Unstinting congratulations are due to the organisers of the Creating Scotland event in the Royal George Hotel, Perth on Saturday 30 March. Not least for their cheek in holding the event in a venue proudly flying the Union flag – the emblem of British nationalism. As an entertainment event on an independence theme, it worked! As a showcase for Scotland’s talent, it worked! As a networking and bonding exercise for independence supporters, it worked! I was, as ever, a bit sceptical about the event contributing to Scotland’s cause. But I have to say, it worked.
At the most basic level of organisation, it worked. I am in a position to know how difficult it is to organise an event with multiple acts in a restricted space. The organisers not only managed this, they somehow contrived to keep everything on schedule. Or, at least, as close to it as to make any criticism on that account silly.
Bruce Fummey kicked off the show and brilliantly set the mood for the whole afternoon. I have known Bruce for some years, but for whatever reason, I had not previously seen him perform live. I just want him to know I wasn’t avoiding him. Despite not having seen hil perform – other than bits and pieces on YouTube – I knew to expect a wee Scottish history lesson laced with humour. And that is precisely what we got. No spoilers! Im not going to say too much about the content of his act. But he read the packed room beautifully and left us tuned to an afternoon of ambitiously mixed entertainment.
There was music from Sheena Wellington, The Yes Yes Band and Graham Brown & Son. I don’t think I need to say more about other than that Sheena Wellington is a Scottish icon whther she likes it or not. The Yes Yes Band epitomises the ceilidh experience of diverse musicians getting together just to play. Graham Brown is just a massively talented musician, songwriter and performer who seems to have played every Yes event there has been. The afternoon was worth it for the music alone. But there was more!
There was drama with Action Theatre Group performing an excerpt from the play, Alba, by Jack Byrne and Jordan Howatt set in 2014 as a group of S4 Classmates battle with the biggest decision of their young lives so far – the independence referendum. A very evocative performance left me wanting to see more of this work.
There was literature with author Cathy McSporran reading form her latest novel, Cold City. I determined to buy the book. Afterwards, Cathy was interviewed by William Duguid, a weel kent face in the independence movement, not least for his work with Yes Perth City. As a dabbling scribbler of low renown, I found her very thoughtful on the subject and quite inspiring. I was going to have that book. William handled the interview like a professional and I could have easily enjoyed another ten minutes or more. But the show must go on. I bought the book.
There was poetry reading by Jim Mackintosh, whose books include Flipstones and The Banes o the Turas, which was shortlisted for Book of the Year at the 2023 Scots Language Awards. Jim is an engaging raconteur as well as an accomplished poet and his wee stories went down just as well as his poetry-reading.
Rounding off the afternoon in the most appropriate way possible we had what I think was a late addition to the programme, The Yes Choir. And what a superbly rousing addition to the day’s entertainment they turned out to be!
I went round to The George on Saturday expecting to hear som political speechifying. But while all the entertainers had something to say on the subject of the constitutional issue, the only thing that was close to speechifying came from Gordon MacIntyre-Kemp in his closing remarks. Which was slightly ironic given his insistence that this was first and foremost a cultural event. It was certainly that. So we can forgive Gordon for slipping a bit of politicking at the end. Especially given some of what he said. I quote from very unreliable memory.
I don’t think we’ll get a Section 30 order. And, quite frankly, I don’t want one!
It was clear that this sentiment was shared by the largest part of the audience. It certainly struck a chord with this Proud Malcontent. I was less enamoured of Gordon’s subsequent remarks giving the impression he believes in a Scotland that is set first Minister is intent of on a road to independence. What he chose not to mention when rejecting the Section 30 process, however, is that the First Minister has declared his intention to take that route regardless of the opposition evident in the room and in the wider independence movement. But this too is forgiveable as broaching that subject would not have been in keeping with the spirit of the occasion.
And what a tremendous spirit that was! Reminiscent of the early Yes movement. Altogether, the Creating Scotland event gave me some encouragement. The spirit is still there. The day’s activities demonstrated that. If only that spirit could be harnessed and chanelled, Scotland’s cause might yet be rescued from the hands of an SNP leadership which, to put it mildly, has let us down.
Gordon MacIntyre-Kemp intimated that there are to be further Creating Scotland events the length and breadth of Scotland. My advice is to grab your ticket early. This venture got off to a great start on Saturday. My expectation is that things will only get better. Good grief! Was that me being optimistic?
Peter A Bell 
How delightful to read about how much you enjoyed yesterday’s event, Peter.
LikeLiked by 2 people
A wee bit of light then at the end of a long, long tunnel!
LikeLiked by 3 people
No. There is no light. Only the tunnel vision of the SNP leadership which can’t see past a disastrous Section 30 request.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I hope more events like this will help to lift your spirits Peter. There’s room for all in this movement. I appreciate your writing and your frustration. Thanks
LikeLiked by 1 person
On X/Twitter, somebody just asked if the pessimist was getting optimistic. Below is my response.
My one criticism of the event was the misplaced optimism. And Gordon MacIntyre-Kemp’s encouragement of same. What the event lacked was an element of realism.
It might be argued that this would not have been in keeping with the spirit of the event. But if the purpose of the event was purely escapism, then it’s hard to see how it serves Scotland’s cause.
At some point, all the people in that room are going to be obliged to face up to what will be required if Scotland’s independence is to be restored.
Escapism is like a space-walk. Great! So long as you remain tethered.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I am in serious need of some optimism re the constitutional situation.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Think Art 25 of the International Covenant of Civil & Political Rights, signed by the UK but never applied by UK or, more importantly, Scotland. It could be Implemented today for devolved matters and Westminster can’t do a thing. Initiatives & Referendums are a UN recognised Political Right for all citizens in a Popular Sovereignty country. Internationally know as Direct Democracy (DD). Check out my DD website at wecollect.scot. Nobody wants to move and personally, I don’t understand it. I’ve lived in Switzerland for 50 years and it works. Pls be optimistic !
LikeLike
It’ll take decades to introduce direct democracy. We can’t even start until independence is restored. And then only if the people actually want it. There’s a good chance they won’t.
The problem with a UN approach is that we have to get Scotland on the list of non-self-governing territories first. That also could take a number of years.
If the ‘solution’ doesn’t fit the timeframe, it isn’t a solution.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Direct Democracy is possible today for devolved matters and, right now, SNC-Salvo is putting it on the agenda with a referendum request in its comments on the Victims, Witnesses & Justice Reform Bill. Parliamentary debate takes place on 23/4 and I believe it’s very likely that DD will be part of the debate. This is going to go on for months. Nothing to do with going to the UN – that was taken care of when UK signed the covenant in 1976 and UN issued its clarifications on Art 25 in 1996. DD exists, is alive and kicking and should form part of Scottish Political Rights with respect to devolved matters – which means Westminster can’t interfere. Today ScotGov is between a rock and a hard place and now it needs the Scottish People to start making a lot of noise in the next three weeks. I suggest you speak with either Sara Salyers (Salvo) and / or Iain Lawson Liberation).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Direct democracy is evidently your hobby-horse. You see everything through that prism. Unfortunately, the prism distorts your view. For example, the rather quaint notion that applying direct democracy to devolved matters – supposing there was the remotest possibility of this happening – would render Westminster unable to interfere. That notion is naive and wrong. So long as Westminster holds the power afforded it by its own interpretation of the Union, it can interfere in absolutely anything.
If applying direct democracy to a devolved matter meant that Westminster couldn’t interfere, then that matter would promptly cease to be devolved using Section 30 of the Scotland Act.
LikeLike
Peter, I understand that perfectly but you may not be aware that Scotland already has an important act that’s applicable only to devolved matters – in fact to ANY devolved matter – and it’s called the Referendums (Scotland) Act 2000. The only problem with that Act is that accessing a referendum must be triggered by a reference to the need for a referendum in another act – and that’s specifically what the Scottish National Congress (Iain Lawson) and Salvo (Sara Salyers) are doing right now with their comment on the Victims, Witnesses & Justice Reform Bill due for parliamentary debate on 23/4. SNC made a referendum request last September and the next step is up to MSPs, a majority of whom can refuse the People’s request. The public debate over the next weeks and months is going to be interesting – and yes, that’s Direct Democracy which I personally believe may ultimately be a route to UDI.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So what? It’s a proper constitutional referendum we need. All this waffle about direct democracy achieves nothing. Look at what you just wrote! “the next step is up to MSPs, a majority of whom can refuse the People’s request”. So, MSPs can overrule “the People”. That’s not popular sovereignty! It’s parliamentary sovereignty!
LikeLike
Peter, a few days back, there was a discussion on this blog about strategy and, to put it in a nutshell, my strategy to help my home country – as best I can at 81 yrs – is the dripping water tactic. Keep nagging away. To that end, when I was a member of SNC last year, we agreed to try and counter the constitutional issues implicit in the Victims, Witnesses & Justice Reform and Sara Salyers & Iain Lawson, bless their hearts, picked up the ball and ran with it. Sara inserted the text “Subject to Referendum” in the SNC comment on the Bill which has been ignored by the Criminal Justice Committee (CJC) – like the Stirling Directive – and this has opened the door to a referendum. Now all we have to do is push it. The Parliamentary debate on the Victims etc Bill takes place on 23/4 and, if the People get their act together by, for example, writing to their MSPs, demonstrating, crowding the public benches etc, MSPs can’t avoid listening. A well thought out e-mail campaign to MSPs – there are only 129 of them, after all – and each address figures on the Parliament website. The Victims etc. Bill still has to go through Stages 2 & 3 so that’s going to provide at least a six month platform to get the People worked up. This coming week I’ll be writing an article to demonstrate why I think the CJC report is flawed and I fired the opening shot in another article last week. FYI I sent an e-mail yesterday to ScotGov seeking clarification of the point in question and we’ll see where it leads. At the end of all this, I’m hoping we’ll be able to demonstrate the worth of referendums to the People and, in due course, they will become systemic rather than needing a popular uprising as at the 1994 water privatisation referendum. Think decentralisation, think People Power, think of the Swiss model of Popular Sovereignty: People+Regions > Government+Parliament. The People ALWAYS have the last word but it happens only happens after a lengthy period of consensus politics. If you can bear to listen further, I would love to open a discussion about decentralisation.
LikeLike
Is it that you imagine time doesn’t exist? Or merely that time is of no consequence? Like all too many other, you totally discount the time factor because it is extremely inconvenient to your argument. You seem to imagine the core constitutional issue is something we can just set aside in order to pursue some other project which, it transpires, is critically dependent on the thing you’re setting aside.
You totally discount the fact that there is a UK general election this year and that, regardless of who wins, that election will result in a UK government with a mandate to rein-in Scotland. A government with a mandate – from the people of England – to preserve the Union at any cost to Scotland.
You totally discount the fact that Humza Yousaf intends going into that election with a ‘strategy for independence’ which is not only bound to fail but which might well be fatal to Scotland’s cause.
Have a wee think about how your dream of direct democracy might fare under direct rule by an authoritarian, centralising, right-wing government in London.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Peter, just an after thought. Yes, Direct Democracy is my hobby horse because I’ve lived for 50 years in a country which practices it – Switzerland. Scotland and Switzerland have exactly the same constitutional basis – Popular Sovereignty – and, if one accepts that, then the Scottish People have the individual and fundamental right to participate directly in public affairs (Art 25 of the ICCPR covenant, signed by UK in 1976). If Westminster interferes with the Scottish People, it will become an international laughing stock.
BTW the SNC Victims etc process we’re about to witness is entirely peaceful – it would be nice if the People could get motivated to jump on the bandwagon.
LikeLike
What gives you the impression the British state is troubled by being an “international laughing stock”? Brext?
LikeLiked by 2 people
“if one accepts that, then the Scottish People have the individual and fundamental right..”
This might be stretching things a bit, Henry, for a colonial society where rights are never respected, and “the native hardly every seeks for justice” (Fanon).
Being away for 50 years, perhaps you have forgotten the reality of life for most Scots in Scotland?
Here we might also remