Wings Over Scotland

If ever there was a chance for social justice and social fairness in Scotland within the UK Union, that’s when the Scottish ruling elite would back indy – to protect their own selfish interests. In the hope they remain the ruling elite. Sp, little chance of that then.

Till date indy is a threat to the ruling class. The SNP speak a dangerous language about social justice – even if the talk rarely comes to much. It still gives poor people ideas that they can be something. That they can have a say in how the country is run. That it’s their Scotland too. That they have a voice, instead of being told what to do by their so-called “betters”

That’s the most dangerous thing of all, making ordinary people think they can shape their country’s laws and political decisions, instead of just accepting what’s given or taken from them.

As some of these people might start asking: just because that’s the way it’s been for the last 300 years, is it the best way?

We could do better.

Why should society be run to suit the wealthy few, rather than the less wealthy many?

We could have a society that has opportunities for the richer and the poorer.

There will always be richer and poorer, but nobody should be in enforced poverty because of Govt policies.

Poorer people with talents and abilities should have the same opportunities in life to make use of those talents as their wealthier counterparts.

That’s the kind of Scotland I want; many SNP and independence supporters want that too. That’s why they are perceived as a threat by the British Establishment and by many in the Scottish Establishment.

@ Rock

Do you not consider your behaviour to be just a wee bit on the creepy side fella? Mebbe take a wee break fae wings and get yir heid the gither.

Great conference speeches today. Was really impressed with the green aspects of it. A9 electric highway, Electricity from renewables supplied to consumers at production cost. Floating windfarms. Selling Scotland as a world leader in research and development of emerging green technologies etc.

Impressive stuff from a forward looking party it has to be said. Makes the other parties look absolutely antiquated in comparison.

Is this record posting #1000 then? =grin=

@ RJS – still at 999.

Re Mhairi Blacks speech, anybody got a link to just her speech, every link I have followed only takes me to an article and no option to watch a video of the speech. I did see one earlier which gave the complete session but it took me about 20 minutes to get to her speech as my iPad was being a pain, its now run out of battery half way through. 🙁

O/T in a way

I just wanted to post this folks, because for me it just sums Nicola up. Did you hear the way she spoke about the baby boxes today? Don’t you think that she would have made a wonderful mother? She’s a natural brimming over with kindness and caring. How lucky are we to have her, as our First Minister.

link to thenational.scot

Petra

We’re a’ Nicola Sturgeon’s bairns.

It’s been a bit frantic on here the past while but today – a really good day for the SNP – has been illuminating. Just what do those who are disappointed want?

If the speeches were not socialist enough then join or support a truly socialist party. If the desire for independence did not seem clear enough then listen harder. Staying in power while making Scotland as independent as possible within the constraints of Westminster is a decent road to travel at this time. All the while working to become self-sufficient in as many visible ways as possible.

If the argument against Independence is that we cannot do stuff on our own then demonstrate we can. Not everything has to be over the top and reminiscent of the post Indyref1 fervour. This is what the MSM would like us to believe is evidence of waining support, that everything should be OTT otherwise support is dying for the SNP and independence. We know otherwise so let’s not fall for it.

Maybe the next referendum should be on membership of both the EU and the UK? Things are changing so fast that until the deal is done we won’t know what is best for us. Like many, my feelings about the EU are a bit conflicted following their response to the Catalan referendum.

I feel Nicola Sturgeon took the right tone and allowed the fireworks to come from others. Mhairi Black was fantastic.

National Trust Scotland have today blitzed my facebook and youtube thingees with a new advert. Is it Sir Neil Oliver OBE, first executive decision and do they have any idea how hard I do not want to go to see anything with his smirk all over it?

link to historyscotland.com

Stu has told us over & over again ~ don’t reply to the trolls
Their job is purely & simply to disrupt the thread
If they’re totally ignored ~ they fail
If we reply to them, even if it’s to castigate or insult them ~ they succeed
Since they are anonymous, insults don’t hurt them ~ they laugh at us
I scroll by ~ I also scroll by any replies to them ~ I suggest everyone should do likewise

Meg and Albert how right you are. She’s looking after us, mothering us all.

Just trying to imagine Davidson or T May in the same position. Although my powers of visualisation are normally excellent, somehow with them it doesn’t quite work for me.

……………………………….

Another REALLY decent Scot, George Kerevan, willing to forfeit the £193,000 salary ..

‘Former SNP MP says he’ll head the FCA and won’t take a salary.’

He say’s he’ll make the FCA a consumer champion (and more) and I bet he would.

link to thenational.scot

…………………………….

Really looking foward to Boris taking over from T May. That alone should get us over the finishing line.

link to youtube.com

The more I look at that wee falling hook on the Cairnstoon, the more it looks like a wee BNI ninja peg with its arms out saying, “put em up, pur em up, let me at her, let me at her” hehe 🙂

” *batteries not included “:
link to youtube.com

Remember this one:
link to wingsoverscotland.com

DON’T. LET. THEM. DO. THAT. EVER. AGAIN.

I hear ye Robert J. My point was to castigate and highlight that it wasn’t just about Nicola’s ‘heart being in the right place’, the fact remains they will mitigate in whatever ways are needed to allow EU nationals to stay in Scotland if Brexit happens. Otherwise Scotland will suffer immeasurable damage to our economy and services. Thereby fulfilling the wishful thinking of those against our movements progress.

I concur with others’, today has been a great day, those insufferable intolerant bastards who look for any ‘chink’ that they imagine they see in the SNP’s policies and hopes for our country and communities so that they can exploit and encourage divisiveness amongst us, can get tae hell.

Nicola Sturgeon does not do ‘pie in the sky’. The last ten years and their record in government along with social attitudes studies and current polling completely hole any erroneous claims that the SNP are in any way ‘struggling’ as a force for good in Scotland. Nor are they attempting to persuade our population to vote form them for the sake of their ‘popularity’. Introducing polices that tackle the biggest issues of our time, and finding ways to mitigate ‘austerity’ and dealing with structural inequality at all levels in our society paves the way for the kind of country we want to live in.

One that has love and compassion at its heart, where it is not about rich versus poor but about everyone really having an ‘equal’ start in life.

