The Undertaker
In so far as it’s worth talking about Scottish constitutional politics at all these days, it’s worth taking a moment to analyse the bloodless, anodyne nothingness spouted by the First Minister on The Sunday Show at the weekend.
That clip is less than three minutes long, but it’s so soul-crushingly boring and full of content-free drone and waffle that it’s almost impossible to sit all the way through it, so we’re going to translate and summarise it for you.
“What constitutes a mandate for independence?”
– “Vote SNP.”
“How do you deliver it where your predecessors failed?”
– “We don’t have the means to achieve that. We want to build support.”
“What does that mean? How much support would be enough?”
– “As much as there was for devolution in 1997.”
Well, we know how much that was: 74%.
It’s a very straightforward interpretation of his words – indeed, the only rational one that it’s possible to make. But some of the SNP’s more demented fandogs on social media have insisted he said no such thing.
So what DID he mean?
Oh, so it was about the vote share achieved by pro-devolution parties in the preceding 1997 election, NOT the 74% of the devo referendum? Well, that should be easy to count up, because we know which parties supported the establishment of Holyrood.
So all we need to do is add up their vote shares in 1997.
That gives us 45.6 (Lab) plus 22.1 (SNP) plus 13 (Lib Dems) plus 0.06 (Greens), which is a total of, er, 80.76% (let’s call it 81%). We stand duly and humbly corrected, “indy swim” – John Swinney doesn’t want to wait until 74% of Scots support independence before he does anything about it, it’s actually seven points higher than that.
Luckily, however, with Swinney occupying a senior role in the SNP (as he has done since 2003) and pursuing “unity” by winning lots of converts to the independence cause with his powerful arguments, personal charisma and bold and competent governance, we’ve already made great strides in just 11 years since the indyref.
Pretty exciting progress, we’re sure you’ll agree. At the rate of 1% a decade we’ll hit that 81% target as soon as the year 2355!
(Possibly a little sooner if the Parliament’s new assisted-dying proposals become law and the SNP can covertly off a load of No-voting pensioners, possibly by filling their care homes with deadly virus patients again.)
But in the meantime, oh boy, he’s got a pledge for us!
You’ll forgive us if we think we’ve heard that one before.
And even The National, which enthusiastically blared all the previous false promises about an imminent second indyref from its front pages, can’t quite contain its scepticism this time.
The only thing that’s changed since Swinney took over from the hapless Humza Yousaf, then, is that the SNP aren’t even bothering to try to make their promises sound credible any more. Swinney speaks with all the fire and verve of a weary old church minister burying his fifth stranger of the day, mouthing token, vague generic platitudes that say nothing and mean even less.
Wings remains of the view that there won’t be a majority of pro-indy seats in 2026, but what there DEFINITELY won’t be is a majority of pro-indy votes, and under those conditions the UK government will not only refuse a second referendum yet again because it has a legal mandate from the Supreme Court to do so, but it’ll also be entirely democratically within its rights to, because a majority of Scots will have voted for Unionist parties.
And we already know what the SNP does in those circumstances: whimpers meekly for 20 minutes and then skips off back happily to the gravy trough until it’s time to offer voters some mouldy carrots again.
Swinney has deliberately set himself a wildly unachievable target because he’s learned that when the SNP promise stuff at a lower threshold and that threshold arrives and they fail to deliver, people eventually start to notice, which is why the party’s support has collapsed by 20 points in the last few years.
And when that target – like all SNP targets – is missed by miles, he can once more turn sorrowfully and reproachfully to the voters with his sad old face and say “Well, it’s your fault. You just didn’t vote SNP enough”.
And so the years will pass, and soon we’ll ALL be dead.
I do watch BBC/ITV and had only read about Swinney’s nonsense before today. It is even worse when viewed. This man is clearly promoted well above his capabilities. No leadership, no strategy, no understanding, selfish, lacking any broadcast presence and totally, totally boring. He a liability to the SNP not an asset.
