This isn’t tricky
Here’s Nicola Sturgeon on the subject of EU legal advice, as quoted by the BBC:
And here’s Alex Salmond being interviewed by Andrew Neil:
NEIL: Have you sought advice from your own Scottish law officers in this matter?
(All emphasis ours.)
It’s not hard to follow – the FM refers expressly and clearly to legal opinions which had been sought with regard to documents which have been published supporting the Scottish Government’s view of EU membership. The Deputy FM does exactly the same thing (“previously cited”). Neither refers to any unpublished legal advice.
The FoI request specifically concerned unpublished advice – if it had been published, after all, there’d have been no need for an FoI request in the first place. There is therefore no contradiction between the FM and Deputy FM’s accounts. It’s that simple.
Good luck with the ongoing…
It didn’t take more than a week for the Mandelson syndrome to kick in. I suppose we can look forward to 2 more years of such stuff.
This ultimately is another ‘SNP accused of’. Given the claims can’t be solidly backed up, it’s going to vanish quite quickly.
In any event, I’m content the EU will state it’s position before the referendum. Possibly quite soon now that we have the Edinburgh Agreement which in effect means the rUK and Scotland will jointly recognised each other as successor states following a Yes vote.
In the end, the electorate just want to know what status will be. When they are told that, it will be another nail in the union coffin. Exactly when they are told it is not quite so important so long as it is comfortably ahead of the vote. White paper next year would be ok, but better if that just confirmed what people had been reading in the papers.
The Nicola Sturgeon quote is remarkably similar to what she said on Question Time last week regarding the audience members question on the same subject.
I noticed a BBC reporter challenged Paul Martin(?) to withdraw his accusation of lying, pointing out that he had selectively edited the quote to make it appear to be a lie. He changed the subject without addressing the challenge, and wasn’t pressed on it.
The unionists are desperately trying to turn this into a popularity contest, much like US politics.
It’s about the referendum stupid.
AS could get caught in a brothel as far as i’m concerned. I’d still vote YES.
I’m trying to work out what Alex meant by, “in terms of the debate”.
I assume it means that he asked general advice from his law officers on the rights and obligations that treaties signed by a parent state impose on a successor state and the other original signing party because he links the legal advice to successor states just after that, “…which argue the position that we’d be successor states.”
I assume what he didn’t ask was a direct question about Scotland’s status in the EU after independence which would involve research into the founding treaties and documents of the EU.
Asking legal advice from the Scottish Law Officers may be a daily occurrence in Government. It’s just that the LibLabCon alliance are desperately hung up on this single question.
Take a step back and it’s quite funny. The Scottish government have defended their right to silence over whether or not they took legal advice but this has been taken by Labour as the advice having been given and being damaging to the SNP government hence the legal efforts to see it.
All this sound and fury and effort from the Labour for an empty box.
It makes sense not to ask the question until now. Now legal advice can be given in the knowledge that Scotland’s withdrawal from the Union will be unopposed by Westminster. There will be no question of the EU having to deal with a new state which has unilaterally withdrawn from a hostile parent state.
I’m sure the public in general will not be able to sleep tonight over the worry that our First Minister has been accused of being a “bare faced liar” by a labour MSP, and doom & disaster are stalking our country because two SNP(former) MSP’s have had an attack of “principle’itus” and it is something neither of the current unionist parties are really familer with. Plus Nicola has made statements to the house without engaging a commision first, which would have advised her sometime after Autumn 2014 on what to say.
Its hell tuesday ahaaaa hhheeeeck help maboab.
Its give a unionist enough rope, and they will ha## themselves, after a commission ofcourse.
I kind of thought something like this was going to happen. Remember the constant badgering of Alex Salmond about whether his phone had been hacked? He wouldn’t say. All sorts of stories were based on speculation arising from that. Just latterly some people I think started to suspect that he hadn’t been hacked at all. So then they spun that as him not being important enough to hack.
