The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

The divided kingdom

Posted on July 04, 2018 by

So this is an interesting one. The UK government currently finds itself in an appalling mess over the UK’s post-Brexit relationship with Ireland, due to the inconvenient fact of a small part of Ireland being in the UK, and has no idea what to do about it.

The closest thing Westminster has to a plan – and it has to be said that it’s not VERY close to a plan – is the so-called “backstop”, which isn’t a backstop at all and merely kicks everything down the road a couple of years, and which the EU has already said is a non-starter.

The fallback on the backstop, as announced last December, is “regulatory alignment” on the island of Ireland, which would effectively mean Northern Ireland staying in the EU and a border coming into existence in the Irish Sea (or to be more geographically accurate, the North Channel).

This would be, um, bitterly opposed by the DUP, on whom Theresa May’s government notionally depends, but given the absolute trainwreck of Labour’s position on Brexit it’s not at all clear that the DUP’s opposition would be enough to scupper any vote, so it could happen anyway, opening a simply massive can of worms.

That’s about the shortest rendition of the situation we can manage. But of course, in reality it’s much more complicated than that.

Because since Northern Ireland and Scotland both voted to stay in the EU – Scotland by a particularly large margin – then any deal which effectively kept NI in Europe would be a huge benefit that Scottish people and businesses would want too.

The downside is that if such special status would necessitate customs and immigration checks in the North Channel – as it would have to – then obviously it would mean the same thing on the land border between Scotland and England.

But how would Scots feel about that? The answer surprised us a little.

According to our recent Panelbase poll, it turns out that a hard border at Berwick and Gretna is a price that Scottish voters are – by a margin of more than two to one – willing to pay to stay in the EU.

As we found yesterday, this is another question where Tories are isolated from the rest of Scotland. While SNP voters (even including the third of them who voted Leave) are absolutely overwhelmingly prepared to tolerate a hard border – presumably since it’d plainly be a further big symbolic and practical step towards independence – Labour and Lib Dem supporters also back the idea by more than 2:1.

Only Tories would be against the idea of Scotland having the same special status as Northern Ireland, and they’re only a quarter of Scottish voters and a fifth of MPs.

And the most intriguing thing about that is this: were it to happen, there’d clearly no longer be any need for a sea border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain.

That’s because NI would no longer be shut off from the rest of the UK, the situation that’s so intolerable to the DUP – instead it would be England and Wales that were effectively quarantined. The need for a hard land border on the island of Ireland could be avoided, replaced with one between Scotland and England which would have no implications for the Good Friday Agreement.

(Also, at just 96 miles the Scotland-England border is a lot shorter than the NI-Ireland one at 310 miles, and has many fewer crossings, so it’d be far easier to manage.)

Now, to say that such an arrangement would be controversial is like saying relations between Israel and Palestine are “a little tricky”. But remarkably, it appears to be the LEAST problematic of the solutions currently open to the UK government.

It would – we’ve just learned – be acceptable to the people of Scotland. It would, at a minimum, be LESS unacceptable to the DUP than any other option is. We know the English would go along with it, because we already know they’d happily cut Scotland and NI loose entirely to secure Brexit, never mind give them a half-and-half status.

And let’s be honest, nobody much cares what the Welsh think.

So there it is. We’ve solved the most unsolvable problem in British politics. Northern Ireland and Scotland get what they want – to basically stay in the EU as part of a Celtic substate with one foot in both camps. England and Wales also get what they want – to leave the EU. We don’t need to have a hard land border in Ireland, destroying the GFA, because the border between the EU and the UK will now be a much shorter and less bloodsoaked one located just north of Hadrian’s Wall.

(If, as pro-Brexit UK ministers keep claiming over Ireland, there’s an easy technological solution which can all but eliminate border friction and delays, then all the better.)

Pretty simple stuff, this politics lark, if you give it a moment’s thought.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

4 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. 04 07 18 12:56

    The divided kingdom | speymouth

  2. 05 07 18 07:03

    Where should the UK’s internal land border be? Is it Carlisle and Berwick?

  3. 17 09 19 19:42

    Is it so bad? | Grumpy Scottish Man

  4. 10 10 19 07:51

    Wrong from the start pretty much | Grumpy Scottish Man

451 to “The divided kingdom”

  1. Proctor Lewis says:

    Oh you are awful, but I like you!

  2. HandandShrimp says:

    As fair an exposition as I have heard from anyone on this topic (and one a few churnalists might very well plagarise).

    I would be happy with this as a least worst option pending we see what we do for ourselves. The bottom line is though that the King and Country crowd are going to have longer faces than their horses on a cold boxing day pretend fox hunt. They are going to see it as an emasculation of the Empire or something. The ultra Unionists in Scotland will undoubtedly go purple with apoplexy…that alone sells it to me 🙂

  3. Ian says:

    How do you ensure that nothing goes to England/Wales directly from Northern Ireland?

  4. James Mills says:

    Now , now , rev. ! You are in danger of showing up the wise people negotiating Brexit with this sort of intelligent compromise . That is not what Theresa wants . Lord knows what Theresa wants !

  5. Macart says:

    Tick, as they say, tock.

  6. Juan says:

    Everyone’s a winner. Simple once you think about it. I doubt the Tory regime are considering this as an option.

  7. Tackety Beets says:

    Simples !

  8. montfleury says:

    It would be with great sadness that I stopped at the Gretna border post, the Proclaimers’ ‘Cap in Hand’ blaring at 11 from the automobile sound system but what must be must be.

  9. fillofficer says:

    jeez rev, thats so simple, it might just work
    win, win situation
    everybody happy
    make it so, please

  10. Ken J says:

    I think you’ve cracked it – you should get the SNP to propose that Westminster debate it asap.

    Sunday 15th July around 4:00pm would be an ideal time…

  11. Patrick Roden says:

    This needs to be shared far and wide with the voters in England.

  12. Ken500 says:


    A GE might be easier to get the Tories out, They can’t afford Brexit. Even with the Hedge funds slush funds. They could always use the Pollsters to try and manipulate it with fraud. Short the £pound and leave everyone worse off. The poorer to pick up the cost. Just maybe the Police will sort them out for electoral fraud. It just needs prison as a deterrent for a patsy. It just might deter them. The Tories and their sychophants.

  13. MajorBloodnok says:

    Now that, is brilliant.

  14. Foonurt says:

    Soartit. Ah fine hing.

    Wheiys awe thae kye, cumin hame?

  15. Weechid says:

    I can hear the folks in SW Scotland who work in Carlisle moaning as I type. Personally, I’m all for it:-)

  16. Welsh Sion says:

    And let’s be honest, nobody much cares what the Welsh think.


    Whilst the majority of this article is useful and contributes much to the debate, you also need to remember that we have ports which face and do business with the Irish Republic.

    Don’t go using hackneyed, Fleet Street tropes in denigrating natural allies. It does both you and the Scottish cause harm, when we are your natural friends and supporters- and indeed share the common enemies and make common cause.

    Yes, maybe the stats show that the majority of Welshies who did vote (the usual “voice of the people” claptrap) voted for Brexit. But that shouldn’t allow the rest of us a voice and equality of respect – that which we (as you, in Scotland) we never get within this Disunited Kingdumb.

  17. Truth says:

    Oh man, this is good.

    We could even use it to close the minimum pricing loopholes to keep the Daily Mail happy.

  18. joannie says:

    Brilliant. Let’s make you Prime Minister.

  19. Ian Foulds says:

    Well done that man!

    Now all we need is to get it out there and promoted by all who are interested in the advancement of the two Kingdoms on they route they both want.

  20. HandandShrimp says:

    Welsh Sion

    How did Welsh Wales vote? Was there a “Little England” effect along the border which tipped the scales. I know the margin was tight.

  21. Liz g says:

    Of course its the sensible solution,not only that, everybody’s “roughly” getting what they voted for.
    The EU could probably get on board too.

    But it will never be an option.
    Mainly because of the extra power’s that would need to come to Holyrood, to achieve it!
    Powers that,as well as being the “Devo Max” that everyone imagined when its mentioned,would also probably involve opening the books.
    But the biggest bug is the oil and gas…. Who would be exporting it to the EU and under who’s arrangements?
    Westminster won’t open that can of worms.

  22. John Dickson says:

    Ian says:
    4 July, 2018 at 11:59 am
    How do you ensure that nothing goes to England/Wales directly from Northern Ireland?

    Now that would be smuggling would it not?

  23. Smeddum says:

    It is probably the only reasonably pragmatic solution that might – just- be remotely acceptable to various parties. And a remarkably interesting one for Scotland.

    It is, of course, possible for goods and people to go directly to England from Northern Ireland via Liverpool, and presumably other ports, so Mrs T. May would have to set up a coastal protection service which would no doubt be costly. And that will apply to all ports at present served by ferries to and from the Republic of Ireland. Also costly. Jings, that fairly eats into the extra cash for the NHS!

    Arlene Foster has proposed a bridge to Scotland. Probably thinking that links Northern Ireland totally to UK. She’s really far-thinking and good at reading the runes, isn’t she?

  24. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “How do you ensure that nothing goes to England/Wales directly from Northern Ireland?”

    You probably have to stop any official direct flights/sea crossings from NI to England/Wales and make people either go through Scotland or go from the Republic, where there are already controls in place because it’s already a foreign country. Could be fabulous news for Dundalk.

    An inconvenience and not ideal for NI folk, sure, but that’s the sort of stuff that happens when major upheaval occurs. This omelette isn’t getting made without SOME eggs getting broken, I just can’t see any way to break any fewer than this.

  25. Proud Cybernat says:

    Best of ALL Worlds.

    At least for the moment.

  26. David Smith says:

    Well hopefully some of the Carlisle folks domiciles in Gretna will be up for a house swap! ?

  27. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “Whilst the majority of this article is useful and contributes much to the debate, you also need to remember that we have ports which face and do business with the Irish Republic.”

    That line was of course both a joke and a practical appraisal of the political situation. But Wales and Ireland will be foreign countries (to each other) after Brexit whatever happens, so my plan doesn’t change anything in that regard.

  28. McBoxheid says:

    Ian says:
    4 July, 2018 at 11:59 am

    How do you ensure that nothing goes to England/Wales directly from Northern Ireland?
    All trade between NI, Scotland and England and Wales as to be rubberstamped on the Isle of Man before its journey can begin.

    Trade between NI, Scotland and the EU remains unchanged, but becomes bonded if it travels through England.

    Trade between the EU and England will be subjected to tariffs at point of entry.

    Incase of dispute and joint agenceny can be set up on Rockall, staffed equally between the EU and whichever countries are involved. This would additionally settle the dispute over Rockall and brought into glorious song by the Woftones (Rock on Rockall (see and of course it would need proctection, which could be provided by the Russian Navy…they are there anyway! 😉

  29. McBoxheid says:

    Wolftones, obviously!

  30. Effijy says:

    Rev, You are a Genius!

    You have the answer for the future!


    John Dickson says:
    4 July, 2018 at 12:26 pm
    Ian says:
    4 July, 2018 at 11:59 am
    How do you ensure that nothing goes to England/Wales directly from Northern Ireland?

    We don’t ensure this!
    England can have a go at it, but smuggling will be big business down South again and HMRC will lose a fortune through it.

    N.Ireland and Scotland would have the EU trade agreement and you will most things cheaper, Human and Worker’s rights protected, we wouldn’t have the massive job loses that England and Wales will suffer due to Brexit.

    Could result in an order for Scottish Navel Ships to patrol England’s coast line and maybe employers like Nissan will move North from Sunderland to stay free of English Trade Tariffs.

  31. This is gold star thinking

  32. Robert Peffers says:

    @Patrick Roden says: 4 July, 2018 at 12:08 pm:

    “This needs to be shared far and wide with the voters in England.”

    Yeah! Why not, Patrick? After all we already share every other bloody Scottish asset with the Better Together Yoonatics – it’s just that the Better Together Yoonatics don’t want to share bugger all with the Scottish Separatists.

  33. McBrian says:

    According to Google Maps there are only 29 road and track crossings that I can see over the Scotland – England border, thats a lot less than 300+ that has been quoted between Eire and NI.

  34. Reluctant Nationalist says:

    Liz g: “But the biggest bug is the oil and gas… Who would be exporting it to the EU and under whose arrangements?”

    Maersk, INEOS, Exxon, Chevron, BP, among many others; with trading arrangements organised by the likes of ICE Futures, and overall tax policy presumably by Westminster.

  35. Welsh Sion says:

    Hand and Shrimp @ 12:26 pm

    Cymru/Wales and Brexit


    Here you go – as usual Google is your friend. (Me too, I hope!),_2016#Wales

    You will see, for example, that my unitary authority, Gwynedd, voted to Remain. However, it wouldn’t be right to put a demographic of Wallia pura voted Remain and the rest of Cymru voted to Leave (See for example, Monmouthshire – which also voted AGAINST increasing the National Assembly’s powers in the 2011 Referendum. It was the ONLY unitary authority so to do out of 22, and the margin was very close.)

    I know of Welsh speaking Welshies who were passionate Leavers, and I know of in-comers who were also Europlhiles. You could say, on balance that the Cymry Cymraeg voted Remain and others did not – but that would be too simplistic. I know that I personally am still sore as a Remoaner and internationalist – and I still fight the good fight for independence for both Scotland and Cymru.

    In other news, are you all aware that there are now Leadership campaigns on-going in ALL (bar one) political parties represented in the National Assembly? Plaid Cymru, Tories, Labour and UKIP are all now involved in Leadership contests.

    The only Party NOT involved in a Leadership ‘battle’? The Lib Dems – but then they only have one (1) Assembly Member (and she’s also part of the ruling Labour Government’s Cabinet.

    Interesting times!

  36. Andy Gaffney says:

    Sure, if the EU pay for the wall. We might need to set up refugee camps on the border for our English friends when they try to escape their nation’s chaos after Brexit.

  37. Chick McGregor says:

    Brexit changes everything. I think some kind of hard border between Scotland and England is inevitable if Scotland manages to escape London’s clutches.

    For trade control of course but probably more so for immigration control. I really think that the English economy will collapse after Brexit and Scotland would not otherwise be able to cope with the resulting huge numbers of economic refugees from South of the Border.

  38. Michael McCabe says:

    Just saying. If there is any jobs going that I have always wanted to be a border guard.

  39. paul mccormack says:


  40. Marcia says:

    The only way out of the mess would be for the 6 counties of the north to join the 26 counties of the south. That might prove to be difficult for the Tories as they need the DUP. No other way beyond fanciful technological system yet to be invented or developed.

  41. Chick McGregor says:

    Welsh Sion

    We had a numpty Laybir heid bummer here saying that if Glasgow voted no in indyref1 then it should be allowed to stay in the UK.

    Glasgow voted Yes, so by his logic, it is now independent.

  42. Robert Peffers says:

    @McBoxheid says: 4 July, 2018 at 12:41 pm:

    ” … All trade between NI, Scotland and England and Wales as to be rubberstamped on the Isle of Man before its journey can begin.”

    But! But! But! The Isle of Man is not governed by the Westminster Parliament but is only a crown, (not United Kingdom Government), protectorate and it only gets EU consideration as a Crown, not a United Kingdom, protectorate. I believe it is classes as an Associate EU Member but associated of who or what?

  43. Moonlight says:

    Some time ago I foresaw this option.
    I suggested the early preparations of our ports and airports for the shipping direct from the continent of our essentials. Aldi and Lidl will play, Tesco might now morph into Carrefour (woopee, great cheese)
    A stockpile of razor wire and concrete blocks for the roads might also come in handy.
    This way there are no losers, not in real terms. The Britnats/OO will not like it, but they will be technically still in the UK, just with hugely more powerful devolved governments.
    So Scotland gets to stay in the EU, but for the time being we don’t have to use that nasty independence word. Scotland keeps everything it values and has a sort of Faroes with knobs on status.
    NI keeps its’ open border, the DUP has no barrier between it and “Britain”(apologies to Peffers). Arlene might get her bridge.
    In due time NI will vote to reunite the island of Ireland and Scotland will see the benefit of being completely independent.
    England can now enjoy it’s freedom from Brussels and watch and learn how it gets on in comparison with its’ immediate neighbours.
    Best solution I’ve heard for a long time.

  44. Liz g says:

    Reluctant Nationalist @ 12.50
    Having the Tax and Control of Oil and Gas at Westminster as it is now,would mean that the Oil and Gas are exported to the EU under LESS favourable arrangements than would be the case if it was exported from Scotland!

    Would the Company’s then not want to lobby for Scotland to be exporting it in the EU internal market?
    And as it is in Scottish Water’s would it not be as much of a Scottish produce as Wild Salmon?

    I cannot see Westminster wanting to risk even the discussion around this,especially since Holyrood would get sight of the true figures for Oil and Gas revenue and reserves.

    Which is why as brilliant as the Revs solution is,I don’t think this plan will see the light of day.

  45. joannie says:

    Maybe the whole of the UK should just join the Republic of Ireland.

    Then we can give Scotland and Wales independence and have the Republic of Ireland and England.

  46. stonefree says:

    Weechid at 12:19 pm
    “I can hear the folks in SW Scotland who work in Carlisle moaning as I type.”
    Might I suggest that they are the ones who back Muddel
    “Personally, I’m all for it:-)” I’m with you on that

  47. Craig P says:

    Genius level thinking Rev.

    You’ve just saved the union.

    Wait a minute…

  48. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “The only way out of the mess would be for the 6 counties of the north to join the 26 counties of the south.”

    That is of course the simplest option technically and practically by a mile. But while it might not be all that far off, there’s no way it’s happening before Brexit.

  49. Proud Cybernat says:

    Ireland doesn’t want a hard border between north and south.

    Scotland, according to the Rev’s latest poll, doesn’t mind having a hard border between Scotland and England.

    And how many times have we heard little Englanders shouting that they want to rebuild Hadrian’s Wall (and gifting a big chunk of north England to Scotland in the process one has to presume).

    What’s not to like? Brexit solved. Let’s get to it.

  50. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “Genius level thinking Rev.

    You’ve just saved the union.

    Wait a minute…”

    Have I, though? Or have I just eliminated one of the biggest psychological barriers to independence by ensuring that there’s a physical border anyway, so it can’t be used as an anti-indy scare story?

  51. Big Jock says:

    Would be the ultimate irony if it came off. We are dealing with a really thick as shit DUP , so no it wouldn’t be agreed by those knuckle draggers who think Global Warming is a myth.

    May has plans to dissolve Holyrood, so she wouldn’t want to strengthen Scotland’s independence.

    Which brings us back to point A – Independence is the only answer.

  52. Muscleguy says:

    Fewer crossing huh? Take a look on Google Earth about the hill areas on the border. There are farm tracks which go right up to the border and over it sometimes with only a short gap, but not always. We’re not talking about public roads but roads which a Range Rover for eg could negotiate, with a full load and maybe a trailer.

    The smuggling possibilities are much greater than you seem to appreciate Rev. I take your points about the economics of running booze across the border now due to minimum pricing but post that scenario the range of goods and people, don’t forget people, can be smuggled across the border increase quite a lot.

    If I can spot this problem then so can the EU and they would insist on an overseen much harder border than at present. Think double fence with dog patrols in between the fences. There’s a long distance path (the Penine Way?) which crosses and recrosses the border several times, another gleaning from Google Earth scrivening.

    That may not be so inconvenient in the hill country but it may well be in Coldstream say and on both coasts where the majority of traffic passes.

    And of course if we succeed in reclaiming Berwickshire (part of the Scottish Crown) then much more of the border is along the middle of a wadeable/fordable river. Am I stood in the river fishing or am I about to wade across illegally? Sales of fishing waders rods and tweeds to illegal immigrants (rented at high cost by smugglers to immigrants) will soar. Vis the Syrian asylum seekers who worked their way up Russia then cycled across the Russian-Norwegian border in the far north.

  53. Gullane No4 says:

    Arlene’s proposed NI/Scotland bridge would make more sense now.
    Probably get masses of EU funding towards it.

  54. Welsh Sion says:

    There was a mention of the Isle of Man earlier and, having read this was intrigued at the difference between it and us in Wales and Scotland.

    Apparently, the IoM has a Sewell-like convention,

    “The UK Parliament has paramount power to legislate for the Isle of Man on all matters but it is a long-standing convention that it does not do so on domestic matters without the Island’s consent.” (

    But note, that UNLIKE Scotland or Wales, that weasel word “normally” has not been inserted between “not” and “do”, which it does in our respective and governing pieces of Westminster legislation.

    Interessant, non ? 🙂

  55. Vronsky says:

    Guilty confession: I suspect we may become very desirous of a hard border with England. The Tories are dragging the poor English towards fascism, ably supported by ‘Labour’. We could have a major problem of economic refugees. Wouldn’t it be poetic if English antipathy to freedom of movement came back to bite them in the arse?

  56. H Scott says:

    An excellent option that has no chance of happening, not least because it would give Scotland more power and an economic advantage, two things the British establishment does not want to happen.
    It’s much more likely that London would induce Ireland’s reunification and transfer a million plus loyalists to Scotland. Irish ‘problem’ solved and a guaranteed No vote at any indyref2.

  57. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “Fewer crossing huh? Take a look on Google Earth about the hill areas on the border. There are farm tracks which go right up to the border and over it sometimes with only a short gap, but not always. We’re not talking about public roads but roads which a Range Rover for eg could negotiate, with a full load and maybe a trailer.”

    And you think that isn’t true about Ireland?

  58. Thepnr says:

    It’s very heartening that 53% would be happy to have a hard border between Scotland and England if it meant remaining in the EU. A hard border then is not quite as scary as Project Fear believed now that the UK is leaving the EU.

    As usual it’s the Tory supporters hugely against it, I would love to know what the figures would be for Yes/No voters if you have them Rev.

  59. msean says:

    I like it,not as good as independence,but would solve the immediate problem.

    Now the hard bit.How to get the Tories to think it’s their idea,because they won’t listen to anyone else while it’s ‘their turn’ for the fancy London offices.

  60. Sinky says:

    Sarah Smith from Peterhead on BBC lunchtime TV news giving a very UK centric view of British fishermen’s access to British Waters.

    Why are the West Coast fishermen never quoted on TV?

  61. joannie says:

    @Muscleguy – the same is true of the Irish border only even more so. The Irish border crosses peoples’ private land, runs up the middle of a village street and crosses several bodies of water where the two governments have never agreed on where the border actually lies or which part of the water belongs to which country. There’s even a house in Monaghan where the border crosses through their house with the result that after several court battles they’ve been told they don’t have to pay a TV license in either country.

  62. HandandShrimp says:

    The Scottish border is 96 miles as opposed to the 310 miles border in Ireland. There are only a handful of practical crossings in Scotland (much of it is forest) whereas in Ireland houses and farms straddle the border and there are umpteen wee roads. It is a much neater solution.

  63. Breeks says:

    Quite simple really. Just confine Brexit to those who voted for it, and let the rest of us carry on as normal.

    Scotland will however need a hard border with England, but don’t worry, we will want one if we want to avoid inferior quality foodstuffs coming into Scotland via “UK” Supermarkets, with no traceability, but laced with GM components, steroids and growth hormones, with inferior labelling.

    Personally, I’d actually demand a hard border to keep that muck out of Scotland, and I’d also like the EU to have our back, and the EUCJ be ready to clobber England with sanctions and fines if it was sloppy with its standards and convergence criteria, or willfully tried to undermine the integrity and EU compliance of Scottish produce.

    This situation however creates a laughable Constitutional dogs breakfast. Say, England is Brexited 100%, Scotland remains in the EU or has a FTA which binds Scotland to European Law, and Scotland itself has a devolved Government in firm command of a popular majority… WHO is actually sovereign over Scotland? What Sovereignty does the EU defer to? Clearly it does, to prevent formal annexation of Scotland. What Sovereignty does the UK defer to? Clearly it does, if it accepts the European Court of Justice has final say over Scotland.

    The only robust and logical Constitutional solution is for Scotland’s own Sovereignty to be recognised, and that in effect, is simply to BE Independent. No mandate required, no majority required, but merely Scotland formally recognised as Constitutionally Sovereign. Scotland is finally free of its 300 years of political entrapment.

  64. galamcennalath says:

    ” The need for a hard land border on the island of Ireland could be avoided, replaced with one between Scotland and England which would have no implications for the Good Friday Agreement. “

    .. sheer brilliance Stu. You have solved the unsolvable and with ease!

  65. Craig P says:

    Have I, though? Or have I just eliminated one of the biggest psychological barriers to independence by ensuring that there’s a physical border anyway, so it can’t be used as an anti-indy scare story?

    Something for everyone!

    We could remake Doomsday ( but set ‘civilisation’ on the north side of the wall…

  66. Ken500 says:

    The fishermen overfished the sea. Throwing back dead fish for years. Black fish. Leading to a need for conservation. They should have been using bigger nets. Like Norway and
    improved terms and conditions.

    The rest is a red herring. A fishy tale. A slimy tail.

  67. Doug_Bryce says:

    Whatever the outcome between EIRE-NI it will provide an indication about independent Scotlands possible future relationship with UK.

    Another reason to wait and see what Brexit means 🙂
    Schrodingers Brexit.

    “Theresa May would seek passport checks between Scotland and England ”

    “Theresa May says she will ‘never accept’ border with Northern Ireland”

  68. McBoxheid says:

    Robert Peffers says:
    4 July, 2018 at 1:02 pm

    @McBoxheid says: 4 July, 2018 at 12:41 pm:

    ” … All trade between NI, Scotland and England and Wales as to be rubberstamped on the Isle of Man before its journey can begin.”

    But! But! But! The Isle of Man is not governed by the Westminster Parliament but is only a crown, (not United Kingdom Government), protectorate and it only gets EU consideration as a Crown, not a United Kingdom, protectorate. I believe it is classes as an Associate EU Member but associated of who or what?

    Thanks for that! I realise that it is only a crown protectorate and not under the control of the UK Government. It has links to both the crown and the EU and therefore however a possible compromise. It was meant to be a tongue in cheek solution. Particularly the Rockall bit, obviously.

  69. Reluctant Nationalist says:

    Liz g @ 1.05pm

    To your first question: yes; to your second question: it depends on whether export arrangements to non-EU countries will negate the effect of a 3% EU tariff; to your third question: yes.

  70. Ken500 says:

    A GE might come sooner before any border question can be settled. The saga could drag on and on.

  71. Proud Cybernat says:

    It probably looks as though, post-Brexit, NI will likely remain part of the EU in some shape or form. There doesn’t seem any way around this.

    Since Scotland ALSO voted to remain in the EU by a margin of 62%-38%, then exactly WHY shouldn’t the people of Scotland have their will honoured?

    This is 67% in this poll preferring to have an Anglo-Scottish hard border to being chucked out the EU. That is 5% MORE than the Scottish EU referendum result. Positions definitely seem to be hardening and moving our way.

  72. Artyhetty says:

    Well done, I am sure the media will pick this up, ask for your article to put on the front pages and run with it!

    Looks like a win win situation, I wonder what the rEU would say to this, they want a simple solution as possible so let’s hope they see it as a realistic option, after all, the useless Britnat incompetents at WM have come up with absolutely nothing workable so far.

    The Tories really do want their cake and eat it don’t they. Not reknowned for playing fair or clean though, if they don’t get their own way.

  73. Del says:

    Fewer Crossings?
    Look at the borders between Switzerland and the various EU states. There are border posts on the motorways but not on all minor roads – despite Schengen, and Switzerland being in EFTA not the EU. There are paths and tracks all over the place. Unless we’re talking about barbed wire on top of the Matterhorn?

  74. jfngw says:


    The BBC agenda is not even hidden now.

    Today – very upbeat report on UKGov proposals, only interview the people who are going to be supportive. Scottish government being awkward, not exact words but you get the inference.

    Yesterday – drugs death high, all attributed to Scotgov, no mention of UKgov involvement with drugs policy.

    They need to destroy the Scotgov reputation, it’s been their task since the 2015 election result. The establishment were shocked by this result as they thought the 2014 campaign by the media would wipe out the SNP. Instead the SNP membership has only increased.

  75. McBoxheid says:

    Thanks for that! I realise that it is only a crown protectorate and not under the control of the UK Government.

    Edit: Direct control

  76. Clootie says:

    …now that is a very big stirring spoon you are wielding!
    The problem is that the Tory cabinet will NEVER agree on any solution.