The needle returns to the start of the song
And we all sing along like before
And we’ll all be Lonely tonight
And lonely tomorrow
None so blind as those that cry SNP!
Indeed! Don’t forget the line…
And nothing ever happens, nothing happens at all.
Like the Yes donkey cartoon.
Typifies to a tee the SNP and its latest incarnation of a First Minister.
Not much more to say, or should I say bray.
perfectly put “Swinney speaks with all the fire and verve of a weary old church minister burying his fifth stranger of the day”, Eleanor Rigby comes to mind.
I can’t help but notice a similarity in Swinney & Starmer in that they both speak as if they’re trying to keep a shit in!!
Well, we both know that they are both full of shit.
It pays them well to be so.
More like continuous verbal skitter
There’s more chance of England voting for it’s own independence than there is the SNP legislating for IndyRef2.
As a business the SNP simply can’t afford to go without Westminster’s cash, so instead, as the cartoon above so perfectly illustrates, they’ll just keep talking about Independence whilst doing nothing to persuade the undecided and soft-no’s of its merits and the polls won’t shift – letting Swinney and his band of incompetents off the IndyRef2 hook indefinitely.
Charlatans…
To paint themselves into such a corner surely takes some skill or compromise.
The sooner the Salmond case comes to court and we see these people fir what they are and some end in jail the better.
Their only hope is the masters in London remember them, which of course they wont.
I actually think a strategy of trying to get independence support clearly into the 60% region (and that support being consistently expressed in elections) is broadly the right one. The problem is, in pursuance of that strategy the SNP has to govern well, and so in that light they are pursuing a strategy 180 degrees in the opposite direction.
WHAT ARE YOUR GAINS ALWAYS ATTACKING SCOTLAND,S GOVERNMENT! NEVER WESTMINSTER! THE ENGLISH CHOICE OF LESLIE EVANS AS MAIN CIVIL SERVICE? TRUST WORTHY?? WHY DIVIDE AND CONQUER AT EVERY TURN. SCOTLAND FREE AND INDEPENDENT SINCE 1314 ENGLISH INTERFERENCE ENDED AND SCOTLAND RECOGNISED AS AN INDEPENDENT COUNTRY! INTERNATIONAL COURT TO EXTRACT THE TRUTH FROM THE LIES AND THEFT! THE U.K.IS NOT A COUNTRY AND NEVER WAS!
Compelling point, there, Robert.
Hear hear,
Uk is not a Country.
Have you even yet not pondered the possibility that Salmond-assassinating Swinney, Sturgeon, Leslie Evans, etc etc, might well not be in any sense supporters of Scottish independence but rather its ultimate saboteurs on behalf of the British State?
It is tempting to think so, and I have no doubt at all that at least a few at the top of the party/in the civil service are assets – NI would tend to uphold that view – and I also think that Westminster and Whitehall have been making hay while the sun shines, the SNP and the Greens and the civil service all colluded to bring about Salmond’s demise.
The problem with that theory is that all of this has been home-grown. John Swinney was once before the party leader and was replaced by Salmond. There is no Salmond now. Sturgeon was proven to be as courageous as Swinney, which was not courageous at all, and Salmond was still there, albeit out of politics, to remind her and us. There is no Salmond now.
Salmond’s pre 2014 government was a competent one, but, still, Scotland voted NO. That route is, now, a non starter. There is no Salmond now.
The only hope we have is to try something audacious and unexpected, courageous and very risky. Above all, we have to shunt the SNP off the scene as far as that is possible. Salmond would have wept – but only for a time. There is no Salmond now.
Most independence supporters understand that completely!
Cozy Feet Pete has decided the problem with Scotland is that it’s full of Scots –
Pete Wishart
@PeteWishart
My contribution to the immigration statement. They are introducing an immigration system that works against our national interest and will damage our economy and NHS
Our ‘national interest’ involves repopulating Scotland with low wage Somalians, Afghans, and Albanians as fast as they can. Young Scottish people can GTF, Cozy Feet doesn’t care about your hopes or dreams. This is the state of Scottish ‘nationalism’ in 2025.