The fact is the SNP’s true aim and commitment to the people of Scotland can be summed up thusly: No child left behind.

Here here k1. No child left behind!
Good conference. 🙂

William Wallace – Thanks

Excellent post K1. ‘No child left behind.’ On the foundation stone of an Independent Scotland.

…………………………………

@ William Wallace says at 11:31 pm …. ”Lenny (Mhairi) about 1 hour 5 minutes in.”

link to pscp.tv

I’ve been hopping around the video due to a shortage of time and no doubt missing some great speeches, however another I’ve come across is Jeanne Freeman’s at 11:00am.

……………………………………………..

Cactus says at 12:00 am … ”Hey Scotland ~ See when we become iScotland. What is the first song that you think will be played..?

I know you’ll be looking for something a bit cheerier, lol, but we could start with this one which will get us into a right bad mood and then we’ll all go absolutely dokey, as only Scots can do.

link to youtube.com

@Liz g

Nothing is O/T on this thread anymore 🙂

Anyway the idea of not for profit energy comapny run by the SG is an absolutely brilliant idea, I’ll certainly be switching to them and the more that do the cheaper they’ll be able to buy their electricity and gas for.

This won’t go unnoticed that’s for sure, power companies will be trembling and having board meetings about this. I didn’t know that this was even possible but glad to hear it is.

I hope this new enterprise can put the others out of business in Scotland, energy should be in public hands and this is the first step. Currently they would have to buy power direct from the market as many companies do that sell it on to us.

The next step would be to produce power themselves, that would be a game changer in the energy market in my eyes.

Thrilled about the energy thing. Well overdue.

Alex Clark @ 12.39
agree totally.

@Alex Clark, 12.39am

Anyway the idea of not for profit energy comapny run by the SG is an absolutely brilliant idea, I’ll certainly be switching to them and the more that do the cheaper they’ll be able to buy their electricity and gas for.

And so will I. A brilliant idea.

Robert J Sutherland @ 1.39
Couldn’t agree more I will be switching as well.
But mair tae the point so will all our pensioners.
They pay attention to stuff like this.
This move is inspired!

@Rock says: 10 October, 2017 at 9:23 pm:

“She means well, but Nicola has ZERO control over UK immigration policy.
As we have seen with the many deportations from Scotland.
After a “snap” Brexit, Scotland will be at the mercy of the Westminster government.”

Dear! Oh! Dear!

Are you really as bloody stupid as you seem?

Of course Nicola has no control over immigration policy. All alert readers are aware that immigration is a reserved matter.

Which is exactly the reason Nicola has instigated an SG policy that cleverly retains and encourages post Brexit EU Citizens employed by Scottish government or Scottish Local authorities, to remain in Scotland.

Are you really so stupid that you could not work that clever strategy out?

I only stumbled upon your daft post because I was searching the thread for something heedtracker had already posted or I wouldn’t have seen you comment. It only reinforces my resolve to scroll past your useless negativity and attempts to divert threads.

Just watched John Nicholson utterly fillet Jo Coburn on Daily politics immediately prior to Nicolas speech.

Challenged the media to stop giving Ruthie an easy ride, brought up the point the tax powers were very limited and the SG does not have the REAL fiscal levers to grow the economy, Scotland being only the 2nd country to discover oil and have no oil fund, independence did not rely on oil/price, SG mitigation of tory policies like bedroom tax and more, also spoke about how the SG cannot legally run a deficit, and reminded Coburn ALL countries run a deficit, just look at the size of the uk one for example…indy Scotland with a deficit you say ? So what, totally normal.

Better yet, never let Coburn butt in and talk over him.

Coburn glad to see Nicola get up to speak by looks of it…fabulous performance.

@Alex Clark says: 11 October, 2017 at 12:39 am:

“Anyway the idea of not for profit energy comapny run by the SG is an absolutely brilliant idea, I’ll certainly be switching to them and the more that do the cheaper they’ll be able to buy their electricity and gas for.”

Aye! Alex, I’ve been giving that one a bit of thought too.

In the first place I see no good reason Westminster can come up with to prevent that great idea going ahead.

Take, for example the many rip-off Arms-Length companies that Glasgow Council had set up and all of them with boards stuffed with Labour Councillors, ex-councillors of their Labour party best buddies.

So there seems nothing legally to prevent the SG setting up not-for-profit companies or failing that SG Arms-Length companies for, well, just about anything. Even if they cannot do so directly as the Scottish government, (and Waste-monster will certainly try to stop them).

Here’s another wee thought – what about setting up an SG Arm’s Length Oil & Gas extraction Company who could be non-profit making and donate the company profits to an SG Scottish Oil-Fund?

After all the licences to prospect and to extract oil & gas are sold to the highest bidder by Waste-monster.

I’m sure a legal way could be found. Even if it was set up as a private company. It could even issue shares to Scottish residents or even allow pensioners to buy shares to boost their pensions. Mind you shares can go down as well as up.

Anyhow I have not yet though the idea through to any real conclusions just yet but the idea certainly has possibilities.

Oh, go to this page and try a Nottingham postcode, one I used was this: NG7 1GX – just to see an example of a not for profit energy company.

link to join.robinhoodenergy.co.uk

Back in around 2012, the SG granted a licence to Thames Water to be able to compete for water supplies in Scotland. Well, there were outcries about this from the Unionists, sneers and sniggers, as you’d expect. So I checked it out. First of all it didn’t apply to domestic water, just business, here’s some background info:

link to scotlandontap.gov.uk

and here’s the list of suppliers businesses can choose from:

link to scotlandontap.gov.uk

but looking into it further, at that time (no idea if it’s the same), the one that had 92.5% of the customers and was the best deal for most (like my unit) was this one:

link to business-stream.co.uk

And who owns it? Scottish Water, who supply all the others, and the domestic market.

The point being that the state owned electric company would presumably also have an arms-length commercial arm, and the commercial market is large.

Like Robert I haven’t sussed this out yet, but it seems to me that if the state energy can capture enough of the domestic market on which it makes no profit, that can give the commercial arm competitive rates for the commercial market, and as far as I can see, that means the commercial arm can make a profit, as well as capturing a large part of the commercial market. Which is gooood!

