving.

    203. ronnie anderson says:

      Aw bless the ever so humble lol

    204. yesindyref2 says:

      Compare Scotland

      with Slovakia (same population)

      most of the diplomatic missions already in Scotland would presumably upgrade to embassies.

      The French got a head start on the rest!

    205. Petra says:

      @ wullie says at 7:32 pm …”deary deary me.”

      Vomit and condoms all mixed in with cocaine, Wullie. Their heads and other parts of their anatomy are well and truly wasted. No wonder the country’s in the state it’s in.
      Soft Brexit, hard Brexit, No deal Brexit, red white and blue Brexit.
      Strong and stable, strong and stable, strong and stable.

      ‘Houses of Parliament Cocaine found in 9 Toilets.’

    206. Sinky says:

      Rev Stu

      Following a stupid article this morning from Ross Thomson, The Scotsman is really treating its readers with contempt by having an erudite opinion piece(Lol) from the unofficial world idiot champion contender Annie Wells on Nicola’s speech

      who obviously didn’t listen to John Swinney’s speech yesterday.

    207. yesindyref2 says:

      With Independence over time, many even of the countries already with diplomatic missions in Scotland would have one or two more in other places – like Holland where the main diplomatic area is in Den Haag where I worked for a few happy months. We stayed in Monster, drove through the embassy district a good few times, wish we had one like that.

    208. sandy says:

      Petra @ 6.45pm.

      Correct me if I am wrong.
      HOL to discuss the “Act of Union”. Isn’t this the Act of the English Parliament prior to 1707 Treaty? The Scottish Parliament had their Act, hence then the “Treaty”.
      As I understand it, HOL can blether as much as it wants. It matters not a whit to the original Scotland “Act”.

    209. Valerie says:

      I think this is a fascinating piece by the Constitution Unit of University College, London.

      With all the talk of a second EU referendum, it’s a detailed analysis of various scenarios, the steps and timescales.

      There is no political spin or opinion.

    210. Glamaig says:

      Robert Kerr says:
      9 October, 2018 at 7:51 pm


      We have already the statement of intent from Paris.

      The new Consulate General in Edinburgh.

      I noticed it on Saturday as I was walking up the High St on the way to the march! Complete with tricolours, and right next to our old Parliament! I like their style. Next time there should be big shouts of Vive La France as we go by.

    211. Petra says:

      Another post disappeared? Second today.

      Does anyone on here have a comprehensive list of the words that you can’t use, such as r*ape?

    212. yesindyref2 says:

      I see from that list Germany has 4, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen and Kirkwall. Good for them! Netherlands, Norway, Finland and Greece have two. From memory the US embassy isn’t that far from Holyrood park, bet they had a couple of observers there. They’d almost certainly want a bigger or second one, considering NATO and all that jazz.

      Lot of jobs and money into the economy with Indy – plus investment of course.

    213. yesindyref2 says:

      US CONSULATE not embassy. We’re not there yet 🙂

    214. george wood says:

      A few people with short memories.

      Without the List system there would not have been a first SNP government (albeit a minority one) at all. Labour won the FPtP part and it needed the List top-up for the SNP to win.

      We would not have had the subsequent SNP government and an Independence referendum would have been an unobtainable dream.

      So we should all raise our glasses to whoever was responsible for the List system being introduced in Scotland, as it was the biggest mistake the Unionists have made in my lifetime, possibly the biggest ever.

    215. yesindyref2 says:

      Apropos of nothing at all really, however it happens, being Independent, a State capital S in our own right, depends on recognition internationally (with some but scant regard to the law). When the US recognises us we’re home and dry, basically, but France would be a big step forward. I can’t see Russya and China wanting to be left behind, so that would be 4 out of 5 of the UN security council leaving the rUK looking kind of petty if it hadn’t made the statesmanlike gesture of being first in line. And of course turning Mundell’s fortress into the embassy of the rUK or whatever it wants to call itself. So be nice to the Yanks! Malt Whisky should do the job …

      Mmm, back to stocktaking it’s a messy job but someone’s got to do it.

    216. Legerwood says:

      sandy says:
      9 October, 2018 at 9:07 pm
      Petra @ 6.45pm.

      “”Correct me if I am wrong.
      HOL to discuss the “Act of Union”. Isn’t this the Act of the English Parliament prior to 1707 Treaty? The Scottish Parliament had their Act, hence then the “Treaty”.
      As I understand it, HOL can blether as much as it wants. It matters not a whit to the original Scotland “Act”.””

      I’ll correct you.

      The Treaty of Union came first. The Acts of Union, one by the Scots Parliament and one by the English Parliament, ratified the Treaty which is a Treaty in International Law.

      The House of Lords proposal for a new ‘Act of Union’ shows a very basic lack of understanding of the importance of the Treaty and its central relevance.

    217. X_Sticks says:

      What Brian says:

      Brian Doonthetoon says:

      9 October, 2018 at 3:09 pm

      O/T –

      There’s 48 hours to go and the iScot fundraiser is at 70%.

      “We plan to create a series of 20 second iScot video adverts to be broadcast on terrestrial and satellite TV over the months of October / November and December.

      You’ve seen what we have achieved working on a lean budget – help us reach out to others via the medium of Television and help us grow and expand our sphere of influence.”

      Every quid counts…

    218. Fred says:

      Tricolour = blue to the mast, true to the last!

    219. Robert Louis says:

      Sandy at 0907pm

      Yip got it in one. The respective acts from Scotland and England were to agree the articles of union – the ‘treaty’. That is what both acts did. One from Scotland and one from England.

      Their is no provision within those articles of union for either England or Scotland to unilaterally alter the articles or terms of union. Nor is their provision for the newly formed Parliament formed by union to alter those terms. The treaty of union is an international treaty formed between two nations (kingdoms), as such either party may unilaterally end it. But neither party has the power to unilaterally alter it.

      England and its unelected lords can produce a new act if they want. It is wholly and completely irrelevant. They just do not understand what it actually does or means.

      What they are doing is a twist of logic. Imagine if you speeded the process up. Scotland and England agree to the treaty of union in May 1707, the then newly formed parliament, where Scots only make up 9% of the voting total, decides to re-write the treaty to suit England’s interests only, just a few days later. Aye, right. That isn’t how it works. That, however, is essentially what these clowns are saying they will do. They should be laughed at.

      If Westminster wants a new TREATY of union, then that is what they must do, and the old one must be ended first. an ACT of union is neither here nor there.

      Nonsense by irrelevant undemocratic unelected nobodies in the house of ‘Lords’ in England, whose actually knowledge of the treaty of union, could be written on the back of a postage stamp. What they THINK they know, however, could fill libraries.

    220. yesindyref2 says:

      As far as I understand it if at all, only the “reconvened” Scottish parliament could legally agree to a new Act of Union with England, which would mean the Scottish parliament would have to be recognised in such an Act (which would repeal the old one) as being officially the reconvened Parliament of 1707, rather than the devolved one of 1999.

      Which would mean Westminster would have to recognise that the dissolution of the Scottish parliament never happened at the end of April 1707 as it was a pre-legal act by Queen Anne and her commissioner who didn’t become the head of state of the new UK of GB parliament until 1st May 1707.

      Hence the catch-22 of having to dissolve the Scottsh parliament first, which should only have been done by its members who adjourned instead and never cam back until 1999!

      There be dragons!

    221. Robert Peffers says:


      I came across this YouTube clip earlier but have only now got round to watching it. It is an recent interview with Jon Snow and Nicola Sturgeon:-

      Snow needs a refresher courses in English Language comprehension and English History. In the course of the interview Snow brought up the point that the Catalonia/Spain situation would somehow prove to be some kind of precedent that would prevent Scotland gaining her independence because the Spanish Government had ruled the Catalan actions illegal.

      Has no one told this poorly educated English Nationalist that the term, “The United Kingdom”, properly describes a union of two, equally sovereign kingdoms to form a bipartite United Kingdom? The words country and countries is not contained in that description and neither is either word used throughout the entire Treaty of Union document, (bearing in mind the actual treaty is Written in French).

      Snow apparently thinks that the United Kingdom is a unified country of some sort but nowhere is there any documented evidence that the United Kingdom is other than a bipartite United Kingdom.

      The fact that there are three countries in the Kingdom of England is totally irrelevant for those countries were, and still are, all parts of the Kingdom of England long before the Treaty of Union was signed.

      We Scots really need to start making these ill educated media people understand the true facts. We should all be pulling up anyone who refers to the United Kingdom as anything other than a union of two kingdoms. If it does nothing else it will disrupt their English/British nationalist claptrap and wrong foot them.

      They are very adept at interrupting the people they interview who are, in all likelihood, better educated than they are.

      It isn’t as if we would be wrong an, while we are at it, why not pull them up every time the use the terms Britain when they mean the United Kingdom and country when the mean the United Kingdom.

      They would find it almost as impossible to deal with as do the people they interrupt and harass when supposedly interviewing them.

    222. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Legerwood @ 21:29,

      Utter WM ignorance and arrogance. All-too-typical, alas.

      If they want a new Treaty of Union, fine, they will just have to wait until we are independent, in order that we can freely consent to it.

      Then they would be welcome to try. =tongue in cheek=

      With all those lovely advantages =cough= they would have to offer us, y’know…

    223. sandy says:

      Legerwood 9.29pm.

      Ta for that.
      Has our government got this up it’s sleeve. A treaty is a treaty. My understanding is that when a treaty is broken, end of, kaput.

      Been broken many times.

      What comes to mind was the “Poll Tax”. Had we had Holywood at that time & the government we have now in power, couldn’t we have sued Thatcher & Co for billions?

    224. Sandy says:

      Legerwood, when did the Scottish/English Acts come into being? Obviously before (March?) 1707.

      The English parliament ceased to exist from that date, as did the Scottish until 1999.

      Want to get my facts correct.

    225. Legerwood says:

      yesindyref2 says:
      9 October, 2018 at 9:43 pm
      “”As far as I understand it if at all, only the “reconvened” Scottish parliament could legally agree to a new Act of Union with England, …””

      We have a Treaty of Union with England.

      We never had an Act of Union with England so we cannot have a ‘New Act of Union’.

      The Scots Parliament passed and Act of Union which ratified the Treaty of Union on our side.

      The English Parliament passed their own Act of Union ratifying the Treaty on their side.

    226. sandy says:


      Just had to get that on record.

    227. Legerwood says:

      Sandy says:
      9 October, 2018 at 10:22 pm
      Legerwood, when did the Scottish/English Acts come into being? Obviously before (March?) 1707.””