After the 2014 referendum I remember thinking that Scotland was a cadaver: a body on an operating table but with a heart still ever so faintly beating. I was wrong. Scotland is a human corpse now manifested as John Swinney and the SNP.
Robertson and Swinney – the Hinge and Bracket of Scottish politics.
One does the arranging, the other sings the words.
Awwwwww….. you have a very keen fan….
I’ve worked in businesses which are cyclical, and subject to the vagaries of the market they service. During the troughs, you dig in, count the pennies and try to retain the staff with the key knowledge and skills to exploit the market when the uplift finally comes.
If I thought for a second that the SNP were lying dormant waiting to leap into action like a coiled spring when circumstances changed in their favour, I would relax.
They ain’t. This is all they are and all they’ll ever be. They’re the Irish Parliamentary Party of the twenty first century. The perfect storm will hit the British State, and the SNP will be concerned spectators.
Didn’t the perfect storm already hit? Shame the SNP did nothing with it.
Swinney is the Gordon Brown of the SNP.
“ Swinney is the Gordon Brown of the SNP”
========
Worse, MUCH worse.
Swinney is the John Swinney of the SNP.
He was an utter dud in 2003. He is an even bigger dud in 2025.
Swinney. Whenever his coupon appears on the TV, invariably the mute button gets selected.
I find that Eeyore has a more upbeat personality than he does.
I have been trying to pin down his voice and attitude. I thought the Rev. I. M. Jolly, too, but Eeyore is a contender. Starmer has the same sort of send-you-to-sleep kind of tone. Not their fault, of course, but charisma, it ain’t. A kind of world-weary, depressed monotone. Salmond they are not.
Why are Scots not more like the English seem to be?
link to centreonconstitutionalchange.ac.uk
“60% of voters in England say current politics makes them feel angry
55% say it makes them fearful, and
78% say it makes them frustrated
9% reported feeling hopeful
3% said it made them happy.
…Reform voters are the angriest (82%) followed by Greens (72%), although there is a sense of frustration across the board, with Labour’s own supporters (80%) reporting high degrees of frustration, ahead of the Conservatives (77%) and tied with Liberal Democrats (80%) but still behind Greens (85%) and Reform voters (93%).
Parenthood and Englishness are the two key identities for Reform and Conservative voters, with Labour, Green and Liberal Democrats more likely to prioritise identities around their age and generation. For no party did class identity make the top three.
…Professor Henderson, a Professor of Political Science at SPS, said: “Almost 10 years after the Brexit referendum and after electing a new government last year, English politics is marked by continued grievance, frustration and anger rather than hope. Addressing the UK’s relationship with Europe remains a top priority, but it is former Remain voters or rejoiners who now list it as a top concern. Grievance with the union, and how England is governed, continues to suggest that the English feel their voice is not heard, their culture and identity not given the attention it deserves.”
Scottish voters are catching up with the English in being scunnered.
The main difference between England and Scotland is that the English have had more immigrants rammed down their throats for longer.
We already have grooming gangs in Glasgow, racist politicians who despise white people and rapidly falling living standards due to immigration so there’s a backlash due. Reform will do well in Scotland, most Scots aren’t ashamed to be white and don’t want Scotland to be turned into a multicultural zoo.
Irony is, Reform are more of a Scottish nationalist party than the vaseline-ringed sickos and grifters of the SNP. The SNP doesn’t care about Scottish children and did nothing about the Glasgow grooming gangs.
It’s as clear as day Swinney and his SNP grifting team don’t want independence.
If you do vote Alba, ISP or I 4 I in 2026 in both votes .
I voted yes yes in 97 why can’t they use their limited powers over tax to reduce the income tax on NHS nurses by 2%?
Hopefully it could increase retention and recruitment,and may even make the SNP more popular.
