The cards are in Scotland’s hands

Oooh Theresa’s not best pleased. And neither is Ruthie, Kezia, and a whole load of Unionist commentators. So that’s a result then. Project Fear is getting off to an early start. Sky News gave air space to that well known expert on Scottish affairs, Nigel Farage, who predictably railed against Nicola Sturgeon and pro-European Scotland as being one of the minor demons of Be’elzebub. It’s not clear why Sky News felt the need to give us Nigel’s view on Scottish matters, as there are more people in Scotland who believe that we’ve been visited by reptilian extraterrestrials than support Nigel’s party. Although to be honest, when Nige does make one of his rare forays north of the border to be heckled in an Edinburgh pub, it’s not inaccurate to describe it as a visit from a reptilian extraterrestrial. It is widely believed that Ukip’s sole Scottish representative David Coburn has a bit of a nerve complaining about immigration when he himself comes from Alpha Centauri.

The dust is starting to settle after the surprise announcement that the Scottish government is going to hold a second independence referendum. According to some reports in the Unionist press, Theresa May might decide to block another vote. I really hope that she does. There’s nothing that Scots love more than an arrogant middle class Tory who’s channelling Maggie Thatcher telling them what they’re not allowed to do and loftily informing them that she will decide on their future, not them. That’s a guaranteed means of boosting the Yes vote. Scots doesn’t have the word thrawn for nothing.

It’s more likely that Theresa will try to prevent another referendum until after Brexit is concluded and Scotland is out of the EU along with the rest of the UK. Scotland holding a referendum while the Brexit process is still going on would be a nightmare for her. Which is all the more reason why Scotland needs to do it then, and not just because it’s going to annoy Theresa, although there is a certain satisfaction to that. It’s not the business of the Scottish government to hold a vote on Scotland’s future when it’s convenient for a Tory Prime Minister who enjoys little support in Scotland. It’s the business of the Scottish government to hold a vote on Scotland’s future when it’s in the best interests of Scotland, and it’s clearly in Scotland’s best interests to have that vote at a time when it’s clear what sort of Brexit deal the UK is in for, but before we’ve been taken out of the EU against our will.

Theresa doesn’t want a Scottish referendum when she’s got her tiny Trumpesque hands full of Brexmess. It’s not just that it means diverting scarce time, energy and resources to fighting a battle in Scotland when she’s fully occupied trying to fend off the entire EU. It also means that she won’t be able to use Scotland’s resources and assets as bargaining chips in her EU negotiations. The EU isn’t going to be very impressed by a Westminster attempt to sell out Scottish fishermen in return for access to the EU for the financial sector in the City of London if they know that it’s quite likely that Scottish fishermen won’t be Theresa’s to sell out by the time negotiations are concluded.

She doesn’t want a Scottish referendum before Scotland has formally left the EU because it means that European citizens living in Scotland will get a vote. After the UK has left the EU, they won’t get a say on their own future or the future of the country in which they’ve come to live and with which they’ve come to identify. That’s a body of almost 200,000 New Scots who are most likely going to break heavily for Yes who will be unable to vote, and that makes it harder for the Yes campaign to reach a majority.

Westminster’s attempts to dictate the timing of the referendum must be resisted. Thankfully they can be. Theresa’s hand is nowhere near as strong as the Unionist media would like to present it as being. We’re told constantly that Westminster’s permission is required for a second referendum to be legally binding, and that’s true. A Section 30 order must be granted. Incidentally, if you want to know the difference between the EU and the UK in one sentence, that’s it. The EU can’t demand you ask its permission to leave, the UK does demand that you ask its permission.