Oh shit, I’ve just realised this fits in well with ScottieDog’s MMT as well.

I guess Iberdrola (aka the former Scottish Power) and Scottish Gas (who are really just British Gas under a different name) have already been lobbying the Westminster parties about this new state owned power company. The UK may still be larely controlled by Ultra-Yoon companies, but Scotland the brand is still seen as a necessary branding by them in some cases.

How ironic that a market set up to favour private energy suppliers is soon to be challenged by a publicly owned company.

Now get the carbon capture and energy storage problems solved and all is good north of the border energy wise.

Also the Scottish government must be looking at ways to force the scrapping of energy surcharges to the Scottish Islands. Why should these remote communities, many of whom already have (or soon will have) wind turbine and tidal generating connections be paying extra for cheap, green energy.

I missed John Nicholson’s performance against Jo Cobun (didn’t Oor Andra train her well to be a Yoon propagandist?), but, maybe the SNP shoud be using the likes of him, Angus Robertson and Wee Eck to spearhead the Indyref2/Independence drive.

Set-up an Independence team, but, keep the likes of Nicola and John Swinney at arm’s length, so, they only appear on TV or do media stuff when it specifically refers to matters concerning the Scottish Government, and the immediate governance of Scotland.

If they (the media, particularly the BBC) want to discuss Independence, then they have to speak to one of the Independence Team.

Immediately, you have taken the “Get on with the day job” angle away from the enemies of Independence such as Colonel Yadaftie, or whoever is leading BLiS that week.

Fergus Ewing: Scottish farmers robbed of £160m EU farm payments
link to archive.is

link to rbs.postach.io

Subject: European Union (Withdrawal) Bill: Implications for devolution
2.30pm today
link to parliamentlive.tv

link to indyref2.scot

Address by President Donald Tusk to the European Committee of the Regions
link to consilium.europa.eu

No cash in Budget for ‘no-deal’ Brexit, says Hammond
link to archive.is

Maybot adopts radio silence over Brexit in LBC interview
link to archive.is

link to balpa.org

@ Socrates MacSporran

Great idea, been thinking the same, though hadn’t thought it through as well as that… ‘then they have to speak to one of the Independence Team’. Brilliant.
All great speakers who don’t put up wi’ coprolite and who are more likely to have the answers to any of the hundreds of questions those wonderful interviewers won’t let folk answer!

@ Meg Merrilees 11.11

I mentioned this about 4/5 days ago. I’m baffled as to why this is not being supported.

Come on folks, get this out there and dig deep.

link to indiegogo.com

@Nana
This bit from the speech of Puigdemont:

“. . . opening a dialogue has been proposed to agree a referendum similar to the one held in Scotland on 18 September 2014. A referendum with the date and a question agreed between the two sides, in which both sides could campaign and present their arguments, and in which both sides commit to accepting and applying the result through a negotiation which protects their respective interests. If that has been possible in one of the oldest, most consolidated and exemplary democracies in the world, as the United Kingdom is, why could it not also be done in Spain?”

If Scotland has been a friend to Catalonia, that bit from his speech is full repayment for it, in that it makes it more incumbent on the UK Government to acquiesce when the request for the Section 30 is repeated, or put the lie to his acknowledgement in the eyes of the watching world.

“In with the same solemnity, the Government and I myself propose that the Parliament suspends the effects of the declaration of independence . . .”

That, with the preceding sentences, makes it very clear that Independence has been declared and suspended, not as some reports have said, that the declaration itself has been suspended. No, it’s the effects have been suspended to allow dialogue.

It is a model even with a fully agreed Section 30 and Edinburgh Agreement that I think Scotland could copy, perhaps with modifications, so that while negotiations with the rUK can start, Scotland can also proceed as a proto-Independent state with whatever applications it needs to go forward.

@ yesindyref2 indeed. My ears pricked up when I heard Scotland mentioned. The stream I was watching cut out at exactly that moment, there was a mad dash to find another.

@Macart

Eat slowly and save some for later.

Was wondering how to spend two hours at Gatwick airport. Many thanks as always for the links.

Seconded. Thank you Nana! I’m seated in a Glesga bus, nae bad wifi too.

Socrates MacSporran says:
11 October, 2017 at 7:15 am
I missed John Nicholson’s performance against Jo Cobun (didn’t Oor Andra train her well to be a Yoon propagandist?), but, maybe the SNP shoud be using the likes of him, Angus Robertson and Wee Eck to spearhead the Indyref2/Independence drive.

In the same context as what you’re suggesting, I said ages ago that the SNP should have two manifestos. The domestic “we’re the government” Manifesto, and the Manifesto specifically for Independence.

It would serve as a similar tool to turn any interview which is meant to be about Indy straying into domestic issues, especially devolved issues like eduction.

If that had been done, the last General Election would have been more orderly, and for example, Nicola would have had a ready counter to deflect aggressive imbeciles like Nick Robinson’s “stick to your record”.

I know that was a devolved issue in a General Election for Westminster, but it’s the principle of the thing. It would work as a device like a shepherds crook to help guide the interview back to the topic of independence and sovereignty, and help ensure IndyRef2 stays focussed on our agenda and narrative, not the Unionist hymn book of 2014.

@yesindyref2

Yes, that is what the statement suggests to me too. I have an uneasy feeling though. Rajoy’s responses to date have been less than reasonable or democratic. Stupid, hasty and irrational yes, especially in this day and age. He should have known there’s no managing the message anymore.

Unfortunately the Spanish government have taken the actions they’ve taken and made the statements they’ve made. They may just reckon on in for a penny…?

Regardless, I don’t see them caving on their position and clearly they’re not overly worried about EU intervention.

The world really, REALLY needs to watch this and learn. It’s not enough to talk about human rights, democracy and self determination. They have to walk the walk too.

The fascist that the BBC made a household name, bites back.

I’d love to hear a BBC ligger like say Jim Naughty, who worked really hard to get UKIP going in Scotland, explain why. Maybe nation state Scotland will have a truth and reconciliation thing, just for the BBC Scotland fraudsters.