In an earlier article about list votes you appeared to be predicting the SNP would have a majority. Do you believe that won’t happen or are you, quite consistently, not counting the SNP as a pro-indy party?
Here’s a thought. Well maybe three
Willie McRae shot HIMSELF in the back of the heid, thew the gun away and went back and sat in his car.
Scotland lost the yes vote in 2014.
Alex Salmond died of a heart attack in Macedonia
AYE RIGHT.
James Kelly back with his 6th post of the last 7 about the man who is ‘obsessed’ with him?. I honestly thought the arrival of Eurovision this week would have had him wetting himself with excitement but nothing gets in the way of a good whinge about Stu it seems?
Perhaps it is time to just ignore James.
You’re probably right but I’ve a macabre fascination with his descent into madness. Still, I’ll take your advice and move on to a less deranged site.
Hasn’t James Kelly blocked comments on his blog ?
If there is a unionist majority at the next election then surely there is no mandate for independence.
Why don’t the SNP accept this and build for the future. In fact why not stop putting up candidates and build an independence party from the ground up and then enter the polls from a position of idealogical strength a bit like what Reform have done.
Reform is getting votes as a protest against all the other parties. Reform is an offshoot of UKIP and is successful as a party in the same places that favoured UKIP. Not all the people who voted for UKIP in 2015 voted Reform in 2024 but 50% did.
Reform has not expnded a great deal beyond the UKIP base of 2015 but it certainly has deepened the base. It may have reached a peak in Scotland. looks very bad for the Tories.
Table 1. Social profile of UKIP 2015 and Reform 2024 voters
UKIP 2015 Reform 2024
Mean age (SD) 54.2 (14.8) 54 (16.1)
% Male 57 57.7
% White British 95.7 91.9
% Degree 24.4 32.8
% Routine + Semi-routine 23.5 22.1
% Retired 48 30.4
% Homeowner 64.7 68.3
Median annual household income £20,000 to £24,999 £30,000 to £34,999
% Previous Conservative 41 77.7
% Previous Labour 13.5 6.5
The Scottish Constitution cannot pass muster under a devolved parliament from Englands Westminster. Parliament As it would turn it into a non-Country UK Constitution
Equally the Constitution of England cannot pass muster either as it also would be turned into a non-Country constitution.
England people would possible come off worse than Scotlands people because they had a unwritten flip- flop starmer style constitution.
Now there are two parliaments in two different Countries, and the Scottish one was voted in by the Scottish people.
The glitch here is that the old Constitution of England has no authority over Scotlands old Constitution in ” The not – a – Country ” United Kingdom, to offer or refuse Scotlands people under Scotlands Constitution from the position of Englands constitution— a vote or referendum on any subject,
would indicate one of two scenarios,
1)
That neither of the two Countries have a valid maintained and retained Constitution while in a non- but invented Country Union. Which defies logic if you are to make commitments to treaties or trade deals.
2) that the United kingdom’s invented Country’s legal position has to be that it left both England and Scotland with their original Constitutions from the get go,
That being the case England constitution within the Treaty of union of equal Constitutions cannot deny The people of Scotland their Constitutional right to withdraw from the treaty of union at any time Scotland,
perceives or recognises that England has used their Constitution within the “one and the same parliament of Great Britain hereafter” to Breach the treaty of union articles, alter the treaty of union articles, and or used the English Constitution in the Westminster parliament to over ride and subdue the Scottish Constitution its Country and its nation.
The crims and spivs of the not-a-country scam have made themselves fortunes selling bogus passports.
I’m one of the gullible eejits that was conned into buying one.
Luckily the immigration people in most foreign countries haven’t twigged, so my fake passport does the job when I travel abroad.
Phew! Jammy or what, eh?
ON THE THEME OF «UNDERTAKING» Scotland’s lawmakers, or some of them, push the sinistrr envelope on so called assisted dying, that in a country with a decline in population projected for the near future.
What has happened to «hope»? Admittedly killing off Scotland’s population by stages, and encouraging sterile «gender diversity» might be easier than struggling for independence.
