The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

The Wasted Years

Posted on June 28, 2022 by

So we now know, if it was ever in doubt, that the Scottish Government is not remotely serious about holding an independence referendum in 2023.

Today’s speech by the First Minister revealed one positive act: that she finally intends to do what this website has been repeatedly calling on her to do since April 2018, by establishing once and for all whether or not the Scottish Parliament has the power to conduct an independence referendum, and that if it is determined by the Supreme Court that it does not, she intends to do what this site called on her to do a year and a half ago – conduct the next general election (now due in late 2024) as a plebiscite.

We’re not sure what the point of frittering away five years by waiting was.

A reminder of what we said in April 2018:

And what we said in October 2020, referring to the 2021 Holyrood election:

That, really was the entire content of the speech: that the SNP is now going to do what we’ve been telling it to do for nearly half a decade, and what the SNP has been relentlessly attacking us for.

All the reasons which were presented for NOT doing that – that support wasn’t yet high enough, the COVID pandemic, the economic recovery etc – have suddenly been thrown in the bin. We’re sure Pete Wishart, Mhairi Hunter et al are already lining up to apologise for their endless smears against Wings, Alba, Martin Keatings and the others who urged them to do what they’ve belatedly accepted must be done.

Almost nobody expects the Supreme Court to rule in Holyrood’s favour, and even if it did the UK government could simply rewrite the Scotland Act. So what today’s speech really amounted to was a postponement of the supposed 2023 indyref (the date of which Sturgeon specified as 19 October) until the end of 2024.

(Quite what happens if there’s a snap UK general election sometime before the Supreme Court delivers its verdict – which would then boot the proposed plebiscite election down the road to 2026 or 2027 – is a question that was neither asked nor answered today.)

Still, credit where it’s due – the announcement was more than we expected, and what we’ve been consistently calling for. (It also clearly wrongfooted Douglas Ross and Anas Sarwar, whose speeches were plainly written for a different situation.)

But the delay of so many years from when it should have happened is indefensible and unforgivable. There was no reason not to submit a proposal to the Supreme Court in 2018, or indeed 2017 or 2016 after the Brexit vote. Had that been done, as Wings called for, the referendum or plebiscite could have been held long before the COVID pandemic struck, before we were dragged unwillingly out of the EU, and Scotland could have been independent already.

Sturgeon also passed up the chance to secure a legal referendum by leveraging Parliamentary arithmetic in 2019, giving Scotland the chance to evade Brexit.

Quite what the SNP plan to do to increase support to the point at which Yes might win is as yet unknown.

There’s no sign of any improvement in their domestic record, and goodness knows what might turn round opinion where gold-plated gifts like Brexit, COVID and a series of astonishingly corrupt and incompetent Tory governments have failed to. There are still no answers on the hard questions about currency and borders and the like.

But finally we’ve been listened to. We hope it’s not far too late, and we hope that the Scotland which will exist in late 2024 after another two and a half years of Sturgeon’s dreadful rule will still be worth fighting for.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

187 to “The Wasted Years”

  1. Peter says:

    Of course , the Tories could call a GE before a supreme court ruling and scupper the entire plan.

  2. Calum says:

    I suppose it’s something. Better than nothing. Def not getting overly excited though.

  3. Fraser Reid says:

    What he said….

  4. Ian McCubbin says:

    Like you I await to see how many of the 300000 activists in YES come back to do the work
    Certainly won’t be guided by any SNP leadership.
    Alba, ISP independent YES hubs AUOB if they if they all combine might bring a yes vote off.
    I await to see how this progresses.
    However the plebiscite route to the UN is only sure way to achieve the result.

  5. Wee Chid says:

    I think the point of frittering away five years was to give enough time to alienate enough of the Yes movement against the SNP that a plebiscite will be lost. Missed the end of her speech. Did she say what would happen if this actually came about? Would it just be another carrot?

  6. fran says:

    They’re too late, I will never vote SNP again regardless of plebiscite election. I have Blackford as an MP & will spoil my ballot if no Alba candidate.

  7. Sharny Dubs says:

    Ah but the end of 24’ is a long way off Stu, heaven knows what can happen in that time, especially if you are colluding with your cough cough opponent.
    It’s just another delay tactic

  8. Andy Ellis says:

    Preach brother!

    I wonder when the next GE will actually happen?

    December 25/ January 25 isn’t a great time for campaigning!

  9. Astonished says:

    I am surprised. At least she has a plan.

    I still think she has got to go.

  10. stuart mctavish says:

    19 October – nailed it,

    well done Nicola

  11. David Mooney says:

    Not sure how to take this. All trust is gone with me, so I find it difficult to believe a word she says. Of course this should have been done in 2017.

    If it progresses as it should I will support the campaign but with suspicion. I wouldn’t put it past the current SNP leadership to sabotage the referendum.

  12. Mac says:

    All you need to know about the UK Supreme Court from their website:

    > Can the UKSC overrule the UK Parliament?
    > No. Unlike some Supreme Courts in other parts of the world, the UK Supreme Court does not have the power to ‘strike down’ legislation passed by the UK Parliament. It is the Court’s role to interpret the law and develop it where necessary, rather than formulate public policy.

    > Can the UKSC overrule Devolved Parliaments and Assemblies in other parts of the UK?
    > The UKSC can hear ‘devolution issues’, which include questions about whether a Bill or Act of Parliament, or any provision of a Bill or Act of Parliament, is within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament or the Northern Ireland Assembly. Under the Government of Wales Act 2006, a question whether an Order in Council, Assembly Measure, Act of the Assembly or Bill is within the legislative competence of the Welsh Assembly can also be referred to the UKSC.

    This is done by design to prevent Scotland breaking away from Westminster rule! I don’t want to be negative we need to be realistic about this.

  13. Ste fella says:

    1. There is potential wriggle room on the plebiscite general election if it’s still in the courts.
    2. The definition of what would constitute victory in a plebiscite election needs clarified. Is it a majority of seats, SNP votes, pro-indy votes?
    3. And most importantly, in what way would victory in a pleb election it constitute a mandate for independence? Would it mean immediate negotiations with wm on independence and if they fail a declaration of independence with say a promise of a confirmatory referendum (with a non-local election franchise) after independence? Or would it just be a bit of pressure to apply to wm for a section 30 again which wm could easily ignore?

    The wm 2024 pleb election pledge has the clear potential to be a phony plebiscite election pledge in that all they do is say they’re campaigning for independence instead of pictures of Sturgeon on a bus saying stop brexit but nothing actually happens as a result of winning it.

  14. 1971Thistle says:

    I think this just says she’ll be gone before the next election; it’s been clear for some time she wants to be off before the shit hits the fan.

    Her successor will then seek his (we know who it is) own mandate, which will be completely and conveniently different

  15. Gregory Beekman says:


    She’s finally listened.

    And – surely! – that means more frequent Wings posts?

  16. Mark Boyle says:

    It’s a bluff and deep down we all know it – a smokescreen to take attention away from her and her party screwing up everything they touch big time.

    To say nothing of the fury her Self ID plans are going to create once ramrodded through and Scotland becomes the safe haven for the sort of people you’d not want anywhere near your kids or female relations.

  17. Christopher Pike says:

    A plebiscite would have to return a majority of votes in favour of independence, not just seats.

    In (normal) elections the percentage of vote share is irrelevant, but this wouldn’t be a ‘normal’ election, this would be a defacto referendum and we must secure a majority of the vote. We cannot argue that the people of Scotland are sovereign, then declare independence without the majority backing it.

  18. Gregory Beekman says:

    MrMilkshake @3:31

    Yes, I agree – switch it on!

  19. Graeme says:

    Can’t see how the SNP have advanced the economic argument for independence enough to shift folk who voted no in 2014.

  20. Stuart MacKay says:

    So inaction for two years because of covid. Yet we have covid, a war, an energy crisis, a global recession, and a looming trade war with the EU over Northern Ireland, like buses, arriving all at once, yet, it’s full steam ahead with the referendum. Not that I think the SNP is being dishonest but the number trees lying across the road and the number that are ready to fall is concerning. On the contrary, as things disintegrate, the Unionist position may simply become untenable.

    Interesting times. I don’t think anybody can make any predictions on how this will play out. Events are arriving thick and fast.

  21. Fionan says:

    I just feel cynical about the date and about the integrity of Sturgeon’s plan. She didnt exactly elaborate the next step after Supreme court decision against the Scottish parliament, she just suggested that this would prove what we all already know, that this ‘union’ is not a partnership of equals and therefore the next election would be plebiscite. But there is no doubt that the unionists would find a way to sabotage that as well. I so much WANT to believe this is us again on the road to indy, but coming from that woman with her gross hypocrisy in all she says and does, I just cant feel that buzz, cant feel that sense of readiness.

    And of course, as Stuart points out, why did she wait till now? Why not way back at all these key points where this announcement would have been appropriate? There is no reason that I can see which has made this one of these key points in time.

  22. mike cassidy says:


    She sets a date that is meaningless because she doesn’t know how long the legal process will take

    For or against

    Basically she’s hoping to be bailed out by an unstable Westminster calling an early GE

    Which will give the SNP another five years on the Gravy Train while paying lip service to independence

  23. Vivian O’Blivion says:

    Yeah she’s painted hersel intae a corner with the commitment tae a plebiscite election. Should have happened in 2017 or 2019. Still, I’m pleasantly shocked that she’s finally done it.

  24. solarflare says:

    Wings was, of course, right all along. The issue could and should have been resolved much sooner than this, and there’s no good reason why it couldn’t have been. But it does at least look like an attempt to resolve it one way or another and then move on to the “what comes after we can’t hold a referendum” stage.

  25. Sparkle says:

    If the question is only “Should Scotland be an independent country?” and require only a Yes or No answer, does that mean the SNP don’t really need to explain ‘how’ Independence will work? The answers to issues such as Currency, Borders, Taxation could all be delayed and postponed until later. Meaning that voters in the Referendum don’t know what they are voting for!

  26. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “A plebiscite would have to return a majority of votes in favour of independence, not just seats.

    In (normal) elections the percentage of vote share is irrelevant, but this wouldn’t be a ‘normal’ election, this would be a defacto referendum and we must secure a majority of the vote. We cannot argue that the people of Scotland are sovereign, then declare independence without the majority backing it.”

    Yes, of course.

  27. robertkknight says:

    Pretty clever strategy, when you think about it…

    Supreme Court shoots down any Indyref2 – foregone conclusion, let’s face it.

    Then next UK GE run on Vote SNP Only for Indy campaign. If successful, lots of cozy-feet Pete’s at Westmobster for at least another 5 years whilst negotiations to repeal Acts of Union drag on, and on –

    Look at Brexit for Christ’s sake… would you trust Boris etc. to deliver on whatever was agreed in respect of dissolving the UK? Aye, right!

    We’re between a rock and a hard place, thanks to dithering and prevarication on the part of the She/Her; all just so the money could keep rolling in to pay for the circus that is the new SNP.

  28. Ian Brotherhood says:

    I won’t be the only one who doesn’t give a flying proverbial what she said.

    The trust evaporated a long time ago.

  29. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “Pretty clever strategy, when you think about it…

    Supreme Court shoots down any Indyref2 – foregone conclusion, let’s face it.

    Then next UK GE run on Vote SNP Only for Indy campaign. If successful, lots of cozy-feet Pete’s at Westmobster for at least another 5 years whilst negotiations to repeal Acts of Union drag on, and on –”

    Yep. But there really isn’t another option.

  30. Robert Dickson says:

    I’m too jaded to take any of this as serious now.
    It’s almost a given that the Supreme Court will side with the British establishment.
    We then hold the plebiscite and win….WM says ‘Fuck Off’
    Then what?

    ‘Oh look lads….I tried’?