However, and here’s the interesting bit, Holyrood only requires Westminster’s agreement in order to hold a legally binding referendum. It doesn’t require permission to hold a consultative referendum, which is essentially an exercise in asking the public their opinion. There’s no reason that Holyrood can’t ask the people of Scotland for their opinion on anything at all. Do you prefer Hellman’s mayonnaise or own brand? Do you prefer to jeer at Nigel Farage from a safe distance or do you like to do it close up and aren’t worried that he might open up his lizard alien jaws and swallow you? Do you prefer Westminster rule or independence? If it’s not a legally binding referendum, there’s nothing to prevent Holyrood pressing ahead with it irrespective of what Westminster says. And the thing about consultative referendums is that once they produce a result the result takes on a political imperative of its own. The EU referendum wasn’t legally binding either, but all we’ve heard ever since is the demand that the will of the people is respected.

The difficulty with a consultative referendum is that it’s possible that the Unionist parties might boycott it. That wouldn’t invalidate the result, but it would mean we’d have to work even harder to ensure a high turn out which gives a clear mandate for independence. However there is a nuclear option which doesn’t require Westminster’s permission, and which the Unionist parties cannot ignore. That’s to dissolve the Scottish Parliament and turn the subsequent elections into a plebiscite election explicitly fought on achieving a mandate for independence. In such an election, achieving a majority in Holyrood for pro-independence supporters would also mean achieving a mandate to negotiate independence.

This would require close collaboration between the SNP, the Greens, and other pro-independence parties and the broader Yes movement to put up a slate of Indy-supporting candidates in the election. Since it’s a vote for a Scottish government, the Unionist parties can’t boycott it, and Westminster cannot dictate the timing. It’s very much a last ditch strategy in the event that all else fails, and if May really is stupid and arrogant enough to imagine that she can dictate when Scotland can have its say or frame the question to her pleasing. What it means is that Theresa May cannot dictate the timing or the question for a second independence referendum. If she does, all she does is to make it less likely that the Unionists will win that vote when it finally happens.

Scotland will have its vote when it suits Scotland, and not when it suits Theresa May. There’s very little she can do about it, apart from rage and fury. There’s going to be plenty of that from the Unionists over the coming months, and it will signify nothing. The cards are in Scotland’s hands this time.

If you’d like me and the dug to come and give a talk to your local group, email me at

Donate to the Dug This blog relies on your support and donations to keep going – I need to make a living, and have bills to pay. Clicking the donate button will allow you to make a payment directly to my Paypal account. You do not need a Paypal account yourself to make a donation. You can donate as little, or as much, as you want. Many thanks.

Donate Button

Or click HERE

If you’d like to make a donation but don’t wish to use Paypal or have problems using the Paypal button, please email me at for details of alternative methods of donation.

frontcovervol3barkingvol2coverSigned copies of the Collected Yaps of the Wee Ginger Dug volumes 1 2 3 & 4 are available by emailing me at Price just £21.90 for two volumes plus P&P. Please state whether you want vols 1 & 2 or 3 & 4. You can also order signed copies of all four volumes for the special price of £40 plus £4 P&P within the UK.

Copies of Barking Up the Right Tree are available from my publisher Vagabond Voices at price just £7.95 plus P&P. The E-book of Barking Up the Right Tree is available for Kindle for just £4. Click here to purchase.

Get your copy of Barking Up the Right Tree Volume 2 by placing an order on the Vagabond Voices website. Just click the following link.

0 thoughts on “The cards are in Scotland’s hands

  1. Pingback: The cards are in Scotland’s hands | speymouth

  2. It’s great to have options which we control. May is learning that she has no mandate in Scotland and that the people of Scotland will make their own decisions.

    I’m also looking forward to our friends in Europe helping us to gain our independence once Article 50 is finally triggered. We won’t be on our own this time.

    • It gets better. Sinn Fein is now demanding a referendum on irish unification and Plaid Cymru have said Wales will need a referendum if Scotland goes. May has been totally pushed onto the back foot. She has lost control of the situation. That will make negotiations with the EU very hard for her.

      • There is an option coming up in May for very large numbers of people to signal their views – the Council elections.
        Almost certainly the unionist parties will be preparing to vote tactically to optimise the chances of unionist party members being elected and being able to make deals to form administrations which exclude pro-independence parties.