Then Alex just smiles at Leveson and confirms that no, his phone wasn’t hacked as far as he knows, but his bank account was.
I will start again as editing last comment, things went pear shaped.
The Nicola Sturgeon quote is remarkably similar to what she said on Question Time last week regarding the audience members question on the same subject.
If you have a look at Question Time from Easterhouse last week, approx 20 mins in a women in the audience addresses the panel about this legal advice question that Labour have thrown up. Nicola answers the question sighting “known Former Director general of the Commission, A former judge of the European Court that make it perfectly clear that Scotland would inherit the treaty rights and obligations of the UK. That is clear and the politics of it are even clearer still”
Ruth Davidson goes on to say “Well we know first of all that the SNP haven’t asked the European Union because we have written to the European Union Commission and they said that you had never asked in thirteen years to tell you what it is……”
If Alex Salmond, Nicola Sturgeon and Ruth Davidson have all publicly alluded to or in Ruths’s case claimed that the SNP haven’t asked, then why does the press think differently – is it down to Labour accusing the SNP and Labour not hearing the answer that they want? Is this why this non story is still running?
Are labour still hung up on process?
Seems the BBC have been jumping through hoops today about how to best spin this. All stories mixed up in some desperate mish-mash, things getting moved around rapidly, changing headlines all the time…
Referendum consultation results already relegated in favour of the SNP EU smear one but that’s not working as it is being denied and there is no hard evidence for unionist party claims.
That and their reputation being, shall we say, somewhat tarnished on the front page of every paper across the UK. Dear dear.
Everything falling into place nicely.
Why make things clear and simple when you can muddy the waters and twist things around until you can feign outrage? That’s the NO campaign plan.
Right, so basically the SNP have asked for legal opinion on the documents they have written, and publicly available to all, regarding EU membership.
Not – the SNP have been in direct contact with the EU asking about an independent Scotland’s EU status.
Is this right ? Sorry to be so thick.
If this is the case, why has it taken so long to say ? Surely if any documents were already in the public domain, the SNP would have said so there and then when the FOI was first raised ?
I think this kind of negative, smear dominated politics could be called something like ‘wear them out’ politics. It is designed to wear out your opponents’ will to resist the constant bullshit that you are coming out with. The media, the No campaign’s broadcasting arm, can be relied upon to back up the No parties in their relentlessly negative campaigns to discredit the FM and the SNP. The fact that they have not learned any lessons from the 2011 Scottish elections surely is now obvious to anyone will half a brain cell. They are treating the electorate with utter contempt. It all started at the council elections, where we had sustained attacks on Salmond by both the press and rival politicians for about a week beforehand. It mysteriously disappeared just after the results were announced….They have been trying to damage Salmond by constantly misinterpreting his actions and words. The obvious answer to what is motivating them is that there is no positive case for the union and there is now a massive amount of self-preservation going on.
tartanfever:
I don’t think I see where the problem is in this case. Actually find it rather amusing. The opposition send in a FOI asking what the legal advice says about being in the EU. The Scottish Govt say they don’t discuss legal advise given to Ministers. Turns out none were asked for. Maybe the opposition should ask better questions in the future. I told a friend about this a little while ago this evening and he laughed. That from a non-political person. Not everybody takes politics seriously as we do, perhaps the vast majority actually.
scottish_skier
I am more convinced than ever that you are correct about Dave and Alex playing a blinder together .
Alex has had the unionists running around in circles and has managed to get everything he wanted and more without even trying .
Dave has just added more votes to the yes camp by stating he wants a crushing victory .
Nothing like having a toffee nose tory saying he wants a resounding victory over us uppity Scot,s to drive people into the yes camp .
All we need is for dave to organise for some tory from the southeast to bring up the issue of british summertime again just before we vote in the referendum .
As for nato , I am not to fuzzed one way or the other as I thought that the S.N.P had put enough safeguards into the debate .
As for nuclear ! be it power or W.M.D , I want nothing to do with it .
As for the two M.S.P,s resigning , as others have stated , I don’t think it will do the YES camp any harm as it shows the broad church of principled people within the YES camp .
Over the years the SNP have had many people resign from it , some due to petty jealousies but most through principles and yet we are still on the brink of gaining our independence .
@DougtheDug
this has been taken by Labour as the advice having been given and being damaging to the SNP government, and this is always what the Unionists think, that when the SNP defend a principle it’s to cover up a failure. I’ve always assumed that it was political posturing but now I’m actually coming round to the view point that they really do believe that Scotland is as incapable as they are themselves.
The EU is essentially a capitalist organisation and for that reason alone Scottish membership is guaranteed: who wants to lose money over a technicality?
I was reading John MacLean today and he wrote this about a hundred years ago, ‘British Financial Capitalism forced back to its last line of defence will cry: “Britain über alles”’. I think that this is what the Unionist are doing: rallying to an outdated concept. They always accuse the independence supporters of clinging to the past and can’t see the irony for the stupidity.
@Silvertay.
Dave has just added more votes to the yes camp by stating he wants a crushing victory .
Interesting yes, because the Tories know fine well Scotland will not stay in the union with them in power in Westminster. They’ve been saying that since well before we went out to vote back in 1997 (without quite saying it). Anyone who suggests otherwise is frankly off their rocker. I mean which country would chose to be ruled not only by a neighbouring country, but by the political party it most dislikes from said neighbouring country.
link to heraldscotland.com
The frantic bellowing by the Unionist parties and the media seem very reminiscent of the ‘John Swinney lets tax raising powers’ lapse furore. They all seem on a hair trigger of expectation for that moment when the SNP experiment fails abjectly. My theory is they’re all such lazy bastards they just can’t be bothered putting in the work on policy/investigative journalism/political analysis. However as time goes on and the mortgage payment becomes due, they’re reduced to putting more and more of the housekeeping on the lottery.
Right oh – I’m all clued up after having listened to Alex Salmond’s speech at Holyrood which makes it perfectly clear.
Newsnet have the story, with an audio clip from BBC Radio Scotland that contains both AS’s speech in the chamber and the rather unbelievable response of Raymond ‘Swing-ers’ Buchanan – who appears to be more confused than even I was – who predicts the end of the earth and the fall of the sky at this huge SNP blunder. Ok, what he actually said was that it would be ‘trouble’ for the government.
The unionists and the m.s.m can lie and spin all they want about A.S but a good general never divulges his battle plans to the enemy on the eve of battle .
The allies never told the Germans that d day would be in Normandy , for months if not years in advance they spun and confused the Germans that the invasion would be in another part of France .
All Alex is doing is spinning and confusing the unionists into such a state that when he does reveal his battle plans the unionists will not be able to counter them .
All we need is the courage of our convictions and to vote YES in 2014 to win the day .
Thanks Tartan fever for the heads up with the Newsnet article
link to newsnetscotland.com
Quite something to here AS running through said advice being published by the SNP going back to 2009.
I wonder what Newsnight will be like tonight?
@silverytay
Talking about lies and spin, I see Raymond Buchanan has come up with another belter on the BBC website. Here’s the headline:
‘Has the Scottish Government ignored it’s own independence consultation ?‘
He goes on to have a go at the SNP for the lack of a devo-max question for numerous paragraphs, but then in the final third of the article he says this:
When the consultation analysis was finally published, it showed that, of those respondents who commented on the issue of a second question, 32% were broadly in favour and 62% were not.
Talk about headline manipulation. Another travesty of journalism. Coincidentally, in Lesley Riddoch’s new podcast, she mentions her dis-satisfaction at the Scotsman article published yesterday she wrote- but which the Scotsman wrote the headline. It’s pretty misleading.
The idea being that a lot of casual observers, often just glimpse headlines on websites or on news stands as the pass them and this affects their vote choice. it’s one of the most deceptive traits of journalism.
Despite no lie having been told, Unionists have decided to make the accusation anyway because they know they have just been led down a path towards a dead end and have been taken to the cleaners yet again.
