The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

The Delusionists

Posted on May 27, 2019 by

We’ve watched in growing amazement this morning as some Remain supporters have tried to spin last night’s election results as somehow representing a Remain victory. Much of it has been based on this batshit-mad graphic from the BBC website:

We’ll give you a moment to digest that one.

No, you haven’t lost your mind. The graph really DOES try to exclude the Tories from a count of “pro-Brexit” parties, as if they were somehow neutral on the issue. Yes, that IS absolutely demented. Yes, the state broadcaster HAS done it anyway. God knows why.

Add the Tories in and the figures become 44% for Brexit, 40% against. And of course, in reality you need to add Labour too, because no matter what most of its supporters and MPs might want, the party campaigned unequivocally and unambiguously on a platform of leaving the EU (just a bit more gently), making the total 58%.

But what the reality-deniers insist is that the result must somehow lead to a general election and/or a second referendum, in which Remain would win. So let’s pretend that that isn’t cobblers (although it is) and examine how it might theoretically happen.

For a general election, there has to either be a two-thirds majority in Parliament (no chance) or the government has to lose a vote of confidence. This seems stupendously unlikely. The Tories survived one in January by 19 votes, and would need the DUP to vote against them (not just abstain) to lose a new one.

The Tories have just recorded their worst election performance in around 150 years, and could not possibly expect to win any new election. They currently don’t even have a real leader, and won’t have for two months. It would be beyond insane for any of them to back a no-confidence vote and trigger an election before the end of July with their party in absolute chaos, and even more obviously ridiculous to do it after they’ve just elected a new leader.

Beyond a reasonable doubt an election held in such circumstances would mean either Labour or the Brexit Party would be the biggest party – both nightmare options for every Tory MP, from Remainers to super-hardcore Brexiters, and also for the DUP.

So it’s all but impossible to see how a vote of no confidence could possibly pass. But if by some miracle it did, the mess it would create would be unimaginable.

Nobody can even begin to guess what sort of policy Labour would campaign on. If they campaigned on a second referendum the electorate would be incandescent with rage – they’re already sick to death of being asked to vote on stuff and wouldn’t vote just for another vote.

(We don’t even know what kind of a second referendum Labour would actually want. What would be on the ballot paper? No deal? Remain? Some imaginary unicorn deal that the EU have endlessly said they’re not willing to negotiate? Two options, three options or more? What would the threshold for victory be if there were more than two?)

If on the other hand Labour were to run on a straight “revoke Article 50” platform they’d be destroyed in their heartland seats in the north of England, and not make anywhere near enough gains elsewhere to compensate. They’d be fighting the newly-resurgent Lib Dems for the Remain vote, and would struggle to be seen as a credible Remain party under Jeremy Corbyn. And in the FPTP electoral system splitting the Remain vote in such a way would be fatal.

For Remain to happen it would require the Remain side to agree firstly on what their referendum would actually be, and then unite around a single party to vote for in the election to get it, and none of that is going to happen. Can you REALLY imagine the Lib Dems, freshly risen from the political grave, standing aside for Labour and gifting Jeremy Corbyn five years of power? Or vice versa?

The Brexit vote, however, would be unlikely to be split. We’ve already seen that Tory voters are profoundly out of patience waiting for Brexit to be delivered. The evidence suggests they’d make good on the explicit final warning they delivered last night and vote for the Brexit Party, as would the small rump of UKIP voters. Farage’s party would reach the tipping point at which FPTP would work in their favour and they’d end up with most seats and a mandate to have Farage in Downing Street.

(Remember, Labour won an absolute majority in 2005 on 35% of the vote. Last night the Brexit Party-plus-UKIP vote was 35%, and that’s without any more Tory defectors.)

This is nothing like 2014, when UKIP voters in the EU election knew perfectly well that they’d have to vote Tory in 2015 to get their referendum. This time Farage could credibly make a play for every seat in England, having swept almost every council area last night in a vote that was seen – just as a general election would be – as a proxy EU referendum. And we know he won’t be short of funding or airtime.

Leave voters would know with certainty that they had to vote Brexit Party this time or end up with at best another hung parliament unable to deliver Brexit, and years more torture for the entire country. Even some Remainers might vote TBP to avoid that.

There is simply no credible outcome of a general election that translates to a Remain win. That means the only way to turn what polls show is majority support for Remain into an actual vote would be a second referendum.

But for all the reasons above, that’s even more implausible than a general election. A second referendum has been repeatedly defeated in Parliament and there’s no sign that the rebel Labour MPs who scuppered it are about to change their minds.

And in any event, the government simply doesn’t have to allow another vote on a second referendum at all. To the best of our knowledge there are no Parliamentary means by which one can now be forced. A confidence vote leading to an election is the only option, and we’ve dealt with all that already.

So the only plausible outcomes from here are these:

1. A new Tory leader is elected who is willing to whip his/her party for a second referendum, guaranteeing its death. Let’s generously call that a long shot at 1%.

2. A new PM asks the EU for another extension, dragging the whole process out for goodness knows how much longer with no real prospects of any meaningful progress – the EU has made it abundantly plain it will not renegotiate the deal. Like option (1) this would be suicide for the Tories, only slower.

It’s moderately conceivable that someone like Michael Gove might try it anyway, hoping for some external deus ex machina to save him in the next two years, but it’s questionable whether the exasperated EU would even go along with it if he did, and of course it would require Gove to win the Tory leadership election in the first place. So let’s say 5%.

3. A new PM somehow convinces his/her MPs to vote for the current withdrawal agreement at the 11th hour, terrifying them with a picture of Tory destruction. The chance of success for this strategy are approximately zero, but you can’t rule anything out nowadays, so let’s go with 1% again.

4. The new PM lets the clock run down (probably while going through the empty motions of trying to get a deal), and the UK leaves with no deal on 31 October. This, as we’ve previously noted, represents the Tories’ only chance of not being obliterated in the next general election, whether it’s in 2022 or earlier.

Most of the candidates for the Tory leadership with any chance of winning have expressly backed this approach already, and it’s by far the most likely. Our figures suggest 93%.

That’s where we are, folks, and all the wishing and spinning in the world won’t make it go away. Run, Scotland, run.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

2 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. 27 05 19 14:56

    The Delusionists | speymouth

  2. 27 05 19 16:23

    Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them | A Wilderness of Peace

219 to “The Delusionists”

  1. Mcdenster says:

    Yes, I know I’m fartin at thunder wishing for the bowler hat bamsticks to have a Damascus moment. Scotland better do an Allan Wells on Columbian Dancin Powder. Stat.

  2. Ian Brotherhood says:

    It’s one thing to try and talk someone in from the window-ledge. It’s quite another to shackle yourself to them, especially if they’re ten times heavier than you.

    Let’s just GTF out, eh? Please?

  3. MerkinScot says:

    Time to DissolveTheUnion. Now.

  4. Republicofscotland says:

    Very good points there Rev, I’d imagine our best bet to exit the union is if Boris Johnson becomes PM, and pushes for a no deal Brexit.

  5. Rob Outram says:

    The writing is on the wall, I’ve got my Reeboks on already.

  6. tartanfever says:

    I read some of the Twitter hashtag ‘remain surge’ and am astonished by many ‘credible’ commentators peddling this rubbish.

    Is there a subplot at work here to try and oust Jeremy Corbyn ?

  7. Mac says:

    The SNP has come top in the Western Isles in the final declaration in Scotland, winning 43.7% of the votes. The Brexit Party was second with 1,640 votes (19.9%), Labour in third with 814 votes (9.9%) and the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats in joint fourth with 611 votes (7.4%).
    The results confirm a sweeping SNP victory in Scotland in which Scottish Labour failed to win a single European seat after more than 200,000 voters deserted the party over Brexit and it suffered its worst election in modern political history”

    On the basis of these results, plus referendum results, plus the SNP being in power on a Remain manifesto, Scotland is entitled to refer the Brexit process to the United Nations and to the EU.

    Scotland is a country that wishes to remain. There is no confusion.

    Any form of Brexit forced on Scotland is a democratic deficit and attack on the rights of the residents of Scotland.

    Let’s get Scottish Independence onto the table and part of the debate NOW!!

  8. panda paws says:

    Dissolve the 1707 Union or Scotland itself will be dissolved from existence becoming North Britain forever.

  9. Mac says:

    “No, you haven’t lost your mind. The graph really DOES try to exclude the Tories from a count of “pro-Brexit” parties, as if they were somehow neutral on the issue. Yes, that IS absolutely demented. Yes, the state broadcaster HAS done it anyway. God knows why”.

    Easy answer to this. Some bright spark thought that if they included the Tories as Leave, they would have to include Labour as Remain. And that would not have been the result they wanted to show.

    Better we just leave it as a close fudge, with an anyones guess split in each party.

  10. Mac says:

    Please Nicola write an open letter to the Conservatives now, promising that any form of Brexit now is against the democratic wishes of Scotland… and as such we will fight with all we have to remain in the EU.

    Yes, we all know this already. But get it much more in the public eye. Let them recognise that Brexit IS the end of the UK.

    It really is time to bang the drum, before the Brexit party is finished.

  11. Effijy says:

    Rev, I recall you being asked into propaganda quay as their script writer faked shock at being announce blatantly biased propagandists.

    Perhaps they would like to explain why when the Tories and Labour stated categorically that they were pro Brexit, the BBC translates this and presents it as Not For Brexit?

    The Beeb are absolutely astonishingly pathetic.

    Is that true or did you hear it on the BBC.

  12. Calum McKay says:

    Does Johnson believe in brexit?

    I doubt it, he went in to hiding before deciding which side to join, he could have gone either way, he chose to stab Cameron in the back.

    I believe he saw brexit as the vehicle to get him into Number 10, no more, no less.

    Johnson has acted out a strident stance and manipulated public opinion that is geared towards brexit, purely to get himself elected by the tory unthinking faithful.

    Has he any room for manoeuvre if he gets the job? He could say “the country is completely fed up with brexit, parliament can’t make a decision, I am going to put it back to the people, and I will implement that decision immediately”.

    If brexit wins, he’s quids in and uk exits on WTO, uk decline accelerates and likely Scottish independence and Irish reunification, but hey, he’s PM.

    If remain wins, he’s quids in too. He has listened to the people, uk remains, there would be an economic boost. How Scottish and Irish affairs react is to be seen, but hey, he’s PM.

    Remember life’s number one lesson learned, never trust a tory!

    Who’d have thought we’d be here three years ago, where will we be in another three years, round the top table in the EU in our own right I hope!

  13. Confused says:

    thus is shown the time-wasting folly of a “peoples vote”/brexitref’#2
    – leave would probably win again
    – and the SNP should just stand well back

    the english really do want to leave – for a litany of semi-justified (but misguided) and outright batshit loco reasons
    – the english really hate their elite and their middle class liberals; bbc/guardian types with holiday homes in tuscany telling people without jobs, what is good for them
    – they might be woke on the issues, but lack any self awareness

  14. Taranaich says:

    Been working on a post like this, but mostly grilling the Lib Dems over their despicable flip-flopping over who counts as a Remain/Brexit party.

  15. Robert Louis says:

    Mac at 204PM,

    I agree with your idea for the FM to within a day, send an open letter, copied to the world’s media, that these results have made it clear once again, that the country of Scotland does not want brexit. That their is ZERO democratic mandate for Scotland to be forcibly removed from the EU against its wishes – or indeed for the EU to permit such a thing.

    The letter should also re-iterate all the electoral mandates which the Scottish government now has.

    Such things are important. I assume the FM will already be drafting such a letter. At every turn we must re-inforce the clear message that Scotland is NOT leaving the EU, just because England has gone loopy.

    FM must keep adding to the pressure. Cannot sit and watch from the sidelines, she MUST take every opportunity to add to their woes in England. Every freaking day.

    We really do need out of this cursed and undemocratic union with England ASAP.

  16. Sunniva says:

    Can we say with certainty that votes cast for Labour or Tories were definitely votes for Brexit? We can surmise that is the position of the parties, but the voters?

    OK, so we do have turnout of around 37%. Which suggests the rest don’t care.

    We do have committed Remainers like Hesaltine and Alistair Campbell voting LD.

    So I suppose you are probably right that votes for Labour and Tories weren’t ‘don’t knows’ on the EU question.

  17. Bob Mack says:

    Either the Union is dissolved or the possibility arises that the Scottish Parliament will be dissolved.

    I believe it is that serious.

    This is an existential threat to both Tory and Labour as well as the UK. They will have to act to keep Scotland under wraps.

  18. mike cassidy says:

    While you’re absorbing the current state of political play

    Amuse yourself at the thought of the Queen having to ask Michael Gove to form a government

  19. Ghillie says:

    Thank you thank you and well done to everyone who got out to vote!

    And a huge ginormious thank you to everyone who worked so hard to send 3 SNP MEPs to the EU 🙂

    Europe can see yet again in a blazing golden glow how very very much Scotland wants to remain in the European fold =)

  20. Robert Louis says:

    From REV’s twitter,

    As per usual, the paid liars at the BBC have intentionally within their graphics, made the SNP look smaller, whilst making Labour and Tories artificially bigger. I’m sure they will try to tell us all, ‘it was just accidental’. F*cking lying propagandists at the Westminster government controlled and funded BBC. They really are the absolute pits.

    The whole lot of them should be put in jail for fraud.

  21. Abulhaq says:

    Albeit early, a quick scan of the European online media suggests few are concerned by the election results from the UK. They have more pressing domestic matters than Faragism. The few that do, report things from the usual London perspective where correspondents consort with the anglo-great-and-the-good. Scotland…mainly out of sight. Life beyond London is certainly tough.
    Which is worse, to be ignored or to be marginalized?
    The British Union threw a colonial cloak of invisibility over Scotland. Those Unionist wear it with such ‘pride’.
    To see ourselves as others see us? if only we could actually be seen.

  22. Scozzie says:

    Like I said in your last article, Scotland needs to forget Brexit and concentrate on independence.

    The SNP simply does not have the arithmetic in Westminster and neither do the remain leaning MPs to prevent Brexit. No potential cross party pseudo-coalition can agree on what form of Brexit they want – it’s completely fragmented across multiple lines.

    The UK is heading towards a no deal because the Tory government needs to prevent the Conservative party from breaking up. It’s simply party over national interest.

    The SNP, after the EU election result, needs to hit the jugular. Despite my criticisms of the referendum legislation going through Holyrood a little too late (in my opinion); I believe now is the time for the SNP to go on the attack. Name the date, start the campaign.