        The STV system can be used effectively, by the independence supporters, too. Simply agree the order of preference and vote that way.

        For example SNP, SNP, Green, Green, SDP. or Green, Green, SNP, …. as long as you vote for the independence candidates – all of them in your ward.

        Council elections are usually poorly attended, but really make the effort to get out and vote. The people who voted NO are the people who vote every election. In a low turnout, they will have a significant impact.

        So, counter that. VOTE!!!!

        • Absolutely Alasdair. Your point is well made.
          You cannot hurt the parties you vote for as long as you put your preferred candidates at the top of your list in direct order of preference. Scot goes Pop has a good piece on this from last week.

  3. The EU’s strict rules for economic convergence will cause Scotland, with its large budget deficit, to impose public spending cuts or large tax rises in the future. …I’ve seen this argument increasingly being put by the no side. How best to respond ?

    • That after 300 years of union having such a large deficit and resulting debt shows union is not working. Perhaps time to try something new?

    • It is not clear that Scotland will have a large deficit after independence – or any deficit at all. Current figures *assign* a certain deficit to Scotland, but they are figures based on our current economy within the UK, not on an independent nation’s figures. Simply put, the argument is flawed, and is based on a false premice.

      • Absolutely correct KlokTok.
        The assumption that their would be a large deficit is just that – an assumption.
        It is most possibly a false premise.
        Beginning a discussion with a false premise usually leads to a false conclusion.
        Basic rule of logic.

    • Scotland currently pays for all its public services, healthcare, pensions etc out of the pocket money we get back from Westminster. The pocket money represents about 60% of the income the treasury admits to Scotland generating, and there is a very big question mark over just how inaccurate they are.
      Westminster will prove obstructive initially, but won’t reasonably be able to provide less revenue back to Scotland than is currently the case. Services will be fine.

    • But on this basis, as UK indebtedness continues to increase, Westminster will simply allocate the Scottish account an ever greater sum of debt. How does remaining in the UK improve matters?

      These accounts are constructed to maintain the status quo via scary soundbites…except that under Brexit, there is no status quo!

      Scotland has a choice between Tory Brexit or independence. The imperialists have shot themselves in the foot. Either be tied to the faltering UK or a family of European nations.

      Why is Westminster so keen to keep Scotland? (Hint: its wealth and resources.)

      • Hi Janet. The national debt belongs to the UK Government as it was responsible for the borrowing to create it. Scotland, if independent, can offer to help with part of it, but it is not obliged to. I believe this question was raised at the Indy Referendum 1 in 2014. The answer was clear and was accepted by Cameron’s Government.

    • It is a nonsense argument and deliberately confuses requirements to join the Eurozone with EU membership. The so called deficit is a product of over 20 Treasury guesstimates of income from taxes not devolved and which cannot be accurately divided. There is a deficit but it can not be accurately calculated and the Treasury will certainly have erred in generous allocations to London. Even if it was as high as claimed it is the result of Westminster macro management of the UK economy and Westminster’s spending choices, like Trident, Hinckley Point etc and would not be relevant to economic management of an independent Scotland. I do not mean to imply there are no challenges just as all other European nations continue to experience

      • My thoughts precisely, russellbruce. The whole convergence thing applies only to the euro area. Of course, they claim we’ll have to join the euro area, which is total nonsense. The same people tell us the EU won’t have us, which is equally (if diametrically opposed) nonsense. Whatever the angle, NO have a scare tailor made to fit. All equally nonsense. 🙂

  4. Considering that Westminster did not allow EU citizens resident in the UK to vote in the EU referendum last June, this is exactly why they want to delay any independence referendum until after Brexit has been concluded. Their strategy is transparent. They cynically used these folks during our last referendum on independence. We must not allow them to discard them for the next one.

