The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


The internationalist brigade

Posted on December 06, 2018 by

We all knew this already, of course. Last year we commissioned a poll from Panelbase which found an enormous 41-point gap between Yes and No voters on immigration. But it was still nice to have it both confirmed and laid out so clearly by Sir John Curtice on Good Morning Scotland earlier today.

(About 1h 55m in. We’re having some trouble recording sound on our new PC at the moment, we’ll get you a proper audio link as soon as we’ve figured it out.)

“Support for the Yes movement is associated with being more likely [around 50% more likely, in fact] to have a positive view about immigration.

So we’re certainly confirming that Scotland does have this rather unusually civic nationalist movement. It’s not a movement that says you have to be born in Scotland for us to value you, it is something that does seem to be relatively open-minded.

On the other side of the coin what we’re discovering – and the reason why in the end Scotland why doesn’t look any more liberal than England and Wales – is that when you look at those who vote for the Conservatives or for the Labour Party, for the Unionist parties, they emerge as being less favourable towards immigration than are Conservative and Labour voters south of the border.”

It’s worth keeping to hand the next time some witless Scottish Labour goon tries to tell you that independence is bad because it’s “separatist” and that voting for the Union is the international-solidarity option. Because that’s a flat-out lie.

Yes voters are the ones happy to welcome people born abroad who’d want to make an independent Scotland their home, while Unionists – and especially Labour – are the ones hostile to “foreigners”, more so even than their English colleagues.

Like we say, we already knew that. It’s no coincidence that the BNP, Britain First, the EDL/SDL, the National Front and every other racist organisation in Britain were on the No side in the indyref. But in Scottish politics nothing is counted as official until John Curtice says it. And now that’s done too.

Print Friendly

    1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. 06 12 18 13:56

      The internationalist brigade | speymouth

    88 to “The internationalist brigade”

    1. Macart says:

      Takes them a while to either catch on or catch up. 🙂

    2. Doug_Bryce says:

      Brexit exposed the real nationalists and xenophobes.

    3. Clootie says:

      All Hail Curtice!

      I’m getting weary of this.

    4. robertknight says:

      I look forward to reading as comprehensive a summary as the Rev’s in both the printed MSM and on the BBC in particular.

      …sorry. Must be the couple of maricakes I had with my coffee at 11 o’clock just beginning to kick in.

      As you were everybody, carry on…

    5. mountain shadow says:

      Anyone fancy letting SiU know?

    6. Capella says:

      If SLab and STories didn’t lie, they would have nothing to say.
      Glad that Sir Curtice has noticed the civic nature of the YES movement.

      Keir Hardie, of course, was anti immigration for the obvious reason that employers will import cheap labour to undercut wages – until labour can be replaced with robots.

      However, in this modern age of EU regulation, nobody should be suffering from punitive low income. Except in the UK, of course.

    7. Sinky says:

      The Brexit disaster is an existential crisis in the idea of Britain’ – how narrow English nationalism is destroying the United Kingdom.

      https://www.gerryhassan.com/blog/the-brexit-disaster-is-an-existential-crisis-in-the-idea-of-britain/

      The Break-Up of Britain’ explores the archaic, ossified relic that is the British state; undemocratic, anti-modern and that sees itself as ‘the mother of Parliaments’. It is also a book in which the state of England is central to this mindset – its gathering unease at events in Europe and the European project, and in which a reactionary English nationalism is emerging, initially around Enoch Powell (who was obsessed with ‘sovereignty’), but then taken up by Thatcher, and now by Brexiteers.

    8. gus1940 says:

      Watching Richard Leonard each week at FMQs as he bobs up and down it would appear that he has wrested the title Zebedee from the unlamented champion of verbal diaorrhea George Foulkes.

    9. Thepnr says:

      This is the official Labour policy on immigration.

      https://www.indy100.com/article/labour-is-actually-selling-an-antiimmigration-mug–eJdljZ1sCx

      This is the official Tory policy on immegration.

      https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/26/theresa-may-go-home-vans-operation-vaken-ukip

      This is official SNP policy on immigration.

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-44249725

      Nationalists eh! What are they like?

    10. Heartsupwards says:

      In an effort to sell brexit on the radio this morning (BBC Radio Scotland), some person, I never caught his name, being interviewed, I never caught the female interviewers name either(Can anyone find out? approx. 05.50 am) stated that one of the benefits of Brexit would be that parliament would have the power to keep Scotland as part of the UK. The interviewer did say that the statement was controversial but he was llowed to blunder on and she never returned to the point.

    11. Xaracen says:

      Hmmm, actually I make that about 1hr and 55mins in, on that link to the GMS audio. 😀

    12. manandboy says:

      The Tory & Labour Parties have defined themselves as habitual and shameless liars. They are both compelled to lie in order to cover up their true intentions and their back-room deals.

      Tory & Labour are totally united in ensuring that their Establishment system of inherited control of power, wealth & privilege in the UK, cannot be usurped by those who want a fairer society.

      John Curtice has become very much a part of the Establishment, hence his status as a permanent feature on the BBC’s propaganda landscape.

