The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

Waiting For Brexit

Posted on April 09, 2019 by

Print Friendly

    512 to “Waiting For Brexit”

    1. Thepnr says:

      It’s the calm before the storm that is surely on its way.

    2. manandboy says:

      No leaves on the tree, and no signs of life in Brexit.

      Is Brexit dead?

    3. dunks says:

      Waiting for GOD NO!!!

    4. yesindyref2 says:

      Godot no!

    5. James says:

      Brexshit wont happen

    6. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      I don’t always agree with Pete Wishart, but on this he gets it dead right:

      Every week you think you’re coming to the end of this Tory Brexit disaster yet it goes on like some weird never ending psychodrama. Today the PM will seek an extension that she doesn’t want and no-one wants to give her. Tomorrow’s instalment could be even more bizarre…

      We need release from this absurdist pantomime, and the sooner the better. Before I die from a strange mixture of ennui and derision.

    7. CameronB Brodie says:

      Seeing as how we’re going all kultural like, these go some way to explaining why the New Right were able to mobilise cultural resentment to globalisation, and bring about the full-English Brexit.

      Aesthetics of Adaptation

      The Present-Day Forms of Discontent in Culture

      Who’s To Blame?

      The Art of Healing: Psychoanalysis, Culture and Cure

    8. mosstrooper says:

      The last thing to die is “Hope”

    9. manandboy says:

      Theresa May is looking more and more like she has been politically cast in the role of the ‘dead’ Charlton Heston in the final scene of “El Cid”. (No working link, but the clip is available on YouTube)

    10. Thepnr says:

      Very recent news from Luxenbourg is that the UK is likely to be offered an extension until the end of this year with conditions attached.

      Most countries appear in favour of this length of extension but a few including France and Spain are arguing for a short extension until 30th June as May requested.

      Deborah Haynes of Sky News reports.

    11. Dr Jim says:

      Old girl Betty Boothroyd makes a speech at 90 years of age and rips the Brexiters and Boris Johnson a new one for their *falsehoods*

      Then says she wouldn’t trust them to run a bath let alone a country

    12. Chas says:

      Except Godot is a tragicomedy whereas Brexit is just tragic.

    13. yesindyref2 says:

      Mmm, the connection is Ireland joining the Francophonie society, with Beckett being a reason. I knows, you know. The Brexiteers were erstaunt!

    14. msean says:

      Even if they don’t leave the EU,Scotland should still leave the UK.It’ll be only a matter of time before they think of some other stuff,like taking away powers because Scotland stood up.

    15. schrodingers cat says:

      are we there yet?


    16. Breeks says:

      manandboy says:
      9 April, 2019 at 4:12 pm
      Theresa May is looking more and more like she has been politically cast in the role of the ‘dead’ Charlton Heston in the final scene of “El Cid”. (No working link, but the clip is available on YouTube…

      Ha ha. On the subject of being strapped on to a horse…

      With her latest meeting with EU to request more time, I pictured May cast as the Roman Emissary at the beginning of the Gladiator film….. “They say no.”

    17. CameronB Brodie says:

      The full-English Brexit is a step in to an ‘exceptional’ unknown full of unintended and unforeseen consequences. It is the abrogation of “good governance”.

      Betwixt and between

      Emotional transitions

      Turner references the significance people attach to the transition from one state to another, where “state” applies to “ecological conditions, or to the physical mental or emotional condition in which a group or individual may be found at a particular time” (94). There’s a clue here to the importance in emotional life and experience not just in how you are feeling at the current moment, but what went before, and what follows after. There’s a crucial transitional element to emotions and moods.

      In an informal way, along with some students, Dorothea Kalogianni and I are currently exploring the representation of transitions from one brute emotional condition (bored, frustrated, excited, meditative) to another for someone listening to intermittent sounds in an art space as recorded by an EEG device — about which more later.

    18. geeo says:

      CameronB Brodie@4.11pm

      Thats a lot of words for “lots of people in the uk hate foreigners” !

      Lots do not even need much encouragement.

    19. Arbroath1320 says:

      EU (Withdrawal) Act 2019 currently being “debated” in the House of Commons. The usual suspects doing the usual anti Remain shite desperately trying to make themselves sound knowledgeable about ALL things post Brexit! ?

    20. Thomas William Dunlop says:

      Mr Becket would find it hard to write anything more surreal & absurd than Britain’s brexit saga.

    21. alistair x says:

      the establishment would rather kick the can down the road to no Brexit or dodder along to a general election, why? us, Scotland, they judge they can ride the storm, whatever happens, but give the snp the excuse to launch another attack on their gravy train?one that might win?
      well that wont do.
      in chess you don’t give your opponent room to manoeuvre, or a easy strike to victory
      Scotland is the real prize, always has been,everything else a magicians distraction.

    22. Robert Louis says:

      Haha. I’d started thinking this was just like waiting for godot. Every day, we get up, and….nothing.

      Now the Tories are whining that if their is an extension, they will have to abide by EU laws. I include among those tories, that rather odd red Tory called Kate Hoey (never understood why she is notionally in the Labour party).

    23. CameronB Brodie says:

      Want to understand why England’s Eurosceptic pseudo-religion has brought about a deep cognitive paralysis?

      Culture: The Driving Force of Human Cognition


      It is often, though sometimes only implicitly, assumed that biological/genetic evolution sets neural substrates, that neural substrates fix cognitive abilities, and that cognitive abilities determine the spectrum of cultural practices exhibited by a biological species. We label this view as the “bottom?up?only” view.

      In this paper we will show that such a “chain of dependence” is much looser than usually assumed, especially as far as recent periods (the last 800,000 years vs. the last 7 million years or more) are considered. We will provide evidence and arguments supporting the idea that cultural innovation may have direct and ascertainable effects both on the cognitive capabilities of populations of hominins (via what we call “cultural exaptation”) and on the neural substrates of the individuals in those populations (via what we call “cultural neural reuse”).

      Together, cultural exaptation and cultural neural reuse may give raise to a plausible general mechanism for cognitive evolution in which culture is the driving force, thus offering a “top?down?also” view of human evolution.

      Enquire within: cultural evolution and cognitive science

      Cultural neuroscience of the self: understanding the social grounding of the brain

      The cultural constitution of cognition: taking the anthropological perspective

    24. ScottieDog says:

      It’s a game or kick the can – as per the twilight zone.

    25. CameronB Brodie says:

      Fair enough. 🙂

      I’m just trying to communicate “England has a problem with social polorisation and structural racism”, in an ethical manner. Scotland has a similar problem but to a lesser extent. It is hard to develop a sense of cultural supremacy when your government is subordinate to another parliament in another country. 😉

    26. WG Saraband says:

      At this point, it feels like Brexit is Theresa May’s incompetent way of boiling a lobster (in this case, us), but refusing to turn the heat up. We’re all just wallowing in this purgatory, and no one has the courage to put us all out of our misery.

      Anyway, I may have taken this metaphor a bit too far:

    27. Craig P says:

      If we are staying in Europe then we will have an election next month. Surely the SNP will be able to get that elusive 3rd seat. I’ve been waiting five years to see the back of David Cockburn.

    28. Capella says:

      Her papers are in Sidcup.

    29. twathater says:

      I don’t think may will accept a long delay , if she does her party especially the erg will explode , the bbbbc are already showing billy bunter lookalike ( francois ) resembling an overdone gammon
      This narcisstic woman is desperate to leave a legacy like the milk snatcher thatcher ( bastard may she ROT in hell ) , as has been evidenced throughout either she is being instructed by the deeeep pocket money men or she is deluded to the point of insanity , this is a person who cannot accept defeat or compromise and in her mind the EU have made a fatal error in not accepting her supremecy

      The very fact that she has made as many trips to all the European countries in an effort to split the solidarity and demeaning herself by doing so , and achieving nada , nothing indicates to me that she has a god complex , that aligned with repeatedly refusing to accept the parliamentary rejection of her WA convinces me that she is desperate for a no deal brexshit and will do ANYTHING to achieve it ,including running out of time

      She will refuse the long extension and stick to her plan

    30. Hamish100 says:

      As I stated in an earlier post. We need an Independence referendum before next years Scottish election. Must be Independence v Brexit election

    31. Sinky says:

      Nothing about the MSM house journalists / TV political commentators ever astonishes me now but why is Labour getting an easy ride over their sell out of freedom of movement, particularly in Scotland where it is more important, and why is Joanna Cherry’s revocation of Article 50 plan not getting more plaudits as it is the only way to avoid no deal in worst case scenario.

      Just imagine Malta has more clout over this than Scotland.

    32. fernleygirl says:

      Hello. This morning I did a search for “top UK blogs”, and this was one of the sites recommended. It’s hard to resist trying to dip my toes in a space with a warning that the owner “WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS”. ?

      I’m an American, and I’ve been following political events in the UK for several years now. I have some questions that I have been unable to find answers for, and hope some of you would be willing to answer them for me.

      The Queen has the authority to appoint and dismiss Prime Ministers. If she wanted to move the Brexit fiasco in another direction, why didn’t she just send May packing? Also, the vote to delay, passed yesterday, had to be signed by the Queen to be made law. She could have vetoed it. Why didn’t she, and wouldn’t that have forced a no-deal Brexit this Friday? Does anyone think Brexit is being delayed/disposed of in an attempt to keep the UK from breaking apart? If so, is it for the benefit of the people, or the Crown?

      If any of you have recommendations for other sites (news or blogs), that would be appreciated, too.

      I was in Scotland and England last spring, and had a wonderful time talking about politics with anyone who had the time and interest. Things have changed so much since then…

    33. Terry callachan says:

      The United Kingdom is a failed state.
      England is confused to a great extent because it has a parliament that is unable to meet its commitments.
      English people are confused because the political party they voted for is unwilling to do what it promised.
      Scotland is abused by them both and has been for decades.
      It is the people of England that vote for the parliament in Westminster not the people of Scotland or wales or NI they have no impact there’s not enough of them,the people of England have been broadly quite happy with rhe performance of Westminster up until brexit they are not interested in what happens n Scotland.
      The contribution by the people of Scotland in electing MP,s to Westminster is a wasted effort .
      Young people across Scotland don’t vote for that very reason.
      I am no racist or bigot I have no interest in either I have rallied against both in the many countries I have lived in but until Scotland stops avoiding the issue and deals with the obvious which is that England ,English people, people living n England vote into power the MP,s that damage Scotland and stop kidding themselves that we are all in it together one big jolly family that has disagreements that can and will be ironed out we will be stuck in this never ending preparation for independence that goes on and on and on just like brexit has.
      Eventually people in Scotland will have to accept that the bad way Westminster treats Scotland is
      done by the people and political party,s voted into power by the people of England ,it’s not all some terrible mistake ,some oversight that the people of England would put right if only they knew , they know and they don’t give a damn because Scotland to them is irrelevant they think we should be grateful that they allow us to call ourselves British and use their English pound whilst we continue to claim Scotland is a different country.
      They want us in Scotland to accept that we are British, not Scottish and they want us to be grateful that we are governed by Westminster ,
      English people however are allowed to be English when being English spotlights them better than being British.

    34. geeo says:

      CameronB @5.02pm

      I think we all know the game by now, but hey, thanks for putting it in big words so we all know how clever you are (eye-roll).

      I recall when you used to post your stuff, mostly pretty interesting to be fair, and just let folk read and digest it.

      Recently however, you give an impression of ramming it down folks throats, or over explaining points already made, simply and clearly enough already.

      You risk coming over as a tad condescending, which i am sure is not your intention.

    35. CameronB Brodie says:

      England’s post-colonial malaise must not be allowed to undermine the viability of Scottish culture and the fabric of Scotland’s civic society. Time folk adopted the post-modern way of viewing the world, in order to escape the illiberal tendencies of liberal society.

      Freud’s social theory: Modernist and postmodernist revisions


      Acknowledging the power of the id-drives, Freud held on to the authority of reason as the ego’s best tool to control instinctual desire. He thereby placed analytic reason at the foundation of his own ambivalent social theory, which, on the one hand, held utopian promise based upon psychoanalytic insight, and, on the other hand, despaired of reason’s capacity to control the self-destructive elements of the psyche.

      Moving beyond the recourse of sublimation, post-Freudians attacked reason’s hegemony in quelling disruptive psycho-dynamics and, focusing upon the social domain, they sought strategies to counter the oppressive (repressive) social restrictions and conformist impositions impeding individual freedom that result from thwarted desire. Postmodern celebration of desire at the expense of reason and sublimation leaves the Enlightenment prospects altogether and moves psychoanalysis into a new terrain, where the very notion of rationality and an autonomous ego upon which much of Freudianism rests has been deconstructed.

      Thus the debate that begins with Freud’s social theories reflects the deeper divisions, which arose with postmodern ethics and discarded Cartesian–Kantian notions of personal identity. Here we consider the moral framework in which Freudian social theory sits and a contrasting understanding of agency that confronts his modernist conception. In that debate, we discern the larger humanist confrontation with postmodernity. Yet, all who engaged Freud shared some version of his utopian ethos, albeit radically restructuring the theory upon which social reform might occur.

      Keywords Sigmund Freud, humanism, modernism, postmodernism, psychoanalysis, social theory, utopianism

      Nietzsche’s Übermensch as a Metaphor for Education

      Social psychology and modernity

      From Social Psychology to Cultural Psychology: The Redemption of Personality

    36. Marcia says:


      The next Holyrood election is in 2021 not next year as the parliament now has a fixed five year term.

    37. geeo says:

      Callachan @5.33pm said: “I am no racist or bigot”


      I think you made a fool of that statement some time ago.

      This ain’t Britnat-land, we actually remember stuff folk like you posted previously.

    38. CameronB Brodie says:

      Yes, I really am desperate to show off. That is most definitely my motivation. Got it in one dude, well done you.

    39. CameronB Brodie says:

      Perhaps I simply have a deep fear of Brexit and I’m doing all I can to save my skin? I’m shitting bricks.

    40. schrodingers cat says:

      Craig P says:
      9 April, 2019 at 5:14 pm
      If we are staying in Europe then we will have an election next month. Surely the SNP will be able to get that elusive 3rd seat. I’ve been waiting five years to see the back of David Cockburn.

      that would be nice and if ukip stand as well as nigels brexit party they may split the vote and allow a green or libdem to replace coburn

      as for the snp 3 seat?? difficult. eu elections are usually low turn out (33%) last time and the snp won 2 seats with 29% of the vote.

      while the brexiter voters will come out, no question, (10% last time due the low turn out of all the other parties) but i unsure if the same energy over brexit exists in scotland, i dont see the brexit unrest promised in england happening in scotland. i have a feeling this might affect the snp turnout

      we would need to move from 29 to 50% to win a 3rd seat. a hard task

    41. CameronB Brodie says:

      Sorry if I’m coming on too strong, it’s just I know a bit about stuff and we’re running out of time. I have very little social capital but I hope to influence those who are in a position to influence society.

      Agency and Responsibility: A Common-Sense Moral Psychology


      Is it ever possible for people to act freely and intentionally against their better judgement? Is it ever possible to act in opposition to one’s strongest desire? If either of these questions are answered in the negative, the common-sense distinctions between recklessness, weakness of will and compulsion collapse. This would threaten our ordinary notion of self-control and undermine our practice of holding each other responsible for moral failure. So a clear and plausible account of how weakness of will and self-control are possible is of great practical significance.

      Taking the problem of weakness of will as her starting point, Jeanette Kennett builds an admirably comprehensive and integrated account of moral agency which gives a central place to the capacity for self-control. Her account of the exercise and limits of self-control vindicates the common-sense distinction between weakness of will and compulsion and so underwrites our ordinary allocations of moral responsibility.

      She addresses with clarity and insight a range of important topics in moral psychology, such as the nature of valuing and desiring, conceptions of virtue, moral conflict, and the varieties of recklessness (here characterised as culpable bad judgement) — and does so in terms which make their relations to each other and to the challenges of real life obvious. Agency and Responsibility concludes by testing the accounts developed of self-control, moral failure, and moral responsibility against the hard cases provided by acts of extreme evil.

      Keywords: better judgement, recklessness, weakness of will, compulsion, moral agency, moral responsibility, moral failure, evil, virtue, value

    42. galamcennalath says:

      @schrödingers cat
      @Craig P

      EU election. Six seats in the Scottish constituency.

      Last time Labour got two. They won’t get that again.

      So yes, it depends on who stands to soak up the pro Brexit vote. And, how much coverage the broadcasters give the far right. (That is UKIP got one last time)

      Last time Greens got more than the LibDems, neither getting a seat.

      Two thirds of Scots simply don’t want Brexit. It’s reasonable to assume that Brexit will feature prominently in both party campaigns and media reporting.

      So I have the feeling that anti Brexit parties will do better because of that.

      What of Indy in an EU election? Mixed blessings perhaps if prominent in campaigning. On the negative side the Tories will run another no-IndyRef2 campaign, but on the positive side it may motivate YES supporters to turn out and boost SNP and Greens.

      My guess?
      2 SNP, 1 Tory, 1 Lab then other two out of Green, Tory, Libdem.

      Forced to choose …
      2 SNP, 1 Tory, 1 Lab, 1 Green, 1 Libdem

    43. Thepnr says:

      @schrodingers cat

      There’s every chance that pro-remain voters will be more motivated to turn out in Scotland than leave voters in the EU elections. At least that’s my hunch.

      If right, then the pro-remain parties should do OK and neither the Tories or Labour fall into that category, at least for now. So one seat each for Tory and Labour with the SNP/Lib/Green getting the other three. SNP at least 2.

    44. Dorothy Devine says:

      STV news no mention of the dire state of drug users, HIV on the up . We did hear about feeble people who had to have a holiday and had large debts because of it, a lot of football , a wee bit of tennis and there ends the stories from across Scotland.

      ITV giving it big licks , lovely shots of hypodermic syringes in the grass . Terrible SNP had not backed the needle exchange in Glasgow , paper to be released tomorrow from Caledonian Uni.

      Hang your heads in shame Scotland!


    45. Robert Peffers says:

      @Craig P says:9 April, 2019 at 5:14 pm:

      ” … I’ve been waiting five years to see the back of David Cockburn.”

      A wee bit of friendly advice, Craig P. Having seen the back of him I advise not bothering waiting to see the back of him, it’s even worse than the front of him.

    46. yesindyref2 says:

      If you don’t want to read the posts by CBB, then you’re not the target audience, but perhaps some people are – including lurkers. Same goes for RP’s postings, we’ve seen them all before – we being regulars. Bue some lurkers won#t, and hopefully there’ll be more and more readers of Wings as it gets closer and closer.

      If nothing else happens, we’re out on Friday, gone, departed, no more EU for us, no freedom of movement, if the EU decides to implement straight away from the first second of the UK being out of the EU with a hard as hard as granite exit, then anyone with travel plans already is fucked.

    47. Thepnr says:

      Would anybody ever fancy this guys job?

      Weekly schedule of President Donald Tusk

    48. Nana says:

      Barnier warns #Brexit extension needs a purpose

    49. Robert Peffers says:

      @Hamish100 says: 9 April, 2019 at 5:38 pm:

      ” … We need an Independence referendum before next years Scottish election. Must be Independence v Brexit election.”

      If you don’t mind I’d rather leave that decision to the SNP and their leader to decide. It is my belief they just may be a wee bit better placed to be able to judge the best course of action than a lone commenter on Wings who thinks he knows best.

    50. ronnie anderson says:

      Cameron B Brodie 6.10 Permison wull hiv you working 24 hour shifts 24/7 an aw the overtime you kin handle lol, you’ll be quids in Cam

    51. Clootie says:

      A Better Together Brexit to save the Union…Labour saves the Tories.

    52. mike cassidy says:

      Remember, people.

      The first elections to reflect the brexitclusterfeck will be the English local elections on 3 May.

      I predict many a ballot paper will be stained with exploding gammon.

    53. CameronB Brodie says:

      Brexit will result in such radical transformation to the social environment, that it will result in profound biopsychosocial transformation at the individual level. Is that what those living in Scotland want forced on them?

      Social Cognitive Theory: An Agentic Perspective


      This article presents the basic tenets of social cognitive theory. It is founded on a causal model of triadic reciprocal causation in which personal factors in the form of cognitive, affective and biological events, behavioral patterns, and environmental events all operate as interacting determinants that influence one another bidirectionally.

      Within this theory, human agency is embedded in a self theory encompassing self?organizing, proactive, self?reflective and self?regulative mechanisms. Human agency can be exercised through direct personal agency; through proxy agency relying on the efforts of intermediaries; and by collective agency operating through shared beliefs of efficacy, pooled understandings, group aspirations and incentive systems, and collective action.

      Personal agency operates within a broad network of sociostructural influences. In these agentic transactions, people are producers as well as products of social systems. Growing transnational imbeddedness and interdependence of societies are creating new social realities in which global forces increasingly interact with national ones to shape the nature of cultural life.

    54. yesindyref2 says:

      @Robert Peffers
      than a lone commenter on Wings who thinks he knows best

      Even on Wings he’s hardly a “lone commenter”, there are others who want an Indy Ref before the next Holyrood Election in 2021 – while the pro-indy parties still have a majority. And elsewhere in the world of Scotland there are many others.

      If you don’t mind I’d rather leave that decision to the SNP and their leader to decide.

      That’s totally different – as long as the decision of when to hold Indy Ref 1 is before the next Holyrood Election AND honours the SNP manifesto choice to “Give Scotland a Choice” over Brexit.

      Because, if they break that pledge – see the first point. We’ll be lucky if we see a pro-Indy majority in Holyrood for years to come.

    55. CameronB Brodie says:

      ronnie anderson
      If it gets us there, I’ll do it. 😉

    56. yesindyref2 says:

      2 not 1!

    57. mike cassidy says:

      In case you haven’t seen the leave-voting farmer who can’t find a workforce!

      Or as someone has put it wonderfully.

      “This man grows fruit with a higher IQ than himself.”

    58. CameronB Brodie says:

      Robert Peffers
      You’re one to talk. Sort yourself out and start acting your age.

    59. Breeks says:

      If I could ask Mr Tusk a question, it would be to explain the difference between his “flextension “ idea, where the UK might pick and choose the timing of it’s departure when ready, and a rolling program of emergency summits jumping from crisis to crisis.

      I believe if he answered that question, the flextension option will reveal itself as a virtual straightjacket for the UK to constrain it from doing anything in Europe, anything that is except leave. It will be Brexit in everything but name, with an open ended wildcard option of a possible Withdrawal Agreement. – Although such a Withdrawal Agreement looks a forlorn aspiration.

      Meanwhile, in Scotland, what momentum there is, is for a Peoples’ Vote and / or Revocation of Article 50, which seems to be a fork in the road for Scotland, with the route to Independence seemingly being the less favoured route. Dare I say the words, now is not the time.

      How thoroughly fkg bleak and depressing. Trainspotting depressing. “They’re just wankers. We, on the other hand, are colonized by wankers. We can’t even find a decent culture to be colonized by.”
      Aye. And we’re too fkg wet and insipid to turn our gross and unambiguous colonial subjugation into any meaningful anti-colonial momentum, let alone nurture a progressive initiative for Independence.

      Maybe some Eurorebel will do us a favour and veto Theresa’s extension, then at least we can try to hold Ian Blackford to his word. Brexit is over. From here on out, the EU and Westminster are just playing pat-a-cake pat-a-cake over who actually pulls the plug.

      No Independence, no end to Brexit, futile Euro Elections to passenger seats, and the BBC trying hard to get the slug Coburn to keep the seat they won for him, and you just know somebody is about to pipe up “hurrah, there’s time for an IndyRef2!”

      Shoot me now. I’m ready.

    60. schrodingers cat says:

      I think the eu elections in scotland will be a bit of a non event, in england farage will probably upset the apple cart. but even these elections will quickly pale into insignificance if treeza resigns

      last vonc, treeza won by 19 votes (with the help of the dup) since then 4 tories have crossed the floor, one has been deselected and one erg tory (francois) is now calling for a vonc. 4 more rebels and treeza falls

      if treeza resigns there will be a leadership election, a very good chance an erg tory will win, bear in mind it is the rank and file tory party members who will get to decide. the erg tories may be a minority in westminster, but not in the rank and file tory party. (70% of whom support a no deal brexit) remember boris’s address to the conservative home at the last tory conference

      He or she will then call a ge. any tory mps who dont support no deal will be de selected by their respective constituency parties. indeed this has already begun. regardless of farages brexit party’s performance in an eu election, they could very well rejoin an erg no deal tory party and stand as tory candidates. (the raison d’etre of farage’s separate parties will cease to exist

      latest polls have no deal brexit at about 40%. a tory party leader who backed no deal in an election would have a very good chance of winning a majority at a ge.

    61. Baldeagle58 says:

      Dr Jim says:
      9 April, 2019 at 4:14 pm
      Old girl Betty Boothroyd makes a speech at 90 years of age and rips the Brexiters and Boris Johnson a new one for their *falsehoods*
      Then says she wouldn’t trust them to run a bath let alone a country.

      Dr Jim, is there a link to Betty’s speech? I’d love to see it!

    62. Thepnr says:


      What’s wrong? You sound a bit despondent due to the certainty of another Article 50 extension. Things not quite working out how you had hoped they would for one of your grand plans?

      Where do the Scottish No voters fit in with your scheme of things? When do they have a say on whether or not they want to see Scotland leave the UK and remain within the UK?

      Have you took account of what 55% of voters said in the first referendum?

    63. Iain 2 says:

      The no voters have died at the rate of around 50,000 per year leaving a different Scotland.
      And then there is brexit.

    64. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      To my way of thinking, it’s simple.

      We MUST have indyref2 before the end of this Scottish parliament. That’s what a lot of us voted for in 2016.

      Of course, it doesn’t have to be indyref2 – it could be a manifesto commitment for indy via a snap Westminster GE.

      BUT, if we in the Yes campaign are left in limbo at the time of the next Holyrood election, I dread what will happen to SNP support.

    65. Terry callachan says:

      Gee whiz geeo , nobody remembers anything you have said but you don’t actually say anything except “oi you get off this site “
      Chill geeo we,re on the same side
      We just see the opposition differently

    66. robertknight says:

      Waiting for Brexit…courtesy of T.M. May but best summed up by T.S Eliot ~


    67. Iain 2 says:

      There might be another way to end the uk, the Scottish people are sovrign and the Westminster parliament has broken the act of union.
      The Scottish people did not vote for brexit, England is breaching the act of union by removing our nation against its will from the European Union.
      I am sure this is known by the SNP.
      We will await developments.

