The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


When Tories tell the truth

Posted on January 19, 2021 by

There’s a most revealing article by George Osborne in today’s Evening Standard. It’s well worth a read in full – it’s not very long – but this is the key passage:

The deathless defenders of Plan A will of course continue to shriek that “he’s a Tory so he must be lying”. And if any of them can ever actually manage to tell us what Scottish voters can possibly DO to Boris Johnson if he keeps refusing, we’ll be all ears.

But since they never seem to be able to do that, we’re going to thank Mr Osborne for that unusual outbreak of honesty, and for admitting that a simple point-blank refusal of democracy is the Tories’ best and only strategy to keep Scotland in the UK. Because for as long as the SNP don’t have a Plan B, it’s the only one they actually need.

.

(PS For idiots about to shout “There’s a brilliant secret plan, Nicola just can’t say what it is before the election because you don’t show your enemy your hand!”: you can’t have a mandate for something that wasn’t in your manifesto, dumdums. Try again.)

Print Friendly

    147 to “When Tories tell the truth”

    1. David says:

      And you can guarantee that the SNP will change nothing.
      Definition of insanity, doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

    2. Breastplate says:

      I’m pretty sure that many ‘plan A believers’ live in a land where the penny will never drop.

    3. David Keenan says:

      And that is exactly what Boris will say over and over again!
      But Sturgeon et al know this.. her sycophantic lemmings either don’t believe it or don’t want to in true Trumpism style!

      A rare admission from a Tory there in translation that they do not really believe in democracy..

    4. Polly says:

      Yes, heartbreaking stuff, but the harshest truth is always the best one to face straight on since there is no further to fall. I wish the leadership would do so. And perhaps facing now just how bad things can become might make all of us more determined to avoid it by any means possible.

    5. frogesque says:

      #MaxtheYES

      Plebiscite for Independence in May.

      Brave lad that he is, Martin Keatings Court action will take years via Courts and he could easily be ‘dissappeared’ one way or another before then.

      ISP are clearly advocating a Plebiscite. Gets my 2nd vote.

    6. John Moss says:

      Plan B is looking good right now.

    7. Sharny Dubs says:

      The history of the British (despotic, totalitarian, ruthless) empire shows clearly that Independence was never won by obeying the rules.
      Independence was always taken not asked for.

    8. 1971Thistle says:

      @David @15h35

      “Definition of insanity, doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”

      It’s not insanity, it’s a plan:

      “You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on.”
      George W Bush (who was never quite a stupid as he was made out to be)

    9. Craig Sheridan says:

      Osbourne is being completely up front here(due to not being a current Parliamentarian). He’s writing this to remind people he was a remainer and the shit show isn’t his fault. On independence it’s the simple truth and he’s revealed the obvious and only feasible Tory approach to stop it. No S30, no,no,no,no,no ad infinitum.

    10. Strathy says:

      Craig Murray has posted about his trial for Contempt of Court, which will take place on 27 and 28 January 2021.

      The charges being brought by the Lord Advocate are: –

      a) Publication of material likely to influence the jury
      b) Jigsaw Identification of Protected Identities
      c) Reporting the Exclusion of a Juror

      These relate to Craig’s reporting of Alex Salmond’s trial.

      http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2021/01/my-trial-and-freedom-of-speech/

    11. ian foulds says:

      ‘… The only way you can have legal path to independence is through a referendum that is voted for by the House of Commons….’

      what is the substantiation for this statement?

      if there is, then there had better be a plan B

    12. JSC says:

      What’s going on here then, with the James Matthews story on Sky about an FOI request getting the full ScotGov panic treatment, all the way up to NS apparently? The internal email was then sent to JM in error

      https://news.sky.com/story/nicola-sturgeon-faces-more-questions-over-alex-salmond-bullying-claims-after-internal-emails-mistakenly-sent-to-sky-news-12192267

      I dislike Matthews with a passion, the smug git crossed the line with chasing Raoul Moat & Dom Cummings parents IMHO (not at the same time, obv), but he might be on to something here

    13. holymacmoses says:

      I don’t actually think we have a plan A at the moment because it’s hardly a ‘plan’ to ask Boris Johnson a rhetorical question.

      So I’m thinking that what Sturgeon has is a virtual plan A
      and

      what we need is a real plan A

    14. ian foulds says:

      sorry, apart from S30

    15. robertknight says:

      I can see Pish Washout with his fingers in his ears giving it La-La-La-Bonnie-Bonnie-Banks-La-La-La…

      A-holes… the plot of ’em!

    16. Livionian says:

      But how will they possibly deal with the ensuing democratic outrage…

      It’s been bleeding obvious for a very long time that this is the Tories policy on indyref2. But just in case there are any twats that think an SNP majority in May will be what makes the bastards on London finally cave then they seriously need to be shown this article.

      People that think Sturgeon has a secret magic plan are almost a kin to QAnoners by this stage, ‘just trust the plan’.

      Particularly interesting in this article is the allusion that we will face a very heavy-handed, Catalonia style crackdown by the British state of we were to hold a referendum without permission. Not surprising, but it’s never been laid out that bare before as far as I can remember.

      Don’t let the fuckers scare you. But the only reasonable option was running the 2021 elections as a proxy plebiscitary vote on independence. But because there are so many incompetent buffoons ruining our independence movement we have missed our only realistic chance of achieving indy this decade.

      I’m starting to feel a teeny wee bit deflated by all this.

    17. Mr C M Howie says:

      You also have zero mandate to govern the country if you make an election a plebiscite, none whatsoever. Which makes that plan a complete non-starter.

    18. Jason Smoothpiece says:

      There are no circumstances that I can see, other than pressure from the USA and or Europe, which would cause the English to grant a referendum particularly one they are likely to lose.

      I fully understand why they won’t allow a referendum, they would have difficulty surviving without the huge resources of Scotland.

      In the next couple of years England will export jam and cider.

      They have very little left to sell, apart from old Betty Windsor I’m sure Disneyland would make an offer.

      They cannot offer us our right to democracy as they simply can’t afford to do it.

      We will have to have some serious thought as to the best campaign to allow Scotland to end the failed union.

      My genuine fear is if a majority of Scottish folk want their right to exercise their democracy and are refused by England where do people go?

      Denying a democratic vote over any period could lead to disorder in the initial stages leading to violence in the longer term.

      There will be some who say Scottish people would not resort to violence I can assure you there are many who would take that course.

      I hope we find a better solution to this issue as violence would hurt those on both sides of the argument.

      I sometimes wonder if the English regime actually want to see violence I hope not.

    19. holymacmoses says:

      There is an Independence boat ready to sail – what’s lacking is a crew of able, willing and courageous sailors. Such sea-farers exist in Scotland and yet we still allow the landlubbers to rule the port

    20. Name (required) says:

      the ‘plan’ is the same as it is for all the power hungry,

      keep power and slow any action that might remove you from power,

      if this means that you have to deny reality,
      then deny reality,

      its remarkable how far that seems to get those in power.

      viva republic (of Eire for now)

    21. Breastplate says:

      Mr CM Howie,

      “ You also have zero mandate to govern the country if you make an election a plebiscite, none whatsoever.”

      Really, I’m guessing if we vote for independence in a plebiscite then we could have Scottish elections thereafter.
      Wouldn’t that be expected?

    22. Shug says:

      I do not understand the position that Westminster can saw no to a referendum the people have voted for
      I see they can struggle to accept the results.
      In what way would it be illegal
      Also remember Osborn is a paid lackey trying to sow fear and doubt
      Currently there is only one way snp control holyrood on manifesto of a referendum and proceed with it
      If they try and reject it you were never going anywhere with any other route as they will always say no

    23. TruthForDummies says:

      There is no legal / illegal path to independence that’s just unionist crap which Nicola repeats.

      How you get independence:

      1. Establish through democratic means that a majority of people of the country want independence
      2, Declare independence with or without the agreement of the state you are seceding from.
      3. Invite other countries to recognize you.

      That’s it
      Sometimes 1. is unclear ie Catalonia 47% voted for pro-indy parties or Rhodesia who didn’t try.
      Sometimes no one recognizes you so you are stuck.

      If you have clear geographical boundaries, a functioning government and a clear democratic mandate you’ve a good chance of being recognised.

      So that’s the road we have to tread.

    24. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “what is the substantiation for this statement?”

      Since it’s the position of both the UK and Scottish governments, it’s the reality.

    25. Garrion says:

      what Shamy said 3:46. The British state and establishment will under NO circumstances willingly provide a fair and un-interfered with referendum on Scottish Independence. End of, no whataboutery or ifs and buts. Particularly when there is an unacceptable (read ‘any’) chance of it not going their way. The sooner that is clearly understood, the better.