Never mind, there will be another scare story tomorrow to laugh at.
Only two years to go so buckle up, it’s going to be a rough ride.
What interests me is how fast that clip of Alex on Andrew Neil was found and presented to the media after Nicola announced that there had been no legal advice on European membership for an independent Scotland.
Did someone just remember it, was it already well known in Labour circles or did Andrew Neil phone his buddies in Labour up about it?
Nobody sat and watched their way through endless clips of Alex on TV to work out what he had said at some time in the last year.
Iain McWhirter is wetting his pants on Scotland Tonight.
John Mackay is getting fairly moist too.
I’m, no legal expert but I would have thought that the vice president6 of the European Commission might know a thing or two about the legalities of Scotland, Catalonia etc remainng within the E.U.
link to newsnetscotland.com
link to newsnetscotland.com
link to snp.org
Now, in my view, if Viviane Reding does not think that either Catalonia or Scotland will need to re-apply to join the E.U. then I’m sorry that’s good enough for me. Simpleton I know!
I’ve come to the conclusion that we will win the referendum in 2014. The basis for this assumption is as follows:
a) Cameron claims he wants an outright victory. …….Increase in people voting YES.
b) Tories will win next G.E. ……Increase in people voting YES.
c) Bannockburn 700th anniversary…….Increase in people voting YES.
d) Ryder cup in Scotland……..Increase in people voting YES.
e) Commonwealth games in Glasgow……..Increase in people voting YES.
f) No positive message from the Bitter camp……Increase in people voting YES.
g) British economy remains in the doldrums……..Increase in people voting YES.
h) More cuts come from Westminster………Increase in people voting YES.
i) The poor,infirm etc are hit with more Westminster cuts……Increase in people voting YES.
j) Threats of attacking Syria/Iran emerge………Increase in people voting YES.
I think I’ll stop there. Ten reasons are a good start I think on the reason why we will win in 2014.
Interesting audio and video editing from BBC Newsnight tonight. Not a particularly well checked story by the BBC journalists either.
The whole thing seems to have again been orchestrated by Labour complete with lie story. More dirty games. Labour going with another lie that it’s the SNP not wanting a descussion, despite nothing coming from Labour since Lamont lurched to the Right.
The earlier part from London was better balanced and asking serious questions about the trust worthiness of the BBC news department following the Jimmy Savile scandal.
“Interesting audio and video editing from BBC Newsnight tonight.”
Mindboggling. Will be urgently seeking clarification in the morning as to whether that was deliberate or if they’re going to try to sell it as a technical hitch.
I’m not picking up exactly what you’re referring to. I just saw a bit of a train crash with Gordon maintaining that Salmond should be absolutely open and frank to a fault to journalists like Neil who are trying to trip him up, no matter how much material he ends up revealing that he’d rather his opponents didn’t have access to.
Brewer seemed to say “I didn’t understand what AS actually said as I’m too thick, so it’s his fault”
Was it sarcasm, or something?
It seems the NO-ists are quite prepared to disgust so many voters into not bothering to vote by reducing our political lives to a three ring circus. Tell a whopper and back-it up through the media and every malcontent they can find and they’re doing damage, you better believe they are. – Yes AS and the SNP are in their sights and getting pelters, but the greater damage is to the folk who are becoming so turned off they will not vote for “any of these chancers”.
It’s simply lamentable. People we all know, have fought in wars to preserve democracy, our not so long ago ancestors sacrificed their lives for the right to vote and these scum reduce the democratic process to a reprehensible level – for what?
Power over others? Noses in the trough? Self-aggrandisement and selfish bastardism?
It ‘s essential that Scotland pulls well away from this cess-pit. Thank God for the SNP taking us where we will be free of it all. Keep the faith and dinnae buckle!