The elephant in the room is this. Given the evidence that SNP cannot win big on the constituency vote and also gain any list seats, why do they still advocate that approach?
Answers on a gravy train…
Said it for years now. The SNP is no longer an Indy party it is in fact a Devo-Nat party. That is the limit of their constitutional ambitions. Westminster is sovereign and that’s the way the SNP want it to remain. The very thought that Scots are sovereign and would act on it to secure Indy scares the shite out of the likes of Swinney.
“The SNP is no longer an Indy party it is in fact a Devo-Nat party.”
=========
Would it not be more accurate to call it a Devo-Unionist party?
Other commenters liken it to the pre-1919 Irish Parliamentary Party.
If the cap fits……
we have a parliament because vast majority of people support having one
we dont have independence because vast majority don’t support having one
basic stuff and not the SNP or John Swinney or WoS or Nicola Sturgeon or Alex Salmond’s ‘fault’.
Scots either vote for something in overwheliming numbers or they don’t. the point is the option is there. If they don’t the political parties can’t do much. London called Scotland’s bluff, not the SNP’s. If the SNP thought Scots would vote for independence in a defacto referendum they’d call it tomorrow.
“Small Majority”
@ Ross: Pish. As I’m sure you know, the SNP has sat on its hands and done nothing but undemocratically impose woke bullshit on Scotland for the past ten years. Everything they have done in that time has been the exact opposite of what was required if they actually had any intention of securing independence. The SNP’s job is to campaign relentlessly for independence and to do whatever is necessary to secure it, and the fact that they have utterly failed to do so is their responsibility, not the voting public’s.
In the video clip, Swinney couldn’t even bring himself to mention Independence when asked, he was avoiding the question altogether.
Whats our problem? The problem is certain bloggers, youtuber aren’t telling the truth when it comes to the SNP and its refusing to move forward with the constitutional question but are painting out the SNP is wanting Independence and its Westminster who’s blocking it, this is piss.
Its down right impossible to get the SNP leadership to take notice of our anger at the party when you’ve got these bloggers, youtubers and The National who blatantly ruse to address the real reason on the constitutional at why we haven’t moved forward since 2014.
I stopped marching on AUOB marches because walking and shouting in the streets hasn’t got us anywhere in the last 11yrs. Its not that I’m not interested in marching its because I contracted AUOB and told them straight you have to be marching against the SNP refusing to enact these mandates they’ve been given, I got no reply.
I stated a long time ago and I’ve notice others now suggesting that Scotland cause is being blocked by the SNP and the Scottish government and that it would be better if Holyrood was shut down.
Let me just point something out to those who listen but are listening to all the wrong people, its possible to nearly get to that 75% if the SNP leadership endorsed the supper majority regarding the two votes, but the SNP and its will tell minions there viewers to give the SNP both votes when in fact they know that this is disastrous for us and our country.
I am left totally bewildered at what the f*ck is going on and how these people want Independence but can’t see where the problem lies.
If the SNP was committed 100% we’d be Independent today but there not and neither are there minions they make a living out of talking about Independence and here is our problem, greed.
100% Yes: I read your comment several times but second and third paragraphs do not make sense. Please read them and re-write them so that your meaning is clear.
We have bloggers, youtubers and individuals who write about Independence and make money from talking about Independence which is fine I don’t have a problem with anyone wanting to make a bit of money. The problem Is when these individuals talk or write about Independence the people listening to them take it as gospel and here is where the problem is. Rather tell the viewers the truth about the SNP true intention towards Independence they’d rather paint a different picture rather than upset the people listening or buying their papers.
If you go onto The National or listening to these youtubers or bloggers tomorrow not one will be stating the SNP has now declared Independence dead and not one will say for the SNP to suggest we get to 75% isn’t democracy and it’s the SNP who’s causing all the problems. The bloggers, youtubers and the National don’t want to upset the apple cart.