      WIthout getting too tinfoil hatty, the same national and international financial and political interests that brought us Trump and Brexit are also sadly aligned against Scottish independence, not on any ethical or political basis, it’s just not good business for them. Too many impacts on the City, hedge funds, credit ratings, etc., – it’s just not what they want, and they are very clear on preventing what they do not want from happening.

      Consequently, it will not be offered, regardless of polls, demonstrations, “task forces”, charismatic sock puppet leadership, etc., or if it is willingly permitted, it will definitively be because it has been handled.

      To be crystal clear, I’m stating that it would also be a terminal mistake to descend into any kind of violence as a means to independence – they know precisely how to manage that eventuality and also how to foment it in their interests (rememebr the spooky bomb scares in and around Edinburgh back in ’14? That narrative will be resurrected if necessary.

      This leaves us with a real and knotty problem… how to achieve independence? A clearly stated plebiscite would actually be effective in demonstrating to the masses that they have, in reality, no effective democratic voice, because even if it goes towards independence, it will be dismissed as illegal. However, it would force the hand of the powers that be to visibly act against a popular democratic mandate.

      That is problematic, and this is why they are very keen to avoid it. As Stuart has forensically demonstrated, the current SNP leadership is very much part of the problem, consequently, unless they vacate, and their is an upswelling of effective, savvy, single minded and objective-focused internal grassroots leadership…

    26. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “You also have zero mandate to govern the country if you make an election a plebiscite, none whatsoever.”

      We already addressed this. Keep up.

      https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-snp-manifesto-2021/

    27. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “A clearly stated plebiscite would actually be effective in demonstrating to the masses that they have, in reality, no effective democratic voice, because even if it goes towards independence, it will be dismissed as illegal.”

      There is nothing illegal about a plebiscitary election. Parties can campaign on any manifesto they like.

    28. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      Can people adhere to the rules on off-topic comments, please?

    29. Peter A Bell says:

      It’s not a Plan B we need. It’s a Plan A that actually works. A plan that is crucially dependent on the goodwill, good grace and good faith of the British political elite is a plan doomed to ignominious failure.

      Plan A fails if Boris says no. Because Plan A acknowledges the veto.

      Plan A fails if Boris says Yes. Because no British Prime Minister is ever going to agree to a referendum unless they are assured of either winning or being able to sabotage the process while blaming the Scottish Government.

      The Plan B currently on offer fails because it only comes into play after Plan A has failed. Which means it first acknowledges the veto and then denies it.

      Plan B fails because it can be thwarted by a simple ‘yes’ from Boris – in the sure and certain knowledge that the process can easily be sabotaged by imposing impossible conditions. The Scottish Government will have no grounds for complaint as by requesting and accepting a Section 30 order they have conceded the British Prime Minister’s right to impose whatever conditions they wish.

      We have to assume we won’t be getting another shot at this. The 2021 Scottish Parliament election must be regarded as the last opportunity to restore Scotland’s independence by normal democratic means. This will require bold, decisive action from the Scottish Government. And once embarked upon the process must be pursued to its objective with relentless determination.

      There is no route to independence through the legal and constitutional framework contrived by the British political elite for the purpose of preserving the Union and protecting the structures of power, privilege and patronage which define the British state. Therefore, the Scottish Government must step outside that framework to create a new democratic process.

      The starting point of a new democratic process by which to restore Scotland’s independence is to assert the competence of the Scottish Parliament in all matters relating to the constitution on the basis of the sovereignty of Scotland’s people and the exclusive democratic legitimacy of the Parliament we elect.

      This will almost certainly be challenged by the British state. If we are not prepared to face such challenges we are not ready for independence. Let them challenge the sovereignty of Scotland’s people! Let them deny the democratic legitimacy of Holyrood! Let them claim sovereignty for their parliament! Let them make the case for the Union that outweighs the case for democracy!

    30. Lorna Campbell says:

      It’s total doo-doo. What they want the Scots to believe is that there is not other path to a legal form of independence. A cursory glance at the countries of the EU and the UN should enlighten anyone who still believes in their guff. The reason – the only reason – they get away with this nonsense is because so many believe them.

      No, we are not getting a S30 Order referendum any time soon or never. Yes, an advisory referendum not sanctioned by Westminster will be quashed, and they will get away with it as Spain did. A plebiscitary election is well within the SNPG’s powers NOW. If the result of such an election is ignored, then we go to the UN on the basis of the breaching of the Treaty. Just stop believing that we have no rights. We have them. Stop believing that the Treaty is useless, only to discover that Westminster knows it isn’t, and is going to use it against us. Stop thinking about Westminster altogether and concentrate on what we can do.

      The path of least resistance is a S30 Order. Its merit is that it is the ‘gold standard’ insofar as it is straightforward and binding on both sides. It does not mean that it is the only way. Plan B still involves a referendum that can be lost. It means that any other route we choose is going to be harder and will involve a confrontation with Westminster. It does not mean it will be illegal. No other route can hope to avoid a confrontation, a head-to-head, with Westminster. It is as simple as that. So, we either take the risk or we don’t.

      If we don’t, as the SNPG has not done for the past six years, then, please, can we just park independence and take what’s coming? If we do, it is going to be hellish because it will be England, not the UK, the pretence will drop, we will be up against, and it is England that is the most nationalistic and aggressively acquisitive and colonial, and always has been, of all the four nations. It is England that we signed the Treaty with and it is England that will try to crush us in order to try and hang on to us (the ruling elites, at least). There is no way past that if we want independence unless Johnson has some kind of Damascene Conversion and overturns almost a thousand years of English aggressive history and agrees with us, a la Czech and Slovak republics, to go for a ‘velvet divorce’. Nah, me neither.

      The other massive problem, of course, is the SNPG. Will Nicola Sturgeon confound us all and go for broke before she falls. I would, in her shoes, but, then, I’m not in her shoes. She is going to go at some point soon, although I think she will try to ride out the storm. Nonetheless, she is going to fall. Why not fall like a shooting star? Clay feet she might have – I couldn’t possibly comment – but heroes with clay feet are still heroes. The Manifesto with independence as the main policy? YES. YES. YES.

    31. Liz g says:

      Jason Smoothpiece @ 4.03
      Well if ” past is indeed prologue ” !
      Of course they want violence in Scotland Jason.
      They operate on the premise that if they can’t rule it they wreck it , they always have.
      It’s not just our resources they want to keep , it’s that they don’t want any competition for London.
      This whole island is geared towards funding London to make them their millions,and they really don’t need the top half of the island getting a share of it all.
      If independence is inevitable and Scotland will no longer accept Westminster rule for very much longer ….the best thing from they’re point of view is to damage our economy, plunge us into civil unrest and keep us as internationally isolated and off of the global stage as much as possible…
      Why the people in the Scottish Government are blind to this is beyond me !!!

      A mass movement building organically is all very nice and they will indeed make movies of it.
      But and it’s a big but ….. The Irish and Black civil rights movements the most prominent and relatively recent in history, didn’t and haven’t met their aims ..
      They got some laws …sure , but despite it all…
      Ireland is not completely free or peaceful and Black people still don’t have parity of esteem in actual lived life..
      Can we not ever learn to do it differently???

    32. Intractable Potsherd says:

      Mr C M Howie says:
      19 January, 2021 at 4:03 pm
      You also have zero mandate to govern the country if you make an election a plebiscite, none whatsoever. Which makes that plan a complete non-starter.

      Why do so many people keep peddling this falsehood? (OK, I know – I’m not quite that naïve!) A plebiscitary election has a party/ies that have the statement “Of we win we will declare independence” or similar. This is not the whole manifesto – there are the usual promises *as well*. Only a referendum had a simple statement with a ues/no answer.

    33. Breastplate says:

      If we look at things from a different perspective then we could argue that we are lucky Boris is refusing a Section 30.

      As has been noted on here before if a Section 30 is granted it can always be shot down in the House of Commons later.

      The refusal of a Section 30 would mean that we are forced into alternative and dare I say, better strategies.

    34. Ottomanboi says:

      All depends on how you define « legal ». The Edinburgh parliament was established because a majority in Scotland wished it. Westminster could have ignored that wish, but didn’t, effectively an acknowledgement of popular sovereignty.
      Osborne in common with Johnson have form as no friends of Scotland. Let them and their fellow little Englanders do their worst.
      A showdown with London could be the making of Scottish politics. A grown up lesson in how to handle bullies with an inflated sense of importance.

    35. Intractable Potsherd says:

      “… If we win…” and “… referendum has…”

      Sorry.

    36. TruthForDummies says:

      Until 2001 every election SNP fought was a plebiscite election

    37. Ian says:

      If Nicola Sturgeon is so confident that the UK Government will agree to another request for a Section 30, why doesn’t she offer something significant to back her confidence. Maybe saying that she would resign if it was rejected, or offer a year’s worth of her salary to support foodbanks. Anything as long as it’s real and not just more hot air.