  31. Ian Brotherhood says:

    I know it wouldn’t be a difficult thing to find out but I can’t be bothered and someone here will know…

    What is the maximum time Sturgeon can stay as FM? (Please don’t tell me there’s no limit.)

  32. Gregory Beekman says:

    Do you think she got wind that Alex Salmond was going to use the UK General Election as a proxyref, so she was forced to follow suit?

  33. Handandshrimp says:

    Well we all like to argue about team selection and tactics and we may well be right but on the day of the match you don’t shout for the opposition regardless of any reservations about the manager’s decisions.

    I’ll be voting Yes or Yes by plebiscite, to do otherwise would be a betrayal of everything we have gone through over the last 10 years. Those that say they won’t vote Yes may as well join the No camp now. Don’t be a Vikki Pollard. 🙂

    Let’s try and win this and then sort out who we vote for to run the country after we are independent.

  34. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “What is the maximum time Sturgeon can stay as FM? (Please don’t tell me there’s no limit.)”

    No, no.
    No, no no no.
    No, no no no.
    No, no THERE’S NO LIMIT.


  35. ScotsRenewables says:


    ~ Named the date

    ~ Said the legitimacy or not will be decided by the Supreme Court

    ~ Promised a plebiscite election if the court says no

    She has – partly due to growing pressure from ALBA I suspect – ticked all the boxes.

    As I see it, it is now our job to get 100% behind what is now very definitely A CAMPAIGN

    Yes it should have happened five years ago, but it didn’t. The YES movement can make it happen now though.

  36. Garry says:

    I don’t think she cares one way or the other. She just wants to be able to claim that she tried her best before she swans off to that well-paid job in Europe.

    Meanwhile, the Yes movement has become so fractured under her watch, with the GRA bullies on the SNP side, through to the blood and soil types that have latched on to Alba, it’s difficult to see how they’re all going to work together.

  37. Unwilling Cynic says:

    I would like to believe IndyRef2 will happen…
    1. Supreme Court will not make a speedy decision
    2. UK General Election will happen before that decision
    3. Sturgeon will say she has to wait for SC decision, so NO plebiscite
    4. No possible IndyRef2 til at least 2029

    SUGGESTION: we must extract a cast-iron guarantee that Sturgeon will enact the EARLIER of her two plans.
    an IndyRef2 legally sanctioned by Supreme Court
    a plebiscite General Election, whether or not the Supreme Court has ruled.

  38. Robert Dickson says:

    I will ALWAYS support independence.
    But as a matter of conscience I will NEVER give personal support to St Nicola.
    She burned her bridges as far as I’m concerned and if we do succeed I will make it my life’s mission to remove her SNP from power.

  39. Dan says:

    Plebiscite GE = Restricted Westminster voting franchise… Que un-civic, regressive, blood n soil, natavist, lacking gold standard and international recognition klaxon! 🙂
    But on the plus side, reduced demographic groups to manipulate with divide and rule tactics.

  40. Liz says:

    The last people I would trust to negotiate a ‘divorce’ with the rUK would be the current SNP. I frankly wouldn’t want them anywhere near the negotiating table – she’d stitch us up totally. Absolutely no trust in her whatsoever.

  41. Tommo says:

    Isn’t the truth this- that this site and others have exposed the SNP game for what it was to the extent that even many of her core supporters have come to realise that for years they have been tucked up like so many kippers ? Forced to either perform or get off the pot She has done what the learned editor advised ages ago; I suspect that She and her cronies know however that this would be a final ‘Banzai’ charge and that -based on the editor’s figures repeated above- any referendum won or granted will result in another loss and the end of the road.
    Still, 5 years on inflated salaries and innumerable TV appearances are not things to be sniffed at, eh ?

  42. Lizzie55 says:

    I can see a general election before 19.10.2023. She won’t make it a plebiscite and the can is kicked down the road for a further 5 years.

    I don’t trust her. Never will now.

  43. DavidRitchie says:

    It will probably end up in court and in the end if it goes to a vote the public will decide and right now cost of living is no I .

  44. Neil in Glasgow says:

    I think I feel the same as a lot of people will. I really didn’t see that one coming, but with what we know of the Furst Meenister’s character I don’t know what to make of it. Yes, massively hypocritical, but hey, there really isn’t any other option, is there? Although, it was worth it just to see DRoss getting his knickers in a twist about an “illegal” referendum (surprised she didn’t make more of that and ask if he’d actually listened to anything she’d said). My question would be what will happeb though if the SNP are returned in 24/25 with plus 50% of the vote. Will they not take their seats? Will it be a ‘hard’ separation? Will they try and top up the pensions for another 5 years? Any ideas?

  45. Andy Ellis says:

    Surely those arguing that they can’t vote SNP in a plebiscitary election in 2024 are missing the point: to “win” a plebiscitary election it’s the total number of votes for all pro-independence parties that is significant. All of them will just have to commit to the same principle? In practice of course – barring some political earthquake in the next few years, the bulk of Scottish Westminster MPs are still going to be SNP.

  46. Republicofscotland says:

    And what if the Supreme court doesn’t shoot down a 2023 indyref, in the hope that Sturgeon has to then rush through an already ill thought out and prepared consultative indyref.

  47. Ian Brotherhood says:

    She knows how divisive she is.

    If she was genuine about a meaningful vote taking place, next year or not, she would step down or at least give us a decent period of ‘notice’.

    For many of us she’s just too untrustworthy. Even the idea of her claiming any credit for our independence after what she’s done is just boak-material.

    She has to go.

  48. Denise says:

    I believe Sturgeon is acting under instructions from London.
    So their plan could 1. I have always feared this – a indyref that is deliberately lost. Or
    2. GE before the Supreme Court rules – the GE and then the ruling that an indyref can’t be held.
    But I can’t help but feel it’s 1 and they intend to kill off Indy forever.
    I don’t know how we stop them.
    SNP will now be riding high everyone will be supporting them.

    Think about what we know about Sturgeon would the British really let her break up the UK. Very unlikely she will be doing as she is told

  49. Robert Graham says:

    Aw naw I fell asleep did I miss anything ?

    Can I download the highlights on Betamax

    Eh exactly? what were the highlights ?

    Question Is Ellis , Dr Jim in disguise ?

    Aye so many questions ma heeds bursting

    What was the fkn point ?

  50. Andy Ellis says:

    @Dan 4.05 pm

    Nice try but no cigar. The franchise for Westminster is what it is. The nativists will still howl at the moon because it won’t exclude all the mud bloods that apparently get to vote by don’t of flying over Scotland on holiday, or drinking Scotch or liking the Bay City Rollers or whatever other nonsense they insist is true.

    Plebiscitary Holyrood elections would be better from a civic nationalist point of view because the franchise includes all residents, so would likely include more folk from the EU who would be more likely to support an indy Scotland in the EU than broken Britain outside the EU.

  51. mike cassidy says:

    Andy Ellis 4.10

    I would love to see the SNP faces when they realise that votes for ALBA would count in a plebiscite referendum

  52. Al-Stuart says:

    Just before 4pm today 28th June 2022 on Sky News…

    Scotland just got TOLD my Mad Professor Qvortrup that there was NO LEGAL WAY SCOTLAND CAN LEAVE THE UK.

    So that’s us telt.

    Best get back in our box.

    Professor QlapTrap, says – from his overpaid sinecure at the well known hotbed of Scots Law (Coventry Polytechnic) that Scotland COULD have had a referendum IF IT WAS A COLONY OF ENGLAND. But as a sovereign nation? Prof ClapTrap says NO, NO, NO.

    In amongst this opinion-whore spouting forth utter guff, he failed to mention he was selling his book – “The Insomniac’s Guide To Referenda CrapTrap”.

    The killer in amongst a verbal avalanche of excrement from Professor CrapTrap was the fact he is CLUELESS about Nicola Sturgeon being our fifth Column Tabbard fae Totty Rocks Tractor Boutique stuffing up at least FIVE earlier opportunities to hold a referendum.

    Hey Mad Prof, READ WHAT STUART WROTE ABOVE. That’s were Scotland is RIGHT NOW.

    Maybe Prof CrapTrap should refund Sky News the fee he just trousered for some of the most ignorant, lazy, out-of-touch putrid mince ever to be uttered by one of these talking heads.

    More pearls of wisdom AND book-sales from Pro ClapTrap…

  53. Republicofscotland says:

    As for a snap GE to put the cat among the pigeons before the 2024 GE. The Tories for now have a large majority in the HoC, however recent scandals surrounding the Tories including Boris Johnson could see the party ousted from power if they move to a snap GE, two recent by-election results in England didn’t favour the Tories if they are anything to go by.

    Still I wouldn’t put it past the Tories to hold snap GE to hinder a plebiscite, and in the process spend a term in opposition to keep Scotland tied to the union and continue draining its wealth, afterall Sir Kier Starmer is basically a Tory heading up the Labour party and I doubt Starmer would repeal many of Johnson’s policies during his term as PM.

  54. Andy Ellis says:

    @Mike Cassidy 4.10 pm

    That’s the logic of the position tho’ isn’t it? It makes sense for all pro indy parties – even if they are opposed in other ways or at daggers drawn like the SNP versus Alba – to be quite specific that they all endorse a plebiscitary franchise. It’s not the number of seats that is important in a Westminster FPTP system: in 2015 the SNP won 56 out of 59 Scottish seats with 49.9% of the vote.

  55. Robert Louis says:

    Well. Firstly, I agree with REV STU, why the wasted years??? Why the attempt to destroy the highly respectable independence champion, Alex Salmond? There is much to be very angry about, but independence is not about one ‘uterus haver‘.

    So, thinking about the speech she gave, I must confess, and eat my words from this morning, it is indeed what we have all been arguing for, for a very long time.

    In many ways, by going straight to the supreme court, it has utterly outfoxed the Tories and orangey knuckle draggers. This gets right to the point, and London, as a result will be in a flurry this afternoon.

    If the English pretendy ‘supreme’ court says NO – which we all know it will, since it is very much an ENGLISH pretendy ‘supreme’ court, then the election becomes a vote on independence. Either way, London loses. If the court says no, then it will be clear to all scots that this is NOT a union of equals, and Scotland is being held against its wishes by England – something which the treaty of union does not enable. If the court says yes, then it is game on anyway.

    Indeed, we could go further, in that if the lying Tory English prime minister chooses not to go down the section 30 route, then it makes him look like a democracy-denying despot, and there is the risk, albeit small, that the pretendy ‘supreme’ court could say yes.

    In many ways, Johnstone, the lying philandering, cheating, backstabbing English Tory, with his pig-ignorance, has made a rod for his own back. Good. If he is a fool, he will let it go to the pretendy ‘supreme’ court. The whole world is watching, and THAT is what really matters.

    Be assured, there will be panic meetings and strategy meetings going on a plenty in whitehall this afternoon. They will pretend it is all just to be ignored, but this way, it simply cannot. They will be panicking.

    I will do anything to get Scottish independence, and this route seems our only option now. We need to get on board. It does not mean I like Sturgeon.

    Oh, and by the way, the answer, as in 2014, is YES. Bring it on!!! Johnson, the last ever UK Prime Minister, will just need to ‘suck it up’. THAT will be his legacy.

  56. Christopher Pike says:

    It will be interesting to see what the UK Government’s next move will be.

    A snap election? Agreeing to a section 30 order or waiting for the outcome of the Supreme Court decision?

  57. Johnny says:

    A few people seem to be asking why now above (and elsewhere).

    Is it because enough time has passed that what others have been proposing for years can be passed off by the SNP and friendly media as “her plan”, i.e. so she didn’t have to be seen to go along with other folk who were challenging her?

    Now there will be a “there never were other people proposing a plebiscite, that’s never happened” from The National and the likes, and grateful Nicola-fans will go along with it, so they don’t have to feel uncomfortable about those Wasted Years.