    68. John from Fife says:

      It appears that a lot of people on here think that T May wants Brexit more than anything else. Is that really the case. Could she not be in league with Labour and want a peoples vote to reverse the EU referendum result.
      Then again in Scotland the SNP are advocating a long extension to Brexit and a peoples vote.
      What about IndyRef2 ??.

    69. Terry callachan says:

      I hope you are wrong.
      If brexit is cancelled and Scottish independence is then shelved a lot of people will wonder what Nicola Sturgeon was aiming for.

      If brexit is cancelled I think the mandate SNP had about any material change bringing forth another independence referendum will dissolve.
      I suppose they could say that there is a material change in that Westminster actively ignored everything SNP said and left them out of all negotiations on brexit but to me that is a weaker position than actual brexit taking place and might bring forth less support for Scottish independence.

      I personally want brexit to happen because I think it will persuade the most people to then support Scottish independence and thereafter we can rejoin the EU or have our own referendum on whether or not to rejoin the EU although I don’t think the number in favour of Scotland being in the EU will have dropped .

    70. Dr Jim says:

      The DUP have more say, the ERG have more say, the EU have more say, the Republic of Ireland has more say, the Downing street effing cat has more say, some dumb joker in London selling whelks has more say

      The only people to have no say are ?????????? Not hard to answer is it
      Have you got enough control yet Scottish Unionists
      Is this it, is this why you all voted no in 2014 or to Leave the EU
      You must all feel great and powerful eh

      England F….d, Wales F….d, Scotland F…..d

      Good job, top voting, takes a lot of thought to F..k yourself up this successfully

    71. Thepnr says:

      In a no deal Brexit which of the member states will be the most affected and disadvantaged?

      Not difficult to understand that it will be the UK very closely followed by Ireland. Ireland will suffer a drop in GDP almost as bad as the UK, the rest of the EU not so much.

      It’s pretty obvious why Ireland will suffer as a great deal of their trade is with the UK particularly in agricultural products such as beef and butter. There’s also the border problem of course and not just because of the Good Friday agreemnet and the troubles of the best.

      A hard border between NI and the rest of Ireland will be a magnet for smuggling and all kinds of crooks, it will inconvenience ordinary travelers and workers going about their daily business.

      Exactly the same would apply to a hard border between an Independent Scotland in the EU and an England that is out of the EU. Such a situation is not ideal and best avoided if that’s at all possible. If it’s not then it’s still a price worth paying IMO but seriously just like Ireland, Scotland if it is to remain in the EU want’s full access to trade with England without borders if possible.

      We should always be seeking the best deal we can for our newly Independent country and it would help if England stay in the SM and CU as a minimum.

    72. Robert Peffers says:

      @CameronB Brodie says: 9 April, 2019 at 8:08 pm:
      ” … Robert Peffers
      You’re one to talk. Sort yourself out and start acting your age.”

      Now get this you flaming numptie.

      You attacked me before and I retaliated. Since then I’ve done my level best to ignore you. I have not read or replied to your comments but I search for my name to see if anyone has asked me anything. Yet here you are again attacking me – I’ll tell you once more – leave me alone or take what you get in reply.

    73. yesindyref2 says:

      You attacked me before and I retaliated

      Other way around, actually.

    74. Ian Mackay says:

      I think if we do get to the EU elections still in the EU that will be good news for those wanting to stay in the EU.

      The highest ever turnout for a EU election in Scotland was 33.5% (at the last EU election in 2014).

      I think if we get a chance to vote it will be much, much higher.

      It will be another chance to deliver a verdict on the Tories’ Brexit.

      And another chance to deliver the Remain vote in Scotland.

      (It will also be another chance for England to possibly vote for Remain parties; but this is much less clear. Not only are the Greens and Liberal Dems at a low ebb but who knows what the Labour Party position on Brexit is!

      And if England vote for Leave / Conservative / Brexit Party / UKIP and Scotland doesn’t AGAIN then it will make crystal clear the political divergence between the two nations.)

      Every general election from now on should be seen in Scotland as between Pro-Independence and Pro-Dependence parties.

      The EU election is no exception , and IF we get another, I expect turnout to be high.

    75. jockmcx says:

      When somethings dead you bury it…and get on with life…

      unless ur norman bates.

      ARE YOU? and mrs (no..i dont think Scotland should be an independant country!)

      Labour was over long ago,and now it’s the tories turn.
      now they will each tear whats left of thier own parties
      to pieces.

      Goodbye goodbye we’re leaving u goodbye tata ta tum tata ta

    76. robertknight says:

      Surely if Brexit is cancelled, the SNP could use the prospect of another Brexit referendum a few years hence, with England removing Scotland from the EU against her will, (again), as leverage to push for IndyRef2?

      So whether it happens this time around, or possibly at some future date, the push for IndyRef2 remains the same – even if the opportunity to call it will not last forever…

    77. Robert Peffers says:

      @yesindyref2 says: 9 April, 2019 at 9:21 pm:

      ” … Other way around, actually.”

      You are wrong but then that wouldn’t be the first time. BTW: I more or less ignore you too. Life is too short than to argue with shit stirrers.

    78. Liz g says:

      Yesindyref2 @ 9.21
      Not exactly,Robert did respond to Cameron abrubty, but Cameron went personal first.
      So both are at fault as far as I can see.
      Unless they both claim hormones…. in which case,it is of course perfectly understandable and you should offer them a loan of that mirror of yours,to calm things doon..
      Although as to who gets first dibs… I couldn’t possibly say 🙂

    79. Thepnr says:

      @Ian Mackay

      Well said and I couldn’t agree more.

    80. CameronB Brodie says:

      Far from thinking I know it all, I’m somewhat daunted at how much I have forgotten. I’m trying to impart the benefit of a professional training as an urban and regional planner, from almost thirty years ago. If folk think me egotistical for doing that, then they have completely misread who I am. If folk don’t appreciate the relevance, they haven’t been doing the suggested reading.

      The Social Psychology of Self-Efficacy


      The topic of self-efficacy is part of a broad literature which has developed around the issues of human agency, mastery, and control. Its more delimited focus is on perceptions and assessments of self with regard to competence, effectiveness, and causal agency.

      Self-efficacy has become an important variable within social psychological research because of its association with various favorable consequences, especially in the areas of physical and mental health. It is also quite congruent with the Western emphasis on such values as mastery, self-reliance, and achievement.

      This review examines the nature of self-efficacy and related terms, reviews the research literature on the development of self-efficacy and how social structure and group processes affect this development, considers changes of self-efficacy over the life course, and reviews the consequences of self-efficacy for individual functioning and for social change. The focus of the review is on the social psychological literature within sociology, psychology, and to some extent political science.

    81. Liz g says:

      Robert Knight @ 9.28
      That my thinking too Robert.
      If Brexit gets cancelled there will be a campaign in England to try again and that means Scotland will always be under the threat of being taken out of the EU all over again.
      Not to mention the changes to the Scotland Act that have been imposed and that the Supreme Court has judged the Sewel Convention to not hold any weight in law…. We have every reason to use that Mandate even if Brexit were cancelled tomorrow…

    82. yesindyref2 says:

      @Liz g
      What happened was that CBB made a post about the “British Constitution, with abstracts and links. RP went into one of his long diatribes and accused CBB of being indoctrinated, not very pleasantly as is his wont.

      The whole point of CBB’s post as far as I could see, actually checking out a couple of the links, was that indeed the “British Constititution” was confused with a “UK Constititution” and indeed with an “English Constititution”. By the people in England.

      Basically RP just said the same thing, but with abuse as per normal. And complained about CBB posting British propaganda, why would he do such a thinh (insinuation, insinuation). Clearly he hadn’t bothered reading CBB’s posting properly, the abstracts – nor clicked on any link.

      The problem we face isn’t just or even “propaganda”, it’s sheer wilful ignorance of the fabric of the UK and Britain, by nearly every English politician and sadly many of the English themselves, including academcis who really really should know better. That was part of CBB’s point (I think I’m right).

      People can’t get the understanding of propaganda unless they realise that it’s not just the intended victim suffers from the results, it’s the perpetrator who is, though appalling ignorance, just as guilty, and perhaps also, a victim as well.

      It’s all there though I can’t be bothered doing the search for the bit of the appropriate thread.

    83. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      “There might be another way to end the uk” is exactly the same way as I see it @Iain 2 says at 8:58 pm

      It is also the reason I think that TMay and The Commons have bottled Brexit so far.

      It comes down to which Union they want to remain in, EU or UK.

      They can’t have both.

      Unfortunately for them only one of these Unions keeps their ‘country’ financially viable.

      That’s why it is referred to constantly as ‘precious’ by TMay.

    84. Hamish100 says:

      Scottish elections 2021. Cheers. I was only a year out! Must be all the excitement. I’ll still stick with an Independence v brexit election is necessary- whenever the die is cast.

    85. yesindyref2 says:

      through not though, plus the usual typos.

    86. CameronB Brodie says:

      Almost, I’m developing an intolerance for the attitude of some and the wilful delusion of others.

    87. Graeme says:

      Dr Jim says:
      9 April, 2019 at 9:08 pm

      The DUP have more say, the ERG have more say, the EU have more say, the Republic of Ireland has more say, the Downing street effing cat has more say, some dumb joker in London selling whelks has more say

      The only people to have no say are ?????????? Not hard to answer is it
      Have you got enough control yet Scottish Unionists
      Is this it, is this why you all voted no in 2014 or to Leave the EU
      You must all feel great and powerful eh

      England F….d, Wales F….d, Scotland F…..d

      Good job, top voting, takes a lot of thought to F..k yourself up this successfully


      Well said Dr Jim

      The reason we’re in this mess is because of the No voters of 2014, I understand we have to hold out an olive branch and be nice to them, I know it’s wrong but personally I have nothing but contempt for them and I’ll never forgive them

    88. Liz g says:

      Yesindyref2 @ 9.43
      Yes, and then Cameron called him a fanny… and on it went.
      So… Like I said they both kicked off

    89. CameronB Brodie says:

      I’d recommend treating No voters as victims of a dysfunctional political system, most of them are good people. Yoons? Well there’s always hope but reason needs boundaries. 🙂

      Listening with Empathy
      Save time, communicate more effectively and improve patient and provider satisfaction

    90. yesindyref2 says:

      We all need to chill out a bit, Indy Ref 2 might be real soon now. Or not.

      @Liz g
      Some of us Independence supporters can get really pissed off when someone tries to insinuate we’re fake. And RP has done that to many WOS posters. Generally those who don’t agree with him about everything, but even including some that do.

      Personally I find it way easier posting in unionist forums, as most people are on the other side, so insults are water off a duck’s back. Friendly fire is more dangerous than hostile, as you don’t see it coming – it’s a stab in the back when you don’t expect it.

    91. CameronB Brodie says:

      Liz g
      I was aiming to end his nonsense about the Treaty of Union being the British Constitution, then and there. My approach appeared to work for a while.

    92. Molly says:


      Why wait for Indy ref 2? If we’ve to have European elections, why not make sure Scotlands voice really is heard and vote for pro Indy candidates?

      Not only would it show Scotland is really in a different place politically, the fact ‘most’ do want to be part of Europe,it won’t do our future any harm if we ever want to join and it would raise more constitutional questions.

      If there was an emphatic turnout ,it would be hard to argue with and better doing something constructive rather than this waiting

    93. One_Scot says:

      Lol, I don’t watch the news for days at a time anymore, and when I do catch it nothing has changed.

    94. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      My experience says you are right @CameronB Brodie says at 10:06 pm

      “I’d recommend treating No voters as victims of a dysfunctional political system”

      I personally know a lot of previous 2014 NO voters (believed the Better Together Propaganda, were sufferers of Jockholm Syndrome or were looking at things from a personal financial position and didn’t like the odds of Independence uncertainty vs Status Quo) who are now 100% YES.

      Most are desperate for IndyRef2.

      You’re correct they are “good people”

      They also seriously don’t like the way Scotland and her Politicians have been treated since June 2016.

    95. While we wait for brexit,

      let us savour the speech in UK parliament by a British Labour MP,

      “a democracy fails to be a democracy if the people cannot change their minds ”

      our very own MP for the communist enclave in Edinburgh,Morningside and The Grange,

      Red Tory Ian Murray,

      with a link to the speech from the indefatigable Nana,

      Murray on second chance,

    96. Hamish100 says:

      Robert Peffers says:
      9 April, 2019 at 7:30 pm
      @Hamish100 says: 9 April, 2019 at 5:38 pm:
      ” … We need an Independence referendum before next years Scottish election. Must be Independence v Brexit election.”
      If you don’t mind I’d rather leave that decision to the SNP and their leader to decide. It is my belief they just may be a wee bit better placed to be able to judge the best course of action than a lone commenter on Wings who thinks he knows best.

      Rather rude Robert. I give my view for what it is worth. If Nicola Sturgeons takes my advice well and good. If she ignores it (more than likely) I am still entitled to my own wee opinion.

      I don’t need the First Minister or Robert Peffers to decide for me.

    97. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      “The case for a consultative independence referendum.” from James Kelly (not the BLiS one).

    98. Liz g says:

      Cameron & Yesindyref2
      The hardest part is remembering we’re all on the same side right now, because this waiting is getting on our last nerve.
      This I know to my cost as I’m sure you two have both seen.
      We all do now and again….
      You needn’t pay any attention Cameron,of course you needn’t but I’m commenting about it to smooth things over and I hope that’s how you are reading it…
      I’d hope if I’m getting out of line another Winger would say something too,because we are all very passionate about Indy and sometimes it hard to see when Not to respond….
      Anyhoo …. We all discussed it to much on this tread already,let’s get back to the real stuff,before we get in any trouble from the real boss…. Apparently he has hammers!!

    99. Fairliered says:

      If there are European elections I would like to see the SNP using it as a mandate for independence and staying in the EU. In this case it would be good if the other pro independence parties did not put forward candidates. Alternatively, if the combined vote for the pro independence parties exceeded the combined vote for the unionist parties, that woud be a mandate for independence. I suspect that the EU countries would support this.

    100. cassandra says:

      @Liz g

      One of them is a bully who is always kicking off at anyone with whom he disagrees.

      One of them constantly implies posters who question anything are Britnats and anti-SNP and anti-Indy.

      One of them has his henchmen backing him up if any one says anything out of turn.

      One them has advocated using VPNs and proxies to protect them self online.

      One of them constantly posts the same repetitive simplistic post advocating waiting for the SNP to decide what is best. He suggests contacting the SNP and when posters say they have he rages that the SNP don’t have to answer to anyone.

      One of them uses the the moniker ‘Auld Bob’when writing the same green ink post BTL in other publications.

      If it all goes tits up and the SNP cannot deliver who will get the blame? The SNP at the next election. By constantly telling others not to take Indy into their own hands and mobilise but rely on the SNP, who is doing the most damage to the cause of Independence?

      I have run the posts in question past a number of SNP acquaintances and Lawyers working in GLSS who are aghast that they are taken seriously.

      Hint, it is not CBB.

    101. McDuff says:

      Spot on.
      Peffers thinks this site belongs to him and his opinion is the only one that counts.

    102. Mad Unionist says:

      The pressure is terrible I am buying my online wine a month in advance now and twice as much. May have to settle for English wine but wonder how that will go down. The home brew could be the last resort.

    103. Thepnr says:

      Then three stooges turn up within minutes of each other. Get a grip lads hahaha.

    104. Liz g says:

      Hamish 100
      I’m staying in topic now
      How about you?

    105. Liz g says:

      Thepnr @ 10.49
      One day we’ll look back and laugh
      Oh look 🙂 🙂 🙂

    106. Mad Unionist says:

      A few good things came out of Eton. The Officer Corps who fought the Kaiser and Hitler. However Cameron gave us a vote and that was a moment in history and probably the first time the working classes really caused a shock to the EU cheese and wine drinking club. If only Cameron had said naw to the silly people, we educated people know better.

    107. Arthur Thomson says:

      I wonder if there has ever before been a situation like Brexit? I also wonder who predicted it? Certainly I predicted that a leave vote would make big waves but I didn’t imagine that the dim witted Brits would actually implement it and so far even they haven’t been dim witted enough to do that.

      Frankly, I don’t care which way they turn. They are between a rock and a hard place and I am entertained by their discomfort. My first choice would be that they continue to prevaricate for a very long time, exposing themselves to the world as the undesirables they really are. Then again, I am not fussy because they have already put themselves into a corner out of which they have no prospect of escape. The Brexit damage has just begun. The Brits have declared war on Europe and they are going to lose.

      The SNP has clearly nailed its colours to the European mast. The time for battle to commence is coming soon.

    108. CameronB Brodie says:

      Liz g
      We’re simply having an inter-generation dispute over the nature of reality, a microcosm of British politics. 🙂

    109. Effijy says:

      STV in Full Scotland and SNP Bad mode tonight.
      ITN News do a special feature on Glasgow Drug
      Abusers living on the street.

      Glasgow’s main Needle Exchange has been closed
      And junkies are sharing needles give rise to those
      affected with the HIV Virus.

      Real story: Glasgow Central Station Needle Exchange
      Closed by “Network Rail”.

      A user was found dead in one of their toilets so they couldn’t face the bad press?

      NHS Scotland, the best performing NHS in the UK, has been aero going funds that will see
      A fully supported mobile van needle exchange for Glasgow City Centre.
      The vehicle has cost £50,000 in itself and ongoing costs for staff and equipment all costs on top.

      Please also recognise that Glasgow Homelessness is being irradiated with only around 30
      People living on the streets. There are overnight shelters but some decide to stay away as the
      Shelter cannot support pets.

      Aren’t you proud of our SNP Government, Council, and NHS.

      Shame the UK Media refuse to indulge in journalism
      and provide a true rounded picture.

      UK Media Bad! UK Government Bad, Brexit Bad!

    110. Liz g says:

      Cameron @ 11.10
      Well us kid’s hate it when Paw and Grandpaw fight.. 🙂

    111. Derek says:

      Well, that passed the time.

    112. Liz g says:

      Effigy @ 11.15
      I didn’t know that the Shelters don’t take pets..
      There’s clearly a gap there needing filled especially since most landlords won’t take them either!!

    113. Dr Jim says:

      What we’re doing is once again waiting for London to tell us what we’re doing and what we’re not

      That’s the issue about Independence, three years of waiting for London to make its mind up what they’re going to do to us

      How many years, how many times, how bad will it be, we can only hope, see that’s the vote right there

      Do we want that or do we not

    114. Hamish100 says:

      Liz g

      Staying in? I’m never allowed out!

    115. Dr Jim says:

      I’m tellin aw your Ma’s oan yeez, an get that telly aff

    116. Thepnr says:

      @Dr Jim

      I prefer to look at it as waiting until the time is right and it is us that will choose that time and the place. They are busy destroying each other, fear not we will step in and fill the void.

      Both the Labour party and the Tories have never had such low support and they are still falling. We don’t need to wait on London doing anything it’s the opposite, just a question of us choosing the best time to end this Union for good.

    117. Liz g says:

      Arthur Thompson @ 10.58
      Well if that lot would have paid more attention to Wings rather than trying to spoil it.
      They would have seen every single problem with Brexit suggested and discussed at length well before the vote.
      Everything from the Irish Border to Westminster being to incompetent to Handel the negoation!!
      Hell bloody mend them ..

    118. Liz g says:

      Hamish 100 @ 11.28
      Ha Ha
      I ment ON topic,I was rushing to post before you got pulled in to that clowns rubbish….LOL

    119. James Barr Gardner says:

      Scotland does not belong to England !

    120. CameronB Brodie says:

      OK, I may appear to be directionless but it’s just that I’m very, very, rusty.

      God and Cosmos: Moral Truth and Human Meaning
      Moral Rationality

      This chapter examines what is required to be fully rational in accepting the authority of moral obligation, in particular, whether such rationality requires a convergence between morality and self-interest. It considers similar but distinct claims by C. S. Lewis (in The Abolition of Man), Kant, and Sidgwick that morality is self-evident and does not require theistic foundations. Sidgwick, however, raises the problem of the “dualism of practical reason” which arises in those cases when it is rational to do our moral duty and to act for our self-interest, but we cannot do both, a problem for which he thought there was no solution. The chapter agrees with Kant’s solution that full moral rationality requires the existence of God and immortality, though it critiques Kant’s articulation at certain points.

      Keywords: Kant, Sidgwick, C. S. Lewis, moral rationality, self-interest, dualism practical reason

      Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals
      An Introduction

      Kant’s Criticism of Common Moral Rational Cognition

      Educated intuitions. Automaticity and rationality in moral judgement

    121. Mad Unionist says:

      Scotland does not belong to the EU or England!

    122. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      CameronB Brodie @ 22:13:

      I was aiming to end his nonsense about the Treaty of Union being the British Constitution

      As you know, I have had similar sparring bouts with RP, but on this I must firmly but politely disagree with this assertion of yours.

      Firstly, the Treaty of Union was the founding document of the UK. It was the sole means by which it was created. That’s an indisputable fact.

      Attempts to prove otherwise, that the shared Stuart monarchy (by then firmly esconced in England) somehow made it all happen out of nowhere, like some conjurer’s magic trick, are fundamentally English exceptionalist in nature. Outrageously hegemonist, even. I would have thought you of all people would be able to recognise that.

      Secondly, while some aspects of the 1707 Treaty were clearly transient, other aspects have enduring major force in the governance of the UK today. The most obvious of which being the self-evident separate existence of Scots Law, guaranteed by the Treaty and nowhere else.

      It is true that oft times the Treaty has been honoured more in the breach, and mostly it remains unmentioned and unremarked in UK governmental circles, but it continues to exert a background influence. Every single UK government of every political persuasion, while remaining studiously mute on the subject, has also always been scrupulously careful not to cross certain invisible lines set by the Treaty, for fear of unleashing a constitutional storm. The present feckless and incompetent UKGov may be the first to do so, in which case it will reap the consequences.

      Up until now, the Scots have chosen mainly to defer out of politeness and an unwillingness to “rock the boat”, but that past behaviour does not invalidate the underlying principle. If you doubt that, just look at the success the “Scots 6” (with the help of an Englishman!) achieved recently in asserting the primacy of Scots Law regarding Art.50. The SC and the ECJ clearly don’t agree with you on the legal force of the Treaty, and they should know. There may yet be more to come.

      Why is it, do you think, that the DUP and the Tories are so immensely sensitive about the potential effects that the Withdrawal Agreement might have on the integrity of the Union? They evidently see a danger which you evidently don’t. This extreme nervousness doesn’t come out of nowhere, though you won’t ever hear any of them admit it. It stems directly from the 1707 Treaty.

      It’s that fundamental. And not to be airily dismissed somehow as “nonsense”.

    123. geeo says:

      RJS @1.17am

      We may not see eye to eye often, but that was a very good post, well put.

      See, I can be nice.

    124. CameronB Brodie says:

      Robert J. Sutherland
      Yes it was the founding document but it is not the constitution. I am attempting to introduce folk to how the British constitution is defined in British constitutional law and dealt with by British academia and law practitioners.

      Why is that so hard to accept as a foundation for change? English Law is the Moral Law, which the government has chosen to ignore by legislating for Brexit. If A50 is acted upon, Britain becomes a totalitarian state (see the British constitution). Is that not a strong enough argument to work with, rather than seeking to get English Law to ratify the Treaty as the foundation of the British constitution and, subsequently, the instrument of the Union’s probable termination?

    125. cassandra says:

      Wisen up people.

      If certain posters tell you you are brainwashed and then keep telling you what to think…

      If they tell you to meekly accept what they say and then get angry if you question them, are they encouraging thinking for yourself?

      If they accuse others of multiple identities but profess to mask their own identities, are they for real?

      If they produce reams of ‘truth’ with no reference material, why should you accept it?

      If ‘Peffers’ didn’t already exist, the 77th Brigade would be inventing them right now – a poster who derails every thread with their own agenda, accuses every new poster of being ‘one of them’. Sets longstanding posters against each other and brings discord to every thread.

      You are being buttered up to passively await Independence to be given to you and then blame the SNP if it doesn’t happen.

      It is right to question everything.No party or movement should be afraid of questions.

    126. Ghillie says:

      The British empire is dying with a whimper, not a bang.

    127. jockmcx says:

      There’s no British empire,only Norman Bates mummy in the

    128. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      CameronB Brodie @ 01:35,

      I am not for a moment claiming that the Treaty of Union 1707 is the whole constitution, or anything like it. That would be absurd, because it obviously doesn’t provide a sound or complete basis for the relationship between the citizen and the state (and was never intended for the purpose anyway). So in that sense you are right, Cam.

      But it does lay down the ongoing basis by which Scotland and England are conjoined in this damned Union, even if far too often that is dismissed as irrelevant or merely ignored. Well, at least by those who like to presume that the UK is a unitary state. Which it manifestly is not. As the examples I already gave do readily illustrate.

      The proposition that the Treaty of Union is void is essentially a Unionist one, I’m afraid, whether intentional or (like much else in the UK) merely defaulted. It may be preferred by high-minded theorists seeking unwrinkled perfection, but judging by the behaviour of practicing politicians over the centuries right into the present day, they certainly don’t concur!

      And with good reason, because the Treaty is a politico-legal powder keg with more virtual explosive power than Guy Fawkes ever managed to muster. And no less dangerous for being neglected.

    129. K1 says:

      I’m bored, here’s some in depth analytical reading material. Fill yer boots…I’m posting more of it so more people can take a view and form their own nuanced interpretations….why not we’ve nothing better to do than sit around staring at our collective navels’.

      (1) The historical status of Scotland and the UK

      26. From 1603, when the Stuart King James VI of Scotland inherited the English throne, Scotland and England (and its colony Ireland) shared the same monarch.

      27. There is little reason to doubt that between that date and 1707, England and Scotland remained separate states. They had separate constitutional systems, despite sharing a monarch. For instance, Scotland af rmed its different rules of succession in the Succession Act 1682 (Scotland). It also had international relations with England, even after 1603, and the English Parliament levied customs dues on Scottish exports.

