It is almost physically painful to hear the SNP bleating about the consequences of Brexit (UK accused of ‘outrageous power grab’ as experts sound alarm over EU law bill) when it was the choice of that party’s leadership to let Scotland suffer those consequences. They promised that they would not let Scotland be dragged out of the EU against the will of the people. Then they opted to do nothing whatever to save Scotland from this madness. People can hardly be blamed if they see a political calculation that weighed the welfare of the people against electoral advantage, with the scales tipping in favour of the latter.
The SNP/Scottish Government has had at least a decade to prepare for the British state’s attacks on the Scottish Parliament and the devolution settlement. It was known in 2007 that the British realised their devolution experiment had backfired. The overriding imperative was that the reinstatement of the Scottish Parliament would never put the Union in jeopardy. The SNP forming even a minority government was a clear threat. The SNP landslide of 2011 sealed Holyrood’s fate. The uppity Jocks had to be reined in. What we see now is that process approaching its ultimate aim of imposing direct rule via the UK Government in Scotland. Scotland is being annexed while the SNP/Scottish Government does nothing but whine and make partisan political capital out of the tragedy.
Ten years ago and more, people such as myself were warning that one of the consequences of a No vote in the 2014 referendum would be accelerating erosion of the Scottish Parliament’s powers while ever greater powers accrued to the Scotland Office or other agencies of the British state operating in Scotland. It required no particular perspicacity to foresee this. It was the obvious response to what the British political elite regards – with justification – as a potential threat to the Union and thence to the structures of power, privilege and patronage which constitute the British state. What is happening now is no more than what was bound to happen. And yet the SNP/Scottish Government seems entirely unprepared.
Scotland’s own government made no effective response when Scotland was wrenched from its place in Europe and it is making no effective response as Scotland’s democracy is being dismantled. They are doing nothing!
The foolish and the deceitful will insist that the Scottish Government is acting to save Scotland. They will point to the proposal for a referendum in 2023 and the UK Supreme Court case and the ‘Plan B’ plebiscitary election and they will invite us to wonder at the political genius of a ‘plan’ which has caught the British on the hop and thrown them into turmoil. But the only genius here is in the way people have duped into imagining this ‘plan’ will lead to the restoration of Scotland’s independence when it not only shall not but cannot bring independence so much as a single day closer.
The constitutional implications of first the No vote in 2014 and then Brexit were never a mystery. What has happened and is happening is no more than what was always going to happen. The serial ‘power grabs’ were inevitable. And yet all the SNP has done by way of preparation is to practice throwing up it hands in horror and rehearse cries of “Outrageous!”. All of which is for public consumption while in private they are beavering away at schemes to turn that outrage into votes.
The foolish and the deceitful will insist that it is all about turning that outrage into Yes votes in a constitutional referendum and not merely votes for SNP candidates in this or that election. The problem with that is that (a) there is no evidence of any increase in Yes votes; and (b) there is no plan or proposal for a referendum in which Yes votes would have any effect even if their number increased massively.
Here is the reality! Even if Nicola Sturgeon’s ‘plan’ works perfectly in every regard it still wouldn’t bring independence any closer. The referendum – if it happens – must be won for Yes because the consequences of losing are unthinkable. But Scotland’s cause stands to gain absolutely nothing from the win. The same is true of the silly de facto referendum idea.
Over the next three to five years the British state will finalise its complete annexation of Scotland with a ‘reformed’ Union that effectively subsumes our nation in ‘Greater England’ – although it will be called ‘Great Britain’. That is as foreseeable a certainty as the consequences of a No vote in 2014 were in 2012 and the constitutional implications of a Leave vote in 2016 were in 2015. We know this is going to happen. The foolish and the deceived only imagine the SNP/Scottish Government intends to do anything to save Scotland from this certain fate. Nicola Sturgeon’s ‘plan’ is a plan to pretend to be acting while doing nothing that can possible avert the tragedy.
Five years from now I expect to be sitting in Perth, Greater England listening to the SNP telling me how outrageous it all is.
Peter A Bell 
I’m sensing there is a growing realisation on the part of folks on doorsteps that what you describe is happening. I’m trying to convince myself that this is not “a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest” to quote Paul Simon, but maybe we’ll see tomorrow in South Glasgow & Dec 1st in West Lothian. If that worm isn’t turning yet then other more direct strategies need to be employed.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Monday 17 April 2023 demo at Holyrood? An exercise in arse-kicking?
LikeLiked by 2 people
It was October 2021 and the Supreme Court render a judgement on two Bills presented to the Scottish Parliament. An extract from the SC judgement:
“The Supreme Court unanimously decides that sections 6, 19(2)(a)(ii), 20(10)(a)(ii) and 21(5)(b)(ii) of the UNCRC Bill and sections 4(1A) and 5(1) of the ECLSG Bill would be outside the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament.”