Nigel Farage?Verified account @Nigel_Farage 11h

Me for @Telegraph: Theresa May is now the EU’s Stepford Wife: subservient and submissive to their every whim.

yesindyref2 says:
11 October, 2017 at 8:06 am
“In with the same solemnity, the Government and I myself propose that the Parliament suspends the effects of the declaration of independence . . .”

That, with the preceding sentences, makes it very clear that Independence has been declared and suspended, not as some reports have said, that the declaration itself has been suspended. No, it’s the effects have been suspended to allow dialogue.“

You miss a vitally important distinction too. The Suspension of Independence which is declared, puts Catalonia in the same situation as Scotland. If they can now persuade the International Community that the Catalans are now sovereign, then they escape the chains of Madrid’s constitutional sovereignty, and enter a transitional stage which formally truncates the one Sovereignty of Spain, which has now arguably become two separate sovereignties.

In Constitutional terms, Puigdemont is playing a clever game for very high stakes. He has delivered the Catalans more negotiations, but altered negotiations, with a credible claim on being sovereign, not a region of Spain. He has opened up all sorts of possibilities of International recognition, and created constitutional ambiguity which the Catalans did not have with their constitutionally unlawful referendum.

It is ALL about the sovereignty people. You either see it or you don’t. The Catalans are giving themselves the tools and instruments of a Nation. To our shame, Scotland already has them, but is too scared or constitutionally illiterate to use them. The Catalans must look upon Scotland’s glacial progress towards Independence with considerable “what are you waiting for” bewilderment.

The Catalans must now manage to get their sovereignty recognised, just like Scotland should right now be trying to get our Constitutional Sovereignty recognised. Not to declare Independence itself, postpone that until the discussions are resolved, but make it crystal clear who does, and who does not make the decisions. Holyrood, not Westminster for Scotland, Barcelona, not Madrid for Catalonia.

Don’t be surprised if the forthcoming talks over Catalonia’s future now feature strong mediation from Europe, and very quickly make plans for a legal, recognised constitutional plebiscite to ratify what Catalans actually want. A sovereign plebiscite which Spain dare not interfere with… theoretically. (There is alway’s the Spanish wildcard option, where Spain will fight to the death). This process of losing Catalonia will hurt and anger Spain, so we need to make some allowances for that.

Catalonia needs International recognition, but Spain needs International Counselling and support. In my opinion, Jean Claude Juncker is in a perfect position to mediate and provide both. Are you paying attention Scotland?

I don’t see Norway or Switzerland desperately trying to keep the peace and keep the sides talking in Catalonia. They aren’t, because they couldn’t. It’s as simple as that. EFTA is nothing when weighed pound for pound beside our European citizenship, and the Goliath with a good heart which we can be a part of.

Here’s a letter I’ve sent to the Observer newspaper. If it’s not published, I live in the hope that friends on here will like it.

_________

Dear Sir,

You comment on the “escapism” of independence and the associated images of “flags, clenched fists and Braveheart heroics” with regard to the current situation in Catalonia (“While Europe’s leaders dither, the cost of Spain’s divisions become clear” The Observer 08 October 2017).

When will Fleet Street put these well-worn tropes to bed? Scots, (at whom this Mel Gibson view of history jibe is intended) are sick of the matching their history to those of an Aussie-American and how it is suppose to fuel their ideas of nationhood.

Yet, despite this, intriguingly enough, your same editorial refers to,
 
” … national frontiers especially in Europe count for less and lees, especially among the young [and] the 19th century concept of the exclusive nation state is increasingly anachronistic.”

Now, here’s the thing: there was a clear majority of “the young” who voted for Scottish independence in the 2014 Referendum. They, along with many “oldies” were voting for an inclusive and European Scotland. This free and European Scotland was the one further endorsed by the 2016 Brexit referendum – an ideal you’d think that would appeal to a self-styled, liberal minded, internationalist and serious British newspaper; indeed, one that promotes its pro-Europeaness and its belief that the days of the nation state are numbered.

Neither Scotland or Catalonia (nor my own country, Wales) are “creating more walls” in their desire for self-determination, as your editorial would have readers think. On the contrary, it is the elite and uncompromising Governments in Madrid and London  who are stopping the peoples of these areas their unalienable rights in the sun – rights shared equally by other freedom loving (and enjoying) peoples, who the Observer are willing so often to champion.

Yours faithfully,

Nice swictheroo on the pissed up hack line. So clever arent they:D

Jamie Ross?Verified account
@JamieRoss7

Apparently the bar in the hotel which is housing most of the SNP staff stopped serving alcohol last night because everyone was too drunk.
1:58 am – 10 Oct 2017

Welsh sion. Great letter,dont hold your breath on it being printed.

heedtracker at 7.53

It merely confirms thew suspicion I have that there is a huge effort going onto frustrate and reverse the Brexit decision.

@yesindyref2

Yes, that was the statement I had in mind.

Dave McEwan Hill says:
11 October, 2017 at 9:44 am
heedtracker at 7.53

It merely confirms thew suspicion I have that there is a huge effort going onto frustrate and reverse the Brexit decision.

Absofuckinglutely!

No wonder, what a catastrofuck it all is.

You can bet all those civil servants are all really sitting in that Brexit HQ thing in Whitehall, wondering how on earth they can back track their stupid way out of it all, without starting a civil war with fascist England.

So that’s calming:D

If you’re a suspicious YES vote on anything UK, youre right to be.

For years I have looked at the cover of my passport and its got on my nerves. On the right of the UK embossed emblem passport cover, there the unicorn of Scotland, on the left, the English lion.

The Scots unicorn is chained by the neck, the English lion? free.

Clearly “care in the community” isn’t working for Ken500. He needs sectioning….

@Bobp Vestos

You can pish off as well. Sanctimonious bastards.

That like prick has been getting away with it for months.

Yes, getting that little prick telt has bright up the day. So thanks.

Breeks says:
11 October, 2017 at 9:58 am
Look on the bright side Ken. If Scotland is Brexited, we won’t need those clickety lids on medicine bottles anymore, and you’ll can get to your meds in the morning.

Breeks are you an SNP voter though?