    38. Heaver says:

      Osborne said we would not be permitted to use the £ till we sorted out our currency. A lie: a sovereign nation can use whatever currency best suits it.

      Osborne said we would lose the protection of NATO. A lie: NATO needs Scotland.

      That was 2014. The slithery git is still slithering. And he was the fucker that gave us Austerity.

    39. Astonished says:

      Mr CM Howie, dear me – Is that the best you’ve got ?

      P.S. How is your dodgy brexit going ? I suppose your half right Liar Johnston is most certainly not governing.
      .
      .
      “TruthForDummies says:
      19 January, 2021 at 4:32 pm
      Until 2001 every election SNP fought was a plebiscite election.”
      .
      .
      .

      Correct and well said , Sir. It’s a plebiscite or the SNP will lose even more members.

    40. Steve Davison says:

      the only time referendum will be offered is when it suits the uk gov such as lets say after a massive melt down of the SNP leaving a disjointed and fractional independence movement having a power struggle on its direction due to some up coming revelation .This of course would need to be supplemented by i dont know a disclosure of crippling debt that would be transferred on independence from lets say a global pandemic .The signs for this would be a relentless media campaign and full on gov attack on whatever was running on issues like missing money, shipyard contracts,drug program cuts, windfarm closure ,expense scandels,EU return,currency on leave and the like .So it would be a bit far fetched to think that this would happen as the sottish voter does not care about there families security but only of a free scotland ,Some people need a reality check as a 2nd no vote and the game is finished for a long time .If you see Boris and his lot as not been savy enough I would say think again

    41. holymacmoses says:

      The Sky news article along with Cole-Hamilton’s response looks like it’s trying to destroy BOTH Salmond and Sturgeon in a oner.
      It’s not rocket science to work out why the Scottish Parliament would be wanting to look at employment laws in 2010 . They had the Scottish election coming up in 2011 and whatever Mr Salmond had done in the year previous it is odd if it concerned bullying, bad behaviour etc, etc on his part given that he led his party to their first ever victory.

      The Record though is up to some filthy tricks. Under an image of Sturgeon, Salmond and Robertson holding the SNP sign in 2010 election campaign, there is a link to the Daily Record article of 2018 implying that Mr Salmond had been accused of sexual assaults in 2008 . That link is almost impossible not to click on because it’s the only possible link for information on the innocuous picture of the three fighting the UK general election in 2010

      The SNP are clearly behind all the disgraceful links in search engines on Google which emphasise the womens’ point of view and never no much as mention that Mr Salmond is innocent. This universal attack on Mr Salmond really needs to be stopped.

    42. Breastplate says:

      Peter A. Bell,
      I quite agree, we need to act of our own volition and force Westminster’s hand, not meekly seek permission for our own existence.
      The grand plans of the SNP have been spectacularly pitiful.

    43. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      “As Tony Blair says, no one has been able to mount a fight since Ruth Davidson left the stage”

      HaaaaaHaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaHaaaaaaa…..HaaaaaHaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaHaaaaaaa

      Ruth “Multiple Election Loser” Davidson!

      The Media Construct who was never asked a difficult question Ruth Davidson!

      That Ruth Davidson?

      HaaaaaHaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaHaaaaaaa…..HaaaaaHaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaHaaaaaa

      Gideon on the marching powder again with that sentence.

      However he is giving the unfiltered English view of losing Scotland.

      “Its departure — with no disrespect to the Welsh — would represent the end of the United Kingdom. The rest of the world would instantly see that we were no longer a front-rank power, or even in the second row. We would instead be one of the great majority of countries who are on the receiving end of the decisions made by a few, subject to the values of others.”

      And that paragraph is (as honest as a Tory will ever be – note no mention of our natural resources in the article) why Westminster will never, ever agree to IndyRef2.

    44. holymacmoses says:

      Hello Wings – I think I’ve just broken the rules on off-topics – by answering a link that someone put up to Sky news. Sorry. Just ditch my response if you think that’s the right thing to do.

    45. Johnny says:

      Steve Davison

      Aye good. Can you foretell the mythical year when dirty tricks WOULDN’T be thrown about in an attempt to stop a Yes vote?

      You can’t, so it’s not a reason for delay as they will ALWAYS cheat and obfuscate in an attempt to frighten folk into voting against independence.

    46. Liz says:

      David says:
      19 January, 2021 at 3:35 pm
      And you can guarantee that the SNP will change nothing.
      Definition of insanity, doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

      Only insanity if you expect different results. I think she is well aware that Johnson won’t grant a Sec 30. It’s what she wants to happen.

    47. Captain Yossarian says:

      The one and only person within the SNP who is capable of taking-on the Westminster Government, and winning, is Alex Salmond.

      As he has admitted himself, he is a flawed character but he is a charismatic leader and without him the SNP and independence has become dishonest and unaccountable and is being increasingly rejected by all Scots.

      Ditch Sturgeon and her coterie and bring Alex back.

      I think this might happen in February or March. Today’s appearance on Sky’s Sophie Ridge programme was embarrassing. Blinking every second and quite obviously lying.

    48. Iain More says:

      I am in a very dark place.

    49. velofello says:

      It is easier to get forgiveness than permission.Arguably easier to get recognition too.

      Permission – from Westminster ia a non-starter.

      Forgiveness – for holding a plebiscite election and then acting on the result? Forgiveness from the nations of the world is a concern?

      Recognition – are the nations of the world really going to turn against us for holding an election and then implementing the result?

      And finally, it will be easier to move towards a plebiscite referendum by ridding ourselves of Nicola Sturgeon, than awaiting for her next feeble application for an S30.

      That last sentence is uncomfortable to type but all the signs point to the problem being Nicola Sturgeon. When she solemnly declared her full commitment to Covid, of which she has no academic knowledge, and to set aside politics was when she lost my support.

    50. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Ditch Sturgeon and her coterie and bring Alex back.”

      Even if Sturgeon was to go, which I think she’ll have to, the chances of Alex replacing her are basically nil. For a start he isn’t even currently a member of the party. But several polls have all suggested pretty unequivocally that the electorate thinks his time at the top is over. I think the best-case scenario for the near future – and I’m making no predictions as to the likelihood of such a thing – is an SNP led by Joanna Cherry or Philippa Whitford, with Alex at the head of a strong list party keeping them honest.

    51. INDEPENDENT says:

      Rev Stu,

      As ever,

      Even if Sturgeon was to go, which I think she’ll have to, the chances of Alex replacing her are basically nil. For a start he isn’t even currently a member of the party. But several polls have all suggested pretty unequivocally that the electorate thinks his time at the top is over. I think the best-case scenario for the near future – and I’m making no predictions as to the likelihood of such a thing – is an SNP led by Joanna Cherry or Philippa Whitford, with Alex at the head of a strong list party keeping them honest.

      BANG ON THE MONEY!!

      My take exactly. Just hoping we have time to get the message out.

    52. David R says:

      SNP accidently send emails to SKY news stating that Salmond is a bully and poor Nicola was trying to protect her friend. Aye right.

    53. ScottieDog says:

      The best I think we can hope for is the SNP as a placeholder for Scottish independence. There will be some wishy/washy (I didn’t say Wishart, although tempting), pseudo commitment to independence in their mandate. We still need them to win big in the holyrood constituency vote with hopefully a decent number of other pro-indy list seats.

      I’m already thinking about what we do in the 2024 WM election, because we sure as hell won’t be independent by then.

    54. Mighty S says:

      WM will move to suffocate ANY route to independence.

      There’s no political will from THIS version of the SNP to make HR2021 into a plebiscite. Unless a freakin’ miracle occurs, this is not going to happen.

      Even if the Yes parties gain a majority in May – all WM needs to do is suspend HR and close that mother down. No more Scottish elections and we’re fired back to 1997.

      As much as I don’t want this to happen – if all our routes are blocked – the ONLY route left is mass civil disobedience, riots and/or violence.

    55. Steve davison says:

      Johnny says
      The point is not that there should be delay but if things pan out a perfect storm is looming to give the westminster gov a chance to secure a no vote and despite all that’s going on is a leave campaign in place ready to go to counter argue I don’t think the eye is on the ball

    56. ian foulds says:

      jason smoothpiece

      There are no circumstances that I can see, other than pressure from the USA and or Europe, which would cause the English to grant a referendum particularly one they are likely to lose

      so, could the Europeans help England out along with the condition a referendum is granted?

    57. wee monkey says:

      “‘The National’ are promising a ‘task force’ for independence.

      I was reading elsewhere that the last task force which was successful was the UK task force to take back the Falkland Islands.

      That was led by Margaret Thatcher, who never blinked.

      We are led by a skanky wee urchin fae Dreghorn who blinks every second.

      The omens are thus not good.”

      From https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7972114991869354050&postID=5282417545997287536

      You even get a mention Stu, unlike some national media!