  58. Robert Louis says:

    Scots renewables at 358pm,

    Yip totally agree. Regardless of what I think of Sturgeon, that is no matter, I want independence. It is time to start fighting for Scotland. The campaign starts now. It is a campaign for independence, not for the SNP.

  59. Eddie Munster says:

    I’m looking at it this way, it was a tactical decision so soft No’s could see how things would continue to be with brexit and a continuous tory government in power.

    It doesn’t matter if its Boris in charge or not, they’re always looking out for they’re own.

    I don’t see Labour getting in anytime soon, even with the fantasy of Labour getting Scottish seats to help them regain Westminster. It’ll be another half a decade before people in England vote Labour with held noses.

  60. Lad says:

    What is the alternative? What else could another FM have done apart from doing all of this a few years ago pre-pandemic?

    At least this is some form of action.

  61. WeeChid says:

    Does this uninspiring announcement mean that us women have to wheest again?

  62. Allium says:

    Don’t think she’ll even be in Scotland this time next year. It would certainly be a bold gambit to talk big in order to incentivise WM to find her a decent NGO job sooner rather than later, but why not? She hates being FM now. Six months off for ill-health, then a recovery and a move to NYC or Geneva.

  63. Robert Louis says:

    Alexander Boris De Pfeffle Johnson, last Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, 2019-2023.

    Maybe Sadiq Khan will give him a blue plaque, or something.

  64. Derek says:

    Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “No, no.
    No, no no no.
    No, no no no.
    No, no THERE’S NO LIMIT.


    No, you’re not.

    And I wouldn’t be, either…

  65. Robert Louis says:

    The question now is, just how quickly will the red Tories jump into bed with the blue Tories again??? I give it 24 hours.

  66. Dan says:

    @ Andy Ellis at 4:19 pm

    Ach, t’was jist making that point for the bantz. 😉

    But aye, your 4.10pm point about recognition of votes cast for ALL constituency candidates standing on a “greater than 50 percent vote share for ending the union” manifesto commitment is something that has been discussed previously on here.
    I agreed with the premise of that so folk that couldn’t bring themselves to vote say SNP could still express their pro-indy vote. T’was probs a few years back now though when the the dead or alive cat was still commenting btl.

  67. Andy Ellis says:

    Alex Salmond being quoted on BBC:

    “The question of Scottish sovereignty can also not simply be left to the UK Supreme Court. The concept of using the UK general election as a backstop will cause a wry smile to those within the SNP and in the wider movement who have been calling for that for the last five years. However, even then, we need to be prepared with the popular campaign which will be required to force recognition of Scotland’s Claim of Right.”

    A true statesman speaks.

  68. footsoldier says:

    It’s all we have so we have to go for it or vote unionist.

  69. Robert Louis says:

    So, REV Stu, any chance of you coming out of ‘retirement’?? Go on, it’ll be fun.

  70. prj says:

    We have a plebiscite election, then what? What is she proposing to do to bring about independence?

  71. Allium says:

    & I still believe Dominic Cummings when he said that a backroom deal had already been done for a three option devo-max fix referendum in a couple of years time. I’d love to think otherwise, but this all just feels like a pantomime.

  72. Robert Louis says:

    Alex Salmond, quoted on the Alba party website, said the following in response to the announcement of indyref2;

    QUOTE “I welcome that we now have some clarity of purpose on independence and that a starting gun has finally been fired with a clear timetable leading to 19th October next year.

    However, we need a united movement and grassroots campaign to deliver success. In particular, voices outwith Government will be needed so that the cause of independence is not weighed down by the day-to-day troubles of the SNP/Green coalition.

    We should not give up on bending Boris Johnson to the people’s will on a section 30 Order to deliver a referendum under the same terms I previously negotiated in the Edinburgh Agreement which enabled the referendum in 2014. There has never been a weaker UK Prime Minister. But that will require a concerted campaign of popular, parliamentary and diplomatic initiatives. And it is urgency which is required to stop Westminster taking Scotland to the cleaners on a daily basis.

    The question of Scottish sovereignty can also not simply be left to the UK Supreme Court. The concept of using the UK General Election as a backstop will cause a wry smile to those within the SNP and in the wider movement who have been calling for that for the last five years. However, even then, we need to be prepared with the popular campaign which will be required to force recognition of Scotland’s Claim of Right”


  73. Shug says:

    How long till the Balmoral incident trends on twitter again, pictures and the what’s app messages start to leak

  74. Andy Ellis says:

    @prj 4.47 pm

    How would winning >50% in a plebiscitary election be any different from the situation if we’d won >50% in 2014? The vote in favour is just the start of a process. Indeed it could be argued that victory in a plebiscitary election is in some ways better or more direct, in as much as the mandate given directly to Scottish pro independence parliamentarians winning a majority in a specifically mandated plebiscitary vote (whether via Westminster or Holyrood), would give them the immediate right to constitute themselves as the interim parliament or National Assembly to declare independence.

    I think most would expect such an assembly or interim parliament to call a Scottish GE right away.

  75. Craig P says:

    Another small benefit of a plebiscitary general election is the franchise. Second home owners with properties in Scotland, but who live outside Scotland, were allowed to vote in 2014. Those folk aren’t allowed to vote more than once in a general election without breaking the law, and will probably vote in their home constituencies.

    Mind you now I think about it, that would be cancelled out by EU citizens who live in Scotland but won’t get the vote, and who would probably vote Yes this time round.

  76. red sunset says:

    Jeez, I go out to meet a long lost cousin this morning and come back to find the wind has changed, and everybody discussing this October 2023 gig.

    So many home truths have been said above. But there’s one more possibility not mentioned yet.
    War with Russia.
    A situation where UK troops were out in the open shooting and being shot at would change the whole political atmosphere, not just in Scotland.
    And that sort of situation would put any sort of referendum – no matter what it was dressed up as – unpalatable.

    Don’t knock the idea. Think about (1) how devious are the British Establishment, and (2) what price would Westminster NOT pay to keep a hold of Scotland?

  77. Dan says:

    @ Craig P

    Quite a lot of the EU citizens (non UK ones coz Scots were EU citizens back then…) I know that voted No in 2014 are no longer here such was their commitment to Scotland after “Brexit”.
    Handy them still having the freedom of movement and effective dual nationality so they can leave when shit gets bad. No such luck for us indigenous yins stuck here… 🙁

  78. Mark Boyle says:

    Allium says:
    28 June, 2022 at 4:49 pm

    I’d love to think otherwise, but this all just feels like a pantomime.

    Oh no it isn’t!

  79. Breastplate says:

    Al-Stuart @ 4:25pm,
    It sounds like Cluedo has a new character.

    It was Prof Qvortrup in the drinks cabinet with a typewriter.

    I think that sounds about right.

  80. Cath says:

    Quite what happens if there’s a snap UK general election sometime before the Supreme Court delivers its verdict – which would then boot the proposed plebiscite election down the road to 2026 or 2027 – is a question that was neither asked nor answered today.

    I really want to be hopeful, because I can see two scenarios: one where both Salmond and Sturgeon were put in a horrific position in 2017, with a plot intended to bring both down and have the SNP taken over by the real horrors. And they’ve been playing a great game with a shitty hand ever since, but have navigated us to a place where both are still very much leading, with two now very different campaigns – one designed to play pragmatically to WM and the unionists; and one to give them a far worse scenario if they don’t. And in the process they’ve blindsided the unionists, made them totally complacent, and put them in a check-mate position. Give us a referendum or we have a plebiscite; the UKSC will either find we can hold a referendum or we’re a colony, in which case we have other, probably better routes out. If that’s what’s happened, I take my hat off to all involved.

    OTOH, there is the other scenario, where Sturgeon really was leading the horrors and working with the UK to destroy Salmond, split the movement and is still working with them. In that scenario, the date announcement, unionist walk out, a new campaign etc is all just theatre, an early GE planned jointly in the knowledge the referendum will never happen, and the SNP will then demand ‘one more mandate’ and both will have another 5 years to embed Brexit, roll back devolved powers, further kill off the indy movement etc.

    Right now, I honestly don’t know which is the truth or closest to it. We’ll soon find out. I very much fear it’s the latter.

  81. Garavelli Princip says:

    I am a founder member of ALBA. But if it comes to a plebiscite general election, I’m guessing ALBA will stand no candidates (so not to split the indy vote). I WILL vote SNP in that case – for the only reason I ever voted for them (and joined the party 37 years ago). Independence. No other reason.

    In fact, given that FPT is more likely to give us the desired result than a referendum on the present local authority franchise – with huge numbers of non-Scots voting, it may be the better option.

    Unless the Yoons make an electoral pact to stand down in each others best prospect seats – which I can’t see happening given that Sir Weird Stammer will be hoping to become England’s PM.

  82. Garavelli Princip says:

    ‘FTP’ should of course be FPTP

  83. Cath says:

    And of course, as Stuart points out, why did she wait till now? Why not way back at all these key points where this announcement would have been appropriate? There is no reason that I can see which has made this one of these key points in time.

    Playing devil’s advocate. If you didn’t want to hold a referendum, because you knew you couldn’t trust those around you or the civil service, and you needed a few years to allow for “state building” that by-passed them, and for the dust to settle on plots designed to derail independence at the time the UK thought it most likely to happen…well, you might wait until it was too late to genuinely hold a referendum using the UK’s rules. Then it looks like they’ve made it impossible for you to hold it and the resulting anger drives a plebiscite election and decolonisation route instead.

    This has to be the hope, and we have to campaign as if that’s what’s happening, holding the SNP to that very firm plebiscite election. We’ll know very shortly if that’s the case, because the SNP will start being willing to work with Alex Salmond and the wider indy movement again. Until that happens, I won’t have any trust at all in the SNP.

  84. Johnny says:

    I will not vote SNP in a plebiscite election on a vague promise that it will mean independence.

    They will need to say, step by step, what would follow a decisive plebiscite vote to ensure Scotland would become independent. This will need to include what mechanisms they will use to bypass any Westminster blocking attempts and it will need to be all such mechanisms, not dripped at us one election at a time, treating folk like mugs when they envisage the next step/blocking effort and pretending you (the SNP) don’t see it for years.

    Anything else is just carrots, on the same “let’s show Boris we won’t stand for it!” theme.

    The SNP need to show what THEY would do to show Boris they won’t stand for it, collecting seats and gravy doesn’t count as showing him.

  85. KPhil says:

    If the SNP fight the next UK election with the sole promise of their vote being a vote for Indy – then what happens id they get that majority up here? Can the SNP then legally begin the process of becoming independent?

    Supposing the turnout is only 60% of which SNP received 60% – won’t the UK government argue that’s not a majority of Scots?

  86. Hatuey says:

    Having read most comments, I have to say Ian Brotherhood’s at 4.17 stands out;

    “For many of us she’s just too untrustworthy. Even the idea of her claiming any credit for our independence after what she’s done is just boak-material…She has to go.”

    Simple and to the point. She has to go and there’s a good chance she will; because from the British State’s standpoint, talking about turning General Elections into independence votes is certainly a step too far.

    I suspect we are about to find out if ‘they’ have anything on her. I’d bet quite a lot that they do. Things are going to get interesting either way.

    It’s possible she is just out to buy time and she will renege on any and all commitments when it suits her. I can’t imagine the MSM and BBC Scotland will give her too hard a time if she decides to ditch the plan to fight the next General Election as a referendum, betraying us all again in the process — they’ve been propping her up for years now on those very terms.

    We can speculate about a lot of this stuff. It’s hard to be sure of anything when you are dealing with deeply dishonest people. If there’s one thing I’m pretty certain of, though, it’s that whatever she is doing will ultimately make independence less likely, not more likely.

  87. Jason Smoothpiece says:

    I crave independence I will walk the Streets and knock on doors once again.