      The Treaty was agreed in July 1706.

      English Parliament passed its Act in 1706 and the Scots Parliament passed their Act in 1707.

      Both Acts came into effect on 1st May 1707

    228. Thepnr says:


      I know Legerwood would answer but maybe not tonight so
      22 July 1706 looks to be the answer.

    229. Arthur thomson says:

      An excellent, well considered speech by Nicola today.

      Surprise fucking surprise.

      It would be good if people would acknowledge just how fortunate we are to have her. She is rock solid. Typical of the Scottish women who have graced my life.

      She mentioned the Edinburgh March and how it lifted her heart. May I take that as my cue to express my sincere thanks to all those who organised and participated in the marches. They once again evidenced the profound competence and decency of our movement.

    230. Legerwood says:

      yesindyref2 and Sandy.

      Acts/statutes of the Scots Parliament. There are 83 Acts/statutes of the pre1707 Scots Parliament still in force in clouding the Act of Union with England 1707.

      Some date back to the 15th century.

      You will find a full list here:

    231. Jock McDonnell says:

      This section 30 nonsense narrative needs to be pushed back on more strongly.
      Beat before you start if you allow that tripe to sink in.
      We don’t need permission, although agreement would be helpful. A section 30 is not necessary.

      Re this new ‘Act of Union’, perhaps it might be better termed an ‘Act to attempt to reform the current crumbling union’. Whatever. The Treaty underpins the current structures. Dissolve the treaty & it all falls.

    232. Robert Louis says:

      The acts were in 1706 and 1707. England first. The difference was down to the dates of parliamentary terms in England..can’t remember the whole story. Treaty effective in May 1707, with passing of act by Scots Parliament in January of that year. Both acts (1 from England and 1 from Scotland) separately agreed to the articles of the treaty of union.

      It was a f*****g disgrace when it was signed, and it still is now. Lords are talking p*sh of the very highest order.

    233. Thepnr says:


      Apologies for stepping on your toes, wasn’t meant 🙂


      Here’s a much better link then the Wiki article.

    234. Collie says:

      Sky News paper review has one major problem. And that is that all the newspapers are from a foreign country and have absolutely no relevance in Scotland.

      Not a peep about Nicola Sturgeon speech or the SNP Conference.

    235. Thepnr says:

      @Arthur thomson

      Very well said that man, and I totally agree that we are (more than) fortunate and in fact blessed indeed to have such a leader at such an important time in Scottish history.

    236. yesindyref2 says:

      Your correction is wrong, that’s what they’re called. You can find them on as

      Union with England Act 1707 (Scottish Parliament) and

      Union with Scotland Act 1706 (English Parliament).

    237. Xaracen says:

      The Treaty of Union was agreed in 1706, and the Scottish Parliament ratified it with their Act of Union in 1707, then the English Parliament ratified the treaty with their own Act of Union shortly afterward. They called it the Act of Union 1706 because the English Parliamentary session of 1706 was still in session, because their parliamentary year ran to different dates from the Scottish one, hence the confusion.

    238. Jock McDonnell says:

      This has been posted often by others – always worth reading:

    239. Dr Jim says:

      The Brits are always screaming about Scotlands FM involving herself in foreign affairs, they do their wee nuts over it, Sturgeon has no right to talk to other countries, get on with the day job, all that garbage

      Yet when Arlene Foster who is at present elected to nothing and her views don’t represent the votes of the people in Northern Ireland who voted to remain decides to visit Brussels for a blether with Michel Barnier and give press conferences outlining her demands and red lines the Brits remain totally silent

      When the referendum comes Scotlands women will be the ones to win it, they were slower to rise at first but once women are for something they don’t back down and they have pals and their pals have pals

      Mon the wimmin

    240. Hamish100 says:

      Maybe for Christmas we should all get new walking boots from Santa. We will be needing them for 2019. Could we have a walk in Berwick (Scots town stolen by the English) demanding its return to Berwickshire.

      Would really annoy the rees-moggs of the world which is as good a reason as any. Good day out!!

    241. Kenneth McDougall says:

      What a tory Dough-ball

    242. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Robert Peffers at 7:17 pm.

      You mentioned,

      “but as Scotland had stopped Divine Right of Kings in 1320”

      Surely the Declaration of Arbroath was only a confirmation of the status quo? I’ve read previous documents (The Declaration of the Clergy 1310) that said that the people of Scotland were Sovereign, not the monarch.

      Here’s a quote from it:-
      “The declaration of Dundee stated: “The people, therefore, and commons of the foresaid Kingdom of Scotland, …agreed upon the said Lord Robert, the King who now is, in whom the rights of his father and grandfather to the foresaid kingdom, in the judgement of the people, still exist and flourish entire; and with the concurrence and consent of the said people he was chosen to be King, that he might reform the deformities of the kingdom, correct what required correction, and direct what needed direction; and having been by their authority set over the kingdom, he was solemnly made King of Scots… And if any one on the contrary claim right to the foresaid kingdom in virtue of letters of time past, sealed and containing the consent of the people and the commons, know ye that all this took place in fact by force and violence which could not at the time be resisted.””

      The acceptance of the Pope of the 1320 Declaration, just confirmed the status quo in Scotland.

    243. Ken500 says:

      Brilliant Speech. One of best ever.

      If Scotland had had FPTP. Scotland would have voted for Independent. YES would have won. The Scottish people were not even given the choice. D’Hond’t was fostered on them by a corrupt alternative regime trying to keep control of Scotland vast resources and hold Scotland back.

      One person – One vote. Democracy.

      Not one person 2 to six votes. It is totally corruption and gives the unionists unfair advantage. A corrupt political system to let the unionist Parties in. Vindictive and evil. Holding Scotland back as usual. Letting the unionists politicans spread their nonsense and lies. Help by the ignorants in the Press in their position because of unionist Parties patronage. An illegal alliance. They would not last a minute in an Independent Scotland and they know it. That is why they are so agin.

      For many people any system that gets Greene, Wells etc out of trolling Scotland. Sitting in Holyrood, twiddling their thumbs and picking up £62,000 plus expenses (£100) and tweeting nonsense is preferable. While sanctioning and starving vulnerable people. How dare they. Getting rid of their vacant coupons insulting people intelligence. It would be worth it.

    244. Legerwood says:


      Nope I was not wrong. I used the shorthand term ‘Acts of Union’ which is perfectly acceptable when striving for brevity and, by pointing out that the Scottish and English Parliaments passed their own Act, I did not compromise clarity.

      The full titles are as you say.

    245. Ken500 says:

      Some of the Andrew Neil’s videos on the net are absolutely pathetic. Just a load of nonsense. What a bully. Spouting total rubbish. Arrogantly trying to be so smart and failing misery. Just like the historical BBC reports from Scotland. Just a pack of lies. Ignorant incompetent. How can someone be so wrong? The totally biased Tory. Alcoholic. Needs some professional help.

    246. Ken500 says:

      With FPTP the SNP would have come through earlier. Hond’t held them back.

    247. Thepnr says:

      @Jock McDonnell

      It’s the first time I’ve read it and is a great find. Thanks for reposting the link, very much well worth reading.

    248. yesindyref2 says:

      Maybe you mistyped, what you did say at 10.33 pm (you can look for yourself) was this:

      We never had an Act of Union with England so we cannot have a ‘New Act of Union’.

      which is of course, incorrect. There was an Act of Union with England, though the official name is Union with England Act 1707.

      Anyway, the main point was that though the treaty was signed and the appropriate acts passed, it’s possible because of what I said (and others have) about the dates, the Union with England Act was not properly ratified, or legally promulgated I think it’s called which, if true, means there never was a legal Union.

    249. Ken500 says:

      Arlene Foster had been getting slagged off big time on the internet calling her out. Negative comments. Non of support. Some of them are quite funny. From folk in the know. No wonder she does not know where to look. Sculking about. The only time she has not be seen shouting her mouth off. Totally out of her depth. An embassassing afront. It looks like she know it,

      Will she be getting a lift back on the private jet, this time. Pocketing £1Billion or so. With £500,000? going up in smoke. Plenty of comments about that.

    250. sandy says:


      Ta for reply. Was lazy but did look it up in the interim. Ah, google. Anyway, ta again.

    251. Ken500 says:

      Each administration signed their separate documents. Then they were taken for Queen Anne to sign. Representatives from each administration agreed the Terms of the Treaty. According to some accounts. Are some of the documents the original copies? Where are they deposited, Or just later copied replacements. Some of them appear to have seals on them They must be the originals because they are photographed. No photos in 1707. Just (portrait) paintings.

    252. D. Macdonald says:

      Personally, I have no problems with the d’Hondt system for elections to Holyrood. However, I would make two important amendments. Firstly, a candidate must either be directly elected or on the list, but not both. He/she must chose which.

      Secondly, any MSP, who has been elected via the list system for two successive elections, must come off the the list and present himself/herself for election directly. There would, of course, be no restriction for those candidates, who are continually returned by a direct election.

    253. Still Positive says:

      Nicola’s speech was awesome today.

    254. Lenny Hartley says:

      Brian Doonthetoon concur with you that the Declaration of Arbroath was confirmation of the Sovereignity of the people, there was a good article on WOS in 2012 which referenced the Picts.
      However i believe it was a standard Celtic practice.

    255. Cubby says:

      Sinky @8.59pm

      Read the article by Wells in your link. Think it took all of 30 secs. It was like a note written by someone in Primary 5. This person is an MSP!!!!!!!!!

      The Scotsman (aka British Nationalist) is really dumbing down. Desperate for readers.

      A pathetic paper catering for stupid Britnats.

      Thomson may be a Bampot but Wells is very hard of thinking.

    256. Ken500 says:

      There are reports on the Terms of the agreement. The Terms of the Act could only be changed with agreement from representatives of both countries. Or the Terms would be broken and the Act of Union would be broken. (Void) It also says that ‘ Scotland had to be treated equally’ (with respect). That never happened. Swallowed up and spat out.

    257. yesindyref2 says:

      Anyways, just to make the argument clearer, some have made it over the years but it’s nowhere near “mainstream”, with “The Scottish parliament, adjourned on the 25th day of March, 1707, (is hereby reconvened)” as so famously said in 1999 in the presence of the Queen herself, the Scottish Parliament of 1707 would had had from the 26th March until 1 minute to midnight before the 1st May 1707 to repeal the Union with England Act 1707, but weren’t given the chance to. And there was of course civil unrest, threats, blackmail and bribery. And even riots in the streets.