Its not a requirement, to be a SNP voter and btl WoS commentatorisor dude but if you’re not going to vote SNP, and you’d like me to stop voting SNP, you’re really going to have explain how on earth Scotland will ever become a nation state, again.

So I’m with my honorable friend Ken500:D

Unless you do have a stop voting SNP for indy Scotland cunning plan Breeks. Keep asking big swinging SNP bad dingdongs like Rock, Colin Alexander, the WoS dilettante prick spotter, all of the above too but answers, come there none?

@Heedtracker

It’s not complicated Heed, but people just don’t see it.

Look at Catalonia, they voted for Independence, but their vote carried no weight because it had no sovereignty underpinning it. Without knowing all the details, and apologies to the Catalans, but they were premature. They should have tested Spain’s decree of illegality, and won some kind of licence from the the UN to hold a referendum against the will of the Spanish Government. The people with recognised constitutional sovereignty over a Catalonia were the Spanish, who declared it illegal, and in law, the International Community is bound by that law. Spain is sovereign over Catalonia. Do you understand me so far? Spain has the final say over Catalonia, and Catalonia’s separation or otherwise is a matter of Spanish internal domestic policy. That is why the International community’s hands were tied. Sovereignty is the distinction between a country being a country or not being a country.

By declaring its Independence, but not enacting it, the Catalans have given Catalonia the status of a Nation in waiting which has its own sovereignty, and thus can create a sovereign legislature to hold a new referendum or plebiscite which will command international recognition where their earlier referendums have not.

A referendum which is not underpinned by the power of sovereignty is not binding upon anyone. Whoever it is who does command sovereignty can simply ignore that referendum, declare it illegal, – do what they like because they are sovereign.

In Scotland, we HAVE constitutional sovereignty according to the letter of Law, at least Scots law, but what we do not have is International recognition of that sovereignty. At this moment in time, the International community recognises Westminster as the sovereign authority for the whole UK, and that view will reign supreme until somebody formally changes it.

Because Westminster is recognised internationally as the sovereign government of the UK, if Scotland had an Independence referendum tomorrow under those circumstances, Westminster would be the Internationally recognised as the sovereign government presiding over that internal domestic referendum, Scotland would seen as a sub-sovereign Region of the UK, and Westminster would be free to ignore the referendum result, call it unlawful, frame the question, – disrupt it and interfere as much as it liked, citing the UK constitution, and asserting that Westminster has Parliamentary Sovereignty over Scotland. Sounds horrific, but that is not far off the status quo.

Yes, of course you could argue upon the premise of Scot’s Law defining this and protecting that, but that only holds water as an argument if Scotland has the sovereignty to defend it. If Westminster is sovereign, Westminster can keep or sweep away whatever it likes. And lately, my word they are getting bolder about doing it. The Lords took back Renewables, May is on course for her Great Repeal Bill without so much as a caveat relating to Scots Law.

It is that same Westminster’s Parliamentary Sovereignty which would empower Westminster to shut down Holyrood, and or affect the Great Repeal Bill over the whole UK, including Scotland, thus potentially sweeping away all the Scottish institutions currently protected by Scotland’s sovereignty.
If Westminster chose that approach, and all the signs are telling us that is exactly where we are headed, then Scotland would be exactly like Catalonia. The International Community might deplore the heavy handed Fascist doctrines of the Sovereign Authority, but in legal technicality it would be a domestic issue internal to the sovereign ruler in Spain or the UK respectively.

If Scotland, whether via referendum, I will say UDI even though it isn’t practicable, or via a Constitutional courtroom is heading towards a constitutional face off with Westminster, then unless we want the International Community to be obliged and constrained by law and convention to recognise UK sovereignty, and thereby NOT Scottish Sovereignty, then Scotland has somehow to register in the eyes and ears of the International Community that Westminster is NOT the Sovereign superior of Scotland. Scotland IS sovereign and the 300 years of professed Constitutional “oneness” of the UK has been a long standing travesty. It is the truth, but it’s also a big idea to sell to the International community.

As it stands, if Scotland has a vote tomorrow which Westminster disputes, Westminster can dismiss it, close Holyrood, and rewrite every Law in Scotland or declare them all void, and assume command over all things Scottish. Oh there’s the technical democracy of Westminster where we outnumbered 10 to 1 of course, but that’s how the faux Parliament has got away with the con for 300 years.

They could assert, as some actually have, that Scotland ceased to exist beyond 1707, and all references to Scotland’s uniqueness as a nation would simply be phantoms and spectres of a bygone era. If Westminster chose to suffocate Scotland to that extent, the International community, constrained by international law, would see the matter as an internal matter to the Sovereign UK government. They would only be able to intervene with an invitation from the UK to do so. Remember 2014 and EU opinions?

But all of this constitutional argument, every chapter and verse of it, becomes a needless and acrimonious detour which all of us can avoid by simply calling for the legal legitimacy of our Sovereignty to be recognised at the outset.

It need not be the blue touch paper for civil war in Scotland that everybody fears, for the millionth time it is NOT a UDI, but we would have a similar status to that which the Catalans are trying to give themselves; a fully sovereign Nation in waiting, able to make and honour international agreements without permission from any superior. The actual event and realisation of Independence can then be paused to allow talks, plebiscites, referenda, ratifications, leave agreements just Brexit. It becomes entirely rational and formulaic.

My frustration with the SNP strategy is that it is focussed solely on winning Independence by a democratic majority won in a straight YES / NO referendum like 2014. I can, and I do respect the motivations and intent behind that strategy, but I am infuriated that nobody will answer the question about the hole in the bottom of the boat. Suppose we win our YES majority in 2018,19,20, or whenever, but Westminster invokes Parliamentary Sovereignty to call the result irrelevant and Holyrood extinct. What do we do then? Tell me. What is plan B when the government which has cheated Scotland for 300 years cheats us again?

I understand the SNP wants to walk softly and make our Independence a consensual right of passage for the whole country, or at least 51% of the whole country, I see it, I get it, I applaud it, but when you want to walk softly in relative safety, you carry a big stick. Our sovereignty is that big stick, yet we seem determined to do this the hard way, and frankly it doesn’t make sense.

