The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


The history of the Scottish Parliament

Posted on May 25, 2016 by

There’s not much happening today, but this caught our eye:

scoparl

As an at-a-glance guide to the evolution of Scottish politics it’s pretty stark.

Print Friendly

    1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. 25 05 16 14:55

      The history of the Scottish Parliament | speymouth

    427 to “The history of the Scottish Parliament”

    1. blackhack says:

      Might be a bit stark, but not for the SNP…:)

    2. Susan S says:

      Wonder how long it’ll be before the UKIP graph starts to move..?

    3. defo says:

      The Ruthie effect really jumps out.I despair at how easily influenced people are.
      That’s why the Southern Tories ran a horse and cart through the election spending rules.
      Ukip support holding up nicely though 😉

      WTF happened to the holiday Mr Campbell ?

    4. AhuraMazda says:

      “The Ruthie effect” = the courting sectarian bigots effect

    5. looks like the prawn sandwich Blairites of the Labour party in Scotland have returned to their roots in the Tory party,

      doctors,teachers,media,charity,all the ones that pretended to have a socialist soul so they could get on in Scotland,

      the same hand knitted brigade that you see and hear in far to many prominent jobs in Scotland,

      time we had a clear out.

    6. K. A. Mylchreest says:

      Ruthie Effect? Or simply the collapse of Labour and LibDem credibility after the Indy Ref? The non-Nat and New ´Labour´ vote had to go somewhere, presumably to the least worst option?

      I would however be interested to know why (fortunately!) UKIP hasn´t been able to take advantage of the situation.

    7. defo says:

      Scot F

      “time we had a clear out.”

      Can I suggest a fool proof test for ‘suspect’ Scots ?
      Wire them up to an ECG, and play them the video of Gemmills goal circa 1978.
      Where would we concentrate them though
      :-0

    8. Heather McLean says:

      “Scot Finlayson says:
      looks like the prawn sandwich Blairites of the Labour party in Scotland have returned to their roots in the Tory party,

      doctors,teachers,media,charity,all the ones that pretended to have a socialist soul so they could get on in Scotland,”

      I take exception to your generalisation! I’m a teacher and have NEVER voted Tory in my life!

    9. Luigi says:

      The only graph you could almost draw a straight line through is Labour’s downward trend. Interesting. I don’t think Donald Dewar and Co had this in mind back in 1997 when they designed the Scottish parliamentary system (that’s the one they thought would keep a Labour-LibDem coalition in power indefinitely).

      The blue tories have definitely pinched quite a few of Labour’s Blairite/yoon voters. I do think that a number of SNP politicians are making a mistake in downplaying Ruthie’s success: there is/was a definite swing to the tories and there was no sign it had peaked on May 5th. Quite a few more rural SNP constituencies could be at risk. Councils too – their recent success may encourage a few closet tories (i.e. independents) to come out of hiding and campaign as true blue councillors. Some rural losses to the blue tories may be suffered next May, but if the red tory can be effectively removed from the equation, this may be a price wrth paying. Who knows? A week is a long time….:)

    10. Cuilean says:

      ‘There’s not much happening today…’

      Well, it looks like the ‘Bella Caledonia’ site is dying, as its fundraiser is sluggish to say the least.

      I feel ambivalent to it for some election articles but, then again, I also feel ambivalent to ‘the National’ newspaper, given it’s ultimate owner, but I keep buying it.

      Should ‘Bella’ die? Does she deserve to be put to sleep, out to grass, ignored, shunned?

      Her death would please Spanner’s Yoon Brigade.

      Is Bella already dead? Do we sit and watch her die?

      Discuss. (You have 19 days to answer).

    11. Davy says:

      For those of you speaking about how ukip is not moving, may I remind you of their leader “David Coburn”.

      Enough said.

    12. Artyhetty says:

      Interesting, given the constant SNP baaaad from 100% of the UKok media.

      If people were more aware of what devolution is, what it entails, and how it works, would this look a bit different. There are people who just don’t take time to inform themselves about how the whole system is managed. We even had a petition from Care2 last week, demanding that the ‘Scottish MOD’ stop bombing Pilot whales to bits! When I told them there was no such thing as a Scottish MOD, they just shrugged.
      It’s been amended now, but I had to go through several channels to get the message to the person who made the petition, would be interesting to know which side of the border they were from though.

      The comments regards the Scotgov by people signing this totally misleading petition, were a disgrace, totally ignorant. It is probably more common than we think, both sides of the border, regards what devolution actually is.

      I hear Gideon is talking down to Scotland today, the britnat establishment have nothing but contempt for Scotland and it’s even worse since our SNP MPs were voted in to represent the people of Scotland in westmonster. Don’t worry gideon, the boot will be on the other foot sooner than you think.

    13. @defo

      `send them all to Morningside and The Grange,whose MP is the epitome of the Blairite prawn sandwich itself Ian Murray.

    14. defo says:

      Scot F

      Isn’t Murray a prawn short of a sandwich ?

    15. Dan Huil says:

      Stark is good. It’s a straight contest now between pro-indy and anti-indy parties. It won’t stop until Scotland regains its independence.

    16. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “WTF happened to the holiday Mr Campbell ?”

      Posting one pic is hardly overworking. But the holiday starts when this bloody cold goes away 🙂

    17. Long may Labour’s decline continue.

      OT I see Kezia Dudgale is taking over the finance brief at Holyrood from Jackie Baillie.

    18. galamcennalath says:

      The important issue is … is this a permanent shift from Unionism to Pro-Indy?

      Clearly Unionists hold out hope that the SNP (and Green) support will diminish and Scotland will go back to UKOK ‘business as usual’.

      We hope it all represents progress towards something much better with the slow death of Unionism!

      Combined Unionism is well down, and the has been some shuffling among themselves.

      I’m reckon the Tory ‘blip’ contains a short term effect of pretending not to be Tories, plus perhaps a longer term effect of a pro Union swing from Labour. However both require that the Tory Scotland branch appear blameless for WM actions, which seem highly unlikely.

      If the Union is represented in Scotland by the Tories, this is no bad thing.

      Labour being seen as a more acceptable face of the Union cost us IndyRef1.

    19. allen ralston says:

      OK slightly OT “But What ruthy said ” by Steve Harley & Cockney Rebel going thru my head now ,mostly the line “what ruthy said must have gone to your head like they say” so its you tube bound for me [ and now any chance of me being productive has gone scant tho it was in the first place ] ,so if im reading the graphs correctly in a near unchanged unionist party vote v slight independent parties vote increase if im stating the obvious here be kind my eyesight re graphs is not good ,anyway what is the strategy going forward to increase the gap from unionist leaning voters because any ive talked to are living in the past ,ah man now Jethro Tull aswell

    20. Capella says:

      It’s good news that UKIP are invisible in those stats. They were polling 13% in Wales.
      https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/05/06/election-polls-new-methods-working/

      Still no news of the election day poll asking people how they voted last time and had they switched. Would be interesting to find the answer. I think it was YouGov but there’s nothing on the site.

    21. K1 says:

      I think someone said, on the previous thread that we have to have our indyref2 before the end of this parliament, this graph certainly backs that assertion up.

      The SNP whilst at the moment holding ground, under the constant barrage of SNPbad and ‘events’ their vote share will diminish over time. The figures are still increasing for the Yes side, but the more air cover the Unionist get and the longer we move away from the indyref1, the more time they have to undermine the SNP as they associate Independence with the party and not the people.

      We understand that they are the ‘vehicle’. If the vehicle is damaged, which is what the Unionist’s are aiming for they think they ‘damage’ the principle and the movement likewise.

      The movement itself has to regroup at the grass roots level. It is bigger than the ‘party’. These bastards are in it for the long haul and now so must we be.

    22. bobajock says:

      From the info there, it clearly looks like the Loon Yoons dumped Labour and LibLiar for Tory heaven.

      The ‘sudden’ drop for Labour, matched with the continued decline for Liar is very much the gain made by Tory.

      As we all know, the Yoons are retreating into the Tory fold, fully aware that they are siding with those who don’t mind killing disabled people via policies.

    23. Greg Drysdale says:

      Labour? That much?!

    24. Greannach says:

      It is interesting to see you Labour and Liberal’s drop coincides with Conservative’s rise. When you’re a Tory/Unionist it doesn’t matter much which flavour you back, but in times of stress it makes sense to support the most obvious and extreme variety. I’m not sure if there is such a thing as a Ruth Davidson factor or if it’s just that the Unionists are retreating back into the laager.

    25. heedtracker says:

      Either its Scotland’s road to getting away from being run by our neighbours or, its the Ruth MacThatcher rise to UKOK power and glory.

    26. David Wardrope says:

      @ Rev. Stuart Campbell @ 2:21pm

      Sir, given the amount of time you’ve had that cold, I believe it now can be called man-flu

    27. galamcennalath says:

      bobajock says:

      “As we all know, the Yoons are retreating into the Tory fold, fully aware that they are siding with those who don’t mind killing disabled people via policies.”

      I hope you are wrong, but I fear you are right!

      With my positive outlook and faith in humanity, I hope the increase in Tory backing is not an endorsement of their WM policies.

      However, we know there is a 25ish% hardcore BritNat faction who may be circling wagons round the Tory banner. For me, these people are a mix of blood and soil nationalists plus ‘I’m all right’, so don’t change anything Union Jackists. So I fear, it is indeed possible that killing disabled people is acceptable collateral damage in the name of their Union.

    28. Lochside says:

      Has any study been done on the RUK influence on the Unionist vote? In the last 5 years, our population has grown by around 4%…mainly from south of our border.We have continued to lose the young and skilled indigenous Scots abroad and to England.

      I’m asking this question because where large concentrations of this cohort, which is generally well off and professional,are in places with high Tory and anti-snp voting patterns.

      When poseurs like Torrance use expressions like ‘Ulsterisation’ I don’t worry particularly about the sectarian meaning,but more about the economic ‘planting’of colonial minded populations ever since Thatcher..whereby excessive house prices have enabled ‘white flight’from England,not only to Scotland, and reverse discriminatory recruitment in many sectors of recruitment resulting in Scots losing out in their own country.

      Would Ruth Davidson have been elected via the constituency vote anywhere but rich settled areas such as Edinburgh city centre or the tracts of Scottish borders,Invernesshire and increasingly the potential breakaway pro UK Northern isles?

      I am not denying the large smug Scottish middle class NO majority along with the bitter lumped proletarian loyalists,but the RUK lot are better organised and run much of civic Scotland outside of the local councils.

    29. Greg Beekman says:

      Rev:

      Do the graphs show Tories at Max got more than SNP at Min?

    30. Jim Graham says:

      I thought SNP share of the vote was highest ever, but on bar chart, 2011 looks lower than 2016?

    31. Greg Beekman says:

      Would be a shame if Unionists can claim Ruth got more votes for the Tories in 2016 than the SNP got in 2003.

    32. Jim Graham says:

      Re previous reply from me, replace ‘lower than’ with ‘higher than’. Oops!

    33. heedtracker says:

      If youre the head UKOK vote Slab propaganda in newsrooms from Pacific Quay to P&J, what do you take from you efforts to get SLab back in the game? Ruth did well, SLab are clearly on the slide, what next for all the SLabour crew at BBC Scotland?

      5 more years of hard core unionists stuff like ofcourse

      Scott Arthur Retweeted
      Orkney Conservatives ?@Orkneytories 6h6 hours ago
      SNP members “care more about selfies with Nicola than policy”, according to a damning claim from someone senior…

    34. schrodingers cat says:

      ditto jim graham

      is this constituency votes or a combination of con and list?

      actual voting numbers would give a more acurate representation of the state of play, including turnout

      labour falling off a cliff
      tories flatlining
      snp voters increasing then dropping due to apathy in 2016

      i hope the bbc continues to bum up ruthie, maybe her voters will think it is in the bag and not show up for the 2017 la.

      by the same logic, maybe 2016 was a wake up call for snp voters for 2017

      why not run a social media campaign based on lies about how the tories are gonna steam roller all of the councils next year and frack scotland?

      it works both ways

    35. crazycat says:

      @ Jim Graham

      They got the highest ever number of votes; as a percentage it was slightly down.

    36. Petra says:

      O/T

      @ Ruby says at 10:47 am …. ”New Act of Union”

      Well Ruby I’ve been wading through this (and the other 2 relative links you posted) for ages now and can see that it’ll take days to cover it all. I started with written and oral statements made by John Curtice, Annabel Goldie / Maggie Chapman, Fiona Hyslop and Tomkins and by God it would make you laugh. The whole process is being carried out by the Lords in an attempt to ascertain how the Scots ‘tick’, figure out where they are all going wrong with this Union of theres and how they can tighten the net on Scotland – rein us all back in. And well the Unionists don’t have a bl**dy clue and in saying that it has fairly cheered me up. More than anything there are some real belly-aching laughs to be found in the document.

      PLEASE read the following in particular the last two paragraphs.

      This is an extract from Tomkin’s written evidence (at the end of) to the House of Lords Select Committe on the Constitution – ‘The Union and Devolution’.

      The question put to him: ‘Practical steps to stabilise and reinforce the Union?’

      Tomkins answer: ”Whilst I consider that strengthening the constitutional and legal architecture of the union state is important, I recognise, at the same time, that it is nothing like enough, if the goal is to safeguard the United Kingdom from threats of secession in the longer term. In my opinion there is no single magic bullet here – no one thing that unionists should do now that is guaranteed to keep the country together. A series of little steps, many of them on their own perhaps quite minor, may be what is needed.

      I do not pretend to have all the answers but one place to start would be to understand why four regions in Scotland voted Yes to independence last year. Glasgow, Dundee, Clydebank and North Lanarkshire did not vote Yes by mistake, or because they misunderstood the question, or because they were misled. They voted Yes because they could no longer see what the Union does for them, they felt they had no stake in it, that it was a Union for others and not for them, and that, for all the uncertainties and risks of independence, “things could only get better”, to rehash a slogan from the Blair era. Glasgow is the UK’s third largest city, and Glasgow voted Yes by a margin of more than 25,000 votes (195,000 to 169,000) on what was, for Glasgow, a very high turnout. My question would be this: what efforts have UK parliamentarians gone to in the year since the referendum to understand why this happened and to address the reasons for it? What steps have been taken to make the people of Glasgow (and Dundee and Lanarkshire and Clydebank) understand and see the benefits that Union brings?

      Here are two ideas:

      (1) Glasgow is full of schoolchildren for whom London is as much a foreign power as New York or Amsterdam. Why not twin every schoolchild in Scotland with one in England and pay for them to visit one another?

      (2) In Scotland there is only one airport connected to a city by train and that’s Prestwick. Why not scrap HS2 and spend some serious money on infrastructure north of the border? You could even call the new train links the Union Line and paint the new carriages red, white and blue.”

      Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.

      By God I’ve heard it all now. What planet are these people from? Many of these children are being fed from foodbanks, living in abject poverty, lack decent clothing in winter, freezing in bed, going to school with nothing in their stomach, lack of opportunity, parents unemployment, on zero hour contracts, depressed, physically ill, cuts to disability, sanctions etc etc etc …. all initiated by Unionist Westminster and advocated by Cameron, Davidson and Tomkins.

      HOW TO UNITE US IN TWO SIMPLE STEPS …. AND THE ANSWER IS LORDY, LORDY …. our poor, wee bairns should go on holiday to England via the Union Line.

      Kids from Glasgow visiting kids from other poverty stricken areas in England – some holiday.

      Kids from Scotland being paired up with children from the South East of England or even just a household wealthier than theirs. That would be a real eye-opener and breed (shape) a most rebellious Scot indeed, even more rebellious than they’ve got on their hands right now. C’mon I like it.

      Here’s just one idea / suggestion for Adam Tomkins – Away back to England ya numpty in your red, white and blue painted train and if there isn’t one I’ll give you a lift and you can wave your wee red, white and blue flag out of my car window …. all the way home. Red, white and blue flag soon to be replaced by red and white only if your ideas, profound lack of understanding, are anything to go by.

      http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-committees/constitution/union-and-devolution/FINAL-Evidence-volume-UDE.pdf

    37. heedtracker says:

      Rancid The Graun explain their relentless SNP bad/sleazy stuff, photo of the buffoon Rory the Tory’s rockery of union and

      “The committee is chaired by Ian Lang, a former secretary of state for Scotland, who held out against devolution under John Major before losing his seat in the 1997 election. He subsequently warned that devolution was threatening the union.

      “Since 1999, devolution has been largely demand-led and piecemeal,” Lord Lang said. “The committee saw no evidence of strategic thinking about its cumulative impact on the union as a whole.”

      22% toryboy vote in Scotland, completely unelected trough for life Lords, that’ll teach us.

    38. brobb says:

      For anyone interested in the Named Person proposal, this article (link below) sets out the pros and cons pretty fairly without all the hysteria we normally get. Interesting to hear Patrick Harvie today appearing to support the proposals now, Ruth, Kezia and Willie might quietly drop their objections if they don’t think they can score a point against the SNP

      http://www.holyrood.com/articles/inside-politics/named-person-policy-set-be-first-casualty-nicola-sturgeon%E2%80%99s-minority

    39. Patrick Roden says:

      “With my positive outlook and faith in humanity, I hope the increase in Tory backing is not an endorsement of their WM policies”

      That’s an easy one to answer:

      The Tories themselves would have been doing a lot of research into what people wanted and the campaign clearly showed that what people didn’t want was the Conservative Party.

      This is why they didn’t mention the Party name on election campaign material and instead concentrated on convincing unionists that voting for the ‘Ruth Davidson for the No to a second referendum Party’ was the best way to save good old Britain!

      Even then, It didn’t look like it would work for some time, until Kez made that spectacular series of own goals, when asked about the constitution, which she apologised to her own party for after the election.

      During the campaign Ruthie got very embarrassed and either refused to answer questions about Westminster Tory policies, or distanced herself from them, I think even claiming that she had challenged George Osborne about one of his budget decisions.

      Now that she is the official opposition in Scotland, she will be reminded constantly by Nicola that her party is causing so much misery all over the UK and none more so than in Scotland, and in spite of our useless media, she will also find that social media will be more and more focused on exposing her and Tory hypocrisy, in a way that she has never experienced before.

    40. Nation Libre says:

      What also has to be remembered given the SNP’s remarkable success despite almost 100% media hostility, is that during almost the entire time that the SNP has been in government, it has been contending with a severe economic crisis resulting in annual budget cuts/reductions to that received by previous Scottish governments

      I think the SNP don’t make enough noise about this fact. Just how much better would they have faired given the same resources as previous LibLab governments

      Can anyone identify budget increases over the length of the Scottish Parliament?

    41. North Chiel says:

      If ever anyone needs ” evidence” of why Scotland requires Independence, then the ” spat” in the House of Commons this afternoon between Angus Robertson and Osbourne clarifies the issue.
      Namely , Etonian Tories with no mandate in our country deciding who is able to live, breath & reside in our country, with the democratically elected Scottish government in Edinburgh reduced to having to “plead the case” on behalf of the ” local community” for an Australian family to remain in our own country .Absolutely a ” shameful state of affairs”, and Osbourne’s final reply makes it ” crystal clear” the Tory strategy to ” colonise Scotland” from RUK .

    42. heedtracker says:

      During the campaign Ruthie got very embarrassed and either refused to answer questions about Westminster Tory policies,

      We saw the very ugly side of Ruth MacThatcher when just this one UKOK fraud on NO voters in Glasgow came up in debate. She’s an ugly liar but who’s a pretty one… look at how the Graun frauds kept Ruth out of it’s UKOK reportage. Its got nothing to do with Ruth in toryboy UKOK.

      http://archive.is/oNjx2

      https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/bae-now-able-invest-200-million-clyde-frigate-factory/

    43. Capella says:

      @ Petra
      That was a tonic, thanks for the notes from the Lords of the Constitution. Didn’t know Prof Tomkins was a comic. Have they tried issuing Scottish children with Union biscuits? I suggest Bath Olivers.

    44. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Well, it looks like the ‘Bella Caledonia’ site is dying, as its fundraiser is sluggish to say the least.”

      As far as I can see it exists mainly to slag off other pro-indy folk now. I don’t know another Yes site that isn’t pissed off with them. I doubt that the road to independence is paved with shouting angrily at voters for not being Marxist enough.

      However, they have a lot of well-to-do supporters so I expect the fundraiser will be rescued by the end. I mean, Irvine Welsh must have a few quid, right?

    45. Capella says:

      Ooh snarky!
      O/T John Robertson has an excellent article on the heads of Scottish institutions and whether they are home grown or incomers. The Arts and Academia are mostly incomers. The BBC, Papers and Businesses are mainly home grown. But, like political parties, they are probably just Northern Branches of the London base.

      http://newsnet.scot/archive/arts-institutions-universities-colonised-case-cringe/

      References a previous article in Bella about the Edinburgh Festival never having a Scottish Director in all of its 67 years.
      See also the article Mike Cassidy linked to about @Scottish Comedy on BBC Scotland. (also, coincidentally a Bella article).
      http://archive.is/puKAx

    46. Iain More says:

      What is also stark is that despite the goading and inflammatory provocation from the Yoon Press and Media and Yoon Politian’s daily for years before the referendum and every day since it, that the Indy believers haven’t risen to the bait and reacted violently.

      The only violence that I see has come from Yoons, indeed it doesn’t seem to take much to provoke them. Even when they win anything they have a nasty side to them. I guess that is why the Yoon Parties are tripping over themselves to attract every bigot of any description there is in Scotland and even using tax payers money to subsidise their gatherings of hate and have the Yoon Press and Media effectively advertising them for nothing.

      It does make me wonder how the SNP can win any election at all against that backdrop yet they have won 3 pretty much outright and one that was close in 2007. Yet there was a No vote in 2014. Scratches head in disbelief a something doesn’t add up

    47. Greg Beekman says:

      Oh no!!!!!!!!!!

      According to site below, Tories in 2016 got a higher vote share than the SNP in 2003.

      Tories 2016 22.5%
      SNP 2003 22.3%

      I was hoping to make the claim that SNP have always been more popular than the Tories since Devolution but alas! not to be 🙁

      How could Scotland do this to us????

      http://democraticdashboard.com/elections/scottish-parliament-election-2016

    48. galamcennalath says:

      Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “I doubt that the road to independence is paved with shouting angrily at voters for not being Marxist enough.”

      Indeed. I would go further and say that too much shouting about a future People’s Socialist Republic of Scotland acts to scare off moderate centre and centre right folks.

      The ideological hard left like to think they speak for someone – the workers, the people, the masses, whatever. However, when it comes to elections they lose their deposits. The era when the Fife coalfields would return a Communist MP are long gone.

      Everyone who speaks out for independence is a welcome voice, however aggressively tying Indy to a hard left (or hard right, should that ever happen) agenda is frankly verging on sabotage.

    49. O/T

      Andy through with another 3 – 2 win,

      French guy is 164th in world rankings,

      must have had his porridge this morning.

    50. jcd says:

      Sorry o/t but this really is quite enlightening for anyone just browsing through comments on here and perhaps a bit new to the idea of bbc scotchland being hostile to Scots and Scotland.

      Originally posted on previous thread by Mike Cassidy.

      http://archive.is/puKAx

    51. Petra says:

      @ Lochside says at 3:05 pm …. ”Has any study been done on the RUK influence on the Unionist vote? In the last 5 years, our population has grown by around 4% mainly from south of our border. We have continued to lose the young and skilled indigenous Scots abroad and to England.”

      To my mind this is THE greatest threat to us achieving our Independence Lochside and it REALLY concerns me. More than anything anyone at Westminster with a shred of intelligence will know it too. Additionally take a look at Capella’s post at 4:36pm.

      @ Capella says at 4:20 pm …. ”Petra that was a tonic, thanks for the notes from the Lords of the Constitution.”

      Yeah a right laugh Capella (if interested check out page 687) but on a serious note it just shows how out of touch these people truly are and no amount of ‘learning’ can change that now. You can’t unravel a cold, callous type of narcissitic personality as it’s akin to the circulatory system in a human body. Therein lies the basis of their downfall, now that Moothie has put herself in the firing line.

    52. Brian Powell says:

      Not surprise to see the LibDem vote moved to the Tories.

    53. Conan the Librarian™ says:

      “I mean, Irvine Welsh must have a few quid, right?”

      Is he back dealing again?

    54. heedtracker says:

      Mike Cassidy isn’t this naive

      “I was left stunned and, depressingly, vindicated as I had always had the suspicion something like this had been going. But it also meant I was living in a country whose national broadcaster appeared to have absolutely zero respect or regard for its own population”

      Its only here to shit on Scotland, always has. Look at clowns like Connolly, Bremner, Rab C Nesbit, Eddie Mair, Fred Maccauly, Susan Calman or all the Scottish monsters they wheel out for soaps like Eastenders, or used to. They get rewarded for the loyalty to the UK BBC style.

      Vote NO Stanley Baxter’s got a new BBC r4 thing coming up and he’s 80. His impression of Scotch morons was one the cringers love to do for our English neighbours.

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b008mh0k

      Baxter was one of the big NO campers who said Scots are canny so we’d vote NO.

    55. DerekM says:

      What this shows is that the blue tories stole the red tory hardcore yoon vote,the good news is that is a small percentage and not all no voters could bring themselves to vote for Ruthie.

      Their plan of trying to make it constitutional failed miserably they stood on a ticket of no second referendum yet those 55% of no voters we keep hearing about either couldnt be bothered or could not bring themselves to vote blue tory,this was their chance to take back the Scottish parliament and kill a second referendum they did neither.

      So the only conclusion can be that not all no voters trust or will back the blue tories and the constitutional question is still on the table since they failed to remove it 🙂

    56. CameronB Brodie says:

      Susan S says:
      “Wonder how long it’ll be before the UKIP graph starts to move..?”

      I thought UKIP were the protozoa of Scottish politics. I think it will take them some time to evolve in to beings that voters would recognise as sentient. I’d give it a couple of ice-ages. 😉

    57. Ruby says:

      Petra says:
      25 May, 2016 at 3:28 pm

      O/T

      @ Ruby says at 10:47 am …. ”New Act of Union”

      Well Ruby I’ve been wading through this (and the other 2 relative links you posted) for ages now and can see that it’ll take days to cover it all

      Ruby replies

      Well done!

      It will take ages but more worthwhile than spending time reading about sex scandals, Alex Salmond playing with someone’s hair or Gordon Brown being a Viking!

      The good thing about reading these documents & watching Parliament TV is that we don’t have to rely on the MSM to give us their ‘interpretation’ of events.

    58. Proud Cybernat says:

      Tomkins, a known Zionist, has only one thing on his mind–his fat arse in the House of Lords.

    59. ronnie anderson says:

      @ Petra
      @ Ruby

      Heres that 678 Page PMSL.

      Mr David B Taylor

      Written evidence (UDE0050)
      678
      Mr David B Taylor

      Written evidence (UDE0050)
      Personally I believe that smaller countries like Belgium, Switzerland, Holland, Lichteinstien and
      others in the world work better in terms of a
      democracy, culturally and economically too. So I’m in
      favour of Scotland splitting up from England and even Wales and Ireland too. Maybe we could
      compose a federal type of get together for the purposes of defence and trade. Large organisations
      seem to be
      clumsy by their nature and slow to react to the vicissitudes of life on earth. I feel that
      England has played it’s last role in it’s empire building ethos and it’s about time we let go of the
      bullying reins of power over our neighbours and set aside our d
      ifferences and renew our
      relationships on a more wholesome and creative basis of justice and friendship.
      October 2015

    60. Bob Mack says:

      Re Bella Caledonia.

      They can have rich funders but the lifeblood is readers .I for one ,will be giving it a miss as they give people like Loki air time.

    61. heedtracker says:

      Future Lord and Prof Tomkinski of Scotstoun also thinks his fav team Rangers, should play in England and that that would cement this farce union. I am not making this up. He’s a such a an awful carpet bagger and English FA wont touch them with a barge pole ofcourse.

    62. heedtracker says:

      It was a yougov poll that gave us The Vow shyste but

      “Peter Kellner, the former YouGov president, has said David Cameron is “just about on course” for the kind of convincing victory he needs to be able to return the UK to politics as normal after the referendum. At a Westminster briefing he said:
      Absent any eruptions due to terrorism or the eurozone, I would expect, as in so many past referendums around the world, the status quo to gain towards the end.

      So I think David Cameron is on course for a 55% to 60% remain vote. But I think 55% is the real winning post because if it’s narrower than that then I think the consequences for British politics are pretty dire.

      Once you get a gap into double digits in percentage terms then I think you at least have a possibility but not a certainty of some kind of return to conventional politics.

      So I think Cameron is just about on course for what he needs. But with four weeks to go, if you make a bet on what I’ve just said, on your own head be it.”

      https://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/09/06/latest-scottish-referendum-poll-yes-lead/

      UKOK shat their breeks but they got away with it, toryboy rule of their Scotland region was saved, for a generation.

    63. Glamaig says:

      Petra at 5:07

      …as is the loss of too many of our young people southwards as Scotlands economy is slowly sabotaged by Westminster.

    64. Clootie says:

      …Red & Yellow Tories now vote Blue Tory!

    65. galamcennalath says:

      heedtracker says:

      ” I think 55% is the real winning post ”

      Yes. And, for the additional reason that it certainly would be stoking up trouble if England voted to leave and Scotland dragged them back!

      Cameron will be well aware of this and want to avoid it.

      If Scotland contributes 9% of the votes split 6:3 to Stay, then England needs well over 50% alone.

    66. Ruby says:

      Has anyone been aware of the focus groups & opinion polls & referendum regarding the New Act of Union funded by Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust

      referred to in this video

      http://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/b95a2097-76c4-41e0-b6d3-fa25dedda041

      Another video from the Constitution committee:

      http://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/b0beaefd-9b59-4503-a796-cae5ab39bf8b

    67. ronnie anderson says:

      Is it just me that thinks every time wee Ruthie speaks in Holyrood its like she,s delivering the Gettysburg address, as for her lines in the sand,leave it to the Sea Ruthie its more natural wavy lines anaw.

    68. Glamaig says:

      Ruby 6:43

      thanks for that.
      I watched a bit but now have to go and calm down after the posh twat referred to ‘seperatists’ for the 4th time, and ‘keep Scotland’.

      Absolutely fizzing. Will try and watch more later but fear for the safety of my laptop.