      28. Devine suggests that ‘Scotland was far from being an independent state’ in that ‘Scottish foreign policy had moved with James [IV] to London in 1603 and there was a great grievance that thereafter foreign policy for both kingdoms was exclusively designed to suit English needs’. But the Darien Project in Panama – the failed Scottish investment launched in 1695 that partly precipitated the union – does evidence a separate Scottish foreign policy, at least to some extent. And Queen Anne’s ministry in London was also ‘forced to accept’ the Act anent Peace and War 1704 (Scotland), despite, Devine notes, ‘the fact that its whole emphasis suggested a separate and autonomous foreign policy’. It provided that ‘after Her Majesty’s Decease, and failing Heirs of her Body, no person being King or Queen of Scotland and England shall have the sole power of making War with any Prince, Potentate or State whatsoever without consent of [the Scottish] Parliament’.

      29. It is also true that James VI proclaimed himself king of ‘Great Britain’ in 1604, but that was probably unconstitutional and was not followed by his Stuart successors. The English Parliament refused to alter the name of the kingdom on the ground, among others, that ‘the alteration of the name of the Kingdom doth inevitably and infallibly draw on the erection of a new kingdom or state, and a dissolution or extinguishment of the old’.10 English judges advised that the change of name, since it had substantive consequences, required parliamentary approval.

      30. Later attempts to unite England and Scotland by both the Stuarts and Oliver Cromwell foundered. Only in 1707 was a lasting union between them effected.

      31. On 22 July 1706, commissioners appointed by the English and Scottish parliaments agreed on 25 articles comprising the Treaty of Union. On 16 January 1707, the Scottish Parliament approved the articles, along with certain amendments made in the course of debate, in the Union with England Act 1707 (Scotland). On 28 January 1707, having been presented with the Treaty of Union and the Scottish Act, the English Parliament passed the Union with Scotland Act 1706 (England). It approved the terms of the Scottish Act without amendment (the two Acts together being the Acts of Union).12 The Kingdom of Great Britain was constituted on 1 May 1707.

      32. The signi cance of the union is debated. There are two questions relevant to this advice: whether it created a new state and whether the Treaty of Union, considered with or without the Acts of Union, still constitutes a treaty in international law.
      (a) Whether the union of 1707 created a new state

      33. There are two possible answers to this question. It is a question not of the position
      of Scotland within domestic law – under which Scotland clearly retained a distinct constitutional status, in particular a separate legal system – but of how the union of 1707 should be treated as a matter of international law.

      34. One view is that the union created a new state, Great Britain, into which the international identities of Scotland and England merged and which was distinct from both. Lord McNair writes: ‘England and Scotland ceased to exist as international persons and become the unitary State of Great Britain.’13 This view has been relied on in UK courts: MacCormick v Lord Advocate.

      35. An alternative view is that as a matter of international law England continued, albeit under a new name and regardless of the position in domestic law, and was simply enlarged to incorporate Scotland. In support of this view, among other things:

      35.1 Scottish members joined Parliament at Westminster, but there was no new election of its English members. This was in accordance with the Acts of Union Article XXII.

      35.2 Treaties concluded by England appear to have survived to bind Great Britain.
      Parry and Hopkins cite the Treaty of Alliance with Portugal15 as the oldest ‘British’ treaty, and it is generally accepted as being such, even though it was concluded by

      35.3 England’s diplomatic representation in the rest of Europe continued uninterrupted. The Acts of Union Article XXIV appears to acknowledge this in retaining the Great Seal of England for transitional purposes.

      36. We note that the incorporation of Wales under laws culminating in the Laws in Wales Act 1536 (England) and of Ireland, previously a colony, under the Union with Ireland Act 1801 (GB) and the Act of Union 1800 (Ireland) did not affect state continuity. Despite its similarity to the union of 1707, Scottish and English writers unite in seeing the incorporation of Ireland not as the creation of a new state but as an accretion without any consequences in international law.

      37. For the purpose of this advice, it is not necessary to decide between these two views of the union of 1707. Whether or not England was also extinguished by the union, Scotland certainly was extinguished as a matter of international law, by merger either into an enlarged and renamed England or into an entirely new state.

      38. It is therefore misleading to speak of Scotland (or similarly of England, Wales, Northern Ireland or the isle of Great Britain) as if it were an entity already possessing international personality in its own right or some other relevant international status, regardless of what status it may have as a matter of UK domestic law.

      39. It may also be misleading to speak of dissolving the ‘union’ effected by the incorporation of those territories: whatever the position historically or politically or in domestic law, in international law the position of the UK does not necessarily differ from that of a state formed in some way other than by a ‘union’. (This point is pursued below in discussing whether Scotland could revert to the pre-1707 Scottish state.)
      (b) Whether the Treaty of Union sounds in international law

      40. Despite its name, it is not obvious that the Treaty of Union did and does sound as a treaty in international law. Certainly there was a negotiation between England and Scotland, an it was subsequently referred to as a ‘treaty’ in both Acts of Union. But the Scottish Parliament, in enacting the Scottish Act of Union, then unilaterally amended its provisions. It is therefore unlikely that it constituted a treaty in itself.

      41. Smith has argued that although the Treaty of Union itself is just a ‘record of negotiations’ between the commissioners that the Scottish Parliament later debated and amended the subsequent ‘complex of exchanged Acts of the two Parliaments’ does constitute a treaty, albeit one concluded in an unorthodox way. On this view, the Scottish Act of Union, in providing that none of its articles would be binding until approved by Queen Anne with the English Parliament’s authority, was in effect ‘the offer of Treaty terms by the Scottish Queen in Parliament to the English Queen in Parliament’, and the registration of Queen Anne’s command of the English Exempli cation under the Great Seal of England without objection in the books of the Scottish Parliament then brought the treaty into force.

      42. But there is no need to express a concluded view on whether the Treaty or Acts of Union ever constituted a treaty in the international law sense. Smith’s view was that ‘[t]wo international persons disappeared in 1707 – the obligants under the treaty – and a new international person took their place’ which, though perhaps ‘bound in constitutional law by the conditions of its own creation, could not in public international law be bound by a treaty to which it was not a party’. Wicks agrees:

      ‘The requirement that a treaty be ‘governed by international law’ is a little difficult to apply to the 1707 agreement, because the parties to it ceased to exist on May 1. There was never the opportunity for the agreement to be governed by international law. This cannot realistically be regarded as representing an obstacle to the agreement amounting to a ‘treaty’, however. The entire purpose of the complex negotiations of 1707 was to enact a legal agreement between the two independent states of England and Scotland. As such it was a validly concluded international treaty, albeit for a very brief time. As the parties ceased to exist in May 1707, the treaty has been of no legal signi cance since that date. Its main signi cance today is as a possible source of title for the new state created in 1707.’

      43. The same result follows from the alternative possibility, discussed above, that Great Britain was the continuator of England rather than a new state. The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties Article 2 (though anachronous here) de nes ‘treaty’ as an agreement ‘concluded between States’. If one of the two parties to the treaty ceased to exist as a state in May 1707, it can no longer sound in international law. The situation is perhaps comparable to the Treaty of Waitangi between the UK and certain Ma? ori chiefs, which on one view (by no means uncontested but still useful by way of analogy) was an international treaty under which an independent state ceded its sovereignty. This view relies on the assumption that there could have been a treaty and yet the resulting constitutional system could still be identi ed with only one of the two parties, England, at the expense of the other – which is certainly possible.

      44. Consistently with the view that the Treaty and Acts of Union no longer sound as a treaty, even if they ever were one, Parliament soon afterwards enacted legislation amending it: the Union with Scotland (Amendment) Act 1707 (GB), which abolished the separate English and Scottish privy councils and created a new Privy Council of Great Britain. The Acts of Union Article IX had provided that the Queen ‘may Continue a Privy Council in Scotland … until the Parliament of Great Britain shall think to to alter it’.

      45. The UK Parliament has since amended or repealed multiple other provisions of the Acts of Union, such as those providing for Scottish representation in Parliament or concerning religion.

      46. Indeed, in 1999 the UK Government suggested to the Committee for Privileges that the UK Parliament had ‘complete sovereignty’ to amend even those articles of the Acts of Union that ‘are expressed to be entrenched for all time (such as the creation of the United Kingdom, the succession of the Monarchy, the Scottish Courts and the Church of Scotland)’. The existence of such ‘entrenched’ provisions is a matter for domestic constitutional law and need not be dealt with here. The fact that at least some provisions are open to amendment by the UK Parliament is enough to reinforce the conclusion that neither the Treaty nor the Acts of Union currently operate as a treaty in international law.

    130. K1 says:

      (2) Possible outcomes of Scottish independence

      47. The assumption that if Scotland becomes independent then it will be with the UK’s agreement is not determinative of Scotland’s or the rUK’s status following independence. Negotiations between the UK and Scotland and the views of other states might well shape that status.

      48. This is also true of matters of succession more generally. The multilateral peace treaties that constituted new states in 1815, 1919–23 and 1947 all dealt with succession problems. For example, the Treaty of Saint-Germain-en-Laye24 provided for the responsibility of the successor states of Austria-Hungary for its public debts. Unilateral declarations can also be signi cant. Thus when Egypt and Syria formed the United Arab Republic, its Foreign Minister informed the UN Secretary-General that ‘all international treaties and agreements concluded by Egypt or Syria with other countries will remain valid within the regional limits prescribed on their conclusion and in accordance with the principles of international law’. Although such a unilateral declaration could not bind other states, other states acquiesced in that position. The continuation of UN membership, though certainly not determinative, is a useful indicator of whether other states accept a state’s claim of continuity or require it to rejoin as a new state (as they did with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia).

      49. There are three possible outcomes of negotiated Scottish independence in international law: (a) one state that is the continuator of the UK and one new state; (b) two new states (neither of which is the continuator of the UK, which would be extinct); and (c) one state that is the continuator of the UK and one state which reverts to the status of the pre-1707 Scottish state. We will discuss each possibility in turn.

      (a) One continuator state and one new state

      50. Logically there are two possibilities: either Scotland or the rUK could be considered
      the continuator state of the UK and the other considered a new state. But the former possibility cannot be seriously entertained. It will be evident, without further elucidation, that none of the factors relevant to state continuity discussed below counts in favour of it. We will therefore focus on the possibility that the rUK – comprised of England, Wales and Northern Ireland – would be the continuator state of the UK and an independent Scotland a new state. This is the position of the UK Government and the position on which we have been particularly asked to advise.

      51. Situations where one of the states existing after secession or negotiated independence is considered the continuator state are the most common in state practice. We will consider them chronologically and then draw some preliminary conclusions about the likelihood of the same outcome occurring if Scotland becomes independent.

      52. In general, state practice shows that continuity depends on the criteria for statehood: a state is the same if it involves what may be regarded as the same independent territorial and governmental unit at the relevant times, despite changes in its population, territory or system of government.

      (i) State practice

      53. The presumption of continuity despite even drastic territorial change is illustrated by imperial powers that have lost territory – including the UK itself, whose continuity is not questioned despite its loss of not one but two global empires. Likewise, Turkey was regarded as the continuator of the Ottoman Empire after 1918. France’s continuity was not questioned despite the loss of Algeria, which unlike other more de nitively colonial territories had been assimilated into metropolitan France, at least according to French law. For the most part, however, colonial or quasi-colonial cases are of little relevance here, since Scotland (as opposed to Australia, Canada, India or other former British territories) is part of the metropolitan UK rather than a colony.

      54. After the partition of British India in 1947, the Dominion of India was treated as the same entity and Pakistan as a new state, though there is some uncertainty about whether British India had already become an independent state before partition rather than a colonial territory still subordinate to the UK.

      54.1 After partition, the Dominion of India retained most of British India’s territory and population and continued its founding membership of the UN. But Pakistan (having initially claimed that its membership should also be automatic) applied for membership in its own right on 15 August 1947.

      54.2 The British Indian government, though constitutionally distinct from the UK, was subordinate to the UK Cabinet and Parliament, at least until the exchange of ambassadors that took place a few months before ostensible independence (and partition) in 1947, and its founding membership of the UN was an anomalous status. Against this: in Murarka v Buckrack Bros, a US Circuit Court of Appeal held that the exchange of ambassadors had ‘amounted at least to de facto recognition, if not more. To all intents and purposes, these acts constituted a full recognition of the Interim Government of India at a time when India’s ties with Great Britain were in the process of withering away’.

      55. Singapore’s separation from Malaysia in 1965 is a clearer case. Malaysia retained its international identity and UN membership and Singapore was admitted as a new state. This occurred pursuant to a separation agreement that referred to Singapore as ‘an independent and sovereign state and nation separate from and independent of Malaysia and so recognised by the Government of Malaysia’. The separation agreement assumed the continuity of Malaysia.

      56. After the separation of Bangladesh from Pakistan, the remaining territory, which comprised the former West Pakistan, was also considered the continuator state.

      56.1 In March 1971, the Pakistani government suspended the National Assembly – in which an East Pakistani political party, the Awami League, had won an absolute majority – and instigated martial rule in East Pakistan. The following month the Awami League proclaimed the independence of Bangladesh on the territory formerly comprising East Pakistan. By the end of the subsequent Indo-Pakistani war, the Awami League substantially controlled that territory. Between the end of the war and February 1972, 28 states recognised Bangladesh.

      56.2 This was a de nite case of secession – forcible and unilateral – rather than negotiated independence. That may have contributed to the acceptance of the rest of Pakistan as the continuator state: its institutions were substantially unchanged, and it retained the majority of the predecessor state’s territory. These factors may have been especially important in this case given that, unusually, Pakistan was the smaller unit by population, though only slightly: in 1975 its population was 68,483,000, whereas Bangladesh’s was 70,582,000.35

      56.3 Pakistan’s UN membership continued, whereas Bangladesh was eventually admitted to the UN separately, on 17 September 1974.

      57. A particularly pertinent example of state practice is the dissolution of the USSR in 1990–91. Several of its former constituent republics, comprising a signi cant part – though not a majority – of Soviet territory, became newly independent states. The largest unit, the Russian Federation, was after initial uncertainty regarded as continuing the legal personality of the USSR. This example illustrates several considerations.

      57.1 In a political sense, it was uncontroversial that the USSR had come to an end: the Minsk Protocol between Russia, Belarus and Ukraine stated that ‘the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as a subject of international law and a geopolitical reality no longer exists’; the Alma Ata Protocol between Russia and ten other former Soviet republics, that ‘with the establishment of the Commonwealth of Independent States, the [USSR] ceases to exist’. Although some authors at the time regarded this as determinative, hindsight has made clear that it is not: the political extinction of a state does not necessarily extend to the legal realm. Thus as Shaw notes, ‘it is clear from all the circumstances’ that the position expressed in these instruments amounted to ‘an essentially political statement not taken by either the parties themselves or by third states as constituting a proclamation of dissolution preventing claims by Russia of continuity’.

      57.2 On 24 December 1991, Russia wrote to the UN Secretary-General, illustrating the signi cance, in practice, of the position taken by a state itself on whether it constitutes the continuator state to an apparently dissolved union: the membership of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in the United Nations, including the Security Council and all other organs and organizations of the United Nations system is being continued by the Russian Federation (RSFSR) with the support of the countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States. In this connection, I request that the name ‘Russian Federation’ should be used in the United Nations in place of the name [‘USSR’]. The Russian Federation maintains full responsibility for all the rights and obligations of the USSR under the Charter of the United Nations, including financial obligations.

      57.3 The newly independent former Soviet republics all accepted this position, and no other state objected to it. The UK’s position, for example, was that ‘it was not necessary to reaccredit [the UK ambassador to the USSR], he just became the continuous representative to the continuum State, namely, Russia’.

      57.4 The European Communities (EC) declared that ‘the international rights and obligations of the former USSR, including those under the United Nations Charter, will continue to be exercised by Russia’ and ‘welcome[d] the Russian Government’s acceptance of these commitments and responsibilities’. This is arguably consistent with two possibilities: that Russia was the continuator state of the USSR or that it was a new state that nonetheless succeeded to all the extinct USSR’s rights and obligations. But in general it is accepted that Russia was indeed the continuator state. The acquiescence of other states in its claim to that effect was rapid and unquestioning.

      57.5 The result was that Russia continued the USSR’s membership of the UN, including its permanent membership of the Security Council.

      57.6 The other former Soviet republics joined the UN separately in 1991 or 1992, except Belarus and Ukraine. Anomalously, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic (like British India) had already become original members in 1945, despite being constituent republics of the USSR. After independence they simply noti ed the UN of changes of name. But any ostensible continuity of those states with former entities has not been consistently observed: since 1991 they have both acceded to treaties to which they were apparently already parties. For instance, the New York Convention included them as parties in 1958.

      58. A case of unilateral secession that was later accepted by the predecessor state is Eritrea. In 1962, Ethiopia had abolished a federal arrangement with the former Italian colony
      of Eritrea, entered into under UN auspices in 1962. Following a military campaign for independence sustained for many years, the Eritrean People’s Liberation Front assisted in overthrowing the military regime in Addis Ababa. The subsequent Transitional Government of Ethiopia accepted Eritrea’s right of self-determination. In a plebiscite in 1993, 99.8% voted in favour of Eritrean independence. The new state of Eritrea was admitted to the UN that same year with the support of the Transitional Government of Ethiopia. Ethiopia continued its UN membership.

      59. Another recent case is the dissolution of the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro (Serbia-Montenegro) in 2006. It was governed by a Constitutional Charter adopted in 2002. Article 2 stated that it was ‘based on the equality of the two member states’. Article 60 dealt expressly with ‘Breaking Away from the State Union’. It set out certain requirements for breaking away, including a referendum, and then stated:

      ‘Should Montenegro break away from the state union of Serbia and Montenegro, the international instruments pertaining to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, particularly UN SC Resolution 1244 [on the international presence in Kosovo], would concern and apply in their entirety to Serbia as the successor.

      A member state that implements this right shall not inherit the right to international personality and all disputable issues shall be separately regulated between the successor state and the newly independent state.

      Should both member states vote for a change in their respective state status or for independence in a referendum procedure, all disputable issues shall be regulated in a succession procedure just as was the case with the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.’

      60. The term ‘successor state’ may be misleading. Its juxtaposition with ‘newly independent state’ and the statement that the state breaking away from Serbia-Montenegro ‘shall not inherit the right to international personality’ suggest that the ‘successor state’ was expected to continue the legal personality of Serbia-Montenegro. That is to say: the intention of the Constitutional Charter appears to have been that the unit not breaking away from Serbia-Montenegro would be the continuator state.

      61. Whether, had Serbia invoked the procedure, the much smaller Montenegro would have been the continuator state might be doubted. But in the event it was Montenegro that invoked the referendum procedure and broke away. The position adopted by all states involved was that Serbia was the continuator state. On 5 June 2006, two days after Montenegro declared independence, the Serbian Assembly adopted a declaration ‘On Obligations of public authorities of the Republic of Serbia as State which continues the State and legal identity of the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro’. Its membership of the UN continued, and Montenegro was admitted in its own right.

      62. The most recent instance of state continuity despite secession is Sudan following South Sudan’s independence. As in the case of Eritrea, after years of war a referendum was held in 2011 that resulted in independence. The new state was then admitted separately to
      the UN while Sudan continued its membership. Like Eritrea, the new state comprised a minority of the predecessor state’s territory and population.

      63. Cases such as Korea – superficially comparable in that on one view the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) is a separate state formed by secession from the Republic of Korea (South Korea) – are complicated by competing claims over the same territory and so have little relevance here as state practice.

      64. Other recent state practice in which it is harder to discern a continuator state, such as the dissolution of Czechoslovakia, is discussed below.

    131. Ghillie says:

      Robert Knight @ 8.46 pm

      You beat me to it and quoted Elliot correctly 🙂

      I last read that poem some 40 odd years ago!

      So, ‘This is the way the British empire ends, not with a bang but a whimper.’

    132. Liz g says:

      Cameron B Brodie
      The most notorious example in living memory of Westminster having to defer to their Treaty obligations is the Lockerbie Bomber Trial.
      Scottish Law was the ultimate arbiter and their was nothing that Westminster or Washington could do about it.
      That doesn’t happen if a Country has been Extinguished by a Treaty (or joined by a King)
      That can only happen if the separation of Scottish Law is still intact…. And it can only be intact if it’s protected by the Treaty that arranged it so!
      This demonstrates that the Treaty is a live document and has power….power over Parliamentary Sovereignty….because they cannot change it without us…. Make or unmake any law they claim,well not one line of that Treaty can they make or unmake…

    133. Ghillie says:

      jockmcx @ 2.20 am =)

      Cameron B, been reading the extracts – jings! Great food for thought =)

      K1 That’s going to keep me busy! Phew and thankyou =)

      As always, alot of good discussion tonight!

      What will tomorrow bring? Probably not a lot that will take us by surprise…or I could be very wrong. No wonder I’m not sleeping well!

    134. Ghillie says:

      Liz G, Well remembered. Excellent point.

      That was a powerful moment in Scotland’s history.

    135. K1 says:

      (ii) Applicability to Scotland and the remainder of the UK

      65. There is one further example of state practice of direct relevance to the UK: the separation of 26 Irish counties in 1922 to form the Irish Free State, which was treated just as a change in territory rather than a break in the UK’s continuity. There is no indication in the Articles of Agreement for a Treaty between Great Britain and Ireland of 6 December 1921 that either party questioned the UK’s continuity; on the contrary, it appears to have been premised on the personality of the UK continuing uninterrupted.

      66. In that case the state eventually changed its name – from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland – though not until five years later, under the Royal and Parliamentary Titles Act 1927 (UK).

      67. There are countless other examples to suggest that no weight can be put on such changes of name. Of the above cases, Russia and Serbia were treated as continuator states despite their different names, each having been the largest unit in a federal arrangement. The example of 1922 suggests that no consequences for state continuity would likewise follow from Scottish independence whether or not the rUK chose to retain the words ‘Great Britain and Northern Ireland’ in its name rather than changing them to, say, ‘England, Wales and Northern Ireland’.

      68. The state practice just recounted also indicates that Scotland’s independence would have the same outcome for the UK as the Irish Free State’s did in 1922. We can draw several conclusions from it about which factors in uence state continuity:

      68.1 In almost all the above cases, the continuator state was the unit retaining the majority of the predecessor state’s population and territory. This is true of the Dominion of India, Malaysia, Russia, Ethiopia, Serbia and Sudan. The exception is the former West Pakistan, whose territory was larger but whose population was smaller than that of Bangladesh at the date of secession. But the difference in population size was relatively minor, and the central government was based in and dominated by West Pakistan.

      68.2 In all the above cases, the continuator state retained substantially the same governmental institutions as the predecessor state. Arguably, Russia and Serbia are again partial exceptions in that the constitutions of the USSR and Serbia- Montenegro did not continue. But it is not suggested that all the institutions of government must continue – on the contrary, even the revolutionary overthrow of a governmental system does not affect state continuity. The continuity of governmental institutions is merely one indicator. But it gives rise to a particularly strong presumption of state continuity. Indeed, it probably explains the continuity the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) after German unification 1990: the FRG and the German Democratic Republic (GDR) did not merge into a single new state but instead the Länder that previously constituted the GDR (plus Berlin) became part of the FRG under its existing constitution. The same view is usually taken of the enlargement of Sardinia-Piedmont by absorbing other Italian states into what became the Kingdom of Italy during the Risorgimento of 1848–70: the Sardinian constitution remained in force throughout that period.

      68.3 In cases of peacefully negotiated independence (Singapore’s from Malaysia and Montenegro’s from Serbia-Montenegro), the parties negotiated terms of state succession that expressly or impliedly identi ed a continuator state.

      68.4 In the other cases, the positions of Pakistan, Russia, Ethiopia and Sudan in continuing the identity of their predecessor states were not questioned by the seceding states, by other states or by organs of the UN. Even in the case of the Dominion of India, although Pakistan initially claimed that it could automatically continue British India’s UN membership, it did not pursue that claim and applied for membership in its own right.

      68.5 In all the above cases, the continuator state was able to continue the UN membership of the predecessor state, whereas the new state submitted a new application for UN membership.

      69. All of these factors count in favour of the rUK being the continuator state of the UK: if Scotland became independent, the rUK would retain about 92% of the UK’s population, more than two-thirds of its territory, and its principal governmental institutions, since the UK Parliament, the UK Supreme Court and its government departments are located in London. The precedent of the separation of most of Ireland also indicates that the UK would survive another, comparable loss of territory, regardless of whether it changed its name (or flag) to acknowledge the loss of Scotland.

      70. In our view, it can be expected that the weight of international opinion would favour recognising the rUK as the continuator. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office has already written in its memorandum to the Foreign Affairs Committee that the ‘overwhelming weight of international precedent suggests that [the rUK] would continue to exercise the existing UK’s international rights and obligations, and that an independent Scotland would be a new state’ and that the UK Government ‘judges that this situation would be recognised by the international community’. We agree with that judgement.

      (b) Two new states

      If your appetite has been wetted…this continues in depth. This was written before our last indyref but much of the content is and will be relevant to our next one. May as well get informed especially on the historical and legal take:

      Annex A
      Opinion: Referendum on the Independence of Scotland – International Law Aspects

      Professor James Crawford SC
      Professor Alan Boyle

    136. CameronB Brodie says:

      Robert J. Sutherland
      Britain is administered as a unitary state (see Brexit). I have never stated the Treaty “is void”, what ever that means. I’ve simply pointed out that the Treaty is not the source from where the British constitution derives its’ moral legal authority. The Prime-minister has chosen to ignore English Law i.e. the Moral Law. Without moral legal authority, the administration of a unitary state becomes totalitarian. That is the reality of Scotland’s constitutional vulnerability.

      The authority of law: Essays on law and morality

      Positivism and the Separation of Law and Morals

      The public conception of morality in John Rawls’ political liberalism

      From constitutional to human rights: on the moral structure of international human rights

    137. CameronB Brodie says:

      Liz g
      I’ve never tried to deny the significance of the Treaty, far from it. But getting the Treaty acknowledge by English Law will be a struggle. The moral authority of the British constitution will be annihilated if Brexit happens. Which path offer the least resistance?

    138. Liz g says:

      K1 @ 3.16
      Thanks K1 I remember reading it at the time.
      It is pretty much the position that the UK is going to take going forward …..and still, like Robert j was saying earlier,they dance around,but never seem to really be definitive about it.

      The one that gets me is the no legal personality in international law….well duh…thats because The Treaty is the arrangements made to deal with international law,as it is for England,but its still not one state its the domestic arrangement for two state’s.
      Just like the EU Trade Treaties are the domestic arrangements for Trade for 28 states!
      They try to copy the US and it’s States but Washington doesn’t have a Treaty like this,the EU is more comparable….