    13. Nana says:

      Apologies for O/T

      Judgment will be handed down at 9.30am in Courtroom 1 on Thursday 13 December in the case of the UK Withdrawal from the European Union (Legal Continuity) (Scotland) Bill – A Reference by the Attorney General and the Advocate General for Scotland,

      https://twitter.com/UKSupremeCourt/status/1070640758288453632

    14. Sharny Dubs says:

      John who?

      Used to think “Sir” meant something until Savil

    15. G says:

      These views are made worse by the fact that Scotland has relatively low levels of immigration compared to England, is far less densely populated, and has lower population growth. So any non-racist argument against immigration (e.g. environmental) is far more difficult to make.

      Immigrants in Scotland also seem to be more integrated and to embrace the culture. Being “Scottish” doesn’t have the racial and ethnic connotations that some people in England associate with being “English”. So even going down a cultural integration angle, it should be lower.

      So it’s just British exceptionalism/bigotry. What an embarrassing bunch.

    16. Abulhaq says:

      It’s such a bloody bore being British…..yaaawwn!

    17. galamcennalath says:

      Glad I’m not a nationalist 🙂

    18. Heartsupwards says:

      I should have made note that this must have been radio 5 live (Before Good Morning Scotland). I’m not usually driving at that time of morning.

    19. manandboy says:

      May I say, Stu, that yet again, your work in general, and this piece is no exception, continues to impress upon us the importance of your presence in the Independence movement, to the point where being without you is virtually unthinkable.

      That includes an element of understatement.

    20. Fraser A Reid says:

      So, Stu – Completely OT but – When Scotland does go her own way, will you be moving house ?

    21. Proud Cybernat says:

      But am I still a vile separatist? And if not, WHY not?

    22. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Hmmm, actually I make that about 1hr and 55mins in, on that link to the GMS audio”

      AS IT QUITE CLEARLY SAYS.

    23. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “So, Stu – Completely OT but – When Scotland does go her own way, will you be moving house ?”

      As I’ve said about a hundred times: yes.

    24. call me dave says:

      Radio Shortbread: GMS

      Prof John Curtis expounds on a Scottish positive view civic nationalism maybees aye! Aye right!

      Just after 1hr – 55mins – 15sec in. 5mins long.

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0001fq4

    25. mike cassidy says:

      G 12.38

      The question that follows.

      Why do so many immigrants choose such a hostile environment as England?

    26. Truth says:

      But as I’ve said before, this is all part of the plan for the union’s defence in indyref 2.

      They are going to play on the base fear of us being over run by immigrants if independence happens and those lily livered liberals are in charge.

      They are sowing seeds in the minds of the Scottish public. If indyref 2 is called it will be ramped up slowly to disgusting levels with the unionist (and scared) boiling frogs going along with it.

      They know the economic argument will be lost. Project fear 2 will make you sick. I hope I am wrong.

    27. William Wallace says:

      @ Stu 12:46

      It clearly said 1m 55s beforehand though 😉

    28. Xaracen says:

      “AS IT QUITE CLEARLY SAYS.”

      😀

    29. Proud Cybernat says:

      “They are going to play on the base fear of us being over run by immigrants if independence happens…”

      People are already looking around them and seeing the increase in doctor and nurse vacancies – and that will become critical. They will see a lot of our produce rotting in fields. They will hear of the pension timebomb where, in just a few short years, there will not be enough young people working in this country to pay the taxes that go to support services and pay pensions. And all these nasty outcomes will happen unless we grow the Scottish population and grow it fast. And that fast population growth can only be done with immigration / freedom of movement. And since Scotland’s devolved parliament has no control over these powers, we need Indy to do it for only Indy will give us ALL the necessary powers.

    30. jfngw says:

      I’ve had a discussion over the years with a couple on No and Leave voters, their claim is that they are not racists, it is other cultures that are alien to Scotland they don’t want. Spot the difference?

    31. manandboy says:

      At this point in the Brexit saga, as pressure continues to increase on all sides, but none more so than on the Tory government, there is just a hint in the statements of Dominic Raab and Andrea Leadsome, that the Tories see their intended outcome as an absolute, whatever that may be. If that is the case, then we have not yet seen the worst of Brexit.

      What we can safely say however, is that it will emanate from the deepest desires of the Establishment to preserve its monopoly on power and wealth in its Empire. To that end, it will stop at nothing.

      One last point. Such is the seriousness of this crises, it must be reasonable to think that the Monarch has had input, if not instruction, in the ear of Theresa May. So we could be looking at Parliament & the People versus the Monarchy/Establishment here.

    32. yesindyref2 says:

      When Scotland does go her own way, will you be moving house ?

      As I’ve said about a hundred times: yes

      The Rev’s got broad shoulders.

    33. Proud Cybernat says:

      O/T

      I conducted this Twitter Poll yesterday. I have to say that the result is not quite what I expected although, in terms of Indy activists, the outcome seems to be in line with the age profile I observe on Indy marches i.e. 45+ age group. Not sure if other SocMed platforms would yield a different result.