      Whatever comes out of Westminster, you can be sure it’s not for Scotland’s good.

    69. heedtracker says:

      galamcennalath says:
      25 May, 2016 at 6:38 pm
      heedtracker says:

      ” I think 55% is the real winning post ”

      Yes. And, for the additional reason that it certainly would be stoking up trouble if England voted to leave and Scotland dragged them back!

      Project Fear 2 will terrify the life out of England voting Brexit. Just the BBC alone can win it for Cameron with “and houses prices will fall by 20% in the UK, if you vote Brexit.”

      That’s all it takes when house prices in England matter more than anything in the whole wide UKOK world. Put it this way, if your 2 up 2 down hoose was worth a million quid in north London, would you leapt into the abyss with likes of Nigel Farage, BoJo or that nutcase Coburn up here?

      Status quo and Project Fear 2, silent majority, likes of Flipper Darling frightening the life out of everyone on BBC r4 this morn, even Nic Robinson had to step in to get the Flipper to ease orf.

    70. Greg Beekman at 4.52

      You make the point

      We do not have lots of time and don’t believe anybody who insists we do

      Politics changes very fast

      Anybody who waits for the “right time ” may wait forever

      We must campaign for independence continuously

      And be prepared to go for it at very short notice

      If the UK votes to leave the EU the next few years in politics will be spent negotiating UK’s withdrawal from the EU and our independence progress will be largely sidelined

    71. geeo says:

      http://stv.tv/news/politics/1355208-lords-urge-uk-government-to-scrap-unfair-barnett-formula/

      This, from the man who gave us GERS …..

      If they want us to leave, they only have to ask…?

    72. caledonia says:

      @
      heedtracker 7.02 house prices works both ways ie cheaper for buyers

    73. CameronB Brodie says:

      Capella & Petra
      Prof Tomkins does sound like a Victorian era nob planning on civilising the natives, through a decent education in proper Anglican values.

      @ Prof Tomkins
      You are a condescending fannybaws, which is the very worst kind, IMHO.

    74. ronnie anderson says:

      @ Dave McEwan Hill Its up to the membership of the SNP to communicate that to the powers that be,if they,ll listen. The Grassroots movement have started talks to bring together a Alliance .

    75. ronnie anderson says:

      Justin Welby invited to address the Church of Scotland, wont be long until we revert back to the 16/1700s & being preached to from the Pulpits on the benifits of the Union.

    76. Capella says:

      At the risk of incurring the Wrath of Rev, here is the link to the 2014 Hugh Kerr article in Bella on the cultural domination of the Arts in Scotland by Unionists.

      http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2014/03/24/the-edinburgh-festival-war-politics-opera-and-scotland/

      “It is quite remarkable that when perhaps the biggest democratic debate in Scotland’s history is raging across Scotland for 300 years that the Festival programme not only ignores it but actively celebrates “The Empire,The Commonwealth and Britishness”. This is not an accident it is a deliberate choice by Mills, as we have already seen he has form in these matters.”

      It was written before the FATWA against diversity in the YES movement was announced. In the light of the angst about control of the media, it shines another light into the UK darkness.

    77. defo says:

      Ronnie

      The kirk was the equivalent of todays media. An incestuous, symbiotic relationship with the unco guid in bed with royalty and the legal system ,which formed the backbone of the establishment.

      Apologies to Robert P if I’ve gotten this wrong 🙂

    78. Ruby says:

      ronnie anderson

      That sounds good to me!

      It’s amazing how difficult these Lords on the Constitution committee are finding it to define the benefits of the Union!

      Glamaig says:
      25 May, 2016 at 7:00 pm

      Ruby 6:43

      thanks for that.
      I watched a bit but now have to go and calm down after the posh twat referred to ‘seperatists’ for the 4th time, and ‘keep Scotland’.

      Be warned plenty more to come!

    79. ronnie anderson says:

      @ Ruby lol whits ah constitution, they canny even define that because they have None,if I get through this it will be ah miracle.

    80. Connor McEwen says:

      https://www.commonspace.scot/articles/8430/bbc-scotland-commissioners-think-public-stupid-claims-comedy-writer

      Another wan o they” thick headed Scottish “,They wullny understand, quotes.

      Then again voting for Tories in Scotland,BBC might be right.

    81. Onwards says:

      @Lochside says:
      25 May, 2016 at 3:05 pm

      “In the last 5 years, our population has grown by around 4%…mainly from south of our border. We have continued to lose the young and skilled indigenous Scots abroad and to England.
      ..
      When poseurs like Torrance use expressions like ‘Ulsterisation’ I don’t worry particularly about the sectarian meaning,but more about the economic ‘planting’of colonial minded populations ever since Thatcher..whereby excessive house prices have enabled ‘white flight’from England,not only to Scotland, and reverse discriminatory recruitment in many sectors of recruitment resulting in Scots losing out in their own country.”

      ———-

      It’s a difficult issue to talk about, and some English folks did vote for independence, but going by the poll numbers its obviously one of the biggest NO voting groups, probably around 80% NO.

      Most of that will be people wanting to maintain a common ‘Britishness’ and being very comfortable with an identity which is effectively just a Greater England with a more colourful flag. For a minority there might actually be something of a colonialist attitude.

      It’s hard, because if we don’t get independence in the next few decades, we could end up like Wales – where almost a quarter of the residents were born in England, which effectively means they will never gain independence.

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/wales/10878554/Welsh-could-become-a-minority-in-Wales-as-English-set-sights-west.html

      A lot of immigration from south of the Border comes from the house price difference. You can sell up in Surrey and retire here with a house and gardens twice the size, and free personal care if needed.

      Personally, I would be happy with bumping up the highest band of council tax or Land and Buildings tax. If people are going to come here and vote against self-government for Scotland, they can pay for the privilege.

    82. Glamaig says:

      Onwards 8:40

      its possible people will be put off moving here from down south because they’ve now been told Scotland’s full of separatists and pickpockets. The natives are restless.

    83. AhuraMazda says:

      “Another wan o they” thick headed Scottish “,They wullny understand, quotes.”

      Okay so we are too thick to understand intellectual stuff and they serve up Loki and Limmy. It’s all starting to make sense.

      Didn’t Rosie Kane even get a spot as a comedienne… I mean, after her career in politics.

    84. Thepnr says:

      “It’s a difficult issue to talk about, and some English folks did vote for independence, but going by the poll numbers its obviously one of the biggest NO voting groups, probably around 80% NO.”

      I think a very fair point and well made. I have no numbers that could dispute your estimate that 80% may have voted NO.

      Let’s assume that that is correct, the numbers I would really like to know is of their peers i.e. similar age, similar education, similar income. How many of their Scots peers voted NO.

      I’d estimate that number to be pretty high also, the comfortably well off retired Scot were more likely to vote NO also.

      Also for the English expat living in Scotland you can assume that much or most of their extended family still live in England. Little to do with place of birth how they voted, much more so their personal financial and family situation.

      I guess people selling their three bedroom semi in London or Surrey to buy a four bedroom house in Scotland and put a little away were likely Tory voters. Another reason to vote for the Union, not because they are English but because they are Tories.

    85. jockmcx says:

      galamcennalath says:
      25 May, 2016 at 4:54 pm

      Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “I doubt that the road to independence is paved with shouting angrily at voters for not being Marxist enough.”

      Indeed. I would go further and say that too much shouting about a future People’s Socialist Republic of Scotland acts to scare off moderate centre and centre right folks.

      The ideological hard left like to think they speak for someone – the workers, the people, the masses, whatever. However, when it comes to elections they lose their deposits. The era when the Fife coalfields would return a Communist MP are long gone.

      Everyone who speaks out for independence is a welcome voice, however aggressively tying Indy to a hard left (or hard right, should that ever happen) agenda is frankly verging on sabotage.

      How to win and lose an indy ref.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knmCuq_wdLg

    86. Ruby says:

      ronnie anderson says:
      25 May, 2016 at 8:16 pm

      @ Ruby lol whits ah constitution, they canny even define that because they have None,if I get through this it will be ah miracle.

      Ruby replies

      FF to 11:00:30

      http://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/b0beaefd-9b59-4503-a796-cae5ab39bf8b

      To hear Professor Sir Jeffrey Jowell claim that his students struggle to understand what our consitution is.

      He mentions Lord Bingham which led me to do a search for Lord Bingham and I came across this:

      http://tinyurl.com/zptyqze

      We should be hearing more re the legality of the Iraq War pretty soon.

    87. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Just finished the Danny Dorling book Inequality and the 1%.

      There’s not that much in it that hasn’t been covered here at some point, but seeing it all gathered together is really quite sickening. If there’s any one issue which should unite the left, this has to be it.

      The guy has a website, for anyone who may be interested:

      http://www.dannydorling.org/

    88. Artyhetty says:

      Re; David Wardrop@3.02

      In that case there must be a ‘woman flu’ going around! I know of several people with this long lasting cold, including myself and even willing it away hasn’t worked, so no, Rev Stu mostly likely has this nasty, ongoing virus, and it ain’t nice.

      Viruses are weird, like aliens, and they mutate, like tories! Arghhhhh…

    89. Effijy says:

      I unsubscribed to Bella Caledonia some time ago.
      For me they started to try and gazump WoS, and added
      in some empathy with our Union masters.

      No need for a substandard reserve team that is scoring own goals, when we have the Premiership Champions and the Rev scoring for us on a daily basis.

      Goodbye Bella from me!

    90. North chiel says:

      If anyone had any doubts on this site of the need for Independence
      for our country, then the “spat ” this afternoon in ” the house” between
      Angus Robertson and Osbourne should make the issue crystal clear, when
      an “Eton Tory cabal” , with no mandate whatsoever in Scotland can dictate to the people of Scotland, just who can ” live breath and reside & work”
      in our country “,with the democratically elected Edinburgh government having to ” plead” to
      our “London masters” to allow an Australian family to reside in Dingwall.
      The final reply from Osbourne confirms that the ” colonisation” of our country from RUK is the main objective of the London government

    91. Petra says:

      @ brobb says at 3:48 pm …. For anyone interested in the Named Person proposal, this article sets out the pros and cons pretty fairly without all the hysteria we normally get.”

      http://www.holyrood.com/articles/inside-politics/named-person-policy-set-be-first-casualty-nicola-sturgeon%E2%80%99s-minority

      Thanks Brobb clear and concise.

      …………………………………………………………

      @ Capella says at 4:36 pm …. ”John Robertson has an excellent article on the heads of Scottish institutions and whether they are home grown or incomers.”

      http://newsnet.scot/archive/arts-institutions-universities-colonised-case-cringe/

      Very interesting Capella and just as I suspected. I’ve noticed a marked difference in the number of non-Scots accents on the news and so on over the last 2 / 3 years in particular, especially the Head of this or Head of that. The majority of key roles in Universities in Scotland being held by non-Scots. Scary. No doubt a first-rate way (attempt) to shape the minds and opinions of youngsters in Scotland than sending them on a Tomkins holiday to England. Thank God for the Internet. However from Westminster’s point of view …. tactics …. tactics …. there’s more than one way to skin a cat.

      …………………………………………………………….

      @ ronnie anderson says at 6:01 pm …. ”Heres that 678 Page PMSL. Mr David B Taylor …. Written evidence (UDE0050).”

      ….”Personally I believe that smaller countries work better in terms of a democracy, culturally and economically too” ….. ”I feel that England has played it’s last role in it’s empire building ethos and it’s about time we let go of the bullying reins of power over our neighbours and set aside our differences and renew our relationships on a more wholesome and creative basis of justice and friendship.”

      Good find Ronnie. The brilliant Mr Taylor in support of small countries having their Independence, however who IS David B. Taylor? Does anyone know? Interesting too that this statement is just plunked in alphabetical order with no question asked and no oral investigatory follow-up. And of course no mention as to who he is. Guess ‘they’ didn’t agree with his views. You came across that on page 678 Ronnie. Tomkins on page 687. Totally polarized.

      …………………………………………………………….

      @ Glamaig says at 6:36 pm …. ”Petra …. as is the loss of too many of our young people southwards as Scotlands economy is slowly sabotaged by Westminster.”

      I’ve read that over 50,000 Scots leave Scotland every year Glamaig, average age 24. Many going abroad never to return. In other words, between one thing and another, we have to get out of this UNION ASAP or end up like never-ever-ever-ever-to-be-Independent Wales (at Onwards 8:40pm).

    92. Ruby says:

      https://archive.is/iKAqO

      Interesting article. About the 8th paragraph down which starts ‘The most powerful parts of the book are the chapters dealing with the international legal order and ­terrorism.’

      is most interesting!

    93. Grouse Beater says:

      Ruby: “Is anyone aware of the focus groups & opinion polls & referendum regarding the New Act of Union funded by Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust?

      I warned about this only weeks ago. Few rang the bells. The initiative come solely from powerful Tories. Expect carpetbaggers such as Tomkins a ‘consultant.”

      It was inevitable extreme right-wing ideologues would move swiftly to block now and for the next 100 years Scotland regaining autonomy, especially after they won the Referendum with such a precarious margin, and so it has come to pass.

      I consider the move extremely sinister http://wp.me/p4fd9j-6G9

    94. Petra says:

      @ North chiel says at 9:32 pm …. ”If anyone had any doubts on this site of the need for Independence for our country, then the “spat ” this afternoon in ”the house” between Angus Robertson and Osbourne should make the issue crystal clear, when an “Eton Tory cabal”, with no mandate whatsoever in Scotland can dictate to the people of Scotland, just who can ” live breath and reside & work”
      in our country “,with the democratically elected Edinburgh government having to ” plead” to our “London masters” to allow an Australian family to reside in Dingwall.

      The final reply from Osbourne confirms that the ”colonisation” of our country from RUK is the main objective of the London government.”

      That’s it in a nutshell. It was on STV news at 6pm North Chiel and was I glad that they didn’t cut Osborne’s tirade short. Scotland desperately needing decent people to settle here such as this Australian family …. wee boy attending Gaelic school …. and they want to kick them out. Then to go and say rather we should be attracting people from down south to fill the Highlands. It would seem that sheep don’t do it for them anymore because they can’t vote. Time for everyone to take the blinkers off and take note of what’s actually going on here. By the way there may be a repeat of this at 10pm on STV.

    95. Glamaig says:

      They’re talking about our future, and not a Scottish voice in the room of course.

      http://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/b0beaefd-9b59-4503-a796-cae5ab39bf8b

      (Ruby’s link from above)

      Tomkins thinks we would be ‘culturally and spiritually’ impoverished with independence. Hmmmm.

      The SNP is a ‘chronic problem’.

      A learned lord thinks the UK is about ‘shared rule’ LOL.

    96. Iain says:

      I’m not surprised to see bella Caledonia is in the shit, it had a too supportive attitude for Yoondom. That attitude will not survive the 21ist century and it will go the way of the daily record, mail, and other assorted yoon rags. All I have to say on the matter is, play with fire, don’t be surprised if you are burned.

    97. Auld Rock says:

      Defo, I would prefer to wire them up to a 133Kv line.

      Auld Rock

    98. Jim says:

      Watching her speech today Kezia gave her front benchers a wtf moment, to paraphrase “Today I met Baxter the robot, his children are going to steal your jobs”.

      Well done Kezia, robots have been stealing jobs for years, automated car manufacture for instance.

      Get a grip on the important issues

    99. Thepnr says:

      @Grouse Beater

      Sorry, I missed you off my mention of a few good bloggers who already post on Wings. An article from you on Wings I think would go down well if you were to submit one.

      Like Tam, I believe the Rev would appreciate his workload being lightened by having a few good articles on topics that are not relevant just today or tomorrow but even a couple of weeks or more into the future. That way the article could be posted at a time of his choosing having not become stale or out of date.

      Wings has always invited anyone to submit articles so this is nothing new, greater involvement from current readers would be a good thing.

      Grouse Beater if you ever do submit an article, mind make it good! The real lowdown on the BBC would be my cup of tea 🙂

    100. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Grouse Beater (9.36) –

      This kind of right-wing manoeuvre can be viewed as a simple provocation, or as a more sophisticated effort to initiate reform rather than just react to popular movements the State decides not to like.

      In either case, it cannot be ignored.

      My personal preference would be for a Civil Rights campaign of some kind (based on asserting the ‘right’ not to see our friends, family and neighbours being killed by austerity measures imposed by a government we didn’t vote for) – it would transcend party-political bickering and limitations of the SG.

      Well-organised, intelligently-targeted and strictly peaceful civil disobedience supported by a diverse non-MSM media. The BBC PQ demos, for example, ticked all those boxes and didn’t even transgress any law, but they frightened the proverbials out of McQuarrie, Boothman & co – that fear was reflected in outright censorship of the demos and, when forced to acknowledge our presence, a ludicrous understatement of numbers participating. As usual, Auntie Beeb could always count on nieces and nephews in Sky and the UK dead-tree press to confirm her version of events.

      We have plenty of options at our disposal to counter anything dreamt up by right-wing think-tanks. Question is – do we have the collective will to use them?

    101. defo says:

      Auld rock

      Fair enough, I suppose. Humane. With that kind of voltage I doubt there would be undue suffering 😉
      In the same position, I wouldn’t have the cheek to vote at all.
      This preposterous talk of ‘ulsterisation’ reminds me of what I really think the referendum showed us. A polarisation was created.
      You’re either Scottish/Yes, or British/No(English). To vote No is to deny Scotland is a nation, not a province. End of.

      From wiki, so it must be true..
      “The Scottish people (Scots: Scots Fowk, Scottish Gaelic: Albannaich), or Scots, are a nation and socially defined ethnic group resident in Scotland.”

    102. Capella says:

      Hasn’t Stu already got a feature called “Soapbox” for special articles written by guest contributers? Maybe it needs some coordination but Stu probably has enough to do. He hasn’t had much of a holiday yet!

    103. Grouse Beater says:

      Thepnr: “Grouse Beater if you ever do submit an article, mind make it good! The real lowdown on the BBC would be my cup of tea.

      IScot has accepted an essay on the Scottish film industry – or lack of it – in which I take a side swipe at the BBC. But yes, if I spilled all that I saw and heard as a BBC executive, including time in BBC NI, and offered a hooker for the night (approved by a senior colleague) I’d be national news tomorrow, Murdoch my best friend.

      Unlike Loki, you’ll get no special pleading from me. I make plain in a few essays, particularly “The Pitch” (over 4,000 hits worldwide!) it became impossible to continue making filmed drama in Scotland because complete power is absolutely controlled by London BBC, and its attendant C4 film industry. It is the English film industry. My company and colleagues are LA based. Nowadays I lecture, script edit, occasionally talent scout, as well as still creating work that might one day be shot in Scotland. I have a script about an assassin purchased and being located, but I don’t count any of that as ‘wild success’. You need to be London based for that, or become cross-dresser and get noticed wherever you go regardless of creative talent. I’d rather be elevating talent in Scotland and showing it off to the world.

      England has its Ken Loach – winner of this year’s Palme d’Or – where’s our committed left-wing director?

      Guess what? The recent Tory paper on the BBC suggests a drama producer for Scotland, and more ‘ethnic’ programmes.

      How many knew BBC Scotland has no full-time proper drama impresario?

    104. The English in Scotland who voted No could have tipped the balance for us Scots not getting our Independence,

      The Scots in turn by voting to stay in EU could tip the balance to deny the English freedom from EU,

      i think the %`s are nearly the same,English in Scotland and Scots in UK.

    105. galamcennalath says:

      Thepnr says:

      “English … estimate that 80% may have voted NO. Let’s assume that that is correct, the numbers I would really like to know is of their peers i.e. similar age, similar education, similar income. How many of their Scots peers voted NO.”

      I have often wondered that.

      I know English born people who voted Yes, but I would say they weren’t typical of many English here. So many are retired and fairly well off, or here with good well paid jobs – your point is that retired / well off Scots tended to also vote No.

      Being English may have increased their likelihood of NO voting, however their age and socio economic status might have been a bigger influence.

      Non Scots, better educated, well off, retired … the folks that we need an increased percentage of voting Yes next time. We don’t need to convert all the NOs in these groups, just enough!

    106. Kenny says:

      Personally, I would like Robert P and many others to contribute to a history of independent Scotland.

      People need to be taught that Scotland was independent for 900 years — and in this dreadful union for 300 years.

      So independence is the natural state of affairs. The union is unnatural!

      There are many interesting tales in Scottish history besides just Mary Stuart, Bonnie Prince Charlie, William Wallace, Robert the Bruce, Macbeth and the likes…

      I would be interested in learning just how integrated Scotland was with France before the union — the French who lived here (and vice versa)… the role of Scots in aiding Joan of Arc…

      And, most of all, the constitutional question. The Declaration of Arbroath. How the monarch can be removed if the people say so (how does that square with the current set-up?). And how the Act of Union was despised and is, I would say, illegal under Scots law.

      Different people could add different bits to create a whole patchwork of the history of the independent Scottish kingdom until 1707.

      And, on the other side, we really need to start already planning the independent Scottish republic. Wouldn’t that be a great thing — to involve the whole country in submitting ideas for our future written constitution, parliamentary set-up, President Wee Nicola, etc…

      If it looks good enough and far better than the UKOK, we may even enthuse the remaining Labour voters and the undecideds to join us — and push the YES numbers over the 50% barrier!

    107. Grouse Beater says:

      Ian Brotherhood: “This kind of right-wing manoeuvre can be viewed as a simple provocation, or as a more sophisticated effort to initiate reform rather than just react to popular movements the State decides not to like.”

      “In either case, it cannot be ignored.”

      I highlighted your last sentence, Ian, because you’re right to be alarmed.

      What we see in that video is only the tip of the Tory iceberg. The planning and money and subsequent polling (in Scotland now) that’s gone into that meeting is considerable.

      Take note how they claim it is a bottom up movement that they intend to generate – can you believe that, Tory and Liberal grandees telling us to believe it is a grass roots movement… Gavin Esler will be proud.

      I agree wholeheartedly that, faced with a concerted attack on Scotland’s right to make its own decisions on autonomy, civil disobedience might well be on the cards.

      I regard that tactic as a democratic right.

    108. Thepnr says:

      @galamcennalath

      “So many are retired and fairly well off, or here with good well paid jobs – your point is that retired / well off Scots tended to also vote No.”

      Yes my point entirely, not so much to do with where you were born than as to how threatened you might feel that the comfortable existence you enjoy may be under threat.

      Wealthy (relatively) retired or very well paid Scots have much in common with their NO voting cousins from the South living next door.

    109. Capella says:

      I did find it astonishing that the Board of the National Theatre, largely composed of business people, passed over Scotland’s leading theatre producer David McLennan in favour of Laurie Sansom. Perhaps the fact that McLennan was the co-founder of 7.84 Theatre along with John McGrath made them think he would be “too political”. After all the Board of the Scottish Arts Council forced John McGrath to resign as director of 7.84 20 years ago because he was seen as “too political”. Readers might recall that 7.84 produced such epics as The Cheviot,The Stag and the Black Black Oil a little different from Alyn Ayckbourn.
      https://archive.is/7ZQ36

      From the Bella article of 2014 I linked to above. Those in charge dictate who gets to make culture and who doesn’t. As long as you depict Scottish people as drunks, thieves and junkies you’ll be fine

    110. mike cassidy says:

      Grousebeater 10.41

      Re something I posted elsewhere, I presume none of this would surprise you about BBC Scotland.

      http://archive.is/puKAx

    111. Petra says:

      @ Grouse Beater says at 9:36 pm …. “Ruby – Is anyone aware of the focus groups & opinion polls & referendum regarding the New Act of Union funded by Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust?”

      ”I warned about this only weeks ago. Few rang the bells. The initiative come solely from powerful Tories. Expect carpetbaggers such as Tomkins a ‘consultant’. It was inevitable extreme right-wing ideologues would move swiftly to block now and for the next 100 years Scotland regaining autonomy, especially after they won the Referendum with such a precarious margin, and so it has come to pass. I consider the move extremely sinister. http://wp.me/p4fd9j-6G9

      Great informative post Grouse Beater and yes it is very sinister indeed: In line with a great number of their ongoing underhand actions.

      ”Forces rallying against the people’s will.” Forces rallying against us all right enough. All out War is being waged on EVERY front. Let’s hope that the SNP have constitutional experts looking into this and preparing to combat them at every turn.

      Additionally skimming through the ‘New Act of Union’ data it becomes clear that the Lordies are keen to ascertain the statistics relating to doing away with our Parliament altogether. Permanence of our Parliament was a key issue in Smith however it has been watered down to a majority of ‘Scottish’ voters being able to write it off altogether. A return to the good old days of complete totalitarian Westminster rule. Wouldn’t they just love that. Some such as Forsyth have even proposed that this could be implemented by carrying out a UK vote over-ruling the Scots, but was ‘shouted down’ by some of his more sensible colleagues. Sensible in that they could no doubt envisage an ‘Irish situation’ on the mainland.

      Anyways it’s simples. Set the SNP up to fail. Ensure that unemployment rises. A wee phone call here and there to ‘maties’ will help it along. Create a situation whereby rUK disabled, those with large families, the unemployed and homeless all head for Scotland to the point that chaos reigns (housing, benefits, economy). News full of real doom and gloom. Maybe even create a ‘security’ issue necessitating the help of UK troops / expertise. The Scots canny go it alone type of scenario. Fill the hills and valleys with rUK Britnat supporters and when the time is right, with many Unionist Scots joining them, call for a Referendum …. not exactly the one that WE want.

    112. Kenny says:

      Sometimes things come to a head over small matters (like the War of Jenkins’ Ear).

      I hope the Scottish government takes a stand by refusing to let the wee Gaelic-speaking lad and his family who settled in the Highlands from Oz from being deported.

      Either we are a sovereign people or we are not. We need hundreds of families like the Brains to counter the assault on Scotland’s territory, population, land since 1707.

      Joannie Cherry would be a good one to dig up all the right laws, whether Scots law or UN law.

      It is time for the SNP to flex its muscles and land a few blows on what is, to all purposes, a foreign dictatorship, as it was in no way elected by the people of Scotland.

      We must now feel our strength and start acting as an independent nation. The case of this Gaelic-speaking lad is the perfect example of how it is time to be ACTIVE, not passive and always answering to the crude UKOK attacks, snipes, propaganda, black PR…

      Time to take the battle to the unelected overlords.

    113. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Grouse Beater –

      The last time this site got wind of a ‘grass-roots’ organisation which smelled a bit iffy, we had it stripped bare within hours and turned its website into a WOS playroom. If memory serves it closed in less than 24 hours.

      It was called Vote No Borders.

      They won’t make the same mistake again, which means that someone, somewhere, will get to name their price for a professional job. And as they up their game, so must we.

    114. Capella says:

      Actually, Ken Loache’s film about Scotland was about alcoholics, thieves and junkies. “My Name is Joe”

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Name_Is_Joe

    115. Grouse Beater says:

      The anti-independence committee meeting Ruby refers to is here, top of the essay:

      http://wp.me/p4fd9j-6G9

      If readers can’t be bothered to read my essay please watch the video – the gorge will rise in your throat.

      It is a meeting of official assassins.

      Their entire motivation is NOT to create a better model for UK power sharing than currently exists, but to create a Bill that blocks Scotland’s sovereign right to have its people decide its constitutional future.

      I think what I have to say in that article prescient in the extreme.

    116. Thepnr says:

      @Kenny

      Well said!

      The UK government should not have the power to tell OUR Scottish government who is and is not welcome in Scotland.

    117. Tinto Chiel says:

      And yet, Capella, David was not a nationalist. If he was passed over, it was for his Left-wing stance on social issues. He thought nationalism split the working class.

      I think most of us now think the working class solidarity argument only works one way, and not to our advantage.

      As for Bella, I stopped reading its self-indulgent Lefty infantile-disorder arguments quite some time ago. It’s like a digital version of a student magazine, doomed to divisive failure and incapable of making a connection with the electorate.

      I know you weren’t quoting it in approval: just wanted to sound off in my frustration.

    118. Thepnr says:

      @Grouse Beater

      Pedant alert! Essay or article 🙂

    119. Grouse Beater says:

      Capella: “Actually, Ken Loache’s film about Scotland was about alcoholics, thieves and junkies. “My Name is Joe”

      An English tourist’s eye view, one showing no source of the malady being due to the policies of the British state, but then one can argue life in the ‘schemies’ – monopolised by Welsh – isn’t all druggies and hapless women getting physically abused.

      Then again, it isn’t a Scottish production company making it … nor will anybody in Scotland see a pound of profit from it. We got no money from ‘Trainspotting’ either – something’s not right, not right one bit.

      It’s like my youth, every television drama and film about Scottish life made it seem we were all wife beaters, and clones of Glasgow bagman Jimmy Boyle. No Mean City they called it. I spent a day in Bar-L with him – how’s that for name dropping? He makes a nice salad if a little plain and unappetising, and to my surprise hid a gold plated Rolls Royce in a lock-up near my home in razor stropped genteel Embra.

      (Crime pays, they say, but I hope it was sales of his sculptures.)

    120. Iain More says:

      I wonder what passes for a historian on the EBC would say about the history of the Scottish Parly.

      I wonder if a certain Mr Oliver would call such voting changes as cancerous in relation to the SNP vote? But not the Tory vote.

      Has he accused the uncertainty caused by the EU Referendum as also being cancerous by any chance yet?

      I am guessing that Dan Snow and the EBC might hail them as great landslide victories for the Yoon Flagship HMS Tory Party. Since they have the SNP Fleet bottled up.

    121. Petra says:

      Did anyone on here see STV news at 6pm? There was some footage of Nicola Sturgeon at Holyrood today followed by Davidson, Dugdale and most of all Rennie getting into Nicola’s ribs. Then it was Harvie’s turn and he was saying something, with a very raised and nasty tone of voice, along the lines that he ”found something to be absolutely disgusting or disgraceful.”

      I reckoned he was talking about the named person act however I may be wrong, because I missed the first part, or it was televised in such a way to make it look as though he was getting into Nicola’s ribs too – shouting at her? Just asking as this has been niggling at me all night.

    122. Grouse Beater says:

      Thepnr: “Essay or article?”

      Yes, I hovered over those terms. 🙂

      I guess an essay becomes an article if in a magazine or newspaper and under 1,000 words!

      The best essays can be 10,000 words or more.