I said before, we HAVE constitutional sovereignty under Scots Law, but we DO NOT have international recognition of that constitutional sovereignty. Instead, we have a grey area of constitutional ambiguity and dispute which the Westminster Parliament exploits to the full. The whole point of my OCD about sovereignty is just to remove that grey area of ambiguity, have Scottish Sovereignty recognised as a terrestrial constitutional reality, and from that point forward we can stop Westminster’s exploitation of the constitutional muddle.

ONLY US, correction, only some of us, here in this bubble in Scotland see this constitutional grey ambiguity as relevant. Westminster brazenly acts as if it doesn’t exist, jeers whenever the issue is raised, and the International Community recognises 300 years of UK sovereignty and established UK convention, and indeed Empire, which has never constrained itself out of respect for the quaint little issue of Scottish sovereignty before.

Until tested and vindicated in law, our sovereignty is just a talisman for us. The Declaration of Arbroath is just a museum curiosity. But tested, vindicated and proven legitimate in modern law, then the World will respect the fact that Westminster does not speak for Scotland, nor can it overrule the voice of the Scottish people. Cross that definitive threshold, and you can have as many referenda and plebiscite’s as we want. But do not cross that sovereign threshold, and Westminster will pull the strings in Scotland forevermore until we do. We can have as many referenda and plebiscites as we like, but never be able to enact any of them.

Catalonia has done it backwards. Secured a majority for Independence first, but now has the problem of getting that majority recognised as sovereign so they can have a vote that counts. Scotland is setting itself up for the same problem – winning a majority then struggling to make it sovereign and binding.

It is my belief that Catalonia will very soon need to run another referendum, this time with recognised constitutional legitimacy from the outset, and then assuming they win, the International recognition will follow. Here in Scotland, just by nailing the ambiguity in who controls Scottish sovereignty, we need only vote on Independence from a tired and large defunct Treaty of Union, and it is not an issue for our “sacred” constitutional sovereignty.

The SNP can continue to govern Scotland with my full support and blessing, but the support and blessing stems from doing things right. Just as my anger is a consequence of doing things wrong. The Constitutional issue of sovereignty, in my opinion, based upon what I have seen and heard, is desperatly misunderstood and being played very badly to the point it could cost us everything, absolutely everything. I would save every one of us that heartache and trauma, that is all, and if that makes me personally unpopular and nuisance to some, then so be it.

I challenge anyone to articulate a good reason or justification for how formal recognition of Scottish Sovereignty, the inconvenient fact of its existence, not sudden creation, in any way weakens or inhibits the actions of the Scottish Government. You are acting like sheep letting your hearts rule your heads, and how many times has Scotland got a constitutional kicking for that particular National frailty down the ages?

Is there any Nation on the planet who would be as reticent as the Scots about enacting a National Sovereignty which contrary to popular opinion has never left our side? Even the US and Australia are more proud of their sovereign claim to nationhood on lands taken by force than Scotland is able to defend its own lands throughout history held in defence.

I said before, we HAVE constitutional sovereignty under Scots Law, but we DO NOT have international recognition of that constitutional sovereignty.

Breeks that’s a lot of not much at all. OFCOURSE Scots are sovereign. This is why we were able to hold ref1 and say Yorkshire can never ever hold one at all.

Ofcourse Scotland is sovereign but we decided to vote NO, to keep the UK, and to keep SHARING our sovereignty, with the English, Welsh and NI.

When Scotland does decide to become a nation state again, Scotland will be instantly recognised as the latest of planet Earth’s familly of sovereign nations, no longer sharing it with the other lot in the UK.

And all because we are sovereign.

Its never going to happen though, without the SNP, as you guys know full well. Exact opposite in fact.

If the yoons do get back in power, they will do everything humanly possible to wipe Scotland the nation, off the face of the earth completely.

schrodingers cat says:
11 October, 2017 at 2:23 pm
ken501

your language is out of order.

Dont be such a wilting lilley SC. Politics is for grown ups and gets heated sometimes.

All you’re trying to do on here is confuse people in an attempt to undermine the SNP and in doing so undermine our chances of getting our Independence.

He sure is. It’s one aspect of yoon culture online today, mix and match Scots democracy with all and anything even remotely similar.

They know that most of us have no real idea what is going on in Catalonia and yoon wise, that’s great because it can then be used to monster Scotland’s progress towards nation statehood.

Rock is another chancer, trying to terrify us all with the Spanish police appalling behavior 2 weeks ago.

Can that happen here? Doesnt matter, trolls like Rock will use that highly improbable outcome in Scotland anyways.

Lovely bunch yoons online, all of which feeds into the online suspicions of the infamous clusterfuck below. If youre out there lads, youre only making this shithead UKOK zone of yours look even more ghastly.

link to securityaffairs.co

Heedtracker.

If we share sovereignty, fine, we are a confederacy, but the Union does not share sovereignty, it declares UK sovereignty is unitary, and absolute. Sovereignty shared is not the same thing as sovereignty joined.

Sovereignty shared is a Union of two recognised sovereign components. Sovereignty joined is the extinction of the primary components to create a single indivisible entity.

If the Union is shared, then good. We have a bipartite Treaty between two separate sovereign entities, and Scottish sovereignty is real. If the Union is joined however, as Westminster likes us to think, then how can Scots Law properly exist independently of UK unitary sovereignty? Is Scots Law a third country all by itself? It would appear to enjoy a Sovereignty all of its own.

My whole point, the point you cannot grasp, is establishing once and for all whether of our sovereignty is shared or joined, because it cannot be both, and the distinction between the two is what the issue is about. It either destroys the concept of Scottish Sovereignty which cannot be joined, or it destroys the Act of Union which presumes two dissimilar and incompatible Constitutional sovereignties were joined to become one.

Resolution of the conundrum does not require a vote one way or the other, but requires Constitutional arbitration, a decision of which absolute circumstance is valid and competent, and which is not.

Right now, only Scotland believes UK sovereignty is shared. The UK and the International Community recognises a single, unitary, UK Sovereignty.

The Act of Union is an abstract contrivance which cannot be one thing nor can it be the other. It is a paradox which can only survive for as long as Scotland is prepared to accept it is being duped but do nothing to rock the boat.