      Where are all the young people? And, more surprising of all, if the 26-45 age group – only 14% active on Twitter. Do we need to reassess how we target specific age groups come IndyRef2?

      https://i.imgur.com/h1eAApd.png

    34. Capella says:

      @ Heatsupwards – the radio programme you mentioned was R5 Live “Wake Up to Money”. The interview was with Vicky Price (remember her?) and Andrew Lineker?.

      He was rattling off all the glorious benefits of leaving the EU including increasing the integrity of the Union, less risk of Scotland leaving. To her credit, VP did say that was an extraordinary thing to say.

      Listen from 33:40 for whole discussion or from 42:40 for his list of all the intangible benefits from leaving the EU including changing the regulatory environment and preventing Scotland from leaving.

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0001fjq

    35. geeo says:

      According to Toodle oo the noo, the Holyrood Continuity Bill judgement will be on Thurday next week.

      We have a fun packed political timetable now .

      Supreme Court clearly told to wait until AFTER the vote on treeza’s deal on Tuesday.

      So,
      …………….

      Monday: ECJ Confirms (as expected) EU Advocate General statement that indeed WM PARLIAMENT can revoke A.50 (despite treeza stating that her GOVERNMENT will not be revoking A.50 when actually, the ECJ ruling means the government cannot actually refuse WM parliament that choice to decide).

      Tuesday: Meaningful vote, and treeza’s deal is rejected out of hand.

      There could be an immediate Confidence motion against the government put forward, or the Tory hard line brexiters will pile in on treeza with more letters.

      Either way, by Wednesday, WM will be in utter turmoil.

      Thursday: Holyrood EU Continuity Bill judgement is declared by SC.

      Whatever way that goes, Scotsgov wins as previously explained many times.

      Then there is an immediate constitutional crisis on treeza’s lap as well.

      Scotsgov actions have flown under the radar for some time now, by the time they (WM unionists) see us coming, it will be too late to take evasive action.

      WM has been so obsessed with the DUP and N.I. they forgot about Scotland, who are coming in hot with the real political and legal weaponry.

      Feckin lovin it.

    36. manandboy says:

      Here’s the briefing note and suggested interventions for Tory MPs for the economy brexit debate https://t.co/84z1nNtDpV

      This is how the script for today has been written by No 10.

    37. Dr Jim says:

      You don’t have to like foreign people if you don’t want to that’s a personal choice for whatever your reasons but the Tories and Labour are positively *against* foreign people and that’s racist

      In a programme last night it was uncovered that the Tories are still operating the hostile environment against the Windrush folk and refuse to release figures of how many people they have and still are deporting

      If planet earth lasts long enough, by simple extrapolation of the inter marriage figures around the globe the population of earth is going to be roughly all the same colour eventually, one wonders how the BNP and racist types accross the British Isles will feel about being the odd ones out, the funny little all white people bursting into flames in the globally warmed hot sun

      The world is changing, you either work with it and mould it to your advantage or become extinct, if animals can adapt to changing circumstances why are the Tories and Labour unable to prevent their own extinction

      They should commission David Attenborough to tell them why

    38. Hearstupwards says:

      Thanks Capella, the way you put it it doesn’t sound as controversial. I nearly choked on my chewing gum at the time.

    39. Robert Peffers says:

      @manandboy says: 6 December, 2018 at 1:07 pm:

      ” … One last point. Such is the seriousness of this crises, it must be reasonable to think that the Monarch has had input, if not instruction, in the ear of Theresa May. So we could be looking at Parliament & the People versus the Monarchy/Establishment here.”

      And that is exactly when Scotland becomes independent for the function of the royal person is legally different in each of the only two kingdoms that comprise the United Kingdom but that royal person also has a different function for the rest of the non-Westminster parts of the British Isles.

      The Monarch of the Kingdom of England is legally sovereign but, under only English law, must delegate their royal sovereignty of England to the Parliament of the Kingdom of England.

      However, there has not been, an elected as such, parliament of the Kingdom of England since 30 April 1707. Westminster is, since 1 May 1707, legally the parliament of the two kingdom United Kingdom. There has legally been no parliament the Monarch of England could delegate their sovereignty to.

      As to the law of the Kingdom of Scotland, the monarch of the Kingdom of Scotland is not legally sovereign but must legally protect the sovereignty of the people of Scotland – a task the monarch of the Kingdom of Scotland has signally NOT done since 1707. Scots law specifically states that the sovereign people of Scotland can legally expel any monarch they deem to not be up to the job and to replace that monarchy with someone who will.

      As to the monarch’s job in relation to the three crown dependencies, (The two Channel Island Bailiwicks and the Isle of Man).

      Note:- the Bailiwick of Jersey, is the largest of the islands.

      The Bailiwick of Guernsey, consisting of Guernsey, Alderney, Sark and some smaller islands.

      In the three Crown Dependencies the Monarchy must protect their interests and they are part of the monarch’s personal united kingdom but not part of the Westminster United Kingdom Parliament.

      Brexit thus provides Her Majesty with a few big headaches.

    40. Golfnut says:

      @Robert Peffers.