      No idea if this will have any bearing on any potential Law case.

    258. yesindyref2 says:

      I’ve seen images of the originals, possibly NRS got to pass on that, did the research a fair time ago. Or or .scot (can’t remember) or electricscotland or undiscoveredscotland – so many to choose from, and all good resources. Got to go, rest of stocktakling to do.

    259. sandy says:

      Mr Peffers,

      Some may complain of your off-time repeated postings but there are always those who are new to WOS & others who perhaps sometimes need reminding, especially trolls.

      Reference your United Kingdoms (plural intended) to Britain. My favourite is when persons asked of their nationally & they state as British, I politely point out that there is no such nation. Yes, we are all part of the British Isles & even Patrick O’Connell of Cork is entitled, but doubt very much that he would, to call himself same.

      Have watched Black 47. Ye canna change true history but you can map out your future.

    260. Lenny Hartley says:

      Read the btl comments on the 2012 wos post I linked to above. Breeks is the only one still commenting from those days although a few were still commenting fairly recently. Anyways good to say at least Breeks has been consistent over the years!

    261. Thepnr says:

      This is pathetic. Peston on the NI border Brexit talks of “movement in a positive direction” when it is no such thing.

      Just a whole load more fudge that will never pass all the hurdles needed to get a deal in both Brussels and Westminster.

      The Brexit bus is hurtling down the hill driverless and the best the government can do is provide more fudge which we can enjoy alongside our copious supplies of popcorn.

    262. CameronB Brodie says:

      From a critical, historical and legal perspective, the British constitution is a load of pants*. Alternative legal opinion is available. 😉

      The Union and the Constitution

      ….Although the Anglo-Scottish Union looms large at present in British politics, as a matter of contention between the Union’s defenders and its nationalist opponents, it remains – as the curiously arrayed battlelines between quasi-nationalist unionists and social unionist nationalists would suggest – a somewhat mysterious entity. Linda Colley’s influential work Britons served a timely reminder to English audiences during the latter stages of the campaign for Scottish devolution that the British state, properly speaking, dates only from the Union of 1707. Given this obvious fact – the Union of 1707, which created the British state, ought – logically enough – to be the foundation stone of the British constitution.

      As is well known, of course, Britain does not have a written constitution, or, more precisely, it does not possess a codified constitution that is written down in any single place. So just what is the status of the Anglo-Scottish Treaty of Union of 1707, which ostensibly underwrote the very existence of Britain, within the clutter of law, prerogative and convention which makes up the British constitution? In particular, what is the relationship between the Treaty of 1707 – the constitutive document of the British state and hence, arguably, the fundamental law from which it takes its being – and the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty, the idea that the British parliament is unconstrained by any kind of fundamental law?

      Indeed, is the Union – which is now the matter of so much political contention – actually enshrined in the British constitution? Or is the British constitution to all intents and purposes what might be called ‘Anglo-British’ – an English constitution which long predates 1707 and scarcely acknowledges the fact of the Union? Notwithstanding the reality of an English-dominated polity, the Union perhaps exerts an invisible gravitational influence on the development of the Anglo-British constitution, producing such bizarre effects as the West Lothian Question….

      What was the Union For? Historical perspectives on Union and Independence in present day Britain

      The Union of 1707 and its Impact on Scots Law

      * that’s imperial not metric pants, of course.

    263. Robert Peffers says:

      Brian Doonthetoon says: 9 October, 2018 at 11:14 pm:

      ” … Surely the Declaration of Arbroath was only a confirmation of the status quo? I’ve read previous documents (The Declaration of the Clergy 1310) that said that the people of Scotland were Sovereign, not the monarch.”

      I believe you need to look a bit further into that, Brian.

      When it comes to things like this you really need to stand back and look at what’s been going on.

      I’ve read so many different bits and bobs but a lot of common sense is often needed to see what is really behind the stories.

      The whole story is all about something that we will never know that happened. The clash between the Bruce & the Red Comyn on the alter steps of Dumfries High Kirk.

      The Comyn most certainly died but as the two men were alone in the Kirk we do not know if Bruce attacked the Comyn or was defending himself from a Comyn attack. So self defence not murder.

      Anyway, this is where the whole thing gets down to the intrigue gong on between the English & Scots royals.

      The English Monarch had been asked to sort things out as to who would be king but was, of course, keeping his eye on his own interests and had encouraged the Pope to excommunicate the Bruce, not for the murder, but for it being on sanctified ground. The Pope obliged but as Bruce was monarch and the normal laws of the time throughout Christendom was Divine Right of Kings the Pope applied that law.

      So as monarchs were sovereign and thus owned their kingdoms plus everything and everyone in the kingdom it meant that all of Scotland was excommunicated. A very serious thing in those days and cut Scotland off from everything. This was the whole thinking behind the Declaration of Arbroath.

      In the meantime the Pope had fallen out with the English King who was getting far too big for his boots with his divorces, executions of wives, and whatnot, and setting himself up as head of the Church in England.

      So note that the version you are quoting comes from the clergy as was the Declaration of Arbroath itself and that the Scottish clergy were in deep trouble because of the excommunication and it isn’t hard to figure out there was great motive for a wee bit bending of truth to make the case for Scottish Kings not to be sovereign.

      If true Scotland and the Scottish Church were off the hook not just by the Holy Roman Se but from the people of Scotland and most of all the aristocracy and other land owners. Scotland was a mainly agricultural based economy and the abbots and monks were often the biggest landowners.

      ” … The acceptance of the Pope of the 1320 Declaration, just confirmed the status quo in Scotland.”

      Indeed it did but was the evidence that the people were sovereign genuine? After all the common people were serfs and villeins and only the landed gentry, and some of the higher tradespeople, like Blacksmiths and Armourers were freemen and had the franchise.

      That doesn’t look like, “The, (common), People”, being sovereign to me. What’s more the old records show it was the King who called assemblies and parliaments. Anyway we will probably never know the truth but often a wee bit common sense points to the most likely story.

      It also looks like, in practice, the King was acting very much like a sovereign in every way. But the essential bit is that as more people gained the franchise the written law applied and there is no doubt it became independent Scots law.

    264. sandy says:

      Again, I ask, is the “Treaty of Union” our trump card in a court of law?

    265. CameronB Brodie says:

      I mean really pants, from all sorts of critical perspectives.


      This article reviews the latest research on the making of the Anglo-Scottish parliamentary union of 1707 and unionism in modern Scotland. Stimulated by the tercentenary of the union, but running counter to the popular mood at the time of that anniversary, many of the recent publications exhibit a novel and sympathetic interest in principled support for union. Using Christopher Whatley’s The Scots and the union (2006) and Colin Kidd’s Union and unionisms (2008)as starting points, the article shows how the new histories differ from earlier work, while also identifying the interdisciplinary roots of the ‘unionist turn’ in Scottish history.


      Entrenching the establishment and free exercise of religion in the written U.K. constitution

    266. Chick McGregor says:


      Haven’t read this before but have read other detailed interpretations of the Treaty of Union.

      I think a little too much emphasis is placed on the ‘forever after’ and ‘for all time to come’ phraseology.

      Virtually every international treaty which has been rescinded also contained similar phraseology.

      While not quite as vacuous as the glib ‘We must ensure this never happens again’ comments of innumerable politicos after innumerable disasters of one form or other it is nevertheless more of an aspirational rather than a pragmatic declaration.

      Witness, not least within the ensuing relationship between Scotland and England, where the ‘forever’ status of the supremacy of the Court of Session for judicial matters in Scotland has been glibly cast aside in recent years.

    267. Liz g says:

      Yesindyref2 @ 11.34
      Playing devils advocate here but…
      Even if the Acts and or Treaty were not strictly Legally sound at the time.
      It could be argued that
      The people of Scotland, being Legally Sovereign,made them Legal and gave their consent to them in 2014.
      Mibbi that’s why Westminster was quite happy to wave through our Sovereignty a few months back?
      And…. included in that consent was that Holyrood is an instrument of the Westminster Parliament we just agreed to allow to write the Laws for Scotland!

    268. Meg merrilees says:

      Been out at the National event in Bannockburn this evening. Good speeches from Paul and The Dug, Keith Brown, Women for Indy, Yes Stirling and Richard ( apologies can’t remember his surname) the editor of the Sunday National. Good turn out too.

      Trying to catch up on the thread but I heard Nicola’s speech this afternoon and thought it was terrific. Did I detect an emotional wobble when she was talking about the Indy March on Saturday. Think she was close to tears as she said ‘this really gladdens my heart’.

      All this waiting for Indy makes me wonder what it must have been like in the months before the battle in 1314.
      People saying – ‘aw, c’moan, can we no’ just head them off at Carlisle’ or, ‘ a’ this waitin’ aroon is doin’ ma heid in’.

      And King Robert just kept saying ‘Patience, passion and patience – wait till we know what route they are taking’ …

      Aye, she’s playin’ a canny game!

    269. Cubby says:

      CameronB Brodie @ 12.13am

      Surely the treaty of union 1706/1707 is the written constitution of the uk.

    270. Ken500 says:

      Did the women SNP voters for Holyrood not start to outnumber the men as a result of Nicola’s example? Some Polls. She certainly brought in increased female voters. (even some who would not bother voting) Holyrood voting is often proportionly less than Westminter. A lower turn out,

      It depends if there are more women (voters) than men as a percentage of the population. It is possible there are slightly more women than men as a percentage of the population. There are more elderly women because they slightly outlive men. The gap is closing. (the No voters) Hiss. Only joking. They are more likely to be in poverty. They live longer and received no (private) work pension rights because they worked part-time. Or did not have an outside job. Receiving no pension rights at that time. P/time workers were not allowed to join work pension schemes.

      At one time when women married they left their jobs. In the civil service and some other profession they had to. Gradually they worked P/T. At one time there were few P/T jobs. Women were main carers. Often still are. Spain is still a bit like that. Like the 1950’s. When women have a child they leave work for a long while. It is changing. They are the main carers and the Spanish healthcare service is very good but their is less aftercare. The family or friends look after people convalescing

      More men than women traditionally joined political Parties. 10 to one? That could have changed with the promotion of women. Women often did the organisation but more men were accepted as candidates. A bias or just more men members? The SNP have totally promoted equal representation. It has been paying off with more female participation. Women are more likely to vote. Increased voters? People like people who are like themselves. Psychology.