  5. Wee Ginger Dug, please tell your human that he is one of the good guys, and his work is much appreciated!

    My take on the “permission” question is that it would be (both technically and actually) unlawful under international law for Westminster to refuse to “permit” us to hold a referendum in exercise of our inalienable right to national self-determination, but tactically it’s not something that can be got around within the time frame in order to have a referendum that’s legally binding.

    That said, it would be an absolute gift to us independentistas if the regime tries to stop us, or even delay us, because – strategically – if we have a consultative referendum, we can say that it’s not legally binding only because the regime won’t allow it because they’re a bunch of anti-democratic fearties, and if a “one issue” Holyrood election is called, we can say, “Courtesy of Ms. May and her merry bunch of Brexiteer comedians, because they left us no real choice”. Actually, the snap election scenario would be preferable, in my view, as the mandate for the Government that would result would be indisputable – I am confident enough of the result not to be afraid of what that result might be.

    I think it is more likely than not that the May regime will indeed persist in its pig-headed intransigence, and persist in making the cardinal error of treating us Scots as stupid and our electorate as lamentably ill-informed, like the electorate in the rUK wa lamentably ill-informed before the Brexit referendum. It is quite obvious too that our First Minister both outclasses Ms. May, and is well capable of outmanoeuvering her – not least because she’s just done exactly that in her press conference at Bute House. And no one can say that Ms. May wasn’t warned, because she was, repeatedly, and in so many words. There’s none so blind as those who will not see.

  6. I like the thought of the third option. Quick, straight to the point and decisive. If all else fails at least we have this option.

    What worries me most, but won’t stop me voting yes again, is if we don’t win the referendum. What hell will ensue from a hard right Tory government on the people of Scotland. Brexit under this Tory mess is bad enough but they would reek havoc on Scotland if we lost the referendum. I believe May is a creature of revenge. I, and many others, would leave.

    • The consequences of not ridding our great country of the rump that is tory red blue and yellow are unimaginable. The great highland clearances would be of nought as Cruella Mayhem would exact a terrible revenge on Scotland as likely brexit will compound her nightmare on downing street.

  7. It’s been much to the credit of the SNP government that a referendum was the preferred route to achieve independence. No party and all parties. A people’s referendum.

    Many folk don’t realise just how fortunate they are, or have been, in being offered the choice and power to choose by the SG.

    The route of the GE or SE is just as effective and legally binding. Perhaps some unionists out there should think about that for a moment and consider their parlous state in Scotland right now, where in terms of representation to Westminster, the SNP muster 54 MPs currently with 56 selected (two still pro indy, though now independent candidates). Then there is Holyrood with 63 MSPs and the addition of Green support (6 MSPs) totalling 69 pro independence with 59 against (all unionist parties combined assuming none would vote otherwise).

    If Ms May wants to go down that route she almost certainly WILL lose. Party politics being what it is and all.

    All that is required by the Scottish government at either election is to form the majority based on manifesto pledge and specific mandate.

    It’s up to Ms May and the branch managers though. Do they feel lucky? Well do they? 🙂

  8. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I would point out again that, under Scottish law, the Scottish people are sovereign. We do not need the permission of our colonial masters to hold a referendum. In addition, under international law, we do not need the permission of our colonial masters to hold a referendum. Therefore, if May tries to block our freedom referendum, we should go ahead with it regardless.

  9. Have we got any hot-shot lawyers in the house?
    I’ve a question for them!!!

    When the Indyref2/new campaign actually starts have the political parties supporting Scotland’s “Imperial masters” i.e British Conservative, Labour and Lib-Dems any right to voice their opinions?

    Should it not just be a Scot-vs-Scot debate?

    In view of the following . . . .

    6. Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

    7. All States shall observe faithfully and strictly the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the present Declaration on the basis of equality, non-interference in the internal affairs of all States, and respect for the sovereign rights of all peoples and their territorial integrity.