  77. Movy says:

    Yep. I’ve been challenged about this on other blogs and have always replied if that’s what it takes, so be it. Let’s get ready for our border posts – and the jobs, infrastructure etc. resulting from that! PS to Proctor Lewis at 11.57 – thank you for reminding me of the late great Dick Emery – but the quote does somewhat date us!

  78. galamcennalath says:

    Now here’s my thought of the day!

    Firstly let me state 100% I want a fully iScotland in the EU. However, Stu’s plan is an excellent half way house. Dare I suggest it would in effect deliver the elusive DevoMax. Lots of new powers would need to be devolved to NI and Scotland to make this work.

    So here’s a thought. Why not have a referendum in Scotland asap on Stu’s plan? Like everything else it needs a few Brexit dominos to fall into place, but we should know the NI situation very soon.

    So IF conditions are right, call a referendum demanding the same deal as NI.

    Get this right and it could be 70% YES.

    I would honestly put off IndyRef2 for 5-10 years is this virtually guaranteed to win first huge step was achieved.

    And here’s the icing- if WM won’t deliver the outcome of SameAsNIRef, go for an immediate IndyRef2.

  79. Doug Bryce says:

    ^ Switzerland is part of the single market (but outside EU).
    Different circumstance to what the Tories want for UK.

  80. joannie says:

    @Proud Cybernat – I think the real answer to your question is that the UK government aren’t interested in honouring the wishes of the people in any part of the UK, they’re only interested in appeasing Rees Mogg and his ilk and holding the Tory party together.

    If it wasn’t for the Irish government, backed up by the EU, they would have already thrown NI under a bus too.

  81. Chick McGregor says:

    About half the Scottish-English border is defined by waterways requiring a bridge point to cross, unless you are willing to swim or wade.

  82. McBoxheid says:

    galamcennalath says:
    4 July, 2018 at 2:17 pm

    Now here’s my thought of the day!

    Very well thought out too!

  83. jfngw says:

    It gives the people of England and Wales what they voted for, chlorinated chicken, hormone infused beef, private healthcare. Keeps Scotland’s produce free from contaminants.

    It looks like the hard Scotland/England border is the best that can be hoped for in these negotiations. It is no longer a red line to me, it is in fact looking like a desirable outcome.

    Now we just need to find out what Dantalion Broon thinks about it.

  84. Guybrush Threepwood says:

    The biggest threat to the UK is not from the YES movement, but from the hardcore British Nationalist side.

    The Tories and the DUP are so desperate to turn us into a single unitary country, that they are unwittingly speeding up the demise of the UK. “Never interfere with your enemy when he is making a mistake.”

    Let’s look at what’s happening:

    The DUP continue to insist that NI should exit the single market/customs union with the rest of the UK.

    The Tories continue to fight amongst themselves.

    A hard brexit is on the horizon.

    The powers grab has already happened and soon the UK Supreme Court will rule against Holyrood’s Continuity Bill. All the chips are falling nicely into place for Indyref2 (and a YES win).

    Sadly I cannot vote in Indyref2 as I’m moving to Japan to be with my beautiful Japanese wife (the Home Office won’t let her live in Scotland with me) – but I will be flying my Saltire from Kyushu on that all important day. I will make sure my children learn all about their special Scottish heritage.

    Go on Nicola! Do your thing!

  85. Dennis Nicholson says:

    Sounds good to me…

  86. Bill says:

    BRILLIANT !!!!

  87. Graf Midgehunter says:

    Get this sent straight away to Guy Verhofstadt and Michel Barnier. 😉

    Give them something new from the most innovative folk in the world, represented by the Rev. in “Barf”, New Scotlandshire.

    Something to chew on an’ spit onto May’s negotiating table..!

  88. Foonurt says:

    Awe thae new joabs, fur thoan watch-toourrs oan wurr boardurr.

    Wae ah supply ah ‘Gatlin-Guns’, fae yoan hauf-Lewis foartae-fifth.

  89. wull2 says:

    Is this option 4 for WM to take in to negations on the back of a fag box.

  90. Edward Freeman says:

    @Guy Threepwood

    Come back to Scotland to vote in indyref2 if you possibly can. Consider it an investment in winning you, your wife and your children the right to live in an independent Scotland, in Europe, with its own immigration service that actually has a care for people’s fundamental human rights – whatever the origins the accident of birth has given them.

  91. jfngw says:

    I see some are concerned that the SNP Claim of Rights debate could remove the sovereignty of the Scottish people. I’m not sure how this can be, since as we are sovereign then only we can vote to remove this sovereignty, it can’t be done by people of another country. They can only have a view on whether they respect this right that is currently I believe in the statute.

    If they do not respect this then I would presume a majority of MSP’s voting for independence then makes Scotland independent since they are then resorting to parliamentary rules (could use the majority of Scottish MP’s at Westminster, same difference currently).

    They either can support the majority of Scots or the majority of representatives, there is no other choices.

  92. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Oh my. Chances of anything like this happening about zero with the present set of ferrets in charge in London, or the ferrets-in-waiting either for that matter, but this is great fun anyway!

    (If, as pro-Brexit UK ministers keep claiming over Ireland, there’s an easy technological solution which can all but eliminate border friction and delays, then all the better.)

    Oh naughty Stu, did you really have to stick the knife in with this trailing barb? =laugh=

  93. galamcennalath says:

    Proud Cybernat says:

    That is 5% MORE than the Scottish EU referendum result. Positions definitely seem to be hardening and moving our way.

    Yes indeed. Subtle signs are everywhere. That’s what getting the BritNats all in a fluster.

  94. Bob Mack says:

    I’ve got 200 spare bricks for a border post.

  95. yesindyref2 says:

    This is a great series of questions because it highlights starkly how the Tories are alone in the world of Scotland, ranged against the SNP, Labour and LibDems voters who are prepared to support Scotland, unlike the Tories.

    For a time Labour and LibDems were able to support the skirts of the Tories, when it was a “preserve May’s precious Union”, but it’s becoming very clear that that is NOT at all costs.

    It leaves Labour and the LibDems in the position they can support Devolution and keep their voters happy with that.

    There is another thing which will come more and more into play over the next few weeks not months, and that’s the recent SSAS which shows that it’s still only 8% who want to see Holyrood abolished. This will become more and more in stark contrast to the 27% who currently intend voting Conservative in Scotland.

    So what is their priority, these 27% of voters, Tory policies, or keeping the Devolution they support? It’s fertile ground for Labour and the LibDems to exploit to increase their own share of the voter support – and the SNP and Greens of course.

    The best thing for Scotland would be if support for the Tories fell below 10%. Perhaps then they’d reform and think of Scotland first.

  96. Liz g says:

    OT sorry
    Anybody know what time the Debate on our Claim if Right starts?
    Thanks in advance

  97. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    >i>Welsh Sion @ 13:20:

    But note, that UNLIKE Scotland or Wales, that weasel word “normally” has not been inserted between “not” and “do”, which it does in our respective and governing pieces of Westminster legislation.

    Yes, it was always my contention leading up to 2014 and even more in the aftermath, that the so-called “Devo Max” was never going to make us anything like the equivalent of the wee Isle of Man.

    And so it has proved. Even the little we did receive is now being sneakily clawed back.

    Not even Stu’s ingenious “solution” to the Brexit dilemma – for which I promptly nominate him for the next Nobel peace prize =grin= instead of that Yankee spiv – will fix that. (As I’m sure he well knows.)

    It’s just a pity that Wales is tucked away geographically where it is, and apparently still locked in political stasis, or we could have a proper federation together…

  98. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Guybrush Threepwood @ 14:26,

    O/T (Apologies!) Hi there Guybrush! Me and the kids have always enjoyed your adventures. Now you’re sailing off to Japan, eh? But as you know, the real treasure is back here at home… =grin=

  99. yesindyref2 says:

    It’s a curious one. I agree it can’t take away our sovereignty as that is not in Westminster’s control. Perhaps it’s along the lines of getting France, Germany, the US to recognise the sovereignty of the Scottish people – i.e. a foreign government.

    I also presume it’s been run past Wolffe, the advocate general for Scotland, and “our man”. I think it’s a win-win trap, but then I’m the eternal optimist.

  100. Thepnr says:

    @Liz g

    It is on immediately after the Ivory Bill which is being debated now. I’d guess not too long then.

  101. Scottish Steve says:

    How could you, Rev?! You want to divide Britain! You want to put borders between us and our friends and family in England! How could you! Don’t you know that solidarity ends at the cliffs of Dover? We’re only meant to hate those nasty Europeans, not our fellow Brits!

    We will make foreigners of ourselves, the unionists cry. And this is a bad thing because…?

  102. Guybrush Threepwood says:

    @ Edward Freeman at 2.44pm

    Thank you.

    @ jfngw at 2.44pm

    I agree with you on the Claim of Rights, though I am not sure where sovereignty truly lies within Scotland as I have heard conflicting opinions within the YES movement.

    The ‘single, unitary UK’ British Nationalists will never allow Scotland to remain in the single market and customs union – they view us as no more important than Lincolnshire County Council.

  103. Andy MacNicol says:

    This doesn’t sound too much different from an earlier suggestion that England and Wales leave the EU and the rest of us stay in.

  104. Guybrush Threepwood says:

    @ Robert J. Sutherland at 3.09pm

    Well since my swashbuckling days fighting the ghost pirate LeChuck are long behind me – Monkey Island has become a rather boring place.

    You should see the price of grog there now!

  105. Proud Cybernat says:

    This doesn’t sound too much different from an earlier suggestion that England and Wales leave the EU and the rest of us stay in.

    Difference now, though, is that the Rev has conducted a poll that shows Scots would happily have a hard Brexit border with England in order to keep our EU status. It was never before considered a ‘serious’ proposition because the conventional wisdom was that Scots would not want a hard Brexit border with England (the position the SNP are arguing for). The Rev’s poll findings make it a more realistic proposition. Whether there is any political will to make it happen is another matter.

  106. jfngw says:

    I think it is likely there will be some debate about the sovereignty, as I suspect when these documents were written the will of the people is unlikely to have included all of the people, same is true of England’s Magna Carta.

    After all the Union was not agreed by the people of Scotland, they seem to have been mostly against it.

  107. Abulhaq says:

    Ukania/Ukak/Ukeich or, if u prefer UKGBNI is causing, by design, mischief max in Scotland. The divide em, rule em ploy is back in action. Being had, being taken for a ride, being the biggest mug on the European block needs fixing. We need to kick this stasis, as the Brit establishment engages in mutual political onanism, owre the proverbial dyke along with the shifty, cocky North Brit double-dealers.
    A massive serving of Nat Mischief….bring it on please, along with tasty side orders of disruption.

  108. Holly Teine says:

    This may be a far fetched idea – I know nothing bout borders between countries and the nitty gritty of how they’re policed, but…

    if there were a hard border between Scotland and England, couldn’t there be a lane on the main routes where regular crossers (such as those working on “the other side”) had a tag in their vehicle and as long as they were on their own, could go through this fast lane to and from work.

    A bit like the TAG lanes on the M6 toll…

  109. Andy Anderson says:

    When we get a hard border between Scotland and England (I agree with Chick McGregor 12.51) think of the benefits to an even more economically challenged England. You could give the new unemployed work to build the new Hadrian’s wall (lets give it a modern name, say Theresa’s folly) in the same way that in the 1930’s we built the hydro dams in Scotland.

    A border control of some description will be needed once we are independent in ordr to track customs tarrifs and immigration even if we are not in the EU. No worries this happens all over the world.

    Good idea Stu…

  110. Sean Swan says:

    There was a proposal made by Dr Brendan O’Leary, the ‘Dal Riada document’, which offers a blueprint for exactly this that might be worth reading

    In any case, even NI simply staying in the CU is not enough to avoid a hard border as a simple CU doesn’t ensure the same sanitary regulations. This might, in theory, be solvable by the entire UK staying in “regulatory alignment” with the EU – but that would mean the UK continuing to enforce regulations made by the EU – an EU in which it would now have no representation – indefinitely. It is hard to see how this squares with the Brexiteers desire to ‘take back control’, so it’s hard to see Boris et al accepting it.

    I’m currently writing a piece on this. Perhaps May is ignoring this, perhaps she knows there’s no solution and is hoping that when it come down to the wire she can persuade the DUP that it’s all the EU’s fault and she has no choice… Do the DUP want to ring down the Tory Gov and risk a Corbyn government? THAT would be the question.

    Either way, it’s going to come down to a hard choice between upsetting the DUP or a hard, no deal Brexit (or maybe more fudge and a further extension of ‘transitional’ arrangements).

    A small criticism, if I may, “such special status would necessitate customs and immigration checks in the North Channel”. No, not unless the Common Travel Area (CTA) was abandoned and either the Republic or the UK joined the Schengen Area (neither are currently members exactly because of the British Isles wide CTA), The UK and Ireland currently have a common external border in the form of the CTA which has been in existence since the 1920s. It is not clear why this would change because of Brexit – the REAL ‘borders’ problem is trade.
    More on the CTA here:

  111. Dan Huil says:

    What happens to Ireland will be of large significance to Scotland. The EU seems fully behind the ROI; let’s hope that continues.

    I don’t care how many times I say this: Britnats are destroying their own so-called precious united kingdom. It’s beautiful to witness.

  112. yesindyref2 says:


  113. jfngw says:

    Journalist that believe they are working to uncover ‘the truth’ for the people. They are either working for a newspaper that’s stance is decided by usually a foreign owned billionaire, or directly financed by the government (with the journalist placement now often both).

    They are not revealing the truth, they are reporting what the money provider decides they can reveal. And produce whatever propaganda they decide is required.

    The only journalists that are reporting without pressure from their owners are those which have no owners. They may still be biased, but it is their own opinion, not written to others requirements.

    Hard lines to all those who aspired to the pinnacle of a BBC journalist just to find out you end up the ‘impartial’ UK governments mouthpiece, some of them seem to relish it though.

  114. yesindyref2 says:

    @Dan Huil
    Ah well, the united kingdom will survive perfectly well after Independence, in its component parts. It’s the PU – Precious Union – is knackered!

    My OT comment by the way is because it’s getting to the stage hardly anything is OT, hence the blank. It’s shaping up to be the Summer of Content for iScotland, and anything goes including the Union.

  115. Abulhaq says:

    All this talk of anglo hard border, isn’t it a little premature? If we are still part of the UK after Brexit is completed we will be in a totally new game, one whose rules will not be set by ‘outsiders’.
    The mood among England’s rulers is for no nonsense from provincials, that’s us, getting in the way of the new order blueprint they keep out of sight but whose ‘libertarian’ schematics can be guessed.
    Beware Scots eg Fox & Gove, especially when telling tales of life post EU.

  116. Jim says:

    This is win win scenario .

  117. Darrin Hall says:

    I’m super cool with that solution.
    Not so sure about the Warminster fuckwits will be keen to lose our assets though…..
    The are those jam exports though, lol

  118. CameronB Brodie says:

    I reckon the Rev. deserves some sort of peace price for that deconstruction. From a critical realist, post-colonial feminist perspective, Britain’s political geography badly needs decolonising, and political agency distributed in a more ethical, pluralist manner. That’s won’t happen though, so Scotland must emancipate itself from the cultural chauvinism and rational paternalism that is British nationalism.

    Julian Go’s Post-Positivist, Postcolonial Realism

    Highland Wifie
    Apologies for the delay in getting back to you re. the % of Scots who self-identify as Scots. That was the link I was thinking about, so my memory was in error if the figure isn’t there. Thanks to Holly Teine for spotting mistake, if I was in error.

    My tongue was firmly in my cheek but evolutionary political psychology does link evolutionary and political sciences.

    Evolutionary Political Psychology

  119. Derick fae Yell says:

    The Scottish/English border would be easy to operate, because there are so few freight capable crossings. The back roads don’t matter.

    Obvious precedent is Norway/Sweden, which is a long border, with dozens of unmanned crossings. The lorries go on the main road via the official crossings, because it’s cheaper than grinding over minor roads

  120. Tinto Chiel says:

    Surprised by the poll results on this issue but your solution was really elegant, Rev.

    Pity you weren’t around to solve the Schleswig Holstein Question…

  121. Thepnr says:

    Result just completed on the Ivory Bill debate. Scotland’s Claim of Right debate up next, so about to start.

  122. Abulhaq says:

    I reckon on current performance it may take a few lifetimes for Scot Nats to finally ‘clock’ the true nature of the beast they’re up against. Too many fancy they’ll get a soft exit from the Union. It will be, if even realised, as hard as the Unionists will make it.
    I’m not being pessimist, simply the realist Devil’s Advocate. There are no soft models for dismembering a 300 year old unitary state and IT has zilch to do with it.. Breaking up is raw, nasty and needs nerves of steel, ask any exasperated EU negotiator.

  123. defo says:

    Promoting such a solution would be a great benefit to the cause, even if it never looks to us informed (or the Tories) like a realistic potential outcome. Logic put aside.

    The effect on the collective population’s directly, and further afield with our Euro pals, would fair throw the consciousness of many into dissonance.

    Go for it Stu. Big it up.

    Not sure if anyone’s said it before, but you really are quite good at this sort of stuff.
    Bathgate Academy (?) didn’t hinder me too much either. 78

  124. Proud Cybernat says:

    Too many fancy they’ll get a soft exit from the Union. It will be, if even realised, as hard as the Unionists will make it… Breaking up is raw, nasty and needs nerves of steel, ask any exasperated EU negotiator.

    Who knew?

  125. Liz g says:

    Thepnr @ 5.12
    Looking like they are wasting time now
    They have gone back to the Ivory bill

  126. Robert Peffers says:

    @Welsh Sion says: 4 July, 2018 at 1:20 pm:

    ” … Apparently, the IoM has a Sewell-like convention,
    “The UK Parliament has paramount power to legislate for the Isle of Man on all matters but it is a long-standing convention that it does not do so on domestic matters without the Island’s consent.”


    If I were you, Welsh Sion, and I’m not, I wouldn’t place too much credence upon the claims of the situation according to the de facto parliament of the country of England who also claim ultimate sovereignty over the people of Scotland under English Law established long before there was a Treaty of Union that formed a bipartite United Kingdom.

    The three Crown Protectorates are not under the Westminster government’s sovereignty as the Westminster parliament is not the elected Parliament of England as no such parliament has sat since 1707. and it was NOT the United Kingdom Parliament the King Billy & Queen Mary delegated their sovereignty to in 1688. Note they still remain legally sovereign under English Law and only legally delegated the sovereignty of the crown of the Kingdom of England but when did the crown of Scotland lose sovereignty to the people of Scotland it the legal proof that is in question and that was most certainly made clear in 1320.

    Westminster’s claims of being sovereign are quite simply gobbledegook. In 1688 the Parliament of the Kingdom of England had already, (illegally even under English law), annexed the Principality of Wales and (illegally even under English Law), annexed all Ireland and forced upon them the English Rule of Law.

    So, in 1688, when the parliament of the Kingdom of England deposed James II of England it was only the Parliament of England that was in rebellion against the King of England because the deposed English monarch was also the King of Scots of the still independent Kingdom of Scotland.

    Hence the monarch’s twin titles of James II of England and VII of Scots because monarchs in Scotland have not been legally sovereign since 1320 under Scottish Law and are still not legally sovereign even under The English Rule of Law as used by Westminster.

    There is absolutely no legal evidence to back up Westminster’s claims of sovereignty over any other parts of the United Kingdom – other than that Westminster says it is so. In 1688 the parliament of the Kingdom of England had asked Princess Mary of Orange if she would accept the Crown of the Kingdom of England but Mary refused. She did not want her Husband Billy to be her consort. The English rebels then offered the English Crown to the couple as joint monarchs and they accepted but they had to legally delegate their sovereignty to the Parliament of England but, in 1688, the Parliament of the Kingdom of Scotland was still independent and had not deposed James II Hence the Jacobite Uprisings still being fought over in 1745 at Culloden.

    Now “tac tent”, (pay attention), we have just had a Scottish MP stand up in the Westminster Parliament and throw down the gauntlet with a challenge that Westminster is not sovereign over Scotland. It was reported here on Wings but pretty much not mentions by the media. None the less it is recorder in Hansard.

    Now I commented to you a long time ago that the best chance Wales has of gaining independence is by waiting for Scottish independence and following Scotland out of the Union.

    If we can legally make our people’s sovereignty stick – and that in the international courts – it will be easy for Wales and N.I. to follow suit.

    The difference in the cases lies in the timings. When England forced her sovereignty upon both Wales and Ireland the rule of law in all three monarchies was Divine Right of Kings but the England that had already annexed both Wales and Ireland changed to being a Constitutional Monarchy in 1688 before the Treaty of Union of 1706/7.

  127. Thepnr says:

    @Liz g

    Does look a bit like time wasting, theyv’e had the vote and should exit stage right.

    Speaker has just said they have another 15 minutes to speak, so CoR debate probably due to start 18:00.

  128. Colin Alexander says:

    Denmark is in the EU and yet parts of it are out of the EU. The UK could do the same. The precedent is there.

    A large majority of the people of Scotland voted Remain, so that’s the position the Scot Govt should have fought for, as the people are sovereign, not the Scot Govt or UK Govt or EU for that matter.

    That’s what should have happened, what happens now with Scotland or N.I. ?

    Who knows?

  129. Robert Peffers says:

    @McBoxheid says: 4 July, 2018 at 1:56 pm:

    ” … It was meant to be a tongue in cheek solution. Particularly the Rockall bit, obviously.”

    No worries, McBoxheid, I read it as tongue-in-cheek but, as I pointed out in earlier comments, even my close family never know when I having them on or when I’m serious.

    Mind you even when I’m having them on there will usually be a serious bit in there somewhere.

  130. Movy says:

    Off topic I know but I’m not on twitter. I am truly horrified to see the cover of an old copy of The Week, which I believe is or was an insert for Scotland on Sunday, showing the saltire as a swastica with an article under the heading of Klan Alba. Surely that was beyond the pale. It’s on the Joy Brahim twitter feed. And given the tenor of the comments on Todd Ferguson, no evidence of any change of direction. And this from Scotland’s MSM. Was there ever any investigation of/apology for this?

  131. Movy (update) says:

    Apologies. Predictive text at its worst. Klan Alba (not Caesar).

  132. Welsh Sion says:

    I don’t see us disagreeing, Robert Pefffers on any score – and am in full agreement that there needs to be a lot more maturity on the part of Plaid Cymru and those Welshies of other parties and none who are actively seeking independence. Perhaps a new leader of Plaid, perhaps realisation of what Brexit will really mean, perhaps a growth in the momentum of Yes Cymru, perhaps the cross-fertilisation of ideas with Scotland and others will all help the cause.

    That’s why I’m pleased to work with both national movements in Scotland and Wales so as to share these ideas. I do not profess to know enough about Scottish history to pronouce fully on it – and my eztra reading and presence here ensures I learn more. I do however have a certain knowledge of my own country’s history and contemporary politics – all of this I happily share with yourselves, admin permitting. We do, after all, as eny fule kno, share the same enemies ultimately.

  133. Calum McKay says:

    Build that wall!

  134. Thepnr says:

    The more I listen to Ian Blackford the more I like him and the greater my respect for him.

  135. Liz g says:

    Thepnr @ 6.14
    Yip he’s really getting into his stride

  136. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Colin Alexander @ 17:40,
    Well, whaddya know? Mr Last-Hope of the Federalists speaks.

    Sensible or a Stu leg-pull (or both), Colin, it’s never gonna happen. If any good sense, respect and moderation had existed among those who really matter in the Unionist Camp, your reformed Union would have happened long ago.

    For them though it has always been London or bust.

    So we’re going to have bust.

    And the sooner the better now, so we can get on with building a bright new future for ourselves instead of wasting brain power and energy trying to keep this clapped-out old Union running on only one stuttering cylinder.

  137. Robert Peffers says:

    @Welsh Sion says: 4 July, 2018 at 6:03 pm:

    I used to Visit Wales at least a couple of times each year, Welsh Sion, and made a lot of good friends. My late wife and I. many long years ago, had befriended a young Welsh couple and their brood who had just finished kitting out an old commercial van as a motor home. They were on their first weekend trial run when we met them.

    We were about to pack-up for the journey back to Scotland to visit with friends who ran a caravan site on Skye. The young man was unemployed and times were really bad in Wales at that time but the family decided, on the spur of the moment, to come with us to Skye. I’ll cut this short and get to the point.

    When we got to Skye the Welsh family were enchanted by both the island and its people. I suggested to the chap that Skye, at that particular time, was crying out for new blood but any that was settling seemed to be retiring English people which was not really what Skye needed as the need was for new young blood not old retirees.

    We had a serious chat and I informed him that there were several really good schemes that would provide grants for hard workers to work and buy a croft but on condition it was a working croft and not a retirement home.

    We subsequently kept in touch for some years until my late wife and we had our vehicle, and ourselves, wrecked by a drunk driver and after a long struggle my wife died and I lost contact with our friends on Skye.

    However, the last we heard was that they were very, very happy and making a great success as crofters on Skye. Needless to say our friends, already Welsh Nationalists had become great supporters and members, of the SNP. I often wonder if they are still settled on the island.

  138. Robert Peffers says:

    @Liz g says: 4 July, 2018 at 6:23 pm:

    “Thepnr @ 6.14
    Yip he’s really getting into his stride.

    Strikes me that he isn’t the only one flexing their muscles down in deepest Londinium. That whole team is really great and have learned their trade very well indeed. I can honestly day I cannot detect a dud one in the entire SNP contingent at Westminster.

  139. Macca73 says:

    Chick McGregor says:
    4 July, 2018 at 12:51 pm
    “Brexit changes everything. I think some kind of hard border between Scotland and England is inevitable if Scotland manages to escape London’s clutches.

    For trade control of course but probably more so for immigration control. I really think that the English economy will collapse after Brexit and Scotland would not otherwise be able to cope with the resulting huge numbers of economic refugees from South of the Border.”

    I agree I also think that business is a big factor in any future Scottish referendum. I remember people saying that some firms and unions were telling workers “You’ll vote no if you expect to keep your jobs”

    Brexit shifts that now where business realises that the only way to keep trade borders open is to be a part of a single market. If they are closed from that the’ll move. It’s already happening. A new referendum could change that but we all know that we’ll have to endure some more pain before enough eyes are opened to get the vote over the line.

  140. Big Jock says:

    Electoral registration cards appearing through doors. No register to vote adverts appearing. Looks like GE coming folks!

  141. Socrates MacSporran says:

    Just a few thoughts in the wake of last night’s England win.

    On paper, they are the highest-ranked and supposedly strongest team left in their side of the draw – they should therefore, make it all the way to the final.

    However, Sweden has a long history of bursting England’s bubble.

    Of the four teams in the other side of the draw, only Uruguay (14) to England’s (13) are lower ranked – England always lose to the first higher-ranked team they meet, the draw-back this time is, that will be in the final.

    IF they win, even if the get to the final and lose narrowly, their media will go so far over the top (they have started already) their reaction may well push quite a few soft Noes into the Yes camp.

    If they win, they might become so sure of themselves and of Brexit, they will forget how much they need us and decide – we’ve won the World Cup, we are the greatest, we don’t need those whinging subsidy-junkie Sweaties and not put up a fight to keep us.

    Almost, but not quite, turning me into an England fan.

  142. Big Jock says:

    Should be New register to vote adds!!

  143. Liz g says:

    Robert Peffers @ 7.04
    Yes Robert every single one of them.
    But I must admit Joanna Cherry is my favourite!

  144. Big Jock says:

    Regards England. I often hear Brit Scots saying they have nothing against the team it’s the commentators.

    They voted to have colonial broadcasters so suck it up. Personally I don’t like their fans or commentators. The team are ok though.

  145. sandy says:

    Luke Graham, claim of right debate. Ignorant bast**d. Scottish NationalisT Party. Is he Scottish with a rose tattoo on his ass?

  146. Dr Jim says:

    Now you’re just effing with the Tories heads now Stu
    you can’t be giving them sensible solutions when complicated ones which can lead to wealth and unbenighted power and can be gotten for just the sacrifice of a few gunshot wounds and the odd bomb bang and a bit of destruction are all that’ll happen

    They’re only Paddies Jocks and bogtrotting no users anyway so who’ll miss a few, C’mon the Tories!

  147. Thepnr says:

    Patricia Gibson is feisty 🙂

  148. Liz g says:

    OMG that Gaffney Guy is embarrassing
    He can’t even read his script

  149. Lenny Hartley says:

    Hugh Gaffney Labour needs to go on elecution lessions never mind diversity training ???