      Hi Gillie….. Hope you get back to getting some decent sleep …Ive a feeling your going to be very busy soon,if you know what I mean 🙂

    139. Liz g says:

      Cameron @ 3.29
      I’m sure you don’t Cameron,but like the Stuff above from K1, there’s a tonne been written by those who do!
      They twist it and muddy the water’s and almost always slant it towards the Treaty Westminster would like to have rather than the one they actually do!
      Like you if it doesn’t come into play when getting our independence if it’s a straight anti Brexit backlash we use..
      I pretty much don’t care either 🙂

      But the danger in not knowing the true position is during the negotiations…. We need the People of Scotland to know their rights and not accept the position that Westminster dictates we attain while achieving our independence.

      I’m sure you wouldn’t want us accepting that continuing state nonsense without a quid pro quo over it.Anymore than I would.
      Just like the Wee Ginger Dug tries to name “British Nationalists” for what they are,we should, I think, have a care for the way we speak about ourselves and the position between Scotland and England.. That’s all,but its a hard habit to break….

    140. CameronB Brodie says:

      Liz g
      I’m not prone to habit Liz, well none I’d divulge here, I’m simply reporting the constitutional legal reality. Remember, ‘I hate the Romans, already’. 😉

    141. Liz g says:

      Re Scottish Law
      Scottish Law most definitely did have an international personality for the Lockerbie Trial.
      And although I couldn’t argue it,and don’t remember where I got it from… I have always understood the the rights to N.Sea oil & gas have to written according to Scotland’s Laws.
      I don’t mean the international laws of the seas I mean the mineral rights!
      Maybe some Winger knows the truth of it??

    142. Liz g says:

      Cameron B Brodie @ 4.08
      Nothing wrong will good habits and if I ever acquire any …
      I’ll let ye know 🙂

    143. CameronB Brodie says:

      By ignoring the Moral Law in order to activate A50, i.e. English Law, the Prime-minister has robbed the British constitution of its’ moral legal authority. As far as the British constitution is concerned, governing the yoonyawn without moral legal authority is totalitarian government. Here’s some Public Administrative Law to highlight why that might prove a tad problematic.

      Administrative Law Values II: the Four Values

      Sunstein and Vermeule — The Morality of Administrative Law


      Challenges of Modern Public Administration and Ethical Decision-Making

    144. yesindyref2 says:

      Mmm well, been busy so still up, time for a break.

      A definition readily obtainable is this:

      The British Constitution is derived from a number of sources. Statutes are laws passed by Parliament and are generally the highest form of law. Conventions are unwritten practices which have developed over time and regulate the business of governing. Common law is law developed by the courts and judges through cases.

      Not Treaties – they are defined as this:

      treaty – a formally concluded and ratified agreement between statesORa written agreement between two or more countries that is formally approved and signed by their leaders

      (though you can also get private treaties and commercial treaties apparently).

      Well, I think it’s fair to say the Treaty of Union was a treaty between two states or countries with their own parliaments.

      The thing is this – that’s external to both countries or states, as it’s between them. In this case it forms the new or enlarged state or country. But it’s not OF law or courts and judges, nor conventions, so it is NOT part of the Constitution, and certainly not all of it.

      What is part of the basis of the “British” Constitution is the Acts of Union – both the one with England and the one with Scotland. They are part of the Constitution.

      But there is a problem. There IS no unified British Constitution, even before Devolution. There is a common part that could be called a UK Constitution, there is also a part which is Scottish, one which is Welsh, and perhaps more so, one which is Northern Irish (more powers in total). Implicitly therefore, but not explicitly, there is an English Constitution.

      So basically speaking the Treaty of Union is not the “British”, nor even the “UK” Constitution at all, and there is no such thing as THE British or UK Constitution. It does not exist, and it can not exist.

      That’s what I think 🙂

    145. CameronB Brodie says:

      “The thing is this – that’s external to both countries or states, as it’s between them. In this case it forms the new or enlarged state or country. But it’s not OF law or courts and judges, nor conventions, so it is NOT part of the Constitution, and certainly not all of it.”

      The Reflexive Relationship between Internal and External Sovereignty


      Sovereignty is deeply contested but omnipresent. The aim of this paper is not to offer a definitive conception of this multifaceted notion. It will rather identify three different dimensions that play a role in our understanding of sovereignty and use these as a basis to explain one particular aspect that has been underexplored in the academic debate: the link between internal and external sovereignty.

      Firstly, sovereignty describes a legal and political status; secondly, it refers to a factual condition; and thirdly, sovereignty entails a fiction that exists independently from factual or legal changes but that pervades our understanding. These three dimensions interlink and reinforce each other both internally (within the sovereign entity) and externally (in the international context).

      The legal status and the factual condition usually, but not necessarily, come together. While territory, people and authority are usually considered the factual basis for legal sovereignty, there are no necessary and sufficient factual conditions that will automatically result in the legal status of being sovereign. As a fiction, sovereignty goes beyond power or legal entitlement. It grasps the deeper emotional and cultural dimension, the fear of losing control and ultimately relevance. Since popular sovereignty has replaced royal sovereignty, the internal political status is rooted in the consent of citizens. This creates a particular link of responsibility in that it aims to ensure that for any action of a sovereign entity there is ultimately an individual or a group of individuals that can be held responsible.

      This paper will explore to what extent this more recent understanding of internal sovereignty is and also should be relevant for our understanding of sovereignty more broadly, including external sovereignty as a condition and a fiction, but ultimately also as a legal status. Indeed, the paper argues there are pragmatic and normative arguments in favour of understanding internal and external sovereignty as a continuum. This confronts the traditional view of international law that denies this connection between the internal and external dimension of sovereignty entirely.

      Keywords: Sovereignty, legal and political status, territory, international law

      Internal/external: The state of sovereignty

      Banishing the Sovereign? Internal and External Sovereignty in Arendt

      Sovereignty: Meaning and Characteristics of Sovereignty

    146. yesindyref2 says:

      Ah well yes, in terms of sovereignty you can’t totally seperate internal from external. It’s quite the strange and almst intangible notion. But internally, in terms of the Law, you can (unless it depends on the likes of the ECJ of course, or even EHCR or ICJ) which is why for instance the UKSC has two judges that the rest defer to on matters of Scots Law – though the other judges can give opinions of course. The crossover is a bit awkward.

      It’s also why Miller avoided Scots Law and decided on the basis of Westminster derived Law, as they didn’t want to go anywhere near it, but that’s another story – so far 🙂

      It’s also worth incidentally noting that while precedent (previous cases) are used by opposing QCs and in Judges’ deliberations, they do not totally restrict the eventual judgement. And of course a judgement doesn’t mean it’s unchallengeable, true or even factual! What one judges, another can judge differently – hence the word judgement.

      And of course the UK has NO constitutional court as such, at best the UKCS has to muddle through as best it can. Or avoid it completely.

      Annex A, by the way, was effectively two professors as QCs, arging the UK’s case – something Aileen McHarg thought was very foolish to be published. I agree.

    147. yesindyref2 says:

      While I’m on a roll, the good professors Crawford & Boyle, acting on a specific remit from the UK Gov to consider the case where the UK was the continuator state, and therefore continue on that basis, they went to great trouble to try to show the Treaty of Union was extinguished internationally, it did not sound. Which shows how vital that was to their argument, they revealed their weakness, and the importance of the cUK to the rUK.

      The problem for them is that the Scotland Act reaffirmed the existence of the Treaty of Union in 1998, then again in 2012, and again in 2016. It is still extant, it flies like a bird in the sky.

      Maggie knows, she’s nimble on her feet 😎

    148. Jock McDonnell says:


      Yes, Crawford & Boyle is not a judgement, its an opinion. The correct place to assess it is in a court of law, not public opinion.
      Thats why governments generally don’t publish legal advice, they may need, as a client, to rely on it in a court.
      Fact is, in the style of Derry Irving, there are many questions of law which are never asked. Especially in the Court of Session. Who knows what the Senators might say.

    149. Kangaroo says:

      Re Continuator State

      The posts above are very useful and we should be at least aware of them. I however take a slightly different line. I agree the Treaty if Union is a live document and WM fiddles with it at their peril. Should Scotland either through indyref or other means dissolve the Treaty then I agree with Rob Peffers that the UK would revert to its previous legal position of two Kingdoms (KoE and KoS). I think some of the documents above, in other posts, were compiled to represent the KoE as the Continuator and they do not have any legal standing until they are tested in an appropriate court. In regard to the Continuator situation I think this could come down to a negotiation rather than a strict legal situation. For example the EU could decide to recognise KoS as the continuator, whilst other organisations may prefer to recognise the KoE as Continuator ie. It could just come down to politics and negotiation, rather than a legal position.

      Question: Which International Bodies would it be beneficial for the KoS to be the continuator? NATO, UN, EU. UNSecurity Council. What ramifications are there? Do we take on the debt mountain?
      I am sure the Scottish Government and/or the SNP have already thought about this as will the KoE.

    150. Nana says:


      Stephen Gethins: “I want to live in a Scotland that is not beholden to the extremists currently calling the shots in Westminster.

      Lesley Riddoch podcast

    151. Nana says:

      Perth and Kinross Council pays out nearly £500,000 for early retirement of two senior staff

      Recent research has found child benefit is at it’s lowest value in the 40 years it has existed. The minister’s answer was woefully inadequate – families need a pay rise.

      Podcast……The listen button is at the top right of pic

    152. Breeks says:

      I’m ardently pro European, and I firmly believe the EU’s democratic conventions bear scrutiny, contrary to the cynical critisms of antiEuropean detractors, but Donald Tusk’s letter ostensibly telling the 27 other EU Nations what to think and how to vote is not a good look and panders to the critics.

      The 27 Nations have a Sovereign veto, and a right to abstain, It isn’t in Donald Tusk’s capacity to overrule them.

      Donald Tusk must be acutely aware of this, so I find myself curious about the process whereby this letter was made public. If I was the cynical type, I might suspect it is evidence of a cat and mouse game with Theresa May to play pass the parcel with the actual, final, decision between leaving by the UK or technical eviction by the EU.

      Don’t get me wrong, I think Donald Tusk is a very decent fella and has a good heart, and is unapologetic that he wants the UK to back away from Brexit, but I suspect he is also absolutely determined that the final coup de grace for UK membership, if and when it does come, will be by Westminster’s own hand. Brexit will be an act of “self” harm committed by the UK.

      The EU is making sure that Theresa the Indecisisive will have to make the decision. You have to be impressed by EU’s total command of these events, and Westminster’s floundering incompetence.

    153. Nana says:

      No-deal Brexit fears over medication supplies
      Given that we are currently due to exit the European Union this Friday without a deal, the issue of safe access to medication is broader than just epilepsy

      Debenhams falls into hands of lenders

      English schools
      Demand for donated uniforms spikes as ‘two million school pupils hit by poverty’

    154. Nana says:

      Ofsted chief not accepted for ‘settled status’

      Revealed: The politicians who profited from £42million second home property bonanza

      First noises out of the 3 hour long meeting of Ambassadors representing the EU 27 tonight confirms earlier impression: most countries warming towards longer extension ending Dec 2019 or March 2020 /1

    155. Nana says:

      Guess who?
      “If you now try to hold us in against our will, you will be facing Perfidious Albion on speed.”

      Mehdi Hasan says
      “This is barbarism, plain and simple.”

      One lot of links in moderation, likely appear later.

    156. Breeks says:

      Lifted from Twitter.

      “Well, I for one am boycotting the EU Elections next month. I’m not voting for those unelected bureaucrats.”


      If you didn’t laugh you’d cry.

    157. Ottomanboi says:

      I believe in an a European Union just not this set up driven by a species of anglo-american, liberal global capitalism. With the dithering Brits out things might change but a ideological reform of the model is necessary. This is not model envisaged by the originators of the European project.

    158. Dorothy Devine says:

      Morning Nana! Love the OFSTED chaps link and the government get out clause of ‘ not refused , just need more info’

      There are times on here when I suspect evil efforts to bring down WoS ,squabbling like weans by those who should know better and aided and abetted by new voices of the ‘ more in sorrow than in type.


    159. Dorothy Devine says:

      ‘anger’ vanished into the ether for reasons best known to the ether.

    160. Nana says:

      Morning Dorothy



      Frustration and worry over Brexit and Indy is bound to have an effect on tempers, it’s definitely having a detrimental effect on me for sure and watching old time wingers falling out doesn’t help 🙁

    161. sassenach says:

      Nana – yes it is a concern to see fellow Wingers having disputes, I think we must have ‘fifth columnists’ operating here with the sole purpose of disruption.

      But I have to hope that, like me, people still will keep fighting for Independence, regardless of what is said or written btl.

      If you believe in it, then why would you change your mind?

      As for trying to spot the ‘culprits’, a waste of time and effort, if in doubt just scroll on by (must be a song title in there!!).

    162. Breeks says:

      Sovereignty is a binary, absolute condition, which doesn’t need a popular majority to exist, but does need legitimacy in law and recognition of that legitimacy.

      Continuer State, and it’s reciprocal, Seceding State, is also a binary condition dependent upon legitimacy in law, and recognition of that legitimacy.

      The Union was created as a Treaty between Constitutional equals, not a Union between a greater component and a lesser one. When the Union is ended, the two components will revert to their pre Agreement status, as two Constitutional equals, but that does NOT translate into dividing the UK and everything it owns right down the middle 50/50.

      Whatever indisputably belongs to Scotland will still be Scotland’s, and whatever belonged to England will still belong to England. So at least some of the ramifications stemming from the dissolution of the Union will be clear cut. But not all.

      It will be more complicated to divide common institutions where the boundaries are more ambiguous.

      Take for example the military. It would be patently be ridiculous to divide the UK military into two equal halves. But if not equal halves, then what? By population ratio? It would seem logical, but opens legitimate arguments about whether the balance should be 2019 population ratio or 1707 ratio. You might clarify that ambiguity by auditing defence spending through the decades, and apportioning resource according to contribution over a long period, however that’s problematic too, because the figures are not available, and even if they were, could they be trusted? Should it include nukes?

      But there are other complications too… It would seem crudely logical to assume England would retain a larger component of the UK Military, but over and above the number crunching, there is the overriding presumption that if the U.K. has an “all-round defence capacity” before the Union expires, then logic dictates that both Constitutional Equals should both be entitled to have an lall round defence capacity. Hence, even if Scotland had a smaller military, it should still be robust and multifaceted. For example if the UK military has equipment that is technically secret, Scotland should not be discriminated against and be fully entitled to share that secret.

      The central principles, the absolutes like Sovereignty and Constitutional Law are not truly negotiable, they are binary absolute conditions, – you are Sovereign or you are not. (Scotland is NOT seceding from the UK – deal with it Westminster). But everything else, before and after, is determined by negotiation, but we should understand the term “negotiation” might include any number of legal test cases and arbitration of disputes.

      Sometimes, where there is dispute, there are International laws and protocols to settle differences, but any number of bespoke settlements might only be resolved through negotiation, or simply left to rumble on for decades as disputed and unresolved… or even a “shared” resource.

    163. Sinky says:

      More on Tax Payers Alliance and other right wing pro Brexit groupings based at 55 Tufton Street London

    164. Nana says:

      Morning sassenach, wise words “stroll on by”

      I think the yardbirds had a hit with a strolling song?

      Last links for now

      Yet more revelations about the DUP and Electoral Commission (covered from the ‘regions’ where The Fear does not so tightly grip the BBC).

      Let’s work through some consequences of a long Art.50 extension:

    165. galamcennalath says:

      WoS in-fighting.

      We all need to be able to focus our anger, frustration, bitterness, pain, exasperation, impatience, dissatisfaction, rage, resentment, and other pent up vexatious emotions into an IndyRef2 campaign! Our wee country needs independence asap and what we all really really want is the opportunity to get the job finished.

      Punching walls doesn’t help much either.

    166. Proud Cybernat says:

      Ian Blackford reminds HoC that “The people of Scotland are Sovereign, not this house.” and “Scotland will not be taken out of the EU against its will.”

      Think about those two statements. This isn’t mere rhetoric from Blackford – it’s a statement of intent backed up with the legal force of Scottish popular sovereignty. Reading between the lines it tells me that if the UK Gov attempts to strip the people of Scotland of their EU citizenship then it will find itself in breach of that sovereign will and find itself before the ICJ. And I think this reality has finally dawned on the UK Gov too.

      For hundreds of years Scotland has sent compliant/complicit red & blue Tories to WM who did nothing but sit on their hands, zip their gobs and trouser their handsome salaries and expenses. Not a word did any of those Scots MPs peep in WM in support of Scotland’s inalienable rights. They just ignored it. Which I think is why today most MPs in WM think in terms of the UK as just one country rather than the reality of it being a Union of countries/kingdoms. One Nation Conservatism. They are only now beginning to realise the truth of the UK’s framework and that has only occurred since the SNP became the majority of Scots MPs in WM. The SNP are pulling those rUK MPs out of their own false myth of what the UK is – a ‘Union’.

      Thus when Treeza-doll states, “We entered the EU as one country and we will leave the EU as one country” – it matters not a jot. The UK is not a country and the votes in England or anywhere else in the UK can never trump that of Scotland when we come to a different view.

      And this is where the UK now finds itself. It now has a majority of Scots MPs at WM intent in standing Scotland’s ground whereas before the red & blue Tories would have simply acquiesced. Not any more.

      I fully predict that, regardless of what rUK does with Brexit, Scotland will be remaining in the EU. If UKGov insists otherwise then that is subjugation of the sovereign will of the people of Scotland – colonialism and we’ll see them in court.

    167. Capella says:

      @ yesindyref2 5:30 am

      While I’m on a roll, the good professors Crawford & Boyle, acting on a specific remit from the UK Gov to consider the case where the UK was the continuator state, and therefore continue on that basis, they went to great trouble to try to show the Treaty of Union was extinguished internationally, it did not sound. Which shows how vital that was to their argument, they revealed their weakness, and the importance of the cUK to the rUK.

      The problem for them is that the Scotland Act reaffirmed the existence of the Treaty of Union in 1998, then again in 2012, and again in 2016. It is still extant, it flies like a bird in the sky.

      Surely it cant be possible to “reaffirm” something that isn’t true? Otherwise we could reaffirm all sorts of things. 🙂

    168. Capella says:

      @ Proud Cybernat – well said. I would add that, even if the UK doesn’t leave the EU now, the BREXIT fiasco demonstrates that Scotland must not allow Westminster to dictate our foreign policy and treaties. Finance and Foreign policy must be made in Scotland.

    169. mike cassidy says:


      The Yardbirds did indeed have a strolling song.

      Here they are performing it in a not-so-swinging-sixties context.

    170. Ghillie says:

      Proud Cybernat,

      Like you, I do hear power in the words Ian Blackford is now using in Westminster 🙂

      These words are carefully chosen and significant.

      ‘Scotland WILL NOT be taken out of the European Union against its will!’

    171. North chiel says:

      “Proud cybernat@ 1000 a.m. historical quote indeed from Ian Blackford “ the people of Scotland are sovereign , not this house”. I entirely agree with your comment “ If the U.K. government insists otherwise ,( Scotland not remaining in the EU )then that is subjugation of the sovereign will of the people of Scotland. ( colonialism as you say). We are supposed equal partners in this “ so called” United Kingdom , consequently how can we remain as an equal partner if England( and Wales?) marginally votes to exit the EU . Whilst Scotland overwhelmingly votes to remain.
      Also , I can never get my head around this “devolved Scottish Parliament” . How can the 2 partner United Kingdom “ devolve” certain functions of government to one partner without “ devolving” the same functions to the other partner ?( and using the same PR voting system by the way as Holyrood). Simply using EVEL within Westminster is totally incompatible and unacceptable, and surely this shambles breaches the Treaty of Union anyway?

    172. galamcennalath says:

      Capella says:

      the BREXIT fiasco demonstrates that Scotland must not allow Westminster to dictate our foreign policy and treaties.

      That’s an excellent argument.

      Saying ‘Scotland mustn’t be dragged out’ is one thing, but a much greater and wider argument is that the whole Brexit episode has shown that Westminster is totally incapable of managing the powers it has reserved from Scotland. The Scottish people need to be asked if all legacy reserved powers now need to be transferred to Holyrood. And that is regardless for how Brexit pans out.

      Only a small group of diehard BritNats would disagree that WM has shown gross negligence and incompetence, particularly towards Scotland. A large majority of Scots would agree with that, the campaign then becomes pursuading that majority than Holyrood is best placed and capable of doing a much better job.

      It adds much flesh to the argument for independence.

    173. Bill Hume says:

      To all of those who want to see Scotland as an independent country I would say this.
      Whether you are Waiting for Godot, waiting to go over the top or waiting to see the dentist, it’s the waiting which is the worst.
      Let us however, do what we do best. Let’s continue to grind the unionists arguments down to dust through marching, informing, talking, leaflets, stickers, yes stones……whatever as individuals we are capable of.

      We’ve waited this long lets wait until the whole sorry Brexit mess is resolved.

      It may be a matter of days or months or even a year but I don’t want to give English nationalists a reason to blame Scotland for the failure of Brexit.

      They created the mess….let them sort it out.

    174. Petra says:

      Thanks for the links Nana and cheer up folks it won’t be too long now. Keep your eye on THE ball.

    175. Sarah says:

      @Nana – totally agree. My scrolling finger is wearing out BUT I still just keep on plugging away and try not to let theses spats deter me. After all I have your links to read and that is a great counter-balance. Thank you [again].

      One thing that Ian Blackford could start adding to his speeches in Westminster is the fact that only Scotland and England were involved in 1707 and so what about the famous English fair play which should ensure both partners are equal?

      I think a great deal of the attitude by England’s MPs is down to ignorance – if it is repeatedly shown to them what the Treaty of Union was, and how it was under duress for Scotland, they might gradually come to see the strength of our argument. I say this having myself spent 50 years in England and only coming to understand the obvious fact that a country should be equal to all others during the 2014 referendum campaign after having lived in Scotland for 10 years.

    176. starlaw says:

      When David Cameron stood in Downing Street making his statement on EVEL proving the existence of two different countries. As things stand that in the House of Commons thanks to EVEL we are two different countries, so be it with Brexit.

    177. Mad Unionist says:

      Over one million Scots voted in an EU referendum to Leave. It was a UK referendum not a Scottish referendum. Over two, million Scots voted to remain in the UK. It was a Scottish referendum. Scottish fascists just do not get democracy!

    178. jfngw says:

      @Mad Unionist

      1.6 million Scots voted to leave the UK, I think that trumps the 1 million that voted to leave the EU. It’s the unionist silly stats that are so funny.

      P.S. The voting franchise was also different,so comparing anything in these two referendums is meaningless.

    179. Terry callachan says:

      The problem with your in depth analysis is that much of it is based on what people have said down the years or even what people have said that other people have said down the years.
      History is unreliable especially when written by those who wish to use it in a court of law.
      Scotland existed as a separate country before the union with England I don’t think anyone would dispute that.
      No matter what circumstances led to a union between Scotland and England there can be no doubt surely that Scotland can choose to be Scotland the separate country if it chooses to be.
      The idea that it would have to become a new country is in my humble opinion incorrect and just a flimsy presumption on your part that puzzles me ,there is no logic in your argument of that point.

    180. galamcennalath says:

      jfngw says:


      All BritNat so call arguments distilled in one word.

    181. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Sarah @ 11:04,

      Actually, I think that most English people, if fully apprised of the facts, would sympathise with us and support us. It’s substantial ignorance combined with hurt feelings of being “walked out on” that are the problem.

      For which much of the blame can be laid at the door of the education system and the media. Democracy corroded from within by lack of awareness, not to say outright press propaganda.

    182. Welsh Sion says:

      Sinky @ 9.48 a.m.

      Re-inforcing your point:

    183. robertknight says:

      @Mad Unionist person thing…

      So what do Yoon-Tory fascists make of TM’s deal getting not one, not two, not three, but probably FOUR attempts at getting through the HoC? Yet the damned electorate, you know, us, only get a single vote on a concept which was neither detailed, costed nor even planned at the time of the referendum!

      You want to talk about ‘getting’ democracy? Go pi** up a rope!

    184. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Absolutely excellent contributions in the National today from Ruth Wishart, Kevin McKenna and Tasmina.
      We are so firtunate that the National has kept going – thanks to a hugely committed team operating on a shoestring – and the Sunday National is by far the best Sunday newspaper in Scotland.

    185. geeo says:

      I see the sectarian bigot is still dribbling pish.

      Scots People are Sovereign – legal fact.

      The Treaty of Union specifically enshrines said Scots Sovereign People’s sovereignty.

      Said Treaty of Union is clear that the continuation of the Treaty of Union is predicated on Sovereign Scots Will NOT BEING SUBJUGATED.

      An example of Subjugation ?

      Lets see…Sovereign Scots voting to REMAIN in the EU but being outvoted by non Scottish votes (subjugated) and forced to leave AGAINST our expressed Sovereign will to REMAIN.

      So there ye go, you can have a uk wide vote, but only if you tear up the Treaty of Union, and if the Treaty of Union is torn up, then Scotland reverts to being an independent Kingdom as per pre 1707 treaty status.

      In which case, the uk wide vote is utterly meaningless, as the Uk no longer exists at this point.

      So simple, even a mad unionist sectarian bigot can understand it.

    186. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      “fortunate” that is.

    187. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      K1 @ 03:03, 03:16,
      yesindyref2 @ 05:30,
      Jock McDonnell @ 06:50,

      Yes, Crawford & Boyle is not a judgement, its an opinion. The correct place to assess it is in a court of law, not public opinion.

      Well observed there. A legal opinion bought by the London government, moreover, and with the specific purpose of determining how assets might be shared out in the event of a prospective separation. It wasn’t actually attempting to establish the constitutional position of an ongoing state, and explicitly dodges that question, but instead tries to establish a basis for why England specifically should retain the UK’s rights to such as the seat in the United Nations.

      This all got kind of lost in the stushie over “extinguished”, words which were actually put in Mundell’s mouth by his interviewer. Mundell was at the time far more concerned about the example of Czechoslovakia, which seems to be the closest example to what could happen here.

    188. Ottomanboi says:

      The lure of synthetic media culture and trash tourism, look, but neither see nor understand. Edinburgh is not alone. Welcome to Fakeworld.