    However I regret to say that when Nicola speaks there is a definite Whiff of shite.

    I watch with great interest

  88. ScottieDog says:

    “Quite what happens if there’s a snap UK general election sometime before the Supreme Court delivers its verdict – which would then boot the proposed plebiscite election down the road to 2026 or 2027 – is a question that was neither asked nor answered today.)”

    A start would be to move back to a four year term at holyrood since there is no longer a fixed term parliaments act in the UK.

  89. Cath says:

    am a founder member of ALBA. But if it comes to a plebiscite general election, I’m guessing ALBA will stand no candidates (so not to split the indy vote).

    It’ll be interesting. I suspect there are a few (maybe a fair few) SNP MPs who wouldn’t be willing to stand on any genuine plebiscite. They’re not there for independence: at best the SNP was a bandwagon they jumped for their career; at worst they’re actively there to disrupt and divide. There is also a huge amount of distrust towards the SNP now among independence supporters. I know there are some of their MPs I wouldn’t vote for at gunpoint, never mind just because it’s a plebiscite. And I would really struggle to trust them to deliver after the past few years too: my concern would be they were only doing it to prevent Alba standing against them on a plebiscite if they were just asking for another mandate.

    It would be far better if it were being run by wider movement, with well known campaigners standing as “the Plebiscite candidate”, on the understanding most of them would be sitting SNP MPs but not necessarily all, and/or there might be a plebiscite candidate challenging an SNP MP in some areas, where the indy movement felt strongly they didn’t want their local MP.

  90. Big Jock says:

    I know Boris is bloody minded. But if I was his advisor, it would be to avoid a 2024 plebiscite at all costs. Harder to fiddle, control and win.

    If he got round the table for section 30 talks, then the SP submission would be null and void as Section 30 already agreed.

    It will be interesting to see if the Tories think that way. Easier to win a referendum than a GE!

  91. robertkknight says:

    For sake of argument, let’s say that the UKSC sides with Westmobster and states that Holyrood isn’t competent to wipe it’s own backside, let alone run a consultative referendum, without the seal of Westmobster’s approval.

    We then move to a plebecite UK GE with SNP candidates standing on a single-issue ticket of Indy or bust, with all other pro-Indy parties endorsing SNP candidates.

    SNP win majority of seats/votes. Huzzah!

    However, the fun begins with the negotiations to dissolve the tangled mess that if the Kingdom of Great Britain/United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

    After several years of bitter argument – look at Brexit – Westmobster decides the new arrangement must be endorsed by UK-wide referendum.

    You see where I’m going with this?

    We’re nowhere near a pet shop but I fear we’re being sold a pup!

  92. Bob Costello says:

    Very predictable but at least the missing 600K will be back in the account now, won’t it? 🙂

  93. Breeks says:

    This is phoney war stuff.

    Holyrood under Sturgeon isn’t going depart from the Scotland Act while it’s the Scotland Act ostensibly giving power and legitimacy to Holyrood, (and paying their wages & expenses). Who do you think they are? Rebels?

    But at the same time, you can absolutely guarantee that Whitehall Mandarins are acutely aware of the more radical Claim of Right strategies simmering in the background. Strategies on the rise, which are already threatening to render Holyrood and Sturgeon’s government superfluous and obsolete.

    Cut through the bluster, and Westminster knows if Holyrood is sidelined by the Claim of Right, then suddenly Westminster has no more Constitutional levers to pull. Westminster actually needs Holyrood more than we do, because no Holyrood means no Scotland Act, and the essential veneer of legitimacy it gives their constitutional encroachment into Scotland is gone.

    It’s brinkmanship. Westminster will concede a referendum, because not conceding a referendum leaves Holyrood emasculated and irrelevant, and undoubtedly, with the thrust for Independence will move outside, and no longer be codified and regulated by Westminster’s Scotland Act rule book.

    Sturgeon remains a massive liability in my opinion, and IndyRef is not our optimal route to Independence, BUT, I think there is potential to keep playing this charade for the time being, so that when Westminster realises a Holyrood referendum is a feint, it’s too late. They are confronted with a Plebiscite General Election, with a UK voters franchise and first past the post result which favours Scotland’s Independence.

    So is that a good Plan? Well it’s eight years late, I don’t trust Sturgeon an inch, I deeply mistrust the SNP, but if this “stalking horse” Referendum strategy takes the heat and draws all the Unionist flak while we perfect our Plebiscite Election strategy, then maybe it can work. Provided the stalking horse will do what it’s told and exit the race when instructed.

  94. 100%Yes says:

    Sturgeon stated she going to write to the PM, I hope she had the good sense to give a date for which he should reply back.

  95. Big Jock says:

    Breeks. I agree. WM would be foolish to block a section 30, very foolish, suicidal.

    The referendum is harder for us to win, but I will take it right now. Because another 2 years of this shit is too much for me to bear.

    I see Boris being pushed to concede the section 30…or being pushed out the door.

  96. George Ferguson says:

    @Hatuey 5:44pm
    Agreed. Good to see you back. And in answer to another contribution, yes, women will need to wheesh for Indy. I am not happy about that. As will I, on the gratuitous abuse of power pre Christmas on the 1 billion pound restrictions that should never have been. I have been monitoring the Lady Poole Inquiry and the academic research being commissioned hoping that issue would be included. So if we all wheest for Indy that’s another 2 years plus of mediocrity. The price of Independence.

  97. ghostly606 says:

    So plebiscite at GE it is, where franchise doesn’t extend to 16 and 17 year olds or foreign nationals. Nicola Sturgeon is utterly clueless. Should have dissolved Scottish Parliament instead. I have little excitement for this as we’ll lose even bigger than 2014.

  98. wee monkey says:

    “The First Minister said that if the court refused it would be

    the fault of Westminster legislation

    and she would fight the next general election as a “de facto referendum” on the single issue of independence.”

    In a few more years down the road.

    Don’t blame me, blame those who voted SNP 1 & 2.

  99. twathater says:

    @ Cath 5.17pm Cath on reading the first part of your comment I was horrified that someone apart from a sturgeon fantasist could remotely believe such a scenario , then I read the second part and order was restored .

    I wholly agree with the 2nd assessment for multiple reasons the principle one being why wait for so long to do something that was SCREAMED from the rooftops years ago by genuine indy people and was choreographed for her

    At this point ALL the broadcasters and msm outlets should be exposing and destroying her lies and corruption , STARTING with the Salmond lies and corruption , moving on to the ferry corruption , the bifarb situation , the seabed sellout , the covid nursing home deaths , the hospital closures , the NHS waiting lists , then maybe just to destroy the voting hopes of indy supporters they will bring out the big guns and go for the GRA TRANS situation to ALIENATE the REAL WOMENFOLK , introducing flowjob and the sex questionaire to children ,going hard on the sexual predations by snp politicians like Grady and MacKay
    YES she has made it extremely easy for people to accept the principle of independence under these perverts and deviants

    As you can probably tell I am NOT convinced, hope doesn’t wash away reality

  100. red sunset says:

    There’s evidence that this is part of the ‘destroy the part of the Indy movement that’s not SNP’.

    It’s been put to me recently that Business for Scotland are “now essentially the de facto umbrella organisation for the YES campaign”.

    All the other groups and organisations that tried getting us all together since 2014 have pretty well gone nowhere. Some will say some of them have been destroyed from within, one way or another. Why did this happen? Some of them had/have some very competent people.

    So we’re looking at a scenario where the plan is to get all the activists to promote SNP candidates at the next UK General Election. Remember 2015?

    I cannot believe there is any way that the SNP will cooperate with other groups, there will not be a wide Indy movement like there was in 2014. Others might be allowed to campaign, but only under the command of the party.

    I am underwhelmed by today’s story.

  101. Mark Boyle says:

    Bob Costello says:
    28 June, 2022 at 5:52 pm

    Very predictable but at least the missing 600K will be back in the account now, won’t it? ?

    You know, that’s a bloody good point – that’s another matter swept under the carpet, another opportunity for some Gordon Brown style “spending the same money twice” in the accounts to cover that up.

  102. Andy Ellis says:

    @Cath 5.46 pm

    Victory in plebiscitary election doesn’t hinge on how many SEATS we win but on how many VOTES we win. It’s immaterial how many seats pro-independence parties win (and realistically it’s overwhelmingly going to be the SNP), as evidenced by 2015 when the SNP got 56 of 59 seats on less than half the vote.

    However much many pro-indy folk might dislike the SNP and/or refuse to vote for them, it doesn’t matter as long as it’s crystal clear that all pro-independence votes are accepted as part of the plebiscitary mandate for indy. When we win 50% + 1 our MPs should immediately withdraw from Westminster, form a National or Constituent Assembly in Edinburgh with our MSPs, and begin the process for an agreed split of assets and liabilities.

  103. Geoff Anderson says:

    I don’t believe her!

    However one hope remains. The campaign is taken out of her hands by real Indy supporters.

  104. Kenny says:

    The best thing about the timing of today’s speech is that now any indy supporter criticising the Scottish Government over GRA Reform or anything else is just going to be a “secret Yoon” trying to undermine “The Cause” and “The Movement.”

    Speaking of The Movement, does it feel like we’re 18 months from a referendum? Do you feel like any of the infrastructure is in place for a campaign to begin? Are the troops rallying as we speak?

  105. Bill McKay says:

    Why run a general election?

    Why not put your own job and own MSPs at risk by dissolving the Scottish Parliament and calling a Scottish elections on that premise.

  106. Ottomanboi says:

    Things are maybe shaping up for a war with Russia as the hawks are gathering. The west, bankrupt, in every sense may meet its nemesis. I wonder how the great and the good of russophobia and wokelandia will deal with that. Manning/theying the barricades to the last? Nicola the human shield? No more faux caviar from Aldi?
    Gospodi pomilui!

  107. Mark Boyle says:

    Andy Ellis says:
    28 June, 2022 at 6:27 pm

    @Cath 5.46 pm

    Victory in plebiscitary election doesn’t hinge on how many SEATS we win but on how many VOTES we win. It’s immaterial how many seats pro-independence parties win (and realistically it’s overwhelmingly going to be the SNP), as evidenced by 2015 when the SNP got 56 of 59 seats on less than half the vote.

    However much many pro-indy folk might dislike the SNP and/or refuse to vote for them, it doesn’t matter as long as it’s crystal clear that all pro-independence votes are accepted as part of the plebiscitary mandate for indy. When we win 50% + 1 our MPs should immediately withdraw from Westminster, form a National or Constituent Assembly in Edinburgh with our MSPs, and begin the process for an agreed split of assets and liabilities.

    Yes Andy, but you can see what’s coming over the horizon, can’t you?

    Sturgeon and the rest of those with season tickets for the Gravy Bus (their own words) demanding that all other pro-independence parties stand aside (after cutting an “alliance” deal exclusively with the Greens), and failure to do so proves that Alba, ISP, Free Scotland Party no hang on now we’re Restore Scotland Sovereignty are filthy ("Tractor" - Ed) unionist plants, etc, etc.

    But if they stand aside, that’s another two years of non-activity (except SNP ‘approved …’) for alternatives to the SNP and any opposition to the Sturgeon-Blackford clique being left to Labour, the Tories, the Lib Dems – jokes that are so bad they’d not get in a Lidl box of Christmas crackers.

    Ask for a referendum you know you’ll not get, keep the mugs dangling on a string for another fifteen months, promise them the next general election is a “referendum” on independence as if the previous three with their crushing majorities never happened … and you’ve some more time to come up with a whole raft of new excuses for kicking the can down the road.

    This has fk all to do with independence and all to do with protecting SNP The Brand – New Labour all over again.