  150. ScottishPsyche says:

    Tommy Sheppard is a magnificent orator.

  151. Thepnr says:

    Will this debate on the Claim of Right go to a vote? Doubt it, put nothing on record so the speaker won’t call a division.

    Hope I’m wrong.

  152. Thomas Valentine says:

    Just watched an American TV show called Salvation and saw a Saltire among member country flags of an international science agency.
    Like to think a friend was sending a message.

  153. sandy says:

    Re 7.38 pm
    Oh no, not another. Stuart Andrew, (very Scottish sounding) Claim of right debate.

    Scottish NationalisT Party.

  154. PacMan says:

    re: continuing conversation about English Football team.

    Quite a few in at work were really getting stuck into both the English team and the commentators. If England does go all the way, the except media ‘love in’ that will go on for years and an Indy referendum does happen in the next year, there could well be a lot of No voters moving over.

  155. Thepnr says:

    Oh well, that’s that. I couldn’t watch much more of this so I’m thankful that important debates on Scotland only happen now and again.

    Sounds weird but who really could listen to Stephen Kerr, Douglas Ross, Luke Graham, Ian Murray or Hugh Gaffney for very long without getting a headache.

  156. jfngw says:

    Look forward to Jeremy Corbyn making the case for a public holiday when we vote Yes in Indyref2 to mark a day of national celebration.

  157. Robert Peffers says:

    @Liz g says: 4 July, 2018 at 7:28 pm:

    ” … Yes Robert every single one of them.
    But I must admit Joanna Cherry is my favourite!”

    I must admit Joanna was probably my favourite also but I could never really choose between Dr Philippa Whitford and Ms Cherry.

    And now there is another fine example of the traditional strong Scottish woman in politics. Our history is full of such great ladies but in days of yore they were kept in the background but were, so to speak, “The powers behind the thrones”.

    A guest at my late (second), wife and my wedding reception was Margo McDonald and I met Winnie Ewing on many occasions. The SNP has been blessed with many such great ladies and is all the better for that.

    I was just commenting earlier that I remember when Wingers were complaining, (much as they do now about our more elderly voters), that it was the female voters who were holding back independence.

    I said then that this would be a really good thing as it indicated the ladies were NOT just following their hearts but giving the matter of independence much more thought and careful consideration and I thought that when they did make their minds up they would show up many of those who complained about them – and so it has proven.

  158. ScottishPsyche says:

    It seems the tactics are now to go for Ian Blackford and to attempt to destroy his character at every opportunity?

    Tories, Labour, and the execrable Lib-Dems are so transparent – pretending they are the grown-ups and diminishing anything that we feel passionate about as silly, even telling us what we should use debating time for. The entitlement they feel they have to be the custodians of those green benches is nauseating.

    Christine Jardine is fast becoming the person I most despise in Scottish politics for the patronising and arrogant way she thinks she speaks for Scotland whereas Joanna Cherry is the wingman everyone needs, so glad she is in our corner.

    I really liked the point Tommy Sheppard made about responsibility is not the same as power and that should be hammered home every time they bring up the ‘bloated SNP government’.

  159. Tam the Bam. says:

    Christine Jardine is as thick as mince.

  160. Hamish100 says:

    do you think bertie Armstrong will run a gunboat between his place of birth and Scotland to stop nasty irish fishermen (the southern type) using up his brit fish?

    I hope the other fishing interests and producers (not just berties team) speak up more for their interests such as inshore / creel fishing. The last thing we need is to give fishing licences to some greedy north east coast fishermen (who would gladly sell you their fishing quota) whether you are foreign or not. Scottish government should say that licences will go to new licence holders resident in Scotland. That will give a few ex captains the hump in Marbella. It would annoy the tories too which is always welcomed.

  161. Macart says:

    The Claim of Right debate is quite the bear trap.

    You either believe that the population of a country has the right to choose its own government and form of government, or you don’t. It’s a very simple question with a binary answer. Yes or no.

    No semantics. No ah buts. No particular situations or circumstances. No ‘normally’. Yes or no.

    Now we know what the Conservatives think of Holyrood and peoples rights. Labour and the Libdems? Have a really, REALLY, good think and choose your next words wisely.

    Or not.

  162. Hamish100 says:


    By chance walking past a graduation ceremony. Fantastic weather , parents, grandparents wider family and friends all enjoying their day. Young adults, older mature students with many languages being spoken but all together. My kind of Scotland

    Best bit? some young folk. tHE guys wearing kilts , girls with tartan plaid. They looked proud to be there- and so they should be- but as I walked past they were speaking Polish.

    Well done to them , well done to Scotland.

  163. Socrates MacSporran says:

    Tam the Bam @ 9.19pm

    With respect, I have come across some gey thin, watered-down mince. I humbly suggest, when referencing Ms Jardine – and several other red, yellow and blue Tories – you perhaps use a phrase much loved by the farming community here in God’s County of Ayrshire.

    That expression is: “he/she is as thick as shite in the neck of a bottle.” Much better, I feel.

  164. Still Positive says:

    Hamish @ 9.45

    When my son graduated from Dundee Uni in 2000 all the men who were his flatmates wore kilts, including the Englishmen.

    All very proud of them and very welcome.

  165. Rock says:

    “Northern Ireland and Scotland get what they want – to basically stay in the EU as part of a Celtic substate with one foot in both camps.”

    Is there any provision in the EU rules for parts of a country to be a part member of the EU?

    Rock (5th December 2017 – “From the archives”):

    “An open Irish border would be nothing less than a backdoor entry for the UK into the European Single Market and the other way round.

    A massive fudge opening the door even wider to massive corruption.

    The only reason it might happen is both the UK and the European Union are massively corrupt politically.

    The “plebs” of the UK democratically voted to get out of the EU and the single market, not for a fudge to protect the City of London.

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

    As a result, instead of being on the verge of independence, Scotland and its political leaders helplessly and cluelessly look on at the theatre going on.”

  166. Hamish100 says:


    and so you should be

  167. Hamish100 says:


    is depressed

    how often can you squander once in a thousand years in every 3rd email from rock?

  168. Thepnr says:


    I think it became clear pretty early on that tonights debate on the Claim of Right was much more about the right of Scotland to have a 2nd Independence Referendum with or without a Section 30 order.

    The government, labour and lib dems were well aware of this though and that’s why there was no vote just an acceptance that the Scottish people are sovereign and that was something British Nationalist representing Scottish constituencies didn’t dare vote against.

    I’m enjoying these new tactics by the SNP who continue to do a good job both in Holyrood and Westminster. Others are noticing too and I’m thinking of the likes of Murray Foote, Iain McWhirter and even Chris Deerin. At this stage maybe that is as much as we could hope for.

    Point is, I think most of Scotlands elected members are doing what they can in making our voice heard down there, it’s a start and I’m happy with that as it also shows up the elected British Nationalist politician for what they are. too.

  169. yesindyref2 says:

    Rock (“From the crypt” – 5th December 2017)

    Spooky, but it’s months to Hallowe’en yet. Back in your coffin!

  170. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

    Aye, “The Claim of Right debate is quite the bear trap.” @Macart says at 9:43 pm

    And even though “…there was no vote just an acceptance that the Scottish people are sovereign” @Thepnr says at 10:10 pm

    That acceptance by Westminster means another domino has just fallen in our favour.


  171. Macart says:


    Pretty much. It was also an open invitation for the establishment parties to make public statements. 😉

  172. call me dave says:


    A man and woman found unconscious in Wiltshire were poisoned by Novichok, the same nerve agent as ex-Russian spy Sergei Skripal, police say.


  173. Tam the Bam. says:

    Socrates MacSporran @ 9-52pm

    I accept your humble suggestion as you so eloquently posed.

    p.s. I was referring to our ‘schools-dinner-mince’…you could literally stand yer fork vertically!

  174. Lenny Hartley says:

    Call me dave, got to be the Russians only they could design a deadly nerve agen that fails every time 🙂 think they have modified the recipe by adding a big red squirrell into the pot and its obviously deactivated the deadly part!

  175. yesindyref2 says:

    Ah well, as Blackford says:

    If the conservatives accept the claim of right motion tonight and the sovereignty of the Scottish people then the conservatives cannot frustrate any future demand for a referendum achieved through a mandate

    (it’s twitter hence the small “c” on conservatives of course. No, stop that, it wasn’t deliberate)

  176. Macart says:


    That’s another domino tipped. 😉

  177. Tam the Bam. says:


    Just watched the Scotland Tonight article re new UK Gov white paper on the fishing industry.Surely SNP HQ could have come up with someone better placed to refute wee Dougie Ross’s verbal diarrhoea than Alan Brown.Good constituency MP Alan may well be but public speaker he is not.It was embarrassing .

  178. yesindyref2 says:

    Yes, and I wonder if it can be used and quoted in the UKSC later this month?

  179. Thepnr says:

    @call me dave

    I hope the two people will recover as the Skripals did, I’ve no idea though if they have any connection to Russia like the earlier incident or whether that could be related.

    The one certain thing that they do have in common is their living in close proximity to the chemical weapons research and testing establishment Porton Down.

  180. colin alexander says:

    Robert J. Sutherland

    Did I say it’s gonnae happen? Naw, I said it should have happened: ( Scotland staying in the EU and England leaving). Now, I don’t know what’s gonnae happen. It seems the UK Govt and so the Scot Govt are in the same boat.

    As for federalism. That’s your words, no mine. It’s your beloved SNP that always want currency union with the UK (first formal, now informal.

    What sort of independence is that? Independent of running your own economy: having another country run it for you.

  181. Macart says:


    Possibly, but I suspect it could also be kept for shortly after the outcome of that case. May have greater impact as it were.

  182. Wonder if this same discussion was happening when Hadrian decided to build a hard border between the Roman EU and Scotland (NB) who refused to join his Empire/Union,

    unbelievably it took the Romans only 6 years to build a wall (plus roads and forts) 80 miles long, in the middle of nowhere and under constant attacks, with spades and chisels,

    so if the Romans can build a Hard border the width of GB in 6 years it should only take modern man with computers and massive machinery about 20/25 years.

  183. ben madigan says:

    O/T – just for a laugh – I don’t know if I ever showed you the Tube map for the new Euro line.
    We’re at Brexit Circus now with Scotland Yard, the break-up line fast coming up .

    You’ll find it in here

  184. Southern Rock says:

    The SNP really need to invest in a world class media trainer to knock their MPs and MSPs into shape.

    This has been known since 2011 and STILL they stutter and stammer their way through basic questioning.

    Get a grip of this SNP.

  185. ben madigan says:

    @indyref2 – any link to the discussion or news about the outcome of the debate? When’s the vote?

  186. yesindyref2 says:

    I guess it depends on whether the SG want to win that case – or lose it. Hard to work out which is the best outcome, from the point of view of Indy.

  187. Meindevon says:

    Hamish @ 9.45

    The Polish guys in kilts! That brought a wee tear to my eye. That’s the Scotland I miss.

    Can’t imagine something similar (a Cornish kilt?) happening down here in DDD.

  188. Macart says:

    It’s win win really when you think about it, but their choice to take Scotland’s parliament and popularly mandated government to court. 😉

  189. Valerie says:

    Good to see this idea articulated. It had come to me too, because I’m familiar with Ireland, have driven around, and through the Border many times. I don’t think of it as a Border really.

    All the talk of bridges etc.also kind of triggered the thought. I suppose I wondered if it would be as an independent Scotland, or devo max, to facilitate trade movement with England/Wales. I don’t think for a minute the Tories would wear it. They despise the thought of jocks prospering inside the SM, and not controlling our assets.

    Just read a day old report from Business Insider that a trade body has concluded a multi million £ deal with Port owners of Rosyth.

    They want to make it the agri hub of the north. The port is to be deepened to take much heavier container transport. It’s brilliant to know things like this are just happening, people taking control.

    Watched the NI committee this morning, where they question the Secretary. She got a hard time from Ian Paisley and Kate Hoey, sitting together as a double act.It’s clear the DUP plan is to push for Direct Rule over NI. Without Stormont, they pointed out, decisions are not being taken, now affecting progress etc.

    I’m sure the DUP are pitching Direct Rule for NI, telling May, you get NI, then the other two devolved gov’t get pushed to Direct Rule, facilitating the UK “internal market”

  190. TJenny says:

    From the UK House Of commons twitter;

    ‘House of Commons approves @theSNP motion on the Claim of Right for Scotland without a division.’

    I feel that a wee shift in the tectonic plates just happened. 🙂

    Exciting times.

  191. yesindyref2 says:

    @ben madigan
    Sorry, I’ve only been following it on Wings with a quick look at a couple of twitter timelines. I don’t think there was a vote, and I think that means it goes through on the nod, but I could be wrong.

    It’s win win, but a case win is the more solid one, a lose would have to be followed by hearts and minds, and that seems to be slow coming – except for a few influential dudes, some on the cusp. Maybe the hope or expectation is those dudes will help sway the rest.

    It’s exciting when you think you know the plot, but get surprises in the scene by scene progress!

  192. Clootie says:

    @colin Alexander 11:59

    The BofE set the interest rate NOW. The raise it when the economy heats up I.e. The South of England.
    The transition case of using sterling after Independence would not be any worse than now BUT we would then have control of the fiscal levers and able to plan our future exit from the Sterling zone.

    Do you really think the BofE looking at London house prices and London Financial Gambling benefits Scotland?

    Transition case is logical. Staying in the Union is madness.

  193. Still Positive says:

    T Jenny @ 12.03

    It did indeed.

  194. ben madigan says:

    @ valerie who said “It’s clear the DUP plan is to push for Direct Rule over NI”.

    i agree that is the DUP plan/hope.

    Unfortunately it’s not gonna happen because it breaches the belfast/Good friday Agreement. That’s an official, UN-lodged international treaty between the british and irish govts.

    As a tiny miinority in the UK and now as a minority in NI, the DUP/Loyalists have used and abused their power, supported by Westminster, for far, far too long

  195. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    colin alexander @ 22:59:

    As for federalism. That’s your words, no mine.

    Maybe I’ve misunderstood you all this time, dear chap. If Stu’s tongue-in cheek proposal for Scotland to remain within the UK in some kind of semi-detached state turns you on, as it clearly does, and you really don’t like federalism, then I’m beginning to wonder what kind of Unionist you truly are. (The Gove fantasyland kind, one must conclude, I suppose.)

    (And anyway, you wanted us out of the EU as well, didn’t you? Or was that just another of your many “positions”?)

    BTW, your bitter SNP antipathy is really showing these days. (Quite revealing, actually, in a tacky kind of way.)

    Now you’re playing the “non-independent” currency card. Ho-hum. Trying to make the best of a bad hand, there, I fear. The proposal will ease the concerns of many doubters – as has been quietly conceded by some BritNats – and in the event won’t last very long, because it’s only a transitional arrangement.

    After indy, the UK pound will tank as economic realities start to bite (since the money markets depend on hard facts and won’t let themselves get distracted by any of the BBC state broadcaster “all’s well in the best of all possible worlds” propaganda), so we’ll all likely want to bail out of that arrangement pretty fast, having in the meantime set up all the necessary mechanisms.

    But thanks anyway for serving up some of the reheated BritNat tactics for us. It’s pretty thin gruel though so far…

  196. Robert Peffers says:

    Here’s a wee tune for you. Listen to it and it will keep running through your head for the next several days:-

  197. Colin Alexander says:


    I agree the BofE manages the Pound to suit primarily the South of England.

    So a sort of Scottish political independence where we have a separate parliament would be a huge positive step forward but, still having our economy controlled by the BofE and rUK Govt robs of us of many of the economic benefits of independence.

    I agree it’s a bad idea to stay in political Union as part of the UK.
    It’s also a bad idea to stay in economic union as if were still part of the UK too.

    We need to control things for the benefit of Scotland’s people, not hand away control to a country that does not care how their decisions affects Scotland’s economy or Scotland’s people.

    If there has to be a currency transitional period, it should be for as short a period of time as possible, not the 10 years + that some have suggested.

  198. Robert Peffers says:

    @Colin Alexander says: 4 July, 2018 at 5:40 pm:

    ” … A large majority of the people of Scotland voted Remain, so that’s the position the Scot Govt should have fought for … “

    For the love of God, Colin, could you please stop telling the professional political persons we Scots voted for what they should have bloody well done?

    If the legally sovereign people of Scotland had thought Colin Alexander knew best they would have elected Colin Alexander as the First Minister of Scotland or as leader of the political party who we thought could reinstate Scotland’s independence from Westminster and England and would thus have ended the United Kingdom for ever.

    But we didn’t – we elected the SNP and the membership of the SNP chose who they thought would be the best elected member to lead the party. Then the members elected to Holyrood elected Nicola Sturgeon to be the First Minister of The Scottish Parliament and that was accepted by the Scottish Parliament.

    Perhaps you didn’t know that the Scottish First Minister and the First Minister’s cabinet members must be approved by a majority on MSP at Holyrood but that is a fact = and Colin- they didn’t choose you.

    You know it would mitigate your colossal arrogance if you said, I believe that Nicola Sturgeon … or I believe the Scottish government should have … but you don’t. You state it as, “The SNP should have done … “ as if you were a better judge than the professional political figures who, incidentally, are doing a very fine job.

  199. Valerie says:

    @ ben madigan

    Yes, the Belfast Agreement was the obvious (quite rightly) defence of the Secretary. It was disgusting to see Hoey and Paisley chuntering away, and suggesting it might be overridden.

    They will use the defence it’s not their side that are violent, and we mustn’t be deterred from delivering services by threats of violence.

    It was obvious the DUP will threaten to withdraw support.

  200. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Colin Alexander @ 00:37:

    a sort of Scottish independence

    Independence is like pregnancy, you can’t have a “sort-of” version. That’s one of the things you just don’t seem to understand.

    You still hanker for us to remain chained in some kind of “half-cock” Union of your own imagining (but not “federalism”, oh no), yet also quibble about the initial currency option of a new fully-independent country.

    “Does not compute, does not compute!”

  201. Lenny Hartley says:

    Ben Madigan, no vote, the speaker said all who say aye and there weas this loud aye from everybody present and the speaker said anybody say no and silence. so the ayes have it 🙂

    Not sure only a vote if speaker cannot tell if ayes or noes are loudest.

  202. liz g says:

    T Jenny @ 12.03
    I think so too..
    Westminster had the chance to turn out in their hundreds and tell Scotland’s representatives.
    Westminster is Sovereign.
    The Claim of right is a fantasy,an SNP spin,a nice idea and without legal substance…… but they didn’t..
    In fact they agreed that The Claim of Right – was – Right..
    Now why ??
    The British Nationalists in Westminster, especially the one’s from Scotland could have had a lot of fun tonight!
    They could have gotten revenge for last nights “voting during the England game”!
    They could have put it on record that Our Claim of Right didn’t mean a thing to Westminster,and because of the 2014 vote,Westminster would be disregarding it!
    They could have laughed and brayed and voted the motion down!
    But they didn’t seem to want to …… Infact they were pretty subdued and only prattled on about how badly Scotland was doing!!!
    Because they didn’t dare…. That’s what’s shifted..
    This is why we needed the SNP in a majority at Westminster.
    When faced with Scotland’s actual position,and asked to vote on the questions that they cannot duck and fudge..
    They had to tread carefully.
    They spoke about everything except The Claim of Right,they spoke around it,and when they did reference it…
    They were, if not deferential to its concept,outraged on its behalf,claiming its being badly misused!
    Seemingly Westminster thinks its a pretty special thing too!!!

    They bottled the Lib Dem amendment on Indy ref 2.If they were confident in their position.Why not take the chance to put the matter beyond doubt?
    Cause they need the Doubt,thats why… Well that and they don’t have the power they think they do over Scotland.
    Tonight’s debate was indeed one of those moments on which History turns… Well done the SNP MPs…..

  203. ben madigan says:

    many thaks to valerie and lenny hartley for their replies

    @ valerie who said “It was obvious the DUP will threaten to withdraw support”
    Let them – if they withdraw support it’s a Westminster (PM May, Tory) problem, not an irish problem and certainly not a northern irish problem

    @lenny who said “so the ayes have it” – great to hear . Onwards to independence Scotland! Time is running short

  204. Robert Peffers says:

    @Colin Alexander says: 5 July, 2018 at 12:37 am:

    ” … So a sort of Scottish political independence where we have a separate parliament would be a huge positive step forward but, still having our economy controlled by the BofE and rUK Govt robs of us of many of the economic benefits of independence.”

    Reality isn’t your strong point is it Colin?

    The reality of an independent Scotland with control of her own many rich natural resources would be in control of an economy whose main problem would be, like that of Norway, preventing their economy from overheating.

    This would be in direct contrast to the Kingdom of England’s economy which, even with Scottish pauckled natural resources is increasing the United Kingdom National debt at an alarming pace. It is not decreasing and Westminster is crowing, not because the debt is decreasing, but because the rate of increase is decelerating.

    How do you imagine the Kingdom of England economic prospects will be when they lose the oncomes they now pauckle from Scotland?

    I cannot predict that but I believe I know a man who says he can. His name Gavin McCrone – that’s Professor Gavin McCrone and the author of the McCrone Report. So volatile it was immediately buried deep in a safe, in a vault, in the cellars of a United Kingdom Government facility, (How’s That for split infinitives, Wowee!)

    Anyhow, if the McCrone report had even a grain of truth in it in 1974, when the United Kingdom economy was poor but not as bad as today, then it sure as hell is even more true today than it was in 1974 and in 1974 it frightened the shit out of EVERY Unionist Party in the United Kingdom enough to make them band together to suppress it.

    And I quote a bit about the McCrone Report here:-

    “The McCrone report is a document on the Scottish economy written and researched in 1974 on behalf of the British Government. It was composed by Professor Gavin McCrone employed at the Scottish Office. The document gave a highly favourable projection for the economy of an independent Scotland with a “chronic surplus to a quite embarrassing degree and its currency would become the hardest in Europe”. This led successive iterations of the British government to classify the McCrone report as “secret”. This was so to avoid fuelling independence sentiment in Scotland. The report became public in 2005 when new freedom of information legislation came into effect”

    Now if you don’t know the problems that Norway has due to their hardest of European Currencies read This:-—heres-why-2016-10/

    So it is not a bad idea but an inspired Scottish Government decision to NOT create a new Scottish Currency for it will prevent the same problems that Norway has if Scotland retains the Pound Sterling and ties it to the English Pound Sterling.

    Note that the Scottish Banknotes are uniquely Scottish – enough of a difference for London Traders in particular to refuse to accept them as if they were, “Foreign”, currency.

    The fact is that a very hard Scottish Currency would force the BofE to regulate the joint currency and thus benefit both former kingdom partners. i.e.If tied to the English Pound the Bof E, (incidentally Scotland owns part of the BofE as it was nationalised in 1946 by the United Kingdom Government and that is a bipartite government). In that case Scotland can demand either a presence on the board or a payment in leu.

    Believe me the BofE would be delighted to regulate the pound properly or Scotland would only need to threaten to unlink the Scottish Pound and the Kingdom of England currency would go down the drain. So the Truth is that the Scottish economy, not the English economy, would be in control.

    Unless, of course, you know better – and if you do then please explain your reasoning.

    So the reality of an independent Scottish economy in charge of its own resources would mirror that on Norway.

  205. twathater says:

    Also watched the COR debate and like everyone else was raging and sickened by these brit nat tractors , the tories are far from the worst , TBH I think all the brit nat ("Quizmaster" - Ed)s are competing to see who could denigrate and disparage Scotland and the Scots the most

    I absolutely loved Ian Blackford’s demolition and destruction of fluffy’s character and incompetence , fluffy was so angry he was nearly greetin

    IMO Lesley Laird deserves a special mention , this woman is an enemy of a better Scotland , her blatant lies of what liebour would do for Scotland is presented without any sense of irony or honesty , Laird has whitewashed the destruction and incompetence liebour heaped on Scotland for the decades they were in power .

    She also mentioned the WASPI women but forgot to mention liebour GCC fighting for 10 years and spending £1 million pounds in legal costs to deny women’s equal pay award

    Labour a corrupt and rotten cabal of pseudo socialists who are the enemy of the working classes

  206. yesindyref2 says:

    So basically speaking after the “pathetic theatrics” of Monday meaning some MPs missed Kane’s penalty, the stupid SNP come up with some meaningless opposition debate and hey, let the children have their way, it don’t mean a thing. The ayes have it without a division, well, so what?

    God did make a brain for Tories, but we don’t know who got it this week.

  207. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    twathater @ 02:18,

    Lesley Laird, JayCee the Messiah’s choice of craven pro-consul to replace Fluffy if he ever gets the chance.

    As for that cynical WASPI trick, that’s Labour all over. “Never mind what we do, just listen to the lovely things we say”.

    We had the same kind of hypocrisy here in Glasgow the other day, the local Labour councillor (who is not a bad sort, really) doorstepping and demeaning himself by handing out a NorthBritLab leaflet roundly castigating the SNP administration for cutbacks, when the main reason for the City being in a financial hole is precisely because of the dastardly legal attack the previous crew perpetrated for years and years on their own female employees at vast public expense (as you mention), and left behind an even more vast compensation obligation.

  208. twathater says:

    RJS @3.12 am

    I have said previously in the past on here ,I was employed by GCC for 12 years and saw the rank corruption first hand , TBH I would say their corruption and incompetence surpasses the other brit nat parties ,

    I have always prayed that the books would be opened up and the betrayers would be brought to justice , it just frustrates me that it has taken so long for the people to realise just how bad they are , yet there are still people who vote for them

  209. yesindyref2 says:

    I just read Blackford’s speech in the National, and I don’t think he missed one single trick.

  210. Macart says:


    Yes. Yes he did. 🙂

    That really does need spreading far and wide.

  211. Robert Louis says:

    Well done to the SNP in the cesspit of Westminster last night. It was interesting to note their were periods when Iain Blackford Spelt out just how Westminster had overridden the express wishes of the Scottish people, and there was silence. It is odd when watching it, since even the braying donkeys from the Tory party went quiet.

    I think the SNP need to keep this up, and do not let this matter drop.

    Last night however, was about putting things on record. Having what is happening to Scotland documented in Hansard in clear detail, and an explanation for all time in record of HOW that goes against the remotest scintilla of democracy. How parliamentary sovereignty doe not exist in Scotlands constitution, and that the people are sovereign instead.

    Most importantly of all, however, Iain Blackford called out the man-snake David Mundell for the utter coward and craven, cloying pathetic excuse for humanity he is. And Mundell did not like it one little bit. Good. He deserved it and much, much more.

    Mundell has been the most appalling example of everything that is wrong with conservatives for a very long time, and yet has been treated gently by the media in Scotland. He is not used to being told what a snake he is. Last night he got it full force.

    The point about Mundell, however is this, in the past, Scottish Tories, despite their politics would FIGHT Scotland’s corner, but the current crop of Tory donkeys from Scotland think it is their duty to destroy Scotland. They foolishly mistake the SNP for Scotland, and whilst trying to bash the SNP are actually bashing Scotland and its people. They should read the history in Hansard and they might get a wee shock. Mind, I am not sure the current Scottish Tory thugs can read.

    Watching last night, it was also interesting to note the way in which the Scottish Tory thugs like Douglas Ross behaved. At first they were laughing with fake bravado, then they tried taking the moral high ground, then they just returned to form, behaving as Tory thugs from Scotland always behave day in, day out in the house of commons.

    Well done SNP. Make then unhappy. Make then uncomfortable. Make it awkward for them, day in, day out.

    The referendum is coming. But, if their is a snap UK election first, we should move heaven and earth to unseat every single Tory donkey in Scotland. That will motivate SNP supporters – and indy supporters.

  212. ScottieDog says:

    I see Richard Murphy is discussing this post.

  213. Ghillie says:

    Welsh Sion WE LOVE YOU!! 🙂

    Guybrush Threepwood @ 2.26 pm You could be our Man in Japan =)

    And obviously that would require alot of traveling home with the whole family in tow! And mibee settling in Scotland again or at least knowing you CAN live where you would most like to.

  214. ScottieDog says:

    There seems to be this belief that currency choice doesn’t matter in isctoand and our resources will save us. If the quantity of money is constricted for any reason (say recession) the resources are of little use. Money moves resources.
    Look back in history after wars when the king re-asserted the exchange rate for currency to gold. Food lay rotting in the fields. Plenty of resources, just no means to acquire them.

    I’m thinking the ship has sailed though as far as the SNP are concerned.