      Susan Aitken is really impressive speaking. Among many others. Women certainly have the gift of the gab and speak from the heart. Inclusive,

    271. george wood says:

      Of course, the reason D’Hond’t was chosen as a PR system was because it had a big FPtP element to it. The unionists thought that FPtP was their insurance policy against the SNP getting an overall majority.

      SNP support was spread throughout the country, whereas unionist support was more area based. FPtP was ideal to hamper the SNP.

      If the unionists had just gone for FPtP then Labour would have won and we would have had no minority SNP government, no referendum and Independence support would still be in the doldrums.

      Now that the SNP has switched with Labour as the dominant party, FPtP favours it. Without D’Hond’t we would not have got to that scenario.

    272. Ken500 says:

      Richard Walker Editor of the Sunday Natuonal getting better all the time,

    273. Thepnr says:

      @Chick McGregor

      I think a little too much emphasis is placed on the ‘forever after’ and ‘for all time to come’ phraseology.

      I noticed in particular the ‘forever after’ reference but even so I took that as being that it applied to that article only as long as the entire treaty was in existence.

      The article then was permanent and could never be amended but that never applied to the whole treaty which like any other could be ended in it’s entirety.

      After all nothing in the physical Universe can be ‘forever after’ except nothing itself 🙂

    274. Liz g says:

      Chic McGregor @ 12.26
      As I understand it Chic, the Forever, Here Ever After, For All Time and In Perpetuity bits,
      only mean for the life of the document.
      While the Treaty is in force these bits apply, it doesn’t mean the Treaty itself is everlasting!
      Scottish Law must always be separate, that can’t be altered.
      But should the 1707 Treaty be struck down, and a new one written ( aye right ) then the new Treaty doesn’t have to say that Scottish Law is separate!

    275. crazycat says:

      @ Robert Peffers at 12.23

      In the meantime the Pope had fallen out with the English King who was getting far too big for his boots with his divorces, executions of wives, and whatnot, and setting himself up as head of the Church in England.

      The English king to whom you refer in that paragraph was Henry VIII, whose reign post-dates the Declaration of Arbroath by approximately two centuries. How can that be “in the meantime”?

      Also, the “Holy Roman See” has a double e.

    276. CameronB Brodie says:

      All sorts of critical perspectives that suggest it is not fir for the purpose of underpinning a modern, pluralist, democracy that reflects the cultural and political differences among the home nations. This could have all have been sorted with the necessary political will, and the monarchs approval, of course.

      Core Principles of the Traditional British Constitutions

      One of the distinguishing characteristics of the British constitutions is its indeterminacy. No clear boundary divides what is constitutional from what is not. What counts as constitutional in practice has never been codified, but is scattered about in sundry documents spanning ten centuries. The very notion of a master legal instrument that one might call ‘the constitution’ is alien to the British legal tradition; thus, Blackstone, the great commentator on the English common law, refers to ‘the British constitutions’ in the plural, and this classical conception of his has been adopted for this chapter, the more faithfully to express the breathing reality of the thing.

      It is not easy to address the question, ‘What were the British constitutions before 1989?’ when inevitably many different answerscan be given about so essentially contestable an object. For if like any polity the British constitutional order could not function without a reasonably well-defined core, the margins are all as fuzzy as quantum mechanics. An organic law arisen haphazardly piecemeal in time and space must be understood in the same spirit. In this spirit this chapter provides no systematic doctrine as a benchmark to evaluate the extent and intent of change in Great Britain before the contemporary era of reform. Nonetheless a general consensus does exist as to where the British constitution is to be found. First and foremost it is comprised in Acts of Parliament the constitutionality of which is not indispute: Magna Carta (1215), Bill of Rights (1689), the Act of Settlement (1701), the Act of Union (1707), and the Great Reform Act (1832).

      It is a series of celebrated texts, beginning in the 13th century, that have made the British way of governing both pioneering and peculiar. It must be borne in mind that these documents are one strand of an ongoing part-codification of the British constitutions which, however, is not limited to Acts of Parliament. Jurisprudence or case law will be touched on as well as unwritten conventions and classic secondary sources. Uncodified constitutions bring about that the most celebrated commentaries on them which come to be taken as authoritative statements of their meaning, relied on by politicians and lawyers alike. The organisation of this chapter follows the basic principles that are at the heart of these sources of the British constitution, namely, the sovereignty of Parliament; the Union of kingdoms; the value of individual liberty; checks and balances; judicial subordination; and, latterly, membership of the European Union.


      Empire Loyalism and Minority Nationalism in Great Britain and Imperial Russia, 1707 to 1914: Institutions, Law, and Nationality in Scotland and Ukraine


    277. CameronB Brodie says:

      The secret of the British constitution’s durability, is that it is not contained in one document. It is also amended on an ad hoc basis. It is, therefore, extremely difficult to corner and kill tame. ;(

    278. Cubby says:

      CameronB Brodie @1.00am

      Sorry not entirely buying your comments.

      The myth of an unwritten constitution is what it is – a myth. Where is it written down elsewhere and why not just combine all these unwritten or indeed written bits and pieces into one actual constitution.

      How can you amend an unwritten constitution?

      The Uk is in interesting company with other states that say they do not have a written constitution.

    279. CameronB Brodie says:

      I’m not a lawyer, all I understand is that there is a British way of doing things, and tradition has cemented these practices, disparate laws and conventions into a binding yet unwritten constitution. A constitution that does not protect the human right of Scottish residents from the Brexit plans’ of English Tories. As I said, the British constitution is pants.

      British parliamentary sovereignty does not respect the principle of universal rights. Otherwise, we would not be in the current constitutional crises.

    280. Gerry says:

      @Sandy 12:26

      Short answer. Yes.

    281. CameronB Brodie says:

      And we can’t forget that we are now living in post-feminist times and political science is a gendered discipline. The practice of law, not so much.

      Autonomy, Oppression, and Gender

      Three Dimensions of Autonomy: A Relational Analysis

      It is no secret that although respect for individual autonomy is a foundational principle of liberal and democratic theory, just what this principle means and how the concept of autonomy should be interpreted and applied in specific contexts are highly contested. For example, in many debates in bioethics, it is not uncommon for disputants on both sides of a debate to invoke the concept of autonomy in support of their position. One way to interpret what is at stake in these disputes is to appeal to Rawls’s concept/conception distinction. While the disputants both invoke the concept of autonomy, they are in fact appealing to different conceptions of individual autonomy, and these different conceptions arise from different normative theoretical frameworks and from different value orientations and political commitments….

      1. Three Dimensions of Autonomy
      A unitary concept is a concept for which there is a single set of necessary and sufficient conditions for the correct application of the concept. Natural kind terms such as water, gold, and elephant are unitary concepts. Ethical concepts, such as goodness, trust, and autonomy, are also often treated as unitary concepts. In the case of individual autonomy, the kernel of what is taken to be the unitary concept of autonomy is the notion of self-governance, the idea that to be autonomous is to be capable of making decisions and acting on the basis of motives, values, or reasons that are “one’s own” in some relevant sense. Different conceptions of autonomy aim, in part, to analyze the necessary and sufficient conditions for a motive, value, reason, or action to be “one’s own.”

      In the literature two broad kinds of condition for self-governance have been identified: competency conditions, which spell out the cognitive, volitional, normative, or other competences deemed necessary to act effectively on one’s motives, values, or reasons; and authenticity conditions, which spell out what it means for these elements of one’s motivational structure to be genuinely one’s own…

      2. Why “Relational” Autonomy?
      Relational theories of autonomy were originally motivated by three central convictions. First, in spite of feminist critiques of autonomy as a masculinist and excessively individualist ideal, it is a mistake for feminists to jettison the value of autonomy because the exercise of some threshold level of self-determination, self-governance, and self-authorization is crucial for women’s emancipation. Second, gender oppression, in different ways in different contexts and to different degrees, constrains women’s abilities to lead self-determining lives and thus can impair their capacities for self-governance and can undermine their sense of being self-authorizing agents. Gender oppression is here understood as a system or pattern of hierarchically structured social relations, institutions, and practices of gender-based domination and subordination. Third, we need a refigured conception of autonomy that is responsive to feminist critiques of overly individualistic conceptions of autonomy. Relational theories aim to provide this refigured conception.14

      3. Self-determination: A Relational Conception
      The notion of self-governance, as I have already suggested, is the core or kernel of what is taken to be a unitary concept of individual autonomy and has been the central focus of debates in bioethics and philosophical moral psychology. One problem with this focus, and with analyzing autonomy in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions for self-governance, is that it makes it difficult to explain how structural (social and political) constraints can undermine or impair individual autonomy and to identify the enabling structural conditions for autonomy….


      GENDER EQUALITY AND SCOTLAND’S CONSTITUTIONAL FUTURES–Scotlands-constitutional-futures.pdf

    282. yesindyref2 says:

      @CameronB Brodie
      Quite possibly pants with no braces, and perhaps the same goes for the Union, as well as that angle of mine on the “ratification”. Treaties are made between heads of state, but need to be ratified by parliaments to be fully binding on parliamentary democracies. The Chemical Weapons Convention [1] for instance has been signed by a handful of countries who haven’t ratified, Israel I think being one of them.

      [1] Many Conventions are observed even if not ratified, I often wondered why the ScotGov didn’t pursue the Sewell Convention, but I think they didn’t really care – Independence means who cares, Westminster is forbye or rather, byebye.

      It’s curious, Salmond and Indy Ref 1 was Realpolitik, the art of the easygoing statesman type compromise. I suspect with a legal background, Sturgeon’s way is very different, and all these things Wingers have been talking about for interest for years, could become deadly serious. Good stuff, because I think the UK is on a very sticky wicket, and they might just fold and give us the chips in the pool 🙂

      Basically spealing, without braces, their pants fall to the floor. Oops, how embarrassing!