    189. Dr Jim says:

      They keep saying it

      Unionists love to keep banging on about their *fact* that Brexit wasn’t a Scottish vote but a *UK wide* vote as if the UK is some entity somewhere else that isn’t Scotland, which once again gives the implication to the lie that England is the UK

      Well it is and it isn’t because Scotland is the UK as is England, Scotland isn’t a region or a part of (they love saying that) Scotland is the UK so to say it wasn’t a Scottish vote is ridiculous, and of course it was as Scotland is 50% of that entity, not a wee bit or a dodd or some invented percentage based on population, we are 50% of the Union or it doesn’t exist in the *partnership* of the whole

      So Scotland becoming Independent isn’t leaving the UK (once again the implication that England is the UK) Scotland becoming Independent is *ending* the partnership that created UK

      Scotland’s importance to England is massive not just for the assets Scotland possesses but for the standing in the world that is enormously reduced on Englands embarrassement at the break up, whereas the effect on Scotlands position in the world becomes the opposite, Scotland becomes bigger more noticable and interesting to other countries who invest in the growth of countries

      If you’re an investor do you want to invest in a country (England) that’s getting smaller or a country (Scotland) who’s growth potential is almost limitless

      Get your money ready rest of the world

    190. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      me @ 12:03,

      Sorry, that last bit should have read “seat on the Security Council of the United Nations”. Recognised independent states Scotland and England would indisputably each have the right to a seat in the UN itself.

    191. gus1940 says:


      At long last the 2 stories which have been up on The EEN on-line site in the People section since September 2018 seem to be moving towards the Exit.

      I refer to the ones about the death of an Albino Squirrel and a Hearts petition against 2 games at Hampden on the same day.

      Many on-line newspapers operate on a Rolling News Basis but this is and has been for months bloody ridiculous.

    192. Dr Jim says:

      Sky news reporting on the terrible state of the UKs high streets and the decline in high street businesses and shop closures, with London and the south east being the worst affected, but they did come up with something very interesting when referring to the *region* of Scotland

      It turns out amazingly that Scotland in 2018 actually opened more shops and businesses than closed them

      Now we never hear that on the news in our Scotland *region*

    193. gus1940 says:

      Yet again The BBC have given the oxygen of publicity to Fascist Tory Boy Mark Francois on today’s Politics Show.

      One must question the near daily appearance of this fanatical extremist nut case and the motives of our broadcasters in facilitating the regurgitation of his inflammatory rantings.

    194. Graf Midgehunter says:

      Johnny Foreigner, “From the outside looking in.”

      Sorry, only in German. 🙁

      From Sunday evening, a popular German talk-show about Brexit starring the famous:

      Dr. Phillipa Whitford (who speaks quite good German..!)

      Greg Hands, Tory minister (speaks German), rabbit in the headlights look and desperately peddling the Tory line. (Booo),annewill5980.html

      Guess who was loudly applauded when they spoke? (P.W.) 😉

    195. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      CameronB Brodie @ 04:08,

      You are only reporting a “reality” in the very narrow sense of acquiescing in an assumed English supremacy that has rarely been tested in a court of law.

      The Treaty of Union was signed in 1707 between two separate countries who happened to share a monarch. Assumed by the English Establishment thereafter to be irrelevant, because it suited their purposes to do so. But here’s the thing. The Treaties of Utrecht were signed by the various powers of Europe only a few years later, 1713-14, still within the reign of the same Queen Anne.

      Which continues to be the UK’s justification for possession of Gibraltar. The English Establishment doesn’t hold that particular treaty as being nearly so irrelevant, does it?

      Sauce for the goose and sauce for the gander?

    196. Phronesis says:

      It’s not a clean break from the EU that’s required but a clean break for Scotland from Perfidious Albion to ensure Scotland remains in the EU (reflecting the democratic wishes of the citizens of Scotland) and makes an ethical contribution to a progressive Europe’s global imaginary and Sustainable Development Pact as a small progressive nation state.It’s not Scotland’s responsibility to fund Perfidious Albion’s speed habit.

      ‘This is the Independent Commission’s first policy report. It issues a call to action for a radically different Europe, through over 100 policy proposals which can be pursued by progressive parties and other actors during the next term from 2019 to 2024, and embedded with a radically different approach to European governance built on a new Sustainable Development Pact’

      The alternative is to prop up Perfidious Albion that is unhinged on speed, euphoric with an inflated sense of self, grandiose, repeating simple acts ‘Brexit means Brexit’ , paranoid and agitated in a pre- stroke phase making absolutely no sense as its succumbs to an ever increasing delusional state and collapses from within.

      There is no redemption or remedy for Perfidious Albion on speed because it has chosen to degrade the welfare system and hard won human rights (it’s protectionist and socialist)behind a veneer of democracy in the full knowledge of the long term damage caused to the next generation. There will be no rising living standards, economic efficiency for the next generation- individual freedoms and democracy are distant concepts if you live in a state of permanent financial vulnerability.

      ‘Number of poor children in working families up from 67% to 70%
      53% of poor children are aged under 5 (up from 51%) – that’s more than 2million children
      200,000 more children in absolute poverty (after housing costs)
      Number of children in poverty at 4.1 million after housing costs (AHC). That’s 30% of UK children below the poverty line.
      Risk of poverty for children in families with 3 or more children up from 32% in 2012 to 43%.

    197. cearc says:


      Phillipa Whitford’s husband is German.

    198. misteralz says:

      Graf, I’m about a quarter of the way into that and just pissed myself laughing when the presenter Tore strips off that Tory wankstain for saying we all have to work together. The contempt everyone there has for him is an absolute joy to watch. And I agree, Phillipa Whitford’s German is excellent.

    199. Graf Midgehunter says:

      cearc says:

      “Phillipa Whitford’s husband is German.”

      A German/Irish couple pushing forward for Scotland.. 🙂


      misteralz says:

      “Graf, I’m about a quarter of the way into that and just pissed myself laughing when the presenter Tore strips off that Tory wankstain for saying we all have to work together. The contempt everyone there has for him is an absolute joy to watch.”

      The contempt and worse still, they couldn’t understand the arrogance and “Empire” thinking despite 3 years of getting absolutely nowhere with their attitude. We want, we want……

    200. Dr Jim says:

      I’m so annoyed my German is lousy

    201. Sarah says:

      @Robert J Sutherland at 11.42.

      You’re right about the English having “hurt feelings” about Scotland’s equality wish. My English mother said “I thought they [Scotland] liked us” and would never understand that wasn’t the point.

      If only the BBC and other media had reported responsibly instead of winding up the public against the EU/immigrants/Scotland, everything would be so much easier, pleasanter and honest.

    202. galamcennalath says:

      Funny how when something sets out to be fake news, it ends up being closer to the truth than what the MSM report!

    203. auld highlander says:

      Whether it’s one day, one month, one year or a decade longer the incompetent government will still need more time.

    204. Nana says:

      They need more time to continue thieving off Scotland.

      Commons debating an SI that makes two amendments to the Electricity Act 1989 to extend a statutory appeals procedure to the Scottish part of the Renewable Energy Zone and substitutes a new definition of “relevant waters” to include those waters in the Scottish part of the REZ.

    205. Nana says:

      @Mike Cassidy,

      Re Stroll on
      I intended to check later, you beat me to it 🙂

    206. James Barr Gardner says:

      Graf Midgehunter says:
      10 April, 2019 at 12:33 pm

      Thanks, nice to see Scotland and Scots talked up.

      I cannot speak German but even so Anne Will has a very professional show, no over talking, no bias.

      Just goes to show how far UK TV has fallen !

    207. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      O/T What is this headline I caught en passant in today’s Herald under the byline of (guess who?) Tom Gordon claiming that the SNP “faces rebellion” or somesuch over a Scottish currency?

      All the while overlooking that the Tory Party threatens to fissure completely and Labour are hardly faring any better.

      He/they really are getting desperate to manufacture distraction.

    208. CameronB Brodie says:

      “You are only reporting a “reality” in the very narrow sense of acquiescing in an assumed English supremacy that has rarely been tested in a court of law.”

      No Robert, I am reporting “the” reality of the British constitution, as viewed by British constitutional law and rest of the world. That should not be taken as an endorsement. Try to empty your judgement of emotion and bias. It isn’t possible to win a battle if you aren’t able to accurately locate the enemy’s position.

    209. Ghillie says:

      RJS Seriously? Is that the best they can do?

      Frankly who gives a toot about currency just now!!

      Spondylus shells sound good enough. Anything!

      Just let Scotland get out of this rancid union.

      Currency will be sorted at the appropriate time.

    210. yesindyref2 says:

      I could have sworn it was Aileen McHarg wrote about Crawford & Boyle, but checking finds this article from Dauvit Broun on SCFF:

      “Dauvit Broun: By Publishing the Legal Opinion in Support of Their Position, Has the UK Government Created a Threat to rUK’s Position as a Continuing State?”

      Maybe she’s writ another one somewhere. Or maybe I’m a fan and think she wrote the whole interent 🙂

    211. Nana says:


      It may have been Sionaidh Douglas-Scott who wrote about Crawford & Boyle. I remember linking to some of her posts re the constitution but I also linked to Aileen McHarg and to be honest I can not remember exactly what the blog posts entailed.

      I’ve had this video in my archives, again I can’t recall if I posted it already.

      Professor Sionaidh Douglas-Scott from the School of Law at Queen Mary University of London talks about sovereignty.

    212. Thepnr says:

      I’m hoping that tonight the EU will force May to accept as long an extension as possible. I’d like it to be a year but it looks likely to be less.

      Any extension is guaranteed to make all the right wing Tories very upset. I’d like them to be as upset as possible so the longer the extension the better.

      Next up though is that May will still have to try and get her deal through once these phoney talks with Labour collapse and she needs to do that before the 22nd May to avoid taking part in the EU elections.

      I’ll be delighted when MV3 (or is it MV4) fails to get past the HoC and it is then that Corbyn must call a Vote of No Confidence as the furious ERG lot will want rid of May even more than they fear an election.

      This bit is really wishful thinking on my part but I think a GE opens a clear path to another Indy referendum. Unfortunately and I might be well off the mark, but I don’t think Nicola Surgeon will spell out where we’re going before this “new deadline” of 22nd May is out of the way.

      I definitely could be a mile out with that view and she makes her move before then, however I do see that as getting May off the hook as it could be enough to frighten the Labour and Tory horses and they do vote through May’s deal and then no EU elections, no general election and no extension to Article 50. I want all three of these things to happen and I suspect plenty others do too.

    213. CameronB Brodie says:

      Some constitutional legal theory and stuff.

      The internal and external aspects of self-determination reconsidered

      The Exercise of External Self-Determination by Indigenous Groups: The Republic of Lakotah and the Inherent Sovereignty of American Indigenous Peoples


      Self-Determination and Secession Under International Law: The Cases of Kurdistan and Catalonia

    214. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      CameronB Brodie @ 15:31,

      You lecture me about “emotion and bias” from a high horse based on nothing more than a theoretical interpretation of a “constitution” that notoriously isn’t even codified! Reams of theory which mostly happily ignore the Scottish component entirely. You’ll be quoting Dicey as an authority next.

      As someone wisely said, the “British” so-called constitution is only what the (largely English) powers-that-be say it is. And you have evidently swallowed that hook, line and sinker. While cheerfully avoiding the cogent counterexamples that I (and LizG earlier) presented.

    215. Sarah says:

      @ Nana at 3.08 re the SI to redefine “Scottish waters”: I spotted that on Parly app twitter and emailed Ian Blackford to see if he was aware.

      He replied to say Yes and Alan Brown was dealing with it for us.

      So at least it didn’t get slipped through unnoticed. I don’t know what Alan Brown managed to do about it tho’.

    216. Nana says:


      Good on you Sarah, excellent.

    217. Liz g says:

      Terry Callahan @ 11.36
      You have misrepresented the posts K1 provided.
      K1 was very clear that these posts were for information only of what is being said.
      They are not, and were not intended, to be portrayed as the opinion of K1.

    218. Breeks says:

      If the EU extend Article 50, why don’t we use the time constructively and seek clarification from the ECJ as to whether Scotland could cite Constitutional Sovereignty and revoke Article 50 unilaterally as our sovereign prerogative?

    219. CameronB Brodie says:

      I think I’m in the groove now. 🙂

      [The effects of self-awareness on the internal and external viewpoint for self-imagery].

      Parallel-Distinct Structures of Internal World and External Reality: Disavowing and Re-Claiming the Self-Identity in the Aftermath of Trauma-Generated Dissociation

      Internal versus external self-esteem : a new measure.

      The effects of being categorised:
      The interplay between internal and external social identities

    220. Ghillie says:

      Nana @ 3.08 pm

      That’s a potentially very worrying scenario.

      WHAT are they up to?

      Hopefully Scotland will be well away before any more kleptomania on the part of the UK government can take place.

    221. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Thepnr @ 15:52,

      It looks like it will a significantly longer extension than May was asking for. A “flextension”, though, that could be summarily ended at any time with some kind of Con-Lab stitch-up.

      Don’t forget that there are (unavoidable) local elections in England at the beginning of the merrie month of may. That may concentrate minds wonderfully. I can’t see either May or Corbyn fancying a UKGE after that, but in the present befuddled circumstances, who knows…?

    222. K1 says:


      I didn’t make any ‘argument’ about anything.

      Try reading what people post rather than your own fevered interpretations of what you imagine people posted.

    223. CameronB Brodie says:

      Robert J. Sutherland
      My “high horse” is a professional training in a relevant field of practice. What is yours?

    224. yesindyref2 says:

      @Liz g
      Indeed, and I suspect K1 was doing a shaggy dog story to boot. I like shaggy dog stories 🙂

      Anyways, from that same Annex A there’s this in Part II The purpose and structure of this advice which clearly shows the remit of Crawford & Boyle, something Unionist commentators at the time totally ignored as it suited their agenda to present it as academic study and conclusions:

      10. We are asked to advise on two questions:

      10.1 the status of Scotland and the rUK in international law after Scottish independence, in particular ‘(a) the strength of the position that the rUK would be treated as a continuation of the United Kingdom as a matter of international law and an independent Scotland would be a successor state’; and

      10.2 after Scottish independence ‘(b) the principles which would apply to determining the position of the rUK and an independent Scotland within international organisations, in particular the European Union’.

    225. Nana says:

      Thanks yesindyref2, I see McHarg edited the book and it has input from Douglas-Scott.

      Went to see if the book is available to buy, well it is at a price!

    226. Nana says:

      WHAT are they up to?

      What they have always been up to Ghillie, theft by any means.

    227. K1 says:

      It wasn’t ‘my’ ‘in depth’ analysis, just to help you out further with your lack of comprehension Callaghan.

      What it was if you actually bothered to read the posts was a diversion from the personal bullshit that was clogging up the thread. Onto core constitutional issues as a means to further discussion on those issues.

      And so it proved?

      Posters began addressing the various points raised in those legal ‘opinions’.

      I prefaced the first post as a ‘fill yer boots’ impetus to this end. Therby moving the thread away from ‘personality’ clashes that were happening. What you did was miss the ‘fact’ that the ‘in depth analysis’ was not mine but ‘you’ made it ‘personal’, once again clogging up the thread with utterly irrelevant ‘non observations’ of something that didn’t happen.

      To end where you ended ‘there is no logic in your argument’ because you are making a ‘false’ argument based on a faulty premise.

    228. K1 says:

      Thanks guys…so glad you got it 😉

    229. yesindyref2 says:

      A key thing from Broun’s article is this:

      Far from declaring that the remainder of the UK would continue as before, and Scotland would form a new, separate state, it is explained in the first page of the Executive Summary of Crawford and Boyle’s legal advice that in international law there are three possible outcomes for the status of Scotland and the rest of the UK in the event of Scottish independence.“.

      Which indeed was clear at the time, specially reading number 10 above when it was C&B’s remit to come to the conclusion that the rUK would be the cUK.

      It’s something I and others argued at the time btl, but unfortunately for some odd reason, no journalist picked up on. Hence why we’re to this day called “Secessionists” which presumes the rUK as the cUK, or sometimes “Separatists” which presumes both states being successor states though C&B don’t seem to make that clear. But never “dissolutionists” which measn reverting to the pre-1707 state according to them.

      It’s an Ace card the negotiators for iScotland have after a YES vote because quite frankly my dear, iScotland doesn’t care which of the 3 it is (perhaps apart from the EU membership), whereas the rUK really really does (UN security council etc.). And if it wanted, iScotland could drag it out for years. And years. And in courts.

      So basically the actual mechanism will be none of these, or an agreed combination. Or if the rUK does a Brexit negotiation style negotiation it will go away with nothing. Except the debt.

    230. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      CameronB Brodie @ 16:20,

      You repeatedly dodged the pertinent issues and now instead resort to invoking superior authority. Retreating into that kind of priestly rank-pulling is beneath you. Or should be. Shame on you. We deserve better.

    231. yesindyref2 says:

      The Peacemaker. Or – Colt 45 as someone I used to know often said. I think it’s a type of beer.

    232. Proud Cybernat says:

      If Brexit is extended (postponed?) for 9 months or more, does that mean Ruth Davidson will have to have another wean?

    233. yesindyref2 says:

      Well, according to prestigious Scottish journalists, Ruth Davidson’s party is very environmentally friendly, as it’s falling apart, rotting internally and composting rapidly, and will soon be very suitable for growing summer vegetables such as ripe tomatoes..

      At least, I think that’s what they said.

    234. CameronB Brodie says:

      Robert J. Sutherland
      I’m not engaging with your argument as it has no academic merit. I deal in reality not wishful thinking. That is the only way to bring about change.

    235. Welsh Sion says:

      Proud Cybernat @ 5:02pm

      If Brexit is extended (postponed?) for 9 months or more, does that mean Ruth Davidson will have to have another wean?

      Either her or Meghan Markle …

    236. geeo says:

      “No Robert, I am reporting “the” reality of the British constitution, as viewed by British constitutional law and rest of the world”.

      CameronB Brodie  now speaks for the rest of the world !!

      Trouble is, as we all know, there is no such thing as a “british” constitution never mind a country called ‘britain’.

      They simply do not exist.

      Britain is a geographic construct, not a country.

      So any perspective based on the idea of a country called ‘britain’ is a false one, fatally flawed from the get go.

    237. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      CameronB Brodie @ 17:17,

      Too self-important now to deign to discuss important matters with mere plebs, eh? “Deal with reality”? =roll eyes= Just listen to yourself. Sez the self-indulgent purveyor of industrial quantities of airless theory that has no traction whatever with real people, and which therefore offers no possibility whatever of effecting any change. But we’ve been here before. =sigh=

    238. CameronB Brodie says:

      No, I speak for nobody but myself and I have never claimed I know it all. I’m expressing the understanding of reality that I gained while undertaking a professional training accredited by the Royal Town Planning Institute. Where are you coming from?

    239. Bob Mack says:

      Re the Constitution.

      Could you Cameron post it on here. You know what I mean . The document written on parchment stating it is the Constitution of the UK. Just like the American one.

      If you can’t then everything is guesswork and application of tradition and accepted practise.

      I’ll wait.

    240. CameronB Brodie says:

      Bob Mac
      The British constitution has still to be codified (written down), in a single document. It is this lack of formal process that has prolonged the constitution’s elusiveness and survival, well past its’ legal relevance or practical effectiveness.

    241. CameronB Brodie says:

      I’m honestly alarmed at the resistance folk are showing to acknowledging reality. Would you think a doctor was doing his job properly, if he failed to diagnose correctly?

    242. Graf Midgehunter says:


      Brexit debate on now with the dohnut .. oops sorry Mark Francois.

      Have fun.. 🙂

    243. CameronB Brodie says:

      Robert J. Sutherland
      Had you even heard of Critical Realism before I came along?

    244. geeo says:

      Who said this : “No Robert, I am reporting “the” reality of the British constitution, as viewed by British constitutional law and rest of the world” ?

      “the” reality.

      Definitely implication of speaking from a position of absolute fact right there.

      “I’m expressing the understanding of reality that I gained while undertaking a professional training accredited by the Royal Town Planning Institute”

      “Understanding of reality” !!!

      That’s fecking hilarious.

      Well done Cameron, you have done it, you have disappeared up your own arse.

    245. geeo says:

      CameronB Brodie says:

      The British constitution has still to be codified (written down), in a single document. It is this lack of formal process that has prolonged the constitution’s elusiveness and survival, well past its’ legal relevance or practical effectiveness.

      Or….”there isn’t one” ??

      Or….”does not exist” ??

      Or….”what has never existed can never be relevent far less practically effective, since it never existed”??

      You got a pseudo link to “Promoting the non existant over factual reality” ?

    246. CameronB Brodie says:

      Having a relevant professional training, I’ve been very wary of playing the “expert” card, as scientific insight can easily come across as pompous arrogance. Remember folks, I’m also very rusty.

      How do you know that what you know is true? That’s epistemology

      Truth, Reason and Justice: Epistemology and Politics
      in Evidence Discourse

      Fear of Knowledge: Against Relativism and Constructivism

      Handbook of Feminist Research: Theory and Praxis
      Chapter 5 | Truth and Truths in Feminist Knowledge Production

    247. Robert Louis says:

      wow a 9 month brexit extension could happen.

      Will that mean another 9 months of CBB, RP, G, YIR2 and some others arguing theoretically about a non-existent, ‘unwritten’ ”British’ Constitution’??


    248. CameronB Brodie says:

      Them links good enough?

    249. CameronB Brodie says:

      Robert Louis
      I’m eager to make progress Robert, but culture and belief has a special kind of inertia.

    250. geeo says:

      Who said this ?

      “No, I speak for nobody but myself and I have never claimed I know it all”

      Certainly not how this comes across ..

      CameronB Brodie says:

      10 April, 2019 at 6:16 pm

      Had you even heard of Critical Realism before I came along?

      Conceited arse right there.

    251. yesindyref2 says:

      “Mine’s is bigger than yours” really is a duff debating tactic.

    252. geeo says:

      I take it Bob Mack aint getting a link to this “british constitution” then ?

      Zero credibility until you do.

    253. Meindevon says:

      Alyn Smith on Euronews now. Sky 508

      Feisty debate!!!

    254. Terry callachan says:

      K1 ..History is just someone else’s opinion you will always always get differing opinions of what actually occurred in the past.
      You posted information that is just an opinion ,Liz g says it was for information and is not necessarily your opinion, perhaps ,I wouldn’t know, but it is still just opinion .
      As I said earlier Scotland was a country long before James 1st England existed .
      To suggest that Scotland may have to begin life as a new country if it leaves the UK is incorrect.
      I know it.You know it.Liz probably knows it.

    255. CameronB Brodie says:

      There is no single document, the British constitution is contained in numerous documents. I have provided copious evidence to this fact. You are expecting the impossible, are sure you’re connected with reality?

    256. CameronB Brodie says:

      Would folk ask a plumber to do their dentistry?

      Falsifications and scientific progress: Popper as sceptical optimist

    257. mike cassidy says:

      For all those arguing on this site.


      Then take some fecking time out!

    258. Thepnr says:

      That’s Theresa May’s time up with the EU27, she’ll be off for a pizza at the British Embassy while they discuss her fate over a nice dinner.

    259. Terry callachan says:

      So many people now trying to make out that Scotland as a country either doesn’t exist or will not exist in future or is actually part of England guffaw guffaw guffaw .
      One thing that is well documented is that England for many many years fought with Scotland usually in Scotland when trying to bully Scotland into bending to England’s will even England teaches that in its history .
      Looking to the future one thing is certain and that is that Scotland is recognised as a country distinct and separate from England across the world.
      Yes there are many people across the world that call this whole island England , but you will find that they are people who come from a part of the world that was under the boot of England at some time in the past and as we and other countries know from experience England’s rewriting of events and rewriting of history continues long after subjugation .
      Whenever I hear someone saying Scotland is not a country or may have to start as a new country if it leaves the UK or Scotland is actually part of England ,I get suspicious, I spent nearly all my educational years in England and remember that this was often the way Scotland was portrayed way back then in the 1960,s .
      It is learned propaganda .

    260. CameronB Brodie says:

      This is more like it.

      Is All Knowledge Provisional?

      Privileging (some forms of) interdisciplinarity and
      interpretation: Methods in comparative law

      Diversity, Knowledge and Power


    261. geeo says:

      Oh dear, Cameron’s delusion continues.

      If there is no written constitution, then IT DOES NOT EXIST.

      If i want to prove i DID pay a builder for work, i need a CONTRACT to show a judge if i take him to court for a shit job.

      Remember folks, Cameron does not think he knows it all, but he absolutely believes he is better than anyone on here…..!

      He actually thinks britain is a country ffs !!


    262. yesindyref2 says:

      @Terry callachan
      Jings, did you read the 3 K1 posts, or at least follow the link at the end of the third one, and read Annex A at all, for instance where it says:

      9. Three departments of the UK Government – the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Cabinet Office and the Office of the Advocate General for Scotland – have jointly instructed us to advise in connection with the proposed referendum.

      This is the UK Government, UK departments, UK Ministers the UK Establishment desired take on the constitutional and succession aspects of our Independence. It’s not even neccessarily their opinion, it’s what they want the reality to be.

      They hired two experts, effecitvely as QCs, Advocates, but there are experts on our side too.

      Repeat after me:

      “They are not K1’s views”.
      “They are not K1’s views”.
      “They are not K1’s views”.

    263. Terry callachan says:

      CameronB Brodie..
      There is no British constitution in law, it exists only as a loose term that England’s Westminster and friends use as an argument to bolster the often arbitrary decision making we see regularly coming from that place ,you can mention British constitution in as many documents as you like but it has no legal standing .
      A bit like some of the other double speak we have seen coming from Westminster which was presented to Scotland as law but turned out to be nothing more than short term wishes that quickly turned to dust whenever we spoke out of turn and decided to have an independence referendum.
      Devolution is a classic example as is the strongest devolved parliament in the world it’s all meaningless nonsense in legal terms just like the British constitution, there isn’t one so how can it exist in legal terms.
      Westminster is clever and nasty and untrustworthy and unreliable but it does a good job of looking after England’s rich.

    264. Terry callachan says:

      Sure I read it all.
      It’s not the whole three posts I disagree with.
      If you read what I said you would see that.