  215. galamcennalath says:

    Picking up on Stu’s brilliant suggestion and Brexit NI solution …

  216. Ian Roberts says:

    Re “weechid’s” comments on commuters to Carlisle, hundreds of Spanish residents cross the border into Gibralter every day with very few problems. Only when the Spanish decide that they want to have a pop at the UK or Gib are there any delays at the border. In our case it could be the English who could try to prevent it working but surely these people who constantly tell us that we are a valued part of the Union would never do that!

  217. Ken500 says:

    The Democratic defict in Scotland as part of the UK is recognised in the UN. Westminster is a undemocratic embarrassment recognised throughout the world. If it does not change it’s ways it will lose it’s seat at the UN. One of the manipulator of world policy. It will probably lose it’s seat at the UN in any case because of Brexit, The Chinese, Britain ‘A small island without Empire’.

    Scotland, ‘the land of discovery and invention’. Recognised the world over.

    That’s why Scotland achieved limited Devolutiin, . People in Scotland appealed to Official world bodies, who uphold ‘self determination, rights and freedoms’. Westminster Law was breaking EU/UN International Law. Limited democracy only came to Scotland in 2000, Devolution/Holyrood.

    The unionists still tried to block it and keep control. Ruining the Scottish economy, when they could. Damaging democracy and the electoral Laws. Lying and cheating like there is no tomorrow. The SNP are establishing the rights in Laws recorded for prosperity at Westminster. For any future reference that is needed.

    Some fishermen and farmers are being sold up the swanney river by the Tory unionists. Ruining their own industry. ‘It wisnae them who sold their industry oot’. The multimillionaires ruined their own industry and blame everyone else. Overfishing and throwing dead fish back for years. Not improving the terms, conditions and remuneration. A bigger share.

    The SNP were sorting out the bigger nets for bigger quotas. After finally getting some representation Richard Lochhead. Instead of being blocked by Westminster unionists. The UK fishing Minister was a Home Counties Tory, who did not have a clue, Then some of them voted Tory to cut off their nose to spite their face. Gove is a cheat and a diabolical liar, along with the rest of them. How people be taken in by him is a mystery. He should be charged with electoral fraud and embezzlement of public funds. Brexit ruining the economy.

    Gove has refused to return or refund the £Millions in CAP funding given to Scottish farmers by the EU. Scotland as part of the UK receives the lowest CAP funding in the EU. The Tory farming minister took it and face it to the wealthier farmers in the south. Soon farming land is going to change ownership in Scotland,

    The majority of farmers are elderly receive on average £27,000 in remuneration. The average wage. Set in their ways. Conservative with a small ‘C’. In many cases the farms will be sold off to new bidders. A change of ownership. Some have mortgages.or borrowing, They will have to be paid off. Many estates have loans or mortgages. They raise loans or mortgages to live off or manage. Tax evade.

    Land (sales) is exempt from tax to keep farms together. Larger farms produce more. In many cases their is no family to take over. Or they are employed in other more lucrative employment. Many farming members work outside the farm/estate to contribute to the upkeep. The costs of extended ownership.

    The food and drinks industry in Scotland is a major industry and a main exporter. Earning £Billions for Scotland. Scotland is self sufficient in food and energy. It gets exported.

    Half of the fish consumed in the UK is imported. There are exclusive EU limits for home ports. A radius for home fleets. 100 nautical miles? Exclusive limit. Under EU regulations which Gov can impose. If the NE of Scotland is the biggest landing place. 80% of the UK fishing industry? There are no foreign boats landing there. How can 40% of the catch being taken by other vessels. Many of the crews are foreign from overseas. The workers from the EU. The best of the catch exported to the EU and overseas for premium prices. Tariffs are the last thing any industry would want. In the future. Brexit bleak.

  218. Shinty says:

    Posting the YT link for folk like me who have buffering problems with all other video forms.

    Ian Blackford COR

  219. Ken500 says:

    EU loans have aided many counties to self determination. In the Eastern bloc. Germany re unification. Poland (40million) Latvia, Lithuania etc were all helped out by EU loands and financial arrangement. ECB. Investment. These countries are doing extremely well by comparison. IR has increased growth, Just look on the back of the Council tax statement to see how many. EU countries are documented. They also got foreign investment in and EU grants. Even Russia has financial arrangements for selling Gas etc into the EU. Supplying Europe. There is a pipeline under the Baltic taking gas to Germany.

    Scotland would not struggle to get the needed finance. It is so full of resources and assets. Economically viable. Improving investment. Undermined by Westminster unionists. A democratic deficit. An International rights issue. Kept hidden under the Official Secrets Act. Iraq, Dunblane and Lockerbie for 100 years.

    Westminster borrows £Billions from the Chinese (Hinkley Point/HS2) and the Saudis? The US – Trident (Borrowed £Billions). A total waste of public money which has to be paid back with interest. Instead of being better spent, £Trns of debt. Although the assets outweigh the debts. The only saving grace. The Scottish resources and assets.

  220. Fred says:

    @ Shinty, thanks for that, Ian Black excellent.

  221. Capella says:

    BBC News item on the chaos on London’s railways because of signaling failure.

    I read the article looking for criticism of the Westminster Government, or even the Transport Secretary, as is customary in Scottish railway events. There aren’t even a few paragraphs with criticism from the opposition parties.

    BBC frames it entirely as a problem for an organisation called “National Rail” and some train companies and commuters.

    Who is the English Transport Secretary? BBC doesn’t say.

  222. Fred says:

    Should of course be Blackford, we’re lucky to have him!

  223. Abulhaq says:

    Come to the sad conclusion that many commenters on this site have their heads buried in the desert sand.
    The SNP and the wider national movement do not seem to realise the enormity of the problem/problems a country like Scotland faces on the independence trajectory. The English, I do mean the English, have run rings round the Scots for centuries as they did in all their colonies. They are psychologically tough, unorthodox, quick witted, tenacious, proprietorial ie what they think theirs they will fight to keep and are perfectly capable of wiping Scotland off the map should they choose to.
    That is the reality. Have we produced a movement with leaders to match? Not from what I see. The SNP gov is a competent, bourgeois devolved administration but it is not a party displaying the necessary passion and fire to lead Scots to independence. That will have to come from elsewhere but alas not sometime soon.

  224. McBoxheid says:

    wrt people not normally considered Scottish wearing the kilt,
    I was recently in Köln (Cologne) to see Runrig on their Last Mile farwell tour. The number of Saltires, lions rampant men wearing the Kilt and women wearing tartan was really quite brilliant to see. I asked one guy, who was dressed like someone out of Highlander, where the fan article shop was. He was a local man from Köln. I heard people in tartan speaking several languages.

    I was a bit overawed to see this love and respect for Scotland and things Scottish. Great to see!

  225. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Hi McBoxheid.

    Germany and Scottish stuff…

  226. Socrates MacSporran says:


    Poor attempt at trolling pal – FOAD is my advice.

    It may be the old joke about how the British Empire worked: The English decided what should be done, and the Scots made damned sure the Irish and Welsh did the exact opposite – is a bit far-fetched.

    But, there is plenty of evidence, the best, most-dedicated and probably most-respected by the locals, colonial administrators, were Scots.

    Also, the success of Scottish-based firms overseas, such as Jardine Mathieson demonstrates the huge role the Scots played in the Empire.

    When the going got tough, the “shock troops” or the British military were the Scottish regiments.

    I m certain, post-independence, there will be a few little Englanders all too-ready to do Scotland down, for having the sheer ungratefulness as to leave “Mother England”, but, I firmly believe there are enough cooler heads in England who will realise – the Romans never totally conquered Scotland, the Normans and the Plantaeganets couldn’t do it and, in the end, the Stewarts took-over England.

    And, when the Protestants kicked-out the Roman Catholic Stewarts, it was a descendant of the Protestant Stewarts, from Hanover, who they got to take the throne.

    If, in a post-independence scenario, the English are ever daft enough to take-on Scotland, I think you will find, we’ve got more pals abroad, willing to give us what we in the West of Scotland call: “hauners” than England has.

  227. jfngw says:

    It is obvious why most Tories don’t want independence. The simple reason is even although Scotland hasn’t returned a Tory majority to Westminster in Scotland since the 1950’s, they have had a Tory government for around 60% of this time. It’s the type of ‘democracy’ they like, being governed by another country is acceptable if it’s to their advantage.

  228. sassenach says:

    Concerned trolls are about, I see, must surely be because the SNP in Westmonster had a ‘good night’in the COR debate.

    I was certainly proud of them, and Blackford’s demolition of the Fluffmaster was class!

  229. admiral says:

    Capella says:
    5 July, 2018 at 9:52 am
    BBC News item on the chaos on London’s railways because of signaling failure.

    BBC “News” also doing NHS anniversary stories this morning. Get it totally wrong when a reporter in Edinburgh states that responsibility for the NHS in Scotland was devolved “in 1999”.

    Ermmmm – wasn’t there a separate Act to establish a separate Scottish NHS in 1947 and hasn’t it always been managed separately from the NHS in England? It’s not as if this information is difficult to find, is it?

  230. Craig P says:

    BBC “News” also doing NHS anniversary stories this morning. Get it totally wrong when a reporter in Edinburgh states that responsibility for the NHS in Scotland was devolved “in 1999”.

    Ermmmm – wasn’t there a separate Act to establish a separate Scottish NHS in 1947 and hasn’t it always been managed separately from the NHS in England? It’s not as if this information is difficult to find, is it?

    Both true – SNHS created separate, but under the Secretary of State for Scotland – a UK cabinet position – so not ‘devolved’.

  231. McBoxheid says:

    Brian Doonthetoon says:
    5 July, 2018 at 10:11 am

    Hi McBoxheid.

    Germany and Scottish stuff…

    Thanks Brian! Great stuff. Wacken (Heavy Metal)is still going strong I think. This takes me back to the seventies. These days I can’t stand up for a whole concert.

    Thanks again Brian!

  232. Kangaroo says:

    Re Claim of Right Debate

    I watched all 3hrs+ of this and at the end “the Ayes have it”, unanimous. Recorded for posterity in Hansard. Sovereignty is with the people. Full Stop; no contest.

    Now the Supreme Court challenge to the Continuity Bill is a bit moot. Fun anyway though; should be good for a laugh.

    After that Nicola asks for, nay DEMANDS, a S30 order and Maybot is stuffed.

    Rock better eat some humble pie. It’s Bye Bye UK, all the way.

  233. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Kangaroo @ 11:19,
    The interesting thing that people may have missed about yesterday’s business is that the political affirmation in the HoC has in effect issued a reminder to the SC that it can’t dodge such fundamental constitutional issues and always defer to a political solution.

    As may well have been the SNP intention. Either expose the BritNats as complete fakes or send a very pertinent reminder to the SC.

    A win-win there, methinks.

  234. ScottieDog says:

    This episode of ‘fully charge’ comes from Estonia. Too wee too stupid…

  235. Abulhaq says:

    @Socrates Macsporran
    Eureka! You display all the classic signs of head-in-the-sandism. You may march, wave saltires and sing the praises of Scots ingenuity, btw Jardine Mathieson were opium traders ie drug pushers and Scots imperial soldiers were ruthless killers, til you’re white and blue in the face but it will cut no ice with the English puppet masters who’ve been successfully pulling the strings for 300+ years.
    Calling me troll, because i take an alternative view, cuts no ice with me either. Go on dreaming with your rather selective take on history. Better still, read some imperialist history, study how the English got and controlled their conquests, at home and abroad, with able participation from Scots, Welsh and Irish. Mugs they ain’t chum, Scots, however, have been their ‘chumps’ for far too long. Adjust the focus on those rose tinted spex and try to see what i see.

  236. Sunshine on Crieff says:

    This is something I put forward, half in jest, just after the 2016 referendum. As said in the article above, we are much more able to handle a physical border – fewer crossings and non of the security implications inherent in dividing Ireland in this way.

    And it should help those NI unionists insecure at having different arrangements come to terms with them. It is the union their ‘kith and kin’ with Scotland that is the more important to them, isn’t it?

    A beautiful solution.

  237. orri says:

    The vote backing the Claim of Right technically can’t be undone as it doesn’t alter the constitution of the UK but rather plainly states that there are limits beyond which it can go.

    However let’s not kid ourselves. Didn’t see the debate but the argument is now one of which form of government have the people of Scotland chosen?

    The 2014 result will be stated as endorsing Westminster as the form of government chosen by Scotland despite claims that things might change to devolve power there’ll be digs that the opposite is true and those who voted knew that. Just as our wonderous media managed an effective blackout on any pending EU referendum, thereby illustrating the potential tarbaby a Scottish Six would have been.

    Given SNP’s have tit for tat revoked a Memorandum of Understanding it’s academic now but the essential point regarding consent was that Westminster could legislate up until the last minute in the expectation that the First Minister would at that point say yay or nay. The Scotland Act does not say Westminster can actually pass legislation into law.

  238. orri says:

    Would that be the Ulster Scots who were booted out of Scotland at the first opportunity for being disruptive bawbags?

  239. Liz g says:

    Robert J Sutherland @ 11.32
    That’s what I thought yesterday was all about too Robert J,the Supreme Court have a Political decision from Westminster that the Scottish People are Sovereign. A very recent one at that.
    They could choose to go with it!
    But they could still dance around an take the view that,this only ment around devolution… As per what the last assertion of the calm of right was aimed at.
    Then they are off the hook by finding that Westminster didn’t clearly define what the intention of Parliament was in confirming the Claim.
    Fortunately,I don’t think the People of Scotland will read it as anything other than… We are Sovereign and can vote if we want to….. I guess the spin round it all in the lead up to the Court case.Will til us off to how the Westminster side will approach it!

  240. Welsh Sion says:

    Capella @ 9.52 am.

    Who is the English Transport Secretary? BBC doesn’t say.


    English Transport Secretary doesn’t ‘do’ railways:

  241. Luigi says:

    Abulhaq says:

    5 July, 2018 at 11:41 am

    You have been called a troll because you have displayed the classic signs of concern trolling.

    What are you suggesting – that we all give up and go back into our boxes?

    No chance. 🙂

  242. Capella says:

    @ Welsh Sion – ha ha that’s brilliant – the Transport Secretary isn’t responsible for railways and the Health Secretary isn’t reponsible for the ENHS.

    If Humza Yusaf and Shona Robison had only known they would have saved themseves a lot of grief over the past few years of BBC FOI requests.

  243. Kangaroo says:

    Liz g
    I think you may be missing something.
    WM have now acknowledged that the people of Scotland are Sovereign. The people have given a mandate to both SG and their representatives at WM.
    The WM MPs have voted against the EU Withdrawal Bill and the SG have voted in favour of the Continuity Bill, in both cases they have used the mandate of the Sovereign people of Scotland. There is now nowhere for WM to go to challenge that legal position.

    The SC could only dismiss the Continuity Bill on a technicality but could not dismiss it on the basis that WM is Sovereign, as Sovereign A is no more sovereign than Sovereign B. The SC must now find in favour of the SG.

    Once the SC case is done (out of courtesy) then Nicola asks for a S30 and Maybot has nowhere to go.

    I suggest that Maybot should quickly arrange for a hard Border between Scotland and England as the Brexit solution otherwise independence will happen very quickly, and there is nothing Maybot can do to stop it.

  244. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Capella @ 12:25,

    Yup. And how much of a non-blizzard of FOI requests has the English Ministries of Health or Transport had to endure from our wonderful EBC, d’ya reckon?

    Simply in diligently exercising its public service committment down south. =cough=

  245. Robert Peffers says:

    Was having a wee think about Ian Blackfords speech:-

    And watching and reading it carefully for the umpteenth time I think this line:-

    “Next year sees the 20th anniversary of the re-establishment of the Scottish Parliament.”

    slipped very quietly into the narrative, but not then expanded upon, is a wee clue as to where the SNP seem to be heading right now.

    It is a point I have been highlighting for a very long time and have always wondered why much more has never been done about it t either Holyrood or Westminster.

    Legally, in April 1706/7. the Westminster, “Kingdom of England Parliament”, ceased to exist permanently by that parliament placing itself into permanent, and final, recession. Thus no, elected as such, parliament of either the Kingdom or the country of England exists today so the question must be asked, “What parliament officially, and legally, legislates for the country and/or the Kingdom of England.”

    The answer is, of course, no one is elected to represent the people of England because every Member of the House of Commons is elected to represent the bipartite United Kingdom.

    Now it gets really obtuse as we get to the several thorny questions about Legal Sovereignty, and how it differs in each of the only two kingdoms that comprise the United Kingdom.

    In 1603 the two still independent kingdom’s crowns landed upon the same person’s head but they remained independent crowns and the reason they remained independent crowns was the different Rules of Law that prevailed in the only two remaining British kingdoms.

    In the three country Kingdom of England the monarch was legally fully sovereign and, Under the Divine Right of Kings, the English Monarch’s word was law.

    In the Kingdom of Scotland the monarch was only King/Queen of Scots and had been internationally recognised as not being sovereign since 1320 when the then international authority, (The Holy Roman Se), fully accepted the Scottish Declaration of Arbroath and lifted the official excommunication they had previously applied to the Scottish Monarchy they had wrongly applied to Scotland as if Scots were still under the Rule of Law of Divine Right of Kings”.

    However, the Declaration of Arbroath, (That Rome had fully accepted), makes clear the Monarchy in Scotland did not have, “The Divine Right of Kings”, and that The Divine Right belonged to the people of Scotland and the monarchy only were the people’s choice of protector of the people’s divine right a.k.a. sovereignty. What is more the accepted declaration also contains the right of the people to rid themselves of any monarch they deem unworthy of the trust placed on them by the legally sovereign people of Scotland.

    This was thus the legal reason there could be no actual Union of the Crowns under Scots Law and also had the side effect of convincing the Parliament of The Kingdom of England at Westminster they could not allow the Scottish King James VI to become James I of Great Britain for to do so under the English Rule of Law of Divine Right would have seen the Scots Monarch just tag the three English Kingdom countries on to his existing Scottish Kingdom.

    Hence James was designated y Westminster as the sovereign, “James I of England”, and concurrently, as the non-sovereign, “James VI of Scotland”. In no way was England about to accept becoming part of the Kingdom of Scotland. Which is why, understandably, James up sticks and moved his entire Scottish Court to London and only once ever again returned to Scotland where he was not a sovereign monarch.

    Which brings us to the next anomaly of the English Parliament’s rebellion against their rightful monarchy, (James II of England & VII of Scotland. The English rebellious parliamentarians deposed James II but, as the two Kingdoms were still independent, their Westminster decision was not applicable to Scotland and that is what triggered the. wrongly named, “Jacobite Rebellions”, but you cannot rebel against a monarchy not your own so the Jacobites were fighting for their rightful Monarch.

    However, the so called English, “Glorious Revolution”, had great repercussions that still detrimentally affect Scotland today. After deposing James II as their monarch the, (cough!), “revolting”, parliament of England offered the Crown of the three country Kingdom of England to Mary of the House of Orange but Mary, (not wishing to make her husband Billy her consort), refused to accept the offer.

    At this the English Kingdom Parliament offered the English Crown jointly to William & Mary and the offer was accepted and they pair were installed as joint King & Queen OF GREAT BRITAIN as if Scotland were not still an independent kingdom. Furthermore there emerged the first signs of a certain pro-England faction among the Scots parliamentarians to throw Scotland’s lot in with that of the English Parliament.

    However, under existing Scots law, this was legally because the Scots Monarchy was NOT sovereign and the people of Scotland who were legally sovereign were rioting in the streets of Scotland against the Scots parliamentarians who obviously were not delegated the now missing Monarch’s sovereignty because under Scots law he wasn’t sovereign and only the legally sovereign people could legally declare who would be the next. King/Queen of Scots.

    Thus certain acts of the, still independent, Scottish Parliament after 1603 expressly acted against the general will of the legally sovereign people shows the parliamentarians were seeking to benefit themselves and not the people of Scotland

    These parliamentarians, “described by Robert Burns as, “Siccna paircel o rogues in ae nation”, were feathering their own nests at the expense of the legally sovereign people of Scotland and their morally wrong legislation cannot stand as acceptable or legal.

    The rioting against the Scottish parliamentarians decisions had reached the stage where the parliamentarians were running for their lives and would, if caught, been strung up by the people who were legally sovereign and thus the masters, not the servants, of the parliamentarians.

    The sovereign will of the people of Scotland was legally abused and such passed acts were illegal. BTW: The not legally sovereign people of England were also rioting in the streets objecting to the union with Scotland but their objections, though very real, were not legally sovereign and they are still today, The Queen of England’s legal subjects.

  246. Les Wilson says:

    Having watched a very large chunk of yesterdays debate.
    I think this was a blinder by the SNP, we now have written in Westminster,that Scottish people are sovereign. They already knew that of course but chose to ignore it. I now doubt the will go to court over the continuity bill, as they could now easily lose the case. However,they may use it to waste more time.

    The Scottish tory group are proven now by their antics to be the enemies within. However, my real disgust is with Mundell, a really odious creature who is most certainly working on behalf of Westminster and despite his many weasel words.
    I think he must be the most detested man in Scotland right now.

  247. John says:

    Was at a quiz night local pub in West Fife, England game on telly. The vast majority of the folks cheering for England. Me and one other guy cheering for Colombia.
    I was just gobsmacked at the sheer numbers of English people living in my local area.
    I also heard a few remarks about SNP etc etc and mocking laughs.
    Make it of what you will.

  248. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Kangaroo @ 12:41,

    I think that both Liz and I take the view that although the HoC has given the SC a clear steer, it isn’t a directive, and from past experience we don’t have confidence that the court will address the issue with due respect for, or even proper understanding of, the Scottish constitutional position. Or even address the issue at all, preferring to dodge it as before in typical English Establishment fashion.

    So no foregone conclusion, I would say. But the latest occurrence has strengthened the Scottish case, on that we all seem to agree.

  249. Petra says:

    Well done Stuart. I can just see the numpties at Chequers discuss this tomorrow … ”brilliant idea; get rid of the micks and the jocks in one go” … and then think about contacting you to find out how they can move our oil and gas south or ”expand and extend” their sea borders.

    On a more serious note it’s great to see that the vast majority of Scots would be happy to have a hard border between Scotland and England (Englanders in the north may want to join us – you’re welcome).

    I’m ALL for it. A new 90 mile long 20 foot high wall will suit me just fine. Keep their rotten grub out, their greedy hands off of our ”gear” and people like Trump, May etc standing waiting on the English side to see if they’ll get permission to enter. In fact with control over immigration we’ll decide which non-EU citizens WE’LL accept. Shoe on the other foot and all that.


    @ Shinty says at 8:56 am …. ”Posting the YT link for folk like me who have buffering problems with all other video forms. Ian Blackford COR

    Thanks for that Shinty. It’s ALL there and on (Hansard) record. Spread it far and wide now folks.



  250. admiral says:

    Robert J. Sutherland says:
    5 July, 2018 at 12:44 pm
    Capella @ 12:25,
    Yup. And how much of a non-blizzard of FOI requests has the English Ministries of Health or Transport had to endure from our wonderful EBC, d’ya reckon?
    Simply in diligently exercising its public service committment down south. =cough=

    To be fair, they haven’t had wee Ruth, stranger to the truth, screeching about it every five seconds or the MSM swooning at every screech. Neither have they had her glove puppets, wee Willie and wee Dick, echoing her screeches, either

  251. ScottishPsyche says:

    As a child, I was disappointed with the low key border between Scotland and England. The moment you were back ‘home’ was one we tried to compete as children to be the first to announce. I would not bat an eyelid at a more formal demarcation and can see the sense in what appears at first to be a tongue in cheek suggestion.

    O/T Ian Blackford is on QT tonight. No doubt there will be lots of talk of ‘stunts’ and bad behaviour. The sanctimony and hypocrisy from the Tories and other Yoons last night was breathtaking, so expect more of the same tonight. He can stand up for himself but I fear an ambush will have been well planned.

  252. HandandShrimp says:

    Bizarre piece on the BBC about Government demanding that Russia explains latest Salisbury poisonings.

    Kremlin Laddie #1 “Didn’t we deny any involvement last time?”
    Kremlin Laddie #2 “Aye”
    Kremlin Laddie #1 “Do you think it is a trick question?”
    Kremlin Laddie #2 “Aye”

  253. Petra says:

    QT tonight: Ian Blackford and the opposition of at least 3 Tories (two plus Dumbleby).


    This is another one that’ll be left standing on the other side of our wall.

  254. yesindyref2 says:

    The timing of it all is very interesting of course. At at time when there’s a Chequers meeting to reconcile differences in the Tory party so their attention is elsewhere, the SNP force divisions where normally there are none, then put the Claim of Right on an opposition debate, one of the 3 they get in a year apparently, where a division is not forced by the unionists. Perhaps even Blackford being on QT is a factor. Then there’s the UKSC coming up, which has the Tories fearing a loss so they’re looking at totally overriding the EU Continuity Bill which could presumably face a challenge from the ScotGov in the UKSC. Then summer recess is coming up, with Westminster having its pants at half mast in the heatwave.

    Very suspicious 🙂

  255. Ian Brotherhood says:

    Jakey Trolling calling Lesley Riddoch a bigot – perhaps another wee sign of indy2 coming over the hill?


  256. Shinty says:

    Ms Rowling seems to be a nasty piece of work. For all her wealth she has no class and not fit to lick LR’s boots.

  257. Macart says:

    @Ian B

    I believe this was Ms Rowling’s stand out statement from 2014:

    “I’ve heard it said that ‘we’ve got to leave, because they’ll punish us if we don’t’, but my guess is that if we vote to stay, we will be in the heady position of the spouse who looked like walking out, but decided to give things one last go. All the major political parties are currently wooing us with offers of extra powers, keen to keep Scotland happy so that it does not hold an independence referendum every ten years and cause uncertainty and turmoil all over again. I doubt whether we will ever have been more popular, or in a better position to dictate terms, than if we vote to stay.”

    Maybe me, but it didn’t quite work out that way. Seems other folks within the YES movement best guess turned out to be the more accurate.

    Or is Brexit, austerity ideology, the sidelining of Scotland’s parliament throughout Brexit negotiations, taking them to court and five straight years of the most appalling media assault part of the whole better together/equal partnership thing?

  258. Dr Jim says:

    We used to be extremists then we were separatists until we became Nazis, our new description is anti English bigots

    So many names we’re called an a constant daily basis and many feel the need to defend these assaults on Scottish people and spend time doing it but this is just yet another British Nationalist ploy in their slim arsenal of tricks

    To discuss a topic, any topic with the dyed in the wool British Nationalist always goes the same way, first they insult you by telling you you don’t understand the argument then they change the subject to divert you from the original argument then they insult you by the use of the name calling a tactic employed to make you lose your temper and if you raise your voice it allows them to claim moral and righteous glorious victory

    My approach is and always has been to these people is to shut down all discourse altogether and walk away quickly before I resort to my mental preference which would be to follow our ancestors advice which was *on meeting an Englishman who has a mind to argue take out your sword and cleave him in two it saves very much time and you can move on with your day*

    The moral: Never argue with a Britnat there’s no good outcome

  259. Phydaux says:

    Brilliant, as ever, Stuart…a slam dunk for a physical border between Scotland and England. The fundamental differences between Scotland and England are increasingly stark.Denying these differences is to propagate the great lie that states we are all the same.

    A physical border is a manifestation of how very different Scotland is to the “ morally repugnant “ Tories ( to quote Ian Blackford in his great speech in the HOC last night )

    Good relations between neighbours require well managed and effective borders, an acceptance that is reflected in the polls by Stuart. Those who share the people of Scotland’s values are always welcome…if a physical border helps to repel the pathological deviants and psychopaths who run the show at Westminster, bring it on.

    Team SNP are doing us proud and can be trusted to never let Scotland down, at a time of great moral crisis. A wee word of warning to the Abslab Party and to quote Dante :
    “ The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in time of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality”.

  260. yesindyref2 says:

    @Ian B
    Thanks for that, it hit my angry spot, here’s what I posted on the N.

    I wasn’t going to bother with this but seeing as a well-known twitter troll has accused the author of bigotry, then it’s all very simple as far as I’m concerned. There is no reason why Scots should support England, or support their opponents in ABE form. It is NOT compulsory. But we all have free will and it’s a sport, a sport, I’ll repeat that, a SPORT. If we want to support any team it’s up to us, and if we don’t we don’t. This flying accusations of bigotry is sheer bigotry itself.