  23. Robert Louis says:

    Scozzie at 249pm,

    Totally agree with your last sentence. NOW is the time.

  24. schrodingers cat says:

    FINAL numbers for last night now in

    2014 EUE 33.5 turnout
    SNP 389,503
    LAB 348,219
    LIB 179,061
    TORY 231,330
    SG 108,305
    BXP 170,807*

    UKIP 140,534
    BNP 13,639
    BF 10,216
    NOEU 6,418

    2015 GE 71.1% turnout
    SNP 1,454,436
    LAB 707,147
    LIB 219,675
    TORY 434,097
    SG 39,205
    UKIP 47,078

    2016 HE (CONS) 55.6% turnout
    SNP 1,059,897
    LAB 514,261
    LIB 178,238
    TORY 501,844
    SG 13,172
    UKIP 46,426 (LIST VOTE ONLY)

    2017 GE 66.4% turnout
    SNP 977,569
    LAB 717,007
    LIB 179,061
    TORY 757,949
    SG 5,886
    UKIP 5,302

    2019 EUE 38% turnout
    SNP 594,533
    LAB 146,724
    LIB 238,289*
    TORY 182,476
    SG 129,603
    BXP 233,424*

    UKIP 28,418

    CUK 30,004

  25. schrodingers cat says:

    There is simply no credible outcome of a general election that translates to a Remain win. That means the only way to turn what polls show is majority support for Remain into an actual vote would be a second referendum

    not certain, but i agree, in a ge, leave will win either by a BXP or BXP/TORY coalition. that is why for bojo/farage to win a mandate for no deal, the best way is via a ge

  26. I was listening to the EU results coming in for England in the early hours of this morning on Radio 4.

    I heard similar nonsense being peddled Libdem Ed Davey and potential Libdem leader Jo Swinson.

    That the combined remain vote parties were ahead of the brexit vote parties.

    I didn’t hear them include tory or Labour as brexit parties.

  27. Robert Peffers says:

    I wonder why, of all times, the FM arranged to be in an EU Member State, (The Republic of Ireland), when these EU election Results were being announced?

    Just sayin’ like.

  28. schrodingers cat says:

    2014 EUE 33.5 turnout
    LAB 348,219

    2015 GE 71.1% turnout
    LAB 707,147

    2016 HE (CONS) 55.6% turnout
    LAB 514,261

    2017 GE 66.4% turnout
    LAB 717,007

    2019 EUE 38% turnout
    LAB 146,724

    the difference between the votes in 2014,15,16 and 17 are consistent wrt the turn out

    last night, support for labour in scotland, in real terms, more than halved.

    if a ge was called in the next few months, slabs support in scotland would fall from from 27% to about 13%

    I cannot see anything that corbyn can or could do to change that

  29. mike cassidy says:

    Robert Peffers 3.00

    Well, its obvious she has no idea what she’s doing

    So it must be a complete and utter accident of timing!

  30. Scottish Steve says:

    Scotland has only one way out but Westminster has a perpetual veto. The Tories will just say no forever to a second indyref. So what do we do? Hold a referendum the UK gov deems illegal and sends police/troops up here to batter us at the polling stations Spanish style?

    It’s all looking rather bleak.

  31. schrodingers cat says:

    2014 EUE 33.5 turnout
    LIB 179,061

    2015 GE 71.1% turnout
    LIB 219,675

    2016 HE (CONS) 55.6% turnout
    LIB 178,238

    2017 GE 66.4% turnout
    LIB 179,061

    2019 EUE 38% turnout
    LIB 238,289*
    (30k was from CUK)

    The libdems are good at getting out their vote, what little there is in Scotland. but in real terms, ie a ge with a much bigger turnout, they will continue to poll about 6-8% in scotland. their claims to have made a huge leap forward are havers

  32. schrodingers cat says:

    2014 EUE 33.5 turnout
    SG 108,305

    2015 GE 71.1% turnout
    SG 39,205

    2016 HE (CONS) 55.6% turnout
    SG 13,172

    2017 GE 66.4% turnout
    SG 5,886

    2019 EUE 38% turnout
    SG 129,603

    the greens voting patterns are all over the place, indicating that their supporters vote tactically depending on the type of election, it is possible that many snp (and a few unionists) vote for them in PR elections, like the eu elections. (cf holyrood 2016 list vote 140k votes, mainly from snp voters)

    in a ge, their share of the vote will drop back down to 1 or 2%

  33. geeo says:

    Mac @2.04pm.

    I think that WM tories may get the message when the INDYREF BILL starts its passage through Holyrood later this week.

    A Bill will a very clear majority to pass it easily.

    Then it is off directly to Betty for Royal Assent, and at that point, WM can decide to challenge its competence and refer it to the UKSC.

    Not sure WM would be too keen on that route.

    So, if unopposed by WM the Indyref bill passes into law, Scots Law, and still no mention of a S.30 yet.

    So, Scotsgov progresses a non S.30 indyref, under Scots Law (unopposed) and Yes win.

    If WM refuse to recognise the result (due to no S.30) then that is a clear and obvious subjugation of Scots Law and a fatal breach of the Treaty of Union (article 19)

    It is a legal slam dunk. Scotland tells the international community we have exercised our sovereign will to be independent, by ending the treaty of union.

    WM can huff and puff, but it is game over.

    And that process starts later this week apparently, so the argument/hysterics of SNP doing nithing/not enough, by certain folk on here, has zero credibility.

  34. Abulhaq says:

    @Scozzie 2:49pm
    The soft, diplomatic cross party, ie Unionist parties, approach has been tried and failed.
    England is headed for exit without an agreement, we seem headed the same way.
    A forceful declaration by Sturgeon that Scotland will not be forced to quit the EU, effectively a challenge to the cherished English parliamentary sovereignty concept (with the usual establishment threats and constitutional ‘consequences’), would be appropriate.
    We need to bring this matter to a head. The BritNats should not be allowed to hog our stage.

  35. The way the media are reporting the e.u. Results is a disgrace they are reporting the losers first and the winners last I mean the lib dems came in 2nd that means they lost who would trust them remember student fees or labour with weapons of mass destruction or the tories with we will implement the ref., result and the 3of them with the vow ??? Proven liars all of them and the media keep putting up these people A.Campbell T.Blair V. Cable etc., all them are held in contempt by decent people but not by the media maybe they think we have forgotten their lies well we never will and never should to many poor souls lie in their graves because of them the only honour they have is dishonour

  36. Steph says:

    Only future Scotland has is independence. We need out of this chaos.

  37. Joe says:

    Very good analysis. Excellent in fact.

    Though there is something missing in all this. You appear to take the view that the EU doesnt need the UK economy. I can already imagine the frustration some people on here might have of reading that. But let me explain:

    Firstly: The UK is the 6th biggest economy in the world. The EU (along with the rest of the world except the US currently) is showing all the indicators of having nearly ended this market cycle and a significant drop in GDP growth (and even recession) totally inevitable in the upcoming year/s. Numbers show that without a trade deal German big business would suffer significantly. You dont just dismiss the 6th biggest economy in the world that is just off your shore and not suffer. The political ramifications of this would be strong in Germany and other EU nations as business would crucify any politician inept enough to allow this to happen.

    Secondly: the EU is entering a political quagmire of its own making. By dismissing the working class of Europe in the migrant crisis these people are turning to the populist right and anti-EU parties as their only means of recourse as the political left has utterly abandoned them all in the name of Progressive political posturing.

    Third: anybody who looks at the data on the Euro and the impact this has had on the individual countries of the Eurozone (only the Netherlands and Germany have net benefits) and one can see that the end will come for the single currency eventually also.

    The EU simply CANNOT afford to have the UK walk out on the EU without significant penalties (penalties which will be bad also for a weakening EU economy) since if the UK did so then member states of the EU would see no reason to follow the EU either and the EU would start to break apart.

    The EU needs a deal with the UK just as much as the UK does with the EU, the difference is they are stronger negotiators so far. We are all being punished by the political establishment on both sides of this argument. The numbers dont lie but the political class does.

  38. schrodingers cat says:

    2014 EUE 33.5 turnout
    BXP 170,807*

    2015 GE 71.1% turnout
    UKIP 47,078

    2016 HE (CONS) 55.6% turnout
    UKIP 46,426 (LIST VOTE ONLY)

    2017 GE 66.4% turnout
    UKIP 5,302

    2019 EUE 38% turnout
    BXP 233,424*

    In terms of the far right, it is clear they too vote tactically unless it is a pr vote, like the eu or holyrood list etc.

    the low turn out of the eu elections, flatters their result in terms of overall % etc, but when it counts, they can get out their voters. last night they gain 60k votes, 33% more which in a ge, will increase the far right vote from 3 to 5 %, thats if they dont have a reason to vote tory, eg a bojo no deal PM

  39. CameronB Brodie says:

    The full-English Brexit is a right-wing coupe and the BBC is a complicit instrument of the New Right. They are playing on our phenomenal conservatism. English nationalism uber alles.

  40. Doug McGregor says:

    That Scotland / England border is getting closer. Hopefully that’s why Nicola is in Eire today , a solution that would at least be workable.

  41. yesindyref2 says:

    Just one little thing:

    “and would struggle to be seen as a credible Remain party under Jeremy Corbyn”

    make that a credible anything party as in

    “and would struggle to be seen as a credible anything party under Jeremy Corbyn”

  42. geeo says:

    Belting graph of EU political mapping from 2004 to last nights results.

  43. schrodingers cat says:

    2014 EUE 33.5 turnout
    TORY 231,330

    2015 GE 71.1% turnout
    TORY 434,097

    2016 HE (CONS) 55.6% turnout
    TORY 501,844

    2017 GE 66.4% turnout
    TORY 757,949

    2019 EUE 38% turnout
    TORY 182,476

    2014,15 and 16 tory votes are in line with turn outs, but 2017 showed a real rise. last night, they fell of a cliff. I think there are a lot of no shows here, even if you added all of the BXP votes to their tally, as could happen in a ge under a no deal bojo PM, their vote is still down, ie they didnt show up. those that did, might not support bojo in a ge either.

    all in all, a very bad night for the tories with little light for them at the end of the tunnel. even combining their votes with BXP, doubtful they would get more than 15% at a ge.

  44. yesindyref2 says:

    The problem (1) is that Farage is funny, so it’s difficult to take him seriously, so he is no threat, so nobody minds him. Yay, his funny party got 29 seats, what a lark!

    The problem (2) is that he is dangerous. Really dangerous. Because he’s actually serious.

  45. katherine hamilton says:

    Scottish Steve at 3.08

    Whit! I’m in my 60’s and if that happens I’ll be at the front of the protest and take my kicking. The young un’s at the back. Grow a backbone. This is Scotland we’re fighting for not your “bleakness”. F off.

  46. Ottomanboi says:

    I did hear NF say something rather pithy last night, he protested that politics should not be dull.
    On that one point at least he might have a point.
    More spark in Scottish politics? More élan, panache and brio, a bit less of the seriously cautious Scotch lawyer?

  47. yesindyref2 says:

    @Scottish Steve
    Have you ever heard of the expression “Rule of Law”? Well, Scotland has it, but so surprisingly does the UK.

    Have you ever heard of the UK Civil Guards? No? That’s because they don’t fucking exist. So “police” are NOT going to be sent up to Scotland unless requested by Police Scotland, as they do not have jurisdiction on our “Rule of Law”.

    So you posting is complete mince, and at that, all sawdust and no meat.

    But you knew that.

  48. Ken500 says:

    There will be no Brexit. The Westminster unionists imbeciles will stagger on until the next GE. The complete and utter chaos.

    Scotland will have another IndyRef and win.

  49. Giving Goose says:

    Re Jo Swinson; the English electorate must be swamped with information that weakens her profile.
    Potential voters need to understand that Jo Swinson is simply a careerist, no different from other careerist politicians.
    Jo Swinson has absolutely no interest in making life better for ordinary people.
    All online forums & conversations need to be seeded with this information.

    Regarding the future of Scotland; if a way forward, within Scots Law, cannot be found to dissolve the union and dissolve it quickly, then we just have no option but to go through the timescale of events as framed by The Rev.
    A no deal Brexit (actually it’s the default) is then the Brexit that has to be taken. Let it happen, let the voters of Scotland feel the pain, experience the chaos and economic reality.
    Then let them choose their path to a better Scotland from that very low baseline. It will definitely help in setting perspectives.

  50. @katherine hamilton,

    well said,

    you`ll no be standin alone,

    Nemo me impune lacessit ya bass 🙂

  51. Ken500 says:

    Add in the debt. UK is 26th in the world.

    It is smaller countries that are the most prosperous, Norway, Finland, NZ, Singapore, Switzerland. Germany is prosperous. The UK is one of the most unequal countries in the world, with massive debts.

  52. Scottish Steve says:

    @katherine hamilton

    There’s no need to be so fucking cheeky. How about you f*ck off?


    Don’t you recall Red Clydeside? When the strike happened, they locked up the Scottish soldiers in their barracks because the government felt their loyalty was in question. They instead sent English troops up to quell the strikers.

    You don’t see the UK state behaving in such a way again to defend its territorial integrity?

  53. Terry callachan says:

    It has been a resounding win for SNP in these EU elections no doubt about it.
    Wings shows us here that across the UK the remain side are still in the minority by a lot

    These EU results show that in Scotland the support for remain is about the same as it was in the brexit referendum

    It still looks as if those supporting Scottish independence are a minority
    SAD but true

    I believe that whoever becomes the new PM will still refuse a S30 for a Scottish independence referendum Theresa May said it would not even be looked at until brexit was well and truly complete , I believe that will still be England’s stance.

    Nicola Sturgeon will never ever just declare Scottish independence no matter what Westminster’s intransigence nor will she just go ahead with a Scottish independence referendum without England’s agreement she will always go down the politically correct by the book route so all this talk of Nicola Sturgeon writing Westminster a letter to say Scotland is ending the union or Scotland is going ahead with another independence referendum sounds nice but it is nonsense and is never going to happen we live in a modern democracy so it will always be done by the book.
    Again sad but true.

    Just who are this majority who continue to support the union
    Labour voters are falling in number so are Tory voters their ship is sinking having been holed by the brexit dilemma
    They haven’t in the main moved over to SNP so where have they gone ?
    The brexit party ? for sure
    The Lib Dems ? I would say yes to that too

    It looks as if the NO to Scottish independence voters are swilling around in a quagmire of grimy choices desperate to find a life belt to cling to but can the SNP or the greens throw them a lifeline that they will grasp ?