    58. Luke says:

      in the manifesto, it should be put in writing that:

      “The manifesto – this franchise – will provide a Scottish referendum on Scottish independence.

      Then, the franchise should also stipulate that, if the referendum is not recognised by the UK Government, then that lack of UK recognition, in itself, is a UK mechanism activating a mandate for allowing Scottish MPs in Westminster to begin direct negotiations to declare the Act of Union void.”

      So what this means is the UK, actually, has given the SNP the mechanism (refusal=mechanism) to activate a mandate for our MP’s in Westminster to begin independence negotiations.

    59. TruthForDummies says:

      I hope Joanna is ready to step up the minute Nicola steps down.
      The conference committee is bizarrely in charge of internal elections and the committee is free-ish of Nicola faithful. The election will have to be quick otherwise the leader going into May 2021 with be Keith Brown whoop-de-doo.

      Salmond owes us, he left us with Nicola, clearly that didn’t work out for him but it hasn’t worked out for us either, so he better also step up.

    60. Mr C M Howie says:

      Well you’re completely contradicting yourself then. You said, as did I, to have any legitimacy, a manifesto would have to be single issue.

      Then you tack on at the end oh and everything else will remain the same so we’d remain in government etc.

      That doesn’t work. Voters don’t tell you why they are voting for you so you can’t infer their reasons. You can’t claim a vote for the SNP is both a mandate for independence and an SNP government. It is only the latter.

      The only way this could possibly have a snowball in hell’s chance of working is a majority in May then a consultative referendum say in September. You cannot get a mandate for both from an election, its not possible, its undemocratic, probably illegal and almost certainly unconstitutional.

      I’m all for anything that advances the cause, if I thought that would work I’d be screaming it from the rooftops, but it won’t and nobody would recognise it.

      A majority in our parliament followed by another one in a consultative referendum would give you something to at least approach the EU with but a plebiscite election doesn’t.

      If you want the Scottish parliament shut down it would be a decent move, if you want independence its a complete non-starter.

    61. dan macaulay says:

      “I think the best-case scenario for the near future – and I’m making no predictions as to the likelihood of such a thing – is an SNP led by Joanna Cherry or Philippa Whitford, with Alex at the head of a strong list party keeping them honest.”

      yes please, that’ll do it

    62. Mr C M Howie says:

      A programme of civil disobedience, people who are self-employed directing their tax returns directly to Holyrood directly, obstructionism practiced by SNP MP’s at WM, a consultative referendum.

      These are things that potentially could work, a plebiscite election couldn’t.

      SNP MP’s could have stopped Brexit by practicing mass obstructionism, they could have paralysed WM and prevented any legislation from being passed. Then refused to desist until a s30 was granted. That might have worked but may have turned off large sections of swing voters.

      They let the moment pass though and that chance is gone.

    63. Shug says:

      Not sure she will go.
      I suspect the unionist will support her through and exploit the salmond story further.
      They can then use the without section 30 it’s illegal
      If she goes cherry or Whitford are class but who leads in holyrood

    64. Captain Yossarian says:

      @Rev Stuart Campbell – I’ve only posted here for the past week or two and so my opinions on this may be different.

      I am posting because I am appalled at what is going-on. I used to keep a watch on this site two or so years ago and thought then it was a load of crap. It is now excellent, truly world class.

      My take on this is that Joe Biden was finished 15-years ago; ask any American and there’s a good chance that is what they would say too.

      My opinion again – but Alex is comfortably better than Joe Biden.

      We are in a situation not too dissimilar to that faced by the Americans aren’t we? Today’s Sophie Ridge programme convinced me that Sturgeon has to go, and quickly.

      I understand what you are suggesting. All I am saying is that Salmond adds something of immediate interest to voters that Cherry or Whiteford do not.

      Sturegon has not broken Salmond and, as these pages show, there is an awful lot of good will towards him. More so than any other Scottish politician that I can remember.

    65. North chiel says:

      The First Minister has been told more than once by the Westminster Tories that they will not “ agree” to a section 30 request . Even if by some future “ miracle” Johnston indicated that he “ might” agree then you can be absolutely certain that “ the attached strings” would enable Westminster to “ manipulate” the said “ agreement” to their advantage . Consequently, the FM should proceed on the basis of a written request DETAILING what Holyrood’s REQUIREMENTS would be ( per said agreement) and make it crystal clear to Westminster that if her “ proposal” is again refused that outcome would be a plebiscite Holyrood election on Independence. It’s no use whatsoever “ pussyfooting about” with these people ( they need to be confronted ) .If our FM is not prepared to CONFRONT this right wing Tory Junta , then she needs to stand down in favour of a leader ready & willing to STAND UP for Scotland and our sovereign people .

    66. holymacmoses says:

      Wings:
      and I’m making no predictions as to the likelihood of such a thing – is an SNP led by Joanna Cherry or Philippa Whitford, with Alex at the head of a strong list party keeping them honest.

      That’s been my choice for quite some time now Mr Wings. I wouldn’t dream of asking Mr Salmond to return to the front of the force. The only thing I want for Mr Salmond is real justice and his name brought back to where it belongs in the Independence movement. However, I do think that anyone who takes over will need the political advice of Mr Salmond for quite some time and I would let him choose what role he wants. There will be lots of other people ready and able to help. It’s actually a great time and a great opportunity as long as there are those courageous enough to cast off.

    67. wee monkey says:

      Bit pointless having an election, I believe that the malfeasance runs so deep that Holyrood should be closed for a while.

      Education, police and the health service can be given time to recover under professional management.

      Throw tools like Jeane Freeman and Angela Constance under the proverbial bus.

      The rest, including the civil service, let a Jury decide.

    68. holymacmoses says:

      BTW I don’t think Dr Whitford would take on the big role

    69. kapelmeister says:

      By refusing to co-operative on an indyref which a majority of Scots want- despite having done so previously – the UK government has shown beyond doubt that the union between Scotland and England is a fiction. England has shown the world she is nothing less than an administering power (a U.N. term) as regards Scotland.

      The United Nations Special Committee on Decolonization (C-24) are there to be approached. They can and do bring pressure on administering powers by getting everyone to the table and getting agreements to referenda. A post-Sturgeon pro-indy SG ought to seriously investigate all this.

    70. Mr C M Howie says:

      What the SNP have needed for years is a threat. You have to be able to say to the UK govt ‘give us a s30 or we’ll do X’. Saying to them ‘it would be really undemocratic not to give us a s30 and you’d be really horrible people’ will just get laughed out of the Commons for the rest of time.

      They are still to come up with X.

    71. Strathy says:

      Sorry, Stuart.

      I’m ashamed to say that I hadn’t read the rules, but I have now!

      Won’t happen again.

    72. holymacmoses says:

      This is a country not a company wee monkey. You can’t just stop. I suspect more people have been totally left out of the loop than you might think and I believe that even more of them would be OK if they had someone decent to run the ship.

    73. robertknight says:

      Sorry for repeatedly stating this, but…

      There is nothing whatsoever to prevent Boris from agreeing with the Scottish Government to bring forward complementary legislation at both Westminster and Holyrood to facilitate IndyRef2, along exactly the same lines as in IndyRef1; a simple date change in the previous intergovernmental agreement/legislation would suffice. (The fact that Holyrood already has legislation in place is neither here nor there when dealing with Westminster).

      With the Unionist majority at Westminster, Boris could then allow a free vote by his backbenchers and the entire legislative process at Westminster would fall at the first fence – the Bill not progressing beyond its First Reading.

      Given only a 6% swing would have changed the outcome in 2014, there isn’t a cat in hell’s chance of Westminster (Commons & Lords) risking the future of “their country” by legislating for IndyRef2.

      Boris could then claim to have acknowledged the democratic will of the electorate in Scotland – his Government bringing forward legislation for IndyRef2. However, he could also claim that Westminster had expressed it’s democratic opinion and, as the UK’s Sovereign Parliament, that opinion must stand.

      What the SNP don’t seem to/want to appreciate is that their so-called Plan A doesn’t simply require Boris to be persuaded to legislate for IndyRef2, but that both a majority in the House of Commons and House of Lords will need to be similarly persuaded.

      Never happen!

    74. Willie says:

      Maybe we should just break their political arms, legs and necks.

      Simples really.

    75. Clwyd Griffiths says:

      But Rev Stu, if the SNP win an outright majority, or even if there’s a pro-indy majority in May, then the Tories have no leg to stand on, surely they cannot keep on saying No in the face of the democratic mandate of the people of Scotland. That would be fascism & anti-democratic.