    Personally having seen the way Columbia cheated I took to supporting England in that match. But before that seeing the smears in the media, any attempt at a smear against Russia, the host nation, I have a soft spot for them. And lo and behold, the whole world seemed to have written them off as useless, but from what I see they play with heart and soul, so good luck to them.

    If that’s bigotry the bigotry callers know where they can shove it. Don’t forget to flush and wash the hands afterwards.

  261. Valerie says:

    @ shinty 2.39

    Yup, in a nutshell.

    A successful billionaire trolling other writers down the foodchain. Classy has never sprung to my mind in any discussion of JK.

  262. jfngw says:

    Ignore Rowling, she has her band of no doubt ever diminishing followers, we all have to grow up sometime and stop reading children’s books. But if you scrape the surface you just find a gentrified Arlene Foster, without the sash of course. A Brit Nat is a Brit Nat, they just see it when they look in the mirror.

  263. yesindyref2 says:

    J K Rowling is a bully, she uses her Harry Potter followers and her money to try to beat anyone into submission.

    The Scots don’t like bullies and here’s a curious thing. NEITHER DO THE ENGLISH.

    In those famous words “and that’s all I have to say about that”.

  264. Dr Jim says:

    Are the British Nationalists so insecure they have to force Scottish people to support a particular football team now, is it not enough for them that they banned our language so we’d speak theirs and then critisise us for the *inferior* way we speak it, is it not enough they banned our choice of Tartan clan clothing, not enough they butchered Scots and threw them from their homes, not enough they transported Scots by the thousands from the country of their birth to be scattered accross the globe against their will, not enough they mock and laugh at our parliamentary representatives democratically elected by us, not enough the most respected politician in these islands Scotlands FM Nicola Sturgeon suffers vocal and written bile thrown at her on and hourly basis

    When does it all become more than enough…..for Scotland

  265. Dan Huil says:

    @Phydaux 2:54pm

    Great post. Completely agree.

  266. Abulhaq says:

    @Robert Peffers
    Admire your tenacity but we are dealing with a system that recently has shown nothing but contempt for Scotland’s interests or the ‘will’ of its people.
    The legalistic, sovereignty route is a very, rather tame, Scottish approach which historically is strewn with frustration in the face of smug indifference from the centre. Sounds good, looks good on paper but sadly the Unionist establishment will simply use it for a baser, meaner purpose or simply ignore it.
    Scotland got its assembly, then parliament because Donald Dewar, John Smith and David Steele working from the centre added their weight to the original Claim of Right blueprint. Tony Blair, not a fan of power sharing and shedding, conceded hoping to ‘silence’ the troublesome lot of them.
    The SNP in government skilfully scuppered Blair’s talking shop, county council plan for devolved assemblies but in the end they were not the prime movers in the devo deal.
    The British establishment views devolution as its creation. It may be uncreated as it sees fit. In their British mindset parliament is constitutionally sovereign and what has been given may be taken back should parliament so decide. It’s all driven by English law. They, the majority, make the rules.
    Brexit has also unleashed something from the grim past, namely English ‘patriotism’. It is a proven dangerous beast with a perverse allegiance even among some Scots. Offer it legal talk and it will simply mock you for your credulity. We need our own St George, plus a super sized political secret weapon. . .

  267. Luigi says:

    As a certified independenista, I actually support the England Football team on occasion – in honour of our English Scots for Yes brothers and sisters. They are not a bad team – QF probably their natural limit/level at the mo (if they are in top form). In addition to Scotland, there are certain national teams that I would favour if they were playing England (cos I like em), but it’s not a huge list.

    I’m certainly not in the “ABE” crowd.

    I agree with others that Columbia were so dirty they did not deserve to go through – which is a pity as they had a fabulous team last tournament.

  268. jfngw says:

    Not a good day for a famous writer and self-publicist. Accuses an English person of being an anti English bigot, then quotes a British Nationalist as an example of a bigoted independence supporter. I can only hope the books are better researched, but as they are mostly children’s fantasy stuff I don’t suppose they take that much research.

    Hard lines any independence supporting person following her, she basically just sees you as a bigot. But still willing to take your cash, her principals have limits I suspect.

    Also as anybody is aware it is unbelievable easy to set up a social media account and claim to be something you are not, a phenomenon well know to those that read the posts on this site.

    Maybe I’ll set up a Brit Nat twitter account and spread the love.

  269. Capella says:

    It will be amusing if England does win the World Cup. Who, from the English establishment, will travel to Moscow to stand with their team? They have so denigrated Vladimir Putin and Russia, specially now with this new Novichok incident, that nobody will be able to appear lest they are called a Kremlin stooge.

    Prince William will miss out on all the glory.

    Maybe Alex Salmond should magnanimously do the honours with a special episode f his show from Red Square.

  270. jfngw says:

    To be honest I’m really starting to think that JK has some problem with Scottish people. Just wanting to run your own country is seen as anti-English and hence bigotry, it strikes me as a colonialist mindset. How can we not see that we are better run from London, now shut up, your betters have spoken.

  271. Dr Jim says:

    The Anti English nonsense is just a smokescreen to cover up the fact they’re a bunch of lying Bastirts and have no argument so deflect from the point by pointing accusatory fingers at others accusing them of the very crime they themselves are committing

    Heard it a thousand times over 300 years

    No I’m not Connor McLeod I’m the other one

  272. Robert Peffers says:

    @Robert J. Sutherland says: 5 July, 2018 at 12:55 pm:

    ” … I think that both Liz and I take the view that although the HoC has given the SC a clear steer, it isn’t a directive, and from past experience we don’t have confidence that the court will address the issue with due respect for, or even proper understanding of, the Scottish constitutional position.”

    Ah! I see I haven’t made the point clear enough yet, The first point I had not thought to mention is that Ian Blackford’s speech is recorder verbatim in the Hansard record of the day’s events in the chamber. This will include all the interventions and also the wee bit I highlighted in my previous comment – “Next year sees the 20th anniversary of the re-establishment of the Scottish Parliament.”

    Ian has cleverly got the point recorded, (and accepted unopposed or unquestioned), that Holyrood is actually the reconvened old Scottish parliament and not a new, (devolved), parliament that is thus not under Westminster rules or customs but also highlights that Westminster is not the continued old parliament of the Kingdom of England that went into permeant recess in 1707 and Westminster has had no one elected as a member of a parliament of England ever since.

    Every Member now sitting in the House of Commons is legally a member of the new parliament of the two partner United Kingdom Government that began on 1 May 1707. but every MSP sitting at Holyrood is a member of the old reconvened Parliament of the Kingdom of Scotland from before the Treaty of Union.

    Furthermore, as the Queen/King of England is legally sovereign and has legally, (under only English Law), delegated her/his sovereignty to the long defunct Parliament of England that ceased to exist on 30 day of April 1707 then Westminster does not actually hold legal sovereignty over the Scottish Parliament reconvened at Holyrood.

    I’ll put that a slightly different way Every non-Scottish MP at Westminster is delegate to exercise Her Majesty of the Kingdom of England’s sovereignty but is chosen by the people of the Kingdom of England who are Her Majesty the Queen of England’s subjects. Every commons MP at Westminster from Scotland is chosen by the Legally sovereign people of Scotland and thus delegated by them to exercise the people of Scotland’s legal sovereignty at Westminster.

    Moreover, every MSP at Holyrood is a member of the continued, pre-union, Parliament of the Kingdom of Scotland and is legally chosen and delegated to exercise the legal sovereignty of the people of Scotland.

    Or even another slightly different way to state the legal facts :-

    While the pre-union Parliament of the Kingdom of England ended forever on 30 April 1707 and has never again existed the Holyrood Parliament of the Kingdom of Scotland was reconvened, as the old Scottish Parliament for the first time in 292 years, by Winnie Ewing on 12 May 1999 with these exact words:-

    “I want to start with the words that I have always wanted either to say or to hear someone else say – the Scottish Parliament, which adjourned on March 25, 1707, is hereby reconvened.”

    There is the whole legal truth The Treaty of Union was between the Old Parliaments of The Kingdom of Scotland and the Old Parliament of the Kingdom of England.

    On 30 April 1707 the Kingdom of England Parliament permanently ended itself and the parliament of Scotland was only legally prorogued. On 1 May the bipartite Parliament of the United Kingdom began as a totally new Parliament and it still exists as such today

    On 12 May 1999 the Old Parliament of the Kingdom of Scotland was reconvened and it still sits today at Holyrood but was legally prorogued between 1 May 1707 and 12 May 1999. As such that old Scottish Parliament has the legal right, (if a majority of the legally sovereign people of Scotland instruct it to do so), legally end the United Kingdom.

    What Ian Blackford did when he inserted that little statement, “Next year sees the 20th anniversary of the re-establishment of the Scottish Parliament.” into the proceedings at Westminster and it went into the Hansard report without any denial from the House of Commons.

    Can you show any legal flaw in my reasoning?

    Bear in mind I’m not a legal expert but have studied this sovereignty issue since, as a teenager, I had it explained to me in detail by an old, semi-retired, King’s Council.

  273. CameronB Brodie says:

    Scots who defend English constitutional law as the means of defining their life’s potential, have been colonised internally. Their minds, and subsequently their world outlooks, have been polluted with British nationalist exceptionalism and paternalistic, narcissistic egotism. Most are lost to reason, though some may still remember the value of basic virtue.

    Virtue as the end of law: an aretaic theory of legislation


    This article investigates a virtue-centered approach to normative legal theory in the context of legislation. The core idea of such a theory is that the fundamental aim of law should be the promotion of human flourishing, where a flourishing human life is understood as a life of rational and social activities that express the human excellences. Law can promote flourishing in several ways. Because peace and prosperity are conducive to human flourishing, legislation should aim at the establishment and maintenance of these conditions. The human excellences (or virtues) are developed in childhood and young adulthood by stable and nurturing families and by educational institutions: therefore, the law should support and foster families and schools. Although some critics have argued that an aretaic theory of legislation must support so-called “vice laws,” this is not the case. A virtue-centered approach must take into account the effects produced by criminalization of alcohol, drugs, gambling, and prostitution. If prohibition is counterproductive, then human flourishing may best be supported by a regime of decriminalization or legalization, accompanied by programs of education, treatment, and support.

    KEYWORDS: Virtue jurisprudence, normative legal theory, virtue ethics, aretaic, Aristotle, flourishing, vice laws

  274. Andy Anderson says:

    Ian Blackford got Westmonster yesterday to agree we, Scotland have a Claim of Rights. Important as this will be used in Law at the Supreme court later this month.

    Taken from the Independent Blog.
    Westminster forced to admit the Scottish people are Sovereign
    July 5, 2018Craig Sheridan 11 Comments

    What happened?
    The SNP have played an ace card when using their allocated Opposition Day debate. Standing order number 36 that was agreed and resolved without contention late last night in the House of Commons. This was a motion proposed for debate by Ian Blackford the SNP MP for Ross, Skye and Lochaber and leader of the SNP group at Westminster.

    What was the motion?
    “That this House endorses the principles of the Claim of Right for Scotland, agreed by the Scottish Constitutional Convention in 1989 and by the Scottish Parliament in 2012, and therefore acknowledges the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of government best suited to their needs.”
    In a nutshell, the SNP were looking for unambiguous admission from Westminster that Scotland has the absolute right to determine its own political future based on the will of the Scottish people.

    Why is this important?
    There has been a lot of talk since September 2014 (including from Unionist politicians) that Westminster holds a constitutional overlordship when it comes to Scotland. Meaning for example, Scotland can only have a meaningful and legal independence referendum if its agreed through a Section 30 order with the UK government as happened in 2014. It means that all of the ‘once in a generation and once in a lifetime’ bleating from unionists means absolutely nothing and that Scotland has the right to determine its future unilaterally based on the will of the people.

    What’s the history?
    1320 – The Scottish right to self determination based on the people being sovereign is an ancient political principle in Scotland and was first officially document in the Declaration of Arbroath in 1320.
    1689 – Aspects of The ‘Claim of Right’ act of 1689 were written into Scottish constitutional law effectively ensuring no royal prerogative would sit above the Scottish Parliament. Especially interesting as Scotland is part of a UK that where all legislation gains royal assent, the exact opposite of our constitutional traditions. It’s worth noting though that the claim of right is not so much a legal standpoint as an accepted constitutional position in Scotland.
    1989 – On the journey towards devolution and a Scottish Parliament the Campaign for a Scottish Assembly crafted a new version which was signed by the vast majority of Scottish politicians from all parties as well as churches, trade unions and other civic bodies, which read:
    “We, gathered as the Scottish Constitutional Convention, do hereby acknowledge the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of Government best suited to their needs, and do hereby declare and pledge that in all our actions and deliberations their interests shall be paramount.
    We further declare and pledge that our actions and deliberations shall be directed to the following ends:
    To agree a scheme for an Assembly or Parliament for Scotland;
    To mobilise Scottish opinion and ensure the approval of the Scottish people for that scheme; and
    To assert the right of the Scottish people to secure implementation of that scheme.”
    2012 – The Claim of Right was debated in the Scottish Parliament to allow MSPs to re-endorse the claims of the sovereignty of the Scottish people. At the time the then Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon called on all parties to “recommit” to its principles.
    2018 – Westminster debates Scotland’s Claim of Right and the motion is resolved unopposed. The full debate can be found at Hansard and is an interesting and highly entertaining read if you have a little (ok, a lot) time.
    Let us commend the efforts of the SNP MPs at Westminster for maintaining a high momentum following the walkout and subsequent disruption tactics coincidentally during some football match. This clears the way for the next independence referendum. Its a political masterstroke and removes all debate around who calls the shots when it comes to Scotland’s political future – it’s the Scottish people.

  275. Liz g says:

    Robert Peffers @ 5.03
    But, and I cannot mind who,also said that the two parliaments were abolished and the new UK one created….. That’s also gone into Hansard….

    As to a legal flaw…. No I don’t see one, but I’m on the same side of the debate!
    There doesn’t have to be a flaw in the legal position for the Supreme Court to decide that the intentions of Parliament (on that particular point) are not clear enough for the Court to take into account.
    Thus batting it back to the politicians to decide.
    That’s what Robert J and I were getting at, if the Supreme Court can find a way to say this is a political and not a legal matter during their judgement on the Continuity Bill they probably will.
    It’s the Bill they are to rule on not our Sovereignty.
    But like you I’m hoping that they will use last nights vote to reach their judgement I just think they may look for a way not to

  276. twathater says:

    In a sense I agree with Albuhaq , we are fighting the good fight , our SNP SG and reps are becoming more positive and feisty , things are ticking along nicely , but what we and the SG can’t do is take our eyes off the ball .

    Remember a cornered RAT is at it’s most dangerous when trapped , we are challenging the establishment and it’s minions of the brit Nat parties and they will come back fighting even harder.

    The biggest threat we face is if another GE is called and the brit nats gain seats , they will roll over as they did previously and accept everything wastemonster tells them to ,we have to make sure that doesn’t happen

    Contrary to what others , myself included demanded ( an immediate indy ref 2 ) Nicola and her team are currently playing a world class game .

    In security parlance , the establishment have to be successful ALL the time to win. , the enemy ( US ) only have to be successful once to win . That once is coming

  277. HandandShrimp says:

    JK Rowling is very much part of Blair and Brown’s “Cool Britannia”.

    It can’t be easy for her at the moment. The SNP rattle that narrative and we were (still are) the bad guys but obviously the Tories are a horrific bunch and things like UC are not just poorly implemented policy they are actively evil. Lob Brexit into the mix, which is a thing almost entirely driven by England, and I am surprised she has anything coherent to say about any political objectives. Jeremy may or may not be a good egg but I think his idea of Cool Britannia is paying to see the Small Faces with a 10 bob note. At the moment the UK is a backward looking place and I would prefer to move forward with Scotland. I don’t have to hate anyone to want that and I would be delighted if JK wanted to stay in an a progressive independent Scotland.

  278. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Robert Peffers @ 17:03,

    With all due respect, Robert, I’m not at all sure that the SC will concur in your constitutional analysis, even if it is absolutely well-founded. That is (part of) the problem.

    The UK parliament has in effect operated through the centuries as the English Parliament continued, and based exclusively (as far as one can see) on English constitutional theory and practice.

    Historically, the Scots powers-that-be have never seriously challenged that development, and English governmental actions in the past have generally been solicitous enough of Scottish interests to make that tenable all round.

    Now is entirely different. With the clear and increasing divergence in Scottish and English interests, the previous “benign neglect” in matters constitutional is now failing. The UKGov attempted powergrab is in effect an admission of its current weakness, not its strength.

    We’re now in constitutional terra incognita. Which is again about to be dumped into the lap of this strange beast the Supreme Court. Which, if it were a proper Supreme Court American-style, would be precisely the right place to deliberate such issues. But the whole judicial tradition of England – despite the wild rantings of The Daily Heil – is specifically to strenuously avoid making judgements which can be interpreted as being political in nature. This is what gives people like me genuine cause for concern.

    History also teaches us – as you well know – that the English Establishment does not have a good record in handling matters Scottish within our fabled “unwritten” UK constitution.

    It doesn’t matter a whit what the “correct” constitutional position ought to be à la Peffers, if English SC judges decide differently, since it’s their judgement that counts in practice, irrespective of how flawed, grossly ignorant or unfounded it may be.

    The HoC vote by acclaim yesterday however is a useful reminder to them that there is a Scottish constitutional position which must be respected while it remains trapped within a UK context, and can only be ignored at their (and the UK’s) peril.

  279. Southern Rock says:

    JK Rowling
    Gordon Brown
    SNP absolutely shite at everything.

    Anyone else get the feeling the BritNats are preparing for IndyRef2?

  280. Southern Rock says:

    Another non deadly poisoning in England.

    There must be a Brexit Summit due to take place.

    Oh that’s right, there’s one tomorrow.

    What a coincidence.

  281. ScottishPsyche says:

    Rowling has developed such a skewed and distorted view of reality from loitering on social media that you have to pity her. I suppose when you become so famous and buffered from the real world you have to go looking for arguments on Twitter to remind yourself you are alive.

    She cannot understand that her birthplace has nothing to do with why so many people do not like her.

    Lesley Riddoch getting lots of traffic so she isn’t too bothered.

  282. HandandShrimp says:


    Given the number of times it is mentioned by Unionists I would say they know that it is imminent any time soon.

    However, stand by for the shock, horror reaction once the date is set 🙂 How could they do this? Oh the humanity!

  283. Abulhaq says:

    @CameronB Brodie
    A culturally colonised mind is truly a bad thing but also a mind fortunately uncolonised thanks to a different cultural feed, watching the process in action without seeing any effective means to combat it is worse.
    I do wonder if Scots fully understand the nature of the thraldom in which they are held. Too many seem to resort to or take refuge in tartan jingoism and infantile flag waving as a self medicated palliative and believe it counts for something. Contemporary Scottish nationalism seems all gut and too little brain. In that anti-intellectualism it is very British.
    Scots created the conditions for their current state however the conditions for the alternative state do not appear yet to exist. It will need a profound if not revolutionary break with old worldviews to create it. The Scots are a cautious people, the result of that pernicious ‘thraldom’, and may in the current poitical context lack the force of will to confect that new way of seeing.
    Speaking objectively I wish the Scots well but I believe they have been let down by a too often faltering and smug leadership grown too fond of the institutional comfort zone.
    My heart lept when the Westminster mps walked out. Now I wonder why they bothered, they returned and normal business was resumed.
    Paradigmatic shifts are not triggered by such timidity.
    I shall be lascerated as a troll for these aperçus and I may have totally misread the runes. We shall see. .

  284. Thepnr says:

    I’ve heard Nicola Sturgeon repeat many times, that before calling for a 2nd referendum she will await clarity on the future relationship between the UK/EU. This seems sensible enough to me, as surely we would need to know what we are arguing for or against in the next referendum.

    Maybe we’ll get clarity or at least closer to it this weekend or maybe we’ll get the usual sound bites for the media. I suspect they will emerge from Chequers after much deliberation to announce that the cabinet are in agreement and that a new “third way” will be put to the EU in a white paper which we will all get to droll over.

    Only problem with that is that the EU might not take very long to throw out the “third way” as being in any way acceptable and the government have then landed on another snake and slide right back down to square one again.

    This obviously can’t go on indefinitely so something has to give. That something might be very big indeed and Nicola Sturgeon will be quite pleased that she has waited thus far.

    As far as Independence goes, the only group not making a hash of it is our side and “things can only get better” 🙂

  285. jfngw says:

    It’s obvious the unionists know that indyref2 is imminent, they are wheeling them out from the vault.

    Darling and Brown will appeal to those who would vote no anyway

    Rowling will appeal to the airheads that don’t worry about research and will believe whatever a celebrity tells them, probably believe Harry Potter world could happen.

    Not quite sure who Mr Jelly will appeal to but he did seem to convince those in D&G he was competent, can he fool all the people all the time? Sees himself as Scotland’s Pooh-Bah

  286. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    ScottishPsyche @ 18:09,

    As Macart kindly reminds us @ 14:47, given everything that has transpired in the wake of 2014, I would have thought that Jakey’s credibility about any matter constitutional concerning Scotland is zero. Nul. Void.

    If she were anything like honest, given what she said back then, she would already be an irate independence supporter, but she would at least have been better advised to stay schtum, to avoid public scorn if nothing else.

    Picking on Lesley Riddoch? What on earth was that about? Lesley’s piece in today’s National is as well-balanced and tolerant as it always is.

    Seems that Jakey’s Labourite world is visibly tottering around her, and she’s not a happy bunny.

  287. jfngw says:

    It will be interesting to see how May produces a Brexit proposals that is worded so everyone sees what they want to see. She hopes they all see the luxurious Morphoton, rather than the dirt and squalor that is inevitable.

  288. JGedd says:

    Can you imagine what it must be like at dinner parties chez JK and les Broons at the moment, with all their cronies unable to digest properly because of all that animadverting about vile cybernats? Much like those sophisticated gatherings round at Historywoman’s mayhap.

    They must be at the gesticulating madly with cutlery stage by now. The great Giant Ego has unslung his jaw again in service of the Union so JK must have been inspired to join the fray and unleash her minions to trawl social media to come up with “stuff”.

    Perhaps she lives behind those towering hedges because she actually detests Scotland and can dream she lives in a different kind of Scotland – something like the imaginary world of her children’s books, set somewhere in the unreal world of 1950s children’s literature.

  289. Thepnr says:


    Why are you addressing “the Scots” in the third person?

    “Speaking objectively I wish the Scots well but I believe they have been let down by a too often faltering and smug leadership grown too fond of the institutional comfort zone.”

    I take it that you are not a Scot yourself then? One thing you are though is a stirrer judging by the last few days posts, that comes through clearly enough.

  290. ScottishPsyche says:

    @ Robert J Sutherland

    The tide is definitely changing – although I am surprised at the same tired old arguments being put out there by the usual suspects so quickly. It is as if the changes in Scotland have passed them by and Rowling’s take on the world as it now seems so uninformed.

    I like that the National can quickly challenge what she says without having to wait a day for an army of lawyers to say it is OK. Her influence is definitely waning and she has no one to blame but herself as she refuses to accept she might have been wrong. She would get so much respect if she could acknowledge that.

    Her stance, now and forever it seems, is that Independence equals Nationalism and all Nationalism is racist and bad, so Independence supporters must be racist and bad (here are my folder of screenshots to prove it).

    Her lack of self-awareness is of Hugh ‘my socialism knows no boundaries’ Gaffney proportions.

  291. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Thepnr @ 18:59,

    Yes, with a back history of nods and winks towards a “more vigorous” =ahem= form of resistance.

    Whoever and wherever he is, definitely one to avoid.

  292. Ken500 says:

    J K Rowlings is half French and carries her French awards as a badge of Honour. French nationalist? Vietnam. Algeria.

    Supports the EU but will be out of it. Gave £Million+ to warmongers causing misery but is concerned about the plight of Thai orphans.

    Command of English. Not so good on economics, accounts or history. Stick to fairy stories.

  293. ronnie anderson says:

    Soon be on the road again lol

  294. Valerie says:

    Oh,oh,oh, blue moon time, folks!

    Ian Blackford on QT tonight, from Kings Lynn. It’s been months since the HoC’s, third largest party got an invite.

    Wonder when Dumblebore will be replaced? Rumour has it Frankie Boyle is up for it.

  295. Petra says:

    Lesley Riddoch born in Wolverhampton, England. Brought up in Belfast, NIreland and Glasgow Scotland. Educated in Glasgow Scotland, Oxford University England and Cardiff University Wales. She’ll be a Scottish bigot right enough then, eh?!

    JKR has a hole in her soul that can’t be filled by loadsa dough and millions of followers worldwide. A soul Infilled with jealousy, insecurity and bile. High time she did something about it.

  296. mike cassidy says:

    Radio Scotland’s Getiton program currently providing 2.5 hours of good snhs stories and music.

    The Misreporting Scotland mob will be very upset at such a betrayal.

  297. Tinto Chiel says:

    A timely woof from The Dog:

    I still struggle with the idea that Chancer Blair’s grandiose/otiose Supreme Court has any right to pronounce on/over-rule Scots Law or Scottish sovereignty.

    Sounds an Article of Union-breaker in itself to me.

  298. Confused says:

    If you want to get out of the Empire there’s a couple of things you need to have in your favour – the inglish fully occupied with other stuff (- BREXIT – check!) and support from external allies, at least on a par with the UK (- unless we want to join the SCO, this means) … Amerika.

    Trump is coming to town. Here is what we should do –

    Nicola should meet him as his helicopter Marine One lands on the Castle Espalanade.

    She presents him with a hat that says –


    and he then says –

    America would welcome an independent Scotland, in the EU and in NATO – however the Scots choose to vote, we will always be a friend …

    – some feelgood bollocks.

    This then undermines the English and their special relationship – “special” as in – oldskool-retarded and “relationship” as in America is the DOM and UK is the GIMP. It is sordid and unequal at best – laughable.

    Vile cybernats then post wild rumours about secret deals that the SG has done with the Americans – that they will “have our back” once we decide to go. The UK has never acted without American approval since it got bitch-slapped over Suez. This will unnerve them.

    Washington lobbyists sell their souls for “access” – but he is coming here, to us. We need to get something out of him. He has or will meet KIM, MAY and PUTIN – STURGEON should also be on that list – and if she is not, that he visits Scotland merely to check HIS GOLF COURSES ARE BEING WATERED PROPERLY – it undermines us, makes us look unimportant. Not a serious country.

    TRUMP meets MAY on Friday the 13th. Let’s make it UNLUCKY for the Ingish.

    There are times in life when we need to shake a persons hand – even if we wash it in bleach afterwards. This is -realpolitik- big-girls-and-boys games – infants to be locked in the soft play area till the adults have conferred.

  299. Robert Peffers says:

    @Liz g says: 5 July, 2018 at 5:23 pm@

    ” … There doesn’t have to be a flaw in the legal position for the Supreme Court to decide that the intentions of Parliament (on that particular point) are not clear enough for the Court to take into account.!

    Ah! There’s the point, Liz g, Both the SG and the de facto parliament know full well that the so called Supreme Court was created by a Westminster parliament that is legally a bipartite partnership of two equally sovereign parliaments and thus Westminster is legally obliged to act as a two partner of equals establishment but has, many, many times broken the terms of the Treaty of Union.

    It is presently openly operating as the de facto Parliament of the Country, (not the Kingdom), of England and acting as if the Country of England were the masters and their only legal kingdom partner in the United Kingdom is just another dominion of the Country of England like Wales and N. Ireland. Legally the union formed a United Kingdom and not a country nor even a union of four countries.

    Yet, while simultaneously claiming to be the fully sovereign parliament of the bipartite United Kingdom there is no such parliament as the Parliament of either the country or the Kingdom of England.

    They really haven’t got a legal case to present in a neutral court and, what is more, they know it. The very big difference now is that not only has this UKBREXIT caper focused the eyes of the World upon what is going on the World’s eyes can see the fraud that is being carried out and, to make matters much, much, worse for Westminster, what they are doing has the capacity to defraud major areas and major powers throughout the World.

    Everyone knows the Westminster Supreme Court is an illegal setup but the difference now is that because the dispute between the EU and Westminster will impact upon the whole World – now they care what happens to wee Scotland. Not least the impact upon the EU Free Trading zone. Which is beyond doubt the World’s largest trading zone.