    283. Dr Jim says:

      The Brits love renaming things as something other than it is
      The Northern Irish Border eg is The British border in Ireland
      but the Brits keep repeating it over and over again until it becomes normalised so everybody else says it too

      The Block grant: That’s a good one, they call the return of our own money a *grant* as if they’re helping us out with charity so everybody uses the term

      The Secretary of state for Scotland implies someone who works for Scotland when he does no such thing, he’s Westminsters representative in Scotland employed specifically to prevent Scotland gaining it’s own power

      The UK wide vote: which was possibly illegal as we’re in a Union of parts one part being ten times larger in population than the other which by definition means the smaller part can never ever win so never ever equals democracy or respect of the so called Union

      Nowhere can you find the defintion of anything United as meaning one side is in charge over the other, that’s not by any stretch of anybody’s imagination a Union

      So there you have it the UK Of Britain England has created themselves as the definers of words

      Equality by UK definition means *Within their reasonable definition that they’ll *not normally* change unless it doesn’t suit their redefinition (Sewel con)

      All the while the UK perform their double dealing and outright lying they tell you that you don’t understand

      The EU have been on to them from the start that’s why the UK are so angry, because they’ve nothing to threaten them with and they’re not allowed to just declare war on folk anymore to get what they want

      If this was fifty years ago there’d be walls and border posts going up right now in NI and the removal of the SNP from the Scottish parliament calling them terrorists just like in Spain

    284. yesindyref2 says:

      @Liz g
      Yes, I think that’s a good counter-argument. The problem for the UK is that it strengthens the idea of self-determination having been expressed in 2014 which was, at that time, not to be an Independent Country. The wording of the Indy Ref didn’t mention the United Kingdom, remember the UKSC looking at the wording of the question as well as the actual EU Referendum Bill.

      And if the idea of self-determination is established, then the UK can not refuse another Indy Ref, or another, or another. At least, I think that could be the counter-counter-argument!

      But basically at a time when the UK is wanting to Brexit, I think it’s a can of worms that the UK shouldn’t take a tin-opener to, it could be tied up for years, and even face a crisis of actual existence. The UK invoked the Article 50 in accord with its Constitution, but what if it doesn’t really have one, whereas England does, and Scotland does, but not the UK?

      If I was Wolffe I’d probably be doing it out of mischief, but then he does always seem to have a smile on his face, as opposed to Keen’s anger. I wonder why.

    285. mr thms says:

      Sorry, I don’t know how to archive

      This story is from July 2018

      “May close to lifting fuel duty freeze to help meet NHS promises”


      “The Institute for Fiscal Studies estimated that if the fuel duty policy had been left unchanged since June 2010, when it was first amended by then chancellor George Osborne, then the tax would currently raise about £9bn a year more than the £28 billion now forecast to be raised in 2018-19.”

      The oil that makes the fuel, that is generating massive revenues for the UK Government comes from Scotland

      I am only mentioning this because the Growth Commission report excludes offshore oil.

      I expect oil exports, worth tens of billions of pounds a year, would make a substantial contribution to the balance of payments of an independent Scotland.

      And how much Fuel Duty would an independent Scotland raise for that matter?

    286. Robert Peffers says:

      @Ken500 says: 10 October, 2018 at 12:01 am:

      ” … There are reports on the Terms of the agreement. The Terms of the Act could only be changed with agreement from representatives of both countries.”

      Have I taught you nothing, Ken500?

      You were 100% right in your intentions – BUT, you then defeated the whole sense of your comment by putting the context of your comment that is about, “The Treaty of Union”, of two Kingdoms in terms of two countries but there are four countries contained within in the two kingdoms that united by reason of the Treaty of Union.

      If we, the legally sovereign people of Scotland, cannot get our collective heads round that truth then how can we expect the Welsh, Irish and English people in the Kingdom of England to get their heads round the facts they have been lied to about all their lives?

    287. manandboy says:

      Thanks entirely to England and the Westminster govt, the UK is the world’s 2nd weakest in public finances. Only Portugal is weaker.

      50% of the massively brainwashed Scottish population still believe we are Better Together.

      To be British means to be brainwashed.

    288. PacMan says:

      The only people who are going on about being impatient for having another indyref is the media and unionists.

      Who should you trust in the timing of the next indyref, the media/unionists or Nicola Sturgeon?

    289. Robert Peffers says:

      @Liz g says: 10 October, 2018 at 12:49 am:

      ” … Scottish Law must always be separate, that can’t be altered.
      But should the 1707 Treaty be struck down, and a new one written ( aye right ) then the new Treaty doesn’t have to say that Scottish Law is separate!”

      It may not have to say that Scottish Law AND English law must be separate but as long as the people of Scotland are legally sovereign in the Kingdom of Scotland and the Queen of England is sovereign in the Kingdom of England the two are inevitably mutually incompatible.

      Which is why Westminster keeps claiming it has sovereignty over the whole united Kingdom and in fact claims to have sovereignty over all Britain by calling itself the British Government.

      It is also why they have no parliament of either the kingdom of country of England but continue to call themselves Her Majesty’s Government of her United Kingdom.

      Not something that occurs to many people is that Her Majesty’s United Kingdom is a personal kingdom only for the monarch her/himself as formed in 1603 but could not be otherwise until the Treaty of Union 104 years later.

      Even today Her Majesty’s United Kingdom personal United Kingdom includes the three Crown dependencies which are independent of the Westminster Parliament.

      So that is why it is Her Majesty’s Government but the fly in that ointment is that Her Majesty is not sovereign under Scots law that is still, today, independent.

      Until Westminster imposes English Law upon the Kingdom of Scotland then Westminster has no legal sovereignty over Scotland but has always acted as if they had.

    290. galamcennalath says:

      manandboy says:

      To be British means to be brainwashed.

      I remember many years ago an international journalist say how when they were in Eastern Europe they would be fed bullshit propaganda…. however, locals often accompanied it with a ‘wink’. They didn’t believe any of it either. When the same journalist went to North Korea they said it was quite different. The bullshit propaganda was actually believed by the local population.

      Your comment reminded me of this! Much of the UK population has totally accepted a twisted propaganda view of reality and the UK’s place in it.

      Take state pensions – probably the worst in the EU. Yet pensioners are the ones most attached to UKOK. Why don’t they see they’ve been ‘had’?

    291. Petra says:

      BBC Scotland news. Depressing as usual.

      BBC FOI request shows that DNA tests in Scotland in 2017 found that 8% of meat found in certain foodstuff, such as pizza, wasn’t on the labelling (no stats for England), RMP / train worker equal pay strike looming, charity finds growing child mental health crisis in Scotland, such as depression (must be treated on a par with reading and writing) and gender based violence is on the rise, but don’t worry folks new habitats for corncrakes are being created. As per usual the BBC couldn’t find even one of the MANY positive stories about Scotland to report on, other than the birdies.

      And on the main BBC news they covered how they’re going to deal with suicide rates, more prevalent with males, mental health issues at work and then from a population of over 60 million managed to find a guy in Glasgow, a banker, who outlined his breakdown due to his workload. Couldn’t get out of his bed and couldn’t stop crying. In floods of tears.

      I notice too that the BBC use the weather programme to highlight, advertise, how wonderful England is, on a daily basis, with Carol Kirkwood, Scot, ouside covering Churchill’s hoose yesterday and another castle today. A history lesson plus weather forecast. And one of their “stories” of a great bridge in Northern England / shipbuilding went on for longer than all of the Scottish news items put together (propaganda being crammed in).


      @ Valerie at 7:13pm … “Nicola.”

      Valerie I replied to your post at 7:13pm, at length, but it just disappeared into the ether. No idea why as it didn’t contain links or “banned” words. I also saved it and tried to post it again late last night to no avail. Just to let you know that I didn’t ignore you. Same applies to anyone else who doesn’t receive a reply from me.

    292. Jock McDonnell says:


      ‘The Scottish parliament, adjourned on the 25th day of March, 1707’ ..
      ‘the Scottish Parliament of 1707 would had had from the 26th March until 1 minute to midnight before the 1st May 1707 to repeal the Union with England Act 1707’

      Why put a time limit on it ? Why not tomorrow ?

      As I see it, in a democracy, the law can be changed via politics & politics are driven by the people. So BBC journos can call us supplicants (and what a cringing display that was) or whatever they like, the law can say whatever they think it says; we the sovereign people can make the changes we desire.

    293. Legerwood says:

      crazycat says:
      10 October, 2018 at 12:51 am
      @ Robert Peffers at 12.23

      “”The English king to whom you refer in that paragraph was Henry VIII, whose reign post-dates the Declaration of Arbroath by approximately two centuries. How can that be “in the meantime”?””

      As you rightly point out, crazycat, and it has been pointed out to him time and time again but still it appears.

    294. wull2 says:

      I posted this last week, so I am not the only one who is Esperance this.
      My Data stopped working, the new sim went missing, some posts have went missing, automatic inspersion of my user name and email address on this site sometimes stops working to discourage me from posting, but it has not.
      I must have got close and touched a nerve.
      If any of the above happens to you, tell everyone you know of your experience and to vote YES next time to stop it.

    295. Robert Louis says:

      The simplest response regarding the nature of the treaty of union is this; the treaty is just the same as ANY other between two countries. It could be between Germany and France or Italy and Sweden. Neither of the partners can say ‘oi, you can’t end this treaty, but we are going to unilaterally change all its terms’.

      The treaty of union can be ended by either partner, at any time. It is an international treaty (agreement) between two countries (kingdoms).

      The original acts (plural) were just ways for the respective TWO parliaments to agree to the terms (articles) of union within the treaty.

      To make it simpler, imagine Canada signs a treaty with USA to buy all its cars from the USA for ‘ALL TIME COMING’ and forever and ever, until the end of time itself. A year later, Canada decides it is a really bad idea and just doesn’t benefit them anymore. Canada then decides to end the treaty. It is that simple. Of course, the USA might seek financial damages etc…but NOBODY, not even the USA can forcibly hold another country in a treaty. Such a concept is absurd – Except to the moronic ill-informed unelected nobodies in the house of ‘lords’ in England. Those folk have spent their entire lives deluded about the nature of the UK and what it actually is. They are, to be honest, quite, quite ignorant.

      The fact that the unelected nobodies in the house of ‘lords’ are talking about replacing the ACT of union rather than TREATY, tells us everything we need to know about their pig ignorance of the matter.

      So, long story short, Scotland can end the treaty of union when it wants, we just need a democratic mandate from the people of Scotland to do so – as the people of Scotland are sovereign. That could be a referendum or an election, clearly stated.

      A treaty is just a formal agreement, no more, no less. Either party can end it, regardless of its terms. One side might not be happy, or disagree, or seek financial damages (depending upon the agreement) but that is all.

    296. crazycat says:

      @ Legerwood

      Indeed, but as has also been observed frequently, posts are read by many more than the person directly addressed, so those people may benefit from clarifications/corrections.

      That also applies to the final sentence of my post at 12.51.

    297. Sinky says:

      Supine Electoral Commission has cleared Cole Hamilton and Lib Dems of bending the rules over allocating bulk of constituency expenditure as Regional List.

      Some real mad Yoon letters in Scotsman this morning

      Meanwhile bbc Radio Scotland now has Labour and Tory newspaper journos discussing Snp conference but no one from Indy media.