    ‘Bury your memories, bury your friends,
    Leave it alone for a year or two,
    Till the stories go hazy and the legends come true,
    Then do it again, some things never end …’

  108. Republicofscotland says:

    A interesting reply from Boris Johnson on hearing about Sturgeon’s Holyrood speech on holding an indyref next year.

    “Asked whether the Prime Minister would open negotiations for independence in Scotland if Scots vote for it in a referendum in October 2023, the official said: “We’re obviously not going to get into hypotheticals”.”

  109. sarah says:

    Depressed and pessimistic are my feelings. We are stuck in the same place for several more years with more time available for the SNP/Greens to ruin more things and brainwash more of our children over the gender issues.

    I do not agree that submitting the case to the UK Supreme court is necessary or desirable. If there is a challenge which leads to the Supreme Court the FM should refuse to be delayed by that process as Scotland has its own Constitution which is not subject to another state – but she won’t.

    I do not believe that the current SNP controllers have any enthusiasm, commitment or ability to run a campaign.

    There is already a majority of independence MPs – it is known and expected that that is sufficient to enable a dissolution of the Union. Yes, it would be helpful to have a majority of the votes as well but it is not essential for making the first move. To do otherwise is to accept that we can do nothing without a majority vote of some kind – and that means we, the sovereign people of Scotland, are under the thumb of politicians whereas our Constitution quite clearly states that the politicians are our servants.

    I despair at the idea of just sitting and waiting for a botched/corrupted vote to condemn us to more years of subjection.

  110. Ian Brotherhood says:

    Anyone who believes Sturgeon is sincere needs their head examined.

    We saw her behaviour at the Harassment Inquiry. Anyone who can lie so brazenly for so long doesn’t deserve trust with anything let alone our independence.

    It suits plenty of folk to just gloss over what happened. What passes for a political intelligentsia in this country can look forward to another 2+ years of gigs proferring their ‘expert’ advice, and well-known grifters like Kavanagh will continue to milk the gullible.

    Rev had a poll, not that long ago, in which a % of SNP members stated that they didn’t even want another referendum/independence. Add to that the sheer volume of keen indyref1 folk who were traumatised by what happened and those who ditched SNP memberships since, say, 2015 because of (insert Reason To Be Scunnered here) and folk like me who will *never* be active in any campaign led by that witch. That’s a big % of the potential Yes vote right there.

    Does anyone really believe that she, Swinney, Robertson et al haven’t crunched those numbers? And that their motivation is anything other than maintaining their lifestyles and pension pots?

    One more thing – why on earth should anyone believe that she’s – all of a sudden! – interested in ‘solidarity’ when she’s taken every opportunity to further smear and insult Alex Salmond? He’s offered the olive branch more than once and she hasn’t so much as acknowledged the gestures.

  111. Anne Johnston says:

    No doubt some crises will crop up so that the supreme court can is not the time!
    ..and Sturgeon will be punching the air in glee!

  112. Rare says:

    The timing must be significant. Maybe newly appointed Lord Reed (who will decide) is open to it? It will be her last chance, so they need to get it right!!

  113. Scott says:

    1. Why isn’t the Court of Session being asked for its opinion on the legality of a referendum in the first instance?

    2. What mechanism isn’t being used today to achieve independence that can be used after a plebiscitary GE?

    This proclamation by Nictating Sturgeon just smacks of desperation to keep the money rolling into SNP coffers, killing off ALBA, ISP et al. while hoovering up the ideas of others and passing it off as £600k worth of beavering away in the background.

  114. Merganser says:

    ‘Be careful what you wish for, lest it comes true’

    If you were in Boris’s position now what would you do about the s.30 request? Given all the polling history, and the lack of a desire for a referendum at this time, there is more chance of a ‘No’ result in a referendum than stopping a majority of voters from voting for the SNP in a general election.

    So he could well give the green light to it, and re-start project fear (currency, borders, pensions etc). Is the SNP ready to counter this effectively?

    Has this all been agreed in advance between Nicola and Boris, with Nicola getting her reward of a new job when the agreement is given?

    This will not have been a surprise announcement to Westminster. The surprise would be if it was not there idea.

  115. Kcor says:

    “But finally we’ve been listened to. We hope it’s not far too late”

    They had to try and save face somehow.

    But I am 100% sure that they will find excuses to prevent it from ever happening.

  116. Tartanpigsy says:

    Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
    28 June, 2022 at 3:46 pm

    “A plebiscite would have to return a majority of votes in favour of independence, not just seats.

    In (normal) elections the percentage of vote share is irrelevant, but this wouldn’t be a ‘normal’ election, this would be a defacto referendum and we must secure a majority of the vote. We cannot argue that the people of Scotland are sovereign, then declare independence without the majority backing it.”

    “Yes, of course”

    Technically not a necessity.
    The snp just need to win the election.
    FPTP is what it is.
    Having this weapon hanging might persuade London that a referendum is a better prospect

  117. Haud says:

    It seems painful bur obvious that Boris will,out of despation, and to try to save his skin , grant a section 30.

    After all he couldn’t care about anything other than himself.

  118. Merganser says:

    ‘Their idea’

  119. Tinto Chiel says:

    @ Sarah & Ian B: yes, she is only going through the motions.

    No Supreme Court (aka Blair’s Pretendy Court which itself breaches the Treaty of Union) will find in our favour and a GE vote is extremely difficult to turn into a plebiscite majority. Even our 56 seats in 2015 failed by a whisper to produce even a bare minimum 50%, despite all the Forth Rail Bridge posing. And that was a time before Nikla had split the movement with her backstabbing of AS and her pushing of divisively loony policies such as GRA and Wokeism (which were never in an SNP manifesto) which provoked the resultant collapse of the Marching Momentum.

    The FM can now sleep safely in her bed knowing she has several backstops to prevent independence while dangling more unicorn and rainbow-sprinkled carrots in front of the credulous boobies who still think she is genuine.

    Job done: and no surprise either for the alert readers on here.

  120. Andy Ellis says:

    @Mark Boyle 6.50 pm

    I don’t give a flying fuck at a rolling donut what the SNP wants or thinks. The SNP isn’t the movement as a whole. I doubt a lot of people scunnered with the SNP will feel able to support them, campaign for them or vote for them. Splitting the indy vote isn’t a concern in a plebiscitary election, it’s the total number of votes that counts.

    I can’t see all the pro-indy parties agreeing to field “unity” candidates in the name of “Yes Scotland” , or even doing an SDP / Liberal style cosy Alliance arrangement.

    From the point of view of avoiding SNP domination of an indyref movement maybe relying on a majority in plebiscitary elections is a better option?

  121. WeeChid says:

    Republicofscotland says:
    28 June, 2022 at 4:27 pm

    My thoughts exactly. Given that both the Tories and Blue Labour are British Establishment through and through, it doesn’t really matter to the powers that be which party is in Govt. They would happily allow for a Tory defeat just to scupper a referendum.

  122. Mark Boyle says:

    wullie says:
    28 June, 2022 at 7:33 pm


    Aye, ‘cos we’re all just gagging to pass on our contact details to some anonymous website recommended by someone who posts up fking “Thatcher government paedo conspiracy” pish.

    Oh, right, after a bit of digging, I see Craig Murray, Iain Lawson and Prof Alf Baird are involved, at least in a public speaking capacity.

    Just a pity the website doesn’t say so clearly and effectively, anyone would think this was another Sean Clerkin type operation.

    And this, ladies and gentlemen, is another part of the problem. The trouble with “let a thousand initiatives bloom” is that soon you have a thousand blooming initiatives competing for the same audience with limited time to devote.

    It’s long past time the dwarf stars of the non-SNP indy movement joined forces for real, instead of running up more “joint platform” talking shops (or at least “joint” until someone refuses to share a platform with Murray, Salmond, Sheridan, etc.) If you can’t unite amongst yourselves, what hope is there of convincing doubters and fence sitters to the cause?

  123. Chas says:

    I missed the big speech. Simply because I cannot stand listening or looking at Sturgeon.
    I understood that today she was going to be outlining her plans for

    tax and spend
    social security and pensions
    and EU membership and trade

    Where are they? Have I got this wrong? Or are these now going to be issued at some unspecified future date?

    The waters look rather muddy at present. However they may be a bit clearer in a year or two………..maybe not!

    Anything that gets Scotland away from Bunter and the Tory’s has to happen before it is too late. Although I suspect it will be a long, hard, bitter fight with no guarantee of success.

    There are 3 distinct Groups in Scotland-

    1) Die hard Independence supporters, numbering 30-35% of the electorate. They will vote for separation, whatever the cost and irrespective of who the leader is
    2) Die hard Unionists, numbering 30-35% who will never entertain any thoughts of Independence, despite the daily shambles, mendacity, cronyism and incompetence at Westminster. In reality not too dissimilar to Holyrood!
    3)The ‘don’t cares’ and the ‘Inbetweeners’ numbering 30%-40%. The former are totally disillusioned with politics in general, feeling it does not matter who/what they vote for. They are all the same and whatever happens their daily life will not improve/change. The votes of the latter are the ones whose votes will be the battleground. Groups 1 & 2 will be irrelevant in deciding any outcome as their intentions are already cast in concrete.
    It seems to me that Sturgeon and the SNP will have to be squeaky clean in the forthcoming months/years. It will be extremely risky for them to ‘go it alone’ with the full force of the Westminster Establishment against them. Can she swallow her pride and ask for assistance from the likes of Salmond. Or is she looking to fail and simply say ‘I tried’.
    Interesting times ahead.

  124. sarah says:

    AND what is stopping Her Majesty sorry FM forcing a Holyrood election sooner, rather than wait for a Westminster General Election?

  125. George Ferguson says:

    @Andy Ellis 7:45pm
    Agreed. In the 2015 GE, I posted thousands of leaflets for Chris Law to get him elected. Never got a thank you. Alex Salmond summed it up today. Without a grass root movement we won’t get over the line. And that will be down to Chris and others to appreciate the situation. We won’t win it with Sturgeon in charge. Gone are the days when hundreds were on the streets. Even in 2015 we only got 49.9 %. And that was a humongous effort. Unlikely to be repeated when we don’t know what a woman is?.

  126. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    !. I hope that the Lord Advocate will cite the Claim Of Rights 1789 (affirmed in Westminster in 2017?) in her submission to the English Supreme Court.

    2. The SNP, as a “pro-independence” party must reach out to the pro-indy groups that were so effective in moving people, particularly, the much despised “schemies” (by some commenters btl here) to YES in 2014, like the RIC, which, I believe is still in existence and did sterling work in 2014.
    There are many pro-indy groups doing fine work to keep the pro-indy kettle bilin’.

    3. A pro-indy march on Holyrood at the opening of the new session of the Scottish parliament should be seriously considered, to let our elected representatives see the strength of feeling for independence that they don’t seem to get.

    We, the people, must gie the politicians a kick in the €rse to goad them into productive action.

  127. Big Jock says:

    Something else to consider. If WM and SC block a referendum,the movement will be galvanised. It will add more weight to the next GE de-facto independence election.

    Will WM play high stakes poker for 2024. Or take the easy path of a referendum 2023?

    I would put odds on a section 30 being agreed now. If it does happen, it will be interesting to see Sturgeons reaction!

  128. lumilumi says:

    Sturgeon is the pits.

    It’s my way or the highway.

    Her way seems very narrow – so narrow many indedendence-minded Scots fall by the wayside. Try to do good things in the ditches, ridiculed and vilified by “the faithful”, Sturgeon lickspittles.

    There’s not the energy, the momentum of 2014. Tiptoeing around for 8 years does not build up confidence, or a movement, it bogs you down in everyday politics.

    My verdict: Sturgeon will not deliver Scottish independence. She will fail to even get a referendum because from the outset, she’s conceded the UK Parliament’s supremacy – contrary to internationally recognized UN rules – and if the UK PM or Parliament say “No”, that’s it with her.