    265. David says:

      Apologies, OT, just had a look at the field for the US masters. There is only one Scot. WTF has happened to our game!

    266. CameronB Brodie says:

      So your resorting to shifting the goalposts.

    267. CameronB Brodie says:

      Terry callachan
      So “there’s is no British constitution in law”? You better have a word with these dudes then.

      About UKCLA

    268. yesindyref2 says:

      Years ago when I was working in London and an FBIS I nearly got into a project with this guy, about random seeding of planets. As well as being a member of the BIS, he was a director of Culham, and hence I took an interest in fusion. I travelled a lot and like pubs, so the stack of old-fashioned computer print, Fortran and Algol from memory, is probably still lurking in my attic. Probably the right decision all the same, young and single is fun, footloose and fancy-free. As they say.

      But I still followed the happenings – and to me – the ridiculously small budget for something so future important. It’s still not there commercially, though maybe around 2050 to actually generate more electricity than it consumes. Though the UK is still very much involved, a lot of the running is in France – another way the UK throws away its natural talent. And ends up with useless politicians at Westminster instead, but that’s another story.

      Anyways, when I was working in Germany I used to go skiing a lot of weekends in winter, and one time headed off on my own as I wanted to get the proper hang of the black slopes. Now, I wasn’t a mad skier, a bit of a control freak really, even used to ski from one mogul to another and perch on the top. What fun!

      Needless to say I went drinking at night, with or without friends from back in South Germany though having said that we did also ski in the Black Forest, but this time I sat there in my seat with a load of empty chairs and a table around me and of course a bier, along comes this group of Dutch people, guys and gals. Naturally me being me and a bit of a blether and out for a laugh I got talking to them and it turned out they were fusion scientists from Eindhoven University.

      This was fascinating and we had a good talk about it, and the current state of play. Me being me, an interested amateur, totally amateur, practically the dodo amongst amateurs when it came to this sort of advanced stuff, but never one to hold my tongue, I made a suggestion about how they could do things.

      Imagine my surprise when they then had a 10 minute discussion (in English so I could kind of follow) about my suggestion, and could it work? Eventually they decided it couldn’t because – reasons – which they explained to me.

      I was gobsmacked, delighted with myself, I’d actually said something sensible about something so esoteric or some such word.

      By then I’d met plenty so-called experts in my own field of so-called expertise and they came in two types basioally. The ones who dismisssed opinions from people they looked down on, and those who listened to even raw recruits or novices who dared to venture an opinion. Turned out the real experts were those who listened to, well, anybody, as that meant they were always learning, not hidebound in their own expertise.

      Personally I was freelance just about all my previous life and of course that’s all bluff to get a gig so you have to suddenly perform what you said you had on your CV but didn’t really so I got to be really good at finding our real fast. My only real expertise was that, but that’s another story.

      It’s something I applied in my own so-called areas of expertise, and in Germany having been told I was a Fachman I genuinely thought they were swearing at me even when I looked up the meaning.

      The moral of this story is that it’s time to finish my cup of tea before it gets too cold though I can of course microwave it as oft times before, and then hae something to eat.


    269. CameronB Brodie says:

      Glad yo got the gist of my logic. 😉

    270. Dr Jim says:

      In England’s news it’s all peoples vote and possibly no Brexit, in Scotland’s news it’s all fishermen demand Brexit and no Independence

      Difficult time for the Government’s propaganda news co-ordinators

    271. yesindyref2 says:


    272. jfngw says:

      Looks like if you scrap the surface of a Green you could find the usual male misogynist. I always wondered why there was so few women Green list MSP’s in Scotland. Only slightly ahead of the LibDem’s, one women MSP between the two parties, but at least they are progressive, or so they tell me.

    273. CameronB Brodie says:

      These point to where I’m coming from.

      An exploration of educative praxis: Reflections on Marx’s concept praxis, informed by the Lacanian concepts act and event

      Praxis makes perfect

      Basic Principles of Critical Pedagogy

      Towards a framework for critical citizenship education

    274. Dr Jim says:

      @jfngw 7:41pm

      Perhaps finding women candidates to equal Willie Rennie’s obvious intellectual ability is proving difficult

    275. 19/30 says:

      David @ 7.06
      Get yourself down to West Kilbride for the Scottish Boys’ Championship (final round Friday). Plenty of young Scots at top of leaderboard

    276. jfngw says:

      Another interesting way the BBC label Yes supporters with negative tags: Stuart Campbell is always tagged with ‘Bath based independence blogger’, but never will they say English born anti-independence multi-millionaire.

    277. Bob Mack says:

      @Cameron B Brodie,

      Every other country in the world with a constitution has made changes to it. It requires what we would term super majorities to overturn an element, or change it in any way.

      UK is very different because it has no codified constitution.
      The government can simply pass legislation with a simple majority to change any aspect of UK law it wishes.

      This is why I say there is no constitution as in the real meaning of holding values and principles of a nation State.
      The “constitution”, as you recognise it, could ,as has been ,at the whim of the party in power rather than the will of a possible majority of citizens and other political parties.

      It is a significant difference.

    278. starlaw says:

      Her Majesty the Queen is the Sovereign divine ruler. That is the Constitution.

    279. CameronB Brodie says:

      Bob Mack
      Your argument has muddled logic. One minute you suggest Britain has a constitution, then you tell us it doesn’t. Which is it you believe?

      The constitution I recognise is tangible and so vulnerable to attack, the constitution you suggest is notional, so can’t be located to be attacked.

      It is the transient nature of the British constitution that makes it such a powerful weapon against moral democracy. Scotland can and must do better if we hope to bequeath a future to our grandchildren.

    280. CameronB Brodie says:

      transient, malleable, flexible, corruptible……

    281. galamcennalath says:

      Bob Mack says:

      The “constitution”, as you recognise it, could ,as has been ,at the whim of the party in power rather than the will of a possible majority of citizens and other political parties.

      Definitely. The dreadful undemocratic FPTP system means governments win power with less that half voter backing. Sometimes less that 40%. They can then go and make fundamental changes. They can take the UK in a totally different direction.

      Thatcher 1979 43.9%, 1983 42.4%
      Blair 1989 43.2%, 2001 40.7%, 2010 35.2%
      Cameron 2010 36.1%, 2015 36.9%
      May 2017 42.4%

      None of these GEs gave the winner a genuine mandate.

      Every single one of them got less than the 45% YES delivered in Scotland.

      The last PM to actually win a GE by getting the backing of more than half of voters was Stanley Baldwin in 1930!

      It’s a stinking system!

    282. galamcennalath says:

      The EU leaders are tucking into a dinner in which one of the courses in scallops.

      I wonder if they are Scottish scallops?

    283. ronnie anderson says:

      SIP ( Scottish Independence party )
      James A Mcvean Alison McCafferty I have done much research on the SiP – Here it is… WRITTEN MAY 2017 –
      Anyone in the Edinburgh West Constituency?
      Have you heard a peep from the
      Scotland’s Independence Referendum Party?
      A certain Mr Mark Whittet is standing for that seat.
      He has demanded that Nicola Sturgeon does not stand against him in this seat…and gets a load of attention from Buzzfeed the tweet was shared 25 times by Unionists.
      A BBC Producer Mr VanVelsen tweeted him his phone number – Why? To a twitter account with 4 followers…
      Mr Whittet has two twitter accounts – one to RT his site and one to like his own posts. – – Mr Whittet’s main Twitter = Mr Whittet’s second Twitter
      Then it transpires Mr Whittet has history..
      “Kelly, a former Lord Provost of Glasgow, helped to launch Holyrood Strategy just over a week ago.
      The agency’s other directors are Lord Fraser, the Conservative Party’s deputy leader in the House of Lords, Charles Brodie, a Liberal Democrat councillor and director of software company Twinsoft, and Mark Whittet, executive director of news events planner MacNews, which will be integrated within Holyrood Strategy. The agency does not have any clients as yet.
      Several public affairs consultants in Scotland are on candidate lists for potential selection for the new Scottish parliament. They include Brodie, a prospective Liberal Democrat MSP as well as prospective Labour members Jane Saren, managing director of GPC Scotland, Lord Watson director of PS Public Affairs, Jack McConnell, head of Public Affairs Europe and prospective Conservative member Struan Stevenson, director of PS Public Affairs.”…/kelly-quits-lobbying-political-care…
      Then you look a little deeper at the people on his political registration form…
      Julia Clarke – A political lobbyist and PR person.
      Very interesting that Mr Whittet and his backers have NOTHING TO DO WITH SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE
      You can easily track them down on Facebook and not one of them mention SIRP or have any links whatsoever to do with the independence movement.
      This is nothing short of a fake independence party set up by people unknown in the indy circles to split the SNP vote in Edinburgh West.
      All the info here was easily googled and looked up on facebook, Twitter and various business websites.
      Edinburgh West SNP have been made aware.
      Hide or report this
      petervanvelsen (@peterjvanvelsen) | Twitter
      petervanvelsen (@peterjvanvelsen) | Twitter

      Something to watch out for peoples .

    284. Sinky says:

      Interesting article on holding a consultative Indy referendum when May or her successor refuses to grant a Section 30.

    285. Bob Mack says:

      @Cameron B Brodie,

      I think it’s you who is muddled. Note “Constitution” is in inverted commas. That means something you know.

      You just don’t like being wrong.

    286. CameronB Brodie says:

      Time for a bit more Brexitology and stuff?

      Not one Brexit: How local context and social processes influence policy analysis


      This paper develops an empirical agent-based model to assess the impacts of Brexit on Scottish cattle farms. We first identify several trends and processes among Scottish cattle farms that were ongoing before Brexit: the lack of succession, the rise of leisure farming, the trend to diversify and industrialise, and, finally, the phenomenon of the “disappearing middle”, characterised by the decline of medium-sized farms and the polarization of farm sizes.

      We then study the potential impact of Brexit amid the local context and those ongoing social processes. We find that the impact of Brexit is indeed subject to pre-Brexit conditions. For example, whether industrialization is present locally can significantly alter the impact of Brexit. The impact of Brexit also varies by location: we find a clear divide between constituencies in the north (highland and islands), the middle (the central belt) and the south.

      Finally, we argue that policy analysis of Brexit should consider the heterogeneous social context and the complex social processes under which Brexit occurs. Rather than fitting the world into simple system models and ignoring the evidence when it does not fit, we need to develop policy analysis frameworks that can incorporate real world complexities, so that we can assess the impacts of major events and policy changes in a more meaningful way.

      The Economic Impacts of Brexit on the UK, its Regions, its Cities and its Sectors

      The Implications of Brexit for the UK’s Regions

      Neoliberalization, uneven development, and Brexit: further reflections on the organic crisis of the British state and society

    287. CameronB Brodie says:

      Bob Mack
      I will defend myself against weak argument, if that’s what you mean.

    288. Mad Unionist says:

      They are EU Scallops until we leave.

    289. Bob Mack says:

      @Cameron B Brodie,

      No Cameron. You defend yourself often by presenting theoretical constructs which you have learnt or read somewhere. Theory is exactly that and changes by the decade. It is often not fact but an attempt to explain that for which there is no rational explanation.
      Don’t justify yourself with theories. Write from your heart,not a textbook.

    290. wull says:

      Guess who reads Wings?

      This evening the BBC reporter following the EU summit in Brussels posted the following:

      ‘Speaking to reporters ahead of the summit, Luxembourg PM Xavier Bettel says he would favour an “intelligent extension”.

      He denies he is losing patience with the UK, but says waiting for British politicians to come to a decision is like the Samuel Beckett play Waiting for Godot.

      Famously, the title character in that production never arrives. …’

    291. CameronB Brodie says:

      Bob Mack
      I’m attempting to highlight some of what I was taught as being important. If you think I’m attempting to misinform folk, then I suggest you take your objection to the Royal Town Planning Institute. If you reject social theory as being uninformative and irrelevant, you are simply helping the Tories.

    292. Nana says:

      A read from inside the Council room – several leaders have spoken, vast majority in favour of a long extension, with some favouring December and some March of next year. Dutch PM Mark Rutte spoke first. Macron has not spoken yet.

    293. yesindyref2 says:

      Further down in his tweets:

      Mrs May told leaders that she believes she can get Withdrawal Treaty passed, that negotiations with Labour are “going well” according to a person briefed on the early exchanges. This was not widely believed by EU leaders.


    294. Nana says:

      EUCO: I am told that Macron is pushing for an extension to end June.
      It could be a long night.

    295. Bob Mack says:

      @Cameron B Brodie,

      At one time great and knowlegable men wrote theoretical dissertations with evidence on why the earth was flat, and everyone believed them. Some still do.

      Theory is not fact.

    296. Nana says:


      Aye, all the lols 🙂

      May malfunctions on arrival in Brussels and lapses into old script
      As British PM talks about a deal that has already been rejected, EU leaders look on with crushing pity

    297. Nana says:

      and you when you think things can not get more foolish in Brexit England

    298. K1 says:

      They are losing the plot by the minute now Nana 🙁

      Scotland would run for the hills if he ever reached the lows of that creasy pole.

    299. CameronB Brodie says:

      Bob Mack
      You haven’t a clue yet you presume to educate. What does that suggest?

      Theory in Social Science

    300. Thepnr says:

      Gonna be a loooooong night at this #Brexit summit. Unanimity is needed amongst EU leaders on how long to grant new extension for and which conditions to attach. 23.30 local time and unanimity ain’t nowhere in sight

    301. Sinky says:

      Meanwhile at Westminster.

      No Labour MP voted against keeping Trident missiles and UK Labour Wed, Apr 10, 2019: from Stewart MacDonals tweet,

      Confirmation from a @UKLabour that @scottishlabour’s position against Trident matters not a jot. Their Westminster Shadow Defence Spokesperson says ‘decisions on these matters are made here’.

      Branch Office put in its place

    302. CameronB Brodie says:

      I’m not a snob but how many of you have a training in stuff like this?

      A History and Theory of the Social Sciences
      Not All That Is Solid Melts into Air

      Theory and Method in the Social Sciences

      Behavioral and social sciences theories and models: are they used in unintentional injury prevention research?

      Complexity Theory and Social Research

    303. Thepnr says:

      I think what’s happening in the EUCO meeting right now is all for show, for us the general public. A case of Tusk the good cop and Macron the bad cop when in the end they finish in the middle.

      That’s the only reason we are even hearing anything at all out of these meetings between heads of state, we’re meant to hear them. My moneys on them finding the middle ground between Macron’s end of June and Tusk’s March next year so we get December LOL. What other compromise is there?

    304. Nana says:

      The Tory plot thickens and so they push forward the thickest into the light. I doubt it will be a leaver who will be chosen due to the damage already done.

      I’m thinking its ‘the quiet pig who eats the most’

      My bet is on sleekit Ham/mond but I don’t really give a damn.

      Latest on the summit
      Emmanuel Macron spoke at the end of the first roundtable of EU leaders this evening. He told them he’s ‘in favour of a short extension, and only a short one’ according to a source. Huge gap with most other Member States including Germany. We’re in for a long night…

    305. Thepnr says:

      By the time the planned press conference gets underway, Juncker might be too pissed to take part 🙂

    306. Thepnr says:

      Press conference can be viewed here:

      No need to rush.

    307. Nana says:


      I think I’ll pass, you can tell me all about it in the morning 🙂

    308. Thepnr says:


      Will do, I can’t help myself, it’s an addiction lol.

    309. K1 says:

      Christ meet yer pal Thpnr 🙂

    310. K1 says:

      Heading for a 31st October date…meeting in the middle by the looks of it.

    311. Thepnr says:


      Doesn’t hurt does it, and want to know something? I’d rather hear things first hand and straight from the horses mouth. Then I’ll know that I’m not being fed bullshit, so I’ll be watching 🙂

    312. yesindyref2 says:

      Down with that sort of thing.

    313. K1 says:

      Couldnae agree more, like ‘live’ feedback rather than the ‘punditry’ polish, so tired of the spin by those whose views are utterly partisan, biased and concealed from view.

    314. jfngw says:

      I fear we have a Transphobesmeller Pursuivant at Holyrood.

    315. Thepnr says:


      If it is 31st Oct then looks pretty pointless to me as I don’t think it leaves enough time for a second referendum if there were to be one without another extension.

      We’re going nowhere between now and 22nd May while the Maybot tries again to get her deal through I suppose it does leave enough time for a general election if she fails on MV4 and we take part in the EU elections.

      Does it matter as far as Scotland is concerned? I’m not sure but it must in some way if you think about it. I’ll wait and see waht the reaction is after tonight’s talks are over.

      I hope the dinner was good though the menu didn’t do much for me.

    316. Mike Cassidy says:

      Transphobesmeller Pursuivant?

      Wasn’t that a Kraftwerk album?

    317. Mad Unionist says:

      CameronB Brodie. Did you have training in how to change a light bulb and how to turn the water of at the tobby? You know important things. Bullshit does not put the dinner on the table. And what do you have against the Tories? Especially when your Nationalists are nearer to the Tories than the Labour mob.

    318. Hamish100 says:

      Cameron b Brodie

      “..then I suggest you take your objection to the Royal Town Planning Institute. If you reject social theory as being uninformative and irrelevant, you are simply helping the Tories.”.

      Really? You help the Tories by voting for them or labour.

      Talking about the Royal Town Planning Institute can they explain Cumbernauld in an existential sort of way? If they achieve that explain Airdrie and Coatbridge post1690 .

      Lol ? It’s getting late folks.

    319. jfngw says:

      Wasn’t that a Kraftwerk album?

      Don’t think so, maybe the Velvet Underground, not sure though. Definitely a Frank Findlay piece I think.

    320. jfngw says:

      Seeing reports that EU are considering extension to 31st Oct, shame 5th Nov would have been more apt.

    321. K1 says:

      And round and round we go again.

      I think a GE will be on Thpnr, they are now taking their extension date to May, will she refuse it? Doubtful.

      As for us and Indy, don’t know where this leaves us at the moment. But at least a GE would give a reading of where the rUK are at plus…changed Tory leadership should be sobering in terms of clarifying where Scotland would be at too.

      I know it’s shit, but I don’t want a crash out either…don’t enjoy this ‘cliff edge’ narrative, it has to be stopped.

    322. Thepnr says:


      31st October it is then.

    323. CameronB Brodie says:

      Mad Unionist
      I have an education but that doesn’t define me. I grew up in a relatively poor family, before my life was thrown in to chaos as a result of my accident. I then went on to build a businesses from scratch. I know what it’s like to be poor and marginalised and fearful for your existence. I know what it’s like to be hungry and at the end of your tether. What about you?

      I’m namedropping to pin my knowledge to a culturally authoritative body, that’s all. Pure Sun Tzu. 😉

    324. HYUFD says:

      Breaking EU agrees an extension to Article 50 to October 31st 2019, so the UK will now almost certainly contest the European Parliament elections next month

    325. K1 says:

      Yeah we know fuddick…do catch up…quicker.

    326. Thepnr says:

      Halloween, when May the turnip’s head is scooped out with a spoon, a candle placed inside and she goes around scaring children.

    327. geeo says:

      CameronB Brodie says:

      10 April, 2019 at 10:36 pm

      I’m not a snob but how many of you have a training in stuff like this?

      How pompous are you ?

      You are making an utter fool out of yourself now.

    328. K1 says:

      Just saw a tweet from BBC Kuensberg, ends it with ‘Surely not another classic EU fudge’

      This a journalist…what fucking world do these people live in? All the fudge is coming from Westminster…laughable media spin as per.

    329. jfngw says:

      Latest sub group poll puts remain at 74% in Scotland. Looks like it’s nearly time our sovereignty is put to the test. But the thought of waiting another six months is pushing my patience.

    330. K1 says:

      Right now we are still in the EU, that’s a good thing.

      If the sub poll is accurate we are moving in the right direction as Scotland is awake to what is taking place. A lot can happen in 6 months, not least changed Tory leadership and imv distinct probability of GE, SNP will clear the decks…are we not all relieved that the trigger wasn’t pulled earlier?

      I am. If FM had gone before now, where would we be? The stars are aligning, it’s ours to be patient and our population is most certainly waking up to the reality of the democratic deficit.

      I’m veering toward the positive, cause the negative is draining and counter productive.

    331. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Thepnr @ 23:47,

      I’ve been otherwise engaged and so not following the “live action”, so is it a “flextension” as some thought likely or is it an obligatory full-term delay..?

    332. K1 says:

      Review in June Robert…so flexi-watchityabastardswe’rekeepinganeyeonyou’ extension.

    333. CameronB Brodie says:

      Got a better argument cause that’s simply a personal attack. I took a lot a shit a number of years back, in case you have forgotten, from those who thought they knew better. They didn’t. It’s only recently that I’ve felt capable of indicating any sort of “expertise”. Do you really view my cautious approach to educational praxis as being pompous? Though I#m very rusty, I’ve got a specialist training in this sort of stuff, geared towards supporting the development of sustainable communities. Who are you outside your imagination?

    334. Capella says:

      @ CBB – Treat the personal insults with the ignoral they deserve, complete. IM not so humble O. 🙂

    335. Hamish100 says:

      Scottish Independence referendum Spring 2020

      Octobers too dreich.

    336. Thepnr says:

      @Robert J. Sutherland

      The date of 31st Oct isn’t even official yet, Juccker now meeting May to get her acceptance of what the EU 27 are offering. Maybe she’ll say NO?

      Best watch the press conference when/if it happens, I’m keeping an eye open for hint of when it will start. Link here:

    337. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      K1 @ 23:59, 12:02

      =splutter= Heh, heh. You have a way with words!

      Your earlier points are well made. There will be the EU elections to address, and that could provide a very useful opportunity to make headway. Or even more than that?

      Maybe an earlier crunch time of June could suit us well anyway for the Prison Break.

      Or could May & Corbyn still decide to “cut and run” now?

    338. Thepnr says:

      STRONG AND ARRGhhhhhhhh…….pift!

    339. yesindyref2 says:

      Mmm, well, the few people I’ve talked to on the phone and mentioned Brexit are fair scunnered with the whole thing. that’s 1. Westminster is paralysed that’s 2. Blackford and Sturgeon have been upping the ante and the sNP are being told to go home. That’s 3. All it needs is more provocation and it won’t be go home, it’ll be “Here’s your S30 now fuck off”. With any luck.

      But first over the next bare few days we might see 1). May resign and a leadership election, there’s time now. 2). A GE called. 3). People’s Vote called. Because of the conflict with IR2, that can’t be called just yet.

      But if it’s a case of business as usual, i.e. none at Westminster, there is a window of opportunity for Sturgeon to call IR2 and squeeze it in before Oct 31. And a Tory leadership challenge doesn’t get in the way of that. None of our business!

      So I’m digging out the Windowlene and tissues to polish up that window of opportunity, and perhaps we’ll see Blackford, Wishart, Cherry and Sturgeon upping the rhetoric – after all who could b;lame them?

      USP for IR2? Get away from rUK Brexit, go YES for Indy.

    340. Capella says:

      That “Hey Europe, let’s continue our love affair” video is going to come in handy for the EU elections.
      Yoons will be fizzing mad…again.

    341. K1 says:

      😀 Robert

      One tremendous positive…is the decidedly prime time viewing of what is going to be the total implosion of the Tory party on a scale never before seen in our lifetimes. 👿

    342. geeo says:

      Spot on K1 @11.59pm

      Over 100 times, treeza stated “we are leaving the EU on March 29th”

      Still in, yet she is still in her job !

      WM gov is DESPERATE for a cause to unite unionism behind.

      That was an indyref campaign they thought was coming.

      Nicola has played them brilliantly, when she finally pulls the trigger, after months of the EU calling treeza’s tune over extensions etc (infuriating English voters) the last thing treeza will need is to be seen as desperate to hold onto Scotland, especially by those same English voters currently fuming over lack of their ukexit prize.

      Happy to say, K1, that I also enjoy a super positive outlook in relation to indy strategy.

      While people are shitting it, i am absolutely not.

      I believe the SNP have a fire proof plan ready to deploy at the critical moment of maximum effect.

    343. Thepnr says:

      This is just a joke right? No, I’m afraid it’s not.

      Nota bene
      31 Oct is not a final, final Brexit date (not least because its All Souls Day). There’s a scheduled #EUCO on 17 Oct that could extend. 31 Mar 2020 is still the default end date – as before an expected April #EUCO to thrash out 2021-2027 EU budgets

    344. CameronB Brodie says:

      Capella 😉

    345. Hamish100 says:

      English elections in May will show how right wing England has become.

    346. yesindyref2 says:

      And Russell !!!

    347. K1 says:

      LOL Thpnr….reality is it’s a ‘longer’ extension than she/UKgov wanted, and all the same positives in terms of possibilities are still sound, imv.

    348. yesindyref2 says:

      Wouldn’t surprise me if the date was September some time. 19th sounds good to me.

    349. Hackalumpoff says:

      Indyref2 19th Sept 2019 ?

    350. K1 says:

      Not one time has she gone begging bowl in hand has she come back with that which she sought…the EU are now running UKexit…Tory rightees and crazy wee brexitees be fuming 😀

    351. K1 says:

      It’s getting…interesting…lol

      ‘Members of the 1922 tell me PM will be gone by late May.

      One says: “If we are in the European elections the calls on her to resign will be massive. Even her supporters would say she is a dead duck. Then we will be into a position of runners and riders and a new leader by July.”

      12:09 AM – Apr 11, 2019’

    352. Thepnr says:

      Still no sign of the press conference starting. Has May surprised us all and given the EU a knockback and told them stick 31st October up your arse?

    353. yesindyref2 says:

      Mmmm, 190919. That has a ring to it! Specially digit by digit.

      Sounds like a number for an emergency service.

      “Help I’m a cerebrity, get me out of heeeeeeeeeere”

    354. geeo says:

      @CameronB Brodie

      Despite your reams of links to THEORETICAL arguments (which as already pointed out, are NOT empirical facts) you have yet to actually PROVE a single thing.

      We get it, you think you are better than everyone else, you like to boast about your ability to find links to the opinion of others.

      What you have never shared, nor successfully argued, is a single original idea YOU have had on the indy subject.

      Who am i outside my imagination huh ?

      That from someone bitching about personal attacks, how ironic.

      Perhaps you could find someone elses opinion on the theory about why people act the victim while projecting the same attitude they complain about ?

      Or better still, give YOUR personal opinion on something, like others manage easily on here every day, despite, according to you, apparently being intellectually inferior to your self proclaimed genius ..!