Sorry for going O/T here but found this over on Guido’s site, thought it might interest those with a penchant for all things economics.
link to europarl.europa.eu
I know that the referendum is still two years away yet but could this be the beginning of the Bitter camps fight back with their first announcement of why we are better together.
link to bbc.co.uk
Nice to know that it is a nameless faceless “lord” who is making these suggestions. Perhaps if he and his troughing Westminster colleagues stopped grabbing “loads of dosh” for their rent, mortgages, toilet roll holders cutlery set and crockery etc then there would be no need for such outrageous disgusting suggestions to be aired in the first place!
This idiot makes me sick to to the bottom of my stomach with such ludicrous suggestions as the elderly having to work for their pension, what the hell does he think they have been doing their whole working life?
This man is an absolute moron.
Yet another fine example of Westminster’s finest coming out with utter diabolical suggestions, far be it that he actually makes a sensible suggestion, like recouping the millions of unpaid tax for example.
I wonder how long BBC Reporting Scotland can maintain their “SNP accused of” mentality without people coming to their own conclusions of bias? Can the BBC and (let`s not beat around the bush) STV maintain this “SNP/Independence is bad” veneer for another two years without offering viewers similar Scottish Labour/Tories “scare” stories?
Do the Scottish media think we are idiots? Why can`t we hear more from Scottish Labour or Scottish Conservatives; they have opinions too, surely?
What are the “good people” of Pacific Quay scared of?
Let`s hear more stores from the Scottish Labour and Scottish Conservatives camps. I`m truly curious as to their intent, but it seems the BBC is not prepared to indulge anything other than SNP scare stories. Again, how long can the Scottish MSM maintain the “Big, bad, SNP” slant without similar airing to Labour and the Tories? How long before the Scottish people notice the absence of any reporting of Labour and Conservative decisions? Can the BBC and STV go two years without the Scottish people coming to their own conclusions?
Liars need good memories. I hope in 2014 the people of Scotland remember where then lies came from, and vote accordingly.
YES 100% YES
Arb,
I have commented on that. It will be interesting to see whether or not it passes BBC moderation. Anyway, it appears to me that Westminster is running away from any sort of social contract between us and them. It is not as if Bichard is likely to suffer for his beliefs, he, after all, can pick up our dosh simply for appearing in the House of Lords. Unlike the folk who experience ATOS at first hand. That is a profound example of a government bereft of humanity.
As you say, the tax deals established over lunchtime drinks are an example of a government which treats the electorate with contempt.
It ought, should it not, be the point of a democracy to arbitrate between the powerful and the weak? Westminster appears to see it as a scam designed to advocate the needs of the wealthy over the weak.
That is what is fundamentally wrong with our society, which probably explains the fundamental disconnect between Scottish voters and the Westminster village. We are better than that. We are better than a Lord. We are better than Bichard.
Must admit to non stop chuckling over this since yesterday. The whole stooshie based on their interpretation of the FMs interviews. FOIs, court proceedings, accusations of liar, liar pants on fire and the outcome is apparently no one lied and the opposition wasted God knows how much public time and cash chasing the source of prior advice which was already in public domain. A first class example of how mindless hatred of the opposition can be an advantage and by that I mean Labour’s mindless fixation on the FM. Don’t look over here, look over there.
I’m still a little uneasy over all this, but the problem is that Labour’s behaviour as opposition is the equivalent of some little snot-nosed brat in school who punches people when no one is looking, then feigns innocence when the teacher turns around to see the victim retaliating. However, if the media are the teacher, then it turns out the teacher is actually the little snot-nosed brat’s dad, so he simply refuses to believe his darling son could be doing anything wrong, and then when he catches his son doing it, he assumes he must have been seeing things.
Then the teacher tells the bullied kid to stay behind after school, and gives him a few punches himself.
Labour KNOW governments don’t disclose legal advice until it suits them to do so, and the reasoning for this is completely sound. They also know fine (or they should do) that there was simply no point in asking the EU until there was a solid proposal to put forward. A respectable media would have understood this and said “but you know yourselves that governments don’t reveal legal advice just because someone asks to see it”, but no, they decided to be complicit instead.