    Her predecessor was far smarter, cannier and more politically astute, brought Scotland to the brink of independence. Probably why she seemingly has such visceral hatred of him, culminating in unfounded allegations that nevertheless damaged his any future political career. (Yes, I think the alphabetties all started with Sturgeon.)

    Sturgeon is now just going through the motions as the leader of the SNP – the party that is supposed to fight for Scottish independence…

    Why now? Are the old guard party faithful not too pleased about getting bogged down in US-style identity politics, getting a bit twitchy? Has the SNP got some private polling data and realised calling a (doomed) independence referendum is the only way to keep those votes coming in?

    The will be no independence referendum under Sturgeon. She already said Boris Johnson or the UK Parliament can block it. And they will.

    What’s the use of this gesture announcement? What’s the use of Nicola Sturgeon?

    As a politician, she’s an utter failure.

    You had ONE job. Utterly failed at it.

  129. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Hi lumilumi.

    Good to see you commenting btl again. How do feel about Finland and Sweden’s move towards NATO?

  130. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Hi lumilumi.

    This is the ringtone on”meine Handy” (from 1:15 onwards).

    Inspired by this:-

  131. Andy Ellis says:

    It’d be interesting to find out who it was came up with the idea of having the Lord Advocate go to the Supreme Court, because from the reactions even among legal and constitutional experts discussing it in the press coverage it’s obviously come as a surprise.

    The thing is even if it’s true (as one of the Labour MSPs said) that the reason behind it is the fact the SG’s legal advice was that a non S30 Order sanctioned would be illegal, by making her take it to the Supreme Court to put the matter beyond doubt it has kinda put the cat amongst the yoon pigeons.

    I do agree it should have been done years ago: it’ll be interesting to see when the determination is made. I understand summer break is fast approaching, and that the (Scottish) Justice hearing it has already been decided.

  132. Saffron Robe says:

    I think Nicola Sturgeon’s biggest failing, amongst her many failings, is that she is easily bought. She is willing to prostitute herself for favour and/or enrichment regardless of the source – whether it is Westminster, Washington, corporate or globalist interests. She is happy to sell Scotland out at every turn for her own personal gain. Someone so lacking in integrity will never be an effective leader or have the ability to deliver independence which is a matter of principle and not one of personal choice. The latter sucks us into the referendum route which ignores the constitutional route to independence and the voiding of the Treaty of Union. The Treaty of Union explicitly states that there must be unitary trade and customs arrangements throughout the United Kingdom. You don’t need to be an intellectual genius to realise that Brexit fundamentally and irrevocably breaks the Treaty of Union by granting Northern Ireland special trade and customs arrangements. It puts Scotland at an extreme disadvantage to another part of the United Kingdom, which the Treaty of Union expressly forbids. Brexit has voided the Treaty of Union and its continuance exists only as convention since there is no longer any legal basis to the treaty. It only needs to be challenged in the Scottish courts to be declared null and void. The constitutional route is the Achilles’ heel of the Union which is why there is so much shadow play over the illegality or otherwise of a referendum. There is no need for a long-drawn-out referendum process when we can swiftly terminate the Treaty of Union with complete justification in a Scottish court of law under the Claim of Right.

    As regards today’s announcement, Nicola Sturgeon seems to be making all the right noises, and plebiscitary elections would be a valid route to independence in the right hands, but her words have shown time and time again to be nothing but empty promises and it seems to me that both these options – either a referendum or plebiscitary elections – allow her plenty of room to obfuscate for the sake of delay. It also allows her time to devise an exit strategy so that she can seemingly go out on a “high” after handing the reins over to her successor whilst having achieved the sum total of hee-haw. I also suspect she feels emboldened to make what is ostensibly a positive move, which she has shown no signs of doing so up until now, because she has cosied up to Uncle Joe and assured him that Scotland will be an obedient and compliant member of NATO. Of course, it matters little if we get blown to smithereens.

  133. Andy Ellis says:

    @George Ferguson 8.03 pm

    “Even in 2015 we only got 49.9 %. And that was a humongous effort. Unlikely to be repeated when we don’t know what a woman is?.”

    I wouldn’t be too sure: the 2015 result was a remarkable result in many ways, but remember people were voting for UK parliament members then, not necessarily for the cause of independence.

    I know many – including me – are disillusioned with the SNP as a party, but given other events since like brexit, the economic downturn, BoJo and the Tories general performance and willingness to break international law, you might find people will be energised by the time of GE2024: gives us two and a half years. I still reckon there won’t be an indyref.

  134. lumilumi says:

    @ Brian @ 8.22pm

    NATO, Finland and Sweden…

    Yeah, it’s and adventure, what with Turkey throwing spanners in the works.

    Sweden is nowadays a very “safety first” culture. Finland has a national memory (trauma) of the Winter War (1939-1940) and the Continuation War (1941-1944), and the Lapland War (1944). Not to mention all the previous wars when Finland was the battleground between Sweden and Russia. Modern Russia seeks to extend its borders to the height of the Russian Empire… when Finland was part of it (1809-1917 – independence).

    Uhm. So. Yes, lots of Finns are getting pretty worried. Our eastern neighbour is even worse than we thought. Cannot be trusted, wants our land.

    Public opinion for/against NATO changed almost overnight after Russia attacked Ukraine.

    Scary times.

    We have a near 1000 mile land border with Russia. We’ve made it work, seemingly friendly relations, cross-border trade and tourism. Covid put a stop to the tourism, the sanctions after Russia’s attack on Ukraine on everything else. Well, for a while westerners and western-minded Russians were able to flee Russia on the St Peterburg-Helsinki train Allegro, after all air traffic to/from Russia was stopped.

    You Scots have one shitty neighbour to the south, with a, what, 100 mile border. Ha ha ha. The English nowadays are mostly benign. You have no idea what it feels like to have a hostile neighbour over your shoulder, right across our border, all 1340 kms of it.

    I hear it’s very hot in Finland right now, +30 or more. Thankfully, I’m spending my summer holidays in woollen long johns. We’ve sailed the Viking trail: Norway – Shetland – Faroe – Iceland. Expecting to touch Greenland and finally Canada’s northern reaches.

    Man, it’s been cold! +2…+5 and a strong north wind most of the way! And damp! We had some rough seas and discovered quite a few of the yacht’s windows leaked!

    Here we are in Raufarhöfn, in nortern Iceland, internet connection working, not really having to worry about politics or stuff in the real world. Our real world is to repair and provision our boat to round the north of Iceland and go SOUTH to reach port in Greenland.

  135. North chiel says:

    “ red sunset @ 0457 pm “ the Tory junta strategists are always 5 or 6 moves ahead of the game , no doubt the Tory money men will be maximising their shareholdings in defence & armaments companies in the meantime .

  136. George Ferguson says:

    @Andy Ellis 9:39pm
    They were voting for Scottish Independence it was an unbelievable reaction. Commentators at the time said it was a revolution. Nicola Sturgeon may hope to replicate that reaction but without the hundreds of people on the street I doubt it and without Salmonds leadership of the grass roots? He was the original inclusive leader. But don’t underestimate the power of people committed to the cause we just need a new leader. Sturgeon is the antipathy of inclusion. She can’t even tell you what a woman is?. She has to go for a successful campaign.

  137. Shug says:

    I thought the BBC main news gave good balanced coverage and then it moved to BBC Scotland
    Oh dear!!!!
    What an infantile report from the Scottish team
    Can’t wait to hear someone quote Boris and truss talking about the right of countries to choose their own way ahead.
    Will be interesting to see how it pans out. Thank god we have salmond on our side

  138. Breastplate says:

    It’s very satisfying to see Wings buzzing again and to see a lot of the old commenters as well as new ones.

    I hope Stu gets back in the saddle soon.

  139. Andy Ellis says:

    Interesting response from Craig Murray to todays events on twitter……

    “Many, many congratulations to Nicola Sturgeon.
    If you hear muffled choking noises that is me eating my hat, and being delighted to do so.
    Let’s now all get started on the public campaign for Independence.”

    I’m not sure when my gaster was last flabbered as much!

  140. McDuff says:

    What really makes me angry is whenever Sturgeon is interviewed she never takes the opportunity to promote the case for independence, ie our rich resources, comparisons with other small successful countries, always outvoted by the superior numbers of English MPs on serious issues affecting Scotland Brexit being a prime example for starters. Total dominance of England on television English national football matches shown on freeview while the Scots have to pay. The list has no end.
    My instinct says she is still playing the game, the end of which is not a referendum or one she knows she will lose.

  141. footsoldier says:

    On STV Scotland Tonight, Andrew Bowie MP took over control of the interview with John Mackay who allowed him to ramble on making the same points and not answering his questions.

    Oh dear! Oh dear!

  142. Wally Jumblatt says:

    The usual Sturgeon trick to try and stop people from thinking she should be thrown out of office.

    Get rid of her before she messes up the next 5 years

  143. Elizabeth Hagan says:

    I have to confess I am not convinced with the argument for Independence. Had the SNP shown any sign of good & successful governance for Scotland over all these years I might have been convinced but their track record in my opinion has been abysmal.I would suggest the caliber of MP’s, MSP’s leave a lot to be desired.
    Where are all the practical, honest, implications of all this?
    Scotland deserves better.

  144. Fireproofjim says:

    Well, let’s roll with it. It’s what many of us have been wanting and it is an improvement. It’s a good route if it is followed through and it is the Wings route.
    I don’t care who gets the credit.

  145. North chiel says:

    “ merganser says @ 0719 pm “ doubtful if Boris will be deciding anything . The puppet masters and Tory hierarchy will “ advise” Boris on the strategy to attempt to thwart Sturgeons bid to force the issue . Almost certainly that strategy will involve BJ being dumped as Tory “ frontman “ ahead of the GE and replaced with another puppet frontman more able to “ promise Scotland will be a future land of milk & honey “ if we stay in “ the precious precious Union “ once again.
    Johnson probably has already been told that he will be replaced as his “ job was done” ie get us out of the EU at any cost . He has probably already been promised a peerage or similar . The Tory hierarchy will have already “ shortlisted their “ candidate puppets “ and another establishment coup will be in the offing , principally to “ con “ the English electorate again via the establishment media into thinking that they will get a “ new style “ of Tory government ( ps a leopard never changes its spots numpties) and of course the new media messiah will have to have to “ hypnotise “ the Scottish voters ( ably assisted by the Britnat Brainwashing media ) into “ sleepwalking into another No vote” either in 2023 or 2024 GE I

  146. msdidi says:

    Well now that there “might actually be a chance at independence” we need you back full time Rev. Please tell us you’re up for it and we can get a crowdfunder started to pay you (and Chris?) a decent wage. No matter what they throw at us we’ve got to do it this time.

  147. Confused says:

    Woman with no credibility asks us to believe her this time, even as she has a habit of not really saying what she wants you to think she said.

    “secure a process, to express their views … ”

    – in the time interval till the big day, I confidently predict, at least one other war (maybe the big one), another new virus, and maybe Lizzie Battenburg-Teacake will kick the bucket too. Any excuse will do to bin it.

    Or just have the thing, but throw it; look shit in the debates, unconvincing to the undecided. Maybe go “full postal” for the vote this time, and let the counting be done in an RAF hangar at high wycombe, to save money.

    Also, people should stop using the word “plebescite”, it sounds like a venereal disease and the punters don’t know what it means, just say “we win, we call it”; alas, for the sake of communication, it is usually best to aim it for the dumbest cunt in the room.

    Nice to see a variety of posters.

  148. Robert Graham says:

    As usual the English media will do exactly as they did in 2014 and thats attempt to scare scots into voting NO it wont work again .

    We were subjected to the biggest propaganda exercise ever mounted in peacetime by Cameron’s government ,every single Embassy around the world took part ,Christ Cameron even asked Russia for assistance .