    I fear not , if it were going to happen it would have happened by now because brexit has caused the biggest division in politics ever known

    The NO to Scottish independence voters from 2014 feel just as strongly about that subject
    as the remainers and brexiters do about brexit

    Here and there some have moved from one side to the other both in the Indy and the brexit debate but on the whole I just don’t see any great change

    Because of the way information is disseminated in Scotland I don’t think we will ever get a clear picture of exactly who the more than 50% are that continue to reject Scottish independence.

  54. yesindyref2 says:

    @Scottish Steve
    This is 2019 not 1919, Scotland is devolved, and so is policing.

  55. Ahundredthidiot says:




  56. Col.Blimp IV says:

    What was that on the radio?

    Scottish Labour – Nil Points … I thought Eurovision was last week.

  57. katherine hamilton says:

    HI Steve
    Happy to F off out of UK. No probs. Yes I am well versed in the history of Clydeside. That’s my point. They stood strong. So should we. That’s all. Apologies if I went too far.

  58. schrodingers cat says:

    2014 EUE 33.5 turnout
    SNP 389,503

    2015 GE 71.1% turnout
    SNP 1,454,436

    2016 HE (CONS) 55.6% turnout
    SNP 1,059,897

    2017 GE 66.4% turnout
    SNP 977,569

    2019 EUE 38% turnout
    SNP 594,533

    this was a very very good result for the snp, in terms of turn out, it is on a par with 2015, 1400k on 71% vs 600k on 38%,
    the snp would certainly increase there vote from 2017, i think 45%is not impossible.

    once again, getting out the vote is critical, especially in the coming ge, why? because the tories and labour will struggle big time. BXP and lib dems wont struggle, but they will be starting from a very low % of the vote.

    this could be our chance.

    i much more up beat about this result now i have seen the actual numbers

  59. Scottish Steve says:


    Policing is devolved but the army is not. You cant rule out anything with Westminster.

    @katherine hamilton

    We’re all on the same side here. No use in being at each other’s throats.

  60. yesindyref2 says:

    @Terry callachan
    I’ve got great news for you Terry, this’ll cheer you up 🙂

    “Legislation establishing rules for indyref2 to be introduced this week”

  61. katherine hamilton says:


  62. Andrew says:

    fab analysis. I really, really don’t know why the SNP are pursuing a ‘people’s vote’ which has no mandate over a second indy ref which DOES have a very clear mandate. No, I don’t want to leave the EU but independence has to come first.

  63. yesindyref2 says:

    @Scottish Steve
    Like I said, the UK has the “Rule of Law”. The UK Government can’t just order the army to kill Scottish citizens in Scotland, that would be murder. If a referendum is legal, then it’s legal, and there’s nothing outside the Law the UK Government can do, or it breaks the Rule of Law.

    Here’s an example of what happens when the UK Government tries:

    it loses, and is forced to obey the Law.

    Like I said, you’re talking alarmist defeatist mince.

  64. Joe says:


    Because the SNP should be called the SIP ‘Scottish Internationalist Party.’ They are, increasingly, globalists masquerading as nationalists.

  65. Joe says:


    You are thinking a little too much in 2 dimensions. You are correct, that tactic would not be used because it would have to be condemned internationally.

    It would look more like this – Scotland would see a surprising surge in Pro unionist groups using violence and intimidation with just enough media coverage to keep them on people’s minds. Then there would be counter groups who are ‘pro independence’ rising up and the violence would escalate further til the point that people would start to think that maybe a return to how things were would be preferable.

    Then for the good of us all Westminster would send security forces to help maintain order and ‘return stability’ so that eventually Scotland could start the transition to a peaceful independent country once the ‘troubles’ were over.

    Of course that ‘peace’ would not happen. Well, not while the oil is in Scottish waters or the majority want independence.

    Its fairly textbook British Intelligence stuff and has been done all over the world. 1 trillion +/- of oil assets doesnt just get handed to normal people.

  66. Terry callachan says:

    To Yesindyref2..your post at 4.27pm 27th May

    Two years is a long time in politics
    waiting until 2021 or even next year for a Scottish independence referendum Is a long wait
    OK so it will be November 2019 before brexit happens
    Leaving those at the helm in Westminster to do whatever they want with Scotland , for a year or more wont be good
    England will not let go of Scotland we will have to loosen their grip bearing in mind we are already being attacked from within by the BBC STV all the radio stations all but one of the newspapers and a big chunk of the more than half the people who still vote against Scottish independence.

    Scottish Independence in my lifetime is my wish
    No stopping us now

  67. twathater says:

    Ian B 1.45pm a very apt description of where we are at present , I agree with the many posters on here and with NS that we don’t want a failed state or a state mired in civil unrest on our doorstep , it doesn’t help anybody

    But I think english voters have made it abundantly clear with the MEP EU votes that they WANT BREXSHIT and they want it NOW , they have shown by the election of so many BP MEP’S all over england that they want out no ifs or buts.

    So where does that leave Scotland , Scotland has shown once again by voting 62% for remain parties that that reinforces and mirrors our EU referendum result that we want to remain within the EU

    Some remain unionists have angrily insisted that the SNP have hijacked their remain vote to indicate support for independence , but this latest EU vote has only reinforced that remaining within the EU is ONLY possible by being independent from England and wastemonster, there is no ambiguity, you CANNOT remain within the EU whilst still being tied to the UK .

    So the choice is PERFECTLY CLEAR for everyone in Scotland , if you genuinely and definatively want to remain within the EU then there is only ONE CHOICE and that is the dissolution of the treaty of union and a independent Scotland within the EU

    Scottish voters and SNP voters have been extremely patient and supportive of Nicola Sturgeon’s endeavours to explain the catastrophe awaiting Brexshit , and that she has worked tirelessly to include and convince English voters and Scots voters of this debacle , but the results in England show that the English are not convinced and are not listening and that they want to go in their own direction , we HAVE to let English voters go on their own preferred path , but the English also HAVE to let Scotland and the Scots take their own path

    It is now time for Nicola to stop trying to mitigate or convince the English electorate that they are choosing the wrong path , it is now time for Nicola to drive forward by the only means possible ,( dissolution of the treaty of union ) to enable Scotland to remain within the EUROPEAN UNION as is the majority of Scotland’s wish

  68. Col.Blimp IV says:


    True … but they are tied to being SCOTTISH Globalists at least until after Independence.

    I say we stick with the Jimmy come lately careerist cabal right up to the glorious day…Then we can force-feed them porridge and Ir’n Bru.

  69. yesindyref2 says:

    @Terry Callachan
    As it says in the article: “Scottish Brexit Secretary Michael Russell is due to unveil the legislation which is expected to be passed by MSPs by the end of the year. “.

    That’s “by”, not “not before”! It could be passed any time, at need. Similar to the EU Continuity Bill:

    This Scottish Government Bill was introduced by the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills, John Swinney MSP, on 27 February 2018. The Bill passed Stage 3 on 21 March 2018.” (4 weeks).

    Ah, the “British Intelligence stuff” ace card. Sorry, all that needs is the 2 of trumps and your ace has snuffed it. In the UK both MI5 and MI6 are subject to the “Rule of Law”. They STILL need the police (Special Branch) for many of their operations, because of the Law.

    My trick, game, set and rubber!

  70. yesindyref2 says:

    @Terry callachan
    Sorry, I forgot to highlight this bit from that webpage:

    The Parliament has agreed to treat this Bill as an Emergency Bill and has set dates for Stages 1, 2 and 3.

    Same could be done for the Ref Bill – at any stage.

  71. Joe says:


    Yes. In that case I have a nice big bridge in London that id love to sell you for very cheap. 🙂

  72. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    Terry callachan at 4.19pm

    Another post with serious daftness included

    That election was not about independence
    The turnout was less than half the electorate
    Very many of the electorate find the EU election uninteresting particularly the young who were very obvious by their absence in our area at the polls
    So no conclusion can be drawn from this election re independence (except that the SNP support has grown again).

    I suspect we may see very significant changes in the political landscape in Scotland in the very near future.

    There is something very dangerous happening in the UK however.
    A couple of months ago Nigel Farage was a high profile individual with no political power or base whatsoever. Due to the UK media – printed and broadcast – which is controlled by an shadowy establishment – a political nonentity without even an identifiable party has been relentlessly promoted and has won a national election.
    Democracy is being killed in the UK.
    This is very serious.

  73. Breeks says:

    Joe says:
    27 May, 2019 at 3:29 pm
    Very good analysis. Excellent in fact.

    Though there is something missing in all this. You appear to take the view that the EU doesnt need the UK economy. I can already imagine the frustration some people on here might have of reading that. But let me explain….

    I’m no economist Joe. I don’t know a lot about economic cycles, nor to what extent one economy’s performance is inextricably linked to another.

    But I do know that the developed world’s dependency upon fossil fuels is coming to an end, and that the car buying public is going to be switching to electric cars which do not exist yet, and where there isn’t adequate infrastructure ready to support them. That’s growth in recycling oily cars, growth in manufacturing electric vehicles and tech, and growth stimulated by public infrastructure investment. That means employment, wages, consumer spending… economic vitality.

    And while it happens, just as popular usage drove a whole series of innovations and improvements to our mobile phones and their batteries, so too a similar evolution will occur with our electric transport. If our electricity generation truly is green and renewable without harmful consequences for the planet, then this too will spawn opportunities for ventures which like transport, are suddenly unburdened by their former carbon footprint.

    I could go on Joe, but the point is, I don’t think the global economy has ever stood upon such a step changing threshold as where we currently are, and for the bold, and those willing to invest and innovate, I don’t think the business cycles of the past are going to be such reliable indicators for predicting the future. It could be like another industrial revolution, but minus the black reek from industrial output, and surplus energy without ethical inhibitions on how it’s used.

    For one thing, and only one thing, alter the planets dependency on fossil fuel like oil, and you will change the whole geopolitical equilibrium of the planet. If energy can be generated locally using wind, solar and geothermal resources, then finally, perhaps the continent of Africa will start coming of age as a food basket and energy sink for more needy overpopulated conurbations.

    With specific regard to Europe losing the UK economy, you could right, but then again, perhaps as little as five years from now the UK economy might be obsolete and superseded by natural evolution. Especially if investment has stalled and deregulation has cheapened the UK brand integrity. The UK’s loss to Europe will also be spread across 27 Countries, whereas the UK will have to bear the burden of losing 27 trading partners, and cope with it all alone.

    My point is, Europe might well suffer the pain of Brexit, but it’s a short term adjustment and recovery will follow. The same is not true for a UK economy starved of investment, international joint venture and economic integration. The UK will be on a downer for a long, long time… or it will wise the fk up.

  74. Scottish Steve says:


    I am not saying the army would kill Scots. I doubt even Westminster would be that reckless and callous as they would be almost universally condemned by the international community. Do you seriously trust the UK Supreme Court to fall on Scotland’s side in this issue? I don’t. Such an entity should not even exist because according to the Treaty of Union, Scots law is separate to English law.

    The UK SC would protect the integrity of the UK by de-legitmising the referendum. I am sure of it. That’s why I’m annoyed with the SNP. They should have gained the legal clarification over a second indyref years ago.

  75. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Joe @ 15:29,

    Retailing English exceptionalist mince. You have to try better than that. When are the Leaver blockheads finally going to realise that they are never going to succeed by stubbornly insisting they can cherrypick whatever they want and the EU will eventually crumble, just “because”?

    Yes, a no-deal exit will hurt the EU economically, but it will hurt the UK much, much harder. And the EU won’t give way because – oddly enough for UKOK thinking – it stands on principle. It cannot and will not undermine its core founding principles no matter what, and certainly not for a bunch of arrogant know-nothings who think they can blag their way through like they have done so often in their imperial past. No matter how many times the fanciful notion is relayed by the faithful media.

    Simples, but something that the dimwit delusionists of Leave just can’t seem to grasp. The only deal these extremists will get, and in fact increasingly want to get, is no-deal.

  76. Bobp says:

    Scottish Steve 3.08pm. The Brits days of ‘battering ‘ anyone are over( just ask the irish). let them try it and we’ll see how far it gets them.

  77. Scottish Steve says:


    I hope so, Bob. I was deeply disgusted with the behaviour of the Spanish government toward the Catalan vote and very disappointed that the EU chose to ignore the violence and suppression of democracy by saying it was an “internal matter.”

    At the time, I only wondered if some in Westminster and Whitehall were thinking, “could we get away with this if we tried it in Scotland?”

    You cant put anything past these ruthless bastards.

  78. yesindyref2 says:

    @Joe “ In that case I have a nice big bridge in London that id love to sell you for very cheap.

    No thanks, not much use to me here in Scotland, anyway you’ll need it to get to work unless you want to take the Victoria line under the Thames.

  79. Robert Peffers says:

    @Scottish Steve says: 27 May, 2019 at 3:08 pm:

    Scotland has only one way out but Westminster has a perpetual veto. The Tories will just say no forever to a second indyref.

    Well! Scottish Steve, as Nicola has announced there will be an indyref2, with or without, a section 30 order, (which, BTW is not permission to hold a referendum). We must assume there will be an indyref2. To which end there is a scheduled debate and a vote at Holyrood within a few days.

    Now there are no laws against anyone holding referendums either under Scottish or English law. Furthermore there is no such thing as United Kingdom law. So how can Westminster prevent indyref2?

    Now plese do not cite Spain and Catalonia as an example for the two situations have little in co0mmon – other than they both involve a claim for self determination. In the Catalonian case Catalonia does not have a Treaty of Union with Spain as a legally sovereign partner kingdom in a two partner united Kingdom.

    Neither does the United Kingdom have a written and agreed Constitution. So the actual legal situation is that both partner kingdoms in the United Kingdom have equal sovereignty and either can thus terminate the union if they wish.

    Now the UK, and thus its two partner kingdoms, are signed up to several organisations and these have all signed up to their human rights charters. So the UK has a signed up to the EU’s human rights and to the United Nations human rights legislation and also the Geneva Convention. This is not the case with Spain & Catalonia – legally Catalonia is an integral part of Spain and is a semi-autonomous region of Spain. Quite a different matter.

    So legally the Kingdom of Scotland and the Kingdom of England are the partners – not the Kingdom of Scotland and the United Kingdom – Do you understand the difference?