    So I would think, perhaps wrongly, that the SNP’s aim is to have Westminster take the matter to the Supreme Court for the mere fact that Westminster does so opens the door for the SG, (now claiming their legal sovereignty), to take the United Kingdom to the World Court, a.k.a. :-

    “The ICJ, (“The International Court of Justice”, commonly referred to as the World Court) is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations (UN). It settles legal disputes between member states and gives advisory opinions to authorized UN organs and specialized agencies.”

    Now consider that the EU is most likely to want to see Westminster defeated and thus retain Scotland (and Scotland’s assets), within the EU as probably does most of the rest of the World with the exception of The United States of America.

    Anyway I believe that Westminster will not have the guts to take the SG to court but here’s a wee thought – not long before the FM, the SG and the SNP began to show signs of invoking the concept of just who is sovereign in Scotland our FM had just visited China, The USA and the EU. Do you really believe that these matters were not spoken about behind closed doors?

    I posted several links a wee while back of clips of actual debate in the EU Parliament and the EU heid Bummers were very much anti-Westminster and pro-Scotland and quite surprisingly open about it. Not to mention the standing ovation during the same debate for Alyn Smyth pleading that Scotland had stood up for Europe and pleading for Europe to remember and stand up for Scotland. The standing ovation he got certainly convince me that Europe would indeed be ready to stand up for Scotland – they were, after all, already up on their feet applauding our man in Europe.

    I really do believe the end game is afoot now and all the signs tell me the SG are more confident than I can ever remember while Westminster are flannelling around aimlessly making lots of noise but achieving little or nothing.

    The EU reps said on day one, “There will be no Cherry Picking by the UK they either accept or reject all the EU freedoms but cannot Cherry Pick.

  300. stewartb says:

    mike cassidy@ 7:43 pm

    You wrote: “The Misreporting Scotland mob will be very upset at such a betrayal.”

    Lengthy coverage of the NHS anniversary on Reporting Scotland this evening. It is quite an editorial feat to insert that number of “buts” in successive sentences! Can’t allow any unalloyed positives even today can they?

    I’m paraphrasing here : at one point in tonight’s Reporting Scotland coverage a nurse made a negative comment to camera, to the interviewer, about today’s NHS. She used the following form of words: “As you said, .. (then the negative comment) ..” The ‘you’ being the BBC reporter. Leading question – with prior negative framing – perhaps?

    (I am tired of being so suspicious – tired of being so cynical – but then I have cause!! Long to move on and leave this crap behind.)

  301. Robert Peffers says:
    5 July, 2018 at 12:47 pm
    Was having a wee think about Ian Blackfords speech:-

    And watching and reading it carefully for the umpteenth time I think this line:-

    “Next year sees the 20th anniversary of the re-establishment of the Scottish Parliament.”


    I watched Ian Blackford’s speech in the debate and must admit when he said that line it did prick my ears. I had my own thoughts as to what was the meaning of those words.

    I didn’t realise until reading your post the true significance of that line.

  302. Ken500 says:

    People in France do not want to be governed from London. Wave their own flag. Compete at sports. Have their own legal and education system. Bill of rights. Liberty, fraternity and equality. Non est de wee, de stupide au de povre.

    Are the French bigots because they do not want to be governed from Westminster?

    Mais wee. Eco boxes installed in Paris to convert urine into compost and cover any unpleasant smell.

  303. galamcennalath says:

    ScottishPsyche says:

    Rowling ….. cannot understand that her birthplace has nothing to do with why so many people do not like her.

    In the same way Farage came to Edinburgh and was heckled to aggressively that he felt the need to hide in a pub. He claimed it was all because he was English.

    These people have such incredibly underdeveloped self awareness! When you say nasty things, people will be offended and think poorly of you. If you keep doing it the reaction will turn to anger.

    The English certainly don’t have a monopoly in turning out assholes. We have plenty of home grown Scots ones too. Place of birth has nothing to do with it.

  304. Thepnr says:

    This is what I was getting at earlier.

    Brexit: Theresa May’s new customs plan ‘dead on arrival’ in EU

    But before her ministers have even agreed to the deal, EU officials told The Independent the white paper would be “dead on arrival” in Brussels if, as expected, it proposes that the UK remain in the EU’s single market for goods, but not services.

    They claimed they had repeatedly warned UK negotiators that this option would not work. They said it had been widely discussed among EU ministers and rejected – including, crucially, by the EU’s two most powerful players, France and Germany.

    Straight down the snake back to square one for the Tory cabinet.

  305. jfngw says:

    Looks like I may need to change supermarkets as it’s pretty much impossible to buy anything that doesn’t have ‘British’ stamped on it.

    Maybe try Lidl, surely a German company can’t get dragged into this xenophobic marketing!

    I wonder if these supermarkets realise they are alienating about 50% of the Scottish customers.

  306. call me dave says:

    Doc Morag Kerr…Aye that one …. asked on rev twitter.

    “Anyone remember how close the 2007 Foot and Mouth outbreak in Surrey was to the Pirbright virus research institute where the only stocks of FMD virus in the country are held”
    “And was there a connection”?

    Well it did ring a bell but I had forgotten what trnspired.

    Porton Down or the Russians for the Novichok well who knows.

    Enjoying all the Claim of Right stuff over the last 2 days and the history lessons from Mr Peffer excellent.

    14th Century law to be cited in Scottish Court as evidence to extradite Clara Ponsatí who is wanted in Spain on charges of rebellion over the disputed independence referendum in 2017.

    Well there yae go! Supreme Court?

  307. wull2 says:

    Deadly poisoning in England, doesn’t affect squirrels, it just creates more.

  308. Famous15 says:

    A day to reflect before the Grand Contest on Saturday when the world will stand still.

    POTUS has an unfortunate infantile flavour and yet we will welcome him.

    JK Rowling having written books for children may not be the role model for my children.

    The SNP deserved a red card for their behaviour in the Mother of Parliaments(sic). We,the peoples of Scotland deserve a red,nay demand a red card.

  309. PacMan says:

    The way things are going, there could well be another indyref which could won. If it does happen and it is not won, there is an uncertain future of the Scottish Parliament being severely shackled or completely disbanded. If it can survive this then the only way forward is to find ways to show the Scottish people how the Scottish parliament could work with the full powers of independence that the biased media can’t denigrate.

    One possible way of doing this is introducing a virtual currency that can be used alongside the GBP.

    AFAIK, at the moment virtual currency hasn’t been used in a real world setting. You can google what it is but it is basically a means to purchase or sell goods and services without physical cash. Everybody is aware of the underlying purpose. For example Tesco shopers get club points and can purchase Tesco’s goods with them. Those of a certain age will remember the ciggie coupons that were saved up to buy items from the ciggie catalogue.

    If a virtual currency could be run alongside GBP in Scotland, in the event of independence, it could can converted to a real currency. It doesn’t mean that economic arguments of having a currency goes away but it gives the psychological boost that having a Scottish currency is possible as a form of it was already being used.

    How could Scottish society be convinced of using a virtual currency when they already use a real currency?

    The simple answer is that businesses, government agencies and even charities are charged by banks to use their services, some on each transaction. For example, if a charity is to move money to the account of affiliated organisation running care services, it gets charged a small amount in the pound by the bank. What would happen if these entities could use a not-for-profit virtual currency to move around money without incurring these charges or if so, at a lower rate?

    Also imagine if ordinary citizens had access to this virtual currency. At a tap of their smart phone they could pay for goods with it. As moving real money around the system in the form of virtual currency would involve savings compared to real money, these savings could be passed to consumers. Service entities could advertise the cost of services in both the virtual currency and in GBP prices. As GBP incurs higher costs, it will be reflected in it’s price if paid for that way. Given the choice, It’s a no brainer what the choice would be.

    While this may sound a bit in the realms of fantasy and I’m not sure if the model I had suggested could really work, the underlying principle is possible through blockchain technology. It a threat to the traditional banking system and we could well see it is some for or other in the next 5 or 10 years. They know it and the keecking their breiks at that thought of it and trying to jump on the bandwagon so they can keep relevant.

    If the Scottish government or individuals in the private sector could implement something similar to what I have suggested and it become large enough, it isn’t too big a step to convert it to a real currency or maybe even when it does mature, the banking system is in a state where having a currency that we know of now may be irrelevant that the currency issue doesn’t matter in the indy debate.

  310. CameronB Brodie says:

    Despite humans being largely emotional creatures, with only a smattering of rationality, it would appear that this is reserved for making political decisions. Apart from British nationalists living in Scotland, obviously, who are generally politically illiterate.

    Do Scots really share the same degree of cultural intolerance as English Tories?

    Socialization Processes and Identity

    Illustrative studies of political psychology. In this section, I plan to summarize briefly several studies in the field of political psychology, which provide a more specific picture of work being done in this field; the studies are described below.

    How voters decide

    Himmelweit et al. (1981) have conducted a longitudinal study of voting behaviour in the United Kingdom over a period of six elections, extending from 1959 to 1974 (described in Hilde Himmelweit’s article ‘Political Socialization’ on page 237 of the present issue). This consumer model of voting is an application of multiple-attribute utility theory, MAUT, (Von Winterfeld and Fischer, 1975; Humphreys, 1977). MAUT assumes that a person chooses the alternative with the highest total subjective or expected utility among the possible objects of choice.

    Based oh their MAUT analysis, Himmelweit et al. predicted the vote of 80 per cent of her sample correctly for the 1974 elections; where-as predictions based upon the voter’s prior voting history were only correct for 67 per cent of the sample. These results are clearly consistent with the thesis that British voters mostly make their voting decisions so as to increase their perceived chances that the policy issues they favour will be implemented: that is, voting behaviour is rational.

    Further, they report that the voters they studied had clearly structured, interrelated attitudes or ‘ideologies’ which persisted over time and which were closely related to their voting. This finding runs counter to Bell’s claim (1962) about the demise of ideology in advanced Western societies and to Converse’s (1964) early conclusion that, apart from a small élite, the mass public had no coherent set of political beliefs which could be construed as a political ideology.

    Political issues have a life history. As Berelson et al. (1954) have suggested, an issue goes through certain stages which have bearing on its relevance to the vote from initial rejection to hesitant acceptance to being taken as a given in the society. The salience and importance of an issue to voting or to an individual’s ideology depends upon where the issue is in its life history.

  311. Breeks says:

    Tinto Chiel says:
    5 July, 2018 at 7:46 pm

    ….I still struggle with the idea that Chancer Blair’s grandiose/otiose Supreme Court has any right to pronounce on/over-rule Scots Law or Scottish sovereignty.

    Sounds an Article of Union-breaker in itself to me.

    I agree with you. I think it is sinister and insidious that so many infringements of Scottish Sovereignty establish themselves with barely a ripple, largely because the level of Constitutional awareness is institutionally suppressed. If you were to ask the average bod in a Scottish street what their views were on the Claim of Right, more often than not you’d be met with a blank expression.

    Constitutional Sovereignty is the definitive issue here. Not democracy or protocol.

  312. PacMan says:

    Also, what I had previously posted about is similar to local currencies that are used in Europe, in particular the Chiemgauer. Links to this are here:

    Worgl Experiment

    In the Land of the Euro, Small Towns Adopt Alternative Currencies

  313. Valerie says:

    @ Thepnr

    What a farce, this was so predictable, it’s boring, like Novichok incidents.

    For TWO YEARS, the EU has said, the four freedoms are indivisible. They have repeated it ad nauseum, because it’s the thing the UK keeps bringing up, various versions thereof.

    From the UK point of view, this nuisance situation would be cleared up, if the 27 would change their laws, regs, infrastructure etc., to suit Brexit.

    I keep saying it. It’s No Deal. It seems an impossible outcome, but the 30+ mental ultra Brexiteers are driving the bus.

  314. Shinty says:

    Tinto Chiel – “I still struggle with the idea that Chancer Blair’s grandiose/otiose Supreme Court has any right to pronounce on/over-rule Scots Law or Scottish sovereignty”

    This is something that has bothered me for a while now. Surely it’s just another breach of the 1707 Treaty of the Union.
    (so many breaches, you tend to lose count)

  315. Tinto Chiel says:

    “Maybe try Lidl, surely a German company can’t get dragged into this xenophobic marketing!”

    jfngw, I was in my local Lidl branch today and noticed a good few examples of UJ branding on food including, a Supporting British Farming banner , despite some saltire-branded stuff on offer: disappointing.

    @Breeks, 9.04: to make matters worse, the SC seems to be the final court of appeal in Scottish civil cases. How did they get away with that?

  316. CameronB Brodie says:

    Just in case folk think I’m being anti-English, when highlighting the cultural chauvinism that is inherent to contemporary British nationalism.

    Does National Identification Always Lead to Chauvinism? A Cross-national Analysis of Contextual Explanations


    This study examines the premise that national identification inevitably leads citizens to endorse chauvinism in the international arena. It argues that the relationship between national identification and chauvinism is affected by three contextual factors: globalization, inter-state conflict, and social division. A multilevel analysis of cross-national survey data from the International Social Survey Program National Identity II (2003) was employed in order to observe these three contextual effects, the sample consisting of 33 countries. The results demonstrate that closer relations exist between national identification and chauvinism in more globalized countries. The effects of inter-state conflict vary according to the indices used to measure conflict. Those countries that experienced a large number of deaths during the 2000s and mobilized resources and personnel evinced a higher level of chauvinism. This effect is not evidenced by other measures of conflict, however. Social division did not affect the level of chauvinism or its relation with national identification. These findings are used to critically evaluate the notion that citizens who identify with their nation tend to be nationally chauvinistic.

    Keywords: national identity, chauvinism, conflict, globalization, social-identity theory

  317. Thepnr says:


    The Brexiteers won’t listen to anyone even the Tories natural partners big business. The screeching against Brexit will become louder and louder while this carries on.

    Only two things could halt it now, a change of government or a change of Prime Minister and a 2nd EU referendum. The first looks very unlikely because if Corbyn is leading a new government then not much will change except maybe an extension to Article 50.

    If the Prime Minister does go then it will depend on who takes her place, Gove is one of the favourites and Javid the other, Gove definitely out, not so sure about Javid. Only one of those two would possibly allow a 2nd EU referendum.

    So I think I’m with you then it looks like no deal though the sooner we know that the better, then we can get on with our own 2nd referendum.

  318. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

    Thinking about the following statements

    “With all due respect, Robert, I’m not at all sure that the SC will concur in your constitutional analysis, even if it is absolutely well-founded. That is (part of) the problem.” @Robert J. Sutherland says at 6:04 pm


    “I still struggle with the idea that Chancer Blair’s grandiose/otiose Supreme Court has any right to pronounce on/over-rule Scots Law or Scottish sovereignty. Sounds an Article of Union-breaker in itself to me.” @Tinto Chiel says at 7:46 pm

    If Bliars (no typo) SC overrules the COR then the appeal goes to ECJ.

    This then gets the EU involved

    Also highlights our legitimate legal right (COR, Treaty of Arbroath etc.) widely reported in Europe.


  319. Rock says:

    Nicola stood “shoulder to shoulder” with Saint Theresa and the “ghastly” Boris Johnson as they declared war on Russia after a false flag operation.

    All independence supporting Scots should follow her fine example and stand “shoulder to shoulder” with the English football team at the World Cup in Russia.

    Nicola is NOT calling an independence referendum before Brexit has been completed and there is no chance of independence for at least 622 years.

    In my humble opinion.

  320. Macart says:

    Couple more boxes to tick this summer, but nearly there. ?

    Procedure and action = consequence.

    The motion was debated and resolved unopposed and recorded in Hansard. It’s debatable whether UK media have picked up on the significance of what’s just occurred and even if they did, they’d hardly give the UK’s electorate the heads up with attendant whys and wherefores. Might prove a bit embarrassing considering the bullshit narrative they’ve ingrained upon modern UK culture on all things Scotchland.

    When that other shoe drops on constitutional crisis and its implications for post Brexit life however? I’d imagine they won’t be too happy.

  321. In defence of JK Rowling,

    the minute she started to become rich and famous the Blairites and the Scottish Cringers were all over her feeding her their narrative of Scotland being tooweetoopoortoostupid,

    Gordon Brown,
    Muriel Gray,
    Gavin Hastings,
    Tom Gordon,
    Kenny Farquarson,
    The Massies father and idiot son,
    Gary Robertson,
    Kaye Adams,
    Alex Ferguson,


    her whole view of Scotland is based on the lies and misinformation supplied by these anti-scots,

    like North Sea Oil she is a golden goose that the Unionists will do anything to keep control of.

  322. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

    “to make matters worse, the SC seems to be the final court of appeal in Scottish civil cases.” @Tinto Chiel says at 9:31pm.

    Is that so?

    Clear cut breach of The Treaty of Union 1707 then, regarding Scottish Legal System being separate and not able to be overruled by its English equivalent.

  323. frogesque says:

    Claim Of Right debated and passes with no vote taken. Unanimous confirmation.

    I should be delighted but this is Perfidious Albion we are dealing with.

    What exactly are they up to?

  324. Ken500 says:

    The SC can’t overrule Scottish High Court decisions. Or they know they break the Act of Union. This has led to an anomaly. People in Scotland are being blocked from right of appeal to ECHR. The Scottish High Court refuse permission. The SC can’t over rule. The EU right of people in Scotland is being blocked. Their rights as EU citizens is being blocked illegally. Tommy Sheridan etc.

    This is not being appealed to the ECHR because of the illegal warmonger Blair who broke International Law with impunity. Set up the SC. He should be in the dock, charged, convicted and imprisoned. Along with the rest of them. Iraq, Lockerbie, Dunblane kept secret under the Official Secrets Act for 100 years.

  325. Dr Jim says:

    Mark Carney more sanguine than a tin of golden syrup says everything’s fine maybe a little interest rate rise over the next few years but the econonmy’s OK and we’re all fine as he oozes back into his chair

    So promises made and gifts exchanged with Mr Carney then

    BMW wrong Airbus wrong Nissan wrong every goddamn expert in finance wrong

  326. yesindyref2 says:

    Seems to me that passed motion is one step further towards defining what is actually meant by “constitutional crisis”, and putting it into real terms rather than just journalese.

  327. Fred says:

    Anent Jakey, Frankie Boyle had her number & didn’t miss & hit the wa!

  328. Thepnr says:


    Were you talking of this?

  329. Tinto Chiel says:

    “If Bliars (no typo) SC overrules the COR then the appeal goes to ECJ.
    This then gets the EU involved
    Also highlights our legitimate legal right (COR, Treaty of Arbroath etc.) widely reported in Europe.”

    Do you play chess, JWT? 😉 Hee, hee.

    The SC now is the CoA for Scottish civil cases, according to its Wiki page (I know, I know). As you say, seems a clear breach of the articles of union re Scots Law as they were taught to me in my secondary school in 1970.

    Perhaps it can all be easily explainerised away by what my (very expensive) lawyer used to call a “pub-lawyer narrow interpretation” whenever I came up with what I thought were killer legal arguments for him to use.

  330. yesindyref2 says:

    @Robert Peffers
    The history has always been interesting, including the dissolution of the Scottish Parliament in 1707, before May the 1st by Queen Anne’s commissioner, where Queen Anne would actually have had the power to do so on May 1st, a Catch-22 because without that dissolution the Acts of Union could not have taken effect on May 1st. As is the use of the word “reconvened” in 1999, in the presence of the Head of State (the Queen), and not contradicted by her, therefore implicitly accepted as a reconvening.

    Up till recently it’s Realpolitiks has had more currency all the same, going through Section 30, the Edinburgh Agreement, the Referendum itself. Cameron understood Realpolitiks, and dare I say, democracy.

    May and her cohort have no such restraints, they don’t do Realpolitiks, not with the EU, nor with Scotland. Quite simply they are clueless.

    So it seems that Law is becoming more and more important – and Law is also based on history as was proven in the UKSC Millar Appeal where consideration was given to both Claims of Right (Scotland and England’s), even though they were delicately skirted by the Judges at the time as the ruling came down to the EU Referendum itself and the Communities Act of 197x whatever, with some discussion on what was meant by “normally” (without discussing what was actually meant internationally by “Convention” as in Sewel Convention – compared for instance to the CWC).

    So ironically it could well be history that determines Scotland’s future, as well of course, as the Sovereign People of Scotland, as the UK Gov has chucked Realpolitiks out the windae.

  331. Macart says:


    I’d say so and the wider UK public haven’t a clue thanks to their media.

    They don’t know what’s coming dads and they’re nowhere near ready. Not for Brexit and not for the consequences of their government’s endangerment of the devolution settlement and the good Friday agreement. Worse, some don’t even care and mainly because they’ve been so poorly informed.

    There are days when you hope that the party political policy gonks shit hedgehogs for the rest of their miserable lives for what they’ve done and this is one of those days.

  332. yesindyref2 says:

    @Tinto Chiel
    Salmond never accepted the authority of the UKSC, and he knows his history.

  333. Welsh Sion says:

    Completely off topic

    Please allow me to post this – so at least fellow groaners can ‘enjoy’. There is the link that tarmac is a Scottish invention, anyway … 😉

    Apparently, a man had to be cut free from a hole which had appeared in a road near Newcastle-upon-Tyne when the tarmac melted. The place of this unfortunate incident? HEATon. (I kid you not – but I’ll get my coat.)

  334. Les Wilson says:

    Ref the proposed currency that may be used in our own Scotland,
    I came across this article that the Chinese government put out
    because of Trumph’s trade war. This except from that, says the way
    they handle their currency, maybe we should take note (excuse the pun).

    “Our country implements a floating exchange system consulting a basket of currencies and based on market supply and demand,” Yi said. “Years of practice have shown this system to be effective and must continue to be adhered to.”

  335. Fred says:

    @ Thepnr, got it in one kid! 🙂

  336. sinky says:

    BBC QT Dimbledum says only two women football bosses in the country when he means England. never heard of Ann Budge at Hearts or Learned Dempster at Hibs.

  337. yesindyref2 says:

    No, they really don’t seem to know at all. The best thing for the UK would be for Brexit to be cancelled, and people do seem increaingly to be of that opinion in the rUK. Too slow probably. From an altruistic point of view I guess I should hope it does get cancelled. Had a Potter weekend just past, no, the real one, Beatrix. So most conversation with locals was about that. It’s hard to think of the damage that could be done to people in the Lakes, whiich proudly had the English flag flying (particularly pubs), but where the Kendal Morrisons had few English flags if any, loads of UJs.

    Problem is that without Brexit there’s not the material change of being dragged out of the EU, so unless all the shenanigans are sufficent for Indy Ref 2 that doesn’t happen for some time, and I’m not sure I could be that altruistic to the rUK. Luckily it’s not my decision so I can take the coward’s way out “no opinion” 😉

  338. Morgatron says:

    Rock @ 9.44.
    The good thing is by your predicted timescale of Scottish independence, you and all us here will be long dead and gone by then , but its gonna happen a wee bitty sooner than you imagine you sleverin cock.
    Now fuck off and enjoy your little days left on earth with your yoonion and give us responsible people peace. Wanker

  339. Fireproofjim says:

    Question Time
    Ian Blackford putting a great case for the customs union and failing that then independence for Scotland.

  340. Hamish100 says:

    I see rock quotes 622 yrs tonight. Last time it was 1000 years. Either way outwith his lifespan unless he is a rogue computer


    Oil at $78 a barrel or in BBC news the oil price has slid. Oh 30yrs ago I was told it would never go above $40 a barrel. The price goes up and down. We still get $0.

  341. sinky says:

    Ian Blackford not taking any nonsense on QT

  342. Kangaroo says:

    Supreme Court has a mixture of Scots Law and English Law judges. Only the Scots Law judges ruminate on Scots Law matters and only English Law judges ruminate on English Law matters. Thus on the Continuity Bill it will be the ScotsLaw judges that hear the evidence and make the decision.
    I am confident therefore that there is NO basis for the Supreme Court to strike down the Continuity Bill.

  343. Big Jock says:

    So how many times in QT did they say this nation when referring to England! Matthew Paris is just as bad. He used the old SNP grievance line. If grievance is standing against Brexit and the Tories and representing what Scots voted for. Like all of them he wants Scotland to just suck it up.

  344. Thepnr says:


    Do you have a link for that?

  345. Big Jock says:

    Kangaroo after WM endorsing claim of right SC will not vote against Scotland. That is why the SNP did this. The timing was just before the SC judgement. If it hadent happened then SC would have struck down the bill. Now they can’t. SNP have outsmarted Mundell and the useless Tories.

  346. Kangaroo says:

    Supreme Court contd.

    So IMHO the likely outcome will be that the SC will find in favour of the SG and the Continuity Bill will become Scots Law. We then have a tension between the Continuity Bill and the EU Withdrawal Bill. Resolution of this would then be for either UK to back down and remove the offensive parts of the EU Withdrawal Bill or Appeal to the ICJ.

    If we have IMHO, the unlikely outcome that the SC denies the Continuity Bill then the SG Appeals to the ICJ.

    So given these options, IMHO the UK will back down rather than go to the ICJ.

    This of course means that the UK cannot sell Scotland out in future trade deals no matter if indyref2 is won or lost.

  347. Cubby says:

    Good performance by Blackford on Question Time. Let’s hope for more of the same from the SNP.

  348. Liz g says:

    Thepnr @ 11.38
    While I don’t have a link either, it’s my understanding that there’s 2/3 Scottish Judges in the Supreme Court.They are ment to be looking after Scottish Law???
    This was Blair’s solution to there being two different legal systems.
    But I don’t know about it being only Scottish Judges to be makin the decision!
    And with Holyrood being an “instrument “ of Westminster anyway, it could be argued that this is not an actual Scottish issue!

    I just hope when we get Indy,we put together a Supreme Court that everyone knows how it works.
    Rather than this bloody mess of a Court trying to marry two legal systems….

  349. Thepnr says:

    There will be only two Scottish Judges sitting in the Supreme Court to adjudicate THE UK WITHDRAWAL FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION (LEGAL CONTINUITY) (SCOTLAND) BILL.

    The judges are:

    Lady Hale, Lord Reed, Lord Kerr, Lord Sumption, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hodge, Lord Lloyd-Jones

    Of which Lord Reed and Lord Hodge are from Scotland.

  350. Kangaroo says:


    Sorry no links as such but the way it works is
    To become a judge you must be admitted to “the Bar” by becoming a barrister meaning you have to pass all your law exams and then barrister exams. These are specific to the Law that you will be using in your practice. Scots and English Law are separate and distinct. The Claim of Right being one such example.
    So if you are not qualified in Scots Law you cannot act as a judge on matters pertaining to Scots Law.

    It is even more nuanced than that though, for example in Oz every State operates under the English legal system. However a barrister from New South Wales has to pass exams in the other States to be able to act in court in the other state.

    In the Millar case there was no need to use Scots Law as the action violated English Law and therefore failed. If it had passed English Law then they would also have to have looked at Scots Law. In the event looking at Scots Law was unnecessary.

  351. yesindyref2 says:

    @Thepnr and all
    As I see it, it’s a challenge as to whether the Bill is within the competence of the Scottish parliament, so it doesn’t come under Scots Law, but under the Scotland Act which is a Westminster Act.

    But, if it involves the 1689, then it does come under Scots Law. So it’s a bit of a guddle, really. I guess respective judges will have input to the respective parts.

  352. Confused says:

    The Claim of Right thing yesterday was beautiful – a landmine was planted and the tories didn’t notice while they brayed. Blackford is proving himself to be a rhino up-front. I like him.

    – and forcing that division during the footie was – delightful. Gerrittrightupyeyaenglishtossrag.

    abulhaq seems to me (yet) another concern troll but coming from the slightly higher end, full of unearned gravitas – a kind of Colin Alexander + 5IQ points and a wider vocabulary. He still doesn’t paragraph his comments properly though.

    “paradigmatic shifts” – my fucking arse!

    – this is a man who identified his own infection then claimed the rest of us have it too – I just don’t care about the english – I don’t cringe for anyone. I just refuse to live my life for them, run things past them, consider them – I am my own purpose, my own meaning – I am not a pawn in someone else’s game – and Scotland is not some other country’s SIDEKICK.

    Scotland will make it as an Independent Nation and NEEDS TO DO NOTHING SPECIAL – we don’t need to find dark matter – or stabilise a nuclear fusion reaction in a tokamak – or complete the Langlands programme …

    All we need is to be able to RUN OUR OWN SHOP without a violent tramp living in the basement stealing all our stuff and threatening to turn the lights off if we boot him out. Once the vagrant has been tossed all the difficulty and problems evaporate. (The tramp will try to wreck the joint on his way out – but we will deal with that.)