To do that creates the present day absurdity, the living paradox of Scotland rejoicing in its popular sovereignty which it cannot weild, but which Westminster can wield at will, doesn’t even need to consult us, and can overrule Scottish “Sovereign” democracy even when it does consult us, but we Scots soldier on, believing we just need a popular referendum majority to contest the abuse of our popular sovereignty by somebody else’s Government which respects no concept of our popular sovereignty to begin with. This is a Constitutional wild goose chase.

Was it perhaps some 18th Century Ronnie Barker who wrote the UK constitution?

This issue isn’t an abstract fictional fantasy like Alice in Wonderland. This is a constitutional, territorial, and jurisdictional dispute between two historic Nations of Scotland and England, which isn’t really resolved by any act of ephemeral democracy on any given day, but requires to be resolved through constitutional arbitration to resolve the tangled fundamentals of two distinct national constitutions shoehorned into one dog’s breakfast of a Frankenstein’s Union which somehow came to life against all known constitutional logic.

All I’m saying is sort out the constitutional mess before we do anything. Let us start at the very beginning, correct what has gone wrong, and sort the UK’s Constitutional fundamentals so we can all start again on sound foundations, not merely add another layer of constitutional jelly onto a seriously fecked up trifle.

Can we not just be thorough, and get the essentials sorted? That’s it. That’s my big grievance. If we’re going to do this, do it right.

Alex Clark says:
11 October, 2017 at 3:13 pm
@Petra

I agree and you have said it better than I could. No doubt “we” don’t get it yet.

The Catalan’s have a majority for Independence, but no official recognition for it. I’ll leave it to you and Petra and the other SNP geniuses to explain CRUX2 to everybody who believed in CRUX1.

Heedtracker, you can have as many referendums as you like. One a day if it suits you. If there is no sovereignty to empower the vote, like precisely what happened with our Brexit majority, and Catalonia’s IndyRef, it is a constitutionally futile achievement.

Before asking Westminster for a Section 30 Agreement, why not also ask the UN and EU whether they will recognise the result as sovereign Scottish result, citing Scotland’s ancient and unrecognised Constitutional Sovereignty, or see it as a UK regional opinion poll citing the UK’s Internationally recognised Parliamentary Sovereignty?

David Cameron agreed to a Section 30 agreement because he reckoned there wasn’t a cat in hell’s chance of YES winning. David Cameron also agreed to a Brexit Referendum. Theresa May has already told us that now, standing on the precipice of the Brexit Abyss when every Council in Scotland voted Remain and economic ruin beckons, this is not the time for a referendum. I would guess, the automatic approval for future referenda might be more difficult.

So what will you do if Theresa May refuses a Section 30? Will the SNP will carry on regardless and allow the recognised Parliamentary Sovereignty of Westminster declare the vote unlawful and unconstitutional under the auspices of the UK’s constitution, so that we can expect Bute House to chairing Emergency talks with Jean Claude Juncker, that is to say after Holyrood is suspended… She wouldn’t dare says the SNP. Yeah, but what if she did??

I don’t understand the hostility towards having the UN and EU acknowledge there is an issue of disputed sovereignty serving as the controversial backdrop to Scotland’s next Independence referendum. To my mind it is a thoroughly sensible and realistic contingency.

Make Sovereignty a known defining issue, and suddenly it’s not about Scotland the wannabe country vs UK Sovereignty, it’s a much more even contest of Scottish Sovereignty versus UK Sovereignty in a contest of technical legitimacy. In my opinion, those are much better odds for Scotland, and furthermore, even before the result was even known, an Indy Scotland-in-waiting could be making all kinds of promissory sovereign agreements and commitments that were meaningful, if conditional on the result going the right way. If we’d done this months ago, our Scottish Government-in-waiting could have shadowed every step of the the UK Brexit negotiations with Scotland’s own Remain negotiations. Every stage would have two alternative endings, one ending for a Scotland still bound to the UK, and a Second ending for an Indy Scotland. – Preparedness.

Even if it was true that Scotland would have to make a Barosso inspired application to rejoin the EU, a quasi-sovereign-in-waiting Scotland could already have been working through the prelambles and details of that eventuality, so that if and when it happened we’d be ready, and the change would be a mere formality we could hurdle at the gallop.

To my knowledge, we’ve done none of that. We’ve been very pedestrian, offloading all the consequences of Brexit onto Westminster, and pinning our hopes on the ScotRef Emergency Break Glass Unit behind Nicola’s desk in Bute House.

The ScotRef vote is shaping up to be a simple double or quits affair, a 2014 re-run with Scotland’s sovereignty up for grabs with another possible NO vote which solves nothing, but ratifies the unconstitutional absurdity of the Act of Union… again.

Now quietly, I hope and pray that behind the headlines and on the quiet, the Scottish Government has been doing precisely that. I hope and pray the Juncker, Verhofstadt and Barnier know chapter and verse about Scotland’s sovereignty and the pivotal roll it is going to play in Brexit. But what kinda shatters that aspiration is the apparent lukewarm indifference we are showing towards our EU membership, and thereby risk capitulating our grand contest of Scottish Sovereignty versus UK Sovereignty by forfeiting our watertight legitimate constitutional grievance about Brexit, and opting for an EFTA position which actually requires Brexit to happen instead.

There is no constitutional leverage to help secure our sovereignty in us joining EFTA. It is only Brexit which creates the jeopardy, constitutional challenge, and suborned democratic mandate for Scotland to contest Westminster’s faux sovereignty. By opting for EFTA, we are effectively saying that Brexit is ok, our sovereign Remain vote doesn’t matter, and in doing that, we are pulling the rug from under our Constitutional battle for sovereignty.

It is not me who is being reckless here. I see no campaign, no preparedness, no anticipation, no planning. No contingencies. I don’t see any strategic initiative over and above perfunctory Government. It’s good, even great perfunctory Government, but it’s not (yet) making sure of winning the battle for Indy. We seem awfully content to let Westminster run it’s own show.

You folks in the SNP might be happy with that. But the only conclusion I can draw from that is that you know something I don’t.