Incidentally, is the reason Labour have pursued this so doggedly because they knew what they were asking for didn’t exist? Is it possible they have someone “inside” telling them so? Or is it simply Labour’s already well established love of using FoI requests in place of proper opposition?
Finally, Paul Martin (who looked and sounded like he was about to crap his pants when Scotland Tonight talked to him) has been giving that old Labour mantra of “we need a debate”. Errr, how can you debate a legal issue? Surely that’s for LAWYERS to debate, and not parliamentarians (particularly ones with no law background)?
Watched Jackie Bailllie last night and she basically said with regard to AS interview never mind what he said – we know what he meant. If anyone is a bare faced liar it’s Ms Baillie.
How about a little thought experiment. If a Tory government had implied that they had received legal advice, which was contrary to the interests of the SNP, had then sought to legally stop this advice being published, and had then admitted in the end that the advice did not exist, everyone in the nationalist camp would be now saying that this was fair and reasonable behaviour.
“had then sought to legally stop this advice being published”
Which isn’t what actually happened, of course. The Scottish Government sought to uphold the ministerial code by not revealing whether the advice existed at all. The Tories, as Adrian points out, openly said it didn’t exist. And indeed, we now know it didn’t. The Scottish Government never said it did. So what’s the story here again?
Effie, this discussion is about the objectivity of the BBC and the MSM, not the objectivity or otherwise of SNP supporters and those who want an independent Scotland. Do keep up.
Effie,
With all due respect, that is not what this story has been about and I will quote again from Ruth Davidson on Question Time last week. This quote from her is about the very same subject.
“Well we know first of all that the SNP haven’t asked the European Union because we have written to the European Union Commission and they said that you had never asked in thirteen years to tell you what it is……”
You can check this word for word and in the wider context. It’s available via BBC iplayer.
Hmmm. Ms Baillie and the truth. Uncomfortable bedfellows, but not something the BBC or the MSM will investigate. This IS much ado about nothing, but unfortunately it gives an impression that something was amiss. In the present times with yet more MPs expenses ‘scandals’ the “they’re all the same” mantra works to the disadvantage of the SNP, who have been, so far, significantly cleaner than the other parties. Not that you would notice according to the media.
Of course the SG followed the Ministerial code, they have to. Of course AS was careful about what he said, he has to (God forbid that Lamont even becomes FM!). This is what I expect from the First Minister of Scotland – careful and thoughtful consideration of questions put by a biased interviewer (lord knows he has had plenty of practice!)
Pro-dependency at its classic worst. There is no story, so invent one, create headlines, then allow it to die (after FMQs, of course) and the populace will be no wiser. The whole establishment media are a disgrace to democracy. I really don’t know how to combat them, as they DO set a tone and ‘background noise’ to the political environment. We can laugh about their absurdities, but many ordinary Scots will not bother to look behind the stories, they accept at face value the headlines (often completely contradicted by the actual story).
I hope that in the next two years we (pro-Independence supporters) can develop the tactic to have widespread dissemination of the facts about independence. These minor issues are conflated into “BIG Stories” – we need to burst these balloons far more effectively.
Jackie Baillie was saying this morning that AS and the SNP were ‘fatally’ damaged by this ‘liar’ nonsense (and the resignations). Salmond has been ‘accused’ and mortally wounded so many times since 2007 (and before) it makes you wonder a) why is he still there beaming away and b) why the SNP just get stronger and stronger in the polls.
Could it be that there is never any real substance to the accusations and as the stories run their course they are milked dry and then just melt away. Contrast this with the socially just and effective policies that the public experience and benefit from every day (prescriptions, bus passes, etc.) and you have to ask yourself which has the greater effect on voting intentions and support for independence?
If Labour focussed on developing socially just policies that Scots want, instead of just trying to reflexively oppose and bring down the SNP at every turn then they might gain some support, but I suppose multi-tasking is asking a bit much of them.