      (Am trying to raise money for iScot magazine … have written to a few Scot’s actors over-burdened with cash.)

    123. Thepnr says:

      The Labour Party is split between the Blairites and the Corbyistas.

      The Tory Party is split between the Ins and Outs of Europe.

      You cannot split an Independence Movement! Or can you?

      Just a reminder, there can be no party politics when it comes to Independence. Independence is bigger than any party.

    124. Capella says:

      @ Tinto Chiel
      The Bella article was from 2014 and was about the decision makers in the Arts being non-Scots. It was an eye opener for me in the Indyref year reasearching the causes of our dependent state. We have no national media reflecting back our shared experience.

      There’s a remake of Trainspotting in the making. More drunks, thieves and junkies? Wouldn’t it be great to see a life of Thomas Muir!

    125. Iain More says:

      Capella says:
      25 May, 2016 at 11:36 pm

      “@ Tinto Chiel
      The Bella article was from 2014 and was about the decision makers in the Arts being non-Scots. It was an eye opener for me in the Indyref year reasearching the causes of our dependent state. We have no national media reflecting back our shared experience.

      There’s a remake of Trainspotting in the making. More drunks, thieves and junkies? Wouldn’t it be great to see a life of Thomas Muir!”

      Is there not also a remake of Whisky Galore in the offing with Eddie Izzard being given a leading role in it. GRRRRRRRRRR!

      One of my uncles had a cameo in the original one!

    126. heedtracker says:

      Grouse Beater says:
      25 May, 2016 at 11:14 pm
      The anti-independence committee meeting Ruby refers to is here, top of the essay:

      They do want to take complete control of devolution, manage the vile seps with a new constitution, popular referendums alongside parliamentary supremacy.

      Smith Commission was great as it pulls and shares but makes vile seps responsible for how they spend money and paye devo’s all they get, UK.gov keeps control of everything else because of their no detriment thing for England, Scotland etc.

      There is no way they are getting devo-max, despite being promised it for their NO win The Vow shyst either.

      Prof Tomkins likes to say “respect the ref verdict where a majority of Scots voted to remain in this union” but what about the 400k English referendum voters in Scotland or even Prof Tomkins himself? He’s from the south coast of England apparently.

      Stage 3 of toryboy plan to take control of any more possible devo-

      Adam Tomkins MSP Retweeted
      Mark Elliott ?@ProfMarkElliott 13h13 hours ago
      A post by Stephen Tierney & me: Today’s Constitution Cttee report on The Union & Devolution https://publiclawforeveryone.com/2016/05/25/the-house-of-lords-constitution-committee-report-on-the-union-and-devolution/

    127. Capella says:

      @ Iain More – OMG you jest! What about Brigadoon, surely time for a remake starring John Barrymore!

    128. Fireproofjim says:

      Iain More @11.47
      Yes, there is a new Whisky Galore film in the making, and Eddie Izzard is in it, but as the pompous English Captain Waggett,
      Otherwise it is a selection of fine Scottish actors and even a cameo appearance of the unique Fergie MacDonald on the accordion. Can’t wait.

    129. Tinto Chiel says:

      Capella and Iain More: you mustn’t use the C word (colonist). Look what happened to Alasdair Gray, a man of genius in at least two art forms.

      Of course, with my cheese-cutter cheek bones and snake hips, I’m just the man to play TM. Don’t worry, Iain, Eddie will be playing that daft English major, but presumably not in a pink beret.

      Heavy stuff on here tonight: I sense the revolution is starting!

    130. crazycat says:

      @ Petra at 11.31

      This may refer to the incident you were asking about:
      https://twitter.com/BBCPhilipSim/status/735471351369236480

      I don’t have a TV so didn’t see it myself.

    131. AhuraMazda says:

      I see that Petra laughed at the suggestions below by Tomkins but I can’t be the only one who found this whole thing very sinister;

      “(1) Glasgow is full of schoolchildren… Why not twin every schoolchild in Scotland with one in England and pay for them to visit one another?

      (2) …Why not scrap HS2 and spend some serious money on infrastructure north of the border? You could even call the new train links the Union Line and paint the new carriages red, white and blue.”

      Darkened rooms full of weird old men in Westminster discussing the possibility of taking our kids away on trains? It’s The Age of The Train all over again, isn’t it…

      I think The Saville Line would be a better name for it, or maybe The Janner Line.

      Not one Scottish accent in the whole ring, I mean room… Not one.

    132. Capella says:

      I fear we will never see a TM biopic. Can you imagine pitching it to a BBC exec!

      Well, it’s about a lawyer turned democrat who went to France during the Revolution then got arrested in Stranraer and transported to Australia, escaped on a US trawler, traded with Canadian natives, got imprisoned on Cuba, shipped to Cadiz was wounded by the British who had devlared war on Spain, was rescued by a Scottish doctor mate, returned to Paris and feted as a hero then died in Chantilly.

      I don’t think they would buy it.

    133. heedtracker says:

      I think The Saville Line would be a better name for it, or maybe The Janner Line.

      Not one Scottish accent in the whole ring, I mean room… Not one.

      Getting desperate troll.

      Anyway there are Scots accented lords there. All thats interesting is the word play dudes like Prof Tomkins use. He’s an English nationalist working to keep England’s control of Scotland but ofcourse, he can never actually say that.

      So we have all kinds of yoon stuff from the guy, pool, share, safeness, power and glory of the NATIONS etc. His stuff about the 2 million Scots that voted NO to remain is a bit creepy considering they voted for the Vow and remain. Also up to 400k of those 2 million NO voting Scots are possibly English too.

      He’s put a lot of effort and plagiarised too but above all else, Prof T’s an English nat and as he always likes to not say, England losing control of Scotland is not going to happen. You can see why they’re shitting bricks over ref 2 though, after everything that they lied about for the NO win and their historic The Vow shyste.

    134. Petra says:

      @ Iain More says at 11:26 pm …. ”I wonder what passes for a historian on the EBC would say about the history of the Scottish Parly. I wonder if a certain Mr Oliver would call such voting changes as cancerous in relation to the SNP vote? But not the Tory vote. Has he accused the uncertainty caused by the EU Referendum as also being cancerous by any chance yet? I am guessing that Dan Snow and the EBC might hail them as great landslide victories for the Yoon Flagship HMS Tory Party. Since they have the SNP Fleet bottled up.”

      This is an extract from John Curtice’s oral evidence (page 196) given to the House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution – ‘The Union and Devolution’.

      The lordies are desperately looking for suggestions / ideas as to how to strengthen the Union. Whilst Tomkins focuses on the practical and visual image in relation to ‘bringing us together’, such as signing up for a Tomkins red, white and blue holiday to England on the Union Express, Curtice disagrees and focuses on the emotional ‘affinity’ aspect; featuring Dan Snow.

      And note Curtice points out that they’ve botched up trying to brainwash us all because education is devolved to Scotland …. they no longer have total control or influence over our mindset. Bet that one put the wind up the lordies. Then again maybe not as they’ve managed to plant a large number of their ilk in some key Scottish educational institutions. Schools are out so just keep on trying to brainwash us over the airwaves why don’t you. Hell mend every last one of them.

      JOHN CURTICE: ”I would rephrase the question slightly, in the sense that it is probably not a question of how you strengthen the image of the Union but rather how might you strengthen the underlying emotional affinity that might then translate into support of the Union basically – Britishness.

      My answer to that is to ask Danny Boyle and Dan Snow to do lots of programmes for you. Clearly in part underlying the argument about the constitution is an argument about culture. Some people in your part of the United Kingdom would prefer Wales to have much more autonomy because in part they see that as a way of promoting the Welsh language and culture. In part and this is not confined only to the Gaelic speaking community in Scotland the nationalist impetus is a wish to promote what they would regard as a distinctive Scottish culture, and undoubtedly to some degree a distinctive Scottish history. It is similar in Northern Ireland.

      Insofar as you can do very much about these things, you may want to ask yourself about the extent to which there is adequate work being done to remind people of and promote to people a sense of shared British culture and history. The obvious problem you face, however, is that you have devolved education, so you no longer have control or influence over the educational curriculum in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland. The pass may already have been sold, from your perspective.”

      http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-committees/constitution/union-and-devolution/FINAL-Evidence-volume-UDE.pdf

    135. schrodingers cat says:

      Thepnr says:
      The Labour Party is split between the Blairites and the Corbyistas.

      The Tory Party is split between the Ins and Outs of Europe.

      You cannot split an Independence Movement! Or can you?

      Just a reminder, there can be no party politics when it comes to Independence. Independence is bigger than any party.

      hear hear, the reds and greens make up a proportion of the yes supporters and while i have sympathy with some of their policies, I am more centralist and dont think we should allow them to hi-jack the indy movement, we, and wos in general, need to appeal to a larger cross section of society.

      after saying that, the reds and greens do make up a % of yes supporters who target other simalarly like minded individuals and try to convince them to vote yes.

      you may not agree with their view of a future indy scotland, no one is asking you to, but gloating about their demise doesnt serve the yes campaign. better to leave them to their own devises and focus on convincing the centre and more right wing elements to vote yes
      you may be miffed that they attack you for not being red or green enough, fair enough, but the correct response isnt to hope, promote and gloat at their demise. that doesnt serve the yes movement. the correct response is to come up with suggestions about how we convince the centre and right wing to vote yes.
      there is a certain amount of hypocracy in the gloating comments on the demise of bella, the criticism i heard most here was they should focus on converting labour to indy rather than attacking the snp.
      for the record, what are your plans to convert libdems and tories to yes?
      otherwise this blog is nothing more than a rant in cyberspace. Lookabootye

    136. schrodingers cat says:

      while you fawn over whether it was a red or green hamster who stole yer piece (the bastards)

      there are other serious bloggers out there and other commentators btl

      http://newsnet.scot/citizen/arts-institutions-universities-colonised-case-cringe/

    137. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Grouse Beater –

      Thanks for the link to that footage.

      Tomkins looks and sounds like a desperate courtier. Unfortunately (for him) he’s a few centuries late to impress any monarch directly.

      When the novelty of being an MSP wears off he’ll realise, to his horror, that he’s within easy arse-kicking distance of the oiks he was so desperate to escape.

      (p.s. Do you know much about Sir Jeffrey Jowell, the wee dude sat beside Tomkins? He’s a very difficult man to get information on, beyond glowing CVs…even Wiki draws a virtual blank. Strange…)

    138. AhuraMazda says:

      Ian Lang is Scottish?

    139. schrodingers cat says:

      the btl comments here are fast becoming a sycophants wet dream, who can brown nose stu the fastest in his all out war against the rest of the yes movement.

      god knows I have just as much reason to dislike bella, but that doesnt include gloating at their demise or dissing people like irvine welsh. he has world wide acclaim, something no one on here has.

      first the greens, now the reds, what next, how WFI are closet ruthie supporters?… get grip folks, this site was once pro yes, if it continues the character assassination of other yes supporting groups, people will start to doubt its convictions.indeed, i already doubt many on here.

      you carry on with your divide and concquer tactics, i’m more interested in pushing forward with yes2, and that includes NOT alienating those who already support this goal

    140. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      ” this site was once pro yes, if it continues the character assassination of other yes supporting groups, people will start to doubt its convictions.indeed, i already doubt many on here.”

      Oh fuck off. Bella and Common Space have carried numerous lurid attacks on Wings and on me personally, and on numerous other pro-indy sites and writers. By and large the rest of us haven’t hit back and have done our damnedest not to get involved in public slanging matches. If anyone’s dividing and conquering it’s not us.

      How many times have we supported other people’s fundraisers, including (in the past) Bella’s? How many did the readers of this site save from humiliating failure after we stepped in to publicise and endorse them? And nothing but abuse and sniping in return. If people have had enough of that I don’t blame them. I’m one of them.

    141. Petra says:

      @ crazycat says at 12:05 am …. ”Petra this may refer to the incident you were asking about. I don’t have a TV so didn’t see it myself.”

      https://twitter.com/BBCPhilipSim/status/735471351369236480

      Thanks Crazycat that cleared that one up for me. Thank goodness he wasn’t being so out and out nasty towards Nicola rather supporting her. On the other hand STV portrayed this as Harvie joining in the bitter fray with the Unionists. Sleekit!

      @ AhuraMazda says at 12:10 am …. ”I see that Petra laughed at the suggestions below by Tomkins but I can’t be the only one who found this whole thing very sinister …

      Darkened rooms full of weird old men in Westminster discussing the possibility of taking our kids away on trains? It’s The Age of The Train all over again, isn’t it …

      I think The Saville Line would be a better name for it, or maybe The Janner Line. Not one Scottish accent in the whole ring, I mean room… Not one.”

      I see you’ve been behaving yourself today AM, lol and I’ll overlook the fact that you didn’t seem to get my ‘ha, ha’ point. Other than that I had of course thought about the implications of sending children off to strangers homes, escorted on the Union Line by God knows who, and additionally the reaction of English parents taking them in at the other end. However you could on forever making points … no point in some instances especially as his suggestions are absolutely ludicrous.

      Anyway I liked the Saville / Janner ring line. Gave me a bit of another ha, ha laugh. Also your paedophile reference would put paid to Tomkins et al ever bringing up his brilliant idea again. One mention that Tomkins and the Lords were thinking of hustling our kids off to England and Tomkins would be run out of town …. Bearsden.

    142. AhuraMazda says:

      Anyway, I think the SNP described the Committee’s findings as “irrelevant” last week, and that’s how I see it. Federalism would take 10 years to define never mind implement. Nothing that a few burnt out old pricks in a room say will change that.

      Tomkins suggested it would be impossible to devolve VAT because of the EU’s requirement that we all have the same VAT rates but that’s absolute nonsense.

      VAT rates across the EU vary from country to country; although they are all kept within certain parameters. I think each member state has to set VAT somewhere between 15 and 30%, something like that. The UK Government has unilaterally changed our VAT rate in the UK 2 or 3 times in the last 5 years, the EU didn’t come into those decisions.

      The key issue — and it is key — is Corporation Tax and the Committee didn’t even mention it. The fact that they didn’t mention it speaks volumes. It goes without saying, of course, that Corporation Tax would include money raised from oil and they definitely aren’t letting our hands near that till.

      If they were serious about the Union they would have discussed devolving Corporation Tax. No EU law currently even touches on Corporation Tax, so no excuses there. The fact that they didn’t proves the union is essentially colonial and they know it’s colonial.

    143. Petra says:

      @ heedtracker says at 11:50 pm …. ”Prof Tomkins likes to say “respect the ref verdict where a majority of Scots voted to remain in this union” but what about the 400k English referendum voters in Scotland or even Prof Tomkins himself? He’s from the south coast of England apparently. Stage 3 of toryboy plan to take control of any more possible devo-

      Adam Tomkins MSP Retweeted

      Mark Elliott ?@ProfMarkElliott 13h13 hours ago

      A post by Stephen Tierney & me: Today’s Constitution Cttee report on The Union & Devolution

      https://publiclawforeveryone.com/2016/05/25/the-house-of-lords-constitution-committee-report-on-the-union-and-devolution/

      One wonders why they don’t just start showing some respect for and listening to our 56 democratically ‘ELECTED’ MP’s at Westminster.

    144. AhuraMazda says:

      Petra, I’m generally much better behaved than I get credit for. And if I’m a troll in here, I’m a bigger troll in real life which I think should be taken into account.

      I’ve been attacked since day one in here but that’s okay. Someone did suggest I was that guy David Torrance in disguise and I was in a downer for 3 days but I’m over it now.

      Schrodinger, people need to decide if they want independence or if they want to be hip. This whole left wing intellectual game is just a sort of fashion accessory. It’s like those little wrist bands everybody started wearing all of a sudden.

      If you want independence, you should support the only party able to deliver it — not attack it.

      Bella should stick to art and crafts or something. From a marketing perspective, I think they need to refine their purpose in terms of what they are and who they are aimed at. There’s a real lack of clarity there in a market that is very competitive.

      But lines were crossed when certain people were allowed to use Bella as a platform for attacking the Independence movement; that was nasty and taken personally by a lot of people I know.

      At the time I said “Hell mend them”. Well, here we are, hell and mending time for Bella. You reap what you sow.

      I know at least 7 or 8 people in real life who will never go near that website again because of their insulting little games. Not one of those people was influenced by anything they read on Wings either, most of them are Twitter types.

    145. Ken500 says:

      The (non) Greens mucked up the Referendum, the majority do not support their policies – 60% tax and an implied land grab – put moderate voters off. Enough to swing the verdict. The majority will not vote for them because of their unpopular policies. They got massive, disproportionate coverage, for a small pressure group.

      Muck up the GE let more Tories through and mucked up the Holyrood election. Lied and let the Unionists through. It nearly was Davidson for FM backed up by Dugdale, because of 2nd rate rejects system. Folk are just waking up to that now. They renege on their policies and collude with Unionists (the status quo) for remuneration and benefit. Ruining city centres and other major projects. It is appalling what they have done. Costing Millions/Billion that could be better spent. They then complain there is not enough funding for essential services.

      If people wanted to own land in Scotland they would buy it. Current £5000 an acre over 25 years. A house can be built on 1/4 of an acre. They want to access the land and they do in their
      millions. The people are more green than the (non) Greens. Scotland has ‘a right to roam’ anybody can access the land. It is the(non) Greens who would try to stop them. They collude with landowners and others to stop people accessing the land or achieving projects which benefit the community.

      They hang on to the SNP support and criticise them at every opportunity. The SNP Gov is one of the most Green in Europe.

    146. Ken500 says:

      Prof Tomkins is a paid public figure. Paid by Scottish taxpayers. There is a professional code of taking a fair and impartial view. A few academics do not comply with these guidelines. Taking an extremely partisan, biased position. How can that be reconciled to how a paid public official can work for two institutions and comply with the EU 48hours directive.

    147. Grouse Beater says:

      Ian Brotherhood: “Do you know much about Sir Jeffrey Jowell”

      Retired judge, now back bencher who wants to ‘streamline the judicial system’ which could be a good or bad thing depending on who ends up making most money from ‘streamlining’. And I presume he also means streamlining Scots law so its sits better with English law and is subservient to it. When does a ‘Brit’ not include Scotland as part of England?

      Jowell is a founder of the Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law (2010) and now its director – the Centre named after arch Tory Lord Bingham, ‘Baron Bingham’, Master of the Rolls, now deceased.

      Bingham oversaw an increasing workload of constitutional affairs after Scottish devolution. One saving grace to his activities was he wanted drones banned as weapons in war. One supposes Jowell agreed – assuming he has any ambition to be promoted by his senior colleague.

      To my mind any think tank that appears to be a group of the elite with a mission to impose change on the majority is suspect. A Tory government upholding the rule of law will be a wondrous thing. (Centre’ – centre of what?)

      Jowell dislikes anarchy – hence his wish for the ‘rule’ of law’ to permeate everything – but anarchy by an individual or the masses is a key force for rejecting the bad for the good in sick societies.

      You’ll find videos of Jowell talking his ideas on YouTube.

    148. Ken500 says:

      Osbourne claims Scotland should show enterprise and encourage people to live and work in Scotland.

      Osbourne policies take £10Billion+ from Scotland which could be better spent. Against the majority wishes and the public interest. Scotland has lost £4Billion+ a year in Oil & Gas revenues. £24Billion. Osbourne and Cameron are complete liars. The only thing that will radically change Scotland is FFA/Independence.

      Osbourne’s tax regime has totally harmed the Oil & Gas sector in Scotland. Putting 60/80% tax on the sector when the price had fallen 75%. It is now 40% Gross incompetent mismanagement that has cost thousands of jobs in the UK. Complete and utter incompetence relevant of the U.K. Gov.

      Osbourne intends spending £200Billion on Hinkley Point and HS2 when the money could be better spent. On renewables, upgrading the present transport system and essential public services. Westminster is sanctioning vulnerable people and starving them to death. Westminster policies have caused the worse migration crisis in Europe since WW11 and is harming the European economy. Costing £Billions.

    149. Ken500 says:

      The HoL has obsolutely no power. It can only delay twice. The Tories are trying to curtail it’s power further. Preventing HoL delaying a Bill.

      Westminster can never change Scot’s Law. Under the Act of Union the agreement was that Scotland could have a separate Legal system, Church (education) and a shared Protestant Monarch. Forever. This can only be changed with agreement of both parties. Or the Union is automatically dissolved.

      The England Supreme Appeal Court is now taking away people rights in Scotland, to appeal to the European Human rights Court. The England Supreme Court (Blair) has to agree with decision Scottish Appeal court because sovereignty resides with the people under Scottish Law. An England appeal court can’t override a decision of Scottish Appeal court in Scotland. The two legal systems are separate. People in Scotland are losing their right, EU citizens, to appeal to the European Court of Appeal. That will have to be changed,

    150. WP says:

      O/T Falkirk Council leader, Labour’s Craig Martin has just awarded the Orange Order a “Community Grant” of £1145, despite opposition from the SNP. Nice to know there are no
      wothy causes in more need of our hard earned money than this. Welcome to 17th Century Scotland.

    151. Petra says:

      Are there no foodbanks in Falkirk WP or children’s charities?

    152. Almannysbunnet says:

      Paul doing a fine job, over at WGD, of dismantling Gordie Broon and his latest intervenshun.

      “He reputedly has a stupendous capacity for facts and a photographic memory, it’s just that there’s no film in his camera and no pointer in his moral compass.”

      Love it!

    153. Ken500 says:

      It is illegal for public bodies to fund or support the Orange Lodge in Scotland with public money. It is elitist, secret, discriminatory and protectionist. Under council code of conduct no such body should be awarded or supported with public funds. It is a private organisation and as such should be privately funded. The Councillors are breaking the Law. The vast majority of taxpayers do not support the Orange Lodge or their divisive, illegal behaviour.

    154. galamcennalath says:

      This is interesting …

      http://indyref2.scot/yes-scotland-no-intellectual-elitism

      “Bella Caledonia is the site most favoured by the self-styled intellectual elite.”

      Indeed, and I agree particularly with the ‘self-styled’ aspect. Being an intellectual is something you become recognised by others because of your knowledge of and contribution to a subject. Individuals who don’t earn intellectual respect through words and deeds, but behave as cerebral elites … are just seen as wankers!

    155. heedtracker says:

      Taking an extremely partisan, biased position. How can that be reconciled to how a paid public official can work for two institutions and comply with the EU 48hours directive.”

      Tomkins bosses at Glasgow uni are unionist tories so that’s fine. The EU 48 hour working time directive was opted out of by Blair and Brown, another working class heroic victory for Labour.

      Labour opting out of the work time directives and many others, shows us some important UKOK thingees.

      1. Labour are red tories or they wouldn’t have opted out of work time limit

      2. Brexiteers are just more tory liars with their Brussels dictatorship bullshit. UK can opt out of any and all EU directives when it suits red or blue tory Westminster and the work time directive is a really nasty example.

      3. UKOK unions rolled over when Bomber Blair and Crash Gordon’s opt out kicked in. They’re giving you the right to work as long as you like teamGB workers. Solidarity, fraternity with all the workers of the EU s vote NO and all that very British shite we had poured over us 2014.

      http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2015/september/-uk-to-retain-working-time-directive-opt-out-as-part-of-eu-negotiations/

    156. Bob Mack says:

      @Galamcennanath.

      Careful or you’ll have an angry puss after you.Mr Schrodinger does not like you to disagree with him.

      Personally I won’t be contributing to Bella again ,not because of the Rev ,but because they promote more anti than pro indy stuff these days.

    157. DerekM says:

      @ WP

      Aye WP its a total disgrace but not unexpected from the parcel of rogues that sit in our council,but we will fix that next year with lots of p45`s and i hope we go further as i do believe we have the most corrupt council in Scotland jail time is needed for the crooks that run it and have run it before them.

      They just managed to keep us out last time by going into coalition with the blue tories they wont do that next year.

      tick tock Falkirk council i hope you like prison food you bastards.

    158. AhuraMazda says:

      It sounds like Falkirk has more than its fair share of Orange bigots. Obviously we need to close down Catholic schools there, deny them funding. That’ll show those Orange extremists.

    159. TD says:

      Ken500 at 8:22 a.m.

      You make a number of assertions that frankly are just not true. I can only assume that you are stating things as you would like them to be rather than as they are.

      First you say the House of Lords has no power. Would that it were so! As you say they can delay legislation – that alone gives them considerable power. They can also scrutinise and change legislation. They can also initiate legislation. There is a cosy understanding between the Lords and the Commons that the Lords will restrict themselves to meddling a bit, but not too much. When the Lords used their power to frustrate the government over Tax Credits, there were howls of protest from the same people who have created the rules which allow the Lords to do what they do. It is a constitutional farce.

      “Westminster can never change Scot’s Law”. Well that’s not true – they did it for nearly 300 years until 1999 and they still do it in respect of reserved matters. The most recent example is the banning of legal highs across the whole UK. What is meant to be true is that the Scottish Courts operate independently of any UK or English Court when it comes to criminal matters. It has long been the case that civil matters could be appealed to the House of Lords and now the UK Supreme Court. Arguably, this broke down with the case of Cadder which concerned the rights of police to interview a suspect. As this was a human rights matter, which is civil not criminal, it was appealed to the UK Supreme Court which made a ruling that fundamentally changed Scots criminal law.

      It remains to be seen whether the right of Scots to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights will be affected. But as human rights matters can go to the UK Supreme Court, there is a case that Scottish appeals should get the same treatment as English appeals. Not how I would like it, but given the UK government’s position on the constitution I can see that this is how they will argue it. And as long as we remain in the UK, it does make some sort of sense. The only solution of course is for Scotland to rip up the current constitutional arrangements and forge its own path. Then we will not need to worry about whether something should go to the UK Supreme Court – it just won’t!

    160. Clydebuilt says:

      Last nights It’v /STV news Gavin Essler interviewed a Garry Parler founded SNP GO……. But according to … http://search.electoralcommission.org.uk/English/Registrations/PerPar4067

      SNP GO was De -Registered on 23/5/16…… What’s this all about…. ?

    161. Fireproofjim says:

      Bella’s been getting a more and more extreme left republican voice, and is in danger of losing all but that extreme fringe of the independence movement.
      Most independence supporters seem to be slightly left of centre, don’t care about smashing capitalism or the monarchy and want independence to be a way of taking responsibility for our own affairs and looking after our own people.
      The more shrill and extreme clenched fist groups of the extreme left will only scare off the more moderate independence supporters.

    162. Flower of Scotland says:

      I was blocked, unfriended got rid off on the Bella Facebook page because I put up some good information (that I got on here) in favour of the Named Person. That was last year. I have never been blocked, unfriended before on any site!

      I did complain on the blog, but was told, more or less, that abusers are not tolerated. So disagreeing and showing some other views are called abuse by Bella.

      Their articles are quite anti Indy sometimes. I just don’t read it anymore because I don’t like its tone.
      It’s very unfortunate.

      Of course, I have not contributed to their crowdfunding campaign

    163. ronnie anderson says:

      @Galamcennalath { Individuals who don’t earn intellectual respect through words and deeds, but behave as cerebral elites … are just seen as wankers!}

      Oh Loki Loki just one reason Yessers gave up on Bella. I gave up on them a long time ago, with they,re leftist rhetoric & at no time have I seen a Bella Banner,s at any Demo’s.

      Wings Over Scotland have attended all the Demo’s orginized by whatever groups in supporting Independence & donated monies to good causes via Badge donations (BDTT & PTC) + Wingers have donated to many Crowdfunders all in the cause of promoting Independence & I hope that continues.

      The Rev can always use extra money, if people who read WoS havent subscribed I would urge you to do so, this is thee site that has Independence at its heart.

      I personaly would like to see a Wings orginized Demonstration ie BBC/Daily Record & take the fight directly to they,re doorsteps.

    164. @schrodingers cat

      your the one that advocated splitting your vote and thereby denying Nicola a majority to get on with Independence,

      your the one that allows that grinning sociopath Ruth Davidson to keep accusing the SNP of being a minority government,

      fricken greens `what are they good for`,`absolutely nothing`.

    165. Brent Crude,

      over $50 a barrel,

      take that ya yoon lickspittles.

      http://tinyurl.com/7e3oeuu

    166. Robert Peffers says:

      Tinto Chiel says: 26 May, 2016 at 12:01 am:

      ” … Heavy stuff on here tonight: I sense the revolution is starting”

      No gonna dae that, Tinto Chiel?

      Are you implying Wingers are revolting?

    167. AhuraMazda says:

      Fireproofjim, that’s more or less true in itself.

      It sounds like word-play, but I think the centre of politics in Scotland is slightly left of centre. Calling it “left of centre relies” on a comparison with English politics which we want to get away from; their definitions of centre etc., are totally screwed up.

      According to Englanders, Blair was left of centre. That’s like saying Genghis Khan was left of centre.

      Corbyn, a totally limp-docked moderate by any objective standard, is regarded as a Stalinist in England.

      Anyway, you’re right, Bella is basically an online urinal for Marxists. They never admit that up front though. I guess they espouse Marxism just by the way they comb their hair or stand or something… don’t bug them about details.

    168. Grouse Beater says:

      Clydebuilt: “What’s this all about…?”

      Moonlighting for MI5

    169. euan0709 says:

      Could some of you clever clogs help me with this.
      It is my understanding that as it stands, In England, Wales and Northern Ireland ?? A case can only “go” to the UK Supreme Court in London with the permission of a Senior Judge in that particular country.
      However this does NOT apply in Scotland where a lawyer can take his case straight to the UK Supreme Court without the permission of a Scottish Judge. Thus weakening the Authority of the Scottish Courts.(Don’t you jist luv Toni Blair)
      I read somewhere that the new Scotland Act would remedy this and give the Scottish Legal System/Courts the same authority as the rest of the UK. As I said can any of you clever clogs enlighten me on this matter.
      Slightly OT….Has the Scottish Red Duster( Scottish Merchant Navy Flag) been officially approved yet ???
      Thanks !!!

    170. Grouse Beater says:

      Euan: “help me with this.”

      A question to post on Peat Warrior’s website.

      You can undermine Scots law verdicts appealing to England’s supreme court – a case of anything considered UK national is by definition superior to all similar institutions.