    298. Ottomanboi says:

      From today’s Guardian

      Britain’s public finances are among the weakest in the world following the 2008 financial crash, according to a fresh assessment of government assets and liabilities by the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
      The Washington-based lender said a health check on the wealth of 31 nations found almost £1tn had been wiped off the wealth of the UK’s public sector – equivalent to 50% of GDP – putting it in the second weakest position, with only Portugal in a worse state.

      The sort of news that could sink the idea of independence among the money conscious grey heads for a generation, or two.
      Events Nicola and Mike, events when will the time ever be ‘right’.

    299. ronnie anderson says:

      Am incandescent wie rage , even in technocolor Jake the Peg hiz been banned from Strictly Come Dancing cause they say he hiz a advantage in the Military Two Step .

      Another day from the Britnat TV GET A FUCKING LIFE .

    300. Les Wilson says:

      Well, if you look at Stu’s twitter feed you will see just how rabid the UK press has become. Rabid agents of UKOK popaganda and insidious remarks particularly over Nicola’s speech.

      Whatever happened to the “we love you Scotland” in 2014? It was of course just another path for Britnat support for their policies, kindly bestowed on Scotland.

      Back then they had to wrap it up in something warmer. It was total lies anyway, but now, they are letting their true contempt glare through and everyone can see it. That can only hasten the union demise.

      Why should we have to live with this?, we should not have to, and we won’t. The writing is on the wall for them and their “precious union” The more truth we can get out there especially in their parliament, the harder to ignore.

      What we do need now is that the SNP do as they say and disrupt that parliament at every available chance. We should be hurling back at them about the way Scotland is treated now and centuries previous and do it very publicly,and never stop doing so.

    301. Cubby says:

      Robert Louis@8.22am

      Excellent summary. Agree with everything you say. I would just add they(the lords)are extremely arrogant as well as ignorant.

    302. Ken500 says:

      It is the FPTP section tgatvtge SNP win outright with D’Hond’t . They only win it outright because of their huge popularity. That was not supposed to happen. D’Hond’t was introduced to stop the SNP winning an outright majority. Nothing to do with fairness, it was introduced entirely to be unfair.

      It is the list that the unionists Party are elected on only because the SNP are prevented from using their second votes to pick up list seats. Once the quota is reach. The unionist get in with a much lower % of the vote. That is why they can’t be got rid of in any way. If people knew who they were voting for they would not vote for them. They vote for a Party which can be manipulation.

      Under FPTP they could be got rid of Wells, Green, Davidson, the Labour clowns, Rennie, Rumbles etc. People would know who they would be voting. All SNP votes would count. The second list one would not be discarded because the quota was reached. (Meaning the SNP cannot pick up list candidates to ad to their tally. An even higher majority.

      Under FPTP there would be unionist but far fewer. Less of them. To spout their lies and nonsense propaganda making a fool of themselves. Bringing the Parliament into disrepute. Davidson would ve working in the media/PR somewhere telling lies and propaganda. Quite suitable. Wells would be back at Markies receiving less remuneration but quite happier back with her chums. Appropriate. Greene would have to find a position somewhere doing something more useful than twiddling his thumbs sending out nonsense twits. They should be checked before they are allowed to send. Ditto the rest of them.

      The Scottish Gov would be much healthier and far better round, relating to the electorates wishes. More representative in accordance with the electorate wishes. The D’Hond’t system does the SNP no favours at all. That is why it was introduced, Under FPTP they would have come through sooner and Scotland would be Independent. There would still have to negotiation. Taking a few years of sorting out but dine easier under amicable terms, .

    303. Valerie says:

      @ manandboy 7.19 am

      That piece explains the dire place UK is in, and being public services, just why England is being mismanaged on a criminal scale. It’s why they will do ANYTHING to clutch Scotland in their deathly embrace.

      What really gets me though, is that this evidence is all there, but Labour can’t get ahead in the polls.

      Corbyn is a weekly embarrassment at PMQs, when the evidence of Tory neglect is all around, but he just can’t score a goal against a strident liar, because that’s all May is. A strident liar, with well rehearsed mantras. The kind of mean nanny that Public Schoolboys love to see spanking Corbyn.

    304. Collie says:

      All this talk of Treaties and Acts of Union from our ancient past, do you think Nicola and her legal reps are considering using the courts to get our Referendum legally recognised?

      Hence Nicola’s remarks from yesterday that Wedtminster will not stop IndyRef2.

    305. Shinty says:

      Robert Louis – well said.

    306. Ken500 says:

      Does anyone know any legislation where the unionist Parties have voted with the SNP on any subject or any matter? Except stopping Westminster taking back powers which would have affected their cozy number. Can’t think of one.

      The unionist Parties just oppose for the sake of opposing. Total negativity on some great policies. Thank goodness for the SNP being in power. Dread to think of Scotland’s fate if any of the non ‘honourable’ opposition get into any position of inceased power/votes. Will not happen anytime soon. A catastrophe just like Westminster is now.

      Some voters vote for what people look like. Appearance and vote agsinst their own best interests. Voting for people of whom their policies they despise, because of ignorance. They just do not bother to take a little time and find out. Or do not vote at all. Wasting their vote. Unless they can’t find anyone worth voting for. Quite easy in the circumstances. Most of the political class are despised with a venom. No wonder. Bets on how much longer the dirty dancer will side step to survive. Or waltz away into the sunset with swagbag of public money, leaving the mess behind,

      Westminster a total and complete and utter unionist shambles. Total lack of competence of Gov. Increasingly Innocent people are dying because of them. The ‘honourable’ opposition are a bunch of total muppets who could have brought the Tories down. In order stop the collateral damage but reneged. Voted through every illegal measure and pointless austerity.

      Austerity there was no need for at all. It costs more. It has caused more damage to the economy than anything thing else. Labour Just sitting there moving the deck chairs while the (world) economy tanks because they do not want the poisoned chalice. Disgraceful total incompetence.

      People in the UK totally support Independence for Scotland according to high Polls. Everyone would be better off. It is just the unionists in Westminster who apposed it because they want to keep control. Obsessive control freaks totally out of contact with the real world and reality. Thinking they know best for everyone and ignoring voters wishes. Most of them are out of touch and should have retired years ago. Holding on so tight when the wheels are falling off. The juggernaut is hurdling down the track as everyone jumps off. Going to destroy the economy and cause massive harm if the brakes are not put on and applied.

    307. Pat Cattigan says:

      Such a pity we blocked each other on twitter as Stu delivers piercing insight into the idiocy of politics in this country.

    308. Famous15 says:

      @Sinky 8.42 Yes I have noted the total madness in letters,tweets etc this morning.I wonder what happened to stir such ludicrous ire and self flagellation. Is independence suddenly even more certain than yesterday.The uneducated ignorance of much of the content is a bad reflection on our education system of a generation ago. Who was in power then? Or,as is more likely,they missed being educated in Scotland,

      I do detect a sameness in much of the critical content pointing to a central source.A’l awa an put ma baco foil hat on.

      Seriously,it does indicate that Yes may be in the lead. I am hearing rumbles from people ,No people,who are not convinced that our Education and health system is as bad as reported especially when they warch the news from elsewhere on this island.

    309. Fred says:

      Arlene Foster is a character from “The League of Gentlemen!”

    310. Liz g says:

      Famous 15 @ 10.27
      I think it’s Nicolas Speech that’s stirred them up.
      If you strip it right back, she told us to keep right on campaigning and organising.
      But she has also kept the British Nationalists from making any definitive move against us.
      They only have the propaganda machine, that’s not actually working.
      They are still left having to ride their Brexit Wave that’s damaging their Union by the day.
      It’s not us she put on pause it’s them!!

    311. galamcennalath says:

      Famous15 says:

      I am hearing rumbles from people ,No people,who are not convinced that our Education and health system is as bad as reported

      Our elderly neighbour is a Mail reading Tory. I just don’t go down the line of open argument with them.

      They recently had a hip done and were glowing with praise for the SNHS. They said,” … in spite of everything your read”.

      That was cue for one of my off the shelve responses… “yes, who spreads the lies and why do they do it?”

      I reckon that is a good way to reinforce their own doubts about what they have taken as factual. Prompts them to think further.

    312. Ken500 says:

      Nicola will use the Law under International UN Law which already recognises the lack of Democrscy in Scotland. Under the human rights of self determination and freedom. Recognised under the UN charter. Recognising Scotland has less democratic right than some Eastern European States getting democracy, Independence and self determination at the time.The reason why Scotland can have an IndyRef any time it wants with a mandate. Westminster has to stick to UN principles or lose menbership and be sanctioned.

      That is why Blair had to set up Holyrood. Address the democratic deficit. Or lose EU/UN rights, privileges, membership and the Veto if Westminster did not comply. Set up with as little powers as possible for legitimate governance in order to keep control of Scotland and the vast resources. A total charlatan. War criminal who should be in jail, The illegal wars caused the biggest migration crisis since the 11WW. Causing death and hardship for millions of people. A human catastrophe. Still not resolved.

      Nicola’s speech was one of the best ever heard in Scotland and elsewhere. It will go down in history. Scotland admired all over the world for bringing the basis of Democracy. Influencing all kinds of regimes. The Declaration of Arbroath. Priniples of which are a base for Democracies all over the world. Scotland has many friends in high places who can help worldwide. In places of power no one would suspect. Alex Salmond knows them all. On first name terms. Great experience of doing trade deals and mutual understanding.

      Trump despises the Tories and the Bullingdon boys. The old Etonians. Just does not understand them or the class system. They speak a different language. Like many Americans does not suffer fools gladly. Migrated to America. Heritage. Many Scotland’s friends and relations, For better relations and trade in some industries, carefully chosen. Oil and Gas interests. Imported fracked US Gas concerns. Being imported into Scotland, Grangemouth. Investment in the Clyde and renewed shipbuilding.very positive.

      UK leaving the EU will cause US businesses to suffer who invested in the UK for access to EU markets, including Trump’s business interests in Scotland who rely on European tourists and trade. They fly to Scotland in large numbers to play golf in Scotland. The course all over the NE and Scotland. Direct flights, £Millions have been invested.

      The fall of the £ agaibst the Euro could put prices up and discourage business. Destroying business interests in Scotland and profits. Bankruptcies? The bankruptcies of the Westminster Gov and the political elite. Sailing down the swanny without a paddle,

    313. Ken500 says:

      The electoral commission is now being investigated because of lack of action. Taken to Court abd sued for a judicial review. It is not finished yet, Neither is the investigation into the dark money and Cambridge Analytica, which May and the Tories sanctioned abd tried to sweep under the carpet.