    Now Hansard records that the Kingdom of England parliament put itself into permanent recess on 30 April 1707 and there has been no English parliament elected since that time. England doesn’t have a legally elected government.

    On the other hand the old parliament of Scotland was only prorogued and was reconvened as Holyrood by Winnie Ewing when Holyrood first sat.

    Westminster is not the parliament of England and if Scotland, with a majority of the legally sovereign people of Scotland backing independence, declares the United Kingdom is over, Westminster has ended because it is the elected government of the union – not of the Kingdom of England.

    That is the legal situation and the international courts and countries must back Scotland for Scotland is in the right.

    Why the hell else did you imagine Westminster brainwashing keeps calling it Britain and The Country? They have been doing that for centuries but the legal fact is the United Kingdom is exactly what it says it is a united kingdom that is, would you believe, actually called THE UNITED KINGDOM because that is exactly what it is.

  80. Jock McDonnell says:

    Still can’t find that bit in the treaty of union which gives a uk pm control over whether Scotland can have a referendum on Independence. There is however a precedent that treaties can fall when one or more of the participants wishes to end it.

  81. Hamish100 says:

    Once again the Labour Party shows that is unable tom Anaheim not only an el cation but it’s own internal affaires. Alistair Campbell on radio ( not scotchland) attacked Corbyns inner cabinet and mentioned Mcluskey UNITE a brexiterbas part of the problem. He also referred to corbyns side kick Murphy. Name rung a bell.

    Looks like until Labour clear out their union infiltrators the party will be undermined for ever.

    The Tories are now infiltrated by the right wing cabal.

    British politics at its worse

  82. Bobp says:

    Scottish Steve 5.18pm. Oh they are a devious lot alright Steve, but i dont think they would be stupid enough to resort to violence. We have a big diaspora all over the world inc Canada,Australia America etc, along with others who wouldn’t let them get away with their bully boy tactics.

  83. Joe says:


    Good points. I will say though that macro business cycles will continue so long as there is capital moving, inflation/deflation and debt.

    Here’s a few things to look at:

    The ESI leads EU GDP growth. The Eurozone (19 countries) is now below the 5 year average at 104. That doesnt necessarily mean imminent recession but we must be aware of the trend and bear in mind that we are now in the longest period of economic expansion in history. – look for ‘flash Eurozone composite PMI’.

    PMI’s are even better at forecasting GDP growth/contraction. Here the Eurozone composite PMI shows just above the level of predicted 0% growth with the Industry PMI showing to be in contraction (below 50).

    Compare this stuff to GDP and it paints a fairly clear picture. You can do the same with most countries and there are other indicators such as bond yields. The global economy is slowing.

    Britain isnt any better. But my whole point is – the politicians can say what they like but business, the economy and the tax base requires them to be less hostile than they are pretending to be and ultimately they will most likely end up doing what money requires.

  84. yesindyref2 says:

    @Scottish Steve
    You appear to have moved when challenged, from this extreme and terribly frightening stuff in your earlier posting:

    Hold a referendum the UK gov deems illegal and sends police/troops up here to batter us at the polling stations Spanish style? It’s all looking rather bleak.

    to this:

    I am not saying the army would kill Scots. I doubt even Westminster would be that reckless and callous as they would be almost universally condemned by the international community. Do you seriously trust the UK Supreme Court to fall on Scotland’s side in this issue?

    Big difference, which correctly acknowledges the Rule of Law, while for some reason still asserting “troops” or the “army” would be barracked around legally opened oplling stations. Next it’ll be the black haelicopters!

    How that Rule of Law is administered is a matter of opinion of course, but it is up to the Courts (plural) to adminster Law fairly and – according to the Law.

  85. ScottieDog says:

    Followed by a trade agreement with trump In November.

  86. Robert Louis says:

    Any bilateral treaty can be ended unilaterally by any signatory. Countries do it all the time, and have done so throughout history. Peace treaties, anti nuclear treaties, carbon emmission treaties etc… They are formed and ended all the time.

    As RP points out above, their is no law prohibiting the holding of a referendum in Scots OR English law. I could hold one if I felt like it, and had the money.

    London likes to keep people thinking that somehow ‘they are in charge’, and can tell Scotland if or indeed when it may leave the treaty of union. It’s just baloney, of the very highest order.

    The United kingdom is a union formed via a bilateral treaty, and EITHER party (Scotland OR England) can end it whenever it wants. No permission is required from the other signatory.

    A treaty is just a formal INTERNATIONAL agreement between a number of partners. The treaty of union of 1707, is not special in any way, it has no special authority or powers. It is not magic.

    All we need is a majority of Scots wanting independence, and the treaty can be ended immediately – or, more likely in Scotland’s case, by ripping the damn thing up, burning it, and posting the ashes to auld lizzie Saxe-coburg Goethe for good measure.

  87. Clootie says:

    What is it going to take to get people to understand that the UK is now a right wing country.

    Brexit and an open arms invitation to the greedy USA exploiters is now certain. It may be 6months, a year or more – but it is certain.

    People have not yet accepted that it is inevitable. Pandora’s box is open and the only hope is Independence. The LibDems are “false friends” because they cannot stop Brexit and they have made it clear that will we stay in the UK whatever happens. Even if the Brexiteers fail this time they will eventually win. It is only a matter of time. The big money is backing the right wing parties due to self interest.

    The majority of people of England are going to get behind the Tories, Brexit Company, UKIP, England First, BNP, etc etc
    Unfortunately a large number of Labour MPs will also try to save their seats by appeasement.

    The LibDems and Labour are hard Unionists satisfied with the Westminster game waiting for the turn at the trough.

  88. Craig Murray says:


    If you think the UK state would stop short of illegality or shedding blood to maintain the Union, I fear you are naive. Scotland is much more valuable than Northern Ireland – and look at the things the British state did there.

  89. Hamish100 says:

    Craig Murray

    Agree. The British state will fight for every inch that they think is theirs by right.

    Even if the democratic process runs counter to their view.

  90. yesindyref2 says:

    @Craig Murray
    Absolutely, and I daresay the Typhoons at Lossie will be armed with Paveways and sent off to bomb Bute House and Glasgow Council Chambers! Not forgetting Holyrood and the Forth Road Crossing of course. Plus QRA launched in full air supremacy mode to shoot down all civil aviation in the skies. Head for the Hills! Owoooooo!

  91. Robert Louis says:

    Craig at 556pm,

    I totally get your point, but I disagree. Perhaps ten years ago I would have agreed, but the mood in England, I think is changing. More and more people now see Scotland as a country with its own viewpoint. I really think westminster would struggle to ‘send in the tanks/troops’ given the current circumstances in Westminster.

    I think right now such a move would be very unlikely, and to be honest, the only outcome would be a hardening of support for independence. My opinion is that they would repeatedly try the ‘vow’ type of approach, offering devo max, etc..a ‘new’ union, or some such. Maybe get David Cameron to come up to Edinburgh and weep again for the cameras.

    While we all know Scotland is valuable to England, most folk in England have been made to believe that England subsidises Scotland, so not only would the use of force be met with resistance in Scotland, but also in England.

    Whereas in 2014, celebrities lined up to tell us to stay, in 2019, I think many might well wish us well, and then move here.

    Such circumstances would prove the use of force force to be unwinnable.

  92. Ken500 says:

    The US was against what happened in Ireland and in fact brokered the Peace process. It was pressure from the US Gov and the UN that influenced the UK unionists. Kennedy Blair etc. The US has many of Irish, Scottish descent. Including Obama. There is a section of the US Congress which lobbies for Ireland. Trade deals etc. Even Trump is Scottish descent. Even Murdoch said Scotland could go it alone. His kids are half Scottish. Wife Anne from Glasgow.

    The Irish have close US ties. The class system is alien to many Americans.They just do not understand it. Posh Eton boys do not go down too well.

  93. Ken500 says:

    Scotland was made a Vow that was never honoured. The Westminster unionists are just cheats and liars. Evel. The Queen purring.

  94. bookie from hell says:

    Sarah Smith calls SNP NO Brexit a gamble that paid off

    hinted many in SNP FOR brexit


  95. Capella says:

    I’ve jut heard the BBCs “Scottish” correspondent, Sarah Smith, admit that the SNP had done well although so had the Brexit Party (no actual figures given leaving the listener with the impression that BREXIT is nearly as popular as the SNP)

    She then added that the SNP had asked voters who didn’t support independence to “lend” the SNP their votes for this EU election. So, Nicola Sturgeon cannot now say that their high vote indicates any support for independence.

    That’s a new construction to put on our votes.
    Personally, I wasn’t “lending” Nicola my vote and I didn’t see any request from her to do so. I am looking for independence very very soon.

  96. Craig Murray says:

    Well, I pray that you are right and I am wrong. But I don’t expect it.
    Meanwhile there is a guiding intelligence behind what happened/is happening to Joanna, Michelle and Alex…

  97. Auld Rock says:

    Re above, I’m sure I heard some English commentator saying that if Boris was elected and then fudged Brexit it could lead to a ‘Civil War’ in England. Anybody else catch that?

  98. Ken500 says:

    Brexit would cause a world recession. Not going to happen in any case. Look at the state of the Tories who triggered it. Oblivion. Now Labour wants a 2nd EU Ref. It will stagger on to a GE. Then an IndyRef. The UK is finished.

    The Brexit non Party polling 16% in a GE. Farague is just a criminal.

  99. Capella says:

    @ bookie from hell – snap 🙂

  100. Chris Kilby says:

    Sarah Smith talking out her arse on the BBC again. So no change there. Furiously editorialising that the Brexit party coming second “proves” that Scotland isn’t necessarily pro-Remain. But somehow omits to mention that the SNP got double the votes TBP got.

    Just like when the BBC kept banging on about the “significance” of the Tories coming second to the SNP when the Nats got more than the Tories, Labour and LibDems combined.


  101. Dr Jim says:

    They’ll give us red blankets infected with Smallpox, Oh no they did that already to the American indigenous people so that’s out

  102. Ken500 says:

    Holyrood was established because of EU/UN principles of democracy and self governance. Westminster unionists would have been thrown out of the EU/UN. They might still be with Brexit.

    Blair formed Devolution with as little powers as possible so Westminster unionists could keep control of it. It is not really working because the SNP keep on winning. Long may it continue until Scotland is Independent and more prosperous and equal looking to the future.

  103. Col.Blimp IV says:

    R J S

    Leaving economies which The Great Satan deems to be off limits to it’s “friends”, out of the equation.

    Which non EU countries do “we” NOT trade with, as members of the EU ?

    Do you think the EU will take the huff and refuse to trade with an ex-member?

    I have been in a few EU countries and can honestly say that I did not find them to be awash with British made goods, the one thing that caught my eye was German stores called C&A and Toys R Us, which were liveried in a strikingly similar fashion to our defunct branches.

    IMHO all this deal/no deal bullshit is little more than shameless scaremongering.

    As I type this on a Chinese made PC, I am drinking a cup of coffee with sugar, while nibbling on a chocolate biscuit, to my left is packet of cigarettes and if I look over my shoulder, I will see a fruit bowl with bananas, satsumas and kiwis in it.

    I have no Idea where the chair I am sitting on was made, I have a Japanese car and I have just checked out the kitchen, only a Bosch dishwasher and a 20 quid deep fat fryer from Aldi hails from the EU.

    They have nothing that we NEED but lots that they would like to sell us, so I think it exceedingly unlikely that they would put us on the banned list, lest we reciprocate.

    They are Capitalists, ergo if they buy anything from us now, it is because the price or the quality is more attractive than the alternatives, not because we are in the EU. They sell stuff to us because we are willing to buy it … same rules apply if we leave.

    I never bought into the England will “punish us nonsense” peddled by the Unionists and it pains me to see SNPers in Remainiac clothing, parroting similar guff re the EU.

  104. Ken500 says:

    Stop smoking

  105. Ken500 says:

    Stop watching the BBC

  106. yesindyref2 says:

    @Craig Murray
    There’s a huge difference between cyberwarfare plus dirty tricks, and actual use of physical force where dead bodies get strewn around the place for all to see.

    Can you seriously imagine for instance, Dauntless, Daring, Defender and Diamond, giving a naval bombardment to Clydebank and Byres Road from the Clyde, or Princes Street and Leith from the Forth, with their 4.5-inch Mark 8 naval guns, assorted miniguns and gpmg’s, reducing Edinburgh and Glasgow to rubble, while sinking all shipping with their Harpoons (if fitted)?

    While Vanguard signals “surrender or we nuke you”?

  107. Dan says:

    Robert Louis says at 6:15 pm

    “Whereas in 2014, celebrities lined up to tell us to stay, in 2019, I think many might well wish us well, and then move here.”

    Well after all that has happened since 2014, these “celebrities” better get off their fookin bahookies kinda quick and start making amends for previously influencing some Scots to lash themselves onto a sinking ship.

    Calling all celebrities… Calling all celebrities, you’re usually not shy types so c’mon, step up to the mic and let us hear what you have to say now.

  108. Capella says:

    Robin McAlpine wrote some good blog articles in 2014 – can’t find them now. One was called something like “Just because you have a gun doesn’t mean you can fire it”.

    The idea is that, nowadays, with total surveillance and law and order and international treaties and alliances and interdependence etc etc, it’s not always an option to simply go bang bang and shoot people. The price might be too high.

    It’s the job of the Scottish government to secure support from partners in various alliances which would make Westminster bullying counterproductive.

    Ireland in 1920 did have support from the USA (DeValera had US citizenship which is why the British couldn’t just shoot him). It still does. If Westminster breaks the Good Friday Agreement, Senators of Irish descent will refuse to do trade deals with a beleaguered Westminster. Is the pain greater than the gain?

  109. Joe says:

    I meant to say in my post at 4:45pm

    While all this is happening people will be active on popular internet forums trying to paint people who suspect fowl play as being foolish and conspiracy theorists etc. Just saying yesindyref2:)

  110. Now is the time for the Scottish Government to give the SNP leader in the House of Commons, a Scottish Legal Document, to hand to the Speaker of the House, REPEALING THE TREATY OF THE UNION OF THE SCOTTISH AND ENGLISH PARLIAMENTS when there is no Prime Minister.
    Put the cat among the pigeons.

  111. Mac says:

    “Scotland should hold a second independence referendum next year, the SNP leader, Nicola Sturgeon, says. the country’s First Minister made the comments on a visit to Dublin, where she said the “latter half” of 2020 would be the “right time” for a new poll.