      Examples:

      The National Theatre is superior to the Scottish National Theatre; the British Museum is superior to the National Museum of Scotland; the Royal Academy of Arts is superior to the Royal Scottish Academy; The People’s Judean Front is superior to …

    171. Glamaig says:

      Petra at 12:38

      http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-committees/constitution/union-and-devolution/FINAL-Evidence-volume-UDE.pdf

      There’s 110 separate witnesses given evidence there.

      1 SNP (fiona Hyslop), 1 Plaid (Leanne), 1 Scottish Green (Maggie C), and 107 assorted lords, academics, and Better Together campaign groups.

    172. Socrates MacSporran says:

      Rev.

      Just had a look at your Twitter feed, and in particular that well-thought-out, reasoned, entirely fair and intelligent, not to say correctly-spelled, with excellent gramar and punctuation, post from ‘Linfield 1690’.

      If ‘Linfield 1690’ is Scottish, I can only say: “From bams like these, auld Scotia’s grandeur springs”.

      If he is from Ulster, the response has to be: “Ireland, Ireland, together standing tall – not”.

      They move among us, and are allowed to breed!!!

    173. Onwards says:

      @ronnie anderson,

      “Loki just one reason Yessers gave up on Bella.”

      Yeah, the guys’s an absolute fud. Promoting ‘No votes SNP’ all over social media and loving the smoke blown up his arse by all the unionist journos for being so ‘open minded’.
      For someone who proclaims to be all about standing up for the working class in Pollock he would rather see them ruled by the Tories in London.

    174. TD says:

      euan0709 at 10:41

      I have not heard of a case going straight to the Supreme Court without the permission of the Court of Session. Chapter 41A of the Court of Session Rules gives details of the procedure for applying for permission to take a case to the Supreme Court. This suggests that permission is needed.

      I haven’t heard anything about the Scottish Red Duster – but it is about time that Scottish ships were not required to fly the butcher’s apron.

    175. G H Graham says:

      Anyone got a graph illustrating the correlation between the number of pies Greggs sells in a day & the number of lies Jackie Baillie tells, say on a Tuesday? Specifically, just after lunch?

    176. Glamaig says:

      you can see where this Lords constitutional reform thingee is going. Cook up a nice shiny pseudo-federal home-rule proposal and put it to a referendum. Its actual effect though (in the small print) will be to make it legally impossible for Scotland to ever become independent.

      It will be pushed as home rule and a lot of people will fall for it.

    177. Robert Peffers says:

      @Rev. Stuart Campbell says: 26 May, 2016 at 1:10 am:

      ” … If anyone’s dividing and conquering it’s not us.”

      Well said, Rev Stu. To my mind the problem rests firmly upon the shoulders of such as Bella slanting away from all out support for Scottish independence if it does not comply with their own personal shade of colour on the political spectrum.

      They have indeed attacked both Wings and Wingers along with some quite nasty anti-SNP and anti-SG stuff thrown in for good measure.

    178. ScottishPsyche says:

      Following on from the comments about what has gone wrong with Bella – for me it is hypocrisy that they exhibit about who is acceptable in their clique and who is not.

      Yet they want our money.

      I honestly feel The National has become the print version of Bella, hence there s no need to fund both. Just look at who endorses Bella, most of them write for The National.

      There is not one single article on Bella that changed my mind about anything. I found Wings, ironically through the evil cybernats rants on MSM and suddenly here was someone actually having the balls to say what many of us had been feeling for so long.

      Stu can defend his opinions outwith politics without any help from anyone here. For me, the value of this site is keeping at the MSM and their double standards.

      GA Ponsonby gets so much stick but he has highlighted the BBC at their worst. Single issues maybe, but they paid a huge part in the Referendum result. Derek Bateman has valuable insight into the workings of the BBC. James Kelly has consistently given clarity on polling and the voting system.They have all been pilloried by the ‘Cognoscenti’ on Bella.

      I know who I will continue to fund in the future.

    179. TD says:

      euan0709

      I have done a little digging on appeals to the Supreme Court. It appears I was wrong – in certain circumstances an appeal can go to the Supreme Court without permission from the Court of Session. I think the conditions for no permission being required are:

      1. The Court of Session ruled with a split decision of the judges, or
      2. The Court of Session dismissed the case on some sort of technicality without considering the merits of the case.

      In these situations, two Scottish advocates have to certify that the appeal is reasonable, but no permission is required from the court. So my apologies – and thanks for raising the point and forcing me to look it up!

    180. Is Bella Caledonia still an “indy” site?

      Was it honestly ever?

      Am truly stunned.

      Thought they were a collective of Brit state pseudo Anarcho-Trots posing in Jock, anti-Brit kit (emphasis on the petit bourgeois anarchy thingy with a touch of trendy social fascism body-line muscle stuff posing in the mirror and flexing like Narcissus with skinny tight swimmer panties on admiring their buttocks and other bits and bobs).

      Dang. Missed that (the fundamental, core principled bit as opposed to the hustle and bustle, pimping opportunism of their “site” now God awful. Sadly. Very much so, in my humble opinion).

      Och well, the Anglo-Brit “Anarcho-Trots” attempt to strut their Anglo-Brit security services stuff yet again ( and on Brit World Beeb their is a JockBrit plant opining in Butcher’s Apron attachment to his uniform).

      Enough.

    181. Les Wilson says:

      The House of Lords document ” The force for Good”
      Is a rambling and a direct attack on Scottish democracy.
      We should be condemning this attempt to ” forever” suffocate the very thought of Scottish Independence.

      Westminster should control all of the functions of government, and should be able to take back devolved powers at any given time.
      Even to close Holyrood Parliament down, should they wish.
      They want direct Westminster control over all Councils, bypassing Holyrood.

      This is absolutely a disgusting document that all Scots, should be very angry about, and the un-elected Lords should hear our anger long and loud.

      Throughout the document everything is directly governed by Westminster decree, and basically the Scots can get stuffed.
      Nothing is allowed to interfere with the cozy life of the Lords
      is what it really says. In order to assure that, Scots must be neutered. This is case for the UN as it MUST break many UN charter rules.

      Not that they care about things like that.
      An utter disgrace, we should all read this and yes, get very angry about it. All aspects of the Union must be thrust upon us whether we like it or not. All for the greater good of the Union, and of course for the cozy un elected and outrageous, House of Lords.

    182. Ken500 says:

      Having a lawyer present at interview is a Human rights position. It’s enforced comes from Scottish/UK/EU membership. Scottish Law was out of sync with Human’s rights legislation which had moved on. Law has always evolved and moved on. Labour/Unionists introduced 100’s of Laws. Delaying twice does not give ultimate power. How quickly that can take affect depends on time and Gov business. Urgent or not. There are already Tories proposal afoot at Westminster to alter this. Take away limited powers. The London Supreme Court was only set up in 1999. The fact that Westminster has acted illegally under Scottish matters and kept it secret under the Official Secrets Act does not support a valid argument.

      At present 2016 – Scottish citizens can be prevented from taking an Appeal to European Human rights court by the London Supreme Court (Blair) because they will always have to acquiesce with the verdict of the Scottish Appeal Court or break the terms of the Act of Union, that Scotland has a separate legal system and the people in Scotland are sovereign. The right of appeal to European rights court is being blocked for EU citizens in Scotland. That will have to be changed.

    183. Ruby says:

      Grouse Beater says:
      25 May, 2016 at 9:36 pm

      Ruby: “Is anyone aware of the focus groups & opinion polls & referendum regarding the New Act of Union funded by Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust?

      I warned about this only weeks ago. Few rang the bells.

      Ruby replies

      I wonder why your article & the whole ‘New Act of Union’stuff went unnoticed for so long?

      Perhaps you need to re-think your headlines in order to waken me up! Perhaps you need to be a bit less subtle

      Here are some suggestions:
      ‘NEW ACT OF UNION BANS ANY FURTHER INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUMS IN SCOTLAND’

      ‘INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUMS MADE ILLEGAL BY NEW ACT OF UNION’

      ‘UNION UNDER THREAT ACTION MUST BE TAKEN’
      http://tinyurl.com/jh5qodr

      PS Has there been any coverage of the focus groups & opinion polls? Is it all being done in secret?

    184. Onwards says:

      ScottishPsyche says:
      26 May, 2016 at 11:07 am

      “Following on from the comments about what has gone wrong with Bella – for me it is hypocrisy that they exhibit about who is acceptable in their clique and who is not.

      Yet they want our money.

      I honestly feel The National has become the print version of Bella, hence there s no need to fund both.”
      ————

      Thing is, I would still rather see them survive than not.

      Despite the censorship and the stupid promotion of RISE and the tactical voting idiocy, at the end of the day they are still a pro-indy site.

    185. galamcennalath says:

      Les Wilson says:

      “The House of Lords document ” The force for Good”
      Is a rambling and a direct attack on Scottish democracy”

      While the legal reality is that the Union exists as a partnership, the London Bubble has always seen it differently. On their eyes we have a de facto United Kingdom of Greater England. Their idea of a solution to the constitutional crisis is simply to entrench their status quo.

    186. Ken500 says:

      The House of Lords is unelected. There is still increasing support for FFA/ Independence. No unelected minority Institition can force their views on anyone under Scottish/UK/EU International Law. There are participating their own demise. They should be quiet or bow out. Their separation Is long overdue. They an unelected minority in Scottish society. Appointed by UK Gov. The HoL is even more irrelevant because of Devolution.

    187. Ruby says:

      https://archive.is/boEkl

      ‘The House of Lords says the future of the UK is at threat’

      I like the picture in this arcticle.

      Oh dear what can they do to stop the tide coming in and destroying their castle made of sand?

      http://tinyurl.com/zgmz3mw

    188. AHuraMazda says:

      I had an argument with a Loki fan on Twitter once. He insisted that Loki was to Pollok what Che Guevera was to Cuba. No joking.

      Anyway, Che, as far as we know, is currently lying dead under an airstrip near some backwater town in Bolivia. The records suggest that Che is handless, i.e. his hands were cut off.

      Now I’m not sure if Loki has hands or not; he seems to type a lot for a guy with no hands. What I do know is that he had a vested interest in promoting RISE.

    189. Robert Peffers says:

      @Ken500 says: 26 May, 2016 at 8:22 am:

      “Westminster can never change Scot’s Law. Under the Act of Union the agreement was that Scotland could have a separate Legal system, Church (education) and a shared Protestant Monarch. Forever. This can only be changed with agreement of both parties. Or the Union is automatically dissolved.”

      Whoops! Wee error there, Ken500.

      I’ll correct it for you:-

      Blockquote>“Westminster can never LEGALLY change Scot’s Law. Under the Act of Union the agreement was that Scotland could have a separate Legal system, Church (education) and a shared Protestant Monarch. Forever. This can only be changed with agreement of both parties. Or the Union is automatically dissolved.”

      When, in the entire 309 years of the Union, (the 309th anniversary of the union was on 1 May 2016), has the Establishment in Westminster ever treated the Treaty other than an English takeover?

      Never ever forget the words of that utterly despicable, “Secretary of State against, Scotland, David Mundell,:-

      “The Treaty of Union Extinguished the Kingdom of Scotland and renamed the Kingdom of England as the United Kingdom”

      That is how The Westminster Establishment has continued to treat Scotland as from 1 May 1707.

      They have assumed that Westminster holds legal sovereignty over Scotland. The actual legal evidence is that, under English law, a sovereign, once becoming sovereign, cannot legally renounce their sovereignty. Under Scots law the people, not either the monarchy nor the state, are sovereign.

      Thus, under English law, it is not possible for the sovereign people of Scotland to renounce their sovereignty and that makes it legally impossible for Westminster to claim legal sovereignty over Scotland. So they just assume that they do without any legal authority.

      In fact it is the main reason the three country Kingdom of England became a Constitutional Monarchy in 1688, instead of a Republic.

      The English Parliament could not legally take sovereignty away from King Billy & Queen Mary of Orange but instead made it clear they would not be offered the English crown unless they delegated their sovereign powers to the parliament.

      Which is why Westminster is named, “Her Majesty’s Government”, and everything is Her Majesty’s by English Law.

    190. ScottishPsyche says:

      @Onward

      Maybe a year ago I would have agreed with you but they represent a particular Yes voter that I have not come across in real life, yet who seems overrepresented in the media.

      Do they change anyone’s mind from No to Yes? Or do they fulfil a role as token ‘civilized’ voices of Indy, allowed to exist by MSM because they pose no threat whatsoever? Occasionally having some ‘anarchic’ pseudo socialist voice write a piece does not make them any more powerful. All the names they list write for other outlets as well.

      For a decent magazine I prefer iScotland.

      I have the same feelings towards them as I had towards Blair Jenkins, for the Yes campaign.Ultimately useless but an acceptable face of Indy for Scotland Tonight and Scotland 2016.

    191. ScottishPsyche says:

      FFS I meant iScot. A beautifully produced magazine that is sadly under promoted.

    192. AhuraMazda says:

      Ruby: “I wonder why your article & the whole ‘New Act of Union’stuff went unnoticed for so long?”

      It didn’t. Those of us who weren’t distracted by the challenge of chasing down imaginary witches & trolls noticed it.

      The legend, Angra Mainyu, also mentioned the issue a few times.

    193. Onwards says:

      @Petra

      Re: Tomkins suggestions – that sort of thing is already ongoing.

      “A series of little steps, many of them on their own perhaps quite minor, may be what is needed.”

      That thinking is why we now have union jacks on our driving licenses, and union jacks to be plastered over broadband cabinets and other infrastructure part-funded with UK taxes. It’s why every second TV show is now the Great British whatever, and why the new Southern General was renamed after the monarch.

      Look at the howls of fury when it was announced that Police Scotland would take over from the British Transport Police on the railways.

      I think little things like that DO help to make a difference in the perception that Scotland is a different nation in its own right.

      I think it would make perfect sense to see the NHS renamed as the Scottish Health Service or the SHS. Not just for branding reasons.. It would actually make practical sense. There is already so much confusion when we hear people in the UK media talk about “The NHS” in general – when there is plenty of differences between the NHS services in Scotland and England.

      Staff here get a bad name from being associated with all the troubles south of the border as the common perception is that NHS Scotland is just a *sub-branch* of a UK NHS.
      And with income taxes being paid here now, people need to be more aware that Holyrood is entirely responsible for our health service.

      The renaming of the Southern General gave the perfect precedent for this. One of the official explanations was that the new hospital didn’t just serve southern Glasgow so it was no longer geographically accurate.

    194. Ruby says:

      The report also stresses the importance of the role played by the BBC and other public service broadcasters play in maintaining “a common British identity”.

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24302914

      I’m trying to find out what is meant by a ‘British identity’

      I was quite surprised by this:

      ‘In England and Wales, the generation least likely to have ticked the box marked “British” to describe their national identity are those who lived through the war and watched the sun set on the British Empire.’

    195. TD says:

      Robert Peffers / Ken500

      Sorry, I don’t agree with either of you. Westminster can and does lawfully change Scots Law. The fact that the Scottish people are sovereign does not mean that the Scottish people could not delegate their sovereignty to the Scottish parliament (pre-Act of Union) and then the Westminster parliament and now in part to the Scottish parliament again. Similarly, both the Scottish people (through their representatives at Westminster) and the rest of the UK can and have delegated a degree of sovereignty to Europe (much to the disgust of the Britnats, but even they do not argue that it is unlawful).

      If you argue that because the Scottish people are sovereign laws passed at Westminster are not lawful, then that would imply that all European legislation is unlawful. And legislation of the Scottish parliament must also be unlawful – because it’s not the people who pass the legislation and the Scottish parliament was itself set up by an act of the Westminster parliament. The principle of delegated sovereignty is well established and it is quite unproductive to go around saying that the constitutional arrangements we don’t like are unlawful. They are not. The people of Scotland as recently as 2014 voted to remain governed by Westminster and if there was ever any doubt about the “legality” of Westminster rule in Scotland (there wasn’t in my mind) there cannot be now. Legislation affecting Scotland, passed by Westminster, is lawful. We may not like the legislation and we may not like the constitutional arrangements, but that is a completely different matter.

      We need to distinguish between the separate legal system enshrined in the Act of Union and the laws that the legal system enforces. We can have the same law in both England and Scotland (e.g. the Psychoactive Substances Act which came into force last night) but separate systems enforcing it. It is the system that is guaranteed to be separate in Scotland – not the substance of the law. The whole point of the union was to have shared laws and shared law-making. I don’t like that and I wish it were not so, but that does not make it unlawful.

      Our future lies in persuading people to withdraw their consent to being governed by Westminster, not in semantic arguments about whether acts of parliament since 1607 are lawful.

    196. Ken500 says:

      Universal suffrage 1928.

      Scotland can vote for or against any Union. Appeal to the EU Court of Human rights. The ‘right to self determination’. Scottish legal system is guaranteed, separate forever. Under Scottish Law the people are sovereign. Westminster lying and keeping Scotish matters secret under the Official Secrets Act is not a valid argument for the Union. It fact the opposite. They should be held to account,

      Support for Independence in increasing. The Unionist cheated and lied in the Indy Referendum. Westminster acted illegally. Illegal payments, lies broke Purdah, false promises etc.

    197. Robert Peffers says:

      @Scot Finlayson says: 26 May, 2016 at 10:30 am:

      … fricken greens `what are they good for`,`absolutely nothing`.”

      Here’s a thing, Scot.

      There is a great divide between the basic idea of being, “Green”, and the plicies of the political party.

      I was born and brought up in a farm cottage in the late 1930s/early 1940s, (a Pluchie’s Raw). My Grandfather came from a long line of farmers but the family were bankrupted by the infamous, “Year o the short corn”, and lost their farm in East Lothian.

      No one could be more, “Green”, minded than that whole family. We were against some then common and newer farm policies of that time. Those policies have had great influence upon the many ills of modern agriculture that persist today.

      So here’s the reality – the Green Party are generally far more concerned with Nimbyism and poorly understood science than is good for them. As long as that persists the Greens will remain a minor party of self-interest and protest.

    198. Ken500 says:

      Many arguments are centred on Westminster acting honourable under the Law. They do not. They act illegally and keep (Scottish) matters secret under the Official secrets Act. They have lied since 1928 and before, how can that be said to constitute legitimate Gov when the UK Gov is breaking their own Laws, Scottish/UK/EUInternational Law. They break the Laws that they make and do not enforce the Law. (Especially in Scotland). Westminster make promises they do not keep.

    199. heedtracker says:

      Channel 4 News ?@Channel4News May 24
      Conservative party opposes election expenses extension: @EdHowker reports: http://www.channel4.com/news/conservative-party-opposes-election-expenses-extension … #electionexpenses

      Hammer of the Scots Anna Soubrey cops investigating election expenses tory shyste but unlike sleaze smeared SNP, England press and BBC etc are not smearing tories with their sleaze, shock. Good example of how tory boy world dominates UKOK media too.

      The ever repellent UK in Scotland tory media, have completely buried tory expense fraud investigations, which instantly raises the query, what’s up with that, Ruth MacThatcher goon show involved?

      Deafening silence from Pacific Quay crew suggests it could be.

    200. Ken500 says:

      It would not imply European Law is unlawful – unless it is broken. The UK (Scotland) voted to join the EU. A damaging campaign is being raged to accommodate UKIP which has no support in Scotland. Is that legitimate? An election promise. Westminster has not honoured election promises to support the NHS or reduce the debt,

      That a 10 to 1 majority of the rest of the UK in Westminster is legitimate and democratic. Scotland voted NO because of a campaign that did not follow the rules as per a General Election. (+ 16/17 year olds) It should be annulled. Promises to give Scotland FFA/Home Rule/Federalism. A complete lie. EVEL was established the next day.

    201. AhuraMazda says:

      TD, I more or less agree that in practice UK law does override Scottish Law in some areas but not all. I would say that Scottish is law remains distinct enough to be regarded as independent of England.

      There are areas where the law is harmonised for the sake of convenience, laws regarding driving etc., but that isn’t the same as “delegated” as you describe.

      Many aspects of business law remain unharmonised so that different laws apply to companies registered up here etc., as compared to those registered down there. At the same time, laws on things like defamation and laws concerning injunctions or interdicts remain very different too.

      You say “Our future lies in persuading people to withdraw their consent to being governed by Westminster” but the more you look into that, the more you see that at no point was consent ever completely and clearly given. This isn’t semantics.

      The Acts of Union which our relationship within the Union hinges on, as I understand it, is premised on the laws of our land remaining distinct and outwith the agreement.

      Britain has no constitution as such. It is a mish-mash of statue and ad hoc slabs of crap piled one on top of the other over centuries. It suits certain elements to keep this stuff ill-defined, open to manipulation, and uncertain.

      But that lack of clarity shouldn’t only encumber us. If the price we pay for their lack of clarity is that everything is a matter of debate then that’s a price they need to pay too.

    202. Glamaig says:

      The ever repellent UK in Scotland tory media, have completely buried tory expense fraud investigations, which instantly raises the query, what’s up with that, Ruth MacThatcher goon show involved?

      Just how was that 8-10% increase in Tory vote in Scotland achieved? Was it the 100 or so geriatrics who turned up at the Scottish Tory conference? Was it a few TV shows starring Ruth McThatcher what dunnit? Or was there massive assistance from Tory Central down south, phoning people and contacting them on Facebook?

    203. heedtracker says:

      Greens like Harvie only want power, more Green seats in Holyrood obviously and they are going after Scottish tory votes because Scottish tories are ferocious nimbies. Just ask Aberdonians.

      Its all in the UKOK spin, Scotland, If Prof Tomkins is anything, he’s a UKOK spin doctor.

      But dudes like Prof Tomkins are even more simpler to work out, if you keep in mind, he’s just another English nationalist in his Scotland region, absolutely determined that England will never lose control of near half its territory, North Seas, vast Atlantic oceanic territory, endless Scottish natural resources and so on.

      Successful PR Scotland with SNP Holyrood would extremely bad news for toryboy England and that’s just not going to happen, if toryboy’s like Prof Tomkins cant help it.

    204. Sinky says:

      Glamaig says:

      The increase in the Tory vote was down to the Referendum galvanising the soft former Tory, but inherently British, voters that had switched to Lib Dems or SNP into voting tactically against the SNP. In two wealthy constituencies Edinburgh Southern and East Lothian the soft Tory vote went to Labour who were the main challengers.

      Further to John Robertson’s analysis of the ethnic composition of senior University staff it may also explain percentage swings in certain seats where there is a higher than average number of incomers who feel British first and foremost.

    205. ronnie anderson says:

      @ Onwards I made the suggestion 2 years ago to put a Big S before the nhs Saltire Blue preferred ,that would be distinctive from any other nhs , will the Bbc camera,s show Snhs signs NAW lol,but the people will get the message.

    206. Les Wilson says:

      Do we at this time, already many of the parts of the Union document, EVEL is one that comes to mind. Given that Scottish MP’s must be held in par with English MP’s, does the fact that no Scottish MP will be able to be Prime Minister again count?.

      Also the fact English MP’s now debate laws that are likely to have a Scottish element effect somewhere but Scots will not be able to vote IF the English MP’s deem it to be English only.

      The fact our MP’s have to leave their seat in Westminster to allow English only discussions, would seem to make our MP’s second class MP’s in their own Parliament to which they were elected.

      Does this not make the results of EVEL an act, outwith the act of Union? Thus could be deemed as breaking the Act of Union itself? Is this possible cause for dissolution should we want it?

    207. Robert Peffers says:

      @Ruby says: 26 May, 2016 at 12:13 pm:

      ” … I’m trying to find out what is meant by a ‘British identity’”

      Oh! No problem there, Ruby. The answer was published in a paper, at the taxpayers expense, by Her Majesty’s Government during the Referendum on Scottish Independence.

      Here is the jist of it as stated by the now, “Secretary against Scotland”,, David Mundell: –

      “The Treaty of Union extinguished The Kingdom of Scotland and renamed The Kingdom of England as the United Kingdom”

      In effect Mundell claims the government published paper states the Treaty of Union ended the Kingdom of Scotland but did not end the Kingdom of England but instead renamed England as, “The United Kingdom”, that included the Kingdom of Scotland. This is born out by the whole idea of Devolution as it stands today.

      The Treaty of Union clearly is a bi-partite treaty between two equally sovereign kingdoms. It is not directly a union of countries. In essence it is not a single country. It is legally exactly as it titles itself, “A United Kingdom”.

      Which United Kingdom, (the actual Royal Realm), does legally includes the three non-UK Crown dependencies. However, the Westminster Parliament does not include the three Crown Dependencies as that organ is legally described as, “Her Majesty’s Government of her United Kingdom”.

      The legal fact is that, under English law, Her Majesty is legally sovereign in her English, (three country), Kingdom.
      She is NOT sovereign, under Scottish Law, in The Kingdom of Scotland for, “The people of Scotland”, are legally sovereign. Yet under English law it is stated that once becoming sovereign a sovereign cannot legally renounce their sovereignty.

      Ergo it is illegal, under English law, for the Scots to renounce sovereignty and thus impossible for them to allow Westminster to hold sovereignty over Scotland.

    208. Grouse Beater says:

      Ruby: “Perhaps you need to re-think your headlines in order to waken me up!”

      🙂

      I sent copies to SNP HQ and to Salmond. I think at time I published it folk were distracted by Hosie et al revelations.

    209. heedtracker says:

      Fracking kicks off big style in Yorkshire, nothing from the Scottish Green leader, lots on stuff like Austria elections but nothing at all on UKOK fracking.

      From nothing to do with us Scottish Greens here

      https://twitter.com/scotgp

      to nothing to do with us Scottish Green leader there

      https://twitter.com/patrickharvie

      Harvie does watch telly though and is interested in the word “climate”

      Patrick Harvie ?@patrickharvie 14h14 hours ago
      Yet another @BBCNewsnight discussion about aviation without a single mention of the word climate.

      Toryboy England’s going to frack the living shit out of England but then, if youre after some tory Scotland votes, its maybe best to not be attacking tory England.

      Save the planet, No to Scots cutting APD. Frack England? sorry what was that, breaking up, going through a tunnel…

    210. schrodingers cat says:

      stu, if you think what they say about you on bella is bad you should see my twitter feed, turn the very air blue so it would.

      seriously though, you attract criticism simply because you are the “gross fromage” of social media, you tweeted today that wos has passed 300k vistors this month alone.

      I know you have helped promote bella in the past and i dont agree with them criticising you. I personally dislike many of their writers, loki included. i have crowd funded them before but wont do so again. I have had run ins with the mods on bella too, especially their facebook page. Ugh.

      I dont agree with the very left wing indy blogs but accept they cater for a section of the indy movement supporters.

      Along with your fame, notoriety, individual page hits, etc comes criticism but also power. This goes with the territory. How you excercise such power is of course your perrogative.

      I merely ask that if you no longer support such sites as bella and common space, (understandably) dont promote them. But dont use your power to destroy them. save that for the daily record

      @Scot Finlayson
      your the one that advocated splitting your vote and thereby denying Nicola a majority to get on with Independence,

      havers scot

      I advocated voting green2 in fife and mid scotland, so glad i did, otherwise labour would have won the 7th list seat, greens not perfect but a lot better than slab.

    211. euan 0709 says:

      Thanks TD and all who replied to my query !
      Part 2 of your answer TD sounds a bit of a grey area to me.
      Now regarding the Scottish Red Duster—–I think that am correct in saying that it pre-dates the British Red Duster by about 200 years.
      There was a petition to our masters in London fairly recently, about allowing it to be used officially ( I actually signed it)–But nothing since then.
      You guys comments would be appreciated……aw ra best………

    212. Tinto Chiel says:

      Robert Peffers:

      “No gonna dae that, Tinto Chiel?

      Are you implying Wingers are revolting?”

      Verily, I say unto thee, yea, yea and thrice yea. If we don’t do it, who will?

      Every time I see you quote Peerie Mun’ell’s, statement, Robert, I think, “What sort of a spineless wee scunner do you have to be to deny the existence of your own country?”

      But then I forget his country is really England, his paymaster.

      @ David MacGille-Mhuire, 11.20: loved the Bella fashion notes, but I think you missed out three other important elements. Never forget the loon pants, the beret and the wee pony-tail. Option extras: roll-ups in Gold Flake tin, well-thumbed copy of Gramsci (in Italian).

      And never forget, Dr John Reid was a Marxist……

      Nana, if you’re out there, hope you are recovering and can get back to typing soon.

    213. Ruby says:

      Grouse Beater says:
      26 May, 2016 at 2:00 pm

      I sent copies to SNP HQ and to Salmond. I think at time I published it folk were distracted by Hosie et al revelations.

      Ruby replies

      Could be or perhaps people had had enough of the ‘nookie nonsense’ and mistook your article for yet more ‘sex scandal’ revelations! 🙂

    214. carjamtic says:

      YES voters realised a long time ago,that Scottish voters, ‘Freedom of Choice’,was being coerced or limited by agents of the Elite 1%.

      Mainly through state propaganda via the BBC/MSM,but also by the Red/Blue/Orange Tories of Holyrood and Project Fear.

      Now it seems,the unelected HoL is in on it,plotting to eliminate another Indy vote…wow.

      We can see you,that’s all of you,some advice Yoons,the day you ban ‘Freedom of Choice’ on Indy,is the day when,the Majority of Scotland’s will be less willing to make slaves of themselves.

      That day has probably arrived already…….think carefully on your next move Yoons,the people of Scotland,have no desired to be Ruled,to be Subjugated.

      We will follow Leaders voluntarily,by choice…..Rulers…well they can fukc right off…..or maybe that’s just me 😉

    215. Ruby says:

      Robert Peffers says:
      26 May, 2016 at 1:51 pm’”

      Oh! No problem there, Ruby. The answer was published in a paper, at the taxpayers expense,

      Ruby replies

      Yes I remember that paper! We never did find out how many £millions it cost us taxpayers to find out that Scotland had been extinguished & become Lesser England way back in 1707.

    216. The `Green` party are just Astroturfers,

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing

      it is a name that resonates with nature and the `good life`,

      like Amazon,apple,Starbucks,

      where if you look closely they are just nasty politicians and tax evading conglomerates,

      as Stu keeps saying,`look beyond the headline`,

      surprised some on this site have been conned by the not so green`Greens`.

    217. Petra says:

      Professor Adam Tomkins, Constitutional expert – University of Glasgow –

      Nation State and the Principles of the Union (pages 682 and 687).