      Cambridge Analytica going in and out of Downing Street. Illegally buying up data. People/groups are organising and suing through the courts. Raised money For a judicial review of the Electoral Commission illegal action in not investigating properly and trying to sweep matters under the carpet. The e-mails have been exposed and the review campaigning group have them for evidence and taking further actions.

    314. Bob Mack says:

      The Treaty of Union was written at a time when it was appropriate to use certain provisions. It made decrees about all aspects of civil and public life ,relevant at that time.

      When recently discussing succession rights to the throne. Jacob Reese Mogg made the point that Catholics could never sit on the throne. In his words, if anyone had ever been a Catholic for one minute of their life they would be considered “dead” as far as inheriting the throne was feasible. This is “absolute”.You can marry a Catholic but cannot be one to inherit the crown.

      The Treaty also made absolute decrees on levels of taxation and universal acceptance of Scottish laws of private life prior to the Treaty. All other laws thereafter could be amended or changed by Westminster.

      Throughout the centuries we have seen changes that actually alter the original articles in such areas as taxation, devolution etc.

      They can indeed be altered, but I think that in so doing the have weakened the original Treaty as being absolute in itself.

    315. Phronesis says:

      ‘In principle, international law operates only at the international level and not within domestic legal systems—a perspective consistent with positivism, which recognizes international law and municipal law as distinct and independent systems. Conversely, advocates of natural law maintain that municipal and international law form a single legal system, an approach sometimes referred to as monism. Such a system, according to monists, may arise either out of a unified ethical approach emphasizing universal human rights or out of a formalistic, hierarchical approach positing the existence of one fundamental norm underpinning both international law and municipal law’

      ‘What is needed is a combination of pragmatic policies that can address challenges like economic inequality, slow growth and disconcerting social and cultural change as well as an ability to convince citizens that liberal democracy provides the most promising path to a better future.’

      ‘Kindness, empathy and safety are at the heart of our recommendations. What is clear is that the health sector cannot do this alone, it involves police, social and voluntary services. We need national commitment and leadership to coordinate all the organisations that encounter people experiencing a mental health crisis, as well as significant investment from the government to transform crisis care’

      From the FM conference speech yesterday;
      ‘And just think how much more we could do, free of the chaos and incompetence of Westminster. Just think how much more hope will be possible when we take Scotland’s future into Scotland’s hands and become an independent country’

      Precisely. Scotland, the country, will withdraw from a treaty that is trampling all over Scotland’s ability to reach its potential and build on its ethical approach to citizenship. Kindness and empathy written into its policies not the poisonous discourse that underpins WM policies reinforced by jingoism, published and displayed daily on newspaper stands all around Britain.

      A healthy economy and an empathetic and kind society are complementary. Scotland is going its own way, the rest of the world can join us if they want.

    316. gus1940 says:

      For the nth time Spectator journalist on A.Neil’s (Spectator Chairman) Daily Politics.

      Naturally as the norm nobody from The SNP.

    317. Cubby says:

      CameronB Brodie @ 1.38am

      I thought I would google UK constitution to see what comes up.

      Lo and behold ( just what I thought to be fair) all the articles about the UK constitution omit the Treaty of Union. It’s like it doesn’t exist. In fact it’s like the UK constitution is the same as England’s constitution. All the magna carta etc. Scotland does not exist. Westminster parliament is supreme other than EU law.

      Britnat propaganda is pervasive. It’s everywhere. The document that created the UK does not warrant a mention. Britnats trying to create their own history. Britnats lying throughout history.

      The UK is England according to the Britnats.

      THE TREATY OF UNION that created the UK has in my opinion logically got to be a part of the UK constitution until it is actually ended. As it is still in force why is it so ignored by all these so called legal experts. Possible answer is to ignore all the rights of Scotland and Scots.

      The great British Empire could not put together a written constitution over a period of more than 300 years if it really wanted to. There logically has to be reason(s) why it has never happened. Just like the repressive other Kingdom – The Kingdom of Saudi that does not have a written constitution. It is in my opinion more to have “flexibility” in dealing with the rights of people.

      Vote for Scottish independence and a proper Scottish constitution and of course democracy not the “faux” democracy we have at present.

    318. Terry says:

      This is a good riposte for those who say scotland doesn’t want to be in a union with England. I say, “ Yes. Scotland does want to be in a union with England – the European Union”. Simples.

      I listen occasionally to LBC. Some of it tosh but James O’brien is pretty good. Anyway I’ve noticed the phone ins from those in England are bringing up two issues – 1. Scotland grovelled to join with England over the Darien affair (yawn) and 2. Scotland couldn’t get the oil out of the ground when discovered and needed the UK to do so. Hence it’s British oil! Some papers must be peddling these two lines in England.

      Ps. Why does my iPhone never capitalise scotland yet does so for England??

    319. Robert Louis says:

      Collie at 0943am,

      The Scottish claim of right, was recently re-affirmed unopposed in the House of Commons. Unopposed. That alone tells us all we need to know.

      It states; “We hereby acknowledge the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of government best suited to their needs”

      That is firmly established,and is in no doubt. It is a foundation of Scottish constitutional law. Westminster cannot block a referendum on independence in Scotland. Of course the British nationalist Labour and Tory parties together with their puppet media tell you it can, but it just isn’t true.

      A section 30 order is not permission to hold a referendum, it is just an agreement on the outcome etc.. and what the question will be etc.. Lots of folk in Westminster tell themselves permission is needed, but it is more wishful thinking than anything else. Of course a section 30 makes things easier, but it is not essential.

      Up until the first referendum in 2014, it was widely accepted, including in Westminster that a pro indy majority of MP’s from Scotland was sufficient to allow for immediate independence. Even that old, uncaring evil witch Thatcher specifically said so.

    320. Ken500 says:

      Frank Fields (Labour) supported austerity voted it through or abstained. Vocally supported universal benefits. Changes to the Welfare system trying to cut costs, Lesding to vulnerable people starving and putting up costs. He speeches agreeing with the Tories. Now making objections. A total lying hypocrite. Now under threat of deselection. Rights and privileges will be taken away. Did that change it’s mind? The total appalling, sickening hypocrisy.

      The politics of the sewer Does not believe in EU membership. A prominent Leave supporter. A prominent attention seeking liar. Making vulnerable people suffer. The blue print of Labour devoid of any principles. They could have stopped this catastrophe long ago. Instead abstained and reneged. Of course refusing to co operate with the SNP to bring any improvement. Labiur useless bastards. Corbyn, Watson and the rest, They never change. Totally incompetent of any change. Policies of the past. Back to the future. Not blooming likely.

    321. Golfnut says:

      A fair example of example of how history as well as reality has been corrupted.
      The English couldn’t pay Marlborough’s continental army, England was broke. There was between 13 and 17 wagon loads from Scotland’s Treasury within days of the Treaty of Union being signed.
      If you haven’t already been the the old Bank of Scotland HO at the Mound in Edinburgh, it’s worth a visit. They have a whole section dedicated to the story of Scotland’s oil. The bank was a major player in finding investors to get exploration and production going, the good bit though, private finance was required because the UK gov refused to invest, and indeed never have.

    322. CameronB Brodie says:

      That’s pretty much how I see it, as well. The British constitution articulates English legal theory and practice, over all home nations, as the foundation of individual legal rights. Despite this, the principles of Magna Carta appears to only apply to English nationals, which means Britain can not be considered a functioning democracy (see Brexit).

    323. Golfnut says:

      @ CameronB Brodie.
      Good point regarding the Magna Carta and the
      so called constitution.
      Something else that requires consideration, the Magna Carta, unlike the Declaration of Arbroath, was rejected by the Papal Court, and therefore has no standing in international law. The Magna Carta therefore is irrelevant in Scotland.

    324. Tinto Chiel says:

      Arlene Foster is a character from “The League of Gentlemen”!

      Or the Mrs Doubtfire from Hell, Fred.

    325. Tinto Chiel says:

      “Arlene Foster is a character from “The League of Gentlemen”!”

      Or the Mrs Doubtfire from Hell, Fred.

      BTW, I literally bumped into a policeman in the post office today and noticed an embroidered Union flag on his uniform. Why are officers in Police Scotland wearing this?

    326. CameronB Brodie says:

      Can the British constitution be made adequate to the task of protecting the human rights of Scottish residents, in the 21st century? Is there the will? Is there sufficient time to do so before Scotland is forced to leave the EU?


      1.1.2. Legal Doctrine and Legal Dogmatics

      There is one kind of legal research prominent in professional legal writings, such as handbooks, monographs, commentaries, and text books of law, that implements a specific legal method consisting in the systematic, analytically evaluative exposition of the substance of private law, criminal law, public law, etc. Although an exposition of this kind may contain historical, sociological, philosophical, and other considerations, its core consists in the interpretation and systematization of valid law. More precisely, it consists in a description of the literal sense of statutes, precedents, etc., intertwined with many moral and other substantive reasons. One may call this kind of exposition of the law “legal doctrine.”


      Positive and normative legal theory often seem to have little to dowith one another. Part I describes the disconnect and suggests that it arises from two sources: the gap between fact and value, and the gap between external and internal perspectives on law. In the following Parts, I lay out a repertoire of strategies and mechanisms for connecting positive and normative legal theory. Part II examines cases in which positive theory serves as a direct source of normative arguments. Part III examines cases in which positive theory serves as an indirect constraint on normative decision making. In the latter case, positive theory serves a constructive role by narrowing the set of normative arguments that must be considered when deciding what to do. PartIV extends the theme of constraints to a second-order question: In light of our best positive theories, to what audiences can normative scholarship be addressed?

      Deliberating the rule of law and constitutional supremacy from the perspective of the factual dimension of law


      Positive law is two-dimensional: it has a justice (or ideal) dimension (and requisite) and a factual (or real) dimension (and requisite). Both are essential. Hence positive law lapses when either of the two is absent. In terms of the factual requisite, law remains in place as actual norms of law (unlike mere norm-formulations), provided that a minimum degree of effectiveness is maintained; that is to say, only as long as the subjects of the law consistently and voluntarily act in accordance with such norm/s, and provided further that deviant conduct is remedied by effective coercive measures. “Norm/s” that lose the factual dimension lapse into mere norm-formulations and no longer qualify as positive law. Thus viewed, a realistic grasp of the content of law is co-dependent on actual conduct, regardless of what the norm-formulations purport positive law to entail, because the norm-formulations may have lost track of the actual state of the law.