    The sky will fall .a world war will start .the prospect of Armageddon is just round the corner if one small nation votes to take its independence back.

    Even tonight on LBC radio English callers voiced their total ignorance of Scotland and Scottish people .

    What currency will they use ? Answer the same as every other nation on earth and I dont give a shit what its called .

    How will they defend their border ? Answer same again the same as any other country .

    One thing Sturgeon said was true it wouldnt matter if every single person in Scotland voted SNP we would still get a English Government based in England governing for the benefit of English people in this one sided Union .the Union is a fantasy it’s a occupation with the pretence of being a union .

  149. Robert Graham says:

    A few comments I noticed and I believe the posters are pretty suspect but the underlying message is clear dont vote YES .

    Yep its started again .beware of some new contributors who will join the plants already in place on this site .

    As Alex said it’s time to put away your differences and dislike of Sturgeon and maybe the SNP this is bigger than that. the English government and media will attempt to sow division.


  150. Iain More says:

    I just dont trust Sturgeon. She has given us no reason in the last 8 years to trust her. I am also of the opinion that she and the chicks with dicks are liabilities to any Independence campaign.

  151. William Russell says:

    There is nothing she or any SNP/Green could say that would persuade me to vote for them in an election, regardless of their stated reason.

    The SNP have lied so many times about indy and Sturgeon and her cult of woke science deniers are the only people who have ever made me consider not supporting indy. Good luck to them if this is for real, but I’m 99% sure this is just more shit to fling at their shit eating supporters.

  152. Breeks says:

    Stuart MacKay says:
    28 June, 2022

    ….. and a looming trade war with the EU over Northern Ireland…

    If it was down to me, the credible prospect of Westminster deliberately breaking International Law and signed agreements would be ratcheted up to bursting point, with Westminster given nothing short of ultimatums that Scotland will not be party to breaking International Law, and the Union is jeopardised by the action.

    Start turning the screw.

    Start shutting down Westminster’s options.

    Start putting Scotland’s interests first.

    If there is to be a Trade War with the EU, get Scotland on the winning side and acting with maturity and diligence while Westminster throws it’s toys out the pram.

  153. Breeks says:

    Bill McKay says:
    28 June, 2022 at 6:35 pm
    Why run a general election?

    Why not put your own job and own MSPs at risk by dissolving the Scottish Parliament and calling a Scottish elections on that premise

    Quite. Given my own comment above, Westminster should be given the ultimatum that Scotland’s MP’s walk out of Westminster the moment Westminster breaks International Law.

  154. DickieT says:

    Unfortunately the Yes movement has fragmented. AUOB has been taken over by zealots who want to promote their policies above independence.

    Believe in Scotland is just a mouthpiece of the SNP who hate being challenged or criticised

    Alba is a joke as are ISP

    All the above engineered by Sturgeon and Pension Pete to ensure their nests keep on being feathered.

  155. Robert Louis says:

    A fundamental question. Where is Hamish?

  156. Robert Hughes says:

    And so the battered spouses return to their abusing partner , telling themselves – ” it’ll be different this time ” . Just like the last time , and the time before that and all the previous times that things were going to be different ” this time ”

    Better stock-up on * make-up * to mask future bruises .

    ” Just in case “

  157. Al-Stuart says:



    Ask yourself one question: “Do you trust Nicola Sturgeon”.

    I do NOT trust her. Anyone who has read Wings Over Scotland must surely have considered the Dreghorn Dirker to be a devious, manipulative narcissistic self-aggrandising tw@t.

    On 30th January 2020 when most of us were in still in some degree of thrall that Sturgeon was genuine and not the wannabe fake First Minister who embarrassed herself and the nation of Scotland by stalking the actress Sidse Babett Knudsen from the TV drama series “Borgen” would have begun to see the warning signs.

    So on that date, 30-1-2020 the following stunner of an article by Stu Campbell should not have been a shock…

    But back when we all still had some belief in Tractor Sturgeon. Even so, the words penned by Stu., still caused jaws to drop. Particularly because they were and still are TRUE.

    So applying that logic and almost every word so many of us have read here by the site’s author, what might be the future?

    I’d bet Stuart £50 at even odds INDYREF2 IS A TRAP.


    Simple: Sturgeon f7cks up IndyRef2, and she has a dubious law degree plus a Ph.D in Fuckuperry, then she WILL LOSE INDYREF2.

    What do YOU think the chances are of EVER having a THIRD Scottish Independence Referendum?

    Job done. nasty Nick can retire as Dame Massey Fergusson of The Dregs.

    She will get a nice, very well paid job as UK Ambassador to the United Nations on Transgender Rights and that will be her in the lap of luxury.

    Whilst Scotland and our natural resource, especially surplus energy production, will be forever a chattel of Engerland.

    The Scots, particularly the house-jocks such as PayPal Paul and his begging bowl and their ilk will moan about fuel prices hitting £5,000 a year per household when Scotland is in ECO ENERGY SURPLUS. PayPal Paul will simply mount another PayPal fundraiser for the terminally gullible NuSNP Wokeists.

    The NuSNP membership will rot away to 15,000. The ONLY threat to Engerland’s colony north of Hadrian’s Wall has been neutered. Alex Salmond’s reputation has been traduced. Whether terminally so is still open to conjecture. Even though the finest First Minister we have ever had was found NOT guilty of Tractor Sturgeon’s perversionn (sic)of Scots Law.

    Well played Engerland. Dirty and you really did have to go so low that there is no honour left, but you get to keep Scotland.

    As for the NuSNP and its wilfully blind, Sturgeon adorista membership, several of whom left this website in a huff, you get oblivion, obscurity and the knowledge you are part of the reason Scotland is unlikely ever to be independent.

    Pension Pete with Alan Big Daddy, Bigger Cockk Smyth, a knighthood awaits.

    If nothing else, today, 29th June 2022, understand this…



  158. David Beveridge says:

    The SC says No so there’s no referendum and the next GE becomes a plebiscite. The SNP take 100% of the seats on a 48% vote share. Saint Nic says you can’t declare independence unless you have the majority of the people behind you. The SNP get another 5 years of short money and the MPs get kept in the style to which they’ve become a wee bit too well accustomed.

    I don’t trust her. Why now? To head off all this Claim of Right stuff? To spike Alba’s plebiscite guns? Why the sudden Damascene conversion when she’s ignored all the glaring open goals over the last few years?

  159. Andy Ellis says:

    @Dave Beverige 7.33 am

    At some point “we” as a movement and a people have to stop hiding behind either outlandish conspiracy theories or the all too apparent sins and omissions of the SNP, and accept that there’s no substitute for actually persuading >50% of Scots that independence is a good thing.

    Surely folk will be able to see that they don’t HAVE to vote for the SNP in a plebiscitary election, because it isn’t the number of seats they win that counts, it’s the total number of votes for ALL pro independence parties that is significant? The same will go for any GE whether Westminster or Holyrood. Now that Sturgeon has accepted the principle of plebiscitary elections (however late to the game she is!) there is no excuse now.

    All pro indy parties should make it plain that from now onwards a vote for them in any election is deemed as a vote in favour of independence in the event pro indy parties gain >50% of the vote.

  160. David Thomson says:

    In the interim, should she receive an offer of a post at an international agency or institution, she’d be off like a shot out a cannon.

  161. stuart mctavish says:

    Robert Hughes @6:40am

    Why not make it different this time – there’s surely enough wingers out there with the requisite skill set to create a virtual bank to seduce tories with a proposed lien on UK ‘owned’ Scottish assets which can, in turn, be used as backing for hereditary non fungible blockchain tokens* and shared among all fourth generation heterosexual males.

    Start now and the IPO (there being plenty to skim in managing the service contracts for such a venture) could be programmed to coincide with the Supreme court’s capitulation on sovereignty (Ditto a petition to Scottish court for custody of Julian Assange) and a not insignificant sum of spending money could be distributed alongside the nf mineral rights tokens 🙂

    *Otherwise non transferable such that the assets are forever held in private Scottish hands but remain available as proof of worth/ solidarity when borrowing to finance cunning plans – and since the lender of such borrowings cannot confiscate ownership when plans go South or the mafia (/medical fraternity!) occupies the choke points, they’ll have a vested interest in making the cunning plans work in accordance with global best practice, etc, etc

  162. Mark Boyle says:

    David Beveridge says:

    I don’t trust her. Why now? To head off all this Claim of Right stuff? To spike Alba’s plebiscite guns? Why the sudden Damascene conversion when she’s ignored all the glaring open goals over the last few years?

    Because she’s in deep, deep shit and this is her one way out.

    Two MPs have been outed as sexual predators and the party did nothing, same as it did with Derek Mackay, who would have been certainly arrested and charged had the same events played out in a land where the Lord Advocate doesn’t sit in cabinet upon the de facto appointment by the First Minister.

    Then comes the ferries scandal – all that money vanished for nothing in return – and a small matter of £600 000 of supposedly ring fenced “indyref” money that vanished from the accounts, still under police investigation.

    Finally, there’s her commitment to self ID and the burning of her boats with many old colleagues irrepairably over it, just as the current revolt in the athletics world and very public enquiries into the highly inappropriate behaviours at the Tavistock clinic appear to indicate we have passed “peak trans”.

  163. Ottomanboi says:

    It is plain Westminster is where the action will be. In Westminster a majority of seats is legally enough for any purpose. We all know SNP in 2015 had a majority of seats, 56 of 59, and 50% of votes cast.
    They might have quit the UK parliament then but her existential idée fixe plainly lay in other parts and maybe still does.

  164. DJ says:

    Andy Ellis @ 7.56 am

    Agree 100% – 50% + 1, it’s the only game in town. Forget the personalities. Independence is bigger than any individual. So stop the greetin everyone and get on with the task in hand…

  165. Breeks says:

    David Beveridge says:
    29 June, 2022 at 7:33 am

    …Why the sudden Damascene conversion when she’s ignored all the glaring open goals over the last few years?

    Because of the pressure she’s come under from ALBA, YES, SSRG, and the increasingly scathing criticism she’s come under.

    It feels like we’re not making a difference, but as Eva Comrie pointed out, Sturgeon has, to all intents and purposes, adopted the position Chris McEleny was proposing when he was booed at the SNP Conference.

    For all the divisive abuse heaped on good YES people and ALBA by Sturgeon’s woke attack dogs, we now see that Chris McEleny was right all along, so why in the name of god was he attacked and abused?

    ALBA, Salmond, and many other critics of Sturgeon have got a lot of other things right too. They were dead right, and she was dead wrong, and no amount of gaslighting is gonna change it. If they’d been listened to rather than vilified, we would now be much closer to realising Independence.

    Sturgeon has made, and continues to make, howling errors of judgement, but the “Council of Elders” who might have kept her right were perceived as a threat, branded disloyal, alienated, and driven out the SNP and into the arms of ALBA, or forced to suffer dogs abuse and busted down to Corporal like Joanna Cherry.

    There may yet be some bumps in the road, but as SALVO and the SSRG reach out to more and more people, and the Claim of Right looms ever larger in the awareness of the people, then Sturgeon’s reputation and judgement will be diminished by her eight years of feckless inaction and Constitutional illiteracy.

    We can but hope for an end to the rank two faced hypocrisy of incidents like Alyn Smith calling for unity moments before his scornful rebuke for a friendly invitation to their Conference from the SSRG. Hopefully “No, absolutely not, never”, becomes his political epitaph. Shit stirrers like Smith have caused enough trouble.

    The bottom line is, it remains to be seen whether Sturgeon and her SNP can be muzzled by the Scotland Act and outmaneuvered by Westminster, but we can be certain the Claim of Right will not be.

  166. Dorothy Devine says:

    Nice to see some old monikers turning up to comment. Handandshrimp I have missed you and I would like to see Kinnivie turn up and so many more.