      ”Union states such as the UK are rare. Other possible examples include the Netherlands, Belgium, and South Africa. As this short list suggests, union states may be either federal in design or unitary. The United Kingdom is neither.”

      Says it all, eh!

      And the Bingham Centre report? We’ll have to have a look at that. …. ”and it could bring clarity to what are currently rather opaque matters (such as the frequency with which secession referendums may lawfully be held in the UK).”

      Question put to Tomkins: What are the essential characteristics of a nation state?

      1. The United Kingdom is not a nation state. It is a union state: that is to say, it is a state comprised of four nations. France is a nation state. The USA is a single nation comprised of 50 states. England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are nations within a single state (although some would hold that Northern Ireland is only one part of the nation of Ireland in this evidence I take no view on that particular matter).

      2.Union states such as the UK are rare. Other possible examples include the Netherlands, Belgium, and South Africa. As this short list suggests, union states may be either federal in design or unitary. The United Kingdom is neither. For more than a century English based public lawyers, under the influence of such figures as Professor Dicey, understood the UK as a unitary state. Scots saw both the limitations and the inaccuracies of this portrayal long before the English. The twenty first century United Kingdom constitution is neither fully federal nor fully unitary in character: rather, it has aspects of each character, held in uneasy tension with one another.

      3. In the UK matters are made more complicated by the fact that underscoring the constitution is not one union but three. The union of England and Wales was an incorporating union, in which English rule and English law was extended to Wales. The reinvention of Wales as a separate jurisdiction is recent, nascent and ongoing. In the twentieth century Welsh identity had much more to do with culture and language than with law and politics. The union of England and Wales and Scotland has never been understood as such: it has always been understood as the union of England and Scotland. Scotland has no particular constitutional relationship with Wales at all. The Anglo Scottish union was not an incorporating one: rather, Scots law, the Scottish legal system (and profession), and the Kirk were left intact even after the 1707 union. The union of Britain and Ireland was different again. For the purposes of this evidence I will focus on constitutional relations within Great Britain and will not focus on Northern Ireland.

      The Principles of Union

      The Anglo Scottish union has and has always had two values at its core: security and trade. The union gives both England and Scotland greater security than either would possess on her own. By this I mean the constitutional and legal structure of Union.

      The central recommendation of the Bingham Centre report, A Constitutional Crossroads, was that the United Kingdom needs a new Act of Union (or charter of union, as that report put it). I agree. That Act could usefully identify and articulate the constitutional principles upon which the UK’s territorial constitution is based; it could strengthen the Union by making new legal provision about solidarity, loyalty and comity; it could place currently non-legislative matters on a statutory footing (such as inter-governmental machinery); and it could bring clarity to what are currently rather opaque matters (such as the frequency with which secession referendums may lawfully be held in the UK). To be worthwhile, however, such an Act of Union would have to proceed on the basis of cross-party support and would have to enjoy legitimacy and support in all four home nations.

      http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-committees/constitution/union-and-devolution/FINAL-Evidence-volume-UDE.pdf

    218. Ruby says:

      Here’s some more P TV for you to watch

      http://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/a3c6519b-6bce-491a-a4f6-fe414e4e231b

      Not many Lords present at this committee meeting perhaps they had a better offer with something more interesting to drink than just bottles of water!

      Here’s Oliver Letwin

      http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/e63e7bc2-d1f7-4047-a788-e808442490dc

      Um eh OMG he really does s p e a k v e r y s l o w ly!

      http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/e63e7bc2-d1f7-4047-a788-e808442490dc

    219. ronnie anderson says:

      @ Schrodingers cat

      { I merely ask that if you no longer support such sites as bella and common space, (understandably) dont promote them. But dont use your power to destroy them. save that for the daily record }.

      If you scroll though the posts you will find the Rev’s post & its anything but seeing any sites fail, altho he would be quite justified should he have said so in that he,s has been attacked by Bella as were Wingers.

    220. heedtracker says:

      Old haunt of Prof Smirky’s btl vote NO ya fascists Scots fury, making usual UKOK media double standard mess of things

      http://archive.is/K7pdt

      Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat politicians will come together to call for a national campaign to defeat online misogyny as research reveals the scale of abuse aimed at women on social media.”

      http://archive.is/4PHD3

      Their bigot thug’s UKOK satire about Sturgeon being a fascist country dancer, into incest is fine though.

      Reading around UKOK ghastly media, you kind of go through these barriers of how truly repellent they can get because their lying hypocrisy has to have a limit. It doesn’t:D

      Still nothing much out there on likes of Anna Soubry investigation by the cops extensions by they whole awful UKOK creep show. Maybe its because she’s a lady, a proud Scot but tory lady.

    221. AhuraMazda says:

      Schrodinger, do you share your account with anyone else?

      One minute you are calling us all sycophantic morons and attacking Wings for slating Bella, next minute you are telling us how you hate Bella and its cortege of communists…

      I’m not asking you to make up your mind or explain to me how life isn’t as binary as us simpletons might think it is. Please don’t.

      But there’s a sequence of events at the heart of all this that matters a lot.

      Once upon a time, we all supported Bella, Wings linked to them and we donated to help them with more than one campaign.

      Next thing we know a Loki article appears on their site, this was last year, and the article amounted to not just an attack on the SNP, but an attack on every one of us who defined ourselves as the 45%. I remember it clearly.

      I also remember how Mr Small defended the decision not only to publish that article but he also supported its central tenets as I recall.

      That sort of thing has since happened a few times since then.

      Most of us would be quite happy not even thinking about Bella’s trivial role in this world, and I’d be happily talking K1 into swallowing his tongue right now if you hadn’t brought it up, so can we drop it?

    222. scottieDog says:

      Regarding bella Caledonia, personally I have enjoyed it’s output but certainly don’t read all of the articles. I am biased because they even published an article I wrote about currency in the lead up to indyref!
      All of this rivalry and bickering is natural and healthy. Progress is never linear. It’s also natural that not all of these outlets will survive in the extended period post indy.
      I tend to be more selective about what I read but that’s just due to time!

    223. heedtracker says:

      Macwhirter doesn’t want another not winnable ref 2?

      http://archive.is/s8D5u

      If and when another independence referendum is mooted, the Scottish Government will have to be absolutely sure it can win it. I’d even go as far as to say that, ironically, Scotland would have to be effectively independent before a referendum could be won. The Scottish Parliament will have to acquire independence policy by policy, tax by tax, until a referendum on independence becomes largely a recognition of reality. Only then would the logic of Project Fear be reversed.

      It’s a sobering lesson for the independence radicals, but it confirms the SNP’s policy of gradualism is probably the only way. Referendums are just too scary for modern electorates, whose fear of losing what they have will always trump the hope of what they could gain.”

      Also explains likes of HoL and Prof Tomkins Britnat’s, plotting UKOK constitutional block on any more devo.

    224. Petra says:

      ”In a spirit of mutual respect.” My backside. As far as I can make out there’s not a Scot amongst the ‘decision makers’.

      A Constitutional Crossroads – Ways Forward for the United Kingdom May 2015

      British Institute of International and Comparative Law.

      ”The United Kingdom has reached a constitutional crossroads. Scotland’s vote last September to remain part of the Union was made in the light of an offer by political leaders of an unprecedented degree of home rule. Much greater transfer of power to the Scottish Parliament will transform relationships between the four parts or nations of the Union. The urgent task of the new United Kingdom government is to craft a renewed settlement that at once meets the pledges made to Scotland; maintains the essential fabric of the Union; and is fair to all nations of the Union in a spirit of mutual respect. To say this will be not be easy is an understatement.

      http://www.biicl.org/documents/595_a_constitutional_crossroads.pdf?showdocument=1

    225. Petra says:

      They’ve decided …. in the process of deciding!

      ”Secession referendums should be held no more than once in a generation. For these purposes a generation should be considered at least 15 years.”

      http://www.biicl.org/documents/595_a_constitutional_crossroads.pdf?showdocument=1

    226. TD says:

      AhuraMazda at 1:18 p.m.

      “TD, I more or less agree that in practice UK law does override Scottish Law”

      I don’t know who you are agreeing with, but it’s not me. I did not say that UK law overrides Scottish Law. I’m not quite sure what you mean by UK Law – there is law that applies to England and Wales, there is law that applies to Northern Ireland and there is law that applies to Scotland. Sometimes the same law applies to the whole UK. But there is no superiority of “UK Law” over other laws.

      “There are areas where the law is harmonised for the sake of convenience, laws regarding driving etc., but that isn’t the same as “delegated” as you describe.

      I did not say that laws were delegated. I’m not sure how one would delegate a law. What I said was that sovereignty was delegated. So the Scottish people delegate sovereignty to Westminster and to Holyrood (also to Brussels via Westminster.)

      Many aspects of business law remain unharmonised so that different laws apply to companies registered up here etc., as compared to those registered down there. At the same time, laws on things like defamation and laws concerning injunctions or interdicts remain very different too.

      So? Actually, the Companies Acts are examples of law which applies across the UK so most company law is consistent.

      You say “Our future lies in persuading people to withdraw their consent to being governed by Westminster” but the more you look into that, the more you see that at no point was consent ever completely and clearly given. This isn’t semantics.

      What happened on September 18th 2014? I would say that the Scottish people gave their consent to being governed by Westminster. However unpalatable those of us who favour independence find that, it remains a fact. We should not delude ourselves – the Scottish people collectively are responsible for where we are. We could get into a lengthy debate about whether prior to 2014, the Scottish people had ever consented. My view would be that by the standards of the time, we consented in 1607. It is true that the standards at that time were pretty poor. But we then spent 300 years going along with being in the UK. And we confirmed it in 2014.

      “The Acts of Union which our relationship within the Union hinges on, as I understand it, is premised on the laws of our land remaining distinct and outwith the agreement.”

      Wrong. The Act of Union provides for a separate Scottish legal system. The laws may or may not be the same. Some laws apply to the whole UK, but the courts in each jurisdiction will interpret and enforce those laws.

    227. defo says:

      The communications chief on the starship Enterprise, and a Japanese car manufacturer?
      A very strange conflation indeed !

      Re Civil disobedience vs just sitting back and taking it.
      I’m game Ian.
      For example, you wouldn’t believe how much trouble you can cause with a wee tube of superglue. 😉
      I’d advocate a dirty protest against the Daily redcoat ect but for the poor shop staff who would be left to clean it up !
      When you’ve nothing left to lose…

    228. Brian Powell says:

      Scottiedog

      Bella Caledonia is anti-SNP and joins a very long list of oppositions. Common Space slightly less so.

    229. heedtracker says:

      Coffee time comedy from Hammer of the Scots MacTernan. He’s a good laugh, give him that. I also voted for him as Labour leader. Torygraph readership really misses Bomber Bliar though

      http://archive.is/G7v2m

      What did Bomber Bliar ever do for us?

      the National Minimum Wage
      Freedom of Information
      Human Rights Act
      Peace in Northern Ireland, settlement of an 800 year old dispute
      Devolution to London, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland
      House of Lords reform
      Tax credits
      The 0.7 per cent of GDP target for foreign aid
      Civil partnerships
      Abolition of Section 28
      The Equalities Act

      Bomber Blair, the father of New Scotland. Even his Lords reform was a Labour joke, they’re all sitting in it now:D

    230. Proud Cybernat says:

      “And we confirmed it in 2014.”

      I see it as a ‘qualified consent’. It was given in 2014 on the premise of ‘The Vow’ being delivered in full; a Unionist promise of better, faster, safer devo-max in return for a No vote. In making that promise the Unionists made a rod for their own backs since, in failing to deliver anything remotely near devo-max, then we are well within our rights to say “No devo-max, no consent.” This is to say that our consent is dependent (and pending) upon the delivery of devo-max. Our consent, in those terms, cannot be seen to have been given in the 2014 referendum.

      This is to say that the people of Scotland should now be asked if we feel that ‘The Vow’ of devo-max promised by the Unionists has been delivered by them. If we agree (in a referendum) that their 2014 promises have been delivered THEN (and only then) can it be said that we have given our consent. But that question has not (yet) been asked and so our consent has not yet been given.

      The ‘settled will’ of the people of Scotland remains unsettled.

    231. Capella says:

      If you’re boycotting Bella then you’ll have missed two very good short videos. Doug Henshall on acting and the dire state of film and television in Scotland.
      Hamish Henderson, a new biopic coming out in June, “Hamish: The Movie”.

    232. Fred says:

      Driving down the A9 today listening to a free-promo by Cauld Kale to Pieman McAveety & his cunning plan to rid Glasgow of litter. Obviously a cunning stunt by the said Pieman to save his arse & fancy salary when Glesga Slab hit the buffers. Nice of Kaye to offer succour to a sucker.

      Ta Ta Bella, will miss that logo though.

    233. ronnie anderson says:

      @ Proud Cybernat Lose the Devo Max we did,nt vote on Devo anything, we voted Should Scotland be Independent .

    234. Greannach says:

      I’ll be sorry if Bella Caledonia goes under for the reasons mentioned by Capella at 3.50 pm, and many more. I’d also be sorry if Bella didn’t try to be a voice of dissent. I know their promotion of a split vote in the Holyrood GE was just plain stupid and very regrettable, but it’s better to have voices of dissent from within the broader pro-independence camp than have more of the likes of the increasingly wacky Scotsman and Herald.

    235. K1 says:

      You just can’t leave me alone Ahurawank can you?

      You’re dripping wi hypocrisy asking the cat if he shares his account with anyone else. This from the guy who has literally used 4 different persona’s on here?

      For someone who claims to ignore me ye just cannae help yersel mentioning me in yer snide little digs, yer a nasty wee man and a total phoney.

      Stop referring to me in yer comments Neoconnat, Ahurawank, Angramainyu, sensibledave.

      Fuck off.

    236. heedtracker says:

      More toryboy comedy. Horatio Nelson very odd bashing on and on about what an absolute lying fraud on Brexit likes of George Osborne are. Its was just fine 2014 and the UKOK triumph but v v bad Brexit wise

      https://twitter.com/FraserNelson

      The banalities of the toryboy.

    237. AhuraMazda says:

      God, TD, you’re a bigger troll than me.

      You make all these points then you end up vehemently opposing and contradicting yourself.

      One minute you don’t do semantics, next minute you say things like “I did not say that laws were delegated…I’m not sure how one would delegate a law. What I said was that sovereignty was delegated.”

      Sovereignty is a theoretical concept, and if we are going to get assholey with words then I could argue that it would be easier to delegate a law than a concept.

      I say the Union is premised on “the laws of our land remaining distinct and outwith the agreement” and you say it “provides for a separate Scottish legal system.” Talk about fucking semantics.

      Are you really suggesting they invented a whole new legal system in Scotland or do you think they kept the one they already had?

      Here’s another way of putting it, are you just trying to sound authoritative or do you have actually have a clue what you’re talking about?

      You’re tedious and if I had the energy I’d go through what you said and prove it contradictory or just plain stupid, line for line, but I don’t.

    238. Dan Huil says:

      heedtracker 3:08pm

      As far as independence is concerned Macwhirter is more politically anemic than an albinic Wishy Washy faffin’ aboot in Aladdin. Oh yes he is!

    239. ronnie anderson says:

      @ Capella I dont contribute to the Bbc. I dont contribute to Bella , but thats not to say I wont watch Bcc or read Bella,information on how others think is still information we can pickup on .

    240. Proud Cybernat says:

      @ Ronnie

      “Lose the Devo Max we did,nt vote on Devo anything, we voted Should Scotland be Independent.”

      I know that, Ronnie. But when the Yoons saw they were going to lose they began arguing that a NO Vote was effectivly a vote for more powers, the BBC even saying it was a vote for Devo-Max (see video below). The Yoons changed the parameters of the vote because they saw they were losing a vote of Indy v Status Quo.

      See BBC Union Jackie & Co here pumping the pre-vote Devo-Max message:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qRJtA50jo0

      And, in so doing, the Yoons secured only a ‘qualified victory’. It was now incumbent upon them to deliver on their pre-vote promises to ensure their victory was fully consented and permanent. And it is up to Scots to tell them whether we feel their promises have been delivered.

      They have not and, until they have been delivered and we are content that they HAVE been delivered, then we have every right to call a second IndyRef as and when we damn well please.

      If the Yoons can’t enter an IndyRef campaign and play by the rules and end up making promises they subsequently fail to deliver on, then they only have themselves to blame when we seek another IndyRef. And there will, if need be, a THIRD IndyRef until the Yoons can behave responsibly and stop making false promises during the campaign. The problem they have, of course, is that by playing on a level field, they know they will surely lose the vote just as they were on the way to last time until their last minute false promise saved them.

    241. Ken500 says:

      The (non) Greens have cheated and lied and reneged on their policies. Put off moderate voters from voting for FFA/Independence with their carry on and wasted £Million/Billions of money which could have been better spent. Their votes have destroyed City Centres and pedestrianisation. They have collude with Unionists at every opportunity – the status quo. They are not radical. They just make people’s lives more difficult Who holds them to account?

      Tomkins should have his contract with Glasgow University terminated, immediately. He has taken a second job (with permission?) which impinges on his ability to honour his contract. EU work directives stipulate 48 hours. The Scottish taxpayers are providing the funds. A few academics think they are above the Law and act not in the best interest of the education system or the Scottish economy. Provide poor public service.

    242. Ken500 says:

      You can get the BC logo in pictorial form on line. The artist?

    243. AhuraMazda says:

      lol @ “Ta Ta Bella, will miss that logo though.”

      TD, this is complete crap too: “What happened on September 18th 2014? I would say that the Scottish people gave their consent to being governed by Westminster. However unpalatable those of us who favour independence find that, it remains a fact. We should not delude ourselves – the Scottish people collectively are responsible for where we are.”

      The referendum never included any mention of “consent to being governed by Westminster” in the question put to the electorate.

      It simply asked if Scotland should be an independent country. The implication was that things would remain as they were before if we voted No, with no mention of what that amounted to or would amount to.

      You seem to be taking a very hard Unionist stance and I can only assume you are trolling. According to that stance, Scotland has no distinct sovereignty even over devolved matters or areas that were excluded from the original treaty of union, like law. That’s crap.

      Now you are twisting the nature of the referendum and the result to somehow try and qualify the crap I refer to above.

      The referendum was rigged, it provided no consent for the delegation of more sovereignty to Westminster than existed before (as you seem to be seriously suggesting), and the people were only persuaded to vote No when Westminster changed the nature of what was being asked by introducing promises of more powers.

      This is completely at odds with your warped view that the result embellished Westminster with even more authority over us.

      And changing what was on offer when they did was illegal — what about those postal voters who had voted before that offer of more powers was made? It was a complete sham.

    244. heedtracker says:

      Hey Capella, you’ve supported Scottish Green’s quite a lot btl WoS, although without much detail, but what’s the Scottish Green deal on fracking in England, or Yorkshire?

      How come Harvie’s keeping out of it all up here in Scotland?

      Is climate change a border thing, or not a Scottish issue thingee, or what?

      Its all a bit odd this Scotland/England border Green party moratorium on not even commenting on tory UK.gov fracking in England, so any info would be great.

      The nice BBC man says there’s more frack oil and gas under Yorkshire than there is left in the NOT Scots North Sea. That’s quite a lot of global warming green house gases let alone what could be catastrophic environmental damage to Yorkshire, yet from Patrick o the Greens, nothing, zip, nada, zero…

    245. Ken500 says:

      The Independence movement has had to sidestep Tories, sidestep Labour, now it will have to sidestep (non) Greens.

    246. AhuraMazda says:

      K1: “facking bastid fack off ya went and done this and that and fack you ya dirty little bastit facking grrrrr duh duh fackin wanka bastid… fack off”

      That’s it, K1, don’t be afraid to chip in.

      All contributions welcome.

    247. Capella says:

      @ heedtracker
      The Greens want to ban fracking “once and for all”. Their manifesto is available on their website:
      https://greens.scot/scotland-can/ban-fracking-once-and-for-all

      I support most of the Green policies but I’m not a member. I joined the SNP because Independence is my priority.
      The Greens have an English branch which I would expect to be dealing with fracking in Yorkshire.

      I don’t really defend the Greens on WoS btl but if I read something plain silly I sometimes provide my own view. Ken500 is the exception. I’ve given up there.

      But I do think that the Greens are sometimes politically naive and shoot themselves in the foot. For example, standing a candidate in Edinburgh Central thus allowing Ruth Davidson a constituency seat. That was stupid IMO.

    248. Thepnr says:

      @TD

      Good points in your post at 3:29.
      Think you may have made an impact on some posters, thanks for helping clear things up in my mind at least.

      @Proud Cybernat

      I agree with your view, we could argue that the No vote was won on promises that were not delivered making the vote null and void.

      Cameron, Clegg and Miliband all signed the vow apparently.

      Phaarrrp!

    249. TD says:

      AhuraMazda

      As usual you are being very tedious. I am not indulging in semantics when I point out blatant inaccuracies in what you say and it is certainly not semantic to point out that there is a difference between a law and a legal system. If you can’t tell the difference there is nothing I can do about that.

      Glad to see you admit you are a troll though – first sensible thing you have said.

    250. heedtracker says:

      I support most of the Green policies but I’m not a member. I joined the SNP because Independence is my priority.
      The Greens have an English branch which I would expect to be dealing with fracking in Yorkshire.

      It does look like Scottish Greens will not cross the border on anything that tory UK.gov does. They should though. Tories own and run Scotland on all the big stuff so why Scottish Greens wont engage with them is just not on. Unless ofcourse Harvie wants Scottish tory votes in a D’Hondt Holyrood.

      Look tory renege on renewable energy onshore, carbon capture at Peterhead. All of that should be enough to get their Green juices going but no.

      Name change due for the Greens now.

    251. TD says:

      Proud Cybernat at 3:48 p.m.

      I take your point about qualified consent. And I think there were a lot of very naïve people back in 2014. After all, many of us, most notably this site, were screaming from the rooftops “Don’t trust them!” When the Vow was published and when Gordon Brown came out with his promises of a near-federal state and home rule I thought “I don’t believe a word of this”. Not that I would have been satisfied if I had believed it – why should we settle for anything less than full independence?

      The trouble is that from the perspective of a unionist, they got the result they wanted and although we might think they achieved it by unfair means the result stands. Next time, the Scottish people need to be aware of the dirty tricks, the con-tricks, the vested interests, the outright lies that will no doubt form the basis of the campaign to keep us in the union.

      Do I blame the Scottish people for where we are? Yes, a bit. We were gullible. What will I do about it? Try to persuade and raise the level of insight into the massive con that was perpetrated on us.

    252. AhuraMazda says:

      TD, I’m a troll at worst. I think we’d be giving you the benefit of the doubt if we called you a troll, meaning you’re a troll at best.

      The upshot of what you have argued here today is that Scotland has less sovereignty over its own affairs than it ever did, thanks to the referendum result — according to you that referendum vote was a vote to delegate more power to Westminster than it had before.

      You have also argued that there is no such thing as a separate Scottish legal system because that too had already been delegated to Westminster.

      I could go on but the above is quite damning.

      If someone from the Orange Order made points like that, it would be consistent with what we might expect from someone in the Orange Order. Are you in the Orange Order?

      As I said, a troll at best. I’m in one of those generous moods.

    253. Capella says:

      Unless ofcourse Harvie wants Scottish tory votes in a D’Hondt Holyrood.

      Highly unlikely that Tories will vote Green IMO. They are horrified to find the Greens in a powerful position in Holyrood and able to progress Land Reform. They had hoped for a clear margin for Unionists in Holyrood and haven’t got it.

      Greens support the Named Person Clause. They seem willing to compromise on OBFA, hard to see where the Unionists can get a clear hit.

    254. Petra says:

      Has anyone checked out Alistair McConnachie’s site? Scary to say the least. Does anyone know anything about him, such as is he Irish?

      This is his submission to the lords (why was he chosen to make a submission?):

      ‘The UK is a Unitary State: Submission to House of Lords Inquiry on ‘The Union and Devolution’.

      WHAT PRACTICAL STEPS, BOTH LEGISLATIVE AND NON-LEGISLATIVE, CAN BE TAKEN TO STABILISE OR REINFORCE THE UNION? HOW SHOULD THESE BE IMPLEMENTED?

      62. The aim of a Union, legislatively, socially and culturally, is to blur differences, not to highlight them in sharp relief.

      63. At present – because legislators are conceiving of the UK as a ‘Union State’ rather than the Unitary State which it is – all the legislative direction is towards separation. Yet, there is an alternative way. As each day passes, we should be bringing everyone in Scotland, and throughout the UK, closer together. As each day passes, we should not be finding ways to drive ourselves apart, or to accentuate our differences, or create division where none existed before, but we should be finding ways to bind all the British people together in common understanding and cause.

      64. What to do? The first requirement is ‘Don’t Make Matters Worse’. Unfortunately, the present Scotland Bill is an example of something which could not be better designed to make matters worse.

      65. While it is not possible to imagine it being ditched – even though the Government has the majority to do that – there are Clauses which could and should easily be dropped, and which would help protect the pro-UK majority.

      66. For example, drop the devolution of the British Transport Police. As soon as the Nationalists acquire this power they will abolish ‘the British’ bit, leading to the death of another British institution in Scotland. They do this as part of their agenda to make the social and cultural struggle harder for pro-UK people in Scotland.

      67. Drop any requirement for the British Broadcasting Corporation to answer to Holyrood via Ofcom. It is the long-term aim of the Nationalists to subvert and convert the BBC, through pressure, into a ‘Scottish Broadcasting Corporation’ answerable to them. Any subservience of the BBC to the Scottish Nationalists would further damage the social and cultural identity of pro-UK people in Scotland.

      68. Drop the devolution of road signs. Road signs are widespread, hugely visible potential political banners. This is why the SNP wants control over them. If it controls this competency, it could make all signs dual-language; brand all signs with ‘Scottish Government’ logos; invent new road symbols just to be different from English roads; change everything to metres, and possibly kilometres – and even though ‘Measurements’ are a reserved matter, it will argue (correctly) that it is doing it within a competence which is devolved. This could lead to a separate Highway Code for Scotland; which would lead to a separate Driving Licence for Scotland.

      69. We do not exaggerate. We know this because this is what the SNP does! It creates difference for the sake of it in order to create division for its own political ends. Our politicians need to be alert to the cultural danger of the Road Sign Clauses and drop them forthwith. We wrote more on this: http://www.aforceforgood.org.uk/devo/unionvid2

      70. Do not make Holyrood ‘permanent’ in law. As above (paras 19-21 above), that would compromise the idea that the British Parliament is the supreme governing body.

      71. Ensure the British Parliament is able to veto Holyrood decisions. This ensures that in theory, at least, the British Parliament remains the governing body and that ‘Devolution is British State Power Exercised by a Subsidiary Body’.

      72. We’ve already mentioned the importance of strengthening the Scottish Office by switching some of the legislative devolution in the Scotland Bill, to administrative devolution (paras 39-44 above).

      73. The second requirement is to ensure ‘ever closer union’ legislatively.

      74. Just as the EU frames its laws to encourage ‘ever closer union’ within the EU, it should be a principle and an aim of the British Government at all times, and the administration at Holyrood – when it is under unionist control – to ensure ‘ever closer union’ within the UK.

      75. In this regard, we should establish in law our Principle 27 above that: ‘Devolution is a Two-Way Process’. This means it should be considered natural for devolved powers to be moderated, adjusted, rescinded or returned to the British centre, where appropriate. This is in keeping with the idea of the UK as a Unitary State.

      76. After all, if we accept that the Union must be maintained, and that the Scottish Parliament is intended to ‘strengthen the Union’, and if we believe in the principle of ‘ever closer union’ for the UK, then there should be no reluctance – in principle – to moderate, adjust, rescind or return a devolved competence if that competence is being used in a way which is damaging to our Union. There should be an assumption that it is possible. There should be nothing controversial about that assumption. It should be written into law, and all legislation related to devolution, including the current Scotland Bill, should state this assumption.

      http://www.aforceforgood.org.uk/devo/hol1

    255. heedtracker says:

      Greens support the Named Person Clause. They seem willing to compromise on OBFA, hard to see where the Unionists can get a clear hit.

      You’re dodging the cross border issue of Scottish Green non involvement. Clearly Harvie is going after the D’Hondt 2nd vote tory, worried about the big climate change stuff what Greens are meant to be all about. Fair enough. Its a cunning plan and they’re not in politics to be sidelined and watch. They want their Green taste of the action.

      If Harvie can take down APD cuts but wont even start attacking tory UK.gov, it wont be very nice or Green but thats just another dysfunctional UKOK side show in the real world Green environmental movement.

      Must be galling for fringe left YESers though at Bella etc.

    256. Thepnr says:

      @TD

      I think I said in an earlier post that you may have struck a nerve with some posters. I really meant one.

      I take it all back, cut someones spinal cord is more apt.

    257. heedtracker says:

      68. Drop the devolution of road signs. Road signs are widespread, hugely visible potential political banners.

      69. We do not exaggerate. We know this because this is what the SNP does!

      70. Do not make Holyrood ‘permanent’ in law.

      71. Ensure the British Parliament is able to veto Holyrood decisions.

      That escalated quickly.

    258. TD says:

      AhuraMazda

      You have a remarkable knack of misquoting and misinterpreting. Maybe you just don’t understand.

      The upshot of what you have argued here today is that Scotland has less sovereignty over its own affairs than it ever did, thanks to the referendum result — according to you that referendum vote was a vote to delegate more power to Westminster than it had before.

      No that is not the upshot. Sovereignty remains with the Scottish people. The Scottish people can take it back from Westminster and give it to Holyrood. But was the referendum result a setback? Yes, of course it was. Fortunately, it is a setback from which we can recover because, guess what – we are sovereign!

      “You have also argued that there is no such thing as a separate Scottish legal system because that too had already been delegated to Westminster.”

      No I haven’t. Where did I say that? The Scottish legal system existed prior to the Acts of Union and continues to this day. The Acts of Union provided for the Scottish legal system to continue and that is what happened. The Acts of Union did not say that Scottish law had to be different or any of the other nonsense that you were promoting in your earlier posts.

      I’m afraid your muddled thinking is showing with these posts. Clarity of thought is what you need. Come back when you have found some.