      C’mon Cameron, give us an original thought..

    355. yesindyref2 says:

      By accepting 31st October doesn’t mean the UK has to stay in till then. It could leave with very little notice, just a letter from May I’d guess, backed by the UK parliament. “Bye bye thanks for the fish dish, glad I missed the warm salad and the codpiece.”

    356. CameronB Brodie says:

      Do the fucking reading, your understanding of science is a tad narrow and chauvinistic, frankly.

    357. HYUFD says:

      Hackalumpoff With the UK still in the EU? Fine, that should seal a Unionist victory, Sturgeon is just as much a ditherer as May though, May still has not delivered Brexit almost 3 years since the Leave vote, Sturgeon still has not delivered indyref2 despite Nats champing at the bit to use the Brexit excuse. Looks like Nats are being played almost as much as hard Brexiteers and very amusing it is too!

    358. Thepnr says:


      Why are you bothering with this? Is there nothing more interesting happening tonight in your neck of the woods?

    359. yesindyref2 says:

      And here’s another interesting thought. People have talked about a GE or HE as a mandate for Independence, but it would need 50%+1 to have any chance at all.

      But what about the EU elections fought on a mandate for Scotland to Remain in the EU? Which achieves 6 pro-EU MEPs AND 50%+1?

      You read it here first, allegedly.

    360. Thepnr says:

      Unbelieveably the Herald are reporting news of tonight EU meeting as Theresa May “wins” a six month extension to Article 50.

      Where do they recruit such decrepit and useless journalists?

    361. Thepnr says:

      What a decent reporter would have said was the Theresa may is “forced to accept” a six month extension by the EU.

      In the Britnat MSM eyes “forced to accept” is equivalent to “wins”.

    362. yesindyref2 says:

      Here’s an interesting factoid via Mike Russell’s twit:

      Days between 1997 general election and DevoRef? 133 days. Days until 31 October? 204 days.” (203 now)

      So all it needs is less than 4 months since presumably it didn’t start straight away.

      @HYUFD “Sturgeon still has not delivered indyref2

      Don’t you read the comments, here and elsewhere? Don’t you understand for even one solitary milli-micro-nano-gigosecond that Sturgeon had to and still has, to wait until your UK Parliament’s jerking about with Brexit has some sense to it?

      Put on your seatbelt pal, because maybe this show is soon to take off and reach Mach 2 in 2 minutes flat. Afterburners to glow.

    363. aLurker says:


      Two EU diplomats say leaders are back in the room making some tweaks to the extension plan they agreed earlier. It seems there are aspects of it that Theresa May did not agree with.

    364. Thepnr says:

      Still no sign of the press conference, I’m thinking May has knocked back 31st Oct and will return to Westminster and leave the decision to them?

      Might even through a revoke Article 50 in there.

    365. K1 says:

      Hey Toryfuddick, are you seriously trying to create a ‘false’ equivalence with our FM and your chosen PM?

      We are a movement, grassroots.

      There is no ‘brexit’ movement except in the addled brains of a wee group of circle jerking right wing Tory MP’s and Nitwit Fartwit wi access to laundered money and shady contacts like the Dailies Mail/Express/Telegraph that allowed them to indulge in one of the biggest astroturf campaigns that the UK has ever witnessed.

      You are beyond help wi this rhetoric. Your chosen PM, has again utterly humiliated herself in front of the entire world. Your party is riven and will tear themselves to pieces over UKexit. They will elect another utterly dimwitted Tory as their next ‘leader’, probably a Johnstone or a Cunt…oh sorry Hunt and they will continue to fracture over this issue.

      Our movement has never been stronger because it isn’t based on the wet dream of a bunch of Eton millionaires having a bet on who can make the most money out of a wee Enid Blyton jolly adventure to prove who can ‘pull a fast one’ on the gullibility and ignorance of a population that has been spoon fed shit about the EU by their pals in the press for 40 years.

      Do try and stay up to date, Scotland voted Remain, we didn’t fall for it, it doesn’t matter how many times you think by looking at the polls to figure out what our next move is going to be, you understand nothing about our country and even less about our independence movement.

      How you think you are in any position to ‘gloat’ on here just shows you up for the narrow minded little Tory wannabe that you are. Get a grip and go to bed, ya fanny.

    366. Famous15 says:

      Why does HYFUD remind me of a vulture waiting for the British Empire to die and hopes that Scotland dies too.

      Well bustard we aint goin to please you. Independence is inevitable but necessarily awaits the implementation of Brexit. To hope or say otherwise exposes you as a unionist plant.

      A cabbage perhaps?

    367. Thepnr says:

      Drat I jumped the gun, extension to 31st Oct agreed.

    368. Thepnr says:


      That’s him telt LOL

    369. K1 says:

      Press conference in 10 minutes Thpnr on that link you posted earlier.

    370. K1 says:

      Och ah know Thpnr…am ah a bad yin. 👿

    371. K1 says:

      May’s chatting with cabinet members…ooer.

    372. yesindyref2 says:

      Sorry in advance, I have the desperate need to play this:

    373. K1 says:

      Faisal Islam

      ‘It’s official … when published in Official Journal of EU tomorrow as an official EU Council decision (probably after a formal letter confirming agreement for Tim Barrow) the EU law Brexit date will be changed to October 31st… Govt will then table U.K. law SI & No Deal off.
      Donald Tusk
      EU27/UK have agreed a flexible extension until 31 October. This means additional six months for the UK to find the best possible solution.

      1:05 AM – Apr 11, 2019’

    374. CameronB Brodie says:

      We might be in the middle of a culture war but that doesn’t mean we can’t science the shit out of the problem. I care not for the Maybot’s red lines, my red lines are the biopsychosocial model of health and my biological security.

      Critical Theories, Radical Pedagogies, and Social Education
      New Perspectives for Social Studies Education

      Evolving the theory and praxis of knowledge translation through social interaction: a social phenomenological study

      Social constmctionism and the development oi medical sociology

      The Four Domains Model: Connecting Spirituality, Health and Well-Being

    375. Liz g says:

      So bad yer good 🙂

    376. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Thepnr @ 00:10,

      Obliged for the EU link there, BTW. Next live (?) coverage is currently scheduled for 02:10, I see…

    377. K1 says:

      🙂 Liz

    378. K1 says:

      Press conference starting…video is now playing on links provided.

    379. yesindyref2 says:

      Isn’t it very sad though somehow, that I feel more respect admiration even, and empathy, for a Polish born president of a council of 28 unruly European – “foreign” – leaders. Very European I guess, and after all his first name is Donald.

      We have breathing space folks, armageddon is not yet upon us, we need to use these less than 6 months to get the hell out of Dodge.

    380. Dr Jim says:

      Michel Barnier just off the phone to Nicola Sturgeon she says that’s fine

    381. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      K1 @ 01:16,

      Thanks. (The time I quoted was of course European summer time.)

    382. CameronB Brodie says:

      Why do I think folk should pay attention to my red lines?

      George Libman Engel: The Biopsychosocial Model and the Construction of Medical Practice


      Pick up most medical practice textbooks published in recent decades and the term ‘biopsychosocial’ is prominent. Over this period, medical curricula internationally have been structured around the teaching of the biopsychosocial model, involving an integration of the biological, psychological and social (Neghme 1985; Suchman 2005). In a survey of 54 medical schools in 1997- 1999, Waldstein et al. (2001) found that 80 to 93 per cent used the conceptualisation and/or measurement of psychosocial factors in their curricula. The biopsychosocial approach is an attempt to redress the traditional model of biomedicine, with its predominant focus on pathophysiology and biological approaches to disease, and its lack of a comprehensive inclusion of the social and psychological aspects of health and illness.

      Psychosomatic Medicine Medical Curriculum Patient Relationship Biopsychosocial Model Early Maladaptive Schema

      The rise and fall of the biopsychosocial model

      The Biopsychosocial Model in Health Research: Its Strengths and Limitations for Critical Realists

      The Biopsycho-ecological Paradigm: A Foundational Theory for Medicine

    383. HYUFD says:

      K1 I thought the Brexit vote with Scotland voting Remain guaranteed a landslide victory for May’s in indyref2? Yet here we are almost 3 years after the vote and despite her supposed ‘great grassroots movement’ Sturgeon has huffed and puffed and still come nowhere near blowing the UK House down, in fact she has not even tried, her main achievement since the Brexit vote bring to lose a third of SNP seats at the 2017 general election

    384. Cubby says:

      The Britnats just keep on demonstrating to the whole world and the people of Scotland just how pathetic they are at governing. This extension is just giving the Britnats more time to demonstrate to Scotland why we need to govern our own affairs.

    385. HYUFD says:

      K1 I thought the Brexit vote with Scotland voting Remain guaranteed a landslide victory for Nats in indyref2?

    386. yesindyref2 says:

      God, Tusk is tired, and no wonder.

    387. CameronB Brodie says:

      P.S. If you remove human agency you undermine human health. Scotland already lacks political agency and Brexit will almost certainly intensify this.

    388. Petra says:

      The reality for this “poor”, “wee” country of Scotland, that’s jam packed full of extremely “stupid” people, is that 14 EU member states, with the same or a lesser population than ours, manages to survive, better still thrive. Add to that with Scotland constituting 1% of the EU population not one of them has anything like our level of natural resources, overall, nor can they claim, as we do with proof to support, have the mostly highly educated “assets” in Europe. And yet they, due to the dictatorial political ignoramuses in poor, wee, stupid England (Westminster), are now in a position to determine our fate. Well not for much longer. How lucky are we to be living, after 300 plus years of our ancestors giving their all for Independence, to see this happen? Have patience folks and more so have faith in Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP to lead us out of this hellhole. Just ask yourself, with all that’s happened, where we’d be now if she’d followed the advice akin to some of the verbose garbage that we’ve had to put up with on here over the last 2/3 years. Support her. Support the SNP and convert one person only and we’re out of this before the year ends.



      @ CBB at 10:36pm … “I’m not a snob but how many of you have a training in stuff like this?”

      I have Cameron and no doubt others who post / visit this site do too.

    389. Thepnr says:


      K1 I thought the Brexit vote with Scotland voting Remain guaranteed a landslide victory for May’s in indyref2?

      Put the cork back in the bottle, it’s late and you have work tomorrow.

    390. HYUFD says:

      Famous15 Nats have been saying independence was ‘inevitable’ ever since Scots voted to stay in the Union in 2014. Yet there has been no real shift either way since excluding loaded Brexit hypotheticals

    391. Dr Jim says:

      James Mates of ITV news not at all happy about small countries having a say over what happens to his glorious imperial UK, he even went so far as to challenge the Prime Minister of Lithuania Dalia Grybauskaite on the subject by implying who does she think she is deciding the fate of the UK

      The Madam president replied *I am not deciding, the UK are*

    392. geeo says:

      CameronB Brodie says:

      11 April, 2019 at 12:41 am

      Do the fucking reading, your understanding of science is a tad narrow and chauvinistic, frankly

      That was what you chose as your 1st original thought?

      Comedy gold.

    393. yesindyref2 says:

      I feel sorry for you, your party is a split incoherent ineffective self-centred mess that cares nothing about the UK, any part of it including England. No wonder you run away from anything to do with it and seek solace here, where there are people with some principles and love of country, people who work hard for the better future of our country rather than its destruction as your party does.

      Why don’t you join the SNP and put your energy to some purpose?

    394. schrodingers cat says:

      missed it tonight but reading comments i think

      there is an extention till october and we will have to participate in eu elections?

      does this need to be ratified by the hoc?

    395. HYUFD says:

      Yesindyref2 I will save that for when Ruth Davidson becomes First Minister. Goodnight!

    396. HYUFD says:

      Schrodingers Cat The Commons already voted for extension this week and the Government can now use a SI to make it official

    397. K1 says:

      ‘…I thought…’

      You know what ‘thought’ does?

      Pees the bed and blames the blankets.

    398. schrodingers cat says:



      i hate campaigning in the winter etc, to cold and wet

      corbyn lost the last vonc by 19

      when treeza and jeremeys talks fail. which they will, another vonc will follow. even if the dup back treeza, which i now doubt, treeza will be out on her arse

      a tory leadership election is now certain, quickly followed by a ge

      dont say i didnt tell you 🙂

    399. Dr Jim says:

      The Westminster cabal and their chosen mighty leader soon to be replaced by their next chosen mighty leader once again laid low by the lesser mortals and small inconsequential countries of the EU with the Republic of Ireland playing politics and payback time statesman like and rather nicely and Scotlands First Minister on the end of the phone guiding the timing just right for the SNP conference and vote

      The five families of the fishing North east are going mental
      Don Alberto Armstrong is doing his nut to the rest of the Lodge and wondering if it’s worthwhile keeping on all those extra Philipinos he hired to fish the Cod and Haddock to extinction just like he won’t get his greedy mitts on the new bonny shoals of Herring that him and his ilk fished to extinction previously because the Scottish government’s cordened off the area of sea they’re spawning in their millions and the Westminster mob can’t change it without Brexit because …..

      They don’t have the powers and it’s now likely they’re never going to get them

      Remember folks in October the SG finalises the powers to legally exclude Westminster from overturning the Fracking ban that the SG can now put permanently in place

      Well timed Scotlands FM and all done on the phone

    400. geeo says:


      Extension agreed OCT 31st with a june review.

      If she gets a deal through the House, before the EU elections, then the elections can be cancelled here.

      HoC may not have to vote on it as the Cooper – Letwin Bill made it law for treeza to seek further extension.

      Hope that helps.

    401. CameronB Brodie says:

      Time for a bit more Brexitology, with a particular focus on Social Phenomenology?

      Performing Brexit: How a post-Brexit world is imagined outside the United Kingdom


      Theresa May’s claim that ‘Brexit means Brexit’ demonstrates the malleability of the concept. The referendum campaign showed that ‘Brexit’ can be articulated to a variety of post-Brexit scenarios. While it is important to analyse how Brexit gives rise to contestation in the United Kingdom, Brexit is also constructed from the outside. Brexit signifies more than the technical complexities of the United Kingdom withdrawing from the European Union. It works both as a promise of a different future and performatively to establish a particular past. Brexit works as a frame with potential to shape perceptions in three domains.

      The first is identity. How does ‘Brexit’ shape national and European identities in distinct national environments? The second is how Brexit shapes understandings of geopolitical reality and influences conceptions of what is diplomatically possible. Third is the global economy. How does ‘Brexit’ work within intersubjective frames about the nature of global economic order?

      Keywords Brexit, diplomacy, identity, performativity, political economy

      Brexit: Sociological Responses

      Brexit, psychotherapy and moral psychology: individualism versus the common good

      Social Movements, Brexit, and Social Policy

    402. CameronB Brodie says:

      Got anything positive to add to the debate or are you only hear to carp and crisis? I think you know where you can take your face.

    403. Dr Jim says:

      I think therefore I am

      Theresa May needs to read more, or well, learn more, or well something more because she’s not getting the hang of this human experience thing at all

    404. geeo says:


      “carp and crisis”

      “Take my face”??

      Nope, not heard that one, please elaborate ?

      You really struggle when not referencing 3rd party theorists huh ?

    405. CameronB Brodie says:

      @ CBB at 10:36pm … “I’m not a snob but how many of you have a training in stuff like this?”

      I have Cameron and no doubt others who post / visit this site do too.

      I wasn’t suggesting I’m anything special, I’m not particularly suited to scholarly work and I was learning this stuff shortly after a serious brain injury. I’m aware that there are lots of folk with similar backgrounds associated with Social Science and with far superior knowledge and technique.

      I was trying to suggest certain commentators lack the advantages this knowledge provides. Subsequently, assertions that I am pompous may be a tad misplaced. 😉

    406. CameronB Brodie says:

      My bad. Carp and criticise. Come on then genius, lead us to the promised land.

    407. Petra says:

      Ooops apologies folks. My last post should have read 12 EU member states not 14. Got to get the facts right and not be seen to be spreading propaganda. Right BBC?


      Next up Boris for PM. That should put the last nail in the Unionist coffin. Add to that the Tory and Labour dinosaurian parties, of the two party state, losing votes to UKIP, Farage’s Brexit Party and to Chuka’s (pro-austerity / NHS privatisation) dolts with the Libdem liars disappearing, finally, right into the ether. The stinking UK political system totally decimated after 100 years, thank God, with the Union being severed, followed by another “stinking” truly fascist English state replacing the “status quo” leaving the English people to sort that one out. The utter chaos!

      Then of course Dirty Money Davidson is due to return on the 4th May. Too bad baby Finn didn’t manage to save her skin, as per the master plan. Maternity leave out by 36 days. Dearie me Ruth, your boss Big T’s fairly let you down, hasn’t she? Put you right in the sh*t. Worse still, for her and her party, grassroots Indy supporters now have a damning catalogue of “Brexit facts” to pass onto the electorate, as is the case with Labour in Scotland. The stars are now, indeed, aligning for us.

    408. yesindyref2 says:

      Considering that an extension of the Brexit date had to be agreed unanimously by the EU-27, any of the following with lower or similar populations to Scotland (5.425 million (2017)) could have vetoed it:

      Malta 440,400
      Luxembourg 590,700
      Cyprus 854,800
      Estonia 1,315,600
      Latvia 1,950,100
      Slovenia 2,065,900
      Lithuania 2,847,900
      Croatia 4,154,200
      Ireland 4,774,800
      Slovakia 5,435,300
      Finland 5,503,300
      Denmark 5,707,300

      as could these with a lower population than the UK (66.04 million (2017))

      Bulgaria 7,101,900
      Austria 8,772,900
      Hungary 9,797,600
      Sweden 9,995,200
      Portugal 10,309,600
      Czech Republic 10,578,800
      Greece 10,757,300
      Belgium 11,365,800
      Netherlands 17,081,500
      Romania 19,638,300
      Poland 37,973,000
      Spain 46,529,000
      Italy 60,589,400

      or of course these two with more!

      France 67,024,500
      Germany 82,800,000

      That’s just one of those 27 countries, iScotland would make the 28th, once the UK has self-destructed into whatever it wants to call itself.

      Democracy EU-style where the leader of a country with less than half a million people could tell the UK to fuck off.

    409. yesindyref2 says:

      Oh, the Unionists have a new argument, no, really they do, don’t look at me like that, they do, they do!

      Some have clearly twigged that the 13 smaller members of the EU with a total population of less than 10% can BLOCK EU legislation, with QMV. They should do, I’ve posted it often enough, quoting the links and figures.

      Now it’s a new tack – iScotland couldn’t PASS legislation it wants without a lot of help with QMV because of its low population compared to the UK.

      Hmm, let’s look at that, using the UK first.

      The UK would first have to get the support of 15 other member states. So far as that goes, population don’t mattter. iScotland could do the same with the support of 15 other member states.

      The UK would also have to get the support of member states representing 65% of the total EU population. (Jan 2017 figures)

      That’s countries representing 65% * 512 million = 333 million. Subtract 66 million for the UK and you get 267 million. So it needs at least some of the bigger members to support it.

      For iScotland with the rUK gone, it would be 65% * 451.4 million = 293.4 million. Subtract 5.4 million for Scotland and you get 288 million. So big wow, iScotland would need to attract member states with a total population of just 21 million more total population. So it needs at least some of the bigger members to support it. With a truly massive, errr, less than 5% of the EU total population more than the UK would. Less than 1/20th.

      We’re a’ doomed!

    410. yesindyref2 says:

      Mmm, I’ve cut and pasted my totally superlative and expert posting into my little big text file. I may wish to use it elsiewhere …

    411. yesindyref2 says:

      Not to mention of course that all iScotland in the EU has to do is suggest it’s thinking of vetoing some other vote requiring unanimous support, but would really really like support for its little bill to provide more EU subsidies for CCS and renewable wave power or such like.

      That’s the way small EU memebrs do it, and I like it. More power indeed to the elbow than the bigger member states but shhhhh, don’t tell them I said that.

    412. yesindyref2 says:

      Such a unanimous vote is required for the EU budget, which is why the EU-27 need rid of the UK by around next April, May/June at the latest.

      Wouldn’t it be great if iScotland was IN the EU in time for that? Mmmm?

      (Machiavelli was a damned amateur)

    413. yesindyref2 says:

      EU 7-year budget.

    414. CameronB Brodie says:

      re. democracy in the EU.

      Democracy and Legitimacy in the European Union

      Abstract and Keywords

      This article examines the quality of democracy and legitimacy of the EU. If the EU can be considered democratic in terms of its institutional set-up, it is so in ways unlike those of nation-state democracies. While democracies in nation states have established governments, the EU has ‘governance’, in which governing occurs without an established government through multiple authorities in highly complex sets of interrelations with state as well as societal actors. Scholars remain divided over whether a complicated set of institutional arrangements has engendered a democratic deficit for the EU and/or its member states, and also differ in the analytic framework deployed.

      They tend to summarize their main arguments using concepts borrowed from systems theory, as they analyse the interrelationships between output legitimacy, judged in terms of the effectiveness of the EU’s policy outcomes for the people; input legitimacy, judged in terms of the EU’s responsiveness to citizen concerns as a result of participation by and representation of the people; and ‘throughput’ legitimacy, building upon yet another term from systems theory, judged in terms of the accountability, transparency, and efficacy of the EU’s decision-making processes along with their openness to pluralist consultation with the people.

      Keywords: EU, democracy, output legitimacy, input legitimacy, throughput legitimacy, systems theory

      The Collapse Of European Social Democracy, Part 1

      The EU is not fundamentally undemocratic; it simply needs to be judged by a different democratic standard than nation-states.

      The EU’s democratic deficit in a realist key: multilateral governance, popular sovereignty and critical responsiveness

    415. Liz g says:

      I’ve not seen any mention of the cost of retaining membership of the EU, since March 29th till October 31st.
      Every obligation to the budget must surely be accruing..
      Which will,I think,add to the final payment?
      A payment much disputed!
      Yet no figures are being discussed!!
      The “Divorce bill” cannot possibly static.As long as the Union continues the financing of it must too.

      Oh my… All these extra payments must surely be taking money from our NHS… I am shocked that this isn’t front page news..So I am…. 🙂

      We should mind this…when we negotiate Indy…and not leave Scotland’s revenue,to long in Westminster s hands/claws!!!

    416. Reluctant Nationalist says:

      Chapter 1: Independence.

      It was almost all I thought about – and at times I admit that I wished for the idea to be cleanly cut from my overburdened mind, to give sweet release from that anguish of patriotic purgatory, the only exit from which seemed to lead descendingly to another unjust and humiliating defeat.
      Frustration and disillusionment, compounded by the shrieking hum of brazen malfeasance, threatened to shatter the delicate momentum of the people’s will before it strengthened into the crucial phase; and the time for that heroic moment seemed to be impossibly out of reach. A cruel trap.
      But the threat could never destroy what was immutable from the hearts and minds of our young and old alike, what was inevitable even when despair gripped; for we had something no one could counter, more invaluable than an invincible army, more potent than the power of a star – we had been trained by the town planning institute, in critical theory.

      Chapter 2: You know where you can take your face.


    417. CameronB Brodie says:

      Reluctant Nationalist
      Chapter 3 Scots applies rational thought to their predicament and vote for democratic national sovereignty within the EU. Subsequently, Scots gain access to inalienable human rights, European social democracy is strengthened and Scotland flourishes as a modern, prosperous nation. 😉

    418. Breeks says:

      Andrew Wilson: Pooling sovereignty gives great power to small nations….

      Yeah, except it isn’t Sovereignty that you pool. Sigh.

    419. yesindyref2 says:

      The end. Or is it the beginning?

    420. yesindyref2 says:

      That earlier made me finally update the EU population figues and calculations on my quick EU guide – no significant difference to the calcs basically. Might motivate me to check out if anything else needs brought up to date. Or not! Zzzzz …

    421. Breeks says:

      I don’t think I can stand another six months of this aimless wait and see pish.

      Theresa May is made to stand in the corridor while the EU decides her fate, while Nicola Sturgeon is made to stand in the corridor outside the corridor while May negotiates Scotland’s fate, and the Scottish people are made to stand in the corridor, outside the corridor, outside the corridor while Nicola Sturgeon procrastinates with our fate.

      Why don’t the people of Scotland demand clarification from the ECJ to clarify the Sovereign Nation of Scotland can revoke Article 50 unilaterally and petition the EU to extend Scotland the same Sovereign recognition as the ECJ does, so that Scotland can determine its own fate through direct negotiations with Europe, and is no longer marginalised by this Russian doll type, layer upon layer of exclusion and abdication of Sovereign integrity?

      Let us show some fkg initiative as if we actually want to be an Independent Nation.

    422. Nana says:


      EU staff qualifications & registrations confirmed
      Health Secretary & COSLA confirm qualifications of EU health & social care staff will still be recognised after Brexit

      “People can’t have faith in a backroom deal by two leaders who don’t possess the ingredients to hold their parties together.”

      Highland Council tax payers are footing the bill to administer Universal Credit.

    423. Nana says:

      Nuclear weapons are abhorrent and a huge waste of money. The only way to remove them from Scotland is with independence.

      WATCH: TORY-DUP DODGY DEAL – By undermining the Barnett Formula and slipping their friends in the DUP an extra £1billion for their support, the Tories have denied Scotland and its people an extra £3.4billion per year. What would you spend £3.4billion on?

    424. Graeme says:

      I agree with Breeks here, I know he’s been beating this drum for a while now and I’ve never really been fully onboard with the idea, but we can’t take another 6 months of this shite, Nicola has to make something happen and soon.

      Back in 2016 when England voted to leave the EU and we voted to stay in I thought it’s game on and here’s we are almost 3 years down the line and we’re no further ahead with the prospect of waiting another 6 months for our fate to be decided this is fucking depressing

    425. Nana says:

      Former Ravenscraig steelworks transformation plan given £66m boost

      Yesterday I asked Scottish Tory MP John Lamont, who was trying and failing to justify the treatment of #Waspi women by the UKGovt, if he also supported the Pension Credit changes, the so called #toyboy tax?

      Conspiracy theories about Nicola Sturgeon are creating division in the wider Scottish #repealtheunioncampaign.
      Tantric (never being allowed to finish) Brexit, also creates s feeling of helplessness in a process driven by another country’s voters.
      Was Alex Salmond smeared by the British state, to ensure that the “ultra-gradualism” of Nicola Sturgeon, would result in no quick and successful indyref 2?