    There will be another Scottish independence referendum and I will make a prediction today that Scotland will vote for independence and we will become an independent country just like Ireland, and the strong relationship between our two countries now will become even stronger soon.

    I want to see Scotland having the choice of independence within this term of the Scottish Parliament, which ends in May 2021, so towards the latter half of next year would be when I think is the right time for that choice.

    She criticised the UK government for treating Scotland with “utter contempt” over Brexit during the visit.

    We voted over 60% to remain, we have tried very hard in the wake of the UK-wide Brexit vote to find compromises and protect our interests, and we have worked hard across party lines to try to prevent the worst impact of Brexit, and we have been ignored.

    Scotland has been treated with contempt by Westminster and people are contrasting that with Ireland, that has been shown real solidarity and support from the European Union.

    Suddenly, this idea of being a small independent country in the European Union, we only have to look at Ireland to see the benefits of that and many people are having their eyes opened.”

    NS in Dublin

    Luvin it. This is a simple message we can all get behind.

  112. yesindyref2 says:

    (Mmm, sounds like the old days of 10 O’Clock closing right enough).

  113. Col.Blimp IV says:


    Don’t be too hard on the celebs, much of their Celebyness is bestowed on them by the British/English.

    Andy Murray got it tight for letting it slip that he supported Anyonebutenglandia at the World Cup and whatever became of Hardeep Singh Kohli?

  114. Robert Peffers says:

    @Joe says: 27 May, 2019 at 3:29 pm:

    ” … Very good analysis. Excellent in fact.
    Though there is something missing in all this. You appear to take the view that the EU doesnt need the UK economy. I can already imagine the frustration some people on here might have of reading that. But let me explain:”

    Forget the explanation, Joe, for it is total mince. But let ME explain. There is absolutely no doubt that your claims are based upon a set of flawed premises.

    The first being that there will be a United Kingdom economy after the Kingdom of Scotland ends the Treaty of Union. Instantly the United Kingdom, and its economy has ended.

    What is more there will be no Westminster United Kingdom Parliament either for the current Westminster Parliament is the United Kingdom Parliament and the last legally elected Kingdom of England parliament put itself into permanent recess on 30 April 1707 and no one has been elected as a Parliament of the Kingdom of England since that date. On the other hand the old Scottish Parliament was only prorogued and was reconvened by Winnie Ewing when she opened Holyrood. If you do not believe me then look at this:-

    Now, in any case the Westminster Parliament doesn’t have a legal leg to stand upon as, being the United Kingdom Parliament, it has conflict of interest as it is the parliament of both United Kingdom partners and thus cannot legally speak for either.

    However, that is only the beginning – When the Scottish Kingdom goes her assets go with her and the international court cases begin, just like other bipartite partnerships ending, for example a marriage, the courts will decide who gets what and why. The will even decide if one partner has unfairly hogged the other partner’s assets.

    Now you may believe the Westminster propaganda that, “The Scots are subsidy junkies”, but that is demonstratively hogwash. So first let’s demolish that claim. It goes like this, “The Scots get more per capita Funding than everyone else”, but that is lies. That per capita figure is derived from the way devolution works.

    When a government function is removed from a Westminster Ministry and devolved to a devolved parliament the funding from that ministry must be also devolved to the devolved parliament. How else could it be funded as the devolved administration had no tax raising powers? Now the three devolved administrations have different levels of devolved powers and thus they have different levels of per capita funding and, as a matter of fact N.I. has most devolved functions and thus the greatest per capita funding – not as claimed Scotland.

    But wait, it doesn’t stop there for England has no devolved powers so England is funded directly by Westminster Ministries but London gets even more extra funding for example for transport and funding for, “National Treasures”, like the National museum, national theatre, et al.

    And we are not finished yet. Since the first drop of oil was extracted from the North Sea the Westminster Parliament claime4d it as a United Kingdom asset by designating all oil and gas extraction as coming from, “UK Extra Regio Territory”, (go look up what Extra-Regio”, means, Joe). Not a penny of that revenue comes to Scotland even although it can be identified as up to 98% from internationally recognised waters under Scottish Jurisdiction. Now I could go on all day with the various scams but suffice for now.

    But here’s another tack on the saga. The Pound Sterling belongs to both kingdoms as this is agreed in the Treaty of Union. Furthermore, the Bank of England does not belong to England and it never has. It began as a private company and remained so until 1946 when it was nationalise, not by England but by the United Kingdom – got the picture now, Joe?

    Oh! Lest I forget, all revenue earned for Scotch Whisky has always gone directly to Westminster and furthermore, as Westminster classes exports as goods leaving the UK not as by where they are produced but as by where they leave the UK from, Whisky, Gin, (70% of which is made in Scotland), leaves from English ports/airports.

    So where is that Massive UK economy you spoke of now Joe?

    Why the hell did you imagine we want independence for in the first place Joe? Did you imagine it was because we just don’t like Englanders? Well Joe it isn’t. We have nothing against the English as such – it is because Westminster is not only robbing us blind but has the temerity to tell us that they have overall sovereignty over us and are our masters when legally they have not and I believe that fact will soon be brought before the international courts.

    Have a nice day.

  115. HandandShrimp says:

    Fair dues to Labour, last night seems to have finally been a reality check (wonder how long that will last). The Tories on the other hand are spinning like tops in an effort to dam up the reality breach.

    Ruth, Murdo and others barely have holding on with their fingertips as the enormity of result sinks in.

    BBC Reporting Scotland are going with historic win for SNP…so that isn’t going to help the mood in Tory HQ.

  116. Mac says:

    Brexit is a Tsunami, but it’s not overnight… this wave of chaos and destruction will last 2 – 3 years before it calms down.

    Scotland needs to take full advantage. Starting now. And no pause until we are clear.

  117. Bobp says:

    RP 6.55 PM. Good post Mr peffers. Get him telt.

  118. Joe says:

    @Robert Peffers

    Im sorry Robert but I was demonstrating what the underlying economy is doing. Whether you want to call is The UK, Europe or the Kingdom of Narnia.

    These are the numbers investment banks, government economists, hedge funds and others that are responsible for very large amounts of money look at as a gauge of future economic conditions and to make management decisions.

    Politicians react to this kind of information and are advised on it by people who have at least half an idea of what they are doing.

    Please note – I didnt mention any preference or bias. These are just numbers and you can make guesses on political policy based on them.

  119. bookie from hell says:

    newsnight election special

    zilch snp

    a brexit bunfest

  120. Dr Jim says:

    Isn’t it funny how none of the media are calling for the resignation of the *many faced man* after what must be considered the worst tactical performance by any leader of any political party anywhere anytime in the known universe yet he’s still in post with nobody questioning it

    BBC Scotland just spent an inordinate amount of time talking about Labour in Scotland and interviewing Richard Leonard (he’s the leader) very nicely with almost reverential commiseration without ever once mentioning the fact that under his leadership Labour have almost vanished in Scotland

    But if the SNP had lost one voter there would have been a post mortem on the magnitude of their failure

    Oh Ruth Davidson wants the Labour party to support her now as the one true party to rid Scotland of the SNP, the party the Scottish people actually vote for
    It seems for Ms Davidson that her own party’s support is pretty rubbish so she’d like to change the dynamic and become Labour leader as well as First Minister, her ambition exceeds her imagination now in her desperation to lead everyone to their doom

    Why is anybody feeling sorry for David Martin Lab MEP? He’s had 35 years of one of the cushiest numbers in politics, he’ll benefit from a whoppingly huge pension for the rest of his life…and he’ll probably end up in the House of Lords for even more gravy floating his way, he’ll be jist fine and dandy, dinnae fash yersels

  121. Shug says:

    Scottish Steve
    I do not think for a moment the Scottish police service would attack voters

  122. Ottomanboi says:

    Cavalier coverage of SNP success on ITV news@6:30pm. Heavily edited FM comments. Refs to independence excised. Some news is just not fit.

  123. Robert Peffers says:

    @Ottomanboi says:27 May, 2019 at 4:02 pm:

    \\\\\\2 … More spark in Scottish politics? More élan, panache and brio, a bit less of the seriously cautious Scotch lawyer?

    so it’s FM BAAAAADDDD! as usual then, Ottomanboi?

  124. Giving Goose says:


    What you might see is a blind eye turned to more extreme elements from the Orange/Loyalist organisations who may attempt disruption and anti-social behaviour.
    There would be arms-length assistance supplied, possibly through intermediaries (for plausable denial), all wrapped in media propaganda with support from the 3 Torys.

  125. Robert Peffers says:

    @yesindyref2 says: 27 May, 2019 at 4:03 pm

    ” … ever heard of the expression “Rule of Law”? Well, Scotland has it, but so surprisingly does the UK.”

    Whoa! yesindyref2 Now I know the point you are making and it is a very good point but – There are indeed only two rules of law in the UK but they are Scotland’s and England’s and the UK doesn’t have one.

    It is a sore point that Westminster uses English law and tags on wee bits to the ends of Acts to accommodate Scots law where the two differ.

    Not to worry though, we will soon see the back of the United Kingdom and there will only be two independent kingdoms in Britain. Mind you our Celtic cousins in Ireland and Wales may also soon reduce the English Kingdom a bit and the Scottish Kingdom may become a republic.

  126. Bob Mack says:


    Why would the Westminster cabal need ships or Typhoons?

    They have thousands of Orange Lodge supporters willing to do their bidding. The Lodge has openly declared it would resist in the event of independence. Having many links to terrorists in NI has prepared their ground.

    Perhaps the rule of law will keep them in check as it did in NIRELAND where they murdered hundreds in collusion with UK forces and spies.

  127. yesindyref2 says:

    @Giving Goose
    Well, it’s the devolved Police Scotland under the ultimate (arms length) authority of the Scottish Government (SNP) who’d be responsible for law and order when it comes to anything like that, whatever arms-length assistance was supplied would also be within the remit of Police Scotland.

    And if the stakes were upped to serious crime of any support, that also comes within Police Scotland’s remit.

  128. johnj says:

    Where’s Ruth?

  129. Effijy says:

    Sarah Smith is yet another twisted propagandist who just refuses to
    Bury her Daddy’s Labour Party even though it’s stone dead.

    I don’t recall asking for temporary votes?
    That Dick Leonard, North SLabore Accounting Unit, asked Scots to give them
    Your vote if you want Labour to deliver Brexit.

    Well Dickie boy, you have been well truely answered! 9% lol

    Wee Ruth I’ll stop Indy Ref 2 If you vote Tory! 12% lol

  130. Welsh Sion says:

    ‘Our’ First Minister, Mark Drakeford (Labour), earlier today:

    “Faced with the damage of a hard-line, Tory Brexit, Welsh Labour believes that the final decision must be made by the public in a referendum.

    “And, for the avoidance of any doubt, a Welsh Labour Government would campaign, in such a vote, for Wales to remain in the EU.

    “We will work with any others who seek the same outcome.”

    Has Drakeford cleared this with his boss, Corbyn? Anyone in the MSM asked ‘your’ Richard Leonard if he agrees with Drakeford?

  131. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Apologies if this has been posted already but It’s been hard to keep up lately.

    The Northern Ireland results:-

  132. Welsh Sion says:

    Robert Peffers @ 7.29 pm

    Mind you our Celtic cousins in Ireland and Wales may also soon reduce the English Kingdom a bit and the Scottish Kingdom may become a republic.


    You will recall that under the Welsh Language Act 1993, Schedule 2 (and enacted by Westminster prior to devolution) that we are no longer ‘united’ with England, as the Henrician Laws in Wales Acts 1535 and 1542 (the ‘Acts of Union’) were thereby repealed.

  133. jfngw says:

    Sarah Smith on the BBC News says the SNP asked for people to lend their votes and it was not a vote for independence. I can find a mention of independence in the manifesto but nothing about lending votes.

    How did Sarah Smith come to spout this nonsense, because anyone who has seen the Ruth Davidson interview earlier in the day can see it has come from Tory HQ. The BBC are merely spouting the propaganda emanating from their controllers.

    The BBC is in damage UK limitation exercise, the SNP vote must be denigrated at all cost.

    Same in NI, they used an Alliance flag on the map which would lead you to believe they were the most popular party. But in fact Sinn Fein won the highest first preference vote.

  134. starlaw says:

    BBC News 6pm Scotland and London were the only two countries that did not vote Brexit .

  135. robbo says:

    I hope Rooth the mooth,wee willie and Leonard keep on with the

    “nae mare referendums” mantra as it seems be doing the trick- naw?

    keep it gaun Ruthie!

  136. Terry callachan says:

    It does not seem possible that the police or armed forces would be used to stop a Scottish independence referendum but it might seem possible for them to be used should YES win and England deem it an illegal referendum.

    Consider Orkney.Now we know that the Orkney’s are a lib dem stronghold with the brexit party actually winning there in the EU election.
    I believe it is like little England there too .
    What would happen if England decided to declare the Orkney’s and even Shetland and possibly a part of the borders as English territory on the grounds that they have voted overwhelmingly against Scottish independence ?
    What would Scotland do ?
    The border in the North Sea has already been redrawn by Westminster so it can happen.

    I’m with Craig Murray on this.
    Do not discount bully boy tactics
    Do not rely on politics to fix everything
    You can not rely on USA or Australia etc etc to do anything other than talk.

    Yes we live in a modern world but believe me injustices still occur and on British soil there is every chance that Scotland will be ignored and ignored and ignored to the point that Scotland goes ahead with a Scottish independence referendum which wins independence but is then denied legitimacy by England’s Westminster but put into action by Holyrood and then challenged by Westminster with HM Forces.
    This kind of thing has happened before.
    Lives do get taken.
    It’s to be avoided if possible , I can’t say at all cost because that would mean abandoning independence so where does that leave us ?
    Nobody not the EU or USA etc etc will come rushing to Scotland’s side.

    Be aware, be wary.
    Westminster should follow legal routes but it doesn’t always do that, we already know this.
    Our Scottish government has to negotiate , it has to be strong, it has to deliver independence if that is what a majority of people in Scotland vote for in a Scottish independence referendum.

  137. Robert Peffers says:

    @Scottish Steve says: 27 May, 2019 at 4:16 pm:

    … There’s no need to be so fucking cheeky. How about you f*ck off?”