    259. AhuraMazda says:

      Tomkins quoted by Petra: “The central recommendation of the Bingham Centre report, A Constitutional Crossroads, was that the United Kingdom needs a new Act of Union (or charter of union, as that report put it). I agree. That Act could usefully identify and articulate the constitutional principles upon which the UK’s territorial constitution is based; it could strengthen the Union by making new legal provision about solidarity, loyalty and comity; it could place currently non-legislative matters on a statutory footing (such as inter-governmental machinery); and it could bring clarity to what are currently rather opaque matters (such as the frequency with which secession referendums may lawfully be held in the UK).”

      Note the reference to “such as the frequency with which secession referendums may lawfully be held in the UK”.

      Tomkins has a big and careless mouth — he admitted there that there are currently no limits or laws on the frequency with which referendums may be held.

    260. schrodingers cat says:

      im a composite troll, clue’s in the name numbnut

      by the way AhuraMazda, did i forget to tell you today….etc

    261. Thepnr says:

      @heedtracker

      An obsession can sometimes be an unhealthy thing. I’m obsessed with Independence, that’s healthy because I’m positive about Independence.

      It’s focusing an obsession on the things you hate that harms your health. Hatred destroys you from the inside.

      Take care not to damage your health.

    262. TD says:

      Thepnr

      I do appear to have upset him, don’t I? He talks utter crap and expects to be taken seriously. I think he has a very muddled mind. The more irritated he becomes, the more muddled his arguments.

    263. Conan the Librarian™ says:

      “God, TD, you’re a bigger troll than me.”

      Hiya Stephen.

    264. You will never get independence while Incomers are allowed to vote on it as I have said before only those who are born in Scotland and who live there should be allowed to determine Their country’s future no one else only Scots should be be able to do that and postal voting should be banned Incomers and postal votes are ways of rigging the vote

    265. Paula Rose says:

      (Thepnr and TD – the more I skip past those comments, just ignore and it will go away)

    266. Pentland Firth says:

      OT Looks like we’ve had the first party split in the new Scottish parliament. Seven Tories voted against the pro EU motion with a further two abstaining. In effect, almost a third of their Group are opposing their Leader,a nd siding with Boris in the War of the Tory Succession.

      One SLAB MSP, Elaine Smith, voted with her Tory pals, and another, Neil Findlay, abstained.

    267. Thepnr says:

      @Paula Rose

      My conversation is with TD, anyone can read of course.

    268. Capella says:

      Found a way of posting a link to the Hamish: The Movie trailer so you don’t have to visit Bella if it is too painful!

      And here’s the Doug Henshall video – 10 mins, but he does mention Bella (and Wings).

      @ ronnie. Me too. I only visit occasionally but sometimes there is something worth reading.

    269. Capella says:

      Oops – sorry! Didn’t realise the vimeo link would embed the video. Don’t kill me with HAMMERS

    270. Song42 says:

      As a long term lurker and vey occasional commenter on Wings, I’m becoming increasingly tired of reading the comments and the attacks from AzuraMazda who was also neonconnat and before that Angimanyu. I learn a lot from a lot of you on this site and really appreciate the discussions. I don’t mind the swearing, I don’t even mind when it gets heated because it seems to allow for people to let off steam as long as you’re not getting too personal with each other.

      K1 is now foolishly reacting to the bait of AM’s undermining hook and I feel needs to use the intelligence that I’ve read and enjoyed in so many of their comments, to now disengage from AM completely!

      @K1 with the kindness of heart…step away from the keyboard, step away from the keyboard, step away from keyboard 🙂 (now I know how to do the smiley)

    271. Thepnr says:

      @Capella

      Just saying the links will likely be removed, embedded links were disallowed quite a while back.

      You need to remove everything before the www. bit for youtube videos, guess that’s why these got through the net as they are on Vimeo.

      No view on the videos by the way. Just saying, so if they are removed it’s not because your being censored.

    272. ScottishPsyche says:

      I think the problem Tompkins will have is trying to reconcile academic ‘truth’ with political posturing. He is at best, naïve, in thinking he can operate in both roles without giving himself away.

    273. heedtracker says:

      It’s focusing an obsession on the things you hate that harms your health. Hatred destroys you from the inside.

      Its entirely reasonable to try and work out what’s going on pnr.

      Maybe its about recalibrating the Scottish and Uk political field. It looks like Green Harvie is not interested in what tory UK.gov does non Green wise and that’s that. He’s got a good balance of Holyrood power vote now, which is what its all about when youre in opposition and want more seats, power, media coverage etc

      Big hitter Macwhirter of the Herald explains it so well as usual

      “The loss of her parliamentary majority could actually be a liberation for the First Minister, and not just because a referendum on independence is off the agenda. In a proportional parliament an absolute majority can be a liability. There is no revising chamber in Holyrood to weed out daft legislation and the committee system has tended to act as a rubber stamp. A leader, who has to rule on behalf of all of the electorate, becomes a prisoner of their own party”

      As well as liberating Sturgeon from the prison of majority government, I just assumed Scottish Greens would go after a very not Green UK.gov but its not what they’re about at all.

    274. geeo says:

      How can the No vote returned in 2014 be remotely ‘consented’ ?

      It surely makes absolutely ZERO difference if the unionist deliver Devo max, super duper devo max, federalization and so on.

      NONE of these things were on the ballot paper that I filled in, not one.

      How am I expected to ‘respect the result’ when the Unionists did not even respect the bloody question ?

      Never going to happen.

    275. Ian Foulds says:

      Thepnr says:
      25 May, 2016 at 11:33 pm

      We do indeed need to focus on Independence as our prime object regardless of politics. We need to separate ourselves from the political union that is the UK.

      Of the many posts published prior to PNR’s post – I have not yet read the many subsequent posts – it would appear we all need to band together to prepare for the nefarious political onslaught which we will have to prepare to legally and peacefully resist to ensure that our Independence is realised and not to be swallowed up in a greater political England – with no disrespect intended to the peoples (excluding the establishment and their lackies) of our southern neighbour. It would be satisfying to see this happen in my lifetime!

    276. Tinto Chiel says:

      Thanks, Petra for digging out McConnachie’s submission. I don’t often read long submissions with much attention but this was a stoater.

      Frankly, it’s pretty gruesome and each point is breathtaking/infuriating but basically he seems to be saying, “We have always treated Scotland like shit but now we have to use every measure to keep the SG impotent, undermine its policies and subvert the will of the Scottish people.”

      I just wish the SG would put up road signs in Gaelic and kilometres only, because, as he says, “It’s what they do”.

      Only joking, Rev.

      😎

    277. ronnie anderson says:

      @ K1 Wooo Saaa Wooo Saaa,dont let the bastard get you down, send him ah song.

    278. Grouse Beater says:

      The short video in the essay linked below will cause anger; listen to the elite stumble and recast their words. In an apparently easy manner they discuss the dissolution of Scotland’s sovereignty to block the will of the people.

      Don’t be fooled by their ‘humility’ at possible failure – they mean what they say. They intend to achieve the ideal and gain the full backing of the British establishment.

      http://wp.me/p4fd9j-6G9

    279. Petra says:

      Riots in Paris over Labour Law changes. If the Scots in general had any idea what was going on behind their backs there would be all out War here. Never going to happen of course with the ‘treat the Scots like mushrooms …. keep them in the dark and feed them with bullsh*t’ media that we’re having to contend with.

    280. Thepnr says:

      @heedtracker

      First off, why should I listen to McWhirter? That’s his opinion and is no more valid than yours or mine.

      “I just assumed Scottish Greens would go after a very not Green UK.gov but its not what they’re about at all.”

      Now that is just your opinion.

      That is what this website is all about, letting ordinary people (maybe obsessed people) state their opinion. I welcome that.

      Maybe I’m just simply an optomist because what I really want to see on this site is the POSITIVE thoughts about how we go about winning Independence.

      That’s my whole point, we have to win it and I’ll take any YES voter from any party. Slagging anyone is a losers game.

      heedtracker I enjoy your style, it is unique on WOS would love you to concentrate on Independence and ignore what you see as the negatives of “the others”.

      Thought we were all Jock Tamsons bairns? I live in hope.

    281. Capella says:

      @ Thepnr – yes the klaxons will be going off in Bath Towers. Stu can remove the links if he decides to. So watch the videos now if you want to see them.
      I was only trying to be helpful (famous last words).

      Re that McConnachie piece, as with Adam Tomkins’ submission to the Lords of Convention, it is very kind of them to spell out their methods. I thought Tomkins’ analysis was spot on. Basically, everything which held Scotland in the Union post-war has been removed or diminished. If they want to save the Union they have to find something worth living for.

    282. Robert Peffers says:

      @TD says: 26 May, 2016 at 12:45 pm:

      ” … Sorry, I don’t agree with either of you.”

      Please yersel TD. You are entitled to your opinion.

      ” … Westminster can and does lawfully change Scots Law.”

      Yes! I know. Which is why I amended the post from Ken500 to read, “Cannot legally change Scots law”

      ” The fact that the Scottish people are sovereign does not mean that the Scottish people could not delegate their sovereignty to the Scottish parliament (pre-Act of Union)”

      Indeed that would be true – except for the very good reason that it is part of basic English Law, (Which is thus also basic UK Law), that any person once becoming sovereign cannot legally renounce their sovereignty.

      Now perhaps you will tell us when this momentous decision by all the sovereign people of Scotland actually took place?

      Considering it is still a basic, unbroken,tenet of Scots law that the People of Scotland are sovereign there cannot have been such a legal move either under English or Scottish Law.

      Not even a majority in a referendum could, LEGALLY, change that.

      As I have pointed out many times on this forum – it is a basic tenet of English law that when a person becomes sovereign they cannot legally renounce their sovereignty.

      Thus no monarch of England, nor of the UK, can legally renounce their sovereignty. As no monarch of either can do so the English/UK legal system belongs to Her Majesty and whoever succeeds her. If you are charged with a criminal offence under UK law the case is, “Joe Public vs Her Majesty”.

      Law is most often set by a precedent and these are found in regard to Sovereignty in Scotland – even before the Declaration of Arbroath in 1320. Indeed that declaration is said to rely upon precedent. However, if you require precedent, how about this :-

      The position in the UK is that sovereignty lies with the Crown in Parliament. This leads to the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty and is taken to mean that one Parliament cannot bind its successors. That, in turn, makes having a written constitution in the UK problematic, if not impossible. However this concept of parliament being sovereign has never fully been accepted in Scotland, and has always jarred with the Scots constitutional tradition of popular sovereignty. In more recent times scepticism about parliamentary sovereignty was most famously expressed by Lord President Cooper in the legal case of MacCormick v Lord Advocate when he said:

      “The principle of the unlimited sovereignty of Parliament is a distinctively English principle which has no counterpart in Scottish constitutional law. It derives its origin from Coke and Blackstone, and was widely popularised during the nineteenth century by Bagehot and Dicey.

      Considering that the Union legislation extinguished the Parliaments of Scotland and England and replaced them by a new Parliament, I have difficulty in seeing why it should be supposed that the new parliament of Great Britain must inherit all the peculiar characteristics of the English Parliament but none of the Scottish Parliament, as if all that happened in 1707 was that Scottish representatives were admitted to the Parliament of England. That is not what was done.

      It certainly was not what was done and that is plain in the very title of the Treaty not to mention the title of the newly created, “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland”.

      Note that it does NOT call itself a new country but calls itself a United Kingdom. Furthermore the official title of the Westminster setup is, “Her Majesty’s Parliament”.

      Under English law no sovereign can give up their sovereignty and under Scottish law no monarch can be sovereign. Thus the Treaty had no option than to keep English and Scottish law independent of each other.

      That means the Treaty will always remain a bipartite union of two equally sovereign Kingdoms. In fact it is questionable if the devolution now in place is even legal under either legal system.

    283. sinky says:

      O/t Good old BBC Scotland at it again. On feature about amateur football they show footage of Kenny Dalgleish playing for Liverpool rather than Scotland.

    284. Thepnr says:

      I enjoy the posts concerning the legal arguments and the history of Scotland. A bit more education is always welcome.

      Looking at the present and the immediate future though you would have to be mentally challenged if you failed to see that YES stills needs to win over at least 5% of the Unionist vote.

      Get on board, ALL are welcome! It’s not rocket science.

      My argument for Independence is as simple as it could be. The Scottish electorate will always get a government of their choosing only WHEN they are Independent. It really is that simple.

      The party that the electorate choose to govern Scotland after Independence will have their own policies and they will have been chosen by the voting Scottish public.

      Could be any party by any name and really I don’t care. It will have been OUR choice, the Scottish electorates choice, not that of the rest of the UK.

      It’s called Democracy for Scotland.

    285. Dan Huil says:

      Perhaps the SNP [inside or outside Holyrood] should test one or two of Westminster’s laws beyond braking point. If they did I believe they would garner even more support than they have now.

    286. TD says:

      Robert Peffers at 6:56 p.m.

      Perhaps it is just a point of language, but when you said that Westminster “Cannot legally change Scots law” I interpreted that to mean that you believe that if Westminster does in fact change Scots Law, then it is unlawful. And if that is what you think, then I think you are wrong. I did read what Ken500 said “Westminster cannot change Scots Law” and what you said. I think you are both wrong. Ken500 because it just is not true – Westminster changed the law in Scotland yesterday with the Psychoactive Substances Act. You because you seem to think that this change in the law is unlawful. My arguments for why it is lawful are in earlier posts – I do not propose to restate them.

      I will however take issue with you on one further point – the point of sovereignty. You say that the people of Scotland cannot renounce sovereignty. I agree. But I did not say they had renounced sovereignty – I said they had delegated it. When did they make that decision? I don’t know – probably back in the mists of time when the King served the people and later when the Scottish parliament was first established. I am not sure if there was a moment in time when a conscious decision was made – I suspect the arrangement just emerged over time.

      The important point is that sovereignty can be delegated – not renounced. We see this every day that parliament sits in Scotland and when Westminster sits in respect of the Scottish MPs. We also see it in Brussels.

      In the context of devolution it is often said (as a criticism of devolution) that power devolved is power retained. Similarly, sovereignty delegated is sovereignty retained. When Holyrood sits, the Scottish people have not renounced sovereignty – they have lent it for a while to parliament for the purposes of making law. At any time, the Scottish people can withdraw delegated sovereignty from Holyrood, Westminster or Brussels. My personal hope is that we will withdraw it from Westminster, but leave delegated sovereignty in Holyrood and Brussels. But as long as Westminster has that delegated sovereignty, it is lawful for Westminster to legislate.

    287. Petra says:

      For Robert et al. What do you make of this extract taken from the written submission by Mr John Bingly?

      For example ”I believe that technically to peruse this to independence is tantamount to treason.”

      ”That the Two Kingdoms of Scotland and England shall upon the first day of May next (1707?) ensuing the date hereof and forever after be United into One Kingdom by the Name of Great Britain.” ………

      ”Should the people of Scotland ask for their independence then the parliament of the United Kingdom would have to consult with the people of Great Britain to discover if it is desired to disband the kingdom.”

      (Pages 50 / 51).

      MR JOHN BINGLY: ‘’Your Question 9. asks if the current constitution is able to provide a stable foundation for the devolutionary settlement? And what changes might be required.

      You appear to be exploring means to effect several Parliaments to come into existence to supplant the Parliament of Great Britain. Or to create potentates within the system of governance.

      I believe that technically to peruse this to independence is tantamount to treason.

      Our constitution does not empower the Crown or its Parliament to destroy or diminish its own omnipotence.

      Sir Robert Megarry V-C Manuel V Attorney General 1983 (C.A.)

      “As a matter of law the courts of England recognise Parliament as being omnipotent in all save the power to destroy its own omnipotence.

      ”The sovereignty of parliament cannot extend to breach the limitations of the Crown. The Crown has undertaken to govern reign-long in accordance with the constitutional laws that provide its limitation. That is an entrenched position that cannot be overcome by any parliamentary meddling or devices.

      The Crown has undertaken and is bound to use the utmost of its powers to achieve this end. The utmost of the Crown’s Powers include the refusal of Royal Assent and force of arms. All officers and Ministers whatsoever are bound to owe true allegiance and to abide by the law. The extant rules of law prohibit devolution of Great Britain. The Crown cannot assent to any diminution thereof and indeed is compelled to refuse all contrary measures by the laws of our constitution.

      The Crown is currently legally obliged reign-long to refuse to countenance measures which detract from the “true intent of the enactments that secure the Protestant religion to the throne”. The Act of Union with England 1707 being one such act states:

      “..to Establish the Protestant Religion and Presbyterian Church Government within this Kingdom has past in this Session of Parliament an Act entituled Act for secureing of the Protestant Religion and Presbyterian Church Government which by the Tenor thereof is appointed to be insert in any Act ratifying the Treaty and expressly declared to be a fundamentall and essentiall Condition of the said Treaty or Union in all time coming..”

      This text proves that the Act of Union is an enactment securing the Protestant religion to the Crown. It is therefore becomes an obligation upon the Crown to fulfil the true intent of this enactment/treaty reign long to the utmost of the Crown’s Powers.

      This Act commands and requires:-

      That the Two Kingdoms of Scotland and England shall upon the first day of May next ensuing the date hereof and forever after be United into One Kingdom by the Name of Great Britain.

      That the United Kingdom of Great Britain be Represented by one and the same Parliament to be stiled the Parliament of Great Britain.

      Her Majesty took her Accession Declaration Oath on the 8 February 1952. From that moment forward the Act of Union was again re-entrenched reign long. Her Majesty’s Coronation Oath has contracted the Crown To Govern only in accordance with the law.

      Parliament may not and specifically constitutionally does not hold the power to enact that which might violate the Constitutional contract which limits the Crown.

      Should the people of Scotland ask for their independence then the parliament of the United Kingdom would have to consult with the people of Great Britain to discover if it is desired to disband the kingdom. In the unlikely event that such a situation could be brought to exist the Crown would have to Abdicate, its Parliament would cease and a new settlement would need to be found and engaged.

      We have a wonderful constitution which must be observed.’’

      http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-committees/constitution/union-and-devolution/FINAL-Evidence-volume-UDE.pdf

    288. ronnie anderson says:

      @ Capella Whit ur you worried aboot Stu killing you with hammers,if that wiz the case you wud be far doon the line as ah Winger dont be afraid to push the boundries.

    289. Capella says:

      @ ronnie anderson 🙂

    290. Ruby says:

      Petra says:
      26 May, 2016 at 5:22 pm

      Has anyone checked out Alistair McConnachie’s site? Scary to say the least

      Ruby replies

      It’s called A Force for Good!
      Sounds very religious he may even have ripped this name off from the Dalai Lama!!!

      http://www.aforceforgood.org.uk/

      Not very impressive website!

      Facebook:
      https://www.facebook.com/UKaForceForGood/

    291. HandandShrimp says:

      In the unlikely event that such a situation could be brought to exist the Crown would have to Abdicate, its Parliament would cease and a new settlement would need to be found and engaged.

      Petra

      Who would have known it had so many benefits 🙂

      Let’s do it!

    292. Bob Mack says:

      @Petra,

      The argument by Mr Bingley is a fascinating one ,but carries an inherent fault. Whilst he is stating that the Crown acquired sovereignty on the joining of the two kingdoms,it is not written as such in any correspondence or agreement papers related to the event or the time. The legal position which is in writing is that the Scottish people are, and remain sovereign.

      This was probably an oversight by the legal system of the time ,but it is a very important ommission when it comes to proof of argument.

    293. AhuraMazda says:

      TD: “It is the system that is guaranteed to be separate in Scotland – not the substance of the law.”

      Throughout the day you’ve stressed this idea that the system is separate and distinct but that westminster has at least for now our delegated sovereign power to introduce laws. When they do, our legal system administers them etc.

      That being the case, on what authority does Scotland introduce laws, on what sovereign basis do the laws peculiar to Scotland rest? If the sovereign authority has been delegated to westminster, the logic of that is that our legal system lacks sovereign authority.

      It’s all fuzzy nonsense. We haven’t even discussed the legitimacy of common law which further confuses and muddies the waters.

      The whole British framework of control rests on horse manure. They call It an unwritten constitution. Slab after slab of dried out horse manure, otherwise known as statute, composed through the ages on an ad hoc basis, and it doesn’t have any foundational legitimacy to it.

      The whole system is best described as Might is Right. Questions of sovereignty and legitimacy don’t even come into it. Where lip service is paid to that sort of stuff, the context is always to screw someone over, in this case Scotland.

      And it suits them to have everybody confused about questions of sovereignty, with absolutely nothing in stone. If it was carved in stone in any definite way we would be able to call them out or at least hold them to it. But that’s exactly what the pile of horse shit is designed to avoid.

      It’s ‘the King has no clothes on’ dressed up as jurisprudence. Of course, certain people have careers at stake so they want to convince us all it has some sense to it. It does but only in so far as Might is Right has sense to it.

      At the root of it all is power, the power of the English aristocracy with their big noses, racism, and that repulsive assumption that they own the whole world. Principle and legitimacy never, ever, meant a thing to those animals. If you want to waste time looking for it between the slabs of dried horse shit, be my guest.

    294. Tinto Chiel says:

      Petra says:
      26 May, 2016 at 8:03 pm
      For Robert et al. What do you make of this extract taken from the written submission by Mr John Bingly?

      In a few words, Petra, horseshit.

      The U.K. would possibly be on stronger grounds if there were a proper constitution, depending upon what that constitution asserted. But there isn’t, so all there is is smoke and mirrors from the Establishment.

      However, we should not listen to them claiming what we can and can’t do. Sovereignty rests with the Scottish people, and, from the Declaration of Arbroath to Lord Cooper’s judgment of 1953, we have a very strong claim.

      I’m sure other commenters will chew this over in more detail but the Establishment have got into the habit of appropriating powers they are not entitled to: it’s called the British Empire.

    295. Ruby says:

      Here’s his Twitter account it’s a hoot!

      https://twitter.com/UKaForceForGood?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

      His real claim to fame is here:

      https://archive.is/TjVrb

    296. K1 says:

      I just did Ruby, he is something else, I was reading his evidence on Petra’s link earlier. This guy is an Ultra Unionist. This for one tiny example of the litany of fear that emanates from every word he utters:

      68. Drop the devolution of road signs. Road signs are widespread, hugely visible potential political banners. This is why the SNP wants control over them. If it controls this competency, it could make all signs dual-language; brand all signs with ‘Scottish Government’ logos; invent new road symbols just to be different from English roads; change everything to metres, and possibly kilometres – and even though ‘Measurements’ are a reserved matter, it will argue (correctly) that it is doing it within a competence which is devolved. This could lead to a separate Highway Code for Scotland; which would lead to a separate Driving Licence for Scotland.

      This guy has some serious paranoia, I can’t wait to we mess wi his heid wi the new road signs powers 🙂

    297. Ruby says:

      http://wingsoverscotland.com/peeking-behind-the-curtain/

      Wings article about Alistair McConnachie!

      Weird that the House of Lords committee took evidence from this person!

    298. Tinto Chiel says:

      Thanks, Ruby.

      Anyone here surprised? No, me neither.

      Pyoor zoomer, by the way….

    299. ronnie anderson says:

      @ Ruby 8.17 Thats the clown that waved the Onion flag in front of Nicola Sturgeon on Buchanan St steps.

    300. TD says:

      AhuraMazda

      Dear oh dear. Where to start?

      First two paragraphs – fine. Then this:

      “That being the case, on what authority does Scotland introduce laws, on what sovereign basis do the laws peculiar to Scotland rest? If the sovereign authority has been delegated to westminster, the logic of that is that our legal system lacks sovereign authority.”

      Answer: on the authority of our delegated sovereignty. That’s what delegating sovereignty means. I cannot see the leap of tortuous logic that leads you to say that our legal system lacks sovereign authority. I don’t particularly want you to explain, by the way.

      “We haven’t even discussed the legitimacy of common law which further confuses and muddies the waters

      Why? Common law is simple and everyone understands it. So murder is against common law. I don’t see why that confuses things.

      “And it suits them to have everybody confused about questions of sovereignty, with absolutely nothing in stone.”

      Shock horror, I agree with you on this one! The lack of a written constitution is something that in an independent Scotland I hope we address from the outset.

      “At the root of it all is power, the power of the English aristocracy with their big noses, racism, and that repulsive assumption that they own the whole world”

      I find that offensive and xenophobic. You are really scraping the bottom of the barrel when you resort to that sort of point. So I think I will end this discourse – you are not worth my time.

    301. Ruby says:

      ronnie anderson says:
      26 May, 2016 at 8:40 pm

      @ Ruby 8.17 Thats the clown that waved the Onion flag in front of Nicola Sturgeon on Buchanan St steps.

      Ruby replies

      and he was kicked out of UKIP!

      https://archive.is/Wonw4

      “SNP MSP Stewart Maxwell called on the pro-Union Better Together campaign to distance itself from McConnachie, saying: “Mr McConnachie’s repulsive views denying the Holocaust are stomach-churning – even Ukip disciplined him for that.
      “He is entitled to vote and work for a No, but he has gone further than that by formally associating himself with the No campaign. Therefore, in the interests of decency and a civilised debate, we would urge David Cameron to dissociate himself from Mr McConnachie and suggest that [Better Together chair] Alistair Darling writes to him requesting that he deregister as a permitted participant.”

      Why on earth would the House of Lords committee take evidence from this person?

    302. dandy dons 1903 says:

      Seems the House of Lards are accepting questions on Scotland in this farce of a “union” from a Holocaust denier-McConnachie, doesnt say much about the unionist lards scruples or credibility does it!?

    303. Bob Mack says:

      Why on earth would the House of Lords take evidence from this person? Because it suits their needs is why.

    304. Petra says:

      @ Ruby says at 8:27 pm …. ”His real claim to fame is here: https://archive.is/TjVrb

      Wings article about Alistair McConnachie! Weird that the House of Lords committee took evidence from this person!

      http://wingsoverscotland.com/peeking-behind-the-curtain/

      Strange isn’t it and it’s the first one listed on the SELECT Committee submissions list, as the names are in alphabetical order. They’ve used his website address beginning with ‘A’ rather than his surname beginning with ‘M’ (or even ‘C’). On checking the list this (using website name) is a one off. Seems that they wanted everyone to read the nasty piece of works ravings first …. and direct people to his website.

      If this is indicative of the calibre of people the lordies are consulting with then things are definitely looking up for us.

      Still trying to figure out if he’s Irish or not. I heard him talking on a video and he seems to have an Irish accent. Also going to go through some of his articles to see if there’s an OO connection …. because I’ve got a sneaking feeling about him.

      Too bad he wasn’t arrested when he stuck that flag in Nicola’s face …. First Minister for Scotland. If that had happened in the US (President or Senators) he’d be lolling in a cell with shackles around his ankles.

      http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-committees/constitution/union-and-devolution/FINAL-Evidence-volume-UDE.pdf

      PS Maybe we should be checking out all others on the list to see what they’ve been getting up to …. their history.

    305. Ken500 says:

      Westminster can’t change Scottish Law on the right of sovereign residing with the Scottish people. Under Devolution Scotland has rights to change some Laws. Scotland was promised FFA/Home Rule/Federalism. That has been reneged on.

      Westminster has ruined the Scottish Oil sector and lost thousands of jobs because of the tax regime imposed by Osbourne.

      Scotland could implement the Leveson verdict.

      The Scottish Gov needs to implement Minimum prices for alcohol.

      The Scottish Gov should invest in early years, keep class sizes down, teachers should get training in additional needs. Invest in (part -time) College places which help people get into jobs and uni. Ensure Scottish students should get their full loan entitlement and educate less wealthy students from elsewhere. (20%).

    306. Ruby says:

      Petra says

      Strange isn’t it and it’s the first one listed on the SELECT Committee submissions list

      Ruby replies

      Very weird! The other question is who is funding him?

      ‘He registered with the Electoral Commission as a so-called “permitted participant” last week, a sign he intends to spend at least £10,000 of his own money or donations.”

      Good or bad that his submission is the first one listed?

    307. Ken500 says:

      Alistair McConnachie could have psychological problems.

    308. John from Fife says:

      What exactly are the HOL up to. Have any Scottish non unionists had any input and what are the SNP going to do about it.

    309. Thepnr says:

      @TD

      Sorry for this but my interest was piqued.

      Having already cut his spinal cord thereby making him immobile. Was it really necessary to chop off his arms and legs too?

      Only asking because I would have went for his tongue.

    310. Ruby says:

      https://athousandflowers.net/2014/06/01/weekly-wanker-031-alistair-mcconnachie/

      ‘He hatched a cunning plan, to stand in the leafy Kelvin Constituency with a generic name “Independent Green Voice”, possibly the most vague and wooly sounding name ever used by a far-right candidate. This time, he mustered 1,300 votes, largely by sheer confusion.’

    311. Petra says:

      @ John from Fife says at 9:31 pm …. ”What exactly are the HOL up to. Have any Scottish non unionists had any input and what are the SNP going to do about it.”

      I’m still working my way through this document John in an attempt to ascertain if we have any ‘supporters’. Difficult for them right enough when they’re seeking information on holding the Union together …. can’t see the SNP having much to offer, lol.

      In saying that Fiona Hyslop SNP MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Culture, Europe and External Affairs has given Oral evidence … page 352.

      http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-committees/constitution/union-and-devolution/FINAL-Evidence-volume-UDE.pdf

    312. TD says:

      Thepnr

      Thing is, forensic dissection is such fun, don’t you think?

    313. crazycat says:

      @ Ruby

      He’s also the man Natalie McGarry foolishly and expensively confused with Alastair Cameron from Scotland In Union.

    314. Petra says:

      @ Conan the Librarian™ says at 9:28 pm ….

      https://athousandflowers.net/2014/06/01/weekly-wanker-031-alistair-mcconnachie/

      And when you take a look inside click on ‘Herald Scotland’

      ‘Blogger kicked out of Ukip for denying existence of Holocaust gas chambers signs up for No campaign’

      ”McConnachie also claimed the Pope was duped over the Holocaust and attacked the Board of Deputies of British Jews, prompting some Ukip members to resign from the party’s executive.”