If everyone was to tell people about the SNP true intentions towards Independence we’d be further down that road.
For the last 11yrs the only thing the SNP has done, was to bring out policies in order to turn the general public away from Independence it has worked. So what we now have is the SNP being honest about Independence, they’re not going to deliver it, ever. But we want you the voter to give us your vote. That’s it, that’s all your going to get from the SNP because your not going to get good governance because they’ve been using this also as a means to put people off voting for the SNP.
I’ve said this many times but I don’t believe its gotten through to some people. When Salmond said, when we get Independence there won’t be any need for the SNP. That was the worst thing Salmond could have said because the SNP leadership, Councillors, MSP and MPs all took Salmond at his word.
The SNP has wasted 11yrs and between The National and their minions they’ll waste another 11yrs. Independence isn’t in their interest. Yes they’ll say they want it while the money keeps coming in but, that all there interested in.
The simple truth is the SNP are a road block to Indy. Until Scots realise this and act on it in the ballot box then nothing will happen. A vote for the SNP is a wasted vote.m
Great article. Good cartoon too.
But the carrot is not nearly mouldy enough.
I don’t remember the last time I heard the SNP mention trying to get additional powers. Not only is there no progress towards indy, we never hear the terms devo max, full fiscal autonomy or even any mention of requesting or pushing for any additional powers.
The SNP made Scotland a branch office and nothing more.
Spot on.
It’s unacceptable said the flee to the dog.
How many times can the SNP say this. Surely they have actually accepted Westminsters veto. That’s what happens when you complain without follow through.
Always look on the bright side of life. Nicola Sturgeon will be leaving Holyrood next year. She’ll be an old lady in Dreghorn going for her milk, and everyone will remember that she’s the former First Minister that should be in jail. Because she failed in her conspiracy attempt to stich up the greatest leader Scotland has ever known – Alex Salmond. Alexander the Great!
Hail Alba!
In the 2011 Scottish election the SNP under Salmond won a majority of seats (69) – the only time there has been a single majority vote in the history of Holyrood.
This lead to the the vote for independence in 2014.
The SNP should be doing everything they can to repeat that – until they do they can kiss another referendum goodbye.
Of course even if there is another referendum there is no guarantee there will be a Yes vote.
Looking at the calibre of politicians in Holyrood on every side (but mainly their own!) and reviewing their track record since 2014, who seriously thinks that they could run a ménage let alone a “new” country. Why would anyone trust them?
Independence? Behave yourself!
People looked at the recent US Presidential Elections and asked, “In a population of 300+M, are these two the best we have got?”. Scots might look at Holyrood and ask the same question.
So, if there won’t be a pro Indy majority next year then why is Alba bleating about a plebiscite election?
Your prediction also doesn’t say much about your hopes for Alba next year.
There is little to no hope for any party that would make life better for the majority.
The next election will see vast numbers staying at home and desperate fools trying the Farage fascist fantasy party.
I know from discussions that some misguided souls actually vote for the party that they think they will win even though they haven’t even glanced at their manifesto.
It’s as if it’s their bet in the Bookies and they just want to say that they won.
Alba I appreciate but without Salmond they will have negligible exposure and votes.
At least if the ancient Romans came back to rule over us the roads would be improved.
DONALD TRUMP became US president, the most powerful democratic leader, on less than 50% of the popular vote. A majority is a majority so he was elected.
The SNP needs to wise up and learn how to do power politics.
Swinney and friends are still in «kindergarten»
Respecting the wishes of the sovereign wishes of the people of Scotland would require a majority of votes, not a majority of MSPs.
Presumably for a majority of MSPs to go against the majority of votes would constitute an act of treason.
That’s if you believe in the idea of the sovereign Scottish people, of course.
Nothing will change if people continue to vote for the TransCult Devolutionist SNP.
They are delighted that they will be the largest Party at Holyrood for decades to come. They are delighted loony Greens and the SNP perverts will ensure that the Indy Movement will die away.