Clearly Labour has had a choice between focussing on spin and media manipulation and developing decent policies, and I think, going for the former option have not chosen wisely.
@ MajorBloodnok
Contrast this with the socially just and effective policies that the public experience and benefit from every day (prescriptions, bus passes, etc.) and you have to ask yourself which has the greater effect on voting intentions and support for independence?
Aye. If the SNP want to damage themselves they should propose a tax cut for the rich, cancel free tuition and privatise the whole NHS or something along those lines. Could also write a few articles for the Mail on how they’re going to attack all those benefit scroungers and stuff. That would do the trick.
If Labour want to beat the SNP, they should jump to the left of them, endorse a return to more socialist policies and support devo max. That would put real pressure on the SNP.
In contrast, if Labour want an end to the union, I’d suggest they dump their 2011 manifesto, adopt a neo-liberal one nation Tory agenda, call Scotland a ‘something for nothing’ culture and angle for an end to devolution. They could also form a cross-party union campaign involving the Tories to ‘crush’ the home rule movement; that would really be suicide.
Effie Deans says:
October 24, 2012 at 9:32 am
‘How about a little thought experiment. If a Tory government had implied that they had received legal advice, which was contrary to the interests of the SNP, had then sought to legally stop this advice being published, and had then admitted in the end that the advice did not exist’
It doesn’t have to be an experiment. The principle of UK governments keeping legal advice secret extends to not confirming definitively if such advice has been sought, therefore much of your hypothesis exists, and we have no way of confirming if the rest does not.
‘But the UK Government has blocked a freedom of information request for its advice on Scotland in Europe. It said: ”Whilst there is a strong public interest in seeing what legal advice has been provided to the UK Government on the implications of EU membership if Scotland were to achieve independence, we have concluded that this is outweighed by a strong public interest in the Government being able to seek free and frank legal advice.”’
link to tinyurl.com
Yesterday was not our finest hour, but let’s not get too worked up about it. The BBC is a national institution and it will always act in support of the union, even if it means biased reporting. We should not expect anything else. However, the spectacular 2011 election result, following four years of negative anti-SNP propaganda, should remind us that on that day, the Scottish people made their own minds up. They will make their own minds up again in 2014. The unionist MSM are quite skilled in over-egging the pudding and desensitizing the population to all their lies and half-truths. The people in the street who we hear regurgitating BBC or Daily Record rubbish do so because in their hearts they want to believe it. Others treat it with the contempt it deserves.
@ Iain. Shows the hypocrisy very nicely. Thanks Iain
General advice you would seek a legal opinion on –
“What would the legal advice be with regard to the process and outcome for countries in general joining or leaving the EU either now or in the past, given their different starting positions, eg. as former colonies, as a result of war, by voluntary agreement, etc.
Specific advice you would now seek a legal opinion on –
What is your legal advice with regard to the process and outcome for Scotland as a former independent country which entered into a partnership with England 300 years ago to form a single political state, is a current existing member of the EU and is now holding a referendum on independence, mandated by the electorate and in agreement with the Westminster government?
In the Andrew Neil interview, Alex Salmond would appear to be answering the first question. He couldn’t be asking the second question because the agreement with Cameron on the referendum only happened last week. When Nicola Sturgeon spoke yesterday at Holyrood, she was referring to something more specific along the lines of the second type of question, for which legal opinion will now be sought.
It’s not hard to understand. Are Paul Martin and Jackie Baillie really too stupid to see the difference?
The issue of the FOI request is a separate issue entirely, to do with whether or not governments are bound by the ministerial code not to release legal advice given to them, rather than relating specifically to what advice regarding EU membership was either given or not given. Unless I’m confused? And who wouldn’t be with the rubbish the MSM is tipping out.
Stephen Noon used to be an SNP advisor, he is now working for yes Scotland. Here is a story that he trailed last November on the EU advice question – this is from Westminster – but the story would be the same from any Government from within the UK – that is the restrictions that they all work to. Opposition parties from all sides are well versed in this protocol. If we wish to change this then it will be up to an Independent Scotland to sort out.
link to stephennoon.blogspot.co.uk
Interested parties please do read this!