    315. Onwards says:

      K1 says:
      26 May, 2016 at 8:34 pm

      “This guy is an Ultra Unionist. This for one tiny example of the litany of fear that emanates from every word he utters:

      68. Drop the devolution of road signs. Road signs are widespread, hugely visible potential political banners. This is why the SNP wants control over them. If it controls this competency, it could make all signs dual-language; brand all signs with ‘Scottish Government’ logos; invent new road symbols just to be different from English roads; change everything to metres, and possibly kilometres – and even though ‘Measurements’ are a reserved matter, it will argue (correctly) that it is doing it within a competence which is devolved. This could lead to a separate Highway Code for Scotland; which would lead to a separate Driving Licence for Scotland.”
      ———-

      Perhaps he could inspire some good ideas.
      Look at how the “Welcome to Fabulous Las Vegas” sign is a tourist landmark – a real icon.

      I’m thinking a giant “WELCOME TO EDINBURGH – SCOTLAND’S CAPITAL”
      road sign, with a giant neon Saltire.

      Or “Welcome to Glasgow – the city that likes to say YES!!”

    316. Tam Jardine says:

      These constitutional discussions and the Bingham report regarding sovereignty and devolution are interesting but they seem to miss, or avoid an important point.

      Constitution law is not a law in the same sense as gravity, or relativity. And if an apple falls from a tree it doesn’t drop because Sir Isaac Newton invented the laws of gravity- he described something that just was and would be- described, defined or not.

      Constitutional law is a description of a state of affairs, an arrangement. Much like the law of the land. Thousands of fans were unable to run onto the park on Saturday because the law forbade it except they did so the law was suddenly superceded by another law that just was.

      These rules laid out and all the awful little rules the unionists want to lay out can be supplanted if we collectively decide.

      If we find ourselves subject to a new rule that says we are no longer EU citizens or our human rights are to be enshrined in a depleted treaty or we all decide that PM Bojo is a step too far all the bits of paper and submissions by Tomkins and the Scotland in traction brigade are going to find themselves fairly irrelevant.

      Government in a supposed democracy is an arrangement that is meant to organise society for the common good I suppose and if that doesn’t work ultimately that government can be rejected from within the ballot or without.

      Whatever my views on the EU I have no intention of having my citizenship removed or my human rights guaranteed by EU convention traduced. Of course like the advertising hordings and stewards and police, at Hampden I will be unable to get on the park.

    317. Robert Peffers says:

      @Petra says: 26 May, 2016 at 2:51 pm:

      “Professor Adam Tomkins, Constitutional expert – University of Glasgow –

      Nation State and the Principles of the Union (pages 682 and 687).”

      The Good Prof Tompkins is that well known phenomenon in Scotland, “The Inglis Bletherskite”. He comes out with the most idiotic statements. Even a still partly educated school child could prove these to be utter cobblers.

      As to Question put to Tomkins: What are the essential characteristics of a nation state?”

      “1. The United Kingdom is not a nation state. It is a union state:”

      That bit is correct – “The United KINGDOM”, is indeed not, “A Nation State”, Thing is neither is it, “a state comprised of four nations,” though.

      The clue, (for the Bletherskite), is in the actual title that, “The United KINGDOM gives itself. It’s a bloody bi-partite kingdom you flaming idiot.

      The Prof goesc on, ” … 2.Union states such as the UK are rare”

      Aye! Prof – and now you know why they are so bloody rare.

      Tompkins then adds, “The union of England and Wales and Scotland has never been understood as such: it has always been understood as the union of England and Scotland.”

      That’s because it WAS a union between Scotland and England you flaming idiot!

      However, it was a union of two Kingdoms and not of two, “countries”, as the bloody numptie would have us believe.

      History tells us the Kingdom of England annexed the Princedom of Wales in 1284 and annexed the Kingdom of Ireland in 1542. (See, “The Statute of Rhuddlan”, and, “The Crown of Ireland Act”, respectively).

      Thus in 1706/7, “The Treaty of Union”, was between, “The Kingdom of England”, that was a single kingdom composed of three countries. It thus was not as Tomkins claims, between two countries but a Union between, two,(equally sovereign), Kingdoms.

      Either this Tompkins chappie is as thick as twa sets o four stacked planks or the numptie thinks we scots are all idiots.

      I would assumed any real constitutional expert, (Tompkins chosen field), would have known that. So why doesn’t Tompkins know?

      Or does he know but just lies through his teeth?

    318. ronnie anderson says:

      @ TD
      @ Thepnr

      AharaMazda is only here to wind Wingers up & to turn people away from reading WoS, about time the Rev banned him.

      Hows about it Rev bin the Troll.

    319. tartanarse says:

      Stu

      I know that no one wants Wings to be a closed shop with folk blowing smoke up each others arse.

      I know that you allow, quite rightly, folk that disagree with Wingers to comment.

      But can you please, please get Mazda to fuck.

      Can’t speak for everyone but I get put off a thread when I see his name.

    320. Thepnr says:

      Iv’e got a wee dog. Who couldn’t possibly love a wee dog or a wee cat, or a budgie or pigeon?

      Not many I’d guess but there are some that will be cruel. Some also that will be cruel to humans as history shows as does the present, some will even be cruel to their own.

      This may be hard to read but I’m just stating fact, and the point I’m trying to make is that we are not all made the same.

      The Tory Government is cruel to those that elected them. Hahahaha

    321. call me dave says:

      Three SNP MPs drawn out in ballot for private members bill. 🙂

      The magic seven in this year’s ballot in order are: Mr Nicolson, Tory Bob Blackman, Tory Alec Shelbrooke, Labour’s Pat Glass, Tory Gareth Johnson, the SNP’s Mhairi Black and the SNP’s Dr Eilidh Whiteford.

      https://archive.is/9NNMK#selection-2013.1-2013.205

      PS:
      Watchdog will not probe ‘love triangle’ MPs expenses

      https://archive.is/ssZEH

    322. ronnie anderson says:

      @ call me dave oh ah canny resist GETIT RITE UP YOURSELF CARLAW.

    323. Petra says:

      Last one of the night for me with someone pointing out why it, Ye Olde Onion, aint working and advocating the Federal approach.

      ”Question: So why has the UK not yet acquired its own federal constitution?

      Part of the answer is the size of England, which accounts for more than 80 per cent of the total population of the UK. It is often noted that there is no example of a federal system incorporating a single unit of anything like this relative size and proving successful. Under such an arrangement, the smaller participants can feel threatened and may wish to secede ….”

      Dr Andrew Blick, King’s College London—Written evidence (Pages 71/72). Extract from the full account.

      Question: Are there applicable examples from other countries with multi-level governance structures?

      One relevant international example that the Committee should take into account is that of Spain. Like the UK it has a multination tradition, upon which there have been historic attempts to superimpose a centralised system.

      Tensions between the two approaches have led to prolonged violent conflict.

      Following the Franco dictatorship, Spain sought to move by consensus into a post-authoritarian era through its 1978 constitution. Under this system, it has been possible for different ‘Autonomous Communities’ within Spain to acquire powers transferred from the centre to suit their particular requirements. The precise authorities taken on, and the speed at which this process takes place, can vary on a community-by community basis. Yet while the example of Spain since 1978 has similarities with the multinational asymmetry of the UK, there are also clear differences.

      There is no one nation within Spain that has the equivalent dominance in population size, and associated qualities, that England possesses within the UK.

      Another distinction is that autonomy is available throughout Spain, while in the UK devolution is not yet possible for most of England. Policy-makers in the UK should be aware that there are examples of federation or quasi-federation in states that are in some ways similar to the UK, but that the relative size of England is unusual and must be factored into any constitutional model.

      Questions: What other practical steps, both legislative and non-legislative, can be taken to stabilise or reinforce the Union? How should these be implemented? Is the UK’s current constitutional and legal structure able to provide a stable foundation for the devolution settlement? What changes might be necessary?

      To address questions 8 and 9 together, a model which has gained a growing body of advocates in the UK lately is that of a federal UK. Those who favour a federal system argue it could provide a clearer basis for the UK constitution. It could, they hold, guarantee autonomy to sub-units within the UK, which would become ‘states’, but at the same time bind these components together more clearly at UK level. It would also, supporters of this approach claim, be the best means of extending devolution to the whole of the UK, including England.

      A federal constitution would imply that the whole of the UK would have an equivalent to devolved government, in contrast to the uneven coverage that prevails at present. Furthermore, power would be shared between the devolved institutions and the UK Parliament.

      The latter would lose its ‘sovereignty’, and a written constitution would become the ultimate authority within the UK system, in place of the Westminster Parliament.

      The UK has also played a part in influencing and drafting federal constitutions across the world, from the US in 1787 (which arose following a revolution against the Empire, but sought to incorporate English political principles), to Australia (1900), Canada (1867, 1982), India (1949), and post-Second World War West Germany (1949).

      So why has the UK not yet acquired its own federal constitution?

      Part of the answer is the size of England, which accounts for more than 80 per cent of the total population of the UK. It is often noted that there is no example of a federal system incorporating a single unit of anything like this relative size and proving successful. Under such an arrangement, the smaller participants can feel threatened and may wish to secede; or the larger component may feel resentful that it is not receiving influence within the system on a scale that reflects its importance and the contribution it is making to the federation.

      If it is accepted that the size of England is potentially a serious barrier to the formation of a federal UK, any consideration by policy-makers of the possible application of this model to the UK needs to take into account how to handle England. One approach is to incorporate a series of English regions, rather than England as a whole, into a federation.

      Historically, advocates of a model of this type have included Winston Churchill, who proposed a system along these regional lines, both within government and in public, when he was a Liberal minister early in the second decade of the twentieth century. England may appear to be by tradition indivisible, but in its Anglo-Saxon pre-history it comprised a set of different kingdoms….

      Some useful historic comparators include Canada, Belgium and Spain. All are developed economies with pronounced internal distinctions, even divisions, that have adopted, in different ways and at different times, federal approaches.

      http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-committees/constitution/union-and-devolution/FINAL-Evidence-volume-UDE.pdf

    324. Joe Coutts says:

      “Two SNP MPs expenses not to be investigated further.”

      In the few times I have observed Jackson Carlaw, I see a drama queen overegging his custard. He seems to love his limelight.

      In my modest opinion. He is too excitable to make reasoned decisions.

      But I could be wrong.

    325. dunx says:

      @ Petra at 8.03pm and @Tinto Chiel 8.26pm

      Something else that was supposed to last forever and ever and ever was this one…

      “His Majesty having been pleased to approve of the foregoing articles, it is enacted, that they shall be the articles of union, and be in force for ever, from Jan. 1, 1801…..”

      Article 8 of the ‘Union with Ireland Act: 1801’

      That bit , “….and be in force forever….” lasted all of 110-20 years.

      Perhaps Mr Bingly could find the original copy in Westminster somewhere, along with the “Government of Ireland, repealing Act of 1920” and the Anglo-Ireland Treaty of 1921.And the Home rule act of 1911(suspended)

      Anyway here is the 1801 Act (section 8 bottom of the page).

      http://www.legislation.gov.uk/apgb/Geo3/39-40/67/contents

    326. ronnie anderson says:

      @ Onwards all Scottish road signs should have a Saltire & Lion Rampant on either side, they say that hypertension is bad for the heart for Yoons.

    327. K1 says:

      Yeah Onwards,

      WELCOME TO SCOTLAND: The Land of Philosophers and Unicorns.

      Ach it’ll be great fun having those ‘levers’ of ‘power’, with which to unleash oor sepurashun agenda 😉

    328. Capella says:

      @ Petra
      In the clip of the Lords committee someone argued that the size of England made a federal system unworkable. The First Minister of England would be too powerful to be ruled by a Prime Minister of UK and so the Union would collapse.

    329. G4jeepers says:

      Onwards,

      I’m thinking a great big fuck off sign at Berwick pointing due east saying “SCOTTISH WATERS” in every language known to man.

    330. Iain More says:

      Is there no way to do Carlaw for not just wasting time but just for being a waste of space and oxygen?

    331. heedtracker says:

      Newsnight kicks off with Sturgeon bad for saying out loud ref 2, probably buried at the end of the show but Kirsty Wark looks jolly angry at her. Newsnight editor’s ex rancid the Graun, same charmer that let thug bigots like Steve Bell off the UKOK leash 2014.

      Graun says England’s going to the dogs no matter how they EU vote. TeamGB establishment losing control of Scotland and England?

      http://archive.is/72CKX

      In or Out EU

      “The result, now and in the future, will be the English manifestation of much the same tensions that are currently tearing through mainland Europe, and a politics that will neither be polite nor controllable. The referendum is symptomatic of these problems, not any kind of solution. And the morning after the big vote – whatever happens – they will still be there, simmering away.”

      You should never put a comma before and!!! Come the revolution Graun…

    332. AhuraMazda says:

      TD, I’m enjoying our chat, please don’t go. I apologise for the big nose thing and anything that upset you.

      So, to sum up, based on your illumination of the subject, we had sovereign authority over our legal system and laws somewhere in Scotland at one time. I think you suggested we gave it away in the early 17th century — presumably under James I — although you have also suggested that we don’t know exactly how or when it was delegated to Westminster. This is convenient for your argument, I’d say.

      That’s how things stood up until the referendum but the result somehow crystallised that delegation of sovereignty and gave it a new, clearer certainty, according to you. Okay?

      Amidst all that we need to imagine that sovereignty, an abstract idea if ever there was one, has been delegated back and forth in regards to law making. I asked how you explain the ability of Scotland to formulate its own laws (a fair question since you said we delegated it) and you have now suggested that westminster delegates sovereign power back to us for that purpose.

      Peffers suggested sovereignty rested with the Scottish people and you ruled that out as I understand it? Just as well for you it seems because that would complicate things further.

      That as I understand it is what you are saying.

      Now, in amongst all that we have European laws which again involved a delegation of sovereignty — some of which was sovereignty that we delegated to Westminster — and also common law which as I understand it predates everything (every single thing) we have discussed.

      Clear as mud, right? Now I know why lawyers make so much.

      Sorry, I think it’s all nonsense.You seemed to give credence to it and at the same time admit it’s nonsense. The idea that the referendum somehow confirmed and validated this is beyond ridiculous to me. All that the referendum confirmed for me was that lying often works.

    333. Petra says:

      @ Tam Jardine says at 10:01 pm …. ”These constitutional discussions and the Bingham report regarding sovereignty and devolution are interesting but they seem to miss, or avoid an important point.

      Constitution law is not a law in the same sense as gravity, or relativity. And if an apple falls from a tree it doesn’t drop because Sir Isaac Newton invented the laws of gravity- he described something that just was and would be- described, defined or not.

      Constitutional law is a description of a state of affairs, an arrangement. Much like the law of the land. Thousands of fans were unable to run onto the park on Saturday because the law forbade it except they did so the law was suddenly superceded by another law that just was.

      These rules laid out and all the awful little rules the unionists want to lay out can be supplanted if we collectively decide…..”

      Exactly Tam they can chunter on all they like about the constitution and so on; in the main disagreeing with each other in fact. They can sit round a table and pontificate, mumbling through their stiff upper lips, about the if and when we’ll have another Referendum. At the end of the day, WE, the people of Scotland will decide not some bunch of unelected, ermine-robed parasites.

      Their days are numbered and don’t they know it. The very fact they’re doing cartwheels trying to figure out what makes the Scots ‘tick’ and how to hold this bl**dy dictatorship together speaks volumes. They’ve also got short memories. Their constitutional laws held no water in relation to Ireland.

    334. Iain More says:

      OT

      Has anybody else also come to the conclusion that regardless of what way we vote on the EU Referendum we will sticking pegs over our noses to do so?

    335. Thepnr says:

      Excuse me. Phaarrrpp!

      Just wind.

    336. crazycat says:

      @ Iain More

      James Kelly has an amusing solution at:
      http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/nats-for-av.html

      though some people do not seem to be getting the joke.

    337. Thepnr says:

      Obviously my lucks in, thought that could have been a wet one.

      Nah, the pricks no even worth that.

    338. Onwards says:

      @G4jeepers

      We need something special for the Border. I’m thinking 2 big granite unicorns either side of the road. With giant searchlights and 2 beams of light crossing saltire style in the night sky.

      Some Tories are saying they need to reclaim the Scottish flag and stop the perception that it is becoming an SNP symbol, so I don’t think there will be any objections there.

    339. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Re this dodgy Lords committee GrouseBeater flagged-up – as and when anyone on ‘our’ side is invited to appear, they could do worse than ask about The Remembrancer’s Office, and its role in scrutinising legislation.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_remembrancer

      The current Remembrancer is called Paul Double, and there’s a wee spiel about him here. Cool name! (‘Please allow me to introduce myself…’)
      https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/about-the-city/how-we-make-decisions/Pages/key-officers.aspx

    340. One_Scot says:

      My view for what it’s worth. I have nothing against trolls. I believe they have a right to voice their opinion as much as anyone.

      What amazes me however is that some people still don’t realise that you should not feed them.

    341. in regards to Tomkins he has never practised Law, he is just one of over 40 teacher`s of Law at Glasgow Uni,

      don`t know what toilet flushed him to Scotland,

      my own professional opinion is that he is `no right in the heed`with a definite Napoleon Complex.

    342. Laying aside the fact that there is no appetite in England for federalism and it cannot possibly work unless Scotland is reduced to the same status as Yorkshire can any body tell me anything that federalism does that independence doesn’t do better.

      There is a constructive option however that trumps federalism. Confederalism.
      Like the Nordic Union in which countries and societies of different size,all independent, join freely together to share certain functions in mutual interest.
      A British confederal arrangement would sensibly include the Republic of Ireland.
      I’d rather join the Nordic union

    343. Clootie says:

      Scotland2016 tonight

      Presenter simply stated tonight that half the SNP voters and members support the “Leave” vote and that the vote at Holyrood today by SNP MSPs did not reflect their views.

      The BBC once again making up statements without any foundation or evidence.

      The polls indicate around 30percent of Scots support “Leave” this would suggest her statement is nonsense as the Tory/Ukip voters alone will account for most of the anti EU vote.

      …why do I watch it….a good question.

    344. Thepnr says:

      @One_Scot

      “My view for what it’s worth. I have nothing against trolls”

      That’s fine buddy, you do know what a troll is? Have you read ALL his posts. Somehow I doubt it. I have.

    345. defo says:

      Well well well

      “Salmond predicts Scots poll in two years if UK backs Brexit”

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36393483

    346. AhuraMazda says:

      Well said, Petra, and I can assure you that I at least was paying attention to your lengthy posts and I thank you for putting in the effort.

      It strikes me that what those freaks in the Constitutional Committee were discussing was relevant to the discussion in here about sovereignty and law.

      I have trouble with the idea that sovereignty can exist anywhere other than in the hands of the people which is partly why I found what TD had to say perturbing.

      Clearly it suits certain elements to argue that sovereignty lies elsewhere, in monarchs and parliaments and such.

      If there’s one thing that proves the people are sovereign, and not parliaments, governments, dictators, and monarchs, it’s revolutions. According to TD and others, the very same sovereign authority (literally) that rules over our lives now also ruled over the lives of Americans and so many billion others around the world.

      Would anybody deny that the US as an independent nation state has legitimacy now? There’s an endless list of other countries that told the British aristocracy to off off too, do they all lack legitimacy? Do they lack sovereignty?

      Consider the list of countries that have gone through revolutions, overthrown their governments, deposed leaders or are products of invasions and other upheavals, and the only possible conclusion you can reach that makes sense of that is that sovereignty ultimately and always lies with the people.

    347. louis.b.argyll says:

      Signs saying ‘dont feed the trolls’ are anti-open-government.

      All lies must be exposed, large constitutional ones and petty argumentative ones.

    348. Thepnr says:

      @Petra

      Whats that on your neck? Fuck it’s a leech get it off quick.

      Euughhh.

    349. cirsium says:

      @Dave McEwan Hill, 11.23

      I’d rather join the Nordic Union.

      So would I as long as they keep the USA at arm’s length

      https://southfront.org/eu-death-watch-part-2-nordic-union/

    350. CameronB Brodie says:

      Re. “68. Drop the devolution of road signs.”

      Now there’s a man that recognises the power of semiotics. 🙂

      What about Westminster’s track reckord in delivering on ““’guaranties’ of expectations across distanciated time-space”?

      https://www.zak.kit.edu/downloads/Hauser-Cultural_Identity_in_a_Globalised_World_final_2.pdf

    351. K1 says:

      Is that just an elaborate way of saying he’s insecure Cameron? 😉

    352. Ian Brotherhood says:

      The Chilcott Report will be issued in less than six weeks.

      There will be all sorts of Euroballs obscuring its release, but we would do well to familiarise ourselves with some very painful memories before we get whatever treatment the MSM decides is appropriate.

      Iraq Body Count –

      https://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/beyond/chilcot-2/

    353. cirsium says:

      Who is funding Alistair McConnachie?

    354. Liz g says:

      Think I’m beginning to understand what the establishments so scared of.
      The crown canny get rid of it’s self.
      Westminster canny either.
      The people of End/W/ NI never could.
      But the Scot’s can…….and it only needs 100 of us.
      Is that the Tap n’ bottam o’it.

    355. CameronB Brodie says:

      K1
      Not really. I’m still taking the piss out of particular political editor but I’m also kind of making a serious point. Our identities are largely shaped by our environment (in the broadest sense). Road signs of a particular Scottish flavour, would at least be a step in the right direction of strengthening a Scottish identity. Especially as continued globalisation is impacting on the significance of location/locality and the connection with one’s traditional cultural values (see above).

      Space and place man, culture and diversity. 😉

    356. K1 says:

      Yeah Cameron I think I get your point, my point is actually in relation to the very real ‘threat’ that this author obviously feels about ‘his’ identity being directly challenged by the prospect of ‘road signs’ and their significance in the ‘Scottish’ context. The prospect of the ‘Union’ being ‘broken’ makes him insecure was all I was saying. So whilst he ‘gets it’ that it would ‘strengthen’ our ‘Scottish identity’ that frightens him?

      His space and place and sense of self is parochial (or local to his entire cultural experience which formed his identity) in this context. He can’t see ‘out’ of his ‘traditions’ and fights to ‘save’ them. We either have to understand and adapt or wail and weep about how it’s no fair that things change. I’ll stop there. It’s getting late.

      Peace out.

    357. CameronB Brodie says:

      K1
      I meant to agree with your earlier point about his insecurity. Sorry for putting you to the effort of a reply and thanks for putting such thought into it’s structure and meaning.

      Umwelt and worms, mind. 😉

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umwelt

    358. AhuraMazda says:

      CameronB, I was on a road today and the sign instructed me to go straight ahead for Glasgow. But the road didn’t go straight ahead, it went into a huge arc for about 3 miles so that I more or less ended up going back the way.

      Was the road sign wrong? Is that a bad road sign?

      I guess it’s the case that signs can sometimes say one thing and mean another. I suppose if signs can do that then people can too, right?

      Anyway, I suppose what matters is that the target audience, people in cars, knew what was being communicated and behaved accordingly. Someone on foot might have received it differently and misunderstood, but we can’t worry about that.

      It would be expensive and inconvenient if we had to put up a whole pile of signs just for pedestrians.

      As long as everybody gets where they are going, I suppose.

    359. G H Graham says:

      Anyone heard from the fake diet pill saleswoman, Baroness McMone or stairheid rammy expert, Johann “Stairheid Rammy Expert” Lamont lately?

      Goodness, it’s quiet.

      Also feels like we’re overdue a graph or something cos I’m feeling like I need a good chuckle.

    360. Robert Peffers says:

      @CameronB Brodie says: 27 May, 2016 at 1:21 am:

      ” … Not really. I’m still taking the piss out of particular political editor but I’m also kind of making a serious point. Our identities are largely shaped by our environment … “.

      The suppression of Scottish identity has been an Establishment aim for a very long time. The more blatant acts, like the banning of Highland Dress, (wearing tartan), suppressing both Scottish languages and the playing of Scottish pipe music were at least very open shows of force.

      However there were, and still are, much more subtle suppressions. The BBC being involved on an everyday basis is perhaps the most obvious but there were, and are, many, many more.

      The most widespread was perhaps the worldwide use of the, “Made in Britain”, slogan and the adornment of Scottish produce with the Union Flag.

      Neither let us ever forget the adoption of an English hymn to God to save the English Monarchy from, “Rebellious Scots”, who obviously could not possibly be in rebellion as the two kingdoms were still independent until after the Treaty of Union.

      During the rapid expansion of the railways, with the growth of steam locomotives, almost every town and city in Scotland saw the construction of, “North British Hotels”, adjacent to mainline rail stations.

      Note, these days, how often that numptie Cameron, (who claims to be the, “British Prime Minister”, and who uses the term, “British”, when he refers only to UK matters. He also often talks of, “The United Kingdom”, as the country when neither Britain or the UK are, “A”, country.

      So yes, you are correct. The. “Scottish Cringe”, is indeed an Establishment produced propaganda drive of giant proportions.

      It cannot be easy to reverse that trend but we should at least make people aware they are being constantly subjected to such Establishment propaganda.

    361. Ken500 says:

      More lies on education attainment from Unionists. Leaving out college places figures. Unionists were means testing students loans on household income. Students from households of average earning could not get a full loan to go to University. The SNP Gov have changed that but the figures have not come through yet. Unionists were preventing students in Scotland going to University through lack of funding.

      Students from Colleges go into second year at University. Is that included in the figure? Mature students 20% are often originally from poorer backgrounds is that included in the figures? There are still 20% of wealthy students from elsewhere getting a subsidised education at Scottish Universities.

      More funding should be put into early years, additional needs training and (part time) college places and less spent educating the wealthy from elsewhere. Scotland still has one of the best education systems in the world.

      Unionists were preventing Scottiish students from going to College/University and the numbers have been screwed through misinterpretation and analysis. Deliberately?

      Nicola is right to directly fund Headteachers to make sure schools get their proper allocation. Councils get the proper allocation and spent the education budget elsewhere. Willy Young is trying to cut the Education budget allocated for pupils with additional needs and shut the bases. To try and get the funding from the Health budget. He will be gone soon, if there is any justice.

      ACC Unionists/Green have destroyed the City Centre building an unwanted, appalling carbuncle and wasted £Milllions of public money getting the City into £Millions of debt. ACC Spent £30Million renovating a Art Gallery. That the majority did not support. They are £12Billion short. They plan to ban Aberdeen Artist Society from having their Annual Exhibition in the Art Gallery. One of the most supported exhibitions. That will be right. The Art Gallery was originally built for the Aberdeen Artists Society to host their exhibition.

      They have £Millions of taxpayers money on unwanted appalling carbuncles and other projects getting the City into £Millions of debt. Yet claim there is not enough money for essential services. Against the majority wishes and the public interest.

      The Unionists wring their hands and bemoan the demise in the Oil & Gas sector. Calling for Summmits and help. Especially from the Scottish Gov. Osbourne put up Oil taxes 11% (£2Bilion) in 2011 when the price had fallen. 60/80% tax when the price had fallen 75%. Completely the Oil & Gas sector. Osbourne is totally to blame for the situation/crisis. Losing thousands of jobs. Losing Scotland £4Billion+ a year. The tax has been lowered to 40% from Jan 2016 instead of 20% Corp tax like other industries. Oil & Gas is being imported putting up the balance of payments deficit and the debt. Osbourne/Cameron Unionists have ruined the Scottish/UK economy, No enterprise and higher taxes,

      Osbourne/Tories intend spending £200 Billion on Hinkley Point/HS2. A complete and utter waste of public money. The Tory fund to transfer public money to private associates creating £Billions of debt. A colossal waste of public money. They are cutting essential public services and are sanctioning and starving vulnerable people to death.

      The Scottish Gov should introduce minimum pricing as soon as possible. It would benefit everyone in Scotland.

      A German tourist was scoffing bottles of Becks. They were put right. A few road signs on drink/driving limits might be appropriate. Some folk do not appreciate Scotland has lower limits.

    362. Ken500 says:

      Could the Scottish gov implement the Leveson recommendations? That could establish a Press code of conduct in Scotland. Instead of the Press self regulation not working. It could hold the Press (broadcasting?) to account. Stop the worst of the regurgitated, recycled lies and misinformation.

    363. Robert Peffers says:

      @Ken500 says: 27 May, 2016 at 8:07 am:

      “Could the Scottish gov implement the Leveson recommendations? That could establish a Press code of conduct in Scotland.”

      I believe it is long past time for the Scottish Government to assert Scotland’s proper place in regards to the terms of, “The Treaty of Union”, and that involves asserting the Treaty of Union’s terms in full.

      The United Kingdom is not now, and never has been , “A Country”. It is now, and always has been a, “United Kingdom”.

      It involved only two equally sovereign independent kingdoms and thus the devolving of powers along the lines of the individual countries of these kingdoms is basically illegal.

      The Treaty of Union actually establishes that the two Kingdoms are permanently, legally irreconcilable. This is due to their respective legal sovereignty being based on quite different systems that cannot be legally changed under either English/UK or Scottish law.

      This is the sole reason the Treaty of Union guarantees Scottish independence for her legal, education and religious systems. Let us not forget that this guarantee, of necessity, cuts both ways.

      Under English law a basic tenet is that a sovereign, just by being sovereign, cannot renounce their sovereignty. This too cuts both ways as UK law is also English law.

      Thus there can be no legal way for the Westminster Parliament to NOT legally acknowledge that the monarchy of England remain sovereign. This led to the creation of the Kingdom of England’s three countries becoming, “A Constitutional Monarchy”, in 1688 and before the Treaty that formed a, “United Kingdom”.

      However, as the people of Scotland were, and still are, legally sovereign then the Monarch of the English Kingdom cannot legally be sovereign over Scotland and nor can the Sovereign people of Scotland hold sovereignty over the three countries of the Kingdom of England.

      Thus the Westminster Parliament of the UK that operates under English law has an insurmountable legal barrier that cannot be legally overcome. Yet from day one, (1st May 1707), that parliament has always assumed it has had legal sovereignty over the legally sovereign people of |Scotland.

      Now get this – both English/UK and Scottish legal precedent has ruled that Westminster cannot have legal sovereignty over the sovereign people of Scotland. Yet these rulings are always ignored.

      In this very thread there are quoted claims by a claimed, “Constitutional Law Professor”, (Tompkins), that are quite obviously, (not to put too fine a point to it), utter pish.

      I’ve already posted debunking his idiotic claims that he bases on the false premise that, “The UK is a Union of Countries”. The legal title of the union is, “The United Kingdom”.

      To claim it as a union of countries is less than honest. While the pair of equally sovereign Kingdoms that legally united to form, “The United Kingdom”, does contain four countries three of them are all parts of the Kingdom of England and thus are subject to the laws of England while Scotland is, and was, a unitary country and kingdom with its own, guaranteed by the treaty, independent legal system that is based upon the people, rather than the crown, being sovereign.