    426. Nana says:

      All Torys lie

      The Trump administration has opened up fresh trade tensions with the EU after threatening to impose tariffs worth $11bn on goods ranging from helicopters to wine and cheese.

    427. Nana says:

      The new disability minister should listen to us. Don’t merge benefit tests

      “Keeping in mind the close result & the severe nature of the irregularities, it is possible that the outcome of the ballot could have been different.”
      The result of a nationwide referendum has been overturned for the first time in modern Switzerland’s history.

    428. Nana says:

      Here’s the official legal text of the decision on the second extension of UK membership of the EU

      Here is what Palestinians children face in the occupied West Bank at the hands of the IDF, armed by the United States and the UK
      Warning distressing footage

    429. Nana says:

      Our lives have been put on hold for long enough, I am due to start new treatment soon and lord knows I have reached screaming point.

      The SNP have done all they can do to help England and this latest can kicking by May only provides more time for them to keep stealing from us, as we saw yesterday

      A very wise fella told me long ago “you never stop campaigning” but that is exactly what we have done. Indy will not be gained by sitting back and playing Westminster’s games.

      I am out and about talking with folk and the ignorance around Brexit and politics in general is shocking. Without a campaign how else are we going to get Scots on board the indy train.

      As for ‘saving’ England, I see daily on my internet travels exactly what the Brexit zealots want and it’s not saving and certainly not by the Nats. England need to get their own house in order and we need to get the hell out before they burn us..

      Enough of statements like this

      This is more like it

    430. Luigi says:

      yesindyref2 says:

      11 April, 2019 at 5:57 am

      The end. Or is it the beginning?

      Tis the End of the Beginning. 🙂

      I think there is an ever so slight chance that MPs will finally pluck up courage to vote for complete revocation of Article 50 – after the EU elections are out of the way, of course.

      This expected fudge over fudge BRINO, now kicked into the long grass, is fooling noone. WM would have voted to revoke Article 50 last year, if they thought they could get away with it. The nettle will have to be grasped eventually.

      The EU is bidding it’s time. Slowly slowly catchy monkey.

      In the meantime sit back and enjoy watching the blue and red tory parties completely implode. It won’t be pretty.

      Indy Ref? Not sure on that one – people are impatient, but my instinct would be to hold fast for a few weeks to see how this all unfolds. I don’t envy Nicola’s job at all, but she is more capable than anyone else to deliver indy IMO, so I leave this decision to her – for the time being. 🙂

      If this looks like never ending Brexit, then we will have to say “Enough is enough” at some stage. 🙂

    431. galamcennalath says:

      Nana says

      “The result of a nationwide referendum has been overturned for the first time in modern Switzerland’s history.

      Their issues with their ref seem insignificant compared to the massive irregularities surrounding EURef. Yet they will have a rerun.

      Wonder what the Swiss Electoral Comission, or whatever it’s called, would make of the quality of EURef!?

    432. Tatu3 says:

      I can’t understand why the SNP can’t now get on with Indy for Scotland….and if England (westminster) then decide to revoke Art 50 or have a so called PV, what does it matter? Even if Brexit never happens I still dont want to be a part of the uk! The EU could have 29 members!
      Let them (england) do what they want/have to do, and we (Scotland) do what we want/have to do.
      Our SNP MPs in Westminster have shown the way for England to get out of the Brexit mess. We’ve tried saving them. They (england) now need to do it for themselves if it’s really what they want.
      Now it’s time to save Scotland.

    433. Luigi says:

      BREXIT BRINO stalled until October.

      Three very big questions:

      1. How much more will this cost the UK economy?

      2. How much will the UK have to pay the EU for continued membership”?

      3. What the hell happens in October – another extension?

      Don’t expect the BBC to ask these, however. The British establishment has circled the wagons, and will do anything to save their precious union or YINO (yoonion in name only).

    434. galamcennalath says:

      I really hope Nicola doesn’t prevaricate any longer.

      Does it matter which way Brexit unfolds when WM has already shown itself as being totally incapable of managing its reserved powers?

      All powers need to be moved to Holyrood asap. Scots need to exercise their sovereignty and decide who is competent to rule Scotland – us or them.

    435. mr thms says:

      Look at the recent timeline (it goes back further to Harold Wilson’s Royal Commission on the Constitution in 1969)

      The Constitutional Reform Act 2005, the Treaty of Lisbon 2009, the Supreme Court 2009, the Scottish referendum 2014, the Scotland Act 2016, the EU referendum 2016, the EU Withdrawal Act 2018.

      If the UK parliament ratifies the EU Withdrawal Agreement, there will be a ‘transitional arrangement’ until 20xx

      that would not only facilitate the return of devolved powers the EU has responsibility for to Scotland, it would facilitate the devolution of reserved powers that could not be devolved while the UK was a signatory to EU treaties.

      Article 50 has several parts for a reason.

      The UK government applying for an extension also gives the EU and member states the time it needs to make changes.

      Part 5 in particular refers to rejoining under Article 49.

      How many times during the Scottish referendum didcthe EU say Scotland would need to apply under Article 49?

      Seems to me that had Scotland voted Yes the UK would have had to leave the EU and the succesdorcstates rejoin.

      It is not an orderly Brexit the UK government is striving for. It is an orderly succession.

    436. frogesque says:

      @ Nana 7.29

      Don’t post a lot but I feel your frustration.

      Please don’t think all of us have stopped campaigning though. All Under One Banner and other marches, Bridges for Indy, YES Sones, All the local yes groups running or being resurrected and created.

      We are here, we kicking.

      We are YES!

      We are YES!

    437. Chick McGregor says:

      Israel is about to land a probe on the Moon and therefore be the 4th country to do so.

      However, it is using a British built engine so it remains to be seen whether it will do a soft landing or a hard landing, abort or indeed blow up at the last minute.

      Breaking news: May not land until Oct. 31st

    438. starlaw says:

      There must be an election of some sort soon. Westminster cannot carryon along this route. The next two weeks will be interesting.

    439. sassenach says:

      starlaw says “The next two weeks will be interesting.”

      We’ve been saying that for what seems like years!!!

      Not sure I can last till Oct – but obviously that’s the plan – we need things to do!!

    440. DerekM says:

      Well if anybody had any doubts about the EU going after the UK regime they should no longer be doubts.

      Unfortunately for Scotland it means we are now back to seeing who jumps first though by them throwing out A50 revoke even if they now flip flopped during an indyref and tried to play the EU card against us they are no longer in a position to veto us joining the EU as an independent Scotland.

      The road is clear my friends time to fire up the indy wagons.

      England should leave the UK i hear wahaha don’t you just love it when a plan comes together.

    441. Bill Hume says:

      Dear sassenach…………plenty to do. There will be European elections and probably a general election.
      Quite possibly a Holyrood election.
      There are marches and events to organise.
      It won’t be boring watching the far right fighting the extreem far right factions in the Tory party and the Labour moderates versus the ‘New Labour’ factions having a “face off”

      I’m actually rather looking forward to it all.

    442. I think seeing as the can has been kicked down the the road for another six months and as others have noted our resources continue to be stolen, the Scottish Government should poll the Scottish people as to who they think should control Scotland’s resources be that, oil and gas or renewable energy to water and food production?

      If the majority of the respondents think Scotland and it’s elected Scottish Government ought to then a referendum should be held forthwith.

      If the result of said referendum returns a majority in favour of Scotland and it’s elected Government controlling our natural resources then we should petition Westminster to devolve the nessacery powers immediately or face dissolution of the United Kingdom for breaching the terms of said United Kingdom for subjugating the sovereign will of the Scottish people???????

    443. mike cassidy says:

      With English local elections on 3 May

      its the next three weeks that will be interesting.

      The ‘down south’ voting that day will surely impact on tory leadership and GE issues.

      And I’m starting to sympathise with those wondering what the SNP waiting game is all about.

      I get the need to have Brexit clarified before calling for indyref2 – if brexit ever happens –

      But surely now there is a case for going public with the constitutional issue.

      Let’s at least have it laid bare.

      Can we in practice dissolve the union?

      Can we in practice just walk away?

      Can we in practice revoke article 50 on our own?

      If the answer’s ‘no’ to this stuff

      And its an indyref or nothing

      Then so it goes.

      But at least we would know.

    444. stu mac says:

      I found this article interesting.

      Should add current regulations which claim to help renters seems to be pretty feeble. Ought to be doing more.

    445. Luigi says:

      It might be a useful strategy to ask for a section 30 soon.

      After all, May will knock it back anyway. Then a number of options materialize: legal challenges, GE mandates, organise a consultative ref etc etc etc.

      I say now go public – a formal request for S30 – what’s to lose?

      But hey, just an idea. what do I know? I defer to the experts. 🙂

    446. DerekM says:

      Oh wow they will not be able to veto the new tax evasion laws either or hold them up in the EU parliament.

      Along with they cant veto us from joining.

      Is this a best of both worlds scenario that some clever people have designed in co-operation with each other hmmm interesting 🙂

      Damn remind me never to play poker with the FM lol

    447. CmonIndy says:

      I have said numerous times on other fora that Westminster know they can have Brexit or Scotland but not both. Many soft Nos will see now the lengths to which Unionist parties will go to keep Scotland’s resources, which might now include permanent break up of the Conservative party.

    448. naina tal says:

      Had a Polish gentlemen visit my business yesterday. He got started on politics. Surprised when he said he was in favour of a hard Brexit. Seems that when Poland joined the EU his wages were halved. He blames the Eu and has never forgiven them.
      He came to UKOK 14 years ago, to England then moved to Scotland. He says he loves Scotland, mainly because of the people who have accepted him with open arms which wasn’t always the case darn sarf. Now thinks he has “settled status”.
      Anyhoo he now says he wants a hard brexit because he doesn’t want any more Eastern Europeans coming here.
      I was very surprised at his attitude. It seems my preconceptions might not be quite right, ie:
      European migrant = Remainer + Indy Yes. Wonder how many others feel like him?

    449. Fergus Green says:

      This petition is calling for an investigation into the conduct of Vote Leave in the 2016 referendum. It may not get 6 million signatures, but 100000 means it will be considered for debate in parliament.

    450. HYUFD says:

      Tatu3 Sorry, on straight Yes No to independence polls in Scotland No still leads comfortably. Even with soft Brexit there is no majority for independence, only in the event of a No Deal Brexit does Yes tend to be narrowly ahead but as the prospect of that recedes with every extension to Article 50 so does the prospect of indyref2 and independence recede too

    451. mike cassidy says:

      naina tal 10.02

      Not all indy supporters want Scotland to remain in the EU.

      And I suppose that grouping will inevitably include some immigrants.

      Wonder if your visitor was one of them.

    452. Cubby says:

      The FUD still on here polluting the site with his British Nationalist Tory lies and misrepresentation. The expert on Scotland all the way from deepest toryland in southern England.

      This Tory has a colonial mindset who thinks Scotland is owned by England.

      All Tories should be humble and embarrassed by the total laughing stock they have made of the UK over leaving the EU but of course the ignorant and arrogant Tories have the biggest brassnecks in the UK. They still think they are some sort of master race. Laughable.

    453. DerekM says:

      Ach Cubby he is just a badly paid soldier who dreamed the advert on the tv about army life only to find himself stuck behind a computer trolling Scottish indy.

      Has the old bat given you guys a pay rise yet man she is one stingy auld bag should come join our new Scottish army think we will call it the British army and let everybody from this island defend her nations and peoples ohh wait does that not already exist hmmm

    454. manandboy says:

      I laughed at this, but I’m not sure why. Perhaps it’s because Brexit only works as a joke.

      @awilliamscomedy sums it all up – Brexit via Burger King

    455. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Bill Hume @ 09:28,

      Oh dear, no, Bill, please. (You’re not joking, are you?) Not ongoing diversions. People will get heartily sick of a never-ending succession of plebiscites which provide no definitive end to the Brexit agony. All the way to Holyrood in 2021, without using the existing mandates?

      People are already fed up enough of all this WM faffing around. If we offered them fast relief from it all, they would queue up to thank us (and vote for it).

      English local elections down south are inevitable, and will likely influence main party thinking. (They are still FPTP, IIRC.) I can’t see the results giving any encouragement to either Tory or Labour for an early UKGE.

      European elections are now inevitable for everyone, it seems. Perhaps our best call is to use these to get the indy message through to persuadeable voters despite the usual media BritNat gatekeepers.

      Then go full-on for IR2 in June – or perhaps September – to put Godot out of his our collective misery?

    456. Abulhaq says:

      Question: Is the established democratic process of which the SNP is part, proving a hinderance to independence?

    457. Legerwood says:

      Nana @ 7:29 am

      I don’t know where, when or who started the ‘saving England’ theme but what the Scottish Government and the SNP MPs have been trying to do is safeguard Scotland and its interests.

      Any benefit that might accrue to England from their efforts to stay in Customs union and Single Market with Free Movement of People as a minimum, or revoking article 50, would be coincidental but not their main aim.

      The unthinkable has also been a factor in their push for CU etc. And the unthinkable – Scotland votes No in indyref 2.

      Whatever the outcome the SG have bust a gut to make sure that Scotland and its people are in the best position possible to
      move forward to independenc or, God forbid, not. That the rUK may also benefit is a side effect but a useful one. An independent Scotland does not need a dysfunctional neighbour on its southern border.

      I hope your treatment goes well. Take care.

    458. Thepnr says:

      Julian Assange has just been arrested say UK police.

    459. Dr Jim says:

      Some might argue there’s been no change in Scotland’s circumstances to warrant a referendum but I think circumstances have changed insofar as the amount of uncertainty has increased yet again for business and investment into Scotland and that always leads to a downturn in spending on the street which in turn is bad for everybody

      Our FM has decisions to make and she can’t be seen to do a *May* and kick the can or two things might happen, momentum for Independence slows due to the perception of apathy, or the growing sense of anger within the SNP will cause a rather large row because of the constant limbo

      If one were a conspiracy theorist one might believe the coincidental charges against the former FM have kept him out of the fray but that time isn’t infinite, so are we waiting for the expected exhoneration of Alex Salmond to allow him to be pitched back into the fray or are the powers that be going to manage to kick his court case can into forever

      One thing seems sure the current FM is going to have a problem if she does anything that sounds like humming and hawing and mumbles

      The membership are chewin their own lips now

    460. Ken500 says:

      The self sighted, self interest of migrants that don’t want others to come. Migration has shaped the world. Many people from Scotland had to migrate because of appalling British rule. The Clearances etc, the taking of Scottish resources to fund London S/E. A 40 Million diaspora. Australia, NZ, US populated by people from Scotland. Scotland depopulated but some people do not want much needed migrants to come here. Total lack of self awareness.

      There are only 50,000 coming to the UK after the foreigner student numbers are taken off. Now less from the EU more from Asia. The foreign students are a fully funded asset. They return home. Westminster unionists caused the illegal wars increasing migration into Europe. They are to blame but accept no responsibility. The EU countries have to pick up the pieces at great cost.

      The Brexiteers try to say the EU costs Britain. Britain costs the EU £Trns of devastation and destruction. Lying sychophants. The EU was established to prevent starvation and war. The Westminster unionists have caused war and destruction all over the world. The are a public disgrace. Austerity is totally unnecessary. The tax take revenues have gone up. £95Billion a year. The Westminster unionists have taken monies from the poorer most in need and given it to the wealthier.

    461. Ken500 says:

      The swines have arrested Julian Assange. He has committed no crime. The Westminster hypocrites and the lying cops. Detaining people unlawfully. What a total waste of public money.

    462. Marie Clark says:

      Nana. I share your frustration, that’s why I’ve not been posting much. Now going to have a rest and get on with life, or I’ll finish up with a visit from the nice men in the white coats.

      I’ve also noticed one or two of the regular posters like Tinto Chiel are missing, sad that. I’m also sad at the bickering between some of the regular posters, not a good look boys, and it generally is the boys.

      I Hope that your new treatment goes well Nana, and that mibbies Nicola will get a move on. You cannae keep the troops standing forever waiting for the starting gun. I’m now beginning to fear that I won’t live to see an Independent Scotland in my lifetime.

      I’m away to lie down in a darkened room.

    463. manandboy says:

      Driven by impatience? Indyref2 only makes sense when we know we are going to win it. We don’t know that yet, so making our move for Indy now, is gambling with Scotland’s future. I for one, am not interested.

      I do agree however with ongoing open-ended campaigning, but it would have to be carefully paced to be sustainable. Otherwise many might tire of it and stop.

      Many have died waiting for Independence. It is a privilege to wait a little longer.

    464. Republicofscotland says:

      Jeez, what a horiffic image of Assange being virtually dragged out of the Ecuadorian embassy.

    465. Ken500 says:

      Germany has 18% migrant population. Germany has a much more successful economy than the UK and does not have the assets that Scotland does. The EU totally appreciates what Scotland brings to the table. Unlike the UK that illegally and secretly takes Scottish assets and wastes them with total mismanagement. Keeps it secret under the Official Secrets Act. Iraq War, Lockerbie and Dunblane kept secret for 100 years.

      Illegal wars, financial fraud abc tax evasion have cost Scotland £Billions. The taking of the Oil revenues and total mismanagement of the Oil, fishing, farming sector. Scotland paying for Hinkley Point, HS2 and Trident a total waste of money. People are being sanctioned and starved by the UK Gov. An absolute disgrace. A world laughing stock. What a total and utter shambles.

    466. manandboy says:


      If the restrictions proposed by GCC are enforced, then I would favour an AUOB ‘Walkabout’ in Glasgow City centre for say, an hour, starting at 1pm, before making a move at 2pm to Glasgow Green in an act of ‘planned spontaneity’.

    467. Sinky says:

      To-day is Leith Walk Edinburgh Council by election and local “neutral” Evening News paper editor allows Tory councillor John McLellan to have a go at the SNP on Council budget cuts.

      The irony of Tories of all people blaming Scots Gov for cuts when local authorities have to spend millions alleviating Tory welfare cuts.

      Also strange that there has been no coverage in MSM / BBC/ STV of last night’s Commons vote on Trident when no Labour MP spoke or voted against renewal of nuclear weapons or of former Scottish Labour Chair threatening to leave party over freedom of movement issue.

    468. Ken500 says:

      Assange had better get proper treatment and pritectdc by the Law. International Law. He is better out of the Embassy. Not a healthy situation.

    469. Ken500 says:


    470. Hackalumpoff says:

      Frustration is infectious, it’s even getting to Indyposterboy

    471. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Legerwood @ 10:35,

      It strikes me that the SNP MPs are placed in something of a quandary at present (and one not of their own making either). They rightly feel that an rUK which is still within the EU trading bloc makes the case for indy that much easier. And they rightly support FoM for Scotland, because it is in our manifest self-interest. But they need not insist on FoM for rUK in order to preserve both of the above, provided the intended final goal is Scottish independence.

      So they could in principle support a May-Corbyn “fix”, if they were willing to abandon the English to a self-imposed isolationist fate. In the past they have, as a matter of principle (rather than as a consequence of EVEL), generally abstained from voting on matters exclusively English. So what to do – stick to principle for the sake of everyone or be tempted to acquiesce in an “exit-fix” that would surely trigger IR2? Even if an unprincipled volte-face would be a very bad look?

      Ironically, it is the UKGov’s insistence on a unitary outcome which even gives the SNP traction in the first place!

      And equally ironically, how is it that in an alternative scenario we are supposed to fear a “hard border” between a Scotland remaining in the EU and an England that has left without any deal at all? An England which in that event will be absolutely desperate for trade deals, and who will be in considerable need of our energy and other resources?

    472. schrodingers cat says:

      is there a fmq’s today?

    473. Hackalumpoff says:

      @schrodingers cat
      11 April, 2019 at 11:54 am
      is there a fmq’s today?

      NO in recess. Away on hols. Nothing to see there.

    474. Robert Louis says:

      I see Tory party liar in chief, Jeremy Hunt, is busy spinning lies to the media about why the police have sat outside an embassy in London since 2002, just to arrest Julian Assange, and why he has been physically dragged out by six men straight into a police van.

      That man, Julian Assange is a hero, and should be getting a medal. It was he and his organisation wikileaks who exposed just how much the USA and the lying UK government had been spying on completely innocent citizens en masse for years. And in a wholly illegal manner.

      Of course julian assange is an ecuadorian citizen and his removal of asylum by the new president there, was and is wholly illegal.

      I guess the US and UK government just don’t like people knowing the truth.

      Just watch as he is rapidly despatched to Sweden to face the fake ‘sex’ charges’, so the USA can finally get their hands on him.

      The way he was dragged out the embassy was an utter disgrace.

      His imprisonment and constant harrassment makes a mockery of any notion of ‘justice’, in this country, Sweden or the USA.

      And so the right wing march of England continues. Dissent will NOT be tolerated.

      Assange will see no so-called ‘justice’. This is a witch hunt, pure and simple, and it is the USA that is behind it. Once he is there, he will never see the light of day again.

    475. Robert Louis says:

      So now brexit is delayed, there is plenty of time for indyref2. Get on with it.

    476. Thepnr says:

      Theresa May to give a statement on Brexit in HoC around 13:00 this then to be followed by Sajid Javid with a statement on Julian Assange’s arrest.

      Sweden have dropped all charges against Assange, first in August 2015 when some of the charges were dropped except the allegation of rape. This allegation was dropped by Sweden in May 2017, it’s unlikely then that Sweden would seek his extradition. It’s extradition to the US he rightly fears.

    477. Thepnr says:

      Theresa May to give a statement on Brexit in HoC around 13:00 this then to be followed by Sajid Javid with a statement on Julian Assange’s arrest.

      Sweden have dropped all charges against Assange, first in August 2015 when some of the charges were dropped except the allegation of r_ape. This allegation was dropped by Sweden in May 2017, it’s unlikely then that Sweden would seek his extradition. It’s extradition to the US he rightly fears.

    478. ronnie anderson says:

      hackalumpoff Holyrood in recess but can be recalled which is unlikely as we now know there is a extension to Brexit

    479. schrodingers cat says:

      the reasons for waiting to announce indyref2 are the same today as they were yesterday

      if this were a staring match, then all i can see on this thread are people blinking.

      wm is now on holiday, nothing will happen there for the next 2 weeks.

      when they return, corbyn will walk out of the talks and then call a vonc

      we also now have an eu election to fight. as many have pointed out that the snp will get 2 meps elected, there isnt much that can change that.

      perhaps we can use the eu election to bring forward some of the ideas here, ie campaign for indy on the manifesto etc, and see what the results are? bear in mind, these eu elections will also be a litmus test in england.

      something has changed tho’ we now have time for a tory party leadership election, eu elections and a GE be for we leave the eu. these events will let us no exactly what brexit means, more importantly, we might even have time for indyref2 as well and be able to campaign to remain rather than rejoin

      we have waited this long, dont lose your nerve at the last moment

    480. ronnie anderson says:

      Robert Louis what material change has occurred or have I missed something

    481. gus1940 says:

      Following the SNP official complaint re the lack of SNP politicians appearing on metropolitan political programs there was a sudden upsurge of SNP appearances.

      However, that hasn’t lasted very long and the BBC have reverted to type and The SNP have been disappeared again.

    482. Thepnr says:

      The commons chamber is still pretty empty, May running late.

    483. Cubby says:

      Politics Live this lunchtime.

      I haven’t watched it for some time but nothing much has changed. A panel of English people talking about Britain and British issues when all they talk about is England. They even talked about moving the UK Parliament away from London to the North. Options mentioned were Birmingham, Manchester, Newcastle all British (English ) cities. Not one mention was made of Wales, Scotland or N. Ireland. The North is England but really as they were talking about the UK then the North should be Scotland.

      In English minds Britain is England and England is Britain. In the U.K. Media we only exist to pay license fees or subscriptions.

      We need to get out of this UK Union which takes our resources and abuses us.

    484. yesindyref2 says:

      We’ll have to wait another few days for Indy Ref announcement I think, to see if anything dramatic happens at Westminster. But not more than 2 or 3 weeks, till after they’re all back after Easter.

      We can’t afford to leave Indy ref 2 for any longer after that at the mercy of Westminster omnishambles. But there’s still plenty of time for a 190919 Referendum.

      4 months to organise it after announcement, similar to Devo 1997, even if Westminster refuses an S30 and then us to do our own thing. So the absolute latest date to announce the date basically, is 19th May, plus or minus a few days.

      From the Herald Jackie Bird is leaving BBC reporting Scotland, she presented her last bulletin. To be involved in other stuff. How sad!

    485. CameronB Brodie says:

      re. immigrants who oppose further immigration. Immigrants can be right-wing and self-serving in their politics, just like anyone else. British and European politics are under threat from external interests who are determined to imbue the public with a febrile, xenophobic, nationalism. The media has plaid a significant role in the neo-liberal grooming of British society, as has HMG civil service.

      Anti-immigration attitudes and the opposition to European integration: A critical assessment


      The aim of this overview is to critically examine the state of research on the relationship between anti-immigrant attitudes and attitudes toward European integration. We argue that the two most commonly used measures of anti-immigrant attitudes do not fully capture perceived threats from immigrants and opinion about different immigrant groups. Future research should pay more attention to two particular issues: first, scholars could employ methodological techniques that capture the underlying constructs associated with attitudes and public opinion; second, researchers could differentiate between groups within the overall immigrant population. This overview identifies themes in the literature while drawing attention to the need for more research on the behavioral underpinnings of anti-immigrant attitudes and public opinion on European integration.

      Keywords European integration, immigration, measurement validity, public opinion, survey research

      UK Public Opinion toward Immigration: Overall Attitudes and Level of Concern

      Attitudes towards immigration in Europe: myths and realities

      Social Dominance and Attitude towards Immigrants:
      The Key Role of Happiness

    486. Wee Alex says:

      For all those folk demanding an early referendum, have you checked with your friends and neighbours, will they Voe yes.

      My feeling, listening to folk is the shambles at Westminster is putting folk off in case Scotland ends up in same position

      Timing is everything, we can’t afford to get it wrong

    487. Hamish100 says:

      I understand your position but some of my neighbours will still vote NO. Most EU citizens will vote YES — if we are still in the EU when we have a vote.
      The waverers will say”.. och lets wait and see if Brexit works..”. It will be an excuse for inaction favoured by many.

      Strike while the iron is hot- Pre October reverendum. August/ September. The nights are still long. The next Brexit vote– it doesn’t matter if 90% of Scots wish to remain we will be taken out.

    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