    Does anyone ponder that we could suffer from BEING TOO RICH – what if the west of Shetland fields are massive, the oil price SPIKES to ridiculous levels and our only problem is the Scottish Pound is now the hardest currency in the world and no foreigner can afford single malt anymore? Nice problem to have. Oh the volatility, it’s a curse.

    I see the famous purveyor of children’s twaddle has been weighing in again – is this not EMBARRASSING for them – they are relying for the high end intellectual attack from an AUTHOR OF CHILDREN’S FICTION – fucksake – its a joke! – wizards-and-shit plus Tom Brown’s Schooldays – Watership Down has more depth to it – and the characters have more emotional depth.

    – preamble over. To the serious shit –

    If you want to get out of the Empire there’s a couple of things you need to have in your favour – the inglish fully occupied with other stuff (- BREXIT – check!) and support from external allies, at least on a par with the UK (- unless we want to join the SCO, this means) … Amerika.

    Trump is coming to town. Here is what we should do –

    Nicola should meet him as his helicopter Marine One lands on the Castle Espalanade.

    She presents him with a hat that says –


    and he then says –

    “America would welcome an independent Scotland, in the EU and in NATO – however the Scots choose to vote, we will always be a friend …”

    – just some feelgood bollocks, but – he says it. That means something.

    This then undermines the English and their special relationship – “special” as in – the oldskool-badway and “relationship” as in America is the DOM and UK is the GIMP. It is sordid and unequal at best – laughable and scary.

    Vile cybernats then post wild rumours about secret deals that the SG has done with the Americans – that they will “have our back” once we decide to go. The UK has never acted without American approval since it got bitch-slapped over Suez. This will unnerve them.

    Washington lobbyists sell their souls for “access” – but the Prez is coming here, to us. We need to get something out of him. He has or will meet KIM, MAY and PUTIN – STURGEON should also be on that list – and if she is not, that he visits Scotland merely to check HIS GOLF COURSES ARE BEING WATERED PROPERLY – it undermines us, makes us look unimportant. Not a serious country.

    TRUMP meets MAY on Friday the 13th. Let’s make it UNLUCKY for the Ingish.

    There are times in life when we need to shake a persons hand – even if we wash it in bleach afterwards. This is -realpolitik- big-boys(-and-girls) games – infants to be locked in the soft play area till the adults have conferred.

    – bring on the trumpton riots, I say.

  353. CameronB Brodie says:

    We are coming up to another crunch decision time, when Scots will be faced with the easy option of supporting the gross structural inequalities that British nationalism sustains, or taking the difficult choice of acting as responsible agents in an increasingly interconnected world.

    Pessimists who predicting perpetual union with England, are perhaps forgetting the powerful force that is human intuition. I am optimistic that Scots will wake up to the authoritarian and culturally chauvinistic nature of Brexit. I’m optimistic as I’m confident that the majority of Scots are not stupid. They have simply been poorly informed in the past.

    The Interplay between Intuition and Rationality in Strategic Decision Making: A Paradox Perspective


    Both intuition and rationality can play important roles in strategic decision making. However, a framework that specifically accounts for the interplay between intuition and rationality is still missing. This study addresses this gap by using a paradox lens and conceptualizes the intuition–rationality duality as a paradoxical tension. We draw on seven case studies of innovation projects to empirically derive a three-step process for managing this intuition–rationality tension through paradoxical thinking.

    Our empirical data suggest that management of the tension starts with preparing the ground for paradoxical thinking by creating managerial acceptance for the contradictory elements of rational and intuitive approaches to decision making. The process then continues by developing decision-making outcomes through the integration of intuitive and rational practices.

    Finally, the outcomes of paradoxical thinking are embedded into the organizational context. For each step of the model, we indicate a set of practices that, by leveraging intuitive or rational characteristics of decision making, practitioners can use to deal with this cognitive tension in the different steps of our model.

    intuition, paradoxes, paradox management, rationality, strategic decision making

    How Sociologists Define Human Agency

    The role of intuition in executive strategic decision making

  354. Thepnr says:


    Sorry mate but you are wrong as I’ve just posted. I’m not having a dig though as I enjoy your posts and your support from down under.

    Keep it up 🙂

  355. Kangaroo says:

    @ThePnr 12:01am

    So in this case only the two Scottish judges make the ruling the others are just there for window dressing although they can and will ask difficult questions.

    Should be fun.
    PS I agree totally with Robert Peffers. He does know his stuff.
    PPS I worked as Finance Director in a large Law International Law firm, so get the gist of the nuances.

  356. yesindyref2 says:

    Got this from Aileen McHarg’s timeline, she says it might show the direction of the UK’s case. It;s the Weslsh intervention, as NI is already intervening.

    If you right click on a name it tells you what party they belong to, if you had any doubt!

  357. Thepnr says:


    When I said “There will be only two Scottish Judges sitting in the Supreme Court to adjudicate” I didn’t mean only those two as all seven will have a vote.

    In other words once you’re in the Supreme Court it is out of Scotland’s hands and no doubt it was planned to be that way.

  358. Legerwood says:

    Liz g @ 11.51 pm and Thepnr @11.38 pm
    Scots Law and Civil Appeals to UK Supreme Court.
    Despite the many and oft repeated assertions, Mr Blair did not conjure the UK Supreme Court out of thin air. He merely took a pre-existing entity – The Appellate Committee of the House of Lords commonly known as the Law Lords – and rehoused and renamed it adding in, I believe, some of the legal functions of the Privy Council for good measure.

    Scottish judges were added to the Committee from the 19th Century onwards.

    The Law Lords heard appeals in civil cases from all UK jurisdictions including Scotland, and criminal appeals from English and Welsh courts.
    If you want a full explanation and description of the system, it’s development and current form then sections 3.1 – 3.3 of this link should fill in the gaps in your knowledge.

    When it comes to Scots Civil Law and the right to Appeal to the House of Lords, now vested in the UK Supreme Court, that possibility has existed and been practised relatively soon after the Treaty of Union and is not explicitly denied (‘through the silence of the text’ is the term used)by Article XIX.

    See for example, “The Union of 1707 and the Impact on Scots Law” By Dominic Scullion (a postgraduate law student) in The Aberdeen Student Law Review.

    Section 4 of his article states:

    “” As noted above, Article XIX of the Treaty of Union preserved the Court of Session but it was subsequently deemed (through the silence of the text) that Scottish appeals could be heard at the House of Lords at Westminster-hall. This had particular consequences for private law in Scotland. If the loser in a civil action felt that his case was not fairly decided in Edinburgh, he had the right to take the case to London. Before the Appellate Jurisdiction Act 1876, the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary at Westminster were English judges. Therefore when deciding an appeal from Scotland, it was very often English law applied. The cynic could view this as ‘unwanted intrusions imposed by a malign House of Lords’43 but if looked at objectively and dispassionately a different opinion could be formed. It is true to assert that there was an unjust make-up in the House of Lords after the Union and that it was not in Scotland’s best interests. It is also true that this could be, and was, seen as a problem. However, when studied with the knowledge that Scottish Advocates sought opinions from ‘eminent English counsel’44 and that this was common at the outset of legal proceedings and not just before an English appeal was mounted, one sees a willingness on the part of the Scottish Bar to put its clients’ interests ahead of resentment of England. When seen alongside the fact that a large proportion of these cases were commercial cases, and that England, as already noted, was viewed even in Scotland as an authority on the lex mercatoria, one is less sympathetic to cries of ‘unwanted intrusions’. The make-up of the House of Lords was certainly pro-English, but this should not be seen as necessarily anti-Scottish. “”

  359. Robert Peffers says:

    @Thepnr says: 5 July, 2018 at 8:33 pm:

    ” … officials told The Independent the white paper would be “dead on arrival” in Brussels if, as expected, it proposes that the UK remain in the EU’s single market for goods, but not services.”

    You have to wonder what it would take to fix the meaning of the perfectly clear phrase used by the European Officials charged with negotiating, and agreeing or disagreeing, acceptable terms for the United Kingdom exit from the European union.

    The terms acceptable to the EU member states were clearly stated and after they were stated further explained and emphasised by the phrase, “And there can be no Cherry Picking by the United Kingdom”, The terms that were laid down as sacrosanct were the four basic freedoms and the phrase, “and there can be no Cherry Picking”, was only used to emphasis that the United Kingdom had only two choices in the matter – They accepted all four Freedoms or they accepted none of them.

    Just how bloody stupid must they be to fail to understand that, “No Cherry Picking”, means what it has always meant you take what is on offer or you get nothing.

    That dozy lot of numpties at Westminster still cannot understand their own kingdom’s official language.

    ” … They claimed they had repeatedly warned UK negotiators that this option would not work. They said it had been widely discussed among EU ministers and rejected – including, crucially, by the EU’s two most powerful players, France and Germany …

    Laughably there is still the misconception that the EU has, “more powerful”, players than other EU member states but that’s what it is – misconception.

    Every member state, no matter of what size, gets their turn of providing the President of the EU and each country, irrespective of size, while holding the presidency sets the EU parliament’s agenda – most crucial of all every member state has a veto.

    Thus, because of that veto, every member state can stop or allow anything the EU wants to do. Furthermore the EU doesn’t enforce by law the rules of the EU because everything is done by consensus and not by force.

    Could anyone claim the same for the United Kingdom?

  360. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Re this whole constitutional issue. There seems to be a delicate little ballet going on at the moment between a reinvigorated SNP and a very defensive London, and I reckon it’s to demonstrate to external agencies like the UN how the UK is handling the right of the people of Scotland to self-determination.

    Thus the HoC debate (with built-in bear trap) and the SC action(s).

    The ultimate point being our inalienable right to call a new independence referendum when all available avenues have been thoroughly explored and exhausted.

  361. Thepnr says:


    Cleared it up for me, thanks.

  362. Kangaroo says:

    Thepnr @12:30am

    If by vote you mean ” will have a say” then you are correct. They will all have input, but to make a ruling they must be qualified in the legal system over which they adjudicate.
    So there will be significant questions regarding which Law applies and whether the Scotland Act is superior in law to the Continuity Bill etc.. Does the Claim of Right take precedence and therefore make the Scotland Act irrelevant?
    These are the nuances that will have to be sorted by this case.

    No easy answer for the UK as per my previous reference of 11:36pm. The UK has to effectively find a ‘legal’ way to discard the Continuity Bill without allowing the SG to appeal to the ICJ. A Gordian Knot, IMHO they will fail, and therefore the SG will win the case.

    We are deep into the end game.

  363. Liz g says:

    Kangaroo @ 12.17
    I don’t think that it’s only the Two Scottish judges that make the Judgement Kangaroo!
    As I understand it they are there to make sure that any Judgement is “compatible” with Scottish Law, and to advise on what Scottish law actually says…
    But the Judgement itself is arrived at from all seven.
    I’m not even sure if they can deliver a split decision like the American Supreme Court.
    But even if they can (which they likely won’t) Scotland’s Law is out voted just like her MPs.
    That would be the breach of the 1707 Treaty,which I’m pretty sure the Judges will be desperate to avoid!
    But it’s unlikely that ANY Judge who believed in Scottish Independence would get a place in that Court anyway.
    It’s no really a place that Scottish Law belongs as it cannot operate independently there!

  364. yesindyref2 says:

    Interesting (i.e. alarming) article via those timelines, saying what I guess we all know about the Tory Government from Stephen Tierney, highly respected:

    At the same time as Parliament prepares to ‘take back control’ from Brussels, the executive is in fact accruing to itself further control over the legislative process.“.

    A functioning democracy needs the three arms clearly separated – Legislative, executive and judiciary. Something that even iScotland will have to take care of.

  365. annrayner says:

    I know it’s late and I haven’t read all the replies but I’ve just come across an update from the Telegraph where a guy called Peter Foster, their Europe Editor, says Theresa May needs to look at a ‘third way’ to solve the Irish question.
    Maybe we should tell him this solution. They should all be really grateful to us for sorting it out for them.

  366. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Thepnr @ 00:01:

    There will be only two Scottish Judges sitting in the Supreme Court to adjudicate THE UK WITHDRAWAL […] BILL.

    This is where Blair’s strange creation really does improperly cross the line and infringe the Treaty of Union, IMO. I stand to be corrected, but I seem to recall that in the old system, it was only Scottish Law Lords, of which there were many in the HoL and all very conversant with Scots Law theory, norms and practices, who used to adjudicate on Scottish matters.

  367. yesindyref2 says:

    That basically goes back to this from the Act of Union:

    “That the Laws concerning Regulation of Trade, Customs and such Excises to which Scotland is by virtue of this Treaty to be lyable be the same in Scotland from and after the Union as in England and that all other Lawes in use within the Kingdom of Scotland do after the Union and notwithstanding thereof remain in the same force as before (except such as are contrary to or inconsistent with this Treaty) but alterable by the Parliament of Great Britain With this difference betwixt the Laws concerning publick Right, Policy and Civil Government and those which concern private Right That the Laws which concern publick Right Policy and Civil Government may be made the same throughout the whole United Kingdom but that no alteration be made in Laws which concern private Right except for evident utility of the subjects within Scotland”

    Civil law – private right, mmmm.

  368. Liz g says:

    Ledgerwood @ 12.37
    What’s. Lex Mercatoria ?
    And thanks for the explanation…. But they are still dancing on the head of a pin there with keeping Scottish Law separate I think!

  369. Gary says:

    May genuinely has no other option here. She HAS to kick this down the road beyond the life of this parliament.

    The DUP will nix ANY agreement that sees there being a ‘border in the North Channel’ lest they ‘feel’ Irish.

    Now that the architects of The Good Friday Agreement ie Ian Paisley & Martin Mcguiness, are both deceased, none of the present leaders have the same investment in seeing it last. Arlene Foster in particular would rather see barbed wire at the border and the return of full scale terrorism again, than concede any ground on this. I honestly think they WANT the troubles back again!

    So, if May wants to resolve this she will have to wait until the government of the day is not dependent on NI extremists for votes.

    At THAT point the government can reach agreement with the EU, stop being seen to favour DUP and therefore also get Stormont up and running again.

    The recent issue surrounding Abortion in NI was, sadly, nothing to do with Women’s Rights, but merely a warning shor across the bows of the DUP that May’s government CAN and WILL force their will upon them.

    However, you can’t reason with extremists and the DUP’s favourite word is ‘NO!!!’ as in “Ulster Says NO!!!” screamed at the top of Ian Paisley’s lungs.

    At least most of the people of NI have little appetite for further violence, sadly though there’s still enough of them to cause trouble – which I note is rarely, if ever, reported on the news in mainland UK.

    We are in a worst case scenario for ALL sides on this. Literally no one will get what they want. Even the Brexiteers are unhappy, and they WON!

  370. Still Positive says:

    I agree that Ian Blackford did well last night in parliament re the Claim of Right and also on QT tonight where he got a decent amount of air time.

    Just hope the court case lands in our favour.

    If you haven’t already done so check out Tommy Sheppard’s speech at the end of the debate last night – magnificent!

  371. Robert Peffers says:

    @Jockanese Wind Talker says: 5 July, 2018 at 9:50 pm:

    ” … Clear cut breach of The Treaty of Union 1707 then, regarding Scottish Legal System being separate and not able to be overruled by its English equivalent.”

    So now you may begin to understand why I have been preaching the fact that Westminster isn’t what it claims to be. That is it claims to be the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland but is nothing of the sort and it never has been.

    As far as the English and the unionists of both Kingdoms that signed The Treaty of Union are concerned The parliament that began on 1 May 1707 was the continuing Parliament of the Country of England that had now added the country of Scotland to the other two countries the country of England had annexed.

    This was made very, very clear when devolution began as there has never been a country or a Kingdom of England parliament elected since before 30 April 1707. Yet Westminster did not create a parliament of England and not even parliaments for Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland when they instituted devolution.

    They retained the running of the Country of England at Westminster but only created, “Assemblies”, for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. It was Holyrood that fought for and won the right to be the parliament of Scotland but Wales & N.I. are only still assemblies.

    Now the United Kingdom is legally a two partner union of equally sovereign kingdoms – it says so right there on the Treaty Agreement and that means Westminster legally became a new parliament of the two partner kingdom but has never been operated as such.

    In unionist eyes Westminster re-opened on 1 May 1707 as still the parliament of the three country Kingdom of England Parliament to which the English generously allowed a handful of Scottish Parliamentarians to sit 0 but expected them to be, like children of those times – seen but not heard.

    However, the legal position was that it was created as the new two kingdom parliament of Great Britain but with devolution they openly retained Westminster as the parliament of the COUNTRY of England that thus was devolving a scant few of the powers of the COUNTRY of England to their three dominions of Scotland, Wales and N.I.

    Now do not take my word for it – take the Words of the Secretary of State for against Scotland who said this on the national TV network:-

    “The Treaty of Union extinguished the Kingdom of Scotland and renamed the Kingdom of England as the United Kingdom”.

    You do not needs look far for the proof – There has not been an legally elected Kingdom of England Parliament or an elected country of England parliament since before 1 May 1707 and the Westminster parliament runs England as the United Kingdom and finances it as the United Kingdom and to make that situation abundantly clear they introduced EVEL to Westminster to prevent all non English MEMBERS OF THE UNITED KINGDOM PARLIAMENT from interfering or voting on what Westminster decides are English only matters

    There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Westminster operates in practice as the de facto parliament of the country of England and it has assumed itself the master over the three other countries but doesn’t call itself the Parliament of the Country of England it calls itself the parliament of the United Kingdom but as it has relegated the Kingdom of Scotland to being ruled by the de facto parliament of England there cannot exist a United Kingdom without the two kingdoms that agreed to be a united Kingdom.


  372. Valerie says:

    @ yesindyref2

    I’m going to read what Tierney is saying in your link, but tbh, it’s just going to confirm what so many have been saying for the last year. It’s a coup. They are a law unto themselves.

    These arseholes have no regard for the separation of powers, it’s Human Rights nonsense gone mad.

    The Sun is running a story that Gav Williamson is willing to give amnesty to IRA murderers, in exchange for laying off ex British troops being pursued for murder. When told it means letting terrorists escape, and breaching Human Rights – his response?

    “So be it”

    The DUP want to rip up the GFA. These are dangerous times for our Irish friends.

  373. Andrew says:

    Everybody gets what they voted for. What a novel idea.

  374. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    Confused at 12.10

    Much enjoyed that post.

  375. Luigi says:

    Kangaroo says:
    5 July, 2018 at 11:46 pm

    If we have IMHO, the unlikely outcome that the SC denies the Continuity Bill then the SG Appeals to the ICJ.

    Please, please, make it so. 🙂 A scenario where the SC (illegally IMO) imposes its will on the Scottish people is highly contentious. If the british nationalist establishment backs down on this, fair enough, but if not, then it’s time to take the gloves off. Win-Win 🙂

  376. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

    Always been a big fan of your work Sensei Peffers says 6 July, 2018 at 1:43 am (as a lot of fellow Wingers are).

    Have cut and pasted a lot of your stuff and send on to Soft No’s and it always gets good feedback and stiffens the resolve to understand that what is happening is unlawful and fighting for Independence is the only way to make our country the place I want it to and know it can be for my kids to grow up in.

    Legal and Historical fact tend to upset The British Nationalists when used in debate or conversation as they only had “Scotland shite, ‘cos EssEnnPeeBaaad”.

    It’s coming for aw that.


  377. Fred says:

    @ Confused, good post indeed!

    Nicola Sturgeon speaking on Radio Scotland this morning couldn’t be heard for background noise, why is that?

    Katie Hokins & Jakey Rowling, two cheeks of the same imperial arse!

  378. Ken500 says:

    The Laws are not the same throughout Britain. Illegal wars. Breaking Ibternstional Law. Tax evasion. The tax Laws are not enforced. Higher taxes are imposed on different business sectors, The Oil & Gas sector is taxed higher when the price has fallen. Illegal. The Oil & Gas sector in Scotland is taxed at 40% since Jan 2016. 30% Corporation tax. 10% supplementary. = 40%. Westminster unionists have ruined a vital Scottish industry. Not equal or fair. Corporation tax is under 20%. Fracking in England is tax free. Not equal, fair or the same,

    The fishing sector has been mismanaged by Westminster for years. The fishermen have been throwing dead fish back. Ruining the industry. Not equal or fair or the same under the Law.

    Farming in Scotland has been mismanaged by Westminster for years, They have taken CAP payments awarded to Scottish farmers for hardship and distributed them to wealthy farmers in the south. Not equal, fair or the same, Scotland as part of the UK receives the lowest CAP payment in the EU. Not equal, fair or the same.

    The UK Laws have supported tax evasion. The UK tax Laws are not enforced. Not equal, fair or the same, UK Heath and Safety Laws are not enforced in Scotland by Westminster unionists. Killing people. People have died all over the world because of Westminster Unionists illegal actions. They make the Law and break the Law with impunity. There are above the Law and from prosecution. Not equal, fair or the same. The right wing Press owned by tax evading non Doms, Not equal or fair. The UK one of the most unequal and unfair places in the world. Illegal and shameful.

    Scotland loses £Billions by not being treated equally, fairly or the same. The McCrone Report kept hidden for years. £Bilions of Oil revenues went south. Scotland was not treated equally, fairly or the same under UK Law. Scotland was depopulated by Westminster centrist policies not treated, equally fairly or the same.

    Westminster broke UK/EU/International Law with impunity. Not behaving, equally or fairly. Westminster unionists have broken UK Law too many times to even be held to account under the Act of Union.

    Westminster unionist Law is corrupt. People are dying in Scotland and around the world because the Law is not obeyed by Westminster unionists. Breaking the terms of the Act of Union daily, Corrupt beyond belief. Brexit will impoverish Scotland once again. That is not for what people in Scotland voted. Universal Suffrage 1928. Scotland outvoted 10 to 1. That is not democractic, equal fair or the same rights.

    Limited democracy only came to Scotlamd in 2000. Devolution and the Scottish Parliament. These limited rights and freedom are now intended to be eroded by Westminster unionists. Not equal, fair or the same but illegal.

    The rights of people in Scotland are being seceded by unfair, illegal decision of Westminster unionists. People are being sanctioned, starved and killed worldwide. Westmibster has caused the worse migrant crisis in Europe since the 11WW. The Act of Union has been broken, repeatedly by Westminster authorities. Including International Law. Eldctoral Law has been broken with Westminster politicians. They are not treated the same but above the Law,

    The Westminster Gov is a fraud of unique proportion. Canvassing against Scotland, illegally. Breaking every Law in the statute book. Keeping it secret under the Official Secrets Act. The Act of Union is a sham. Scotland is not even consulted. Brexit negotiations etc. Not equal, fair or the same. A Tory farce. Brexit is unaffordable. It will hit Scotland hard and Westminster knows it. Not equal, fair or the same rights but illegal legislation.

    Under the terms. Scotland would have it’s own legal system, Church (education) Protestant with the same monarch and be treated equally and fair forever. That is not the case. No taxation without representation. Iraq, Lockerbie, Dunblane kept secret for 100 years.

    The Act of Union is a fraud and has not been adhered to at all. It has been broken by Westminster unionist politicians so many times. It is a farce.

  379. Abulhaq says:

    Indeed i am a ‘stirrer’. Few respond or have answers to my stirring though. I think that significant.
    Scottish nationalism is a rather ‘amateur’ project compared to the historic nationalisms that created most of the nation states in modern Europe. Even by Catalan standards we do not measure up.
    Note i say ‘we’ for i have Scots ancestry as well as French and Egyptian. Im a cosmopolitan mélange.
    Scotland matters to me, interests me. However i do not go in for wishful thinking i see things as they are. Scottish nationalism is not sophisticated enough, where are the intellectuals? It seems even the core identity element ie culture is understated. That is an aberration. It explains why the movement struggles to capture the ‘hearts and minds’ of Scots in sufficient numbers.
    The SNP is good at its job, its bread and butter trade, but it fails to set the passions alight.

  380. Fireproofjim says:

    Robert Peffers @12.44
    Your post last night on how the EU has stated the U.K. cannot “cherry pick”. and how every EU state,no matter how small, has a a turn at the Presidency, can set the Agenda and has a veto on every matter, was an excellent summary of the situation which so many people are unaware of.
    The EU is run by consensus, not Dictat as the likes of the Daily Mail would have us believe.

  381. Breeks says:

    Confused says:
    6 July, 2018 at 12:10 am
    The Claim of Right thing yesterday was beautiful – a landmine was planted and the tories didn’t notice while they brayed. Blackford is proving himself to be a rhino up-front…..

    …..There are times in life when we need to shake a persons hand – even if we wash it in bleach afterwards. This is -realpolitik- big-boys(-and-girls) games – infants to be locked in the soft play area till the adults have conferred.

    Problem is Confused, is that the British Establishment, plus that conniving worm Farage, have undoubtedly been briefing Trump on the line he should take with us Scottish “separatists”, and given his history with the SNP, I think Trump will already be predisposed towards backing the Union. Trump is petulant and childish, and no diplomat.

    I confess, I was very surprised that his predecessor Obama took the line he did over Scotland. Clearly America has a rather short “Constitutional” memory when it comes to its own emancipation from British rule. Maybe that initial ardour for Freedom is the same selfish self interest which wants to deny others what it demands for itself.

    Putting myself in the Scot Gov’s shoes, Trump is a bit of conundrum, but much, much, worse than Marmite. If you love Trump, that means turning a blind eye towards a lot thoroughly dodgy actions odious beliefs, but simply hating Trump is going to alienate you from a large part of the fickle American population. They know Trump is a bellend, but he’s their bellend, and any attack on Mr Prez is an attack on the US.

    Scotland clearly possesses features which Trump wants to appreciate, but frankly, given his rich list of demands and expectations that he’ll be treated differently by his own set of rules, he is really no different in any respect from the British Colonialist who “cultures” our native environment for the exclusive privilege of slaughtering our wildlife. If Scotland had any “big game” left, Trump strikes me as the Walter Mitty / Quartermain type who would be demanding the right to shoot it.

    Can Scotland afford to “not” embrace Trump? Yes I think it can. The challenge is doing it in a way that doesn’t upset Redneck America.

    Our more immediate priority is setting the foundation for Scotland’s future in Europe. Scotland staying in Europe will to some extent offer the similar benefits to the US as the UK does. Scotland will be an English speaking Nation in Europe which the Americans, especially our Scots diaspora, will still see as the “old country”. In the middle to long term, that will work in Scotland’s favour just as it currently benefits Ireland.

    IF, and that’s a big if, the Americans are persuaded to be miffed about Scottish Independence in the short term, I really don’t see that philosophy lasting very long at all. The simple reality and truth is that America has no axe to grind with Scotland, and on the rare occasions when America stops to think, they will surely appreciate the roll which “rebellious” Scots played in creating their own country, and appreciate too Scotland’s strategic significance in the North Atlantic.

    Trump? He’s just a phase America is going through.

    The challenge for Scotland will be to snub Trump the man, which I myself would like to see, but do it while affording appropriate respect to his Presidential Office. That will be no mean trick considering how thin skinned the Americans can be.

    However, I would much rather Scotland got it wrong and offended Trump rather than getting wrong and offending Europe. A good relationship with the USA is highly desirable, but a good relationship with Europe, and in fact EU membership, is a much more important issue to get right.

  382. Legerwood says:

    Liz g @ 12.59am
    It is commercial law relating to trade etc.

    The Scallion article deals with it. Sorry cannot give a link because it is a off file.

  383. Ken500 says:

    Trump is President of the US. Not elected in Scotland. The US electorate can recede Presidential powers every two years. Too much emphasise on power and spin. The US State governance. 52 States averaging out 6million people. On a Federal system. The D’Hondt system. The loser wins. The administration appointed not elected. Of limited power over State legislation. Balances. State legistature balances out. Local democracy. Some element of financial balance. Financial assistance.

    Trump will only be there in majority power for three years. Or another four with extension?

    If Trump can aid world peace so much the better. No illegal wars. Everyone benefits.

    Trump can’t stand privileged Oxbridge old Etonians. Just does nit get it. Or being lectured by ignorant, incompetent old school marms.

  384. dmw42 says:

    Anent repercussions from the Claim of Right debate, surely the Conservative MP’s representing Scottish constituencies must now resign, or be recalled?

    By their actions, they have affirmed the Claim of Right and thereby acknowledge that their constituents are sovereign. They must therefore further acknowledge that their constituents have temporarily vested that sovereignty in them as their elected representative in the Parliament of Westminster.