    Some strange woman up thread telling us how awful the SNP have been with never a backward glance at the disgusting disaster that is the Tory government in Westminster.

    I have no idea why any Scot or anybody living in Scotland thinks that Westminster is better for Scots than Holyrood with full power.

  167. Andy Ellis says:

    @Ottomanboi 8.34 am

    People can believe that UDI based on <50% is feasible and keep repeating it all they like, but it doesn’t make it any more true. The 2015 election result was 49.97%. Close, but no cigar.

    For the result to stand based on plebiscitary elections, it’s the number of votes cast not the number of seats that counts.

    Nobody is going to recognise a claim for independence that doesn’t demonstrate a majority of voters in favour. Anyone claiming otherwise is living in cloud cuckoo land. Every “cunning plan for indy” hits the brick wall of needing to demonstrate majority support at some point.

  168. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “People can believe that UDI based on <50% is feasible and keep repeating it all they like, but it doesn’t make it any more true. The 2015 election result was 49.97%. Close, but no cigar.

    For the result to stand based on plebiscitary elections, it’s the number of votes cast not the number of seats that counts.

    Nobody is going to recognise a claim for independence that doesn’t demonstrate a majority of voters in favour. Anyone claiming otherwise is living in cloud cuckoo land"

    100% this.

  169. Robert Graham says:

    Ellis @ 8:56

    FK off yah English plant

    Remember the VOW ?

    The English Unionist controlled media are on high alert they will use the same tactics as before FEAR .

  170. Andy Ellis says:

    @Robert Graham 10.00 am

    Tell us Robert, is Rev Stu an English plant and is he obliged to fuck off too?

    You might want to have an alternative ID ready before you answer that…. 🙂

  171. Mark Boyle says:

    Breeks says:
    29 June, 2022 at 8:45 am

    Because of the pressure she’s come under from ALBA, YES, SSRG, and the increasingly scathing criticism she’s come under.

    I’m sorry, but Sturgeon feels zero “pressure” from any of those you have just listed.

    The Scottish Sovereignty Research Group is a complete irrelevance to the fourth estate, never mind the man and woman in the street – it receives mentions in the 4000 copies sold a day The National and zip all elsewhere.

    Sturgeon would be shitting her pants more about criticism from the prog rock band of that name than of YES. For a start, they’ve got more fans (gawd knows why when they’ve only one original member left, but I digress).

    As for Alba – oh, please! The Rubbish Party of Ayrshire is a greater political threat to her than Alba – for a start, it can win and keep council seats. Alex is a great orator, a great telly turn, but that’s it. Any lingering fears she had in that direction vanished on Friday 6th May.

    She has Holyrood, the judiciary and almost the entirety of Scotland’s media in her back pocket and as so feels pressure from no one up here. However a number of chickens have come home to roost, including a couple of financial impropriety scandals, the sort of thing the more thinking elements in Westminster may take an active interest investigating – power devolved is power retained, and well she knows it.

    That’s why there’s been the rush to promise a referendum she knows full well there’s no chance of happening but you can make a lot of noise when you kick the can down the road, loud enough to distract everyone from other matters.

    She knows England’s Tories will play along because they also want something to distract from the crisis they find themselves in – much as they’ve indulged the SNP because Strong SNP = Weak Scottish Labour in what was once one of their heartlands: 50+ free seats of thick as fk lobby fodder and a massive revenue generating extended activist base (Labour plus the 57 varieties of Trot thug squadristi tagalongs) the collapse of which has been near disastrous for “the people’s party”.

  172. Mark Boyle says:

    Andy Ellis says:
    29 June, 2022 at 8:56 am

    People can believe that UDI based on less than 50% is feasible and keep repeating it all they like, but it doesn’t make it any more true. The 2015 election result was 49.97%. Close, but no cigar.

    For the result to stand based on plebiscitary elections, it’s the number of votes cast not the number of seats that counts.

    Nobody is going to recognise a claim for independence that doesn’t demonstrate a majority of voters in favour. Anyone claiming otherwise is living in cloud cuckoo land.

    Rev. Stuart Campbell [He who runs Wings Over Scotland …] says:
    29 June, 2022 at 9:58 am

    [in reply to the above post by Andy – word for word]

    100% this.

    Two minutes later:

    Robert Graham says:
    29 June, 2022 at 10:00 am

    Ellis @ 8:56

    FK off yah English plant

    😀 Hi Robert – feeling incredibly stupid yet? 😀

  173. Hatuey says:

    I’m afraid it isn’t clear that victory in the plebiscitary election would be determined by vote share rather than seats. John Swinney on the radio this morning suggested it would be determined by seats, that a majority of seats would be enough to secure independence and begin negotiations…

    In a parliamentary system it’s seats that count for everything else. I’m not sure about the basis upon which you’d separate out Scottish independence as the one and only issue that must meet a much more difficult standard, i.e. an absolute majority of votes. This would make sense if it was a purely binary choice but since there are a multitude of parties involved it simply isn’t.

    I’m with John Swinney on this, in cuckoo land perhaps.

  174. Andy Ellis says:

    @Hatuey 10.35 am

    Swinney is simply wrong. The international community simply won’t accept a claim or declaration of independence which doesn’t also have a clear majority of votes. Your criticism that General Elections are fought on multiple issues, not binary choices is simply dealt with: if pro indy parties make it clear prior to the vote that they are assuming votes for them specifically support their plebiscitary mandate, then that is what will happen.

    I’m actually with those that would prefer plebiscitary elections at Holyrood to be the mandate rather than Westminster, but will happily support doing it for GE2024 if that is first. The franchise for Holyrood is also better for the indy movement. Of course the SNP and Greens could always provoke early Holyrood elections if the Supreme Court finds against the SG.

  175. Andy Ellis says:

    I see BBC news are reporting that the Lord Advocate Dorothy Bain will personally argue the Scottish Government’s position in the Supreme Court. I have my doubts she’d be willing to do that if she fundamentally disagreed with the referral, even if she had doubts about the merits of the question whether Holyrood had the legislative competence to hold a non S30 sanctioned referendum.

  176. Andy Ellis says:

    @Hatuey 10.35 pm

    Supplementary to the above, looks like your mate John Swinney won’t be joining you in cloud cuckoo land. Apparently he’s clarified that he misheard the question posed and thought it referred to majority of votes not seats.

    Fear not, I’m sure plenty of “cunning plans for indy” UDI moonhowlers will be keeping you company! 🙂

  177. Breastplate says:

    Tactically, I think it would have been better for John Swinney to stick to what he said about winning seats would be enough regardless of him believing it or not.

    If it is dismissed out of hand, (no matter how ridiculous some people believe it), we’re basically throwing away weapons in front of the enemy.

    You can argue that you know these weapons don’t work but it’s probably not a good idea to tell your opponents that you have nothing up your sleeve.

    The argument that seats would be enough could perhaps force the hand of the Unionists to get what you really want.

    Just like the Unionists throw in the line about “once in a generation” or “once in a lifetime” whether they believe it or not, it’s not ever going to be their main or only argument.
    After all, Margaret Thatcher seemed to think sending a majority of pro independence MPs to Westminster was enough to start the ball rolling on independence.

    Would it not benefit the independence movement to turn the question back on them and let people hear them explain why it’s different now?

    A Yes/No referendum would be better than a plebiscitary GE or HE because there’s lots of room for the Unionists and the SNP to muddy the waters.

    So whether you believe you have a pish poker hand or not, play it like your going to win regardless.

  178. Breastplate says:


  179. Willie says:

    Things will be interesting moving forward.

    Sturgeon may we’ll have been moulded to being an agent of the United Kingdom. Who knows what dirt the security services have on her and others. For that is the way the establishment works. And for that reason, we need to realise that depending on how the cards start to fall, the selective use of scandal exposure could well play a role. But that can cut two ways – and Sturgeon knows it fine, if as widely reported she has scandal to hide.

    And so as we approach what could be the prelude to the plebiscite it will be interesting to see how the movement comes together. The UK, as they have done elsewhere around the world, have conducted a dirty war but we can, and I believe will out manoeuvre them, and this is the start,. Surgeon and her ilk will need to shape up or be shipped out.

    So cautious optimism about the steps announced yesterday. And yes, the FM needs to make peace, do the right thing, because it’s not just her handlers who could expose her.

  180. Bill McKay says:

    Not happening we’ve been had again..

  181. Hatuey says:

    As I understand it, everybody including Thatcher, Salmond, and others accepted at one time that a majority of seats would be enough to secure independence. Things have changed, of course, but let’s not suggest the position is ridiculous or that anyone who argues for it is in some way extreme or stupid.

    My earlier comment invited readers to explain why independence alone, amongst many other arguably equally important matters and policies, should be required to satisfy the new standard of requiring an absolute majority of votes. Simply re-stating your subjective opinion — or anyone else’s — doesn’t explain anything.

    And it would be difficult to explain why or how you could justify that position in a parliamentary system which has an unwritten constitution, with no mention of absolute majorities being required anywhere on any particular issue.

    If everybody understands that a vote for the SNP is a vote for independence, that the SNP is standing on that single issue, why wouldn’t seats count when they counted before for everything else?

    It’s a unionist argument to suggest this is too important an issue to be resolved by a seat count — they didn’t express that before, certainly Thatcher didn’t — when economic policy, wars, austerity, and a million other things are unquestionably decided on the basis of seats.

    Scotland has been dominated for decades by Westminster parties who took advantage of the constituency based system, allowing them to ignore how we voted. If there’s an argument against us using a general election as a plebiscite, it could only meaningfully be based on the argument that a general election is a UK-wide vote and that you can’t simply and conveniently single out how Scottish constituencies vote.

    That is a unionist argument, the same argument they made when we moaned about being ruled by tories that very few of us voted for.

    It is a concession to suggest votes rather than seats are what will count if this goes ahead. Those who argue in favour of that concession are also conceding that we are in some sort of negotiation and, that being the case, why should we give up a politically solid negotiating position? I think we have a much better chance of securing a section 30 if we stand firm on this now.

  182. Andy Ellis says:

    @Hatuey 3.30 pm

    It’s not a concession at all. A GE fought on a specifically plebiscitary prospectus is quite clear as long as it’s sufficiently advertised as such before hand. We’ll all know what we’re voting for and why. The SNP, Greens and Alba are all going to confirm that a vote for them in a plebiscitary election will be regarded as a de facto vote for independence.

    More importantly of course, international recognition hinges on demonstrating a clear majority OF VOTES. They don’t give a fuck for the seat count, particularly in a FPTP system. The fact a majority of seats was accepted as a mandate for independence in the olden days is immaterial now: things have moved on since the 1970’s. We’re not giving any weapon up or weakening our negotiating position, because the argument has no merit.

  183. Hatuey says:

    Andy, I’m afraid your answer proves that nothing is “quite clear”. If it was, you’d refer to precedent or some statute that supports your position. But you can’t. That means your position is just your opinion which has no more or less intrinsic value than the opinions of others.

  184. Andy Ellis says:

    @Hatuey 8.58 pm

    What an odd argument. Of course nobody knows what will happen. The future isn’t ours to see. All we can go on is what seems more likely. There isn’t a precedent for this situation, just as there wasn’t for brexit or for many other issues.

    For example we can’t “know” what the Supreme Court will find WRT the legality of the indyref. Legal and constitutional opinion is split. Eventually they’ll make a decision, so once group of people will be found to have been wrong in their view of what is going to happen, agreed? Such is life.

    I’m pretty confident my opinion is better grounded that lots of others, particularly some of the knuckleheads in here. Time will tell.

  185. Cuilean says:

    The point of frittering away 5 years?

    Ask yourself how much money the Murrells have pocketed over that 5 years.

    There’s your answer

Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.

↑ Top