      Grasping the actual content of law, including constitutional law, therefore requires not only analysing the norm-formulations of the formally recognised sources of the law, but more specifically social and political observation which may reveal the following: (1) actual behaviour that closely corresponds with a legal norm-formulation, in which case the formulations reliably happen to reflect (and by implication to describe) the actual state of law; or (2) conduct that regularly deviates from the norm-formulations (usus) by the deviators who deem themselves legally bound to act as they are acting (opinio iuris),in which case new (substituting) law has in fact come into being, without such substituting law being reflected in a new (amended) norm-formulation; or (3) large-scale but inconsistent and irregular deviant conduct where the deviators do not consider themselves legally bound to act in the various deviant ways, combined with haphazard enforcement, thus allowing deviators to get away with their transgressions.

      Unlike the first scenario, the purported norm (law) as reflected in the norm-formulations is in part unsettled but unlike as in the second scenario, no new norm (law) has come into being. A legal lacuna opens up – that is, an area not regulated by existing legal norms. Viewed from the perspective of the factual dimension, law, including constitutional law, is much more susceptible to the volatility of unpredictable changes and instability than what the doctrine of the rule of law and constitutional supremacy purport it to be. The doctrine holds law (and the constitution) to be formulation driven, and therefore formal-static in nature, in that the law remains essentially static until the norm-formulations (the text) are amended in terms of the prescribed amendment procedures prescribed by the constitution. Consequently, the prevalent doctrine of the rule of law and constitutional supremacy fail to account for the factual dimension which causes it (the doctrine) to obscure the inner workings of the factual dimension of law, and therefore acts as a hindrance to understanding the nature and content of (positive) law, including the constitution.

      Keywords: Critique of rule of law and constitutional supremacy; faith strengthening language of the doctrine; factual dimension / requisite (of law); justice (ideal) dimension / requisite (of law); substituting law; lapsed law; legal lacunae; substituted law; legal norms in contrast to legal norm-formulations

    327. Petra says:

      @ Cubby says at 11:26 am …. ”The great British Empire could not put together a written constitution over a period of more than 300 years if it really wanted to. There logically has to be reason(s) why it has never happened.”…

      Yeah when you think of how organised the UK was previously and the many highly intelligent people who could have easily done so over the last 300 years it gives you food for thought. I reckon it never happened because the Scots were wise enough to keep control over Scots Law, Cubby. Just my opinion. They couldn’t ‘merge’ all aspects of the two Kingdoms together, so abandoned the idea altogether.

    328. CameronB Brodie says:

      Parliamentary sovereignty does not deliver impartial justice and is incapable of securing individual liberties and human rights (see Brexit). Popular sovereignty is the way to go. Has been since 1320. 😉

      Constitutional Justice: A Liberal Theory of the Rule of Law


      This book explains and defends the concept of the rule of law as an ideal of constitutionalism, and discusses the general principles of public law set in the broader perspective of legal and political philosophy. Although primarily an essay in constitutional theory, its practical implications are fully explained by reference to case-law examples. Drawing on the experience of a number of common law countries — especially Britain, the United States, and Australia — this book seeks to identify the common elements of a shared constitutional framework that provides the foundations, in each case, of a liberal democratic legal order. These common foundations include certain constraints on the exercise of state power, challenging the widespread view that the rule of law should be conceived as a purely procedural ideal.

      The book explains the essential connections between a range of matters critical to the relationship between citizen and state, including freedoms of speech and conscience, civil disobedience, procedural fairness, administrative justice, the right of silence, and equal protection or equality before the law. The limits of parliamentary sovereignty are shown to derive from its status as a common law doctrine, when the common law is interpreted as a deliberative process of moral argument and justification. Legislative supremacy is qualified by a counter-balancing judicial sovereignty, ensuring the protection of fundamental common law rights of procedural fairness and equality.

      Keywords: constitutional theory, liberal law, rule of law, constitutionalism, public law, political philosophy, case-law, common law countries


      The principle of popular sovereignty is what distinguished the new American republic from every other nation whichpreceded it in human history.7 Popular sovereignty remains the single most important animating principle of American constitutional law. But the concept of popular sovereignty is not a simple, unitary idea; instead, it comprises a number of interrelated and mutually reinforcing elements. In particular, the American conception of popular sovereignty embraces the following seven fundamental principles:

      1. The Rule of Law. The people are sovereign and their will is expressed through law. The Constitution is ordained and established as law—the supreme law of the land.

      2. Limited Government. The people are sovereign, not the government. By adopting the Constitution the people created the government, imposed limits upon its power, and divided that power among different levels and branches.

      3. Inalienable Rights. Every individual person is sovereign in the sense that he or she retains certain inalienable rights, which the government is bound to respect.

      4. Equal Political Rights. Each person is a sovereign political actor; therefore each person has an equal right to participate in government. Accordingly, the Constitution protects freedom of political expression, freedom of political association, the equal right to vote, and the principle of majority rule.

      5. Separation of Church and State. The people are sovereign, not God. Laws reflect the will of the people, not the presumed will of God. Religious authority is not a legitimate basis to support the enactment or interpretation of any law or the adoption of any official practice.

      6. The Power of the National Government Over the States. The American people are sovereign, not the states. No state has the power to secede from the union or to nullify any federal law. The states retain only those powers not granted to the federal government or reserved to the people.

      7. National Independence and the Limited Authority of International Law. The American people as a whole are sovereign and independent and are not subject to any foreign law or power. The political representatives of the American people have the power to abrogate treaties or other forms of international law.

      Over the centuries each of these constitutional principles has blossomed and borne fruit. As Morgan predicted, the principle of popular sovereignty in all of its manifestations has continued to change and develop, resulting in profound changes in the interpretation of the Constitution.8

      Part I of this article defines the meaning of the term “sovereignty” generally. Part II describes how the concept of popular sovereignty was understood in America at the time of the founding and during the antebellum period, particularly as it found expression in the Declaration of Independence and the speeches of Abraham Lincoln. Part III of this article discusses the seven principles which are implicit in the American concept of popular sovereignty, and how the evolving nature of our understanding of these principles has affected the interpretation of the Constitution down to the present day.;Constantly


      Summary: This paper aims to answer the following question: what is the understanding of the principle of sovereignty in the EU today, and how should this knowledge inform our actions tomorrow? It is demonstrated that from both doctrinal and practical points of view, it is impossible to determine conclusively what sovereignty or its preservation entails in the present European legal setting. The only point of clarity regarding the contemporary interpretation of sovereignty is that the principle should no longer be conceived in traditional and absolute terms – since this would be incompatible with the current European legal and political reality.

      Yet, while there seems to be an agreement on what sovereignty is not, there is no agreement, in either legal doctrine or practice, on what this principle actually is. It is argued that such a deeply contested nature of sovereignty puts in question not only the role and strength of this principle, but also the adequacy of its use as a legal parameter for determining the boundaries of the European integration process. It is thus concluded that in legal debates concerning the future of the EU, arguments relying on sovereignty should not be taken at face value. Rather, they should be approached with a critical eye and with full awareness of the disputed nature of the principle they rest upon.;Constantly

    329. CameronB Brodie says:

      No man is an island and no nation is fully sovereign, not in the globalised world we live in today. The British constitution has had its day, it is no longer fit-for-purpose. The doctrine of rule-of-law begs for Scots to be re-united with their popular sovereignty (that includes new Scots, as well).

      Doctrine Of Sovereignty

      EDITOR’S NOTE:- The concept of sovereignty has been evolving since time immemorial. Since the World Wars, countries have stepped up their sensibilities towards their territorial limits. The recent South China Sea dispute highlighted how territoriality has extended itself to water bodies as well as air space. This article discusses the political theories explaining sovereignty. It also delves into aspects such as de jure and de facto control, with special emphasis on critically evaluating Austin’s theory.


      A State and the doctrine of sovereignty are inseparable parts of the same machine. Therefore, it is impossible to discuss one, without understanding what the other entails. In the simplest terms, the doctrine of sovereignty refers to the quality of enjoying a superseding authority over a geographical area or a populace. However, before going further into understanding what sovereignty is, it is important to first understand what a State is.

      The Theory of EU Constitutional Pluralism: A Crisis in a Crisis?

      The semantics of constitutional sovereignty in post-sovereign “new” Europe: A case study of the Czech Constitutional Court’s jurisprudence

    330. yesindyref2 says:

      @Tinto Chiel
      Interesting one, I never noticed. I found this with a similar question and some sort of answer:

    331. Fred says:

      @ Tinto, was the Polis UJ badge not the handiwork of heid-puddock Bernard Higgins?

      Anent Arlene Foster/Mark Gattis, Royston Vasey’s own. “You’ll Never Leave!”

    332. Tinto Chiel says:

      Thanks for that, yesindyref2. Funny things was, I didn’t seem to notice any on Saturday and yet I saw quite a few police over the course of the day and my eyes are rather sensitive to the BA. Maybe no-one was wearing stab vests….

      @Fred: used to like the menacing, throaty voice of the LoG character who used to rasp, “Are you LOCAL?” at any incomers. Post-Brexit, England seems to be turning into one giant Royston Vasey, imo.

      Apologies for double post. The first didn’t appear, then I remembered my polis query and tried again. Awaiting hammers.

    333. stu mac says:

      @Robert Peffers says:
      10 October, 2018 at 12:23 am

      The Pope obliged but as Bruce was monarch and the normal laws of the time throughout Christendom was Divine Right of Kings the Pope applied that law.

      You missed a step. On Comyn’s death and guessing what was coming, Bruce moved very quickly to have himself crowned king (By Bishop Wishart IIRC a long time supporter) so by the time of the excommunication thing he was king. A small point but it makes a difference as the way you wrote it seemed to imply he was king at the time of Comyn’s death, probably not what you meant. They had met to try to come to an accommodation – possibly to agree to differ and put off their quarrel until after the English were overthrown. We’ll never know for as you say the killing of one meant whatever happened was kept quiet.

      One thing that is known is that Bruce and Red Comyn had a great dislike of each other, beyond merely the family rivalry (both had claims to the throne, Comyn being related to Baliol) and at one point at a meeting of Scots nobles they had to be pulled apart after going at each other daggers drawn. This – though far from definitive – suggests the killing of Comyn may have been a case where a disagreement on terms led and argument then a fight resulting in the killing.

    334. Fred says:

      A case of Comyn assault if ever ah seen wan!

    Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.

    ↑ Top