    But, and it’s a big but, each Conservative MP representing a Scottish constituency not only voted for the EU Withdrawal Bill – against the sovereign will of those constituents – but also voted to give full powers to the Executive without Parliamentary scrutiny. That is, they have relinquished the temporarily vested sovereignty of their own constituents without approval to do so.

    I will be pointing this out to my own MP and hope that others do the same.

  385. Abulhaq says:

    The best nationalisms ms Rowling are internationalist. They are the small country nationalisms that aim to protect, foster and promote the things that make their cultural communities what they are but make no claims to superiority over those of other communities. Those things do not divide. It is only attitudes such as the Herrenvolkisch outlook of an overweening majority, privileged group which sees division and by implication a threat to its hegemony.
    The UK is modelled on the interests of that particular group. That group has never expressed any interest in or care of the diverse communities within its governance. Historically, it has even attempted to eradicate such diversity. The perspective from on high can make puny dwarves even of giants. Scots and others have a right to challenge that exalted perspective.
    If that disturbes the equilibrium, good and well.
    Sabah al ward! A morning of roses to all!

  386. Sinky says:

    English Scots for Yes should be writing to all those papers who gave publicity to JK Rowling’s non sensible claims.

    Good article ion The National on the subject

    Ian Blackford was brilliant on Question Time last night

  387. Ken500 says:

    10% + of US voters are of Scottish descent. Enough to swing a US presidential election. Many keep close ties to Scotland. There are Congress members of Irish association who canvass for the Irish Republic. Same for Scotland. Great trade opportunities. The 40milion diaspora.

    Mad cow came from Alabama and devastated the UK farming sector. Exports were only restored after 10 years. More food had to be imported. Affected the balance of payments deficit and the debt in the rest of the UK. Scottish farming sector affected by association. Not protected.

  388. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    Abulhaq at 8.42

    That is just about the silliest post I have ever seen on here.

  389. Greannach says:

    Theresa May’s cabinet bonding exercise at Chequers takes place, appropriately, in the Hawtrey Room. Charles would have been pleased.
    Carry On Governing.

  390. Welsh Sion says:

    From my home country (in translation)

    Wales ‘losing opportunity’ to influence Brexit discussions
    5 July 2018

    The ministers of the governments of Wales and Scotland say they have lost out on an opportunity to influence Brexit’s discussions.

    They want to see draft copies of the UK Government white paper on Brexit in discussions in London on Thursday.

    They say that the fact that they did not see the document earlier meant that Cardiff and Edinburgh have not had the “significant” influence that had been promised.

    It comes just a day before Theresa May holds a meeting of his Cabinet to agree what the government wants from the final agreement with the EU.

    The Welsh and Scottish ministers said it was now “impossible for us to make the kind of meaningful contribution – based on evidence – we believe is key”.

    In a joint statement by Finance Secretary Wales Mark Drakeford and Michael Russell of the Scottish Government, they said the UK Government had broken their promise “to try to get an agreement on their viewpoint of the discussion”.

    David Lidington, who chairs the committee on Thursday, said the UK Government will “be positively involved” with the devolved governments.

  391. Welsh Sion says:

    Greannach says:

    6 July, 2018 at 10:14 am

    Theresa May’s cabinet bonding exercise at Chequers takes place, appropriately, in the Hawtrey Room. Charles would have been pleased.

    Carry On Governing.

    That’s the problem, though isn’t it? The nature of their “governing” is a complete farce. Mind you, I think Sid James and Co. would make a more decent fist of running ‘the country’ than this motley crew of chancers, liars and egotists.

    Whilst we should encourage the likes of Nicola Sturgeon and her Government to “Carry on governing” – and the majority of Scots agree – I wouldn’t trust Boris Johnson to empty my bed pan.

    Oooooooh, Matron!

  392. Ken500 says:

    The Swansea Tidal scheme would have produced far more energy at a fraction of the cost of wasteful Hinkley Point. Another disgraceful, wasteful Westminster decision. Damaging the Welsh economy.

  393. Breeks says:

    dmw42 says:
    6 July, 2018 at 9:40 am
    Anent repercussions from the Claim of Right debate, surely the Conservative MP’s representing Scottish constituencies must now resign, or be recalled?

    By their actions, they have affirmed the Claim of Right and thereby acknowledge that their constituents are sovereign…

    Funny dmw42, I watch Stephen Kerr during the debate saying how it was their (MP’s) job to lead us. I remember thinking at the time that it’s actually their job to serve us, not lead us. That is the central point of what Sovereignty actually means, – we, the people, rule. They, the government, serve.

    Another went on, might have been Kerr, about how it was impracticable to govern by referendum. My immediate thoughts on that were equally stark. Because WE rule and they serve, it strikes me we need innumerably more referenda, and a Constitutionally alert Government which actively seeks out the will of the sovereign people. The BritNat narrative to obstruct a second referendum is Constitutionally illiterate, but perhaps contrived to be so deliberately.

    I return to your point however. How can’t BritNat Unionist’s claim to respect Scotland’s Constitutional Sovereignty while arguing that the Sovereign will of the people should be silenced and denied a referendum?? That surely makes their position as our elected delegates untenable.

  394. jfngw says:

    The pro Brexit lobby are aghast at how evil the EU is, they expect to dictate terms to the EU and that there terms should be respected. They see any compromise to gain access as turning the UK into a vassal state.

    What I don’t see is the EU refusing the UK the choice to leave, ever taking them to court to stop them having the choice, excluding them from any input, threatening to change the laws here if we don’t agree, then taking the ability to overturn the legislation of the democratically elected government. If you want a an example of a vassal state, then there is no better one than Scotland.

    Is there any other democratic country that has been governed by a party that has failed to win a majority in it’s country for over 60 years, and has ruled the country for the majority of this time. It’s time for democracy in Scotland.

  395. Proud Cybernat says:

    A Tale of Two Tails.

  396. jfngw says:

    If any one was giving the MSM the benefit of doubt about its impartiality today’s Herald fudge story must surely remove it. If it wasn’t being ridiculed so much I’m pretty sure that the BBC would have picked up on it. Drat another story lost for Sarah Smith.

    Although it is likely to be a drop in the ocean compared to the fudge being prepared at Chequers today.

    Remember it is the Ruth Davidson supporters march in Glasgow tomorrow, I’m sure this display of unionist solidarity will be warming the heart of a famous millionaire, she just hates nationalist bigotry, Scottish ones anyway.

  397. Breeks says:

    Ok, might be a long shot, but sorely tempted to ask the Bookie for odds on the Russians getting caught bugging today’s meeting at Chequers…

  398. Thepnr says:

    @Proud Cybernat

    I liked that, spot on. 🙂

  399. Thepnr says:

    @Proud Cybernat

    I liked that, spot on. 🙂

    Lots of very good posts on this thread, great read.

  400. Robert Peffers says:

    I see that our wonderful SNP/SG has announced it has a plan in place to deal with matters if/when the monster is identified.

    Nah! Not the plan about what to do if Nessie is found. I’m talking about when/if the Westminster originator of the Westminster/Tory Brexit Mantra.

  401. yesindyref2 says:

    @Abulhaq “Scottish nationalism is not sophisticated enough, where are the intellectuals?

    Same goes for the rest of the UK, it seems the day of the intellectual has gone. So any perceived weakness in Scotland going against say England, is the same on the other side, for the rUK going against Scotland. Basically speaking we’re all thick as mince, having to work too hard to make a living.

  402. Abulhaq says:

    @Dave McEwan Hill
    Challenge it, simply calling it silly is not an argument. I do not indulge in mutual back scratching. Too many posts on nationalist sites are of the mutual admiration type. The direction, character, form and content of Scottish nationalism is open for discussion, is it not? If not, it ought to be as it is failing to win over the many and without that there can be no question of independence.

  403. dmw42 says:

    Breeks @10:20am – “That surely makes their position as our elected delegates untenable”.

    I could not agree more.

  404. Kangaroo says:

    Supreme Court contd..

    I see that the National and the Herald have articles which suggest that the UKGov are exploring a ‘Nuclear option’ if they lose the ‘Continuity Bill’ case.

    Will they hold em or will they fold em?

  405. Robert Louis says:

    The people of Scotland looked from Esther McVey to JK Rowling and from JK Rowling back to Esther McVey again, and already they couldn’t tell the difference.

  406. Proud Cybernat says:

    BREAKING from Pravda Quay
    with Union Jackie Kim Ono:

  407. galamcennalath says:

    Brexit. Yet again, though it’s billed as the final time, TMay and chums are going to thrash out what the want from the EU.

    And as sure as day follows night, the EU is going to come back again and say, “FFS, when we say no cherry picking we mean it!”

    So what are the Tories about?

    Do they believe in the UK entitlement and exceptionalism to the extent that the EU will relent and allow cherry picking? Maybe they believe by delaying until the last minute the EU will roll over and accept UK superiority in all matters.

    Or, is it just a charade to crash out with no deal and blame the EU for intransigence?

  408. Hamish100 says:


    Yir well up yir backside this morning. Is the sun still shining there?

  409. Luigi says:

    Abulhaq says:

    6 July, 2018 at 8:42 am

    Few respond or have answers to my stirring though. I think that significant.

    Nope, this may bruise your ego, but concern trolls are…. well, usually ignored. I only inform you this out of kindness.

    Don’t waste your time, you’re not very good at it. 🙂

  410. Abulhaq says:

    UK is the happy home of anti-intellectualism, compared to continental Europe that is. We might strive to be different from the UK.

  411. yesindyref2 says:

    Curiously it was abiesalba in the Grun days (heed’s slovenian girl-friend),, who pointed out the importance of that gap between the three arms of a state. Her take (I think) was the gap was needed for Independence. That’s not right, and that and similar caused her to get attacked as a flag troll. After all, in the likes of China, perhaps Russia, North Korea, it is at times one person exercises all three.

    The UK is on the way to that with May, but so far there doesn’t seem to be any interference in the judiciary so it has a way to go for total fascism. In the US on the other hand, well, judges seem to be being sacked and replaced, not a pretty sight.

    But both the UK and US are independent states, her argument relates to the type of independent state we want.

    So far the SNP, no matter how hard a critic some of us are, don’t show real signs of wanting to suppress the gaps. Both Salmond and MacAskil didn’t like what the UKSC did, but that was on the basis of preserving Scots Law. Ironically both were criticised at one time by the Legal establishment for the opposite – compromising Scots Law. It’s a strange world.

    The SNP run consulations before legislation. They publish articles about what they’ve achieved in Government, perhaps they should also put together a piece on how public consultations have changed and improved intended legislation, to show how they too respect the difference between Legislative and Executive.

    It’s less important with Devolution than it will be for Independence, when Holyrood will unmistakably be the top chamber of Scotland. That too, of course, is behind Sturgeon pushing the Claim of Right in 2012, referred to carefully by Blackford the other night. I guess it’s because of that I have no fear of “fascism” creeping in while she’s at the helm, she clearly believes every single word of that Claim of Right with a passion.

    But it’s also a strong argument for YES which isn’t being used. Yet.

  412. Socrates MacSporran says:

    Kudos to Greannach for pointing out the Hawtrey Room as the stage for one of today’s meetings.

    In ‘Don’t Lose Your Head’ or “Carry on Chopping” as it was also known, Charles Hawtrey played the Maquis de Sade, nd one of his lines was to invite one of the girls to: “Come into my nook.”

    She refused, giving Hawtrey/de Sade the line: “You’re not the nookie type then.”

    The trouble with this Cabinet as too-many, particularly Boris are the nookie type – and its the UK they are seeking to fuck.

  413. Robert Peffers says:

    Seriously now I’m surprised to learn the growths in jobs in the financial sector in Scotland have outstripped the growth in financial sector jobs in London over the past year.

    The Industry-led body, “TheCityUK”, said the number of jobs north of the border grew 6.6% to 161,000 while those in London only rose 5%.

    Financial and related jobs in Scotland now accounts, (pun intended), for 8.9% for the (cough!),”Scottish Economy”.

    This is stated, by the BBC, as, “the largest area contribution outside London”. Thing is, the tax revenues earned by those, “Scottish Area”, workers goes directly to Her Majesty’s Treasury in London where it becomes, according to Englanders, “English taxpayers money”, that is partly used by Westminster to subsidise the lazy, workshy, alcoholic people of Scotland.

    You have to laugh – because if you don’t – you would have to cry.

    My private thoughts are that this is a sign the financial sector in the City Of London are moving jobs out of London while getting ready for BRUKEXIT.

  414. Abulhaq says:

    @Hamish & Luigi
    Go on dreaming the dream guys, for at the moment, dreams are all that’s going for Scottish independence. The solid fatberg of unionism isn’t shifting. Am i right or am i right?
    Have a good day!

  415. Luigi says:


    6 July, 2018 at 11:25 am

    The dream shall never die. 🙂

  416. Ian Brotherhood says:

    @Abulhaq –

    The civic nationalism which has made the SNP so popular and kept them in office for a decade may not get your pulse racing but it’s brought us to the verge of independence all the same.

    Some of us here have been advocating civil disobedience for years but there seems to be little appetite for it. Yet. Like it or not, that’s ‘democracy’. Frustration has been growing for decades but that doesn’t give hotheads carte blanche to start blowing things up.

    As observed by Alex Salmond, Peter Bell and many others, Scottish indy activism simply doesn’t ‘do’ the violence associated with other movements and that’s why our gatherings (e.g. the ongoing AUOB marches) feature large numbers of women, children and dogs and have been entirely trouble-free. Perhaps, in time, there will be a Truth and Reconciliation process to help heal the wounds but there’s no need for thousands of deaths and immeasurable trauma as a precursor.

    In short – if you’re looking for a rabble to rouse then you’ve come to the wrong place.

  417. yesindyref2 says:

    Your problem is such as this: “Go on dreaming the dream guys, for at the moment, dreams are all that’s going for Scottish independence. The solid fatberg of unionism isn’t shifting. Am i right or am i right?

    which is negative. On a site like Wings which is very heavily pro-Indy, and where we believe we WILL be Independent, it goes down like a lead ballon in swampy quicksand. Your comments on the other hand, like the one about JKR are interesting and “neutral”. It’s a case of picking the argument to suit the audience.

    Can Scotland get ourselves a solid intellectual base? Yes we can, but as May would say “Now is not the time”. Now is the time of polarisation for most of those active on forums, social media, you’re either for it or agin it. It’s polarised, and that’s not where debates, totally open discussions can take place. After a YES vote, then yes.

    But after a YES vote, the sky really is the limit on intellectual debate, because YES makes the realisation of any intellectual aims actually possible, whereas currently we can waffle all we like about many matters, only to find that Holyrood is powerless to do anything about it – except talk.

  418. Macart says:

    @Ian B

    The closest I come to insurrection, is when I (politely) ask Mrs M (light of my life) if I can go out for a tincture. 🙂

  419. orri says:

    There are dangers in discussing an “enemies” possible moves but I suspect that Westminster’s only move is to insist, despite being forced to reluctantly admit that scots are sovereign, that they are the sole channel through which we express that sovereignty.

    In other words as it’s now apparent that any sovereignty Westminster holds over Scotland evolves from the people and for their purposes is pooled rather than distinct and then devolves to Holyrood. That’s kind of like a tenant sub-letting with the landlords permission having the option to cease doing so.

    Our argument must now be twofold.

    First that the Acts of Union mat be read in terms of Westminster being a joint session of the previous parliaments. That the Scottish Grand Committee exists is a two edged sword given it may be seen as the continuation of the Scottish Parliament within the UK but that implies that they rather than Holyrood are defacto the treaty signatory. At present there’s an SNP majority there so all it takes is for it to resit for some more mischief. Such as the making or overturning a Scotland only Bill. has more details. IF Westminster insists on it’s right to legislate for Scotland on currently devolved matters then it must either abolish that committee and lose any pretense at being sole successor to the original Scottish Parliament or it must do so through that committee.

    The second element is discipline. Always talk about transference of powers and never about devolution. The powers in the EU parliament wielded by our current MEPs were transferred their by authority of the Scottish people. Those at Holyrood also transferred by our authority via our duly elected representatives.

  420. yesindyref2 says:

    Risky, but one of these things we have to do sometimes. For me it would be suggesting changing the channel when X Factor or BGT is on, or Dancing on Ice. My life just wouldn’t be worth living! Anyways, time to see what The National has to offer. Maybe a quick look at the H as well …

  421. Robert Louis says:

    Legerwood at 1237am,

    Of course the pretendy UK ‘supreme’ court in England is a pseudo derivative of the unelected law lords, but that misses the point. By naming it the UK supreme court, Tony Blair created a new entity which did NOT exist previously. In addition, it created a false gravitas to the body, which again, in the past it did not have. It was not merely a continuation of the law lords in a different building, as you suggest.

    Originally, all cases in Scots law (civil and criminal) were considered by the Court of session in Edinburgh, Scotland, but Westminster UNILATERALLY took it upon itself to start hearing civil cases a short while after the union treaty – wholly and completely in breach of the treaty of union.

    The fact that law lords in London were ruling on Scots law civil cases, was an anachronism, and should not have been allowed to happen in the first place. By creating the pretendy UK ‘supreme’ court in England, Tony Blair gave it a veneer of credibility regarding Scotland which it should not have.

    The supreme court in Scots law and Scotland is the court of session in Edinburgh, it is older (founded in 1532 by King James V), has true credibility and is actually located in the country upon whose laws it deems to judge. It is Scottish law lords who preside – unlike the pretendy UK ‘supreme’ court in England.

    I refer you to article 19 of the act of union with England.

  422. Macart says:


    Live life on the edge. That’s me all over. (cough)

  423. K1 says:

    We’re ‘intellectual’ sufficiently to have voted overwhelmingly to remain in the EU…not because we all agree that the EU is by any means perfect…but for many we did know it would provoke the constitutional crisis we are now witnessing, should England vote leave (how prescient were we) and that we would gain the opportunity to once again vote in indyref2 much sooner than it seemed likely prior to EU vote.

    Many of us encouraged our relatives to vote leave down south too…for same reasoning. (Y’know that bit wherein the intellect is engaged in assessing a given situation, arrives at a given position and then follows through with action based upon that reasoning?)

    There are many routes to self determination…as was noted and praised during our last indyref…ours was one of the most peaceful and non violent attempts from any nation.

    This we intend for indyref2 also.

    We’re the most sophisticated electorate on these islands…and anyone spouting such blatant empty headed ‘intellectually challenged’ reasoning such as yours can get in the fucking sea 🙂

  424. orri says:

    Last I heard the UK Supreme Court has yet to sit in any court or other legal venue in Scotland. It has sat in Scotland but not been allowed any of the trappings it would like. Basically it’s kind of a fuck you and sod off.

  425. yesindyref2 says:

    Yeah, pretty powerful article from LPW before he goes off wasting his time on beaches and that.

    The last part really needs to get “out there”, but more than that, both Labour and the LibDems – the parties of Devolution – need to pay attention and consider their positions on Indy, which is the only defence against more powergrabbing, and more powergrabing, and more, right to the end of Devolution as we know it.

  426. Meg merrilees says:

    Welsh Scion @10.26 am

    So does Theresa enter stage right saying ‘Infamy, infamy, they’ve all got it in for me” ?

  427. Sarah says:

    @Macart and yesindyref – so your role model is as in Michael Marra’s song “Hermless”?

    I’m not sure I believe it….

  428. Meg merrilees says:


    My worry is that WM will argue that the NO vote in Sept. 2014 was a valid decision of the Sovereign Scottish People to stay in the UK thereby transferring that Claim of Right to WM.

    A big claim to make and hopefully totally invalid.
    Is this why they are seeming to roll over and let the debate remain unchallenged yesterday?

    Of course that NO vote in 2014 only agreed that we should stay a member of the UK… not an equal partner ( so maybe this is where Fluffy gets that idea from) but it would not change the over-riding proviso made by Clause 19 of the original Union treaty for Scots law to remain absolute, would it?

  429. yesindyref2 says:

    My excuse is that my wife is from and of a country that is free, that cast off the shackles and chains of Westminster nearly 100 years ago, whereas on the other hand I’m part of the collective under a Westminster regime that seems to actually hate my country. not just assimilate it like the Borg. That inevitably means she’s far superior to me in every way.

    But Resistance is NOT futile. Where’s Picard when you need him? Is Sturgeon really Janeway?

  430. yesindyref2 says:

    @Meg merrilees: “My worry is that WM will argue that the NO vote in Sept. 2014 was a valid decision of the Sovereign Scottish People to stay in the UK thereby transferring that Claim of Right to WM.

    Can’t do that, the Claim of Right was actually clearly exercised by the People of Scotland in 2014, and the form of Government they decided on was the status quo with more pwoers for a devolved Holyrood. But that choice is eternal unless specifically and voluntarily removed, not just to be exercised once and only once.

    The only way the Claim of Right could be negated is by a specific majority of the people of Scotland.

  431. K1 says:

    Surely we temporarily transfer our sovereignty to our as our MP’s as our representatives in WM and not to the parliament itself? WM can’t claim our sovereignty…the CoR is the recognition of our right to self determination if we so wish, so how can WM be the decider?

    Or is ma thickness blinding me tae some obvious thing that I’m missing…halp Mr Peffers! 🙂

  432. Meg merrilees says:

    Indy ref 2


    But do they know that!

  433. Welsh Sion says:

    Meg merrilees says:

    6 July, 2018 at 12:31 pm

    Welsh Scion @10.26 am

    So does Theresa enter stage right saying ‘Infamy, infamy, they’ve all got it in for me” ?

    ‘Ere! Stop messing about (with my name)!

    (“Scion” does kinda fit in another sense, though …)

    Have a great weekend, Wingers! 😀

  434. yesindyref2 says:

    Righty, LPW’s article, key point:

    35 Power to intervene in certain cases.

    (1)If a Bill contains provisions—

    (a)which the Secretary of State has reasonable grounds to believe would be incompatible with any international obligations or the interests of defence or national security, or

    (b)which make modifications of the law as it applies to reserved matters and which the Secretary of State has reasonable grounds to believe would have an adverse effect on the operation of the law as it applies to reserved matters,

    he may make an order prohibiting the Presiding Officer from submitting the Bill for Royal Assent.

    That’s “international obligations such as trade agreements which become treaties which are international obligations.

    Such as force-feeding us rubber chickens and hormonised beef, selling off our NHS, Railways, Ferries, Toll roads, garbage disposal, prison services, water, anything and everything currently devolved – if it suits Westminster to flog it off to the Yanks.

  435. yesindyref2 says:

    Further to the above post, it seems to me that we are going to be in a position where it is Scotland Act v Claim of Right. And perhaps, perhaps, that starts on the 24th July at the UKSC – but doesn’t end there.

    Far simpler of course to call Indy Ref 2, get a 60%+ YES vote, and get the hell out of Dodge, shaking the dust off our sandals. No socks please, we’re the Scottish People.

  436. orri says:

    As it’s short here’s the article,

    The Scottish Grand Committee is a committee of the House of Commons. It is not a select committee (see Scottish Affairs Select Committee), but rather a grand committee composed of all 59 Scottish MPs (72 MPs prior to 2005).

    It has its origins in a Scottish standing committee set up in 1907 to consider the Committee Stage of exclusively Scottish bills. Its remit was widened in 1948 to include consideration of bills “in relation to their principle” and up to six days of Estimates debates. In 1957 up to two days of Matter Day debates was added and Committee Stage consideration was transferred to a small Scottish Standing Committee.

    In July 1994, a number of new procedures were introduced in the SGC which provided for:

    questions to be asked of the Secretary of State
    statements by, and subsequent questions to, any Minister of the Crown
    substantive debates on the adjournment
    half-hour adjournment debates at the end of each sitting (chosen by ballot)
    the power to meet in Scotland
    The Scottish Grand Committee’s function is to oversee UK Parliament bills specific to Scotland. However, since the creation of the Scottish Parliament none has been presented, and consequently the Committee has met only occasionally since. It is not a defunct body, however, as a Scotland-only UK Parliament bill is still theoretically possible. The Committee last met in November 2003.[1][2] For several years it met at the Old Royal High School in Edinburgh. The retention of the Scottish Grand Committee was agreed by the House of Commons on 21 October 1999.[3]

    Should be taken into consideration with the claim in the Scotland Act intended to do away with consent. What you’re meant to presume is that Westminster has an unlimited power to legislate for Scotland.

    However EVEL is in effect a convening of an English and/or Welsh Grand Committee during the passage of a bill in much the same way as the above.

    Westminster therefore admits that when it comes to Scot’s Law they are limited by their own rules. In this case to repeal or amend the continuity bill they must either hide it in UK wide legislation which is what they’ve already tried to do or put it through the Scottish Grand Committee who will have exactly the same right of veto that EVEL is based on.

    That is unless they insist that up till now the functions of the SGC have been taken up by Holyrood. In which case Holyrood assumes the oversight function or a joint session of Holyrood and Scotland’s MPs does.

    Westminster will have it’s procedures followed no matter how inconvenient that may be to them.

  437. Sarah says:

    @yesindyref2 at 12.43: thank you for the excuse to refresh my Startrek education! How simple their problems seem compared with ours…

    I’ve been worried in the past that SNP, MPs and MSPs and Scottish Government weren’t aware of the impatient feeling in the Yes country for a range of different approaches to Scotland’s status to be tried, and for a referendum sooner than later.

    However, judging by recent events, I now think they knew what they were doing all along. Looking at Ian Blackford’s Facebook he and his staff certainly get plenty of input from the public.

  438. call me dave says:

    “No socks please, we’re the Scottish People”.

    Exactly! Dress sense was always ours. But better maybe losing a loose sandal in the Tweed on the way across is more stylish. 🙂

  439. yesindyref2 says:

    Well, the SNP are either stumbling along sometimes making a good move as just a reaction, or working to a plan all along. I sometimes wonder if, while Indy Ref 1 was plan A, there was also a Plan B from way before that, and it’s continuing and accelerating.

  440. yesindyref2 says:

    One sandal on my foot
    But I keep walking along
    The Unionists, are chasing me
    Insults fly
    Right on by
    But I’m singing a happy song


  441. Macart says:


    Much like last indyref’s currency options there was (I strongly suspect) constitutional plans B,C,D and E.

  442. Foonurt says:

    Ah wee bit, aff-toapic.

    Yoan basturts yaizin ah 1351 Scoattish treason law, tae sen thoan Catalan professor, ower tae thae Spanish thugs.

    David II, wiz held fur ransome. Efturr bin woundit, ett Neville’s Croass, 1346. Hid tae peiy, ah hunnurr thoosin merks, [bae ten years] tae git oot, 1357.

    Whaw wiz thurr Scoattish treason law-makar[s] oan 1351?

  443. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Greannach @ 10:14,

    Nicely observed. It gave me a good chuckle.

    (Well, in times like these, if you don’t laugh, you would cry.)

    jfngw @ 10:33,

    The best exposure I have yet read of the fake depiction of the EU as bossy superstate, and the reality of life as we know it in the UK.

    Every Yes-Leaver should read, if they still have any doubt of where their real loyalty should lie come the next indyref.

  444. Foonurt says:

    Yull no bae lang thurr no, ya basturt Sutherland. Loardin ower, yurr yeows.

    Furst tae bae tappult. Awe yoan ithurr wans, tae thae jougs.

    Fae Loudoun Hull, wull mairch tae Scoattish Independence.

  445. meg merrilees says:

    Welsh Sion

    Apologies for calling you Scion – I’m in the middle of doing summer apple tree pruning

  446. Welsh Sion says:

    Apologies, accepted, Meg Merilees @ 5:47 – Not too much of a problem.(See “Off Topic” on how to say my name).

  447. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Foonurt @ 16:52,

    Aye min, ther’ll be a fair few Sutherlands, baith the anes fa bade at hame and the ithers fa endit up strewn across the warld, that’ll be cheerin that braw day.

  448. Kangaroo says:

    Border posts between Scotland and England may be problematic as the Treaty of Union requires that all Excises and Duties are the same in both Scotland and England. Thus if border posts were introduced with differential tariffs then it would breach the Treaty. Back to square one I think.

    So England can get its Brexit if
    a) Scotland is independent, and
    b) NI is given special status or reunites with the Republic.

    I don’t think there is any other way.

  449. Bryon Adamson says:

    An elegant and deceptively simple solution, and one which should be forwarded to the SG to formally suggest to May, with all haste. Well, as much haste as necessary since Theresa’s busy re-organising her larder to make room for cans of baked beans or caviar or whatever it is that types like her and Phil buy with their salaries.

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