OT
I kind of had to make that post in the defence forum about Faslane the same night to make the thing current, a couple of small mistakes in it that actually understated the case for Faslane losing no jobs or economic benefit with Indy. Mostly of course it was a genuine posting to reply to the article, but it was a bit dual purpose – an old-fahioned UseNet troll where you are fishing to catch a reply with hook and bait. Well, it worked today with a post from one of the 2 or 3 fish I had in mind, and it’s a cracker.

“What a pipped dreamland dadsarmy lives in.
There is absolutely no way any of those dreams are going to become reality.
an independent Scotland will be a basket case unfortunately, rolling up debts of £15-20 billion per year on top of ALL the costs lumped on them for independence £200-300 billion a year + a proportionate share of the UK sovereign debt. There is no way Scotland will be allowed to leave the uk without taking on responsibility for its fair share of this debt.
Faslane will close, all subs will move to Wales or south west England. All shipbuilding will go back to English yards.
good luck with all that!”

I won’t be replying. job done, but link saved and that is a thread at the right time (next year probably) I’ll be using on several of the NOes and undecideds to show what Scotland is up against 🙂

@Breeks
Sorry not to reply to you earlier by the way, I was knackered and went back to my pit for a few hours. For me personally though the issue is over until the terms of Brexit are clear, probably about next September, and I’m 100% happy with the way things are going, and how they went at the SNP conference.

Robert Peffers,

“@Rock says: 10 October, 2017 at 9:23 pm:

“She means well, but Nicola has ZERO control over UK immigration policy.
As we have seen with the many deportations from Scotland.
After a “snap” Brexit, Scotland will be at the mercy of the Westminster government.”

Dear! Oh! Dear!

Are you really as bloody stupid as you seem?

Of course Nicola has no control over immigration policy. All alert readers are aware that immigration is a reserved matter.

Which is exactly the reason Nicola has instigated an SG policy that cleverly retains and encourages post Brexit EU Citizens employed by Scottish government or Scottish Local authorities, to remain in Scotland.”

“Numpties” need to understand that whether the Scottish government encourages them or not, it is Saint Theresa who will decide what rights they have to stay in the UK, including the North British region.

The right to remain in the UK and for how long will be decided by Saint Theresa, not Nicola.

You responded to my 9:23 pm comment addressed to another poster.

But you failed to respond to my 9:10 pm comment addressed to yourself because you are left speechless when your “pish” is exposed.

🙂

@K1

I’ll second that. Back under that bridge Rock, there’s a good troll.

Hi K1 at 8:39 pm.

I would tend to concur with your input re Rock.

He/She usually types his/her input after teatime. And it always finds something to be upset about, then spews out all the stuff that it has saved for a rainy day, quotes from everyone under the saltire and so on.

“Those days are past now…”

Gie up, Rock, you’ve been well sussed.

SHAZBOT! I’ve just fallen into Rock’s trap again! Woe is me!

Alex Clark (aka Thepnr),

“I’ll second that. Back under that bridge Rock, there’s a good troll.”

Robert Peffers says (to Thepnr):
27 March, 2017 at 7:40 pm

“Oh! For the Heaven’s sake stop being so bloody stupid. First of all you are not the person who decides what the purpose of the Rev Stu’s blog is. That’s the Rev Stu’s choice to make. Secondly you probably wouldn’t recognise a real Troll if it was chewing on your ear.”

@Liz g

You know what it’s like, you just type often without thinking when you want to make a reply and can make mistakes. Breeks was right in this case as I did make a mistake in my choice of words.

“Scotland handed over it’s sovereignty to Westminster in perpetuity until the sovereign people of Scotland decide they want all the powers back and the treaty annulled.”

I should have said unless rather than use until, I’d agree that picking out errors in grammar like this instead of dealing with the argument is being pedantic.

“Scotland handed over it’s sovereignty to Westminster in perpetuity unless the sovereign people of Scotland decide they want all the powers back and the treaty annulled.”

Sorted, though I think my meaning was clear in the first place.

Alex Clarke @ 11.04
Aye he was right,in this instance!!
About the way you phrased stuff…..
And while words are important… We are in a conversation here.
My point was that we put all the terminology in the mix till we all know and accept what we mean,,,,well as far as we can.

Especially since …..well !!! Breeks is wrong.

Ahm away fur sum cough sweeties

..

Breeks @ 7.41
Well aye Breeks I would…..
Regurgitating leagal facts doesn’t move a conversation about the concept of Sovereignty along.
The legality of Scottish Sovereignty is no in dispute!
That the power of it is used at Westminster is pretty obvious as well.
It’s the Sovereignty of the people themselves that we are trying to define….. that’s the part that’s not so easy to explain….it can mean different things to different people,and that’s the bit you don’t seem to accept.
But that’s the thing that Alex had attempted to discuss and you shut him down because you have a narrow vision of what you think you mean…..so aye you were being pedantic.
As for queen Isabella…..well monarch’s aren’t known for taking other people’s point in to account either,so who knows.
I certainly wouldn’t presume to know her mind,any more than I would presume to have the absolute definition of popular Sovereignty.

I got pelters for droning on saying that without sovereignty, neither Catalonia nor Scotland could expect or rely upon international recognition of their respective democratic majorities.

From a Holyrood Committee Meeting with Michel Barnier, 11th September 2017:-

“He [Ross Greer] asked Mr Barnier if he was aware that the UK was offering positions outside its own competence and what was his view of that? Mr Barnier told the Committee that he was extremely interested in this debate, but that he could not comment on internal constitutional matters…” My emphasis.

@Breeks

If you really wanted to advance the cause of Independence then you’d use you obvious intelligence and skill at writing to do that.

Instead you focus on one topic only, that of sovereignty which makes you a one trick pony when it comes to comments on Wings.

Would you not agree with me that for 95% of people that means not a jot? There is plenty to discuss and debate but for you only one topic seems to matter and to be honest you’ve bored me for months with the same subject.

That’s it as for as any discourse goes with yourself, carry on regardless I know that you’ve already bored more than half that read Wings. Take it up directly with the SNP if you must, few here are listening anymore.

Sovereignty comes when we gain our Independence. Hysteron proteron.

SNP Excellent.