I do not want Independence under the Green/SNP children of the damned. MSPs who hate Women, like to mutilate children, promote TransCult propaganda in schools and spend all day waving the Palestine Flag instead of the Saltire.
I was a supporter and activist of Indy for over 50 years and I now oppose it. I don’t give a shit what the Nicophants scream because I have seen their vision of Scotland.
They go to the Supreme Court for a ruling on the Right to determine Scotland’s future and lose and accept it meekly.
They go to the Supreme Court for Women having Dicks, lose, and ignore the ruling.
Ladies with Dicks are more important to them than the People of Scotland
The only thing I was not in agreement with Alec Salmond with was the route that was latterly taken to complete independence.when we had a majority voice in Scotland that worried the union side and the snp was first recognised everywhere in Britain.
And I still disagree with this being the route today,
There is no legal position within the union that allows for the Westminster parliament of Great Britain to act as a English parliament and use English laws and Constitution and refuse Scotland a referendum,
It is not a treaty or a new invented Country, and could not be recognised as a treaty between two kingdoms and territorial bordered Countries if both or either constitutions have ceased,
The fact that the shared Westminster parliament of Britain uses the power of English law and the English Constitution to refuse and acknowledge the Scottish constitution, the Scottish realm and territory of Scotland, is a valid enough reason on its own to end the treaty of parliamentary union.
That it uses English law and English Constitution to refuse Scotland a referendum to tell Scotland that it needs more than a certain percentage votes to leavethe parliamentary union,
At the same time Westminster parliament stating they did not ask the Scots to join because they would have voted No.
Thus Dividing and segregating the old parliament of Scotland from the Scots themselves, the Sovereign community realm and territory of the Scots.
The old parliament of Scotland and its elite members went into the treaty of union parliament in Westminster (whilst it was still acting as a English parliament without the Scots nation
, without the Scots kingdom, realm or territory simply because they acknowledged and could not bring themselves to include the Scots in a vote after much debate,
And the Scots would not go with them
That the Scots would say No.
That was a major error even for those days.
Unlike the constitution of England, in the Scottish constitution, the Crown is not Sovereign, which meant in Scotland the Monarch could not give aurthority the members of the Scottish parliament or to the treaty without the Consent of the Scots.
The nation of Scots not asked and they did not give it.
It is another one of those glitches and errors for the union parliament and the union of the two kingdoms
Not asking or giving the Scots a vote to join the union by choice under the Scottish Constitution in Scotland left the Scots segregated apart from the Scottish parliament that entered Westminster, and separated from the now English monarch that did not understand the Scottish Constitution,
The Scots nation and territorial realm remain outwith the treaty of union, outwith the parliament in England and do not require the law of England or the constitution of England or the monarch of England for permission for a referendum.
Some confuse and conflate the consent of the old Scottish parliament with it being consent of the Scots nation, through the parliament.
However both old parliaments and commissioners of both Countries did no such thing,
They discussed and debated wether to to give the Scots a Vote. They did not conflate or presume that the Scottish parliament, the Monarch in Scotland , the Scots were one and the same thing.
In the end out of fear of Scots saying No,
they put the Idea of the problem what to do with the Scots on the back burner for another day
Today Scots are colonised by threat to pretend they are in the treaty of union with England.
Ashes to ashes
Funk to funky
We know major Johns a junkie
Strung out in the SNP high
Hitting an all time low.
He never did good things
He never did bad things
He never did anything of any use at all.
Robert Knight is spot on here. In the current political climate, England is more likely to end the union than Scotland.
That’s what ‘ political organisation professionals ‘ do.
Like the self description. That’s absolutely genuine and gives an insight into who and what our elected politicians consider themselves to be.
I’m an indy supporter and tried to watch that on Sunday but I had to switch off. It took Swinney too long to even mention the word Indy. I gave in and turned it off. The SNP is dead.
Scotland has absolutely NO CHANCE of independence with this shower of SNP Politicians. Absolutely wasters.