It is amusing to find someone like Gordon MacIntyre-Kemp talking about the constitutional issue in terms some of us arrived at several years ago, only to be dismissed as fools or worse by him and other members of the independence movement’s old guard. As I recall, Pete Wishart called us “zoomers” among other such abusive terms. Now, they are all slowly coming to the realisation that the “zoomers” were right all along.
Of course, they announce these borrowed ideas as if they are the product of their own fresh thinking. Something none of them have exhibited evidence of to date, while some have treated novel ideas as some kind of heresy. Not that we should be precious about such things. Personally, it would trouble me not in the slightest if Gordon MacIntyre-Kemp had lifted the material literatim from my articles on #ScottishUDI. If it serves Scotland’s cause, I’ll turn a blind eye to relatively trivial matters like plagiarism.
What I will not do is allow myself to get carried away with something that has the superficial appearance of a blossoming epiphany among those heretofore wholly subscribed to the Sturgeon doctrine. It pays to be cautious. One would be wise to attend very carefully to the form of words used.
I have not yet read the document in full – I couldn’t find it on the BfS website and have not yet got around to trying to recall all the ‘subsidiaries’ launched by Gordon MacIntyre-Kemp over the years. But even among the snippets contained in the Sunday National article one finds phrases that demonstrate why it is advisable not to take these apparently epiphanous pronouncements at face value. Take the following, for example.
…the Scottish Government, would then invite the UK Government to “join negotiations on the terms of Scotland’s independence”
Believe in Scotland unveils its route map to independence at General Election
There we have it! Confirmation that Gordon MacIntyre-Kemp’s mind is not yet fully decolonised. He all too readily slips back into the ‘old ways’ of deferring to Westminster.
The British state cannot ‘grant’ Scotland independence. The UK Government has no role in deciding the terms on which our independence is restored. Gordon MacIntyre-Kemp may insist that what he’s referring to is the post-independence settlement. But if that is what he meant, that is what he should have said.
But let’s not be ungracious. Or ungrateful for what may be promising signs of a shift of perspective coming from those previously in thrall to the severely limited thinking of Nicola Sturgeon on the matter of a process by which Scotland’s independence might be restored. I suppose it was inevitable that all strands of thinking on the matter would eventually converge on #ScottishUDI as the only viable process. Gordon MacIntyre-Kemp isn’t quite there yet. But he’s edging towards it.
What next, I wonder? Are we soon to see Pete Wishart declare that he was always in favour of a genuinely radical approach to the constitutional issue?
Peter A Bell 
“Of course, they announce these borrowed ideas as if they are the product of their own fresh thinking.”
Quite.
I couldn’t find the 4 page paper either although judging by the wordy reportage in The National GM-K’s thinking seems to be convoluted and wooly at the same time. Quite a feat.
Maybe he’s waiting for feedback and ideas from the likes of yourselves and others in order to clarify “his” thinking?
“It is understood to have been sent to all pro-independence party leaders who have elected MPs or MSPs on Friday evening.”
This could be code for GM-K to act as intermediary between the warring pro-Independence parties. We know he’s an SNP mouthpiece so he could be their delegate to open discussions with the Alba Party, ISP etc as the SNP leadership cannot bring themselves to discuss directly with other nationalists politicians? Just a thought.
“The process in the event of a double-majority mandate that BiS recommends is the re-establishment of the Scottish Constitutional Convention, including all stakeholders based in Scotland, including political parties, trade unions, charities, religious organisations and civic societies”
Hmmnn … that could be done now. And was promised on 31st January 2020 by Nicola Sturgeon in her Brexit capitulation speech. Why is another ‘mandate’ required for setting this up?
“The convention, in partnership with the Scottish Government, would then invite the UK Government to “join negotiations on the terms of Scotland’s independence””.
Discussion of apportionment of joint assets and liabilities that’s all. Otherwise you’re not on!
“The convention would meet and design a framework for Scotland to “become an independent nation and agree on a legally and democratically acceptable path to Scotland’s independence within four years of this General Election””.
Legally acceptable under which set of laws? Why would it take four years of this General Election?