Speaking after FMQ’s that day (and reported in the Sunday Herald on the 13th November), Iain Grey thundered “The SNP has effectively taken out a superinjunction against the people of Scotland: not only are we not allowed the facts, we’re not even allowed to know whether the advice exists.”
And, not to be undone, willie Rennie of the Lib Dems, demanded that “if the Scottish people are to make any kind of informed decision, we need clarity on the advice the SNP has received. If not, it will be in danger of losing the mandate it gained in May.”
Scottish Skier said:
In contrast, if Labour want an end to the union, I’d suggest they dump their 2011 manifesto, adopt a neo-liberal one nation Tory agenda, call Scotland a ‘something for nothing’ culture and angle for an end to devolution. They could also form a cross-party union campaign involving the Tories to ‘crush’ the home rule movement; that would really be suicide.
Nice try, SS, and I’d love to believe that, but seriously, do you imagine for a minute that “Scottish” labour – or even their Westminster masters – are bright enough either to think of that or to carry it through?
@adrian b
Thanks for that link, Adrian – duly posted it on my Facebook page. I think we should all be circulating this to all of our contacts. They have a right to the correct information rather than the lies and innuendo coming from the opposition parties in Scotland, who are hell-bent on insulting our intelligence.
EU issue will come to a conclusion when EU comment on this and it will be before the referendum. It could also be that the Tories preempt it anyway by proposing a referendum on the EU which i believe the UK would vote NO.
i did chuckle today to see a tweet from Foreign Secretary encouraging Bosnia to make reforms so he could speed up their accession to the EU….really you could not make this up.
Salmond i think played the field with the EU quotes to keep the item dead in the water, Labour have played this well with regards to making mud stick. On the positive side the real core of the argument looks to be a formality anyway.
@Kenny Campbell,
“it could also be that the tories pre-empt it anyway by proposing a referendum on the EU which I believe the UK will vote No”.
Indeed. In fact, this is a much greater and more realistic threat to Scotland’s continued membership of the EU than independence, though don’t expect anyone in the Scottish MSM to dwell very long on this prospect.
But it raises a crucial question for Scottish Labour. Suppose that the Tories do force the issue of EU membership with a UK referendum on the UK’s continued membership. The likely outcome here is that in a referendum on the UK’s continued membership, England would probably vote No and Scotland would probably vote Yes. In spite of this, Scotland would then have to leave the EU, even in the event of Scotland democratically voting to remain in the EU in a UK referendum on the issue.
In that event, what would Scottish Labour’s position be? Given that Scottish Labour upholds the sovereignty of the Westminster Parliament and sees Scotland as a ‘region’ of the UK, Scottish Labour would, yet again, have to say to the people of Scotland that, in yet another UK election, Scottish votes are worthless, they count for nothing. The consequences here would be disastrous for Scotland, not least because it would isolate us from Europe, we would be locked ever more deeply into British isolationism and Scottish Labour would, once again, have betrayed the Scottish people, all in the interests of Labour’s British nationalism.
Let’s not forget also that in 1973, the Labour Party was opposed to British membership of the then EEC. So if Scottish Labour had had its way, Scotland wouldn’t even have become a member of the EU in the first place! It’s a bit rich now, therefore, of Scottish Labour to attempt to take the high moral ground on Scotland’s continued membership of the EU.
There is a remote possibility that a referendum on EU membership may be one way for the British government to attempt to scupper the independence referendum. In the section 30 order, section 3 (2), ‘Modification of Schedule 5 to the Scotland Act 1998’ it states:
“The date of the poll at the referendum must not be the date of the poll at any other referendum held under provision made by the Parliament”.
It’s highly unlikely of course, or my name’s Ian Smart!
It’s an awesome paragraph designed for all the web visitors; they will get advantage from it I am sure.