  10. Nicola is really playing a blinder, in her speech she said, she would seek authority from the Scottish Parliament to agree terms for section 30 with the UK gov. No permission being sought, demanded or pleaded for. The Scottish Parliament is the only parliament she seeks authority from.
    May has a choice either to discuss terms or not, she could make them as onerous or easy as she please, as could Nicola. Exit polls, independent observers, prison for anyone interfering with the postal votes. Roothie not allowed to ride her buffalo during daylight hours.
    What we can be certain of, is that if or whatever Westminster signs up to, won’t be worth the paper its written on, be they Vows, conventions or treaties.
    My own thoughts are that may will refuse an agreement, I’m thinking Nicola is counting on her doing just that.

  11. Of course, if an election is called on an Indy/no-Indy platform, the Unionist parties would have to agree in advance to form a coalition government to prevent independence. Let me say that more clearly, the Labour Party would need to agree in advance to go into coalition with the Conservatives.

    Interesting times.

  12. not sure I totally agree with everything here Paul, any extension of the 2 year period would require EU consent, but TM can leave at anytime before, the 2 years is a maximum, indeed there are already rumours in wm that she intends to storm out of brexit negotiations just after the german elections this autumn. but even if she doesnt, she can pull out of the eu 4 weeks before indyref2. the power to decide if indyref2 happens before or after brexit is TM’s, not nicola’s

    coupled with todays announcement by Margaritis Schinas, Chief Spokesperson of the European Commission and a Deputy Director-General at the Commission’s DG Communications “Holyrood would have to seek membership of the European Union under Article 49 in the event of a ‘Yes’ vote in a future referendum” “The Barroso doctrine, would apply” the A49 is the route new members need to apply to join the EU. Ms Jacqueline Minor, the European Commission’s Head of Representation in the UK, although widely misquoted in the press in Feb, did also say via A49

    a50 is the route for continuing members or successor states, I think this was the hope of holyrood, if we win indyref2 before brexit, then we would not leave the eu/single market but be able to negotiate our EU or EFTA/EEA membership.

    this is looking less likely now

    I not sure about Westminster being able to veto a previously decided electorate midway through indyref2, but once the UK is out, scotland would lose EU legal protection and i wouldnt put it past Westminster to pull some kind of stunt

    nb EU Commission’s DG Communications……………keeps the Commission abreast of political developments and of trends in public opinion and the media. It also coordinates communication campaigns within the Commission.

    • As someone else said, the conversation would go something like this:

      “Do you meet all the requirements for membership of the EU?”


      “Prove it”

      “We were a member for the last X years, and didn’t want to leave. There have been no changes in the law in the last X weeks that effect our ability to comply with EU regulations”

      “Oh, all right then. I guess you’re in. Sorry, back 🙂 “

    • DG Communications, eh? I’m not convinced that what Ms. Schinas said is indisputably correct, and that the statement she made reflected a legally reasoned argument. In other words, I think there may be an error of fact and law in there somewhere, and that the competent court would very possibly agree with me. If it’s a political decision and they just don’t want to go down the successor State route but have us in “on the nod” instead – well, we’ll find out pretty soon, I don’t doubt, but either way

      Actually, having Ms. May storm out of the Brexit negotiations in advance of our referendum could be the best thing to happen to us – it would prove beyond doubt to the Europeans that the Westminster regime is incapable of acting in a mature and rational manner, and therefore cannot be considered a proper negotiating partner; it would prove beyond doubt to us Scots that she doesn’t care about the interests of her own country, never mind ours; it would give the Europeans proof positive that our own Scottish Government has had the right of it all along; and it could not fail to encourage the Europeans to welcome us even more wholeheartedly (if you can be more than wholehearted) – in fact it would prove to all and sundry that the Westminster regime is jointly and severally not just dimwitted and crazy, they’re positively barking.

  13. The only thing that Holyrood can’t do is change the laws of the UK as a whole without first obtaining permission in advance. In most circumstances that would be a problem.

    However given the SNP can legitimately claim legislative authority in both Westminster and Holyrood combined a change of the laws of Scotland is all the really need.