    76. twathater says:

      I very seldom agree with Peter Bell but he is right , Sturgeon HAS asked for a sect30 and been told to feck off on at least 2 occasions , a sect30 that gives THEM the right to manipulate and frustrate anything within the agreement , eg the level of turnout minimum 80% of population ,the level of votes required for yes 70% , and ANY other mental conditions they want to punt

      Even the plan B proposed by Angus and Chris had to first ASK for a sect30 first before any other action could be taken, which would then be a plebicite in another election which once again takes MORE time for the WM scum to sabotage

      Sturgeon KNOWS that a sect30 will NEVER be agreed which she is happy about because it lets her blame WM and gives her more time to implement her shite policies and illegality , and if it somehow was granted SHE KNOWS WM would insist on conditions which would render independence worthless

      As Lorna Campbell and many other worthies have pointed out the ONLY WAY for REAL SCOTS to show they WANT independence is through the BALLOT BOX and if WM won’t agree to a binding referendum for Scots to decide their future then the ONLY OTHER way of determining Scots VOTERS wishes is through a HR election where all independence supporting parties standing for election have the MANDATE , that if the parties win the majority of seats in the SP that is an INSTRUCTION from Sovereign Scots citizens under the DECLARATION OF ARBROATH that the union is dissolved and negotiations take place immediately for the disbursement of assets

      That would be THE DEMOCRATIC choice of the citizens of Scotland and should satisfy the requirement of recognition from other countries , elections the world over are recognised as the PEOPLE’S choice

      If unionist parties refused to participate (which I doubt) or unionist voters refused to vote or vetoed it it would still be a choice of Scots to participate in a DEMOCRATIC election

      The ONLY CURRENT way we have to SHOW our votes count is through a plebiscite election , as WM has BLOCKED the referendum way of democracy , SO SNP GET ON WITH IT AND PRODUCE THE MANDATE

    77. Liz g says:

      Mighty S @ 5.31
      No they’re not and no it isn’t…
      There are a fair few routes we can try to get free.
      The problem is that the current leadership in Scotland is committing us to the section 30 only route,
      And George Osborne has watched “War Games” too many times,…. well,,, they don’t get to not play this game, Mighty S !
      The time is soon coming when the uselessness of a section 30 can’t be denied any longer and those with the lack of imagination need to get out of the way

      The end of the Union has to be political as was and is the settlement of any post democracy disagreement.
      Legal and Direct Action can only ever get ye so far ….so we should, and should always try , to skip the bloodshed part .
      We’re no done with the Law yet and we’re certainly no done trying to shif our politics on to the right path ..far from it…
      It’s why we’re all here ….. Aye ?
      So if we’re smart we don’t do the violence thing …they are so much better at it any way.
      We find one of the “many routes to a countries independence ” that Alex Salmond spoke of on September 19th 2014 and start there…
      Someone could always just ask him …. Eh ?

    78. L says:

      In response to Stuart’s comment; Strong rumours that Salmond preparing to launch a new List party. Would be just what Holyrood needs.

    79. holymacmoses says:

      I’m astonished at just how many people can work out ways and means for WM to avoid giving Scotland Independence and yet those same people can’t bother their minds to consider the ways of gaining independence. It’s like lots of folk are pretending to be Sun Tzu but writing:
      ‘The Art of How to Determine All Your Opponent’s Strengths and Calculate Every Way In Which an Army Should Avoid Any Engagement With The Enemy,Thus Ensuring That No Wars Will Ever Be Lost’

    80. Col says:

      Is it worth holding a world wide press conference to state that the ancient nation of Scotland is being denied its right to choose whether to leave the Union it entered willingly by our neighbours in the UK Parliament? Try and make it an issue for Europe and the USA especially. We need their support. Maybe have a wee word in some ears that England denying Scots their rights risks another situation like the troubles in Northern Ireland. Maybe even say violence here could jeopardise the peace there also.

    81. Michael says:

      Sigh. For the millionth time….
      Everybody, yes everybody, knows that BJ isn’t going to accede to a referendum. But we still have to go through the motions of asking, for international recognition of Scotland’s independent status, even if that results from a plebiscite election.
      SNP manifesto isn’t out yet.

    82. Christian Schmidt says:

      I wouldn’t trust Osborne’s view on this. I think his primary interest is embellish the 2014 victory (& esp. his own contribution) and having a dig at Johnson.

      I am not a lawyer but I think there are two important legal points. Firstly given that Scotland voluntarily joined in 1707, surely it must be able to voluntary leave. That’s certainly worth putting to the Court of Sessions (and afterwards to the UK Supreme Court). Secondly there is the Irish precedent, where the British view was *explicitly* that the London government was negotiating with the MPs from a part of the UK that demanded independence. I think Scottish MPs could demand the same (hopefully without the war though…)

    83. Bob Mack says:

      @Clwyd Griffiths,

      The leg they will stand on is the old “You had a referendum in 2014” . Then perhaps add the once in generation line.

      Meanwhile Boris forges ahead neutralising the competencies of the Scottish government

    84. Hugh Jarse says:

      QC or MD as the 1st First Minister?

      Both seem very intelligent, decent, and up to the task, which at least is more than the opinion of the US ambassador when briefing DC about the incoming Osbourne & the pig fucking guy.

      “Not up to it” , whatever “it” was.

      🙂

      I know where my vote for our first President will be going!

    85. robertknight says:

      Holymacmoses @ 6:19

      The point is…

      IndyRef2 is a non-starter.

      Plan A was dead on it’s feet the moment it was announced.

      Alternative?

      1 Policy on SNP Manifesto…

      Independence.

      Simples!

    86. Christian Schmidt says:

      “The only way you can have legal path to independence is through a referendum that is voted for by the House of Commons”

      “what is the substantiation for this statement?”

      “Since it’s the position of both the UK and Scottish governments, it’s the reality.”

      Not sure about this, there have been plenty of occasions were the position of the UK government or of the Scottish government has been shown to be incorrect. (Just ask Joana Cherry for the UK government…)

      What I find really irritating is that this indeed the position of the Scottish government, which is do dumb.

      And a question on this: Was that also the official position of the Scottish Government under Salmond?

    87. Michael says:

      Clwd Griffiths @6.12. Eh, yes they can.
      But it doesn’t matter. With 19 polls in a row in favour of independence, we don’t really need a referendum on that any more.
      1. Have a plebiscite election.
      2. Win it with a pro indy majority (obv)
      3. Have an election on the only thing that really matters – whether a post indy Scotland should join the EU or EFTA/EEA.
      4. Get on with our lives!

    88. Liz g says:

      Twatthater @ 6.16
      That’s pretty much where I’m at at the moment.
      They need to get on with an explicit Mandate for May.
      And I think for our part we need to make it very clear that should we not get said Mandate, we’ll put every last one of them in Labours current position come the next election, because we’ll have used that time to replace them.
      So they get us out the Union or they are out of Holyrood !
      Either way we’re out of the Union with or without them..
      Many SNP MSPs are leaving and the new crop I’m pretty sure don’t want to be a one term only politician….
      That’s our leverage for May….. Let the Yes movement down this time and we’ll turn that energy and talent into to a party the likes of which will be the actual ” unstoppable force ” they spoke of !!!
      We are not going to sit around and do nothing for the next 5 and we are never going away.

    89. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Iain More (5.05) –

      You okay?

    90. Michael says:

      Sorry, referendum on EU vs EFTA, not election

    91. Robert Hughes says:

      Lorna Campbell says ” Stop thinking about Westminster altogether and concentrate on what we can do. ”

      Exactly right .

      Is it a reflection of some kind of national inferiority complex that we seem daunted by the prospect of challenging any/every attempt at intimidation by the UK State and continue to allow it to frame the question of our Independence in self-servingly narrow terms ?

      Or is it only the current SNP Management that suffers from this crippling condition ?

    92. Christian Schmidt says:

      On a replacement for Sturgeon, surely this person would need to be lead candidate for FM at this year’s election, which means after deadline for nominations (when is that?) it have to be a candidate for the Scottish parliament and could not be an MP? (Before the deadline the new leader could always be parachuted into a safe seat.)

      I also do not think Joana Cherry would be a candidate, though she would be an excellent Justice Secretary and lead negotiator when it comes to independence negotiations. And Alex Salmond should not lead his own list, that just shows that the SNP is split.

    93. Republicofscotland says:

      I think we in here all know Plan A is a non starter, and ergo its Sturgeon’s first and only choice because she knows its unattainable and she’ll never need to worry about Scotland actually becoming independent.

      Of course I agree with Osbourne for the first and probably last time in my life that Johnson would be stark raving mad to grant a second indyref, because he and everyone else knows fine well he’d lose it, so denying democracy permanently is the only safe route to go.

      But where does that leave us, are we just to say oh okay and go back to shutting up and do as we’re told, of course not. Independence will never willingly be given by any English PM ad finitum, Scottish resources are far too important, and to lose them would severely weaken England in a whole host of ways, so we’ll never be allowed to leave this onesided union via Westminster.

      So in essence we’ll need to take our independence as just about every other independent nation in the world has done so over the centuries. The big question that we’ve not decided on yet is how are we going to do it, by what route are we going to achieve it, when will we begin to move down that particular route, and how are we going to vehemently defend (convincing the outside world )that route to independence.

      Just now some of us and I exclude the present company, still believe that Sturgeon will somehow magically force Johnson to grant an S30, though they never give any factual evidence as why Johnson would willingly give up Scotland and all the assets that go with it, that have been plundered for over 300 years.

      Until the penny drops for those folk and they’re many of them, that Sturgeon has absolutely no intention whatsoever of holding an indyref with or without Johnson’s permission, we’re in a weakened position and not quite united.

      We can’t do much about Johnson’s refusal to issue an S30, but we can aid in the removal of the domestic stumbling blocks to independence that is Sturgeon and her husband Murrell and their vile clique by calling for her removal and with holding any party donations, and tearing up our party memberships if you have them.

      Most importantly we shouldn’t be looking towards Westminster to point the finger of blame on the lack of movement on independence, I expect nothing but a 100% lack of cooperation from Westminster when it comes to Scottish independence, no the onus to bring about independence lies 100% with the SNP government, its the very reason they exist, to bring us independence, and after we rid ourselves of Sturgeon Murrell and the vile clique the next FM must be strongly reminded of this.

    94. Cath says:

      Teddy Hope getting an entire SNP Bad section on BBC News, even “weesht for indy” to complain he’s been silenced. If anyone really wants to know where the power and media SNP bad is, there you go. It’s not with the bloggers and Salmond supporters. And yet the usual wilfully blind will continue to be wilfully blind.

    95. Cath says:

      That should be “even using weesht for indy”

    96. Willie Jay says:

      “Ain’t this a mess, Sheriff?”
      “Well, if it’s not a mess, it’ll do ’til a real mess comes along…” (apologies to Cormac McCarthy)

      I honestly believe that is where we are now today in the scope of Scottish Independence. We are in a mess.

      We seem to be in a total mess with *NO* obvious outlets pointed out to anyone at all by the *ONLY EVER PARTY IN SCOTLAND* which initially claimed it was *SEEKING( Independence.
      That Party no longer seems to be seeking Independence.
      To go back to the beginning:
      Where do we turn to get out of this mess, Sheriff?

    97. G H Graham says:

      Sadly, there just isn’t the intellectual capacity, never mind the political will, to achieve what Peter A. Bell is proposing (which I support by the way).

      The track record of Sturgeon’s regime proves that it has zero interest in independence. I know, we’ve done this subject to death.

      Furthermore, even if they had the spirit for a fight, I’m far from convinced they have the firepower among its ranks to win the war of attrition against the pillars of the mighty, self serving, self preserving, British establishment.

      The SNP can’t even get one devolved benefit scheme running, courtesy of serial losers like Shirley-Anne Sommerville MSP.

      https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17467830.snp-urged-apologise-devolved-benefits-delayed-2024/

      And it doesn’t seem to matter who’s in charge of a particular transport project because there’s always a massive delay, “unexpected” cost or massive losses to find someone else to blame for.

      https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18212617.nicola-sturgeon-dragged-200m-calmac-ferry-fiasco/

      As Linda Fabiani’s flawed & biased inquiry has revealed, the SNP can’t even get one man jailed on trumped up, phony charges which they all seem to have agreed upon, was necessary to dispatch their collective political enemy so they could continue unimpeded with their lesbian legislated revolution.

      https://www.thenational.scot/news/18867995.alex-salmond-inquiry-chair-hits-holyrood-former-fm-obfuscation/

      The point is that this is hardly the Star Chamber we’re talking about; a supposed ambitious team of political heavyweights, determined to find a path through the British minefields towards independence.

      Instead, we have a kinky clique of house harridans who seem mostly motivated into action by their hatred of men. Well, one man in particular while simultaneously hallucinating from moral high ground with their annoying, nit picking, edge trimming, fucking nanny-state interference.

      These are the type of people who would cheat you out of winning Monopoly then stand up & bitch about the inequity of the free capital market, alter the rules of the game to make it impossible for anyone else to get a look in & change all four train stations into gender neutral toilets.

      FFS.

    98. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @G H Graham –

      Yay!

      Hear hear sah!

      Can’t help imagine they’re less Monopoly, more Pass the Pigs – don’t have to concentrate so hard.

    99. John H. says:

      Osborne’s article proves for once and for all that we aren’t partners in a union of equals. As far as they are concerned we are prisoners. They think they own us.

    100. 100%Yes says:

      The SG should have requested a section 30 order the day after the UK voted to leave the EU in 2016 and when the UK refused the SG should have then taken legal action and shouldn’t have stopped until Scotland was Independent.

      We have no leadership or direction in which to travel I could list all the failing of the leadership in the SNP but what is the point it wouldn’t change a single thing. The one thing we need is a new leader of the SNP and the Murrels given bus fair back to London and told don’t call us well call you.

    101. Contrary says:

      plebiscite election in May: simple, fast, no begging, no legal issues.

      I’ve already written at length – even for me – on some of the current situation we are facing (not mentioning s.30 once mind you) on Richard Murphy’s blog. Because I was was trying to summarise much of what has been happening for him (I haven’t kept him up to date on the current state of things from my point of view, though he does have his own sources obviously) two comments turned into fairly massive posts (even for me), and still didn’t cover half of it, and the grammar is atrocious.

      But I’ve had a couple of comments praising them as good summaries, so here is a link for those of you that like a long read:

      https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2021/01/15/for-those-who-thought-scotland-has-the-kind-of-leadership-we-should-aspire-to-it-may-be-time-to-think-again/#comment-873824

      (Scroll down a little way for the second).

    102. Sensibledave says:

      Heaver 4.35.

      Yes. Scotland can continue to use the pound as a sovereign nation. Just a couple of issues arise though. Scotland would have no control over the currency, fiscal policy, interest rates or QE policies. Scotland could not use the pound and enter the EU. You would have to accept the Euro. iOS luck with that.

    103. Sensibledave says:

      *good luck with that!

    104. Saffron Robe says:

      It is not whether something is legal or not, it is the righteousness which underlies the law that is important. For instance, murder could be legalised but it wouldn’t make it right. Therefore, for George Osborne to say that only Westminster can dictate a legally binding referendum, or for Nicola Sturgeon to say that only with Westminster‘s permission can a referendum be legally binding, then they are both wrong. If self-determination is determined by someone else (in our case London) then it cannot be self-determination. QED.

      In the situation we are now in, I don’t think a referendum is a valid route to independence anymore. It has become a red herring. The best route to independence, as Stuart has made abundantly clear, is via a plebiscitary election – the voice of the people.

      We just need to get rid of the blockage first.

    105. Robert Hughes says:

      G.H.Graham .

      All of that ! Think you nailed the weirdness of it all perfectly . Looking forward to David Lynch’s warped take on it .

      If Edinburgh is the putative Athens of the North does that make Holyrood the Lesbos of the North ?

    106. 100%Yes says:

      The Tory’s have trump the SNP with having a plan.

    107. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Contrary (7.29) –

      Very interesting, thanks.

      😉

    108. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      “The only way you can have legal path to independence is through a referendum that is voted for by the House of Commons”

      Martin Keatings People’s Action on Section 30 case will determine this one way or the other in the not too distance future.

    109. Lothianlad says:

      And Nicola Sturgeon is in on the tories plan.
      She has No intention of fighting for independence. Scotlands National sovereignty is a poor second to her colonial power and status.

      Whilst she has a carrot and stick for the SNP faithful, the british state has a bigger carritvand stick for her and the inner circle!.

    110. Lochside says:

      Scotland’s Parliament was ‘united’ with England’s Parliament in the Westminster Assembly back in 1707. It can only be ‘disunited’ in the same legislative and Sovereign arena. That action can only be instituted by either the SCOTS MPs or their English counterparts, specifically the English MPs.

      Holyrood is the DEVOLVED i.e. ‘accounting unit’ (ref.Alf Baird) that does exactly the same functions + that all the Colonial administrators i.e. Secretaries of State for Scotland did before it. It has no internationally recognised legitimacy to run a recognised plebiscite that will have any Sovereign weight unless our MPs first dissolve/resile the Treaties and Act of Union based on Brexit etc. as breaches of the aforesaid International act.

      As mentioned, Westminster can stymie or ignore all actions related around pleas via Westminster or unilateral devolved Holyrood plebiscites. The process must be: dissolve the Union at source in Westminster; return all Mps to Scotland; form a Common Civic wide assembly including all MPS and Msps’ declare Independence and send the Declaration to the UN and to the International community of an intended plebiscite of all Scottish citizens who are residents and have a minimum of ten years residency ( no second home owners). to confirm our Independence.