“The proposal states that if the UK Government refuses to engage, then “the Scottish Constitutional Convention will begin the process under its own auspices and through the power of the undisputed Claim of Right of the Scottish people””.
If GM-K believes the Claim of Right is undisputed i.e. that the Scottish people as sovereign and what we say goes then that principle isn’t deployed AFTER the Brits don’t play ball. It’s in play all the time. It’s omnipresent. It just is.
But I suppose it’s some kind of progress:
Manifesto for Independence – Slow Learners edition
LikeLiked by 4 people
Your questions seem appropriate on the basis of what is reported. But for all we know the answers might be in the actual document. Can it sensibly be described as having been “unveiled” when it remains concealed?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Judith Duffy also reports in the National (https://archive.is/0qZDt#selection-1721.31-1721.308). that “there should be debate and discussion over what is the best way forward to draw up a plan that independence campaigners can get behind.
The first of the SNP regional assemblies kicking off in Central Scotland yesterday offers hope there will be the opportunity for party members to do this. It’s a conversation which the wider independence movement should of course also be involved with.”
I get the distinct impression that they are trawling FOR ideas rather than trailing THEIR ideas. And at the moment these ideas have only been discussed within the SNP or SNP affiliated persons and organisations.
We’ll see (maybe).
LikeLiked by 1 person
“It is understood to have been sent to all pro-independence party leaders who have elected MPs or MSPs on Friday evening.”
Unless I have forgotten some other Political Party who ‘have elected MPs or MSPs’, that would seem to mean the SNP, the Scottish Green Party and Alba.
I am enterpreting this to mean:
It was sent to Humza Yousaf, Patrick Harvie, Lorna Slater and Alex Salmond.
My suspicions are aroused by such circumlocutory confections as they are so often used to attempt to mask some opportunity at misdirection.
In this case perhaps an explanation might be that GMK is attempting to avoid the mindless aggression some people exhibit at the mere mention of the name Alba.
Perhaps GMK is attempting to avoid that by stating what his criteria were for inclusion rather than directly naming the three parties involved.
Perhaps the burgeoning cadre of observers, commentators and bystanders are finally preparing to acknowledge which way the political winds are blowing.
Hope springs eternal, but I wouldn’t bet money against the SNP ruling clique deciding to ignore or torpedo this latest opportunity for progress and compromise.
Come on Humza, don’t fuck this up!
LikeLiked by 3 people
Sorry, OT. From the National:
“Praise for Arran no-take zone shows consensus possible on HPMA plans”
oh, where is this consensus?
“A UK Government minister has hailed a project the Scottish Greens once hailed as a model for deeply controversial fishing ban plans – in a sign consensus could yet be built on the contentious proposals. ”
Are they totally fecking thick? Knowing the depth of opposition in large parts of the islands and highlands, of fecking course a UK Minister is going to say “How wonderful this is”.
As our host would say: “I despair”.
LikeLike
Add to that you have this incredibly and totally unaware thick as mince completely divisive and moronic cultish autocratic dictatorial “Bow down and kiss my SNP butt” comment from Mike Russell:
“All sorts of issues go to make up the current toxic mix of over-the-top anti-Green rhetoric but the sneering commentary about a perfectly sensible Scottish Government plan for heat pumps to help as part of a much wider emissions reduction strategy has revealed a nasty and ultimately self-harming streak of climate sceptic populism even within the Yes tent.”
Disagreement is futile, you will be assimilated, we are the SNP, starve and go homeless but get your debatably green heat pump. By Order.
What a twit. The word is “Independence” which we are all supposed to agree on, not whatever myriad of issues the rich SNP and Green MSPs decide are more important in their tiny minds if they have one.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yes, BiS/BfS are the new kite flyers for the SNP.
At least they have twigged that the Yes movement are not swallowing the SNP’s ‘ one moreandate’ so they have been tasked with herding all the Yes groups into their leadership. Why else have they now, after 8 years since 2014, started marches? The SNP thought they had undermined AUOB enough for it to disappear but people still support their marches. Humza of course, who could never attend any AUOB marches, will address the BiS march.
LikeLiked by 1 person