One of the reasons given for that judgement was this:
“Section 28(7) of the Scotland Act preserves the unqualified power of the UK Parliament to make laws for Scotland. If any provision of an Act of the Scottish Parliament purports to modify section 28(7) of the Scotland Act, it will contravene section 29(2)(c) of that Act, read together with paragraph 4(1) of Schedule 4 to that Act, and will therefore fall outside the competence of the Scottish Parliament.”
We now await a further Supreme Court judgement, and I speculate that if the above factors (and more) play their part, Scotland and its people will be told that it is outwith the powers of the Scottish Parliament to hold a Referendum not just in October 2023, but on any future date, precedent will have been established.
I also speculate that result, if it occurs, will radically change the nature of the debate within Scotland, in many different and important ways, not least in the reaction it will provoke.
Just my 2p ….only time will tell.
LikeLiked by 4 people
I wonder about that reaction, Mike. Why would it be any greater than reaction to the judgement to which you refer? Why would it exceed reaction to Brexit being imposed on Scotland despite our 62% Remain vote? Why would the reaction be any more pronounced than reaction to the denial of Scotland’s right to decide?
It’s always the next thing that’s going to be the big thing. It always has been the next thing that is going to be the big thing. I suspect it always will be the next thing that is going to be the big thing. It is likely that the SNP/Scottish Government can spin this out until it won’t matter how big the next thing is, it will never be big enough.
There seems to be no end to the gullibility of Sturgeon/SNP loyalists. If it’s what Nicola wants they’ll spend decades believing we’ve ‘never been closer to independence’. They’ll happily chase an endless string of big things always believing that the big thing they are chasing is THE big thing only to be told on getting that big thing that there’s another big thing to be won.
It is possible to break free from this cycle of frantic ineffectuality. But the SNP/Scottish Government won’t do it and the Yes movement won’t make them do it. So we’re fucked.
#DissolveTheUnion #ScottishUDI
LikeLiked by 4 people
It was deliberate on my part to end with “only time will tesll” but I do hold the belief that what (when) we hear the ruling from the Supreme Court, it will have an importance – quite what depends on what the ruling is.
Yes you can have a referendum – your comments and conclusions are only too accurate. Opinion polls don’t win independence.
No you can’t – ever, legal precedent is now set – will I believe have consequences, perhaps not yet fully understood – thus my speculation, …. only time will tell.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think I can help you out there, Mike. Whatever way the court case goes the position remains exactly as it is now. We wait on Nicola Sturgeon ‘demanding’ a Section 30 order only to be rebuffed then listen to her pleading for another mandate at the next election so she can ‘demand’ a Section 30 order again and be told to fuck off again.
If it’s yes from the court we have a referendum which, if Yes wins, means only that Nicola Sturgeon will ‘demand’ a Section 30 order and be told to bugger off (by way of introducing a wee change from ‘fuck off’).
If/when the Section 30 order is refused yet again, we move on to a plebiscitary election – which is a joke. But supposing we win in Sturgeon’s terms all that then happens is that she ‘demands’ a Section 30 order.
When that demand is treated with the now routine contempt, Nicola says we have to give her another mandate so she can ‘demand’ a Section 30 order again but honest it’ll be different this time because of reasons.
There is literally no end to it. Except #ScottishUDI, of course. But Nicola Sturgeon will only do that if she if forced to. Only the Yes movement – the Scottish people – can force her. But they’ve got other stuff going on so fuck it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The SNP at Westminster and Holyrood really are just like The British Labour Party in Scotland used to be: All piss and wind.
We are asked to support them and lend them our votes periodically in return for on-going and never-ending bluff and bluster.
Their collective gusts of hot and humid air are akin to farting into a hurricane and they don’t care. They know this but they don’t care.
LikeLiked by 6 people
Reblogged this on Ramblings of a now 60+ Female.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, indeed, Peter. You and all the bloggers were warning that this would happen. It was clear to anyone who gave it any thought. Sorry, but I’m just about done with it all. If people won’t listen, there is little you can do. If the SNP deliberately throws obstacles in its own path – and ours – what can you do? Something will give very soon and it won’t be pretty. Alternatively, the West will eventually provoke Russia into a nuclear war and it will all be academic. Fulminating about “Russian rockets” falling on Poland, then, “… maybe they weren’t Russian… “. Duh! The Ukrainians use Russian-made weapons, too, and they have done for many years. It could have been either side. We are being used like a snotty hanky by Westminster and Whitehall and the chaps on Thames Embankment. Scotland is the front-line here. If we do not get out from under, there will always be the threat of another war to keep us chained. UDI – and very soon, or that something will give. I cannot express my contempt for the SNP and its rainbow warriors who would be about as much use as a tissue if a real war started.