      I bet you wish you had a pound for every time you have explained this.
      Scottish Sovereignty, Scots law/ Constitution.
      Scots Monarchy.

    41. Gerry says:

      @Robert Pfeffers

      THIS….

      “As to the law of the Kingdom of Scotland, the monarch of the Kingdom of Scotland is not legally sovereign but must legally protect the sovereignty of the people of Scotland”

      …is the very heart of the matter. A crucial distinction that is Scotland’s ace in this game.

    42. Capella says:

      @ Heartsupwards – the male policy wonk was Andrew Lilico – bio here:
      http://www.europe-economics.com/page/22/andrew-lilico.htm

      Dr Andrew Lilico is Executive Director and Principal of Europe Economics. He is a Fellow of the Institute of Economic Affairs and Chairman of the IEA/Sunday Times Monetary Policy Committee. As Chief Economist of Policy Exchange from 2009-10 he produced what the BBC has described as the “essential theory” behind the Coalition’s initial deficit reduction strategy.

      So what Andrew advises gets turned into policy. Look out.

    43. galamcennalath says:

      Sovereignty …. the Supreme Court’s judgement on the Holyrood Continuity Bill will be given on Thursday 13 December, in a week.

      That will be interesting.

      It has been said it is a win-win for Scotland. Either they uphold Holyrood’s power to legislate, or they don’t and that will look like London literally laying down the law against Scots’ will.

      We will see!

    44. Geordie says:

      Let’s paint this on the side of a bus and park it outside Jakey Rowling’s house. Her and her “blood and soil Scottish nationalists” slur that she hides behind.

    45. call me dave says:

      Oooft!

      Shares can go down as well as up! All four FTSE’s 2.7% down

      FTSE250 500 points down all morning.

      Pound up against Euro and Dollar.

      Jings! Feart tae look later.

      I should have sold more shares at Christmas last year. 🙁 🙂

    46. crazycat says:

      Pedantry alert:

      Much as I would like to get rid of peerages etc, they do currently exist and there are rules for referring to/addressing their holders.

      I’ve noticed here and elsewhere a tendency to refer to Sir [surname], or Dame [surname]. This is incorrect; it should be Sir/Dame [forename][+ optional surname]. So John Curtice is Sir John, or Sir John Curtice, but not Sir Curtice*.
      (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forms_of_address_in_the_United_Kingdom#Knights)

      Also, knights, dames, baronets and baronetesses are not peers and not members of the House of Lords.

      *I do realize that referring to him thus might be a joke, but sometimes the same mistake is made about other, less amusing, individuals.

    47. geeo says:

      @galamcennalath

      Re: Contnuity Bill.

      If SC rules with WM, it will have to have legally set aside both the Treaties of Union and the Devolution(Scotland)Act.

      In that case, the SC will have ended the treaty of Union.

      If, as it really has to, to make a legitimate judgement, the ruling goes with Scotsgov, then that means ALL 111 returning powers must be returned directly to Holyrood on March 29th 2019.

      Imagine the effect that will have on WM’s ability to negotiate a trade deal with the EU, if by some miracle treeza makes a deal passable through WM.

      Fishing in Scottish Waters would be FULLY DEVOLVED to Holyrood, for example, so, no Scottish agreement on access, no WM using our fishing grounds to trade away.

      Then of course, if the SC rules with Scotsgov, it will have had to have done so by recognising our Legal Sovereignty of the People of Scotland.

      Otherwise, it would have no reason to rule in Scotsgov’s favour, if WM was sovereign over Scots, would it ?

      So, there we go, we cannot lose.

    48. geeo says:

      @crazycat.

      You feel free to bow and scape all you like, i have never referred to anyone as ‘sir’,’dame’ or any other ‘title’ bestowed upon them by enemies of my principled beliefs, and never will, unless as a sarcastic mocking reference.

      Eg: “that well know SOCIALIST warrior, ‘Lord’ Darling…”

    49. manandboy says:

      Politics – the only game in town this week, and next week, and the week after….

    50. galamcennalath says:

      “Brexit can be stopped, says Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon”

      https://www.breakingnews.ie/world/brexit-can-be-stopped-says-scottish-first-minister-nicola-sturgeon-890307.html

    51. OT., I will say that unless you have only those who. Are born and live in Scotland the true Scots being the only ones allowed to vote in the next ind., ref., then you will lose again it will be like having lost a battle because you used the wrong tactics you are going to fight a battle again using the same tactics but expecting a different result that of course is the first sign of madness I still say to you on here who want everyone to be able to vote you are just as bad as the no voters or you are really trolls

    52. Alasdair Macdonald says:

      If you look at the BBC website, the report on this, which, if the entire article is read, contains the same information as Mr Campbell has set out, but the framing is somewhat different. It sets it in the context of Scotland being little different from England and Wales in the matters being explored. A major plank of the unionist argument has been to present the pro independence case (which the unionist media usually term ‘separatist’ as resting on ‘Scottish exceptionalism’. This is a variation on the ‘blood-and-soil’ nationalism, so beloved of the Nazis. In our own language, it is the ‘wha’s like us?’ Idea. I heard it used as recently as ten days ago, when former Labour MP and Daily Telegraph columnist, Mr Tom Harris trotted it out on the Sheteen Nanjiani programme. (Of course, ‘Rule Britannia’ is by no means ‘exceptionalist’!!!!