      Note that under English law when the term, “The Crown”, is used it is synonymous with the Government but this cannot hold good under Scottish law where the Crown is NOT sovereign.

    364. One_Scot says:

      ‘That’s fine buddy, you do know what a troll is? Have you read ALL his posts. Somehow I doubt it. I have.’

      If you don’t allow them a say, then we are no better than they are, leaving ourselves open to the controlling and dictatorship accusations. And as for reading all of his or their posts, I have better things to do with my time.

    365. Ruby says:

      https://archive.is/D3M9R

      Mr MacAskill reveals that at the time the Herald was seeking to publish the information, he took a call from Tory MP Alistair Burt, who was working with the FCO.
      “He threatened not just to pull the Herald’s story, but to pull the whole edition of the newspaper,” he said.

      “I was incredulous. I told him that the people of Scotland would definitely notice if there was no Herald the next day.
      “It really showed the extremes the UK Government was prepared to go to to stop the publication of something fundamental to Scotland’s leading criminal case.”

      Very interesting story!

      I was just wondering before reading this story if the MSM would print a story about the HOL Constitution committee taking evidence from an extreme right wing holocaust denier.

      I was say that story is definitely newsworthy!

    366. Ruby says:

      Ooops typo in last post should read

      I would say that story is definitely newsworthy!

      PS

      Tut! Posts about trolls are very boring!

    367. Fergus Green says:

      On the troll issue, we all know who he, she or they is or are. I just ignore their posts, but others take the bait.

      I think this site should welcome views from posters who feel they have something positive to say about the union, as that will generally stimulate a good debate I would not like to see someone blocked simply because they are not an Indy supporter.

      However, I do believe an element of discretion should lie with the site administrator. If it appears that a poster is simply trying to divide opinion, stifle meaningful discussuin and clog up the threads, I would be happy to see them barred. Over to you Stuart.

    368. Conan the Librarian™ says:

      In the role playing game “Dungeons and Dragons” a troll is a creature you can chop to pieces in every battle, yet it keeps coming back, again and again.

      Until it is cleansed with fire…

    369. Marcia says:

      My Referendum Bingo card is doing well. On the BBC Radio 4 News today the lead item is pensions or the threat to them if there is a leave vote. Will Labour activist phone up pensioners and tell them that their pensions will stop on the 24th June if they vote to leave? I am waiting for the threat to the shipyards on the Clyde next but maybe they might not do that as events….

    370. Ruby says:

      Fergus Green says:
      27 May, 2016 at 9:27 am

      On the troll issue, we all know who he, she or they is or are. I just ignore their posts, but others take the bait.

      Ruby replies

      I believe the correct terms for the person you call a troll is a Flame-baiter’

      OMG I seem to have been sucked into the extremely boring discussion about trolls!

      Sorry about that!

    371. Les Wilson says:

      defo says:

      Well surprise surprise your BBC clip as posted, does not show Salmond speaking at all. Heavily edited now.

    372. Robert Peffers says:

      @Fergus Green says: 27 May, 2016 at 9:27 am:

      “On the troll issue, we all know who he, she or they is or are. I just ignore their posts, but others take the bait. … Over to you Stuart.”

      Our Rev Stu has more than enough to do, Fergus. Leave it up to the individual Wingers as to who, or what, they want to read and reply to.

      However, those who are Troll bait risk having the less gullible Wingers also scroll past their replies along with those of the Trolls. Then just scrolling past their replies to anything if they prove to be too frequent repliers to trolls.

    373. gus1940 says:

      Onwards @11.09

      I would prefer giant copies of the statues of Bruce and Wallace which flank the gatehouse of Edinburgh Castle – one on either side of the M74.

    374. Chic McGregor says:

      @DMH, Cirsium

      “I’d rather join the Nordic union”

      I mooted the idea a while back that Scotland might be able to join the Nordic Council right now as an associate member (2 votes) since semi-autonomous regions are allowed membership. That may not be possible, since the three current semi-autonomous associate members are all semi-autonomous from full members of the Council and that may be requirment. So p[robably unlikely.

      No harm in asking though.

      If we could and did get in then one thing which might be possible is the re-raising of the Scotland to Norway sub sea cable project. Would, could, Westminster again block the project? Win, win either way.

    375. Glamaig says:

      Robert Peffers at 7:58

      a very interesting post.

      Its increasingly obvious there is a campaign ramping up to weaken our national identity as Scots and replace it with a ‘British’ one.

      For a long time we were allowed ‘Scottish’ everything, as part of the same thinking behind devolution, that it would flatter us and let us think we were semi-independant, and reduce SNP support.

      They now realise they made a mistake and are back-pedalling. National identity is produced or at least strengthened by everyday exposure to the symbols of nationhood – currency for example, signs, maps, flags. All these things work on our sub-concious.

      See, for example, the work of Michael Billig, a social psychologist. Just a minor example is the weather map seen by millions on the TV every day. The UK is outlined, Republic of Ireland, if it shown, has no weather, and the map is distorted to make Scotland less prominent.

      I believe our increasing exposure to the word ‘British’ and the union jacks appearing everywhere even on our groceries, is just one part of a concerted campaign on many fronts.

    376. Thepnr says:

      @Fergus Green

      “I think this site should welcome views from posters who feel they have something positive to say about the union, as that will generally stimulate a good debate”

      Couldn’t agree more.

    377. Glamaig says:

      My Referendum Bingo card is doing well. On the BBC Radio 4 News today the lead item is pensions or the threat to them if there is a leave vote.

      Theres a new one every day. 26 days to go. I can imagine the BBC are sitting with a pile of 26 more scare stories ready to go!

      Meanwhile they are furiously back-pedalling on all the immigration scare stories they were so busy promoting for a couple of years. Suddenly migrants are going back to Turkey and a gunboat has been sent to the Med.

      They are so obvious. What treats are in store for the last week before the vote?? Perhaps the scientists at Aldermaston have raised Winston Churchill from the grave for an intervenshun?

    378. Petra says:

      @ Ruby at 9:20am …. ”Holocaust denier”

      Exactly Ruby. Why is no one picking up on that? This man, McConnachie, has been selected to advise the lords, as one of a handful of people from a population of millions, on the future of Scotland.

      The corrupt media and of course the Tories have made a meal of so-called anti-Semitic Labour politicians and yet the lords are ‘courting’ this man and in doing so promoting him and his site. Who recommended him? Where is he getting his money from?

    379. Tinto Chiel says:

      “I’d rather join the Nordic union”

      “If we could and did get in then one thing which might be possible is the re-raising of the Scotland to Norway sub sea cable project. Would, could, Westminster again block the project? Win, win either way.”

      An interesting and cunning suggestion, Chic, with two obvious benefits: colossal amounts of Yoon frothing and bile (not good for their health) and Scotland seen to be quietly behaving like a country which is independent already.

      In other words, The New Zealand Gambit.

    380. Ruby says:

      Glamaig says
      I believe our increasing exposure to the word ‘British’ and the union jacks appearing everywhere even on our groceries, is just one part of a concerted campaign on many fronts.

      Ruby replies
      I wonder when the British branch office parties will fly the flag?

      I thought it was pretty weird that ‘Better Together’ didn’t use the Union Flag.

      Even weirder that the Ruth Davidson Party didn’t want the British Prime Minister to visit Scotland during her campaign.

      I’m not to sure if this bombardment of Union flags is going to work perhaps we should ask the branch office parties why they are so reluctant to fly the flag why they are so keen to hide their Britishness.

    381. Paula Rose says:

      Even my milk bottle had a bit of theUJ on it this morning – I am not a happy bunny.

    382. Ruby says:

      @ Petra at 10:13 am Exactly Ruby. Why is no one picking up on that?

      Perhaps if we can find out how a Tory minister can threaten not just to pull a story but a whole newspaper we might get the answer.

    383. Breastplate says:

      I don’t believe Mazda to be a troll and calls for a ban In my opinion are excessive.

      He is contributing to the debate by making valid points (about the sharing of sovereignty for example) and attempting to answer questions asked of him.
      Some may not like or agree with his answers but it is extremely important to hear different views when they are accompanied with reason.

      As I have said before, this is my own tuppence worth.

    384. Dan Huil says:

      I’ve lost some weight because of the Butcher’s Apron. Don’t buy food advertised with that flag.

    385. Petra says:

      Tories, anti-Brexit, now announcing that if we leave the EU the level of state pension will drop …. by £135 a year (a couple of quid a week). Tories, Brexit, announcing that this is a load of old codswallop backed up with facts …. accuse them of scaremongering.

      I just wonder how many No voters, listening to this, are now realising how they were well and truly duped.

    386. Bob Mack says:

      For what it is worth,I do not mind contrary viewpoints to the norm of the site. Whether or not they are trolls is irrelevant. They are putting forward views that many had previously referendum,and many still hold.

      Our task is to persuade and convince no matter what the argument. We have a large readership on Wings and we must show them all regardless of whether they be independence minded or Unionist that we have valid arguments to allay and answer their concerns.

      A publication that is intended to stimulate debate cannot be seen to stifle it at the first hurdle.

    387. Grouse Beater says:

      Please be advised:

      All trolls bring with them two supporters. They usually say things such as, “I don’t always agree with so-and-so’ but I’ll fight to the death for his right to say it’.

      Then there are the genuine who think freedom of expression is the same as shouting ‘Fire!’ in a crowded theatre, but would never allow a nasty neighbour into their house to tell them they’re a sweaty, bare-arsed dick.

      Suffering fools to show how nice and tolerant we are takes the eye of the real goal, which is their prime purpose.

      Enlightenment here: http://wp.me/p4fd9j-3Tl

    388. Breastplate says:

      Grouse Beater, as you’re doing the advising, could you please clarify if AhuraMazda is the troll you are advising against and if I’m one of the two supporters he has brought with him?

    389. Ken500 says:

      Union Jack on products is required under EU directives to give consumers information on where the products originate. The source (place) of origin. It is cheaper and easier for production to put a Union Jack on the products. For export and overseas trade. Many goods are exported, especially from Scotland. Scottish products are also defined by label. Scotland produces high values goods which often have the Saltire – tartan- on. Until people in Scotland vote YES? They will still be goods produced in Britain.

      Purdah period now for EU Referendum. Totally ignored and broken in the Scottish Referendum.

    390. heedtracker says:

      Tories, anti-Brexit, now announcing that if we leave the EU the level of state pension will drop

      That was headline BBC r4 EU propaganda this morn but that crew are fascinating to witness in action, as they are actually balancing their EU ref stuff to a extent that makes Pacific Quay vote NO 2014 fury look even more grotesque. Think Keunsberg, Naughty and Botox Bird sneering at Salmond 2014 but now Salmond’s George Osborne 2016. Very weird.

      Their UK.gov Remain economist minster guest got a real doing over from r4 dude, who sneared at all her Project Fearing and then frightfully plummy Sarah Montague, did an amazing impression of angry British colonial mistress about to give her uppity John Swinney a sound thrashing.

      BBC r4 is stuffed with tory English nationalists but they’re clearly hedging over Brexit.

    391. Ken500 says:

      The EU Pension nonsense was rushed out at 10pm last night before the Purdah period. Westminster Unionists were still at it right up to the Scottish Referedum vote. Totally ignoring the purdah period. The illegal, false vow etc. Cheating and lying in every way.

    392. cirsium says:

      @Grouse Beater, 11.53

      Good comment and interesting essay.

    393. CameronB Brodie says:

      IMHO, dialectic debate only works if all parties are supportive of establishing the truth. I all goes wrong when one or more of the participants are introducing fantasy, dressed up as fact. Opinions sold as facts are worse than lies, as they mislead the less-informed.

      I have zero tolerance for dissemblers, so I hope you all appreciate my good behavior folks. 😉
      .

    394. Grouse Beater says:

      Many thanks to Cirsium at 12.24.

      And enjoyed Cameron’s remarks at at 12.29.

    395. Ruby says:

      Breastplate says:
      27 May, 2016 at 12:08 pm

      Grouse Beater, as you’re doing the advising, could you please clarify if AhuraMazda is the troll you are advising against and if I’m one of the two supporters he has brought with him?

      Ruby replies

      Surely you must know the answer to that yourself!

      I would say the risk of you being mistaken for a back-up Troll would be very high.

      I had a look at your previous posts and decided that you probably weren’t a back-up Troll.

      It would seem to me the Flame-baiting troll has been highly successful in the work he has done here. Everyone seems to be arguing about him/her and I expect he/she is having a good laugh about it all!

      I really don’t know what the Flame-baiting troll has been posting lately as I haven’t read any of his/her posts since he/she subjected my to a torrent of abuse but I can see that he/she has managed to create discord so well done that Troll!

    396. Ruby says:

      I meant to add to my previous posts that Trolls often back themselves up

      ie they have several accounts.

      Perhaps I’ll open another account and congratulate Ruby on making such brilliant posts.

      PS
      Grouse Beater I will definitely be reading your essay. I learned my lesson when I failed to read ‘The Bitch is in heat again’

    397. Fan of Ruby says:

      Your post are brilliant Ruby. I am a big fan.

    398. Paula Rose says:

      Brilliant posts Ruby!

    399. Bob Mack says:

      @Breastplate,

      Paranoia is rife on occasions. God forbid you grasp a point made by anyone other than a’ kent” avatar.

    400. AhuraMazda says:

      I’m Breastplate too now, then. I suppose that means I’m heading in the right direction, a few weeks ago I was Duncan Hothersall…

      Here’s a proposed social experiment: put 10 morons in a forum and tell them to attack anyone who doesn’t bow to their bull as a troll. See what happens…

      I see Grouse Beater is still going loco down in Acapulco or wherever he is and has dedicated yet another article to me. I’ll maybe read it later.

      I actually have a program on my computer that reads these things for me and it has a voice which I associate with you now, Grousey; it’s almost as if I am sitting right there with you in your mansion by the beach, discussing your socialist ideals with you.

      Let’s get a few things clarified. I’m not hated in here because I am a troll or because I say things that are wrong; I’m hated and called a troll because I say things that are so often right.

      I was right about RISE and the radical left, I was right when I said the radical left cost us the referendum with their fanatical crap (they did), I was right about Bella (a year ago), I was right to point out that closing down catholic schools in response to the aggression of Rangers fans was insanity, and I was right to question the horse manure being peddled yesterday too.

      If you think otherwise, well, let’s hear why…

      Here’s another thing for the list: the clique in here stifles debate. Most of them are here to flirt or something and I probably get in the way of that, but above all else they are just boring.

      There are good contributors in here, I’d say a lot of them. I take them seriously and treat them with courtesy for the most part.

    401. Fred says:

      McWhirter a big-hitter or a big-shitter! U choose.

    402. Breastplate says:

      C’mon guys, I thought we agreed not to all show up on the same page at the same time.

      On a more serious note people, if we’re not careful, this could turn into The Witchfinder General X Factor.

      AhuraMazda and Bob Mack, you two have been rumbled. I’m OK because I’ve been vetted by Ruby and I’m allowed to keep posting on this site.

    403. AhuraMazda says:

      You’re forgetting something that CameronB suggested 2 weeks ago; that I might also be Rev Stuart too. The context of that and timing was interesting…

      Anyway, love to chat but I have trolling to do.

    404. Grouse Beater says:

      Ruby: “Perhaps I’ll open another account and congratulate Ruby on making such brilliant posts”

      🙂

      Well, you’ve fulfilled Rule 1 of trolling – always turn the topic into a discussion about yourself.

    405. Breastplate says:

      Could somebody tell me how to access historical comments on this site, I’ve seen people writing about this but have tried using the search facility but to no avail, thanks in advance to anyone kind enough.

    406. K1 says:

      He doesn’t ‘fit’ the description of ‘trolling’ as such, this isn’t someone making sound arguments or debating the finer points or even providing counter arguments when interacting with posters on here. This is someone attacking posters under 4 different monikers so far. Look at the exchange with TD in this very thread, nasty, patronising accusative opening gambit. When TD takes his bile apart, he attacks again, when TD finally eviscerates his ‘argument’. He comes back on his knees referring to this exchange as a ‘chat’ begging TD to come back.

      Those of us who challenge him on this are singled out and referred to in his posts on unrelated threads, people forget or can’t read all the comments to see that many of us have initially had in depth exchanges wi him under his other moniker’s: Neoconnat, Angrimainyu, sensibledave. He’s not some ‘newbie’ on here providing a ‘different view’. On the contrary he very much wants to be considered an authority on all subjects and displays all the signs of someone with a breathtaking arrogance that is profoundly lacking in compassion or ‘moral compass.’

      He derails the threads, ‘rewards’ and ‘punishes’ those he deems worthy. Has confused and contradictory opinions regarding his political stance on every subject. Jumps on ‘bandwagons’ on threads as a means of coming across as ‘relevant’ and almost always has to be ‘controversial’ as if he alone is bringing some ‘stunning’ insight that no one else can provide ‘except’ him. Attempts to get others to ‘gang up’ on posters who he decides have ‘got it all wrong’. Weighs in with absurd analogies conjuring up lurid and oft times quite disturbing imagery. And has a real penchant for the denigrating of ‘others’ when they take issue with his condescending patronising and totally ignorant diatribes.

      So it’s fair to say I would like him barred from Wings, unless of course others really do enjoy having the equivalent of Boris Johnson on the site. Just throwing my tuppence worth in ?

    407. K1 says:

      Breastplate, go to off topic.

    408. K1 says:

      ? = 😉 (never use the smileys on Kindle or Android devices, always come out as question marks 🙁 )

    409. AhuraMazda says:

      K1, I thought we both agreed that going into the ring with Ali was a bad idea for a man of your stature?

      I see you have cleaned up your act and stopped cursing and swearing so much. If it’s okay with everyone else, I’m going to put that down as a small victory for myself.

      I actually think Peffers was the biggest loser in the discussion yesterday and I hope my rather clumsy involvement helped distract from that and minimise the damage. I’d be the first to admit I’m no expert on constitutional law and issues of sovereignty but I gave it a crack.

      Peffers has been coming in here almost every day — he did so again today — and quite matter of factly arguing that Sovereignty rests with the Scottish people. Yesterday was his big chance to deploy his knowledge and arguments against someone (TD) who was saying something quite different.

      I like Peffers although he clearly finds me tedious. That’s fair enough, I can handle it. But yesterday he wilted before our eyes and I took no pleasure in that.

      I more or less stand by what I argued yesterday though, that the whole UK constitution is best regarded as a pile of steaming horse manure, with layer after layer piled up over the centuries in an ad hoc fashion, and that’s its primary purpose was to make change and progress virtually impossible.

    410. Ruby says:

      Breastplate says:
      27 May, 2016 at 2:54 pm

      Could somebody tell me how to access historical comments on this site, I’ve seen people writing about this but have tried using the search facility but to no avail, thanks in advance to anyone kind enough.

      Ruby replies

      I know a way of doing it but there might be a quicker way. This is what I do.

      Say I wanted to find posts by a poster called ‘Angra Mainyu’ then I would key the following into Google search

      site: http://www.wingsoverscotland.com Angra Mainyu

      you would get this result

      http://tinyurl.com/zq28dfh

      You would then need to scroll through the comments on the various different links to find posts by Angra Mainyu alternatively you could cut and paste the entire thread into a text editor and search for Angra Mainyu.

    411. Ruby says:

      Breastplate says:
      27 May, 2016 at 2:14 pm

      AhuraMazda and Bob Mack, you two have been rumbled. I’m OK because I’ve been vetted by Ruby and I’m allowed to keep posting on this site.

      Ruby replies

      I wish I had seen your post before I bothered to try to help you!

      I have no control over who can and cannot post on this site the only power I have is to decide which posts I read and which I don’t.

      If I have any doubts about posters I like to give them the benefit of the doubt by looking at their previous posts. Do you have a problem with that?

    412. Ruby says:

      Grouse Beater says:

      Well, you’ve fulfilled Rule 1 of trolling – always turn the topic into a discussion about yourself

      Ruby replies

      Not only that but I have also created a back-up troll it was easier than I thought.
      See post by Fan of Ruby at 1:09

      All you do is change your name at login.

    413. K1 says:

      You are quite incapable of actually addressing any points that posters make. Instead you select a ‘jump off’ point and ramble on about you, that’s it, it’s all about you.

      You have just proven one of the very points I made in my comment. You think and speak in ‘combatative’ terms. You view your exchanges with others on here in terms of ‘victories’ over them and you gloat over ‘defeating’ them. You pour scorn over what you consider as ‘weakness’, not just in their arguments, but you actually insult the ‘person’ making the comment.

      You are ‘triumphalist’ in your ‘point scoring’. This is not ‘debating’ dave/ahura/angry/neocon, this is aggressive and it’s aim is to ‘dominate’ and ‘humiliate’.

      Your boxing analogy is just another example of this very aggressive stance that you have adopted on Wings.

      You seem to ‘seriously’ believe you are superior to others, and this combatative language is your way of showing off what ‘you’ consider to be your strength. You want everyone to see you as a misunderstood ‘genius’ and those who question anything about who and what you are, are pilloried with the disdain that you employ to invalidate and escape answering those who are enquiring.

      It is you who ‘set this tone’ from the start, with anyone who had the ‘gall’ to have a different opinion from you on a wide variety of subjects.

      You are a fraud, you acknowledged that you did not and have never voted in any Scottish elections, whilst indicating that you had. It was only when I presented you with a comment that you made stating that you had only ever voted once that you got ‘caught out’ in this lie.(Neoconnat)

      Is this why you changed your moniker again?

      Just answer direct questions for once? (Preferably without turning it into a pissing contest)

      (By all means stand by what you said, it was precisely the entire ‘manner and approach’that you used to say it that I was highlighting, can you not distinguish between these two separate points?)

    414. AhuraMazda says:

      K1, I agree, I am often guilty of not addressing points and going off on tangents. Sorry about that. I’ll try to avoid that here.

      I notice you go on to suggest that my style has no finesse and can also come across as hostile. This puzzles me. Are you suggesting that the two posts below from you have finesse and are friendly?

      Honest answer to an honest question?

      K1 says:
      24 May, 2016 at 1:39 pm

      Yer shite’s nae worth sniffing and yer pish reeks tae the high heaven’s.

      K1 says:
      24 May, 2016 at 2:11 pm
      You don’t own this site prick. So fuck off wi yer holier than thou pish. Ya wee shit stirring wanker.

    415. ScottishPsyche says:

      If anyone is interested here is the link to the Sutton Trust Report on access to Uni.

      http://www.suttontrust.com/research/

      Even the summary bears little resemblance to the headlines on BBC Scotland.

      Basically more school leavers go into higher Ed in Scotland than anywhere else. However fewer go straight from school to Uni in Scotland. Also a much higher proportion of Unis in England take in students with lower grades than in Scotland.

      Essentially comparing apples with pears, when trying to compare the 2 systems. And is no one asking why a crap degree from an English 3rd rate Uni is something to aim for?

      All twisted and distorted by our media as usual.

    416. Robert Peffers says:

      @Breastplate says: 27 May, 2016 at 2:54 pm:

      “Could somebody tell me how to access historical comments on this site, I’ve seen people writing about this but have tried using the search facility but to no avail, thanks in advance to anyone kind enough”.

      Depends what you mean by, “Historical”, if you mean old posts then just use some key word related to what you are looking for in a search engine.

      However, there are a strip of headings across the top of each Wings page and among them is : – “REFERENCE”. It includes lots of stats.

    417. Robert Peffers says:

      @ScottishPsyche says: 27 May, 2016 at 7:18 pm:

      If anyone is interested here is the link to the Sutton Trust Report on access to Uni.

      http://www.suttontrust.com/research/

      In similar vein I note that, “The Treasury Select Committee”, (a committee of MPs), has published a report that, “Both sides in the EU referendum debate have been peddling, “misleading”, figures and, “Implausible assumptions”.

      Whit! Wha kent?

      After the absolute shit the Establishment threw about in the independence referendum it is a wonder anyone in the UK now believes a word any of these chancers say anymore.

    418. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Anyone wanting to find previous posts by a named contributor, see this post:-

      http://wingsoverscotland.com/things-we-dont-remember/#comment-2062671

    419. Paula Rose says:

      Carry on folks – silly beyond belief xx

    420. AhuraMazda says:

      “Paula Rose”: “Carry on folks – silly beyond belief xx”

      Do you ever contribute to political debate, “Paula Rose”, or are you just here to flirt with other men?

      I have no particular problem with the flirting stuff but this is a politics forum and it really is all that I ever see you do. I mean, fair enough, I’m not perfect but 99% of the arguments I am involved in at least have some sort of basis in politics.

    421. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      I assume AhuraMazda has not suffered/enjoyed a stroke from Paula Rose at the various pro-indy rallies that took place over 2014/15?

      Why not? Weren’t you there? You’re not shy are you? You were there but unassuming? We should be told…

      So many questions raised by your starting on Paula Rose…

    422. Paula Rose says:

      So funny xxx

    423. K1 says:

      I’m beginning to enjoy this now. 🙂

      I’m very definitely ‘having a go at you’ with these comments but as any one from here would tell you there is an ‘element’ of humour in my comments too, but I don’t expect ye tae get it Ahura (you don’t know the joy of playing with language, clearly). You have been consistently aggressive and insulting and extremely patronising. You of course don’t like to have that ‘come back at you’? I don’t like your insulting and denigration of me and others either, which you have being doing since our first ‘exchanges’ but it didn’t stop ‘you’ did it?

      Are you seriously attempting to justify your own aggressiveness on the back of those comments Ahura? Our history with each other on here predates those examples?

      You still won’t acknowledge ‘your own part’ in ’setting the tone’ since you came onto Wings, not just with me but with many other posters.

      You want me to relate to you in a different manner? As I have done over these past few comments? Well what difference has it made Ahura? Y’see it’s not about my ‘swearing’ at you is it, it’s about ‘oneupmanship’.

      And you want to cite these two comments to ‘berate’ me for doing exactly what you do everyday to others on all threads?

      That’s hypocrisy.

      These comments are specifically ‘aimed’ at ‘you’ and I am giving you my reasons for doing so.

      Can ‘you’ likewise now explain to me why you are combatative with everyone who disagrees or questions or argues with any of the content of your posts on here? And why you inevitably resort to insults and denigration when they do? And why you indulge in triumphant point scoring and claim ’victories’ over others and display a rather repugnant superiority in discussion with others?

      Just answer the questions Ahura. Let’s see if you can be man enough to have a reasonable chat about any on this instead of the childish attempt to garner more support for your claim as a some sort of ’victim’, which is just a bit rich and contradictory coming from the guy who likens himself to Mohammed Ali in bizarre analogies.

      Okay let’s wrap this up and place my comments in their context.

      On the article: A slight stramash.

      My first comment

      K1 says:
      24 May, 2016 at 12:23 pm

      Why are any of your engaging with this clown?

      Can’t you see what he’s doing?

      It’s so laughable if is wasn’t so fucking tragic. Enjoy being ‘wound up’ folk?

      Gaun yersel’s!

      He’s got ye aw talking about yer past and yer ‘stuff’, y’know the ‘stuff’ ye’s wur aw too intelligent to be part of and want no part of? That’s the stuff folks, eh?

      Come back into the present. Let’s go forward. The past is ‘so’ last year.

      Ahurawank responds:

      Ahuramazda says:

      24 May, 2016 at 12:56 pm

      K1, it might have escape the narrow parameters of your small mind, but the Unionist have opened up a new front against the Independence movement and it hinges on sectarian division.

      That isn’t something any clown in here can claim credit for.

      Get with the program and stop trying to reduce Wings to some sort of dating website.

      I then respond to that:

      K1 says:

      24 May, 2016 at 1:39 pm

      On this ‘one’ occasion I will respond to your ludicrous assertion:

      Yer shite’s nae worth sniffing and yer pish reeks tae the high heaven’s.

      Away ye go ye sad wee man.

      Ahurawank responds:

      AhuraMazda says:

      24 May, 2016 at 2:03 pm

      Informative as usual, K1.

      You should let yourself go sometimes though, stop worrying all the time about what new visitors to the site might think.

      I respond:

      K1 says:

      24 May, 2016 at 2:11 pm

      You don’t own this site prick. So fuck off wi yer holier than thou pish. Ya wee shit stirring wanker.

      You don’t live in Scotland and you’re not a supporter of Scotland’s Independence, never have been dave. Yer just a wee sad man wi nae pals…and no fucking wonder.

      I elaborate further…

      K1 says:

      24 May, 2016 at 2:30 pm

      Oh and I can get increasingly ‘profane’ dave. Anything to draw you away from the bile that you spout…ya fanny. I’m not the one who has tried 4 different persona’s on here and lied through ma teeth about where I am from, how I have voted, where I live…you have.

      That makes you a creep of the highest order and you deserve nothing but disdain for the liar that you are. There’s not a genuine grain of truth in anything you state on this forum, because all of it rests on top of the lie of your credentials. Therefore you cannot be regarded as anything but a disingenuous and thoroughly indecent person.

      You seek to point the finger at others to ‘shame’ them for their ‘language’ on the basis of ‘what others may think of that’ but you cannot see the utter shame of your own position; a liar and a phoney taking the ‘high ground’ in an attempt to shift the emphasis from their own hypocrisy?

      Well here’s what I think of that: fuck of you hypocrite. Got it yet? There is nothing you say on here that will ever have any merit, you are an amateur agitator. Your constant contradictions and weird Tory views are an anathema to the very essence of our cause.

      Now away and fuck off ya prick.

      Ahurawank responds

      AhuraMazda says:

      24 May, 2016 at 3:28 pm

      Meltdown.

      I respond

      K1 says:

      24 May, 2016 at 3:36 pm

      Go to a hospital then!

      (doesn’t alter the facts dave whatever yer wee ‘insinuation’ is supposed to imply, just comes across as more creepy dave stuff)

      😉

    424. Paula Rose says:

      *opens another bag of popcorn*

    425. DerekM says:

      lol i have told you all before they are the same person take it from a real troll a big bad vilecybernaticus trollasaurus scourge of planet zoomeryoontroll 😉

      He is just a little wanna be attention seeking troll not even fit for a snack,so do the right thing and just ignore him the more you bite the braver he will get.



    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