    That is no way to talk to a lady, Scottish Steve. The cheeky one is you

    ” … Don’t you recall Red Clydeside? When the strike happened, they locked up the Scottish soldiers in their barracks because the government felt their loyalty was in question. They instead sent English troops up to quell the strikers.”

    Of course we remember it but things are a little different these days and the Westminster Government are getting their collar felt a bit more frequently of late.

    Not only have they had some warnings by the UN for the way they are treating UK/EU citizens but have been first warned about the way they treated Chagos Islanders and just last week were given an time limit to get themselves out of the Chagos Islands.

    They have been in trouble over the Northern Irish atrocities, about the infiltration of CND and how they treated Miners during the miner’s strike. The EU have lost patience with them and they have few friends in Europe now either but most of all when they were putting troops on the streets of Glasgow there was no Holyrood Parliament to fight Scotland’s corner. We have the SNP and the Holyrood parliament now not to mention being the third largest party at Westminster. They simply won’t get away with anything now.

    Westminster/England is quickly running out of friends and making more enemies by the day. What’s more their stupid belief that, “England Stood Alone”, and beat the NAZIs was always mince and they had the British Empire, the Russians and the free French/Poles and other free continentals – who have they got now? There’s big black storm clouds gathering over the White Cliffs of Dover and the storm is imminent.

    We won’t see the UK state behaving in such a way again to defend its territorial integrity because its territorial integrity hangs by a thread.

  138. Confused says:

    is frank kitson still alive?

    we should picket kentigern house with placards saying

    don’t you subvert our democratic independence movement
    – careful now !
    – down with that sort of thing !!

  139. yesindyref2 says:

    and England deem it an illegal referendum.

    Scotland can not hold an illegal referendum.

    I repeat.

    Scotland can not hold an illegal referendum.

    “England” can deem nothing illegal, only the courts can do that in a country that follows the Rule of Law, and hence it’s back to square one:

    Scotland can not hold an illegal referendum.

    If the courts don’t prevent it happening, IT – IS – LEGAL.

  140. Dan says:

    Col.Blimp IV says: at 6:54 pm


    Don’t be too hard on the celebs, much of their Celebyness is bestowed on them by the British/English.

    It’s a pity all that bestowed celbyness won’t put food in the mouth, or a roof over the head of our society’s most vulnerable.
    Wealthy “celebrities” need to comprehend they live in a very different world from the less fortunate in life.

    Our society is being systematically taken apart in many ways and the inequality gap continues to widen, so maybe they should’ve considered these aspects before using their influence to get us to stay in a union with the principle driver that is steering the UK bus off the cliff.

    They may well be able to say “I’m a celebrity, get me out of here”, and up sticks moving to more amenable environs, but others aren’t afforded such luxuries.

  141. Terry callachan says:

    To Robert peffers 6.55pm 27th May your post…

    What you say is disputed by Westminster Robert and you can hark on about ancient law all you like but it’s not as simple as saying that is what was agreed 300 hundred years ago so that is what stands today.
    There are many constitutional issues where disagreement will arise and there is no point saying Scotland has its own law if England’s own law reaches a different conclusion.
    There will be no EU law to sort it out if we brexit with no deal either.

    This idea that it’s all straightforward because of things that were written or agreed 300 years ago is quite frankly, balony.

    Precedent is often tendered as proof that old laws were changed in practice if not in writing or judicially so I’m sorry but your explanation to Joe is not accurate.

    The separation of Scotland and England will have to be negotiated and agreed by both sides.
    That will mean trading some of what we have for some of what they have.

  142. yesindyref2 says:

    the Orkney’s are a lib dem stronghold with the brexit party actually winning there in the EU election.

    No. Thet. Did. Not. The LibDems won the EU election, the SNP came second.

    Liberal Democrats Share %33.5 (-1.9)
    Scottish National Party Share %24.2 (+7.3)
    The Brexit Party Share %16.2 (+16.2)

    Any chance of waiting with the next totally incorrect piece of crappy falsehood till I’ve finished my half sausage supper (sharing with wife)? Thanks.

  143. Terry callachan says:

    To Robert peffers your post at 8.07pm 27th May

    I think you underestimate England’s Westminster

  144. Scottish Steve says:


    I have not moved positions. I didn’t mention the army killing anyone. You did. I said “batter” voters, not “kill” them.


    I never said Police Scotland would attack voters. Go back and read my original comment again and you’ll see that.

    @Robert Peffers

    Lady? I’m not going to treat her with kid gloves because she’s a woman. She told me to fuck off first yet you’re trying to say I am the cheeky one? Behave yourself. I was merely returning the sentiment she first gave to me.

  145. Muscleguy says:

    The only problem I have with this analysis is turnout. Which was down in England even if it was up here in Scotland. So basing a second Brexit referendum on those figures assuming the non voters would split the same way is begging the question a bit.

    Also a hard crash out Brexit solves nothing. The planes won’t fly, the Eurostar and freight services cross channel won’t run and the channel Ferries won’t run either because no recognised regulator hence no insurance cover.

    I will be my house on the EU letting the UK struggle secure in the knowledge at some point they will have to come back to them then the WA will be sitting there to be agreed first. The WA is fantastic for the EU as it gets to eat the City’s lunch pretty much forever. All the Euro business is absolutely gone for good regardless.

    Say they try and mint new regulators, fine, except you have to EVERY SINGLE trading partner to recognise them, starting with the EU so they go to aks and are greeted by the WA to be agreed first.

    You can iterate this as many times and in as many scenarios and trading discussions, security discussions etc. etc. The WA is not going to go away and neither will the UK’s need for things like French nuclear power to keep the lights on when Coro finishes.

    The French fishermen would push their luck like crazy in the Channel requiring talks and oh look the WA is there.

    Want to get things done in the WTO with all the EU countries and the EU itself as members? forget it. Unless, there’s this WA to discuss.

    So a hard Brexit won’t fly unless the UK truly wants to become some sort of hermit kingdom cut off from the world it once bestrode with an Empire the sun never set on.

    Oh and expect world pressure on sundry Imperial rocks which remain while Blighty is cut off. The problems will mount and mount and mount.

    The choice is WA or the Norway option or rejoining/revoking Article 50 hoping the empty supermarket shelves and cancelled holidays and weddings etc etc will bring enough rabid Brexiters to their senses, realising there are no sunlit uplands waiting past Brexit, only more humiliation and decline in status.

    Oh and sterling will absolutely tank, with no trade moving and nobody moving demand for it will drop off a cliff. So all those consumer goods even if they could get in would be unaffordable for many, food prices ditto.

    I warn Brexiters not to be poor, I warn them not to be sick, I warn them not to be young, I warn them not to be old, I warn them not be ordinary or not qualified to the eyeballs.

  146. Terry callachan says:

    To yesindyref2.. your post at 8.19pm

    When it is said Scotland cannot hold an illegal referendum the issue is confused

    A court can determine the referendum illegal
    Westminster can refuse to agree the terms of the referendum
    If Scotland goes ahead with a referendum and England’s Westminster do not recognize it as legitimate it would be fair to say that it is illegal as seen through the eyes of Westminster under English law
    A Scottish independence referendum will be determined using English law because Westminster uses English law and the Scottish government has agreed to abide by rules and regulations set by Westminster for the holding of referendums in the uk an example I can quote was when Alex Salmond set the question to be asked in the 2014 Scottish independence referendum but had to negotiate and agree to a different wording of the question because of regulations set by Westminster governing how referendums are carried out.

  147. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Hi Terence callachan.

    RE: Orkney or Shetland seceding from Scotland.

    I think Robert Peffers (?) pointed out a couple of years ago that they would then become ‘enclaves’ within Scottish territorial waters, with a 12 mile exclusion zone. As far as I recall, there is no oil within Orkney or Shetland’s 12 mile zone.

    So, what would be the point?

  148. Col.Blimp IV says:

    Dan says:at 8:19

    “Wealthy “celebrities” need to comprehend they live in a very different world from the less fortunate in life.”

    But they do Dan, haven’t you seen them cajoling and shaming us into donating to Children in need?

    Or competing in celebrity versions of quiz shows and donating their winnings to charity?

    Not an inch of free brand building for them at these gigs, eh?

    The self sacrifice almost moves me to tears.

  149. Terry callachan says:

    Hi Brian doonthtoon.

    If Westminster decide with the agreement of the majority of people in Orkney and Shetland and elsewhere for that matter, that they are to be part of England and England deploy forces to uphold that wish you can forget about enclaves and 12 mile territorial waters.
    Robert peffers implies that the rule of law will safeguard everything but that is no foregone conclusion ,it might be correct but it might not, there are many many instances where Westminster has simply ignored the law , ignored international law, believe me when it comes down to it strongarm tactics work across the world to this very day.

  150. Robert Peffers says:

    @Terry callachan says:27 May, 2019 at 4:19 pm:

    ” … I believe that whoever becomes the new PM will still refuse a S30 for a Scottish independence referendum”

    You just aren’t paying attention are you Terry?

    During her speech at national conference Nicola categorically stated that there would be an indyref2 with or without a section 30 Order. Now there is a indyref bill debate and vote scheduled at Holyrood in a few days time.

    The SNP/Greens will push it through and it then goes for Royal Assent – and the trap is set to spring.

    No matter how Westminster attempts to deal with it a full blown constitutional crisis is going to ensue. At the Royal Assent stage Westminster can choose to contest it by referring it to the Westminster Supreme Court or not to contest it and Westminster already has its hands full.

    If the Supreme Court rules against it the SG appeals it to the international courts. If the Supreme Court rules in favour, and there is already rulings that indicate the may have to, game on and the international courts have already shown they may have to rule in favour. Bear in mind that there is absolutely no doubt that the United Kingdom is a two partner kingdom of equally sovereign kingdoms as a result of an international Treaty of Union and in such treaties either partner in the treaty can revoke the treaty at will.

    In fact, at least twice in the Westminster chamber recently a government minister has stated that in international treaties either side can end the treaty at will. It doesn’t matter they were speaking about the UK and the EU the point is it is an accepted principle of international treaties.

    I’m not a lawyer but I can see no way out of the whole sorry mess but the end of the United Kingdom. Also remember that Westminster has conceded the Scottish Claim of Right and the Scottish Claim of Right is that the People of Scotland are sovereign and if they are sovereign then they have legal right to end the union.

    What is it about all that you do not understand? In the first place there is the rock solid claim that as Westminster concedes the claim of right then we have the right to end the union. How does Westminster get out of that? They cannot concede the claim of right but then when we want to end the union say, “Ah! but!

  151. george wood says:

    The SNP has it’s best ever result in an EU election and people are on here scaremongering about the consequences of voting for Independence.

    Scotland is very well thought of Internationally and so it would a massive PR disaster for rUK to send troups here just at the time it would be desperately trying to do trade deals.

    The people of England would not like it either. They have sold the idea to English people too well that we are subsidy junkies. I don’t see it being popular down South to send in the troops to keep us.

    There are also people in England who believe in democracy that want to keep the UK as it is who would be appalled if force was used to subvert the will of the Scottish people.

  152. yesindyref2 says:

    @Terence callachan
    The only part of your posting that isn’t totally wrong is this:

    A court can determine the referendum illegal
    Westminster can refuse to agree the terms of the referendum

    Yes, the referendum could be challenged in court before it takes place and judged illegal, or more precisely ultra vires, i.e. beyond Holyrood’s legal authority. In that case

    The referendum would not and could not, take place.

    Yes Westminster can refuse to agree to give a Section 30 Order, or to sign an Edinburgh Agreement 2. They can also decide not to recognise a referendum that returns a YES, a clear self-determined expression of the Scottish people to become Independent in a LEGAL Referendum. Good luck with that.

    Westminster did NOT agree the wording of the Indy Ref 1 question, that was totally up to Holyrood. Which agreed to take the Electoral Commission’s recommendation. That was NOT Westminster.

    Indy Ref 1 was under Scottish Law, under a Bill passed by the devolved Holyrood Parliament NOT English Law.

    And it would NOT be fair to say Westminster could recognise it as illegal, as Westminster is just as subject to the Law as Holyrood is.

    And the Scottish government has NOT agreed to abide by rules and regulations set by Westminster for the holding of referendums in the uk. It has done nothing of the sort.

  153. Terry callachan says:

    To briandoonthtoon.
    Hi again.
    The biggest ever oil field in Scottish waters was discovered not that long ago to the west of Shetland.
    A lot of the North Sea and North Atlantic is covered by Orkney and Shetland durisdiction.
    Scotland would not want to loose these.
    Westminster has history of ignoring law and order when it chooses .
    England will have more clout than Scotland negotiating with others more practice and expert knowledge too.
    Negotiation is key that’s why Nicola Sturgeon will not call a Scottish independence referendum without Westminster’s agreement.
    She is pressing the buttons saying the right things showing intention but inevitably will aim for negotiated settlement and I believe she will get it but at what cost ?
    What will Scotland have to relinquish to get independence ?
    What do we have that the big fish will take in exchange for release of the minnow

  154. yesindyref2 says:

    that they are to be part of England and England deploy forces to uphold that wish you can forget about enclaves and 12 mile territorial waters.

    More ignorance. The UK is both a signator to UNCLOS, and has ratified it, and in fact on the basis of it has very kindly agreed the EEZ between the UK and all adjoining countries. Thanks UK, makes life a lot easier for Independent Scotland.

    The UK is not going to break UNCLOS.

    Here’s UNCLOS for you:


  155. Terry callachan says:

    To Robert peffers…your post at 4.19 pm 27th May

    Cheeky cheeky how dare you say I am just not paying attention.
    Get one thing clear here, I state my opinion, you state yours, I won’t insult you if you don’t insult me
    Simple courtesy

    I’m paying attention alright but quite frankly I think you simplify too much and discount too many possibilities suggested by people when your rationale is weak.
    You might be correct but you equally might be incorrect and yet you scold and insult opposing views out of hand.

    What Nicola Sturgeon says and what comes to pass may not match.
    She has said there will be a Scottish independence referendum with or without a S 30 but I believe that to be mere fighting talk I do not think it will come to that I’m pretty sure negotiation will prevail because it makes life easier for all.
    Time will tell.
    I don’t believe everything politicians say, not even SNP politicians.
    Maybe you do.
    We disagree fair enough
    I won’t insult you by saying you are not paying attention to the possibility of the argument I put forward
    But I could
    It’s not necessary though
    Fair comment put politely is achievable

  156. Robert Peffers says:

    @Joe says: 27 May, 2019 at 4:36 pm;

    ” … Because the SNP should be called the SIP ‘Scottish Internationalist Party.’ They are, increasingly, globalists masquerading as nationalists.”