      The framing occupies the first half of a fairly lengthy piece. The second half, then discusses the ‘civic’ nationalism of the SNP and how so many SNP supporters hold these ‘enlightened’ pro immigrant values. It then shows that compared to their equivalents in England and Wales, Conservative, Labourand LibDem supporters in Scotland are markedly more reactionary and illiberal. To be fair, the majority of voters for those parties in Scotland are on the enlightened side of the argument.

      So, there is, indeed, a significant difference between Scotland and the rest of the UK, but this difference disappears when results are aggregated.

    53. One_Scot says:

      geeo @ 1.20pm. Lol, I’m glad someone is able to keep up with what’s going on.

    54. Luigi says:

      geeo says:

      6 December, 2018 at 2:30 pm

      @galamcennalath

      Re: Contnuity Bill.

      If SC rules with WM, it will have to have legally set aside both the Treaties of Union and the Devolution(Scotland)Act.

      In that case, the SC will have ended the treaty of Union.

      If, as it really has to, to make a legitimate judgement, the ruling goes with Scotsgov, then that means ALL 111 returning powers must be returned directly to Holyrood on March 29th 2019.

      Imagine the effect that will have on WM’s ability to negotiate a trade deal with the EU, if by some miracle treeza makes a deal passable through WM.

      Fishing in Scottish Waters would be FULLY DEVOLVED to Holyrood, for example, so, no Scottish agreement on access, no WM using our fishing grounds to trade away.

      Then of course, if the SC rules with Scotsgov, it will have had to have done so by recognising our Legal Sovereignty of the People of Scotland.

      Otherwise, it would have no reason to rule in Scotsgov’s favour, if WM was sovereign over Scots, would it ?

      So, there we go, we cannot lose.

      Aye, that’s about it: The BritNat establishment well and truly caught between a rock and a hard place.

      Man, what a time to be alive. 🙂

    55. louis.b.argyll says:

      Those who sow division must expect a harvest or dividend.

    56. jacks1 says:

      Hello Wingers,

      Don’t post here often but found this in my email today and thought you would need a laugh.

      Apparently, It’s time to get on with it. ??

      brexitdealexplained.campaign.gov.uk

    57. G says:

      mike cassidy says:
      6 December, 2018 at 12:50 pm
      “G 12.38

      The question that follows.

      Why do so many immigrants choose such a hostile environment as England?”

      I would imagine it’s the opportunity to make money. That’s been the main driver through history behind people leaving Scotland and Ireland for England and the new world countries, when there weren’t the opportunities here. People also move abroad to broaden their horizons and experience different cultures.

      I’m surprised that people would choose to move to an England with a Hostile Environment, windrush scandal and Brexit, but I guess most people aren’t all that politically clued up, so maybe it takes time to filter through.

      There was a case where an Indian student was murdered in a racist attack in Manchester a few years back. Applications to British universities from India plummeted. These students are fairly lucrative for universities so there’s one example of a direct economic hit.

    58. Luigi says:

      I wonder which way the SC will go with their ruling on the Continuity Bill. In other words, what will the BritNat establishment instruct them to do?

      Aye, no point in setting up a BritNat Kangarooo Supreme Court with all its’ fake, assumed authority over the Scottish judiciary, if you end up being screwed whichever way you instruct them to rule. My heart bleeds. 🙂

    59. Tatu3 says:

      Noooooo! It was all going along so well until 2.50pm ?

    60. G says:

      Apologies if that last post came across as patronising. Just trying to think myself into the mindset of someone contemplating a move to England 🙂

    61. Glamaig says:

      Radio Scotland trailed the story this morning (the radio equivalent of a headline) as ‘survey shows Scots are no more positive about immigration than the rest of the UK’.

      Thats the spin and the headline they chose. How transparent!

      Turns out to be because SNP/Green voters are more positive, and Labour/Tory voters are more negative, so it averages the same.

      Proof of ‘always read (or listen) beyond the headline’!

    62. jfngw says:

      Willie Rennie (he truly is the tin man) seems to think it is a stupid idea to have a plan B with regard to Brexit. He has one plan, stop Brexit, if that fails I will assume he will then start spouting why was there no plan B by the FM, or run around like a headless chicken.

      He proves every week that he has not the ability to be the FM, mind you that is a pretty crowded field with the opposition at Holyrood.

    63. Robert Peffers says:

      @Golfnut says: 6 December, 2018 at 1:48 pm:

      ” … @Robert Peffers.
      I bet you wish you had a pound for every time you have explained this.”

      Yes! And I only found out about it myself in the late 1940s, (and I said that with a completely straight face).

      Seriously, it only shows how efficient the Westminster Establishment propaganda is. People like myself have been attempting to get the truth out there all those tears and, only now, is it beginning to make a very slight impression upon even the YES movement faithful.

      It is the real key to independence but the People of Scotland must believe it for it to work.

    64. Daisy Walker says:

      O/T

      If Terrible May’s Meaningful vote goes ahead on 11/12/18 – and they will be incredibly reluctant for it to do so now the Cancel option is on the ballot…. it looks like they have finally realised that Terrible Mays deal – by differentiating how NI is treated, threatens the terms of the Treaty of Union, making No Deal their now favourite position. (The DUP are on board with this – and so will the Scottish ‘lucky’ 13).

      But it is going to be a harder sell to some of their other MP’s, who could at least have pretended there was some beneficial compromise in TM’s.

      And some of them must be at least looking to their own futures, and areas, and realising they’ve not been picked for the big bribes, and so will need to keep their current jobs.

      The Labour leadership is currently doing a grand job of showing no cohesive opposition – expect lots of ‘we must respect the will of the people’.

      Should the SC – in London – find against the ScotGov, depending on the why of it, there may be grounds for appeal to ECJ.

      And since there terms of Cancelling the leaving of Brexit have to be ‘constitutionally legal’, it stands to reason, the actual leaving process, must also be Constitutionally legal. Brexit could find itself postponed until this aspect is legally bottomed out.

      Which would be rather sweet, because, just for once, it would be Scotland, kicking the can down the road, and in that interim period, as of 1/1/19, the EU’s Tax Haven legislation starts to kick in. Ouch. Prepare to see Moggs and Johnston’s squirm and start to get desperate.

      Hey ho. I mentioned earlier that TM’s deal broke the terms of the Treaty of Union for all signatories (not just the Scots), enabling the English to appeal. I really should have expanded that a bit, and said the people of England, Wales and indeed (although I think they would be daft to do so) NI.

      Welsh Sion, would you care to mention this to our friends in Wales? I’d hate for the Scots to have all the ‘legal’ fun when it comes to putting spokes in WM’s wheels.

      Best wishes to all.

    65. Capella says:

      @ Crazycat – guilty as charged! I do refer to the stat guru as Sir Curtice because I think it sounds funny – reminiscent of a rude song, details of which I forget. But you are quite right to point out my wrongness 🙂

    66. frogesque says:

      JHC on afuckingbike

      Blair Patterson at it again with the anti foreigner blood and soil inward looking parochial nationalism.

      How many times? Forget the incomers, convert the soft NOs, the OPs and their no surrender knucledraging followers.

      There you have it on a nutshell, Indy on a plate!!

    67. crazycat says:

      @ geeo at 2.37

      I don’t bow or scrape either.
      I do, however, think it matters to get things right (hence my pointing out that I was being pedantic).

      Also, it does matter when people wrongly assume knights and dames are peers, because they then expect these people to be able to do things they can’t, such as vote in the HoL, or pass their titles on to their even more undeserving offspring.

    68. K1 says:

      *’Question 18: Do you have any views on how long someone should be resident in Scotland before they become eligible to vote?

      Question 19: Do you have any other comments to make on this issue?

      8.4 A total of 751 respondents answered the tick-box part of Question 17. Table 8.1 shows that there was general support among organisations (92%) and individuals (78%) for extending the franchise to everyone legally resident in Scotland.

      Table 8.1: Q17 – Do you agree that the franchise should be extended to include everyone legally resident in Scotland?

      Respondent type

      Yes No Total

      Organisations 24 (Y) 92% (No)2 8% 26 100%

      Individuals 568 (Y)78% (No) 157 22% 725 100%

      Total 592 79% 159 21% 751 100%’

      That’s 92% of respondents out of a total of 592 respondents including 24 organisations in agreement with above question.

      ‘8.5 Question 18 invited views on how long someone should be resident in Scotland before they become eligible to vote. This was an open question, with no tick-box. Question 19 asked for any other comments on the issue of extending the franchise. Some respondents commenting at Question 18 included an explanation of why they had suggested a particular length of residence, while others provided their explanation at Question 19. As there was a great deal of overlap between the issues raised at Question 18 and Question 19, the responses to these two questions have been analysed together.

      8.6 A total of 613 respondents – 43 organisations and 570 individuals – commented at Question 18 and / or Question 19.

      https://www.gov.scot/publications/electoral-reform-consultation-analysis/pages/10/

      Blair Paterson and TC, your views are not and never will be representative of those living in Scotland, this survey if you care to read any of it will let you see the ‘numbers’ involved in terms of support for the franchise being extended to ‘everyone legally resident in Scotland’, this was a nuanced survey and of course issues wrt to ‘holiday homes’ and ‘students’ and length of ‘residence’ were aired. But nowhere, absolutely nowhere in that survey is there even a smidgeon of support for both of you come on here regularly to spout.

      The reality is we will not be excluding those from England voting in our elections and referenda, to do so would be against the express wishes of the Sovereign people of Scotland.

      Now go and fuck yersel’s ya pair o’ xenophobic pricks.

      —————–

      *with thanks to yesindyref2 for putting this up in the wee sma’ hours…I’d wondered whether there was some feedback from the survey as of course was one of the respondents. Cheers.

