There is no ‘Great Secret Plan’

As I have explained countless times for the benefit of the politically naive, there cannot be a secret plan. For such a thing to be possible Nicola Sturgeon would need to have a near-infinite number of options some of which only she can identify. That’s not how it is in the real world.

In the real world, there is a very limited number of options and all of them are knowable by anyone who cares to think about it – and maybe do a wee bit of research. They are certainly known to “our opposition” who will have gamed every scenario.

There is a reason Nicola Sturgeon is so tight-lipped about such plans as she has actually formulated. And it’s not to conceal those plans from the opposition but to prevent the Yes movement from getting wind of them. Because if independence activists were aware of what she intends they would be even angrier than they are now.

Knowing what options are available to her – and being mature enough to eschew fantasy politics – we can readily see that Sturgeon has only three broadly defined options.

She can go back on everything she’s said on the matter and proceed according to the steps described in the #ManifestoForIndependence published prior to the 2021 election (see below). This is so unlikely as to be barely worth considering. I include it only at the urging of my mildly obsessive completism.

Manifesto for Independence

She can go with the Section 30 process. Which is what she has intimated clearly is her preference. In this scenario, she first compromises the sovereignty of Scotland’s people by seeking permission from the British state to do something that the sovereign people have an absolute right to do without the consent of any external power. The consent for which she petitions is either granted, or it is refused. If it is granted then the British state will use the power thus afforded it to ensure that the referendum is unwinnable for the Yes side. They will do this in any or all of numerous ways, including but not limited to imposing conditions such as a qualified majority. Or perhaps imposing conditions that not even Nicola Sturgeon can accept – such as restricting the franchise – in which case there is no ‘Edinburgh Agreement 2’ and therefore no referendum with the Scottish Government being blamed.

Or the Section 30 order may be refused. Which is what is generally expected. What then for Nicola Sturgeon?

She could meekly accept the diktat of the British government and abandon the referendum while asking the people of Scotland for yet another mandate in the 2024 UK general election. This may seem unlikely. But it is perfectly in keeping with the way the SNP has conducted itself in the past. So it cannot be ruled out.

However, she has not-quite-promised that there will be a referendum even if a Section 30 order is refused. Which, of course, makes the whole business of requesting one utterly pointless other than if the aim is to demean the nation and compromise the sovereignty of Scotland’s people. The question then becomes one of how she goes about arranging this referendum. Again, there are options. She could go back to square one and go with the #ManifestoForIndependence actions. This would prompt questions as to why she didn’t just do this in the first place. Those asking such questions would be shouted down by the SNP/Sturgeon loyalists. Because that’s all they can do.

Otherwise, and more likely by a huge margin, she will choose, as she always has, to try and avoid the confrontation with the British state which is inevitable if independence is to be restored. She will do this by proposing a ‘consultative’ or ‘advisory’ referendum that is so toothless that the British will be content to let it go ahead knowing it will not threaten the Union and knowing also that they will be able to say we’ve had our referendum and should drop the whole thing. An assertion that Sturgeon could not dispute as she too would want to claim that she had delivered the promised referendum.

These are the broad brushstrokes. But it’s plain to see that there is absolutely no scope for any ‘Great Secret Plan’.

Unless you know differently, of course. But then, if you know then it’s certain that “the opposition” know as well.

If you find these articles interesting please consider a small donation to help support this site and my other activities on behalf of Scotland’s independence movement.

Donate with PayPal

16 thoughts on “There is no ‘Great Secret Plan’

  1. Hmmm… pretty much sums it up. Unless, of course, Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP step out of the way and stop blocking any avenue that does not require to be led by the SNP: i.e. if the people themselves brought a case and/or if another political party ran with it. Yes, I know, pretty much fantasy, too, right now, but never say never. Dams can be breached. She will, of course, present an advisory referendum when the S30 is refused and it will not be honoured by Westminster or the Unionists – even if it is a YES vote majority. She knows that, too, but it will not be her fault. Except it will, and many will know that, even some of those who are allies against all reason. Somehow, I don’t think even that will breach the dam enough to allow more than a trickle through. I think the breach will come from elsewhere, but coming it is.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. There is no avenue that side-steps the Scottish Government and Scottish Parliament. And only the SNP is the party of government. That isn’t going to change in time to make a difference.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. The possibility of a referendum that is simply an opinion poll by any other name is interesting. It would suit the “activists” in the Scottish Government just fine. No matter what the result it would be business as usual in pursuing the progressive/green agenda while at the same time calling for more shoulders to push on the wheel of independence so next time, surely, it will be successful. With appropriate media involvement just the right amount of spin could be added to show that given all the chaos in the economy, ukraine, pandemics, etc. now was not really the time. That might just work.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. Indeed, Peter, indeed. Which is why the dam needs to be breached. No administration, no parliament, whether at Westminster or at Holyrood can seriously believe they can stand in the way of independence forever when half the population wants it. If they do believe that, they are even more deluded than the men in frocks.