    More importantly repealing the Scottish version of the Act of Union might be more symbolic than anything as the meat on the bones is gaining the legal, in Scots’ Law, claim to be the defacto signatory for out part in the Treaty that formed the 1707 Union and thus a mandate from the people of Scotland is all the authority they need to end it.

    If Scotland is no longer governed by the UK constitution it’s up to Westminster to alter it to reflect reality. Of course until they do the disputed claim to Scottish territory might make joining NATO a bit problematic.

    A section 30 request is polite but by no means a necessity.

  14. Excellent analysis of the situation ,Paul.
    No we shall not be waiting until we have been forcibly removed from the EU.
    They’d love that. We sit back and do nothing until the Darling Duds of May conclude their business with the EU and we#re out, like subservient little colonist serfs?
    We go while we are still members and comply in full with all EU terms and conditions.
    They don’t do irony do they? We are not asking their permission.
    The basis of Self Determination is that WE decide our fate, not our bigger increasingly belligerent neighbour.
    EU Nationals who have graced us with their presence here will have a vote. It’s the whole fucking point of the exercise, after all. We voted overwhelmingly to stay in Europe.
    Since the Home Office is already issuing Notices to Leave to Europeans who have worked here, married here, gave birth to children here, what chance May and the Nasties ‘allowing EU citizens to vote if we foolishly wait until after the Nasties have left Europe? They’l be getting herded on to cattle trucks and transported to Dover and Tilbury before you can say.’precious union’.
    WE go now, and within our timescale, and in tandem with the WM Cabal exiting the EU.
    I smell their fear.

  15. “She doesn’t want a Scottish referendum before Scotland has formally left the EU because it means that European citizens living in Scotland will get a vote. After the UK has left the EU, they won’t get a say on their own future or the future of the country in which they’ve come to live and with which they’ve come to identify. ”

    Is that true? It hadn’t occurred to me. Can’t the Scottish Government define the franchise (like last time)?

  16. Pingback: The cards are in Scotland’s hands | pictishbeastie

  17. “However there is a nuclear option which doesn’t require Westminster’s permission, and which the Unionist parties cannot ignore. That’s to dissolve the Scottish Parliament and turn the subsequent elections into a plebiscite election explicitly fought on achieving a mandate for independence. In such an election, achieving a majority in Holyrood for pro-independence supporters would also mean achieving a mandate to negotiate independence.”

    Don’t like that idea at all. SNP/Greens only have 9 or so seat majority in Scottish Parliament. That could be overturned which would be a disaster.

    I would prefer that Westminster MPs resigned en masse and use ensuing by-elections as vote for Independence. First past the post much more reliable for gaining a majority, and it is Westminster we want to dump.

  18. Kinda think she’s gonna scurry amongst the dregs of anything she can find in her attempt to assuage…”oh” she says, “I have all these options for Scotland that I forgot to tell them about…”

    Aye right, Madame May…

    Absolutely bloody right Paul…we’re thrawn…not hung and drawn.

  19. twathater says:
    14 March, 2017 at 5:21 pm

    Posted this on WOS


    Nicola I watched daily politics today and was utterly appalled at Tommy Shepard , if this is going to be the level of disputation put forward by our (SNP SG MPS and MSPS ) we would be as well not bothering with a referendum .

    Tommy allowed 2 very incompetent MSPS to SPOUT DELIBERATE LIES , spurious MISINFORMATION and outright scaremongering , without in any meaningful way challenging them , some on the site are trying to deflect blame on to the interviewer but I am sorry to say the blame lies squarely with Mr Shepard .
    On watching the programme I was convinced that Mr Shepard was not even in the room .
    Too many SNP persons participating in the broadcast media are simply not good enough at it , they are time and time again being caught wrong footed or simply don’t have answers to challenges, they are constantly reacting rather than challenging, this is the wrong methodology ,you are allowing dubious and deliberate lies and obfuscation to register in people’s subconscious whilst your responses are frequently interrupted and talked over,not allowing the answer oxygen .
    Let us not forget the establishment drones are experts at this, they have centuries of disabling peoples ideas and dreams
    The Scottish people NEED convincing through proper facts spoken coherently and with conviction , that Scotland can survive and prosper,and make their OWN decisions on their and their childrens future, without being dragged along reluctantly with decisions made by their neighbours.