      Unless we seize our Sovereignty back in the place where it was spirited away to by the ‘parcel of rogues’, we are are farting at thunder. The Devolved talking shop is a distraction and a dead end for our fight. Our MPS could and should take the mace and smash it literally and figuratively into smithereens along with the fiction of Britain and the UK.

    111. Lothianlad says:

      And here is the sadest part of the constitutional situation….
      The SNP HAS the power and the mandate to give westminster a cardiac arrest!!

      All the cards are with scotlands elected supposedly independence party, but, sturgeon and the inner circle have taken the people for mugs and danced a unionist jig.
      History will not be kind to Nicola sturgeon and her brit nat hubby.
      Scotland though will prevail.

    112. Liz g says:

      While we’ve gone as far as we can go with the Westminster side of things and should turn our attention to Holyrood.
      That doesn’t mean that we forget about our MPs.
      I’ve always held that the real power to end the Union lies with them.
      That Holyrood is the only directly elected body by the people of Scotland and therefore has the democratic authority to speak for us was always something I could live with.
      But since I never really believed that any of the UK institutions were really democratic anyway, I couldn’t in all honesty believe that Holyrood as an ” Instrument of the Westminster Parliament ” was the real route out of the Union.

      Our Westminster MPs are the ones who can and should act.

      There seems to be a real disconnect between the FM and the Westminster MPs.
      Ruth Davison as we all saw had the same thing.., she had no real power or authority to direct the Tory MPs votes and didn’t even try .
      Why is that ?
      Well , I’d say it’s because of the special protections and rights of Westminster MPs they vote only as they want and while their leaders can induce them to vote as the party requires, they cannot be forced to.
      The SNP situation is even more weird, because the Holyrood Leader writes the manifesto they stand on ….. but even so once they are MPs they belong to the Westminster system and no Holyrood leader can touch them !!!
      So here’s the thing….
      Why don’t THEY act.

      There’s a lot they could do for Scotland and they never seem to act.
      They could have dared the Queen not to sign at least one bill for T May and the recent internal market bill was ripe for a parliamentary rebellion.
      The EU agreement breaks the Treaty of Union directly and in the whole of its purpose as a Trade agreement…. are they going to do a thing about that?
      If not why not?
      Scotland made no agreement with Ireland and its the Scottish MPs responsibility to ensure the deal we are stuck with is upheld , its not their remit to protect the GFA , but rather the terms and conditions of the trade Treaty our resources are bound to!
      Why weren’t they in the (so called ) Supreme Court arguing that Westminster will break the Treaty of Union if the Queen signs the EU agreement into law .
      Make them choose a Treaty and we had them!!
      But naw they sat on their hands and let Westminster have the best of both Treaties…
      Also
      Why weren’t THEY standing on a manifesto to End the Union in December anyway ?
      That’s a plebiscite election to the Parliament who’s authority we apparently need.
      Well WHY didn’t our MP candidates ask for the democratic authority from us then, to take our wishes into that Parliament?

      I have no time for calls to have the Scottish MPs leave … it did nothing for the N. Irish.
      But why on earth our MPs are not disrupting the functioning of that Parliament is beyond me .

      Why are we to wait for the Holyrood election to have a mandate ( all the others never changed a thing ) only to have an also ran Tory in London tell us it’s really only going to be “noise ” anyway?

      There is no one who could seriously argue that any Scot who voted SNP in December was under the illusion that their SNP vote was for preserving the UK Union.
      So what else do those MPs need ?
      They are as permitted to claim they are to follow the will of the Scottish People as the other MPs claim they follow the will of those who wanted to leave the EU.
      Why don’t they?

      Not forgetting that they can resign and force a plebiscite election , all legal and everything too, and they should be making dam sure that George Osborn and his ilk know it too.
      Because ultimately when the formalities of the ending of the Treaty takes place it will be those MPs which are directly involved , and I’d say they should be involving themselves in that very thing right about now !!!

    113. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      Join the Euro Klaxon from @Sensibledave says at 7:33 pm!

      The pound will be worth 80p at most when Scotland regains Independence as per Jim Rogers.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rp2XS1nbvA

      The only reason the UK State still has AA (but with a negative outlook) is UK State has actual physical collateral, Scotlands oil!

      Basically it`s the same as `high street` credit, if you own property you get a better rating and pay less interest, without oil/collateral the UK State would be downgraded to BB or less and have to pay much higher interest on its national debt.

      Remember The McCrone report contained a highly favourable projection for the economy of an Independent Scotland with a “chronic surplus to a quite embarrassing degree and its currency would become the hardest in Europe”.

    114. Jock McDonnell says:

      Lorna Campbell: ‘It’s total doo-doo. What they want the Scots to believe is that there is not other path to a legal form of independence. A cursory glance at the countries of the EU and the UN should enlighten anyone who still believes in their guff. The reason – the only reason – they get away with this nonsense is because so many believe them.’

      Thats it exactly.

    115. John H. says:

      Did Theresa May take Sturgeon aside at one of their meetings and point out the horrors that would be inflicted on Scotland if we dared to go for independence? Is this the reason for Sturgeon behaving like a deer frozen in the headlights?

    116. Andy Ellis says:

      @Rev Stu 5.14pm

      From your lips to God’s ears! ?

    117. Breeks says:

      Mr C M Howie says:
      19 January, 2021 at 4:03 pm
      You also have zero mandate to govern the country if you make an election a plebiscite, none whatsoever. Which makes that plan a complete non-starter.

      I’m sorry, can you remind me just what mandate the Tory’s have to govern Scotland, and force Scotland out of Europe against the emphatic will of Scotland’s sovereign electorate to remain?

    118. cynicalHighlander says:

      @ John H. says:
      19 January, 2021 at 8:20 pm

      Did Theresa May take Sturgeon aside at one of their meetings and point out the horrors that would be inflicted on Scotland if we dared to go for independence? Is this the reason for Sturgeon behaving like a deer frozen in the headlights?

      She was simply told you need the sanction of British PM for that UN job ,just saying.

    119. Col says:

      Still think we just use the current mandate, set a date for whenever, say Sept 2021 or Sept 2022. Tell Bojo it’s happening. He can refuse all he likes but if the people agree, and that’s what counts, then they will vote SNP in May, if they don’t they won’t. So that then puts Bojo against the Scottish people as opposed to the SNP.

    120. Tinto Chiel says:

      John H: “Did Theresa May take Sturgeon aside at one of their meetings and point out the horrors that would be inflicted on Scotland if we dared to go for independence? Is this the reason for Sturgeon behaving like a deer frozen in the headlights?”

      I always think that NS seemed to change her attitude to independence after her weird meeting with The Maybot on the banks of the Clyde (opposite Pacific Quay, I’ll have you know, about the time of an anti-BBC demo, IIRC) rather than her saltire-festooned Bute House affairs previously, when she seemed to rub it into the colonial masters that we lived in the early years of a better nation, etc, etc.

      God knows what compromised stuff she was exposed to then but we seem to have been on the slippery slope ever since.

      It’ll all come out eventually, I hope, but probably not in time to save us from its consequences, unlesss we embrace the Breeks’ Constitutional/Stu’s Declaration of Bath option.

      All power to Craig Murray as he faces up to a vindictive and corrupt Scottish Government and legal system.

      Short of a jury, we have to rely on our judiciary, so God help Craig and his defence.

    121. Breeks says:

      I think it’s too neat.

      Tories being so casually brazen about subjugating Scottish Democracy and a Scottish ‘Government’ / First Minister emphatically declaring the Section 30 route to our unconstitutional subjugation as Scotland’s only legal recourse when that patently isn’t true. It just utterly stinks of back door connivance and collusion. Scotland has been shafted, and it’s a work in progress to shaft us again.

      Sturgeons SNP doing it’s level best to obstruct Martin Keatings clarifying this Section 30 business is another deeply troubling matter that is begging for a Steward’s Inquiry.

      More you think about it, the less sense it makes. There is most definitely something rotten going on in Bute House. I’m honestly beginning to think the smearing of Alex Salmond, horrendous though it is, is just the tip of a rather grubby and deeply unpleasant ice berg.

      Scotland desperately NEEDS an impeachment protocol, not only to formally impeach as necessary, but even short of actual impeachment, the people need the political leverage of threatening impeachment as a measure of influence and control over a runaway rogue administration, not unlike the one Sturgeon’s is beginning to resemble.

    122. Effijy says:

      Last week I posted a strange pattern that I seen in
      the UKs reporting of the daily Covid deaths.

      Although this is the country’s biggest event in 75 years
      they don’t seem to be too troubled to add the stats over
      the weekend nor the following Monday.
      Tuesdays figures escalate dramatically?

      The last couple of days have averaged 600 U.K. Covid deaths
      and today 1,610 deaths.

      With something so important they don’t think it worth keeping accurate daily figures?

      An we wonder why Bojo land leads the world in Covid deaths.
      Over to the media for help.