    69. K1 says:

      Should read total of 79% of respondents out of total of 592 supported the franchise being extended, 92% organisations, 78% individual respondents. 🙂

    70. Welsh Sion says:

      Daisy Walker @ 4.07 pm

      Have a look at the previous thread (‘In England’s Dreaming’) regarding ‘legal’ fun and the repeal of our ‘Acts of Union’ by Westminster 25 years ago this month, Daisy!

      You’ll be pleasantly surprised to see that we are ahead of Scotland (for once!) in not having any legal ‘Union’ with our neighbours.

      Thank you too for remembering us, however in your own post!

      (Let’s see what Mr Drakeford will bring. Nothing very new, I’d imagine …)

    71. geeo says:

      Daisy Walker @3.50pm

      Lets not forget the Dominic Grieve (tory) amendment (defeat no.3 the other day) which takes control of brexit from the government to parliament should treeza’s Deal fail.

      Funny enough, that hardly rates a mention in the meeja for some strange reason…

    72. Andy-B says:

      Its nice to know I’m not on the side of the bigots and xenophobes.

    73. schrodingers cat says:

      yougov poll

      remain 52% no deal 48%

      if correct, rees mogg would avoid an euref2, we would lose, but that is enough to win a ge

    74. schrodingers cat says:

      oops
      we, read he

    75. robertknight says:

      O/T

      If the UKSC finds against the Scottish Government’s “UK Withdrawal from the European Union (Legal Continuity) (Scotland) Bill” and resolves that it is incompetent, or whatever the legal speak is.

      As we’re still in the EU, can the SG appeal to the ECJ? 🙂

    76. Ken500 says:

      It would all be fine if the Westminster unionists hadn’t cause the worse migration crisis in Europe since the 11WW, but wait. The Tories have been fighting like rats in a sack about the EU since 1976 blaming ‘Johnny foreigner’ for everything. The EU matters took down Thatcher. The Tories, Labour and the LibDems repeat the same mistakes over and over again. They never learn.

      Yet Germany has 20% migrants, 3% unemployment and is in surplus with one of the best economy in the world. They make things and sell them. They learnt their lesson on war. Just don’t mention it.

      Just don’t say people in Scotland has the same attitude. Many people from Scotland were migrants because of Westminster’s economic policies, They had to leave Scotland. Most people in Scotland have relatives all over the world. They are far more sympathetic to migrants because of their experiences, of people having to leave. Westminster policies drained Scotland of people.

    77. Daisy Walker says:

      @’robertknight says:
      6 December, 2018 at 5:24 pm
      O/T

      If the UKSC finds against the Scottish Government’s “UK Withdrawal from the European Union (Legal Continuity) (Scotland) Bill” and resolves that it is incompetent, or whatever the legal speak is.

      As we’re still in the EU, can the SG appeal to the ECJ? ?’

      It would very much depend on the terms of the judgement. For example, the recent successful appeal to the ECJ over the ability to Cancel Brexit, was possible because the initial court refused to make a verdict, judging the whole thing to be ‘theoretical’. The appeal was made on the basis of the word ‘theoretical’ – arguing that it was anything but.

      Sorry can’t be any clearer until the verdict comes out.

    78. sassenach says:

      Capella @3-51pm

      Could that have been “Oh Sir Jasper do not ………..” ??

      Brings back happy memories of rugby team coach to away games!

    79. Valerie says:

      Piece timed this afternoon in Guardian. UK accused of watering down Citizens Rights. Apparently they have changed what was in the draft.

      These criminals have no shame. They care nothing for UK citizens living abroad.

      http://archive.is/UzMIQ

      Watching the parade of whining gammon in HoC, we are set for No Deal. Tories are apoplectic about the backstop, as it’s meaning finally dawns.

      We must be doomed to sit in this circle of hell forever.

    80. Valerie says:

      geeo @ 4.51

      Ian Dunt wrote a piece on the Grieve amendment yesterday, and it was just incredible. Dunt had to write it because he was so stunned.

      He said there was a rumour circulating that the govt may ignore the Grieve amendment, and he wrote on the almighty constitutional crisis that would be.

      Folk like Dunt, seasoned, and with connections, can’t believe the way this govt acts.

      Everything we experienced in 2014, is being enacted again. The lies, the arrogance etc., but it is 10 times worse with the economy being crashed deliberately.

    81. starlaw says:

      Any upcoming Indy Ref 2 should be fought on the future of the NHS the one thing the elderly Daily Mail readers will listen to. Scare the hell out of them about bodies left to lie in the streets etc under the UK rule.

    82. Gary says:

      Interesting point about how all the racists were NO voters in 2014.

      It reminds me of the ‘Britannic Party’ Who? Yes, they were a ‘real’ political party. They were an off-shoot of the BNP. The Glasgow branch of the BNP fell out with each other (yeh, they even hate each other lol!) and so a small number, between ten and twenty, split off to form an entirely new political party calling themselves The Brittanic Party.