    Liked by 3 people

      1. Maybe. I’d like a wee peek at the census forms which were returned. Basically, they are ignoring many, many old supporters now decamped to ALBA, whatever you think of ALBA. They are ignoring half the population, women, in favour of the trans lobby. They are ignoring the plight of the low-paid working-class suffering from the Brexit bullet (not bounce). The pandemic and the Ukraine crisis are excuses for so much now, with Brexit being ignored, too, as having no relevance six years on. Ay, right! Of course, Nicola Sturgeon knows fine well that she made the biggest mistake of all in not doing something to get us out before Brexit. They are taking their own supporters for idiots and force feeding them carrots. Something will give, Peter, and I rather think it will be sooner rather than later. As I always say, I could be very wrong, though.

        Liked by 4 people

  3. Sorry, meant to add: I’d bet the Census forms turned out to be a massive civil disobedience exercise in that many, many women will have declaimed the gender bits. Anyone who counted them, read them, analyses them, will all see that it was a total mess. I’m not usually one for doing things the same as England, but, in this instance, it should have been held in the same year as the rest of the UK.

    Liked by 5 people

    1. It’s not much of an exercise in civil disobedience if you can only suppose that’s what it might have been. Perhaps the single greatest defining characteristic of civil disobedience is that there’s no mistaking it. It’s obvious. Explicit. It’s easy to say afterwards that it was civil disobedience.

      The TV licence is a case in point. I can’t KNOW, of course. But I’d be happy to bet that only a tiny fraction of those who don’t pay are engaging in civil disobedience. That doesn’t stop the anti-PSB mob from claiming every non-payment as a ‘vote’ for them.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Sorry, I don’t understand you, Peter. I didn’t suppose anything. All the women’s groups in Scotland ensured that it would be an act of civil disobedience. The SNP is claiming that it was a great success but it has been leaked that it was a disaster because, a) not enough people sent it in to make any sense of the data overall and b) the gender issue was well and truly debunked, not making any sense of the data. I’d say that civil disobedience considering you get find normally for defacing the Census form or for not sending one in. Of course, the SNP is not going to advertise that because… Don’t worry, though, more active plans are afoot. At least women are trying to actually do something about their situation instead of baaaa-ing meekly.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. I was only trying to make the point that an act of civil disobedience has to be very evidently that. Like Ghandi and the salt tax protests. Nobody could say that was just tax-dodgers. I may have been a bit clumsy making that point as I was on an ‘unofficial’ break from doing the housework.

          Liked by 1 person

    2. I certainly hope that you are not wrong in thinking, as you say in the previous post, that something will give, sooner rather than later.
      As to this one, I deliberately asked for a printed census form when I found I could not submit the on-line one with out completing the sex/gender question. I sent off the printed version completed apart from that question to make the point that it was that one alone which i disagreed with. A small act of civil disobedience though I think any chance of embarassing those who devised that question, will be lost in the general mess of the whole process, starting with holding it a year late.
      I also refuse to pay the TV licence but, as I so rarely can be bothered to watch anything, it is rather an empty gesture.
      Any other suggestions on a form of civil disobedience are welcome.


  4. Ha ha, I don’t believe you do the housework, Peter. Nah… you probably do, like most of the chaps I know, some of it, anyway. Yes, I do see your point, and I, too, wish there mass civil disobedience, but you can take a horse to the water but you cannot make it drink. People have to find out for themselves. She really, really, can’t afford to muck this up this time, because, if she does or tries to feed us more carrots, she will fall. Like Blair, anything decent that she did do will pale into insignificance beside such treachery and she will go down in history as having betrayed us utterly. No amount of ‘trans’ nonsense is going to erase that culpability. I would actually think a great deal of her if she just dropped this rubbish on the grounds of truth: some 80-90% + of the population does not want it; 50%, however, wants independence. If she wants to leave a legacy, that is it; but it cannot be a shoddy backroom deal with Johnson and President Biden, both poised to become our Nemesis (es?), by keeping the nukes joining NATO without regard to the realities of that step, and enabling fetishists to impose their totalitarian and gender queer theories on us against our will.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.