    I desperately want my country to be independent, to forge it’s own future , to make its own way in the world and to make its own decisions ,to decide how we raise our finances and how and who we spend them on ,to trade with who WE want ,to ensure that every citizen has a future without deprivation and homelessness , to utilise our resplendent resources for our citizens not for the benefit of pirates.
    I want ALL of these things, but unless the SNP SG step up and take the fight to the establishment and their unionist lackeys,fight fire with fire ,proact rather than react then we will all face 2014 disappointment again

  20. If you read this blog Angry Salmond, can I suggest that in an Independent Scotland, we re-name the month of May?

  21. Dear God!

    ‘Nicola Sturgeon is a liar and a traitor – Off with her head’

    Which was later changed to:

    ‘Nicola Sturgeon – another treacherous queen of Scots – has miscalculated’

    The appalling tragedy of Jo Cox has apparently taught the media nothing. The media are winding up the rhetoric and zoomers who read and ‘act’ upon such rhetoric.


    This will get much worse before it ends. They are looking for hatred and violence and where none exists they are looking to manufacture it.

    GIVE THEM NOTHING. Where you meet rage or hatred from zoomers, give them a blank wall to look at. Meet that rage and hatred with quiet, peaceful determination. Remember what we face and the levels to which they will sink. The only way this ends is when we walk away from it and close the door on it ourselves.

    Be careful out there.

    • Aye Macart, that’s how I roll.

      If I see a comment which is deliberately calculated to rile, I ignore it.
      If I’m confronted with a comment which is deliberately calculated to rile, I ignore it.
      No amount of goading or nastiness from anyone on social media is going to lure me into a ‘tit-for-tat’.
      Our increasingly strident ‘media’ won’t report ‘their’ abuse but they’ll certainly trumpet ‘ours’.
      As you rightly say, best not to give them the ammunition they crave.

      All the best.

  22. The issue of 200,000 EU citizens being denied an Indy vote after BREXIT is something I hadn’t considered. It’s a scandalous idea but one that WM may well push for. After all, they prevented EU citizens voting in the EU referendum. The BrexitNats are not going to take kindly to EU citizens voting for anything. However, with a large, stubborn demographic still wedded to the union, and ready to turn out in large numbers to vote NO yet again, the EU voter will be crucial. Furthermore, to deny them a vote after all they have contributed to Scotland is just not right. This is serious, folks. There is a real threat here.

    We need to ensure the EU voters are included in the Indy Ref, whatever way they decide to vote.

  23. Have to say I quite like the idea of the ‘nuclear option’, i.e. Dissolve the Scottish Parliament and hold a fresh election on the sole mandate of independence. However, would the complicated version of proportional representation we have get in the way of a positive result? What if a majority of pro independence MSPs were returned, but with a popular vote of say 49.9%?

  24. I am hoping that just by calling for a new independence referendum, regardless of it’s timing the EU will now be unwilling to accept our resources eg fishing rights as bargaining chips in brexit negotiations.
    After all they could soon belong to Scotland and that would put them in an awkward position if they want us to stay in/ rejoin the EU?

  25. Richard murphy is a tax expert, and lecturer, his piece yesterday, and another today, suggest that the GERS figures, are, at best a guess, at worst, open to ‘manipulation’, worth a read,

    We are being sneered at as economically inept, and incompetent, but are not being given ‘correct’ figures to assess Scotlands Income ?

    We do need to fully research this, so that we can confidently show the electorate that an Independent Scotland will not only survive, but grow, and prosper.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.