      So far, so not very interesting right? Well the thick plottens!! Mysteriously these thick headed bozos numbering under twenty managed to get themselves a nive fat donation to help them campaign for ‘NO’ in 2014. The donation was for the sum of £10, 000!! Now even if they were ALL involved, successfully, in some very profitable criminal exercise I STILL don’t buy them getting a SINGLE donation of £10k from ONE of their members.

      So how did they use the money? Well, I haven’t inspected their records so in short, I can’t say – for certain. However one of their members was photographed out campaigning for NO – alongside Labour Party activists!

      I would assume they DID spend the bulk of the money appropriately but the fact a tiny party, only just come into existence managed to snag £10,000 and suddenly goes campaigning with Labour has my spidey senses tingling.

      You may well ask yourself was the party simply set up to take that donation and allow EXTRA money into the NO campaign. You may well ask if the ‘co-ordination’ between Labour and Brittanic means the money came, illegally FROM Labour and that the ‘co-rdination’ itself ie two parties campaigning as one, means that they broke YET ANOTHER of the campaign rules.

      If this had happened in the Brexit Campaign the Remain camp would have picked it up, reported it and had it taken seriously by the Electoral Commission (as was the case with several issue that they DID report)

      However is happened in the Scottish Independence Referendum where the entire state apparatus was brought to bear against a YES vote. The chances of such chicanery EVER being brought to justice is slim to none.

      It’s very revealing in another way of course. Labour were perfectly willing not only to cheat, lie and breach a number of electoral rules but they were willing to hand ten thousand pounds to a bunch of racist thugs and interact with them on a daily basis to cheat the electorate.

      This is one of the many, many reasons I will never trust the Scottish Labour Party again. They have abandoned every single principle they ever had and have dealt with people who are beyond the pale. It’s akin to what UKIP have done in allowing their leader to employ the violent racist thug Tommy Robinson as an ‘advisor’ only it’s worse, Labour are, ostensibly, all about equality whilst behind the scenes they consort with racists and criminals…

    83. geeo says:

      @Valerie.

      Do you have a link to that Ian Dunt article you reference please ?

    84. Reluctant Nationalist says:

      Dr Jim @ 1.34pm

      Haha! Nasty little spook.

    85. Muscleguy says:

      Scotland has a long history of accepting and integrating immigrants. There were the Strathclyde Britons fleeing the Saxon invasion of England.

      The Normans David I invited in to establish feudalism which included the de Brus family.

      Business immigrants from the Low Countries in the Middle Ages given the surname Fleming.

      Danish and Norwegian ‘Vikings’, the relationship with the latter sort got warmer over time and included intermarriage. Remember we got the Northern Isles and Sutherland in lieu of a cash dowry they couldn’t pay.

      Italians in the ’20s, anyone up for telling Armando, Sharleen or Peter they aren’t Scots? Peter might have retained a sonic screwdriver.

      South Asians in the ’60s and ’70s same question wrt Aamer etc.

      Poles who stayed after WWII. Part of why the modern influx of Poles has been less of an issue up here. The two groups connected via the churches and the new people have been folded up and made us.

      I’ve known several African scientists while working up here and all like the place, beyond their kids being described VitD. That was regardless of religion, the Christians and Muslims were the same. Because of the university black faces are not unknown here in Dundee, the Yes City. With so many Yessers about is it any wonder they feel welcome?

    86. CameronB Brodie says:

      Playing catch-up here. Brexit articulates English culturalism mixed with right-wing ‘economic’ bollocks. Brexit is what happens when you stroke English exceptionalism. Brexit articulates English Benthamite utilitarianism and is intrinsiclty illiberal in nature.

      Brexit exposes the fact that British nationalism is an expansionist form of English nationalism, simples. Brexit exposes the lack of democracy in Britain, for all those living outside of England.

      Brexit will harm Scottish culture and public health.

      Cultures of Negotiation: Explaining Britain’s hard bargaining in the Brexit negotiations

      Abstract

      The Brexit negotiations present a puzzle for scholars of international bargaining, who tend to assume hard bargaining follows from advantages in bargaining power. In spite of its relative weakness vis-à-vis the EU27, however, the UK’s negotiating strategy bears all the hallmarks of hard bargaining. Drawing upon a series of elite interviews conducted in late 2017, this working paper argues that British hard bargaining is a consequence of three ideational factors particular to the UK case: the dominance of a conservative ideology of statecraft, a majoritarian institutional culture, and weak socialisation into European structures. These three factors not only predisposed UK
      policymakers to favour harder bargaining strategies, ceteris paribus, but also contributed to a misperception that Britain possessed more bargaining power than was actually the case. This paper argues that the UK’s bargaining strategy comes with a high risk of immediate failure, as well as longer term self-harm.

      Keywords
      Bargaining strategy; Brexit negotiations; United Kingdom; constructivism; ideology; institutional culture; socialisation

      https://www.ucl.ac.uk/european-institute/sites/european-institute/files/cultures-of-negotiation-paper.pdf

    87. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi CamB.

      Good to see you active again!

    88. sarissa says:

      In other news, St Mirren are set to invoke the ‘we might lose to Aberdeen, so let’s postpone’ tactic.



    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. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.




    ↑ Top