      Here’s wee pensioners with a needle in their arm and Harry misses the Royal family!

      That’s better?

    123. Andy Ellis says:

      O/T and due apologies for referencing Scot Goes Plop in here but…

      https://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2021/01/scot-goes-pop-survation-poll-sensation.html

      I think #cosyfeetPete’s head is going to explode. 🙂

    124. Ian Mac says:

      There are plenty in the Scottish establishment, and the SNP, who will be quietly quite happy with that. They can pay lip service to the wishes of the people, curry favour with them and get nice cosy jobs, without ever having to take responsibility for implementing to those wishes.

    125. Bob Mack says:

      @Andy Ellis,

      I dont find the poll sensational at all. I think it merely reflects what we on here have been saying for months now.

      It does however clearly show how out of step the SNP and many of their members are with public opinion.

    126. Andy Ellis says:

      @Bob Mack 9.35pm

      Indeed, but nice to be proven right huh?

      It’ll be fun for folk to mercilessly rib #cosyfeetPete about it tho’!

      As for the SNP, they’ll ignore it….the gradualists aren’t open to reason.

    127. Hugh Jarse says:

      Aren’t you supposed to archive that Andy?
      🙂
      Cheering stuff.

    128. Beaker says:

      @Effijy says:
      19 January, 2021 at 9:09 pm
      “With something so important they don’t think it worth keeping accurate daily figures?”

      I think many people are simply getting used to a routine when they should be raging. No doubt we will hit the grim milestone of 100K by then end of the month.

    129. Bob Mack says:

      @Andy Ellis,

      Its actually nicer to read Mr Kelly admit he was WRONG!!

    130. george wood says:

      A plebiscitary election is a non-starter.

      The unionists and their chums in the media will say the election is on the SNP’s record in power. The public knows what referendums are, but talk of plebiscitary elections will just confuse ordinary voters.

      You would have the bizarre position where one side is saying this is about Independence and the other saying no it’s not.

      You won’t get the turn-out you would get in a referendum, which would make the result have less weight. You would have to have a minimum turnout threshold, that you wouldn’t need in a referendum.

      The only game in town is a referendum which means getting a refusal from Westminster first and then holding one anyway.

    131. Cringe says:

      Gideon is talking shite about legality. The English veto on independence or even asking the voter’s view is Nicola Sturgeon and her supporters novel contribution to the debate. I can’t recall any serving UK government expressing this view.

    132. Duncan Clark says:

      Osborne making more sense in a couple of paragraphs than the SNP is not a sentence I thought I’d ever type.

      Regardless of plans for future, there don’t seem to be any plans for the present as it feels the SG, with the honourable exception of Kate Forbes, are too busy briefing and plotting against each other to do any work.

      Could the comments also be read as an attempt by Osborne to force Johnson into a corner over Scotland? Does Osborne want revenge for his chum Cameron?

    133. Andy Ellis says:

      @george wood

      Utter nonsense. If (and given the small amount of time left I accept it’s a fairly big if) the pro-indy parties MAKE it a plebiscitary election, then that is what it will be. Such elections are constitutionally and historically a much more common route to independence than referendums.

      Turnout in a plebiscitary election in May would guarantee a high turn out. Yoons aren’t going to boycott a General Election the way they might veto an “illegal” or non S30 sanctioned referendum: if they did, they hand full power to the Yes camp. Pure fantasy on your part.

      You’d have to have a very low turnout for it not to be recognised internationally.

      Your response is constitutionally and politically autistic.

    134. robertknight says:

      George Wood @ 9:58

      “The only game in town is a referendum which means getting a refusal from Westminster first and then holding one anyway.“

      Fingers crossed Martin Keatings’ case will place a dirty great big hole below the waterline on the whole need for a S30.

    135. Mc Duff says:

      The reality is that England only respects countries that bite it like Ireland they do not respect us because our leaders just whine and moan.
      Despite what Osborne says, if the SNP MP`s had walked out months ago this would have disrupted Westminster and would have created some embarrassing international headlines. If we don’t want to be at Westminster then don’t .
      We deserve what we get.

    136. Tom Platt says:

      Sadly for him, but fortunately for us, George Osborne isn’t being honest is he?
      He’s being as dishonest again as when he stood by and let UK media pretend that British Government would not let Indy Scotland use the pound after his distorted dash to Scotland make the announcement.

      Peter A Bell is wise imo to suggest that we ignore this latest f George’s huge attempted bluffs!
      Peter’s twittered meme talks even more sense than Peter’s text here and provides an even better route to YES.

    137. laukat says:

      I think James Kelly’s poll on plan B is interesting. If a new pro-indy list party lead by Salmond appeared in the next few weeks this poll allows them a platform to launch the idea of a more agressive route to independence.

      As things stand I will vote SNP 1 & 2 for fear of allowing a unionist party in however if Salmond leads a pro-indy party they will have my list vote.

      I would suggest that one or two MP’s (Angus B McNeil) may defect to a Salmond party along with a couple of SNP MSP’s (Kenny Macaskill). You could quickly see Salmond’s party having more elected representives than the Libdems.

    138. Bob Mack says:

      @George Wood,

      You do realise we have already had not just one, but two refusals already.

    139. george wood says:

      @Bob Mack 10.13pm

      Yes I’m aware of that, but the SNP will be the one’s in charge of our side so we have to go with what they are saying up to the point of their doing nothing when Westminster says no.

      If something changes at the top of the SNP then things may be different.

    140. twathater says:

      There are many great comments BTL on the thread but IMO the 2 that go right to the heart of the matter are Lochside’s and Liz G’s , previously highlighted by Alf Baird

      That as the HR entity is a devolved parliament (accounting unit) GRANTED by the grace of WM they have little power as a SUBORDINATE PARLIAMENT TO WM and even less with the unionist tractors residing within , therefore the REAL ONES who represent our Scots sovereignty within WM are the MP’S we elect to send there , unfortunately they are deciding to represent their party and leader rather than the sovereign people who elect them

      What I think should happen is that on a determined specified date , we , all of us collectively en masse should send emails to ALL of our MP’S and DEMAND that they as the REAL and TRUE REPRESENTATIVES of sovereign Scots people at WM hereby withdraw from this parliament to gather with other Scots representatives to reconvene the TRUE parliament of Scotland where a determination will be made on the dissolution of the Treaty and Acts of UNION due to the repeated breaches of the Treaty by the english parliament acting as the UK parliament

      DISCUSS

    141. Fireproofjim says:

      I think it’s quite simple really.
      1. Demand a section 30 from Westminster, in the next three months. expecting refusal, but pointing out that a refusal will result in a May election in which the SNP’s ONLY policy will be independence.
      2. In the event that the SNP get a majority for that policy we will consult and advise the UN, the EU, the USA and the Heads of the Commmonwealth that we will hold a referendum on Independence in early 2022, pointing out that the UN supports the right of self government for all peoples.
      3. We hold the referendum, which by this time will have a lot of support around the world.
      4. We win and declare independence, which we will effect within, say, two years, which is plenty time to negotiate outstanding issues with Westminster and by which time the pandemic will be a distant memory and of little importance.

      It is all completely democratic and Westminster cannot refuse to recognise such a situation without being seen by the world as totally anti-democracy.

    142. Effijy says:

      I keep putting dates back for when SNP might actually show a pulse.
      The line was a Brexit deal agreed at end of December,
      1st Jan 2021 when fully out of the EU just the two most recent.

      If all our Care Homes, their staff and NHS staff are vaccinated within 4 weeks then the worst is over.
      They could announce that the over 70’s and teachers will be vaccinated within the next month.
      The HR election is on and it can go-agead.
      Now does Boris agree an Independence Party majority will deliver an S30 referendum?
      If he said yes then it is a normal election and if not it’s a plebiscite election where a majority
      see us claim our Sovereign and Civil rights.

      Go for it and get independent foreign adjudicators by the thousand watching it.

    143. Jontoscots20 says:

      I was one of the business audience to hear Gideon’s mirthless announcement of the imperial fiat in Edinburgh in 2016. He joked that having a shared currency wasn’t like having a shared record collection after a divorce. But he does us a favour probably in his urge to scunner his Bullingdon buddy Boris. So COVID is covering a multitude of sins at the moment and allowing diversion from difficult stuff. The shallow talent pool of the Hoyrood SNP contingent is highly compromised. This is the time for disrupters of the status would.

    144. Clwyd Griffiths says:

      @michael I agree with that!

    145. Claus Lohmar says:

      Let us wait until next week, please.
      In one week we will know if the Scottish Government has the right to hold a referendum without WM permission.

    146. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Let us wait until next week, please.
      In one week we will know if the Scottish Government has the right to hold a referendum without WM permission.”

      If you think there’s going to be any sort of definitive result in the Keatings case next week you’re in for a very large disappointment.



    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