LikeLiked by 4 people
I’m sure you’ll be on the front line if a war broke out.
LikeLike
Well, yes I will be, so will you and everyone else on this thread because we will have no choice. Your sarcasm is noted, Alec. Do you really think that that the nukes at Faslane will discriminate between non-combatants and combatants if they are triggered or that an enemy nuke will care whether I or you or anyone else is a soldier or a civilian? Get real, man.
You evidently did not read my post properly. The least we should expect from our elected representatives, who, incidentally, have a duty of care towards each and every one of us, is that they do not intentionally set out to harm us and that they at least try to minimise the harm that can be done. I would applaud the SNP and its leadership for some of the welfare advances made – give credit where it’s due – but on defence, independence and this vile and dangerous GRA reform nonsense, they have failed us badly.
The nukes were there before even I was around, so I can and would not blame them entirely for that and I can’t blame them for the dirty tricks pulled by the establishment on independence. Nevertheless, they have done little to nothing about having the nukes removed from Scottish soil and little to nothing about independence except place it very firmly within the grasp of Westminster, always following the Westminster defence and social policy line after much bluster.
On the GRA nonsense, they have deliberately, in the face of a massive body of evidence, pushed this dangerous stuff through, and, in the end, if they get their way, it will prove to be just as deleterious to Scots and Scotland as the lack of independence or the presence of the nukes. Deliberately putting your population in harm’s way has been a staple of political careers. It needs to stop. We need to stop putting ineffectual people into political power and psychopaths into commercial power over our lives. You evidently think otherwise.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Do I ?
LikeLike
Actually, I agree with a lot of what you write, although not all.
LikeLike
That is your prerogative, Alec.
LikeLike
from: https://timeforscotland.scot/about-the-rally/local-events
Get involved
The Supreme Court will announce its decision on Wednesday 23 November. There are plenty ways to make your voices heard. If you plan to be active that day please contact one of the eight rally organisers listed below – or just turn up. Above all register on this website for all the latest about all the rallies.
Mibbies will see some of youse regular commenters in Perth?
I’ll be the one wearing the aspidistra in my lapel. 😉
LikeLike
Why?
LikeLike
Because we are human. We have hope.
If you don’t try, you never win.
↪ in reply to Peter A Bell
anonynat scott 4 hrs ago
User ID: 1709930
Really positive images of indy supporters went right round the globe that night. The chances are very high that we can do it again the day the Supreme Court’s decision is announced. But we need to gather that same day – not wait till it’s more convenient.
Unlike previous Prime Ministers, independence campaigners will not be attacking the legal system or dismissing judges as ‘enemies of the union’. But if the verdict goes against the Scottish Government we will ask how on earth the nation of Scotland – supposedly an equal partner in the UK – can ever hold a lawful vote about its own future.
Time for Scotland rallies across Scotland will lay that challenge directly at the door of Number Ten.
↪ in reply to anonynat scott
anonynat scott 4 hrs ago
User ID: 1709930
and similarly the public mailshot:
We need positive images of Yessers beamed around the globe on Wednesday night.
Unlike previous Prime Ministers, independence campaigners will not be attacking the legal system or dismissing judges as ‘enemies of the people’. But if the verdict goes against the Scottish Government we will ask how on earth the nation of Scotland – supposedly an equal partner in the UK – can ever hold a lawful vote about its own future.
Time for Scotland rallies across Scotland will lay that challenge directly at the door of Number Ten. Will you be there?
Get your blank banner ready raring to go for Wednesday. Win loose or draw it will be Time for Scotland.
If it rules in favour of the Scottish Government, then its game on for indyref2 next October and we should celebrate that fact.
If the Court rules against, we need to ask how on earth Scotland can legally and democratically vote to leave the union. If judgement is reserved in any way, we should be restating that now IS the time and that the Scottish people are sovereign.
LikeLike
Some sort of collective hysterical blindness has afflicted the Yes movement in the matter of what this court case is about. And, of course, the reality of Nicola Sturgeon’s plan. It’s quite an astonishing phenomenon. Because the effort at deceit has been minimal. It almost entirely relies on people’s willingness to be deceived. Or should that be eagerness?
I am not, of course, the only person in Scotland to have seen through the scam of Sturgeon’s ‘plan’ – the mock referendum and the joke plebiscitary election. That would be truly odd. But it is the sheer numbers of people who have been taken in that is astonishing. Even people I know to be quite intelligent and perceptive have abandoned their intellect in favour of this collective madness.