    Err! Joe, may I point out that the middle initial in SNP does NOT stand for, “Nationalist”. It stands for, “National”. That is the party of the whole nation of Scotland. Now that may explain to you why the SG attempts to look after the interests of everyone in Scotland.

    I learned, way back in the early 1940s, that the party stood for the People of Scotland and it defined them as, “Anyone of any creed, colour or country of origin, who is mainly resident in Scotland, pays their tax as a Scot and is qualified to vote in Scottish elections.”

    So there you go – not nationalist party but national party.

  157. yesindyref2 says:

    This is like Grun CiF back in 2012 all over again, the futility of the ridiculous and desperate Unionist arguments.

    I wonder what set off this total oblivious panic 😎

    Surely not the SNP major win in the EU elections …

  158. Terry callachan says:

    To yesindyref2…your post of 8.51 pm 27th May

    Sorry but you are wrong.
    I will try and seek out the legislation on referendums held in UK
    It was grousebeater or rhoughtcontrolscotland or similar that put it up on their site recently.
    I was surprised it existed
    But there it was , the regulations pertaining to referendums held in the uk
    How you have to apply to hold one
    What the conditions are
    Who is allowed to vote in it and who is not etc etc etc

  159. yesindyref2 says:

    Mmm, back in 2012 one tack was “Salmond cuddling up to Murdoch”. My guess is it won’t be long before someone will be like “Sturgeon cuddling up to Alistair Campbell”.

    And it won’t be long before we get a sixth AC, one third of an SSN + SSBN, 1 frigate, half a destroyer, a Sopwith camel and a bottle of pop and a sausage roll and Salmond with a shotgun in a rowing boat off to mow the meadow. Hic! Pass the cider Rosie.

    Ho hum, nothing original there then.

  160. Cubby says:

    Terence Callachan – you have been spraying your shit all over this thread. Your shit has been corrected on numerous occasions on Wings by posters who have a lot more patience than me. So my conclusion is that you either have a very serious memory problem or you are spreading crap on purpose.

    So what is it? – and don’t give me any of this I am entitled to my opinion crap. Truthless Davidson is entitled to her opinion but I don’t want to read her lies and misrepresentation of facts on Wings. Memory problem or shit stirring phoney independence supporter – so what is it?

    The SNP have a great election result and out come all the concern trolls on Wings.

  161. Terry callachan says:

    To yesindyref2 your post of 9 pm 27th May

    I very much hope you are correct
    I am well aware that Westminster is signed up to UN treaties and others but as you probably know the UN has many of its treaties ignored regularly and holds very little clout unless of course it is a minnow disregarding the treaty in which case the larger members will employ forceful measures to bring them into line

    Scotland cannot rely on the UN to protect it if Westminster goes ahead and takes Orkney Shetland etc
    Of course the UN will humph and haw like with the chagos islands and perhaps ten years late will issue a decree but they can be ignored too as they often are

    I believe negotiation will take place
    But all possibilities should be considered so there are few or no surprises but it’s Westminster we are dealing with here
    The biggest bully of them all over centuries well practiced and used to getting its way

  162. Terry callachan says:


    Take your medicine , your behavioral problems showing again

  163. Joe says:

    @Robert Peffers

    Thanks for the clarification. You are right about that.

    Happily however it looks like many pro independence Scots see through the facade and are alert to the warning signs coming from them now.

  164. yesindyref2 says:

    @Terry callachan
    I’ll make it easy for you. It was held under PPERA guidelines by agreement between both governments. But here’s how it went with the wording and control, and electorate:

    6. The Order enables the Scottish Parliament to legislate for a referendum with one question on independence. The wording of the question will be for the Scottish Parliament to determine and will be set out in the Referendum Bill to be introduced by the Scottish Government, subject to the Electoral Commission’s review process, as set out in the paragraphs which follow.

    Sadly for you you’re not pulling wool over blind eyes with vague references to “higher authorities”. The above is the actual Edinburgh Agreement, the framework itself.

    However, in the absence of an Edinburgh Agreement, then clearly the terms of that absent Edinburgh Agreement are clearly – absent.

  165. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Col.Blimp IV @ 18:34,

    Another brazen Leaver inversion of the facts. It isn’t the EU which is looking to “punish” the UK (or rUK). This is another typical example of blame-shifting. The blame for any economic damage that ensues from an entirely voluntary exit without a deal will lie directly at the door of the Leavers who have chosen to do so. Nobody else.

    Wake up. It’s not up to the EU to lift a finger to give an exited UK any special favours at all. Nor cave in to its absurdist special posturings. Duh. Leaving is not the EU’s choice and not the EU’s problem to solve. The EU will happily trade on whatever terms the UK chooses freely for itself, all on its lone.

    If that’s “WTO”, so be it, and all its consequences. After all, it’s the Leavers who have been telling us relentlessly that this will be just dandy anyway. Another lie, as even you seem to realise.

  166. Joe says:


    Do yourself a favor mate. Facts and numbers dont count to some people. As the Samuel Clemens/Mark Twain saying goes ‘Never argue with stupid people. They will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.’

  167. Cubby says:

    Terry Callachan @9.26pm

    The last resort of the Britnat on Wings. So so predictable Terry old boy.

    Callachan you are nothing but a phoney independence supporter who likes to paint a picture of independence supporters as English hating racists.

    You’ve also gone over the top in recent days with your concern trolling posts. Callachan you are a shit stirring phoney independence supporter.

  168. george wood says:

    Terence Callachan doing his best for the Union.

    Trying to scare people out of voting for Indepedence by talking of invasion by the army if we vote for it.

    Lying about Orkney & Shetland’s claim on oil something which has been so thoroughly debunked that even Unionist politicians don’t use it.

  169. Petra says:

    The first now?

    ‘The only hope of salvation.’

  170. yesindyref2 says:

    @Terry callachan
    Do you really need me to spell it out about UNCLOS? Very well, I’ll give you some hints:

    UK – UNCLOS – Gibraltar + Falklands + South Georgia + Ascension Island + … well, China come to that, Russia, South China Seas, Korea …

    and you think the UK will turn its back on UNCLOS …

  171. yesindyref2 says:

    They will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience

    Try gently to bring you UP to our level, and feed you with knowledge and experience.

    However, we can take a donkey to water, but not make you think. So you learn heehaw and go away with NOTHING.

  172. Robert Peffers says:

    @Scottish Steve says: 27 May, 2019 at 5:07 pm:

    ” … Do you seriously trust the UK Supreme Court to fall on Scotland’s side in this issue?”

    Sorry to have to tell you this, Scottish Steve, but you are not nearly so well informed as you think you are. The Scottish Law Lord already brought the matter of, “The Scottish Claim of Right”, before the Westminster Supreme Court. Now before going any further, “The Scottish Claim of Right”, goes way back at least to the Declaration of Arbroath, (1320), but is supposedly based upon evidence going back before that time. It is basically the legal fact that under Scots law the people, not either the crown nor the parliament are sovereign.

    There have been several times, going back long before even The Union of the Crowns, (1603), that the Scots have made their claim of Right – that is asserted the people of Scotland’s legal sovereignty. The latest being in the Holyrood parliament and signed by every party in the house bar a couple of Tories.

    Now the Scottish Law Lord put the Claim of Right before the Westminster Supreme Court and it was not contested by Westminster. Thus it was accepted by them. It has since been taken upheld by the ECJ. There is absolutely no doubt that the people of Scotland are legally sovereign and that is acceptable to both the Supreme Court and the ECJ.

    So to put that in a nutshell. If the majority of the people of Scotland say the union is over it legally is over.

    There remains only one small doubt and that is if the people of Scotland elect a Scottish Government does that delegate their legal sovereignty to the Scottish Parliamentarians.

    As did the 1688 Glorious Revolution in England that forced William & Mary to legally delegate their Divine Right of Kings to the Parliament of England.

    However there is no doubt that the people of Scotland are legally sovereign. Which is why Nicola always wants a mandate for matters of the constitution. Doing so puts it beyond any legal doubts.

  173. CameronB Brodie says:

    Talking about delusionists, here’s one for fans of fuzzy queer-space, luxury communism, whatever the feck that is.

    Achieving concrete utopia through knowledge,
    ethics and transformative learning


    Roy Bhaskar’s concrete utopianism assumes that a key role for intellectuals, given the current precarious situation of humanity, is the envisaging of alternative possible futures, coherently grounded in the deep structure of what already exists, which includes what people already know and have. Without this grounding, people will not be able to make a persuasive case for change. With this grounding, and by combining the realism of the intellect with the optimism of the will, they may be able to usher in a future of which the youthful Marx said ‘the world has long since dreamed’.

    This paper is both motivated by Bhaskar’s position, and takes it as its starting point. I therefore begin by presenting three scenarios for the world’s future, which I take to be real possibilities. I consider which of these possibilities would be worth striving for, and in so doing, I introduce a strategy that I take to be a means to that end. Specifically, this strategy involves harmonizing interventions with critical realist eco-philosophical ambitions. I argue that such interventions should therefore have an interdisciplinary framework, be dedicated to an ethics of dialogue and care, and be directed by dialectical (transformative) change and learning.

    KEYWORDS: Concrete utopianism, knowledge, interdisciplinarity, ethics, transformative learning, ecoliteracy

  174. Terry callachan says:

    To yesindyref2.

    Conveniently avoiding the subject , you are wrong , the Scottish government has to apply to Westminster to hold a referendum which you correctly point out is overseen by the electoral commission you were wrong again on second point which is that Alex Salmond did have to change the wording of the Indy ref 2014 question so that it met the conditions of the election and referendums act I correct you on a third point which is that it is Westminster that wrote and amend that act and have only given the electoral commission the job of making sure it is adhered to but you know that don’t you, you are just unable to accept that you were wrong and resort to foolish behavior.

  175. Joe says:

    ‘…they may be able to usher in a future of which the youthful Marx said ‘the world has long since dreamed’.’

    Marx. lol.

  176. CameronB Brodie says:

    And here’s a useful read to help delusionists become more real.

    Abstraction: A Realist Interpretation

    …. Practice always takes place in the muddy waters of the concrete: it cannot be usefully informed by a theory which does no more than reduce the concrete to the abstract.

    But all this is no more than a statement of the problem. To solve it, it is at least necessary to clarify concepts such as ‘theoretical’, ’empirical’, ‘abstract’, and ‘concrete’. This paper attempts this by drawing upon arguments from the realist theory of science, especially as it has been recently developed by Bhaskar and Harre [6]. In so doing, I shall try to shift debate about these concepts outside the crippling polarity of empiricism and rationalism which characterises the present crisis of epistemology…..

  177. Joe says:

    Big Jock

    I think that if its ‘independence like Ireland’ then its not very independent.

  178. Terry callachan says:

    To George wood .. your post at 9.41pm

    You joined midstream ,
    I’m not saying it is likely that the army will be used against Scotland
    The discussion started way back initially about the police being used against people in Scotland
    I only joined the discussion later
    My contribution was that if aS30 is refused time and time again and Nicola Sturgeon does what others on here pointed out in the national newspaper that she said she would do which is hold a Scottish independence referendum with or without a S30 there would be a point where Westminster might declare the referendum illegal under the political parties and referendums act 2000 because it was carried out without due process being an application and agreement to and by Westminster.
    I said I think it possible that if YES won said referendum and the Scottish govt declared independence the army could be deployed.
    I think this all highly unlikely but the threat and possibility is always there .
    Westminster MPs threatened to deploy the navy to Gibraltar if Spain went ahead with its reunification efforts.
    I went on in the discussion to say the first places Westminster might deploy to would be those areas of Scotland that show high unionist numbers such as Orkney Shetland etc etc

    And so the discussion goes

    Do I think it likely ? Of course not
    But always possible

  179. CameronB Brodie says:

    As this is a CORE issue, here’s another for fans of ‘queer-space communism’.

    Problem-based Learning:
    A Critical Rationalist Perspective


    Although problem-based learning is being adopted by many institutions around the world as an effective model of learning in higher education, there is a surprising lack of critique in the problem-based learning literature in relation to its philosophical characteristics. This paper explores epistemology as a starting point for investigating the theoretical underpinnings of problem-based learning as a learning model.

    Criticisms of empiricism are analysed in terms of the perceived learning outcomes of learners undertaking a problem-based learning curriculum. It is argued that models of empiricism theorised by philosophers such as Bacon, Locke and Hume cannot fully account for the learning model found in problem-based learning curricula.

    It is proposed that an alternative epistemological approach is needed. The work of Karl Popper is discussed, whose Critical Rationalist epistemology, emphasises the generation of bold conjectures and criticism. Popper’s work shows a positive contribution to the demands of higher education, characterised by learners who are serious about making professional progress. The paper concludes by critically analysing the tensions and contradictions of problem-based learning in light of Popper’s epistemological theory of Critical Rationalism.

    Keywords: Problem-based Learning, Epistemology, Critical Rationalism, Philosophy, Karl Popper.

  180. Col.Blimp IV says:

    Big Jock

    “The UK government has insisted it would not support such a vote at the present time, arguing that the matter was supposed to be “settled for a generation” by the independence referendum in 2014.”

    I distinctly remember a caveat along the lines of, “unless there is a significant material change of circumstances”. said I think by Sturgeon.

  181. CameronB Brodie says:

    Care to elaborate on your lol?

  182. CameronB Brodie says:

    The missing link.

    Problem-based Learning: A Critical Rationalist Perspective

  183. Col.Blimp IV says:

    Big Jock

    Here it is.

    It also includes…

    “Ms Davidson said she did not see a situation where, if another referendum was to be held, her party would block it.”

  184. yesindyref2 says:

    @Terry callachan
    You’re unbelievable! And I mean that most sincerely.

    1. “Conveniently avoiding the subject” I avoided nothing.

    2. “you are wrong” I am right

    3. “the Scottish government has to apply to Westminster to hold a referendum” no it doesn’t

    4. “which you correctly point out is overseen by the electoral commission” Only if the ScotGov agree as they did for Indy Ref 1 via the Edinburgh Agreement. The Scotgov in its consultaion asked specifically about the role of the EC – see “Role of the Electoral Commission”

    5. “you were wrong again on second point which is that Alex Salmond did have to change the wording of the Indy ref 2014 question” No he didn’t have to, but in fact the ScotGov changed the wording after a response from the EC, NOT what you say here:

    6. “so that it met the conditions of the election and referendums act” Nope. You are wrong yet again.

    7. “I correct you on a third point which is that it is Westminster that wrote and amend that act”. No idea what you are wittering on about, the EA refers to PPERA as I stated.

    8. “and have only given the electoral commission the job of making sure it is adhered to”. Nope, the EC, answerable to Holyrood NOT Westminster, can make recommendations but had no enforcement powers whatsoever.

    9. “but you know that don’t you” – see answer to 8.

    10. “you are just unable to accept that you were wrong” That’s because I was 100% correct.

    11. “and resort to foolish behavior.” I guess foolish behaviour in your terms is being 100% correct instead of, as you are, almost 100% wrong.

    12 “Common.” Thanks, but your attempt at flattering to deceive won’t work on me. I’m immune to your wiles.

    13. for a baker’s dozen: “”. Most sensible thing you posted all day.

  185. Joe says:

    When it comes to marx ‘lol’ is a deserved response.

  186. Col.Blimp IV says:

    CameronB Brodie

    Maybe Joe was reminiscing about Rufus T. Firefly.

  187. CameronB Brodie says:

    At no point is my quote making any claim to the value of Marxist thought or theory, it points to optimistic realism. Are you a pessimistic irrationalist, perhaps even prejudiced to the extent that you are triggered by the sight of Marx’s name?

    Col.Blimp IV
    I used to be the one making Marx jokes around here.

  188. yesindyref2 says:

    One that seems appropriate for the Unionistas is this one:

    “He may look like an idiot and talk like an idiot, but don’t let that fool you. He really is an idiot.”

  189. CameronB Brodie says:

    If only I knew his work better, the putdown master. We can aspire. 🙂

  190. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Brian Doonthetoon @ 19:48,

    A belated thank-you for that NI update. A straw in the wind – SF with a smidgen more first-pref votes than the DUP. Looks like an Irish reunification poll is on the horizon. So we had better get our skates on before all those Orangist refugees head over here to vote against indy.

    That graphic in the Belfast Telegraph was extraordinarily clear and revealing, BTW. You could easily see how the transfers and surplusses were being distributed at each stage. Five pictures that were truly worth a thousand words. But then they are used to STV over there.

    Ireland teaches us yet another useful lesson in governance.

  191. Golfnut says:

    @ Robert Peffers.

    No Robert, I don’t think their is any doubt that the people of Scotland do not delegate their sovereignty to Parliament, either pre union or since. Lord Cooper, parliamentary sovereignty is an English principle and not one that is recognised in Scottish Constitutional law, nor should we forget that the Treaty of Union made Westminster as much subject to Scots Constitutional law as it is English. They have tried very hard to bury those particular aspects of the Treaty of Union.

  192. schrodingers cat says:

    we can only do what we can do, if we win more than 50% in a ref or election, then we have a mandate for indy, as long as we make it as clear as possible that indy is what people are voting for, eg bollox to britain etc.

    we exhaust the democratic process first. how westminster will react? i dont know, maybe tanks on the lawn, maybe not.

    we will cross that bridge when we come to it

  193. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    george wood @ 20:51, 21:41,

    Well said, George. A new form of reaction seems to be in genesis – if not outright intimidation, at least the implicit threat of it. We have seen this for some time now in the media, always helpfully enabling it: “oh, we can’t possibly have another EU referendum, the Leavers wouldn’t accept it” =hint, hint= Never mind that they might actually be in a minority now, their will must be obeyed or there could will be trouble. At which point no-one seems to have stopped to think, well, if so, that would be the end of democracy. A very English coup.

    Raising the threat of Unionist/UKGov trouble in Scotland over IR2 is the predictable progeny of this disreputable line. It’s the kind of thing you resort to when you have run out of any reasonable case. And anyone who encourages this kind of anti-democratic scaremongering is either deliberately setting hares running or is a useful idiot. Knaves and fools time once again.

  194. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    schrodingers cat @ 11:51,

    UKGov was traditional master of the effortless bluff, but it’s looking tired-out and past it now. After a 50% vote for indy, it (and the rest of the world looking on) will know the game is up. And we have lots of friends over on the Continent now.

    What people are forgetting is that whereas the Tories do fret about the Union, the Faragists are in a different league entirely – to protect the financial interests of their backers, the offshore money-laundering industry. They don’t actually care about “sovereignty” except in the very specific sense of keeping the Caribbean money havens and their dubious backers, criminals, oligarchs, etc., free from any kind of external scrutiny. As for Scotland, they don’t really give a damn. (Not until they see the government books, at least.)

    Maybe the fastest way to indy now is for the SG to get really, really interested in money-laundering! =laugh=

  195. CameronB Brodie says:

    Here’s a curative for ‘queer-space communist’ bollocks. Remember, International Relations theories set the tone for national and foreign policy. The Anglo-American, neo-liberal model of government follows an intensely positivist approach to IR, an is not conducive to sustainable and inclusive social cohesion, IMHO.

    Feminist Ontologies, Epistemologies, Methodologies,
    and Methods in International Relations

    Summary and Keywords

    Feminism operates on various feminist epistemologies, methodologies, and methods. While there is no consensus on how to organize or label these, there are a few generalities that can be drawn between these epistemologies, particularly in the international relations (IR) context.

    Classifying these epistemologies generally under the umbrella (or in the constellation) of postpositivism makes clear the contrasts between positivist social science and more critical approaches. Moreover, within the many critical approaches in feminist IR are many points of convergence and divergence.

    Feminist IR theory also focuses on the complexities of gender as a social and relational construction, in contrast to how nonfeminist ontologies focus on the rights of women, but including those of children and men as well. Hence, the postpositivist ontology takes on a more complex meaning.

    Rather than trying to uncover “how things really are,” postpositivists study how social realities (the Westphalian system, international migration or trafficking, or even modern war) came to be, and also how these realities came to be understood as norms, institutions, or social facts-often examining the gendered underpinnings of each. Most feminist IR theorists (and IR constructivists) share an “ontology of becoming” where the focus is on the intersubjective process of norm evolution.

    Keywords: feminism, feminist epistemologies, feminist methodologies, feminist methods, feminist IR theory, postpositivism, feminist international relations, gender, social realities, feminist ontologies

  196. CameronB Brodie says:

    And I think this one relevant to a lot of contemporary public debate. I appreciate you’re all disappointed I could only find an abstract. 🙂

    Critical Realist and Postpositivist Realist Feminisms: Towards a Feminist Dialectical Realism


    Current inquiries into the meaning of feminist concepts, such as the third world woman worker, seek to explain contemporary social relations of global capitalism within the context of the legacy of post-colonialist structures. At the same time, these very concepts draw attention to the limitations of language to adequately approximate the world as it is in order to capture some truth about its categorical entities, in particular, about the embodied experiences of the third world women worker.

    Through a comparative analysis of critical and postpositivist realisms that highlights feminist interventions in the context of standpoint epistemology, and the evolution in both towards dialectics, I argue that feminist dialectical realism offers an alternative to feminist poststructuralist materialisms as well as addresses limitations in prevailing standards for truth in social theory and philosophy.

    keywords: Adorno, constellationality, dialectics, postpositivist realism, dialectical realism, feminist dialectical realism, feminist standpoint epistemology

  197. Graeme J McAllan says:

    Think Ian has the right idea – we all need to Get Tae France out of here 😉

  198. Joe says:

    CameronB Brodie

    I was laughing at a section of the guff you pasted. Not at you.

    But yes, thanks to the 20th century i have a choice of finding Marx amusing or horrific. No irrationality here.

  199. orri says:

    A Section 30 is agreement between governments to transfer powers between, in this case, Holyrood and Westminster.

    1) It’s bidirectional, if you look at exactly how the power grab is being set up, it’s not actually happened yet, it’s an attempt to bypass Westminster’s need for an S30 to negotiate on Scotland’s behalf in areas currently devolved.
    2) It’s between governments. If either Westminster of Holyrood control changes, or even the FM or PM, then technically and S30 ends with that change.
    3) In the case of independence it’s only needed to lend, minimal, assurance that Westminster will abide by the result. Mainly by transferring the power to alter Westminster’s jurisdiction to Holyrood thus allowing the same kind of trigger as in the AV referendum to be included so that on a YES result Westminster can’t simply overturn it.

    Technically Westminster could simply have ignored the declaration of the Republic of Ireland. They didn’t and Sturgeon might be being less than subtle in visiting Dublin now. Westminster folded then and changed it’s name.

    Obviously Scotland isn’t part of the Kingdom of England so no need to ditch the Queen if Westminster play funny buggers. Only if she takes sides.

  200. Robert Pennington says:

    Agree with most of what you write, but wonder what actual evidence is there that the public “are already sick to death of being asked to vote on stuff”?
    The occasional opportunity to cast a vote is the only chance to actually try to influence anything in the sham UK ‘democracy’, so why would anyone be sick to death?

  201. CameronB Brodie says:

    Critical realism guff? Now I know for sure that you’re a bigoted idiot.

  202. Joe says:

    CameronB Brodie

    Denouncing someone as ‘bigoted’ when you know only that they find Marx laughable says more about you than it does of them im afraid to say.

  203. Ian McCubbin says:

    The UK as a state is finished now and we all no it. Count down is on.

  204. CameronB Brodie says:

    I’m laughing at you as you don’t appear to be able to read, given that I had suggested you’re a bigoted idiot, not that you’re simply a bigot.

    You also appear to want to paint me as a Marxist, or at least that I’m selling Marxism. The quote you are misrepresenting made no value judgement of Marxism, nor was it suggesting Marxism is desirable. It was pointing to the emancipatory optimism of the early social sciences. Marx had also been dead for some time before the Bolsheviki revolution, and was a vague memory by the time of the Stalinist pogroms, you tit.

  205. CameronB Brodie says:

    There’s me jumping in with both feet, what a tit.

    OK, my bad, but you’re still bigoted to denounce stuff you clearly don’t understand.

  206. CameronB Brodie says:

    Just in case folk think I’m getting a bit big-headed, I had a formal introduction to this stuff, otherwise I wouldn’t be a bit of a post-colonial feminist. Radical, though that’s not me claiming I know it all. 🙂


  207. Joe says:

    No problem for me. Political discourse with more leftist types usually involves being personally labelled A: something nasty/evil coupled with B: something of low intelligence.

    Im used to it and every time its done it proves the underlying mindset – throw a label onto those of different opinions that justifies taking a dismissive stance. Its very much the thing with socialist/progressive types but it only scores negative points outside of the lefty bubble.

    Being on a WOS comment section I expected a lot more than ive had.

  208. CameronB Brodie says:

    So what does a post-colonial feminist do outside their lunchtime?

    Development studies

    Why can foreign aid hinder developing countries? How do you solve humanitarian crises? Does gender equality exist in the Middle East?

    Development studies focuses on world issues including poverty, civil war and human rights abuses….

  209. CameronB Brodie says:

    You were dismissing the meta-theory of the social sciences, as Marxist pish. That requires a certain, special, derision, IMHO.

  210. Joe says:

    I attack your idea/concept and you attack me. That’s whats caused the left to turn into murderers every time they gain total political power.

    Why? Because leftists don’t have idea’s. The idea has them. And to attack the idea is to attack them personally and they respond in kind. Our exchange is a perfect example.

    I know this and I was one.

    You are correct though, I do consider the meta-theory of the social sciences as Marxist pish.

  211. CameronB Brodie says:

    Critical realism isn’t my “idea/concept”, it’s philosophy drawn from the physical sciences. It is used as a foundational tool of social research. Yes, science is political and you are a Tory twat.

  212. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    I think you are really turned on by each other…

    Eh’ll git mah coat…

  213. CameronB Brodie says:

    Brian Doonthetoon
    I think Joe and myself are both “danglers” and I’m not that way inclined. I also consider the narrow-mindedness typical of right-wingers, to be more than a bit of a turn-off, as I have a rational concern for social sustainability. 😉

    Introduction to the special issue: applied critical realism in the social sciences

  214. Gary says:

    I see your point about The Brexit Party winning, at least a decent number of seats, at the next GE. However, despite their undoubted popularity among Brexit supporters they still have one or two obstacles in their way.

    Firstly, that was an EU election, people are more willing to vote for a non traditional party, hence UKIP’s MEPs at the last election. Secondly the turnout is ALWAYS lower and therefore those who can get their supporters motivated are in with a better chance AND Farage is an excellent motivator and campaigner, whilst Labour and Tory were, at best, lacklustre and in some cases activists just refused to campaign. Essentially they (Labour and Tory) hoped their core support would back them anyway and that ‘too much’ campaigning might actually turn woters away from them.

    Aside from all that, Farage, quite cleverly, decided to make sure that The Brexit Party was a ‘single issue party’ to ensure that the previous right wing policies of UKIP wouldn’t put off those who normally voted Labour. That’s fine for EU elections where, allegedly, MEPs will only be in office for a period of a few months. Voters may be more reticent to vote in a government who have NO POLICIES except LEAVE. If they react to this by forming policies they may them lose their Labour Voting supporters.

    Ironically, Batten’s bringing the racist thug Tommy Robinson into UKIP has actually helped the Brexit cause. It caused Farage, and many members, voters and potential candidates to disassociate themselves from the now toxic party and, in Farage’s case, go on to form a party around Farage’s successful leadership brand. Had UKIP been without Robinson then The Brexit Party wouldn’t exist, they would have a ‘non-Farage’ leading it into oblivion at the polls despite anger among uber leave voters.

    But I agree, Labour’s idea of becoming CLEARLY anti Brexit WILL kill them at the next GE just as badly as being unclear (if not worse) The LibDems will do well and so will the SNP, maybe more Greens too. But there is no room for confidence and supply nor a coalition in this as LibDems have already set out their stall as being ultra unionist and unwilling to do ANY deal with SNP.

    A hung parliament, perhaps six months of uncertainty and inaction then back to the country for another go at it, maybe a SLIGHTLY better result for the Tories and maybe another deal with whatever’s left of DUP, who also lost ground in the EU elections (they haven’t listened to their OWN VOTERS and won’t be happy until they’ve got machine gun posts and barbed wire at the border) There will STILL be no deal on Brexit and anything possible will be killed of by the terrorist sympathising DUP…

  215. Joe says:


    I had a good laugh at that.

    Cheers to you and Cameron also

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