Nobody thinks. A question such as my “Why?” is supposed to prompt thought. But nobody thinks. They suppose the answer to be obvious because they’ve lighted upon an answer which they are comfortable with. Precious few appear to have learned the number one rule of analytical thought – keep asking the questions until you get to the answers that you are NOT comfortable with.
Almost everyone has answered the question by explaining – as if it was not obvious – that if there is an event then it matters how well attended it is. They have their answer. They like that answer. They stop thinking. They probe no further. They will even insist that there is no further to be probed because that is the whole of it. There is NEVER a point at which all possible questions have been asked, far less answered.
The shallow explanation that such events have to be well-attended fails to address the question of why the rallies are being held in the first place. What is it about this UKSC judgement which makes its publication an occasion for mass demonstrations? What is it about the issue before the court which makes it important enough to warrant any kind of event? The questions are all there. But I’ve yet to encounter anyone who has thought to ask them.
I asked the question because the way people answer it provides some insight into what they suppose the answers to the marginally deeper questions would be should they have thought to ask them. I generalise. But I think it’s fair to say that the vast majority of people in the Yes movement who have made their views known are highly excited about the UKSC judgement because they think it is important. They think it is important because it has some significance for Scotland’s cause. They think it is significant because they think the judgement will add to or alter the debate around the constitutional issue.
I almost all cases, they suppose the judgement to be important because it relates to a proposal for a constitutional referendum in 2023. They imagine this proposed referendum will be a decisive moment for Scotland’s cause.
They are wrong on every count. But more importantly, they don’t care if they are wrong. Even if they were aware of how wrong they were, they wouldn’t care. Because the reality is just too discomfiting.
Nobody is at all interested in thinking about the reasons these rallies are happening. There may be numerous reasons. But folk tend to stick with their favourite and not ask any more questions. Very few, therefore, will come to the realisation that far from the least of these reasons is to build up the hype around the whole affair. It suits certain people just fine if independence activists are too busy marching and cheering and yelling slogans to stop and think about the reason for all this commotion. The rallies make the judgement seem important which in turn makes the 2023 referendum seem important. If everybody – or nearly everybody is convinced of that – they will be ready to be used. If they believe they are working towards something momentous then they can be more easily persuaded to do whatever is asked of them on the grounds that it is all in the name of this momentous purpose.
So, the rallies will happen and everybody will be roaring about the UKSC and the Westminster government and the Tories and nobody will be shouting at Nicola Sturgeon and the Scottish Government. Which is what they would be doing if they’d really thought about the question – why?
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’ll be going to Holyrood or Perth. If noone goes it’ll look like noone gives a fuck. I do give a fuck, so I’ll go in order to demonstrate that. I’m not sure what else I can do. Having some evidence that other people do give a fuck is a motivator to continue demonstrating that you do give a fuck, which is why I also stand on bridges every so often with a couple of other fuck givers and wave yes flags at the traffic, a surprisingly large proportion of which demonstrates what looks very much like enthusiasm for our communications, suggesting they might give a fuck too. It keeps us aff the streets I suppose.
LikeLike
I’ll be going to Glasgow, Buchanan Street, Conert Hall steps, 5pm – 7pm – if my legs keep improving (I had an infection and an itchy purpuric allergy rash to go with it but it’s finally clearing up after weeks – I have more creams than Fox’s).
Why?
I largely agree with Joanna Cherry, but as I’m Not A Lawyer I can be more forthright in my opinion, and fair comments.
The UKSC can rule the referral premature. This is a weak evasion of their responsibility to the Rule of Law, and totally disrespects the Lord Advocate, Scotland’s highest law Officer. She has asked a straight question in accordance with the Law, as to whether she can advise the Minister of the eligibility of the Bill the Minister wishes to introduce to Parliament. This is her right, her specific privilege, and indeed her duty. She can clearly NOT produce the final passed Bill as this is the duty of our democratically elected Parliament, not her – that would be some sort of autocracy not a democracy. They should answer her question, or completely abrogate their responsibilities to the Rule of Law, and show their contempt of our “pretendy” Parliament.
If they do this I want to be in the company of fellow democracy supporters on the Concert Hall steps to protest with very loud boos. The world media will hopefully observe and comment that democracy is indeed, dead in the UK.
The UKSC can rule that the proposed Bill is not within the competence of our Parliament. If they do so they are not only interpreting “reserved matters” in far too broad a sense hence stymying our Parliament at Holyrood in the execution of its duly elected duties, they are saying in effect that the People of Scotland are not – a People – and hence do not have the right to self-determination.
If they do this I want to be in the company of fellow democracy supporters on the Concert Hall steps to protest with very loud boos – and perhaps to discuss next steps like higher legal action, and a regular series of mass protests. Or a Referendum organised by US, the People. Or by MSPs on our behalf who will otherise be sacked at the next Holyrood election. We ARE a People, and have the right to the form of Government – and its composition – we choose.
The UKSC can rule that the Referendum can go ahead.
If they do this I want to be in the company of fellow democracy supporters on the Concert Hall steps, not just to cheer and celebrate, but to show that Indy Ref 2 must then go ahead on October 19th 2023 with no excuses and no delays.
LikeLiked by 1 person
On the article by Riddocj I’m going to agree with these comments:
“I’ll be at the rally in Glasgow!”
“We can only hope, but here’s the thing – will Nicola or Pete or Ian or Kirsten or Alyn or Mhairi or Chris or any of that bunch be there?”
and
“So whats the chances of NS addressing the crowds ? Ill be outside Holyrood to see.”
Sturgeon should address the crowd at Holyrood – and should announce that beforehand. I’ll repeat that fpr the hard of hearing, and it will become a refrain at least by me:
Sturgeon should address the crowd at Holyrood – and should announce that beforehand.
LikeLike
“Sturgeon should address the crowd at Holyrood- and should announce that beforehand”. FFS whit’s she gonnae tell ye?– that the Supreme Court has barred her fae dishin’ oot ony mair carrots!
yesindyref2, you are indeed a “lost cause”
LikeLiked by 2 people
If you think it’s all a bluff and she’s dangling carrots while applying for jobs with the UN and laughing all the way to the bank with two large salaries with her fake husband stashed away in the Balmoral Hotel along with her box of French Fancies while the large staff don’t notice a single thing, no problem.
Go to one of the 10 rallies next wednesday with your YES badge, Saltire, a big bunch of carrots for her to munch on, and a box of Mr Kiplings to keep you going and CALL HER BLUFF.
Wha daur meddle wi’ me.
LikeLike
“Skye and Inverurie join indyref2 verdict rallies bringing total to 10”
https://www.thenational.scot/news/23132113.skye-inverurie-join-indyref2-verdict-rallies-bringing-total-10/
It would be good to have a whole load of people out next wednesday the 23rd November to show the world we mean business. Pass it on to your family, friends and yes groups, and please, every blog but up an article about it and links. Remember the days Wings used to push these rallies and marches?
Who’ll do it now?
Wha daur meddle wi’ me.
LikeLike
With the arrival into Scotland of perhaps another half a million (or more) ‘No’ voters since 2014, a further referendum again using Holyrood’s irregular ‘local government’ franchise suggests independence is already lost by that method. Which is maybe why the UKSC might well give the OK for SG to undertake a consultation process, something it often does anyway concerning a range of issues, and which may or may not lead to subsequent legislation. I suppose it must be merely a coincidence that the recent Scottish census data is still being kept secret. Not much to celebrate no matter what the UKSC opinion is. Its just as well independence does not depend on a dubious referendum.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Weel stated alfbaird. Whaur I bide oan the Isle o’ Skye theres nae need o’ a census tae confirm oor right tae national franchise is aboot tae be usurped by marauders frae anither airt.
We hiv wi’ oot doot a sair fecht oan oor haun’s tae preserve oor identity as Scots.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“With the arrival into Scotland of perhaps another half a million (or more) ‘No’ voters since 2014”
Someone’s been feeding you some duff disinformation there Alf. As you can see from this on page 3, the total net migration in from 2014 is around 9,000 a year from the rest of the UK for a total of just 72,000 net migration in from the rest of the UK.
The figure from the rest of the world is higher, but it seems they’re evenly split YES and NO from surveys.
So at most there’s maybe 36,000 more NO voters since 2014, not 500,000!
You need to be carfeful who you believe, there’s agents provocateurs trying unsuccessfully to tar the Indy Movement with anti-Englishness. Don’t be caught out!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sorry, I missed out the URL from the National Records for Scotland:
Click to access pop-proj-2020-scot-nat-pub.pdf
LikeLike
Net migration is not the issue. You do not seem to be aware what is happening in terms of those holding to a Scottish culture/identity, as the basis of the Yes vote, which is falling, and those holding to another culture/identity, forming the basis of the No vote, which is rising. Scotland’s historically low birth rate is also a factor in this regard, which also seems to have passed you by. And the census results are still kept secret, not that you seem to bother. Perhaps you are simply unable to compute what is happening to Scotland’s population, in the absence of any border controls, or property/land sale restrictions, and with a large populated neighbouring country?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Net migration is PRECISELY the issue.
The census results are NOT kept secret, there is no madcap conspiracy, they are going through the phases.
Current phase is “consultation on census outputs to seek feedback on our plans“.
Next is: “We plan to start publishing census information from 2023 onwards.”
https://www.scotlandscensus.gov.uk/about/2022-census/scotland-s-census-2022-what-happens-next/
Sorry Alf, you’ve been fed more disinformation with “it’s a secret”, and you seem to have swallowed it whole.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Okey-doke. Having a spare hour I finally copied the data from NRS into my own spreadsheets and did some very simple summation.
National Records of Scotland is the official register for Scotland, your birth, marriage and, err, in a good few decades hopefully, death, are registered there. The statistics below are apparently taken from GP registers. Those tables are accessible from here:
https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/statistics-and-data/statistics/statistics-by-theme/migration/migration-statistics/migration-flows
and here’s the sums from the data “by age”:
Net migration between Scotland and the rest of the UK
Year All ages 0-64 65-90+ % of 65+
2014-21 65,539 60,691 4,848 7%
Net migration between Scotland and International excluding rUK
Year All ages 0-64 65-90+ % of 65+
2014-21 113,779 115,333 -1,554 -1%
So please let that be an end to being fooled by the PUDU – the Precious Union Disinformation Unit.
No worries 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I would maintain that ‘net migration’ is not the main issue when it comes to the matter of independence. What matters is the national identity and sense of belonging of the people seeking liberation and changes in that regard. What we see in Scotland is an ongoing change in the national identity/sense of belonging of the overall population, which in colonialism usually occurs through cultural assimilation but also via migration (‘settler occupation’ coupled with historic ‘banishment of natives’). Independence is also known to become more difficult where a population becomes culturally diverse, which is again at odds with SNP SG policy.
Language is critical here as it is only their indigenous language (and culture) which gives a people their own national identity and national consciousness, and hence the desire for nationhood. You will be aware that the Scots remain deprived of learning their language, a human richt tae oor ain mither tongue, such deprivation being a feature of colonialism. The 2011 census stated there were only 1.6 million Scots speakers remaining out of a population over 5m which suggests the majority (two-thirds) of people in Scotland are Anglophone. Fifty years ago, for those us going back that far, it would easily have been the reverse. Today the number of Scots language speakers will probably be closer to 1m.
Language and changing demographics are therefore two critical aspects of independence, which suggests your emphasis primarily on the basic arithmetic calculation of ‘net migration’ is not a key factor here.
Click to access The-Socio-Political-Determinants-of-Scottish-Independence.pdf
LikeLiked by 1 person
You said earlier and I quote:
“With the arrival into Scotland of perhaps another half a million (or more) ‘No’ voters since 2014”
so that was nonsense wasn’t it, considering that in that time the total of net migration from the rUK was just 65,539 in the 7 years up to mid-2021, and from the rest of the world just 113,779 in those 7 years – a grand total of 179,318 – including YES voters?
Even if every single one of them, and another 55,000 up to mid-2023 for a total of 234,000 was a NO voter, that still isn’t “perhaps another half million (or more) ‘No’ voters since 2014“, now is it?
At a highly unlikely 75% of them being NO voters, it would make just 117,000 and since worldwide voters split more like 50-50 according to polls, far less than 100,000.
Perhaps as little as 40,000 at most – less than one-tenth of that grossly exaggerated “half a million (or more)”, isn’t it?
So you were misinformed and won’t be making such wrong claims again, will you?
Will you?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Like I said, ‘net migration’ is not the main issue here; rather, in the context of independence, the ‘absolute’ change in the identity of the voting population is what is important.
As a further illustration of this, you may (or may not) also be aware that the Scottish population has been growing primarily through in-migration over the past 20 years or so, according to the census. This is therefore a relatively recent phenomenon. The Scottish population has grown by some half a million since 1999, mostly due to people coming from rest-UK, with the ‘Scottish’ birth rate now being the lowest on record and lowest of all UK nations.
Post indyref14 survey data suggests that people from rest-UK have the highest propensity to vote ‘No’. Your handle suggests you want another indyref yet you appear rather ill-informed about significant recent and ongoing changes in the voting population for any indyref. Almost as if you want to take folks up a blind alley! Why did you think the ‘Yes’ vote has not been increasing?
LikeLiked by 1 person
“The Scottish population has grown by some half a million since 1999, mostly due to people coming from rest-UK”
Nope, wrong again, according to the NRS:
net migration between Scotland and the rest of the UK
2001-21 – 165,378
net migration between Scotland and the rest of the world
2001-21 – 269,079
Total net migration was 434,457 – close to the half a million when 1999-2001 are added in and 2021-22, but most is from the rest of the world, NOT the rest of the UK. In fact it’s 62% from the Rest of the World, and just 38% from the rUK.
“Almost as if you want to take folks up a blind alley!”
I want the debate to be informed by genuine facts not agenda driven make-believe.
How about you? Fact like me – or fantasy?
LikeLiked by 1 person
You are, of course, (roughly) correct Alf regarding the volumes of migrators into Scotland.
The NRS data shows that between mid-2014 and mid-2020 the number of persons moving into Scotland from the rest of the UK (rUK) was 278100 and from outside the UK (oUK) the total was 223100. (Data Figure 4 on this link shows that: https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nrscotland.gov.uk%2Ffiles%2F%2Fstatistics%2Fpopulation-estimates%2Fmid-20%2Fmid-year-pop-est-20-figures.xlsx&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK).
For 2020-21 the volumes were 56186 and 8194 from rUK and oUK, respectively. (Table 5 on this link shows this: https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nrscotland.gov.uk%2Ffiles%2F%2Fstatistics%2Fpopulation-estimates%2Fmid-21%2Fmid-year-pop-est-21-data.xlsx&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK)
So a total of 334298 (rUK) and 264100 (oUK) and a grand total of 598398 between mid-2014 and mid-2021 according to the NRS.
Evidence from the Scottish Referendum Study (Prof James Mitchell, Edinburgh University: https://blogs.sps.ed.ac.uk/scottishreferendumstudy/files/2015/03/Scottish-Referendum-Study-27-March-2015.pdf) indicates that rUK and oUK voters in the 2014 referendum were predominately NO voters and very much so in the case of rUK voters (72%).
Of course, there have also been population outflows from Scotland too – 418924 between mid-2014 and mid-2021 again according to the same NRS sources named above. What matters is the composition of these ‘leavers’ and the NRS records for 2020-21 – the only year for which they have an age breakdown – shows that two-thirds of this total is comprised of those aged 34 and under. That is, those who are most inclined to vote Yes (which is 65%-72% depending on which opinion polling firm’s survey results you consult).
So, a double whammy against the chances of YES in any future referendum using the same rules as in 2014.
I, therefore, agree it is the structure of the population change that counts rather than a simple ‘net’ impact of migrations in and out of Scotland.
LikeLike
Nicola Sturgeon and the W.E.F. – says it all for me. Indpendence? Not a hope.
LikeLike
One more myth – “flatlining” of the YES vote. In fact according to the BSA / SSAS page 12 “Table 4 Attitudes in Scotland towards how Scotland should be governed, 1999-2021”:
Click to access bsa39_constitutional-reform.pdf
Year – – – 2014 – 2015 – 2016 – 2017 – 2019 – 2021
Indy – – – – 33 – – – 39 – – – 46 – – – 45 – – – 51 – – – 52
Devo – – – 50 – – – 49 – – – 42 – – – 41 – – – 36 – – – 38
No Parl – – 7 – – – – 6 – – – – 8 – – – – 8 – – – – 7 – – – – 8
So, contrary to popular misconception, since 2015, support for Indy has risen from 39% to 52%, at the expense of Devolution which has dropped from 49% to 38%.
Hope that formats OK, and – time for a well-deserved cuppa 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
FFS! This moron doesn’t know the difference between opinion polls and the attitudes survey! The stupidity is astounding!
LikeLiked by 2 people
If you don’t automatically understand the significance of 1.96 and 2.58, then perhaps you should ask people that do, before you make any amateur comment about polls or surveys, or surveys containing polls.
As it is, I’m afraid you’re a rectangular example of a triple regression.
LikeLike
You’re a fucking idiot. The attitudes survey is NOT the polls. Only a total shithead would make the kind of direct comparison you did. No amount of subsequent blather will conceal your idiocy.
The POLLS have flatlined since 2014. That is a fact. You are a buffoon. That is another fact.
Average for Yes in the 12 polls using 2014 question subsequent to Nicola Sturgeon becoming FM = 45.25%
Average for the 12 most recent polls using 2014 question = 44.42%
FLATLINED!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Dear me Peter, you’re a bit like that Luddite who said:
“FFS what a moron. How am I supposed to get my saddle over that big lump of metal?”.
I suspect you’re a bit peaked, perhaps you should have a student’s tea, or maybe even get a bit skewed!
LikeLike
Average for Yes in the 12 polls using 2014 question subsequent to Nicola Sturgeon becoming FM = 45.25%
Average for the 12 most recent polls using 2014 question = 44.42%
FLATLINED!
LikeLiked by 1 person
OMG you didn’t remove the don’t knows first.
OMG
LikeLike
Average for Yes in the 12 polls using 2014 question subsequent to Nicola Sturgeon becoming FM = 45.25%
Average for the 12 most recent polls using 2014 question = 44.42%
FLATLINED!
#DissolveTheUnion #ScottishUDI
LikeLiked by 1 person
And “FLATLINED” is the best that you can say!
Accumulating the YES% weighted by volume for those pollsters carrying out surveys post 2014 referendum to date:
Panelbase:
30 Oct-5 Nov 2014: 51% (1st poll); 7-10 Oct 2022: 48% (50 polls accumulated)
Survation:
6-13 Nov 2014: 48% (1st poll); 24-28 Mar 2022: 48% (45 polls accumulated)
Ipsos:
24-30 Aug 2015: 55% (1st poll); 13-19 Oct 2022: 52% (16 polls accumulated)
The only other polling firm that has carried out surveys consistently since 2014 is Yougov but they don’t publish volumes related to the Yes% and No% therefore no weighting can be applied. But on a simple average:
Yougov:
27-30 Oct 2014: 52% (1st poll); 30 Sep-4 Oct 2022: 47% (39 polls accumulated)
So either flatlined or down (although up on actual referendum result of 45%).
All numbers are sourced from the Polling firms own websites where the detailed data tables are stored and published.
LikeLike
Anyways, as well as not being able to do stats you can’t even do maths.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_on_Scottish_independence
Last 12 opinion polls doing it your amateur way (SGP would be speechless and so would mathematicians), and removing the don’t knows:
YES – NO -Tot – Result
50 – 43 – 93 – 53.76
46 – 49 – 95 – 48.42
47 – 47 – 94 – 50.00
43 – 45 – 88 – 48.86
45 – 46 – 91 – 49.45
42 – 47 – 89 – 47.19
46 – 48 – 94 – 48.94
48 – 47 – 95 – 50.53
39 – 45 – 84 – 46.42
44 – 46 – 90 – 48.89
45 – 46 – 91 – 49.45
38 – 46 – 84 – 45.24
TOTAL – – – – – 587.15
Average of 12 = 48.93%
That’s not 44.42%. I suggest you leave maths to the numerate rather than shouting out and swearing how ignorant you are!
LikeLike
The reason a mathematician would be speechless by the way, is that you wouldn’t quote that many decimal places working on rounded data – you’d go back to the raw data and work out the percentages unrounded (or just add all the data together). Ho hum.
LikeLike
That mathematician might also be speechless in regard to your simplistic emphasis on ‘net change’ as opposed to ‘absolute change’ in the structure of a population; the latter is clearly of greater significance when it comes to constitutional voting intentions which are heavily influenced by the overall change in the national identity of a population.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh Alf, why can’t you just admit you got it badly wrong? Very badly wrong?
YOU said:
“With the arrival into Scotland of perhaps another half a million (or more) ‘No’ voters since 2014”
when the official National Records of Scotland show that less than half that number of people IN TOTAL, whether YES or NO – less than 200,000 in total – migrated in Net in that time, making your claim about half a million – which is 500,000 – something even an early primary school pupil would tell you is total nonsense.
And there is no proof at all that now there would be any more NO than YES voters. Brexit happened since 2014, and everything changed.
and then YOU said:
“The Scottish population has grown by some half a million since 1999, mostly due to people coming from rest-UK”
when the official National Records of Scotland show that it’s mostly people from the rest of the world – 62%, whereas from the rUK it’s just 38%. You even got that detail wrong.
Just admit it and move on, even if it does blow your thesis to smithereens. Long-term you’ll get more respect for that.
LikeLike
I believe you are mistaken and that the census tells us that the numbers of people moving to Scotland from rest-UK consistently exceed those coming from all other nations combined. National Records of Scotland also stated in 2020 that: ‘Migration has been adding to Scotland’s population for the last 20 years’.
The fact remains, and much as the census confirms, that without independence a country simply has no control over what happens to its population, or control over much else such as even the national language taught. In such scenarios the national identity, national consciousness and national allegiance of the population will inevitably alter.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“I believe you are mistaken”
Not me Alf, the National Records of Scotland (INRS), the official records. The census is not published yet, so the census tells us nothing until it is published – which won’t be until 2023.
Yes, NRS tell us that net migration in 20 years was nearly 500,000, 62% of that from the rest of the world and just 38% from the rest of the UK so migration from the rest of the world exceeded that from the rUK (nearly double), the total opposite of what you wrongly assert.
And the census can not confirm anything you assert at the moment, because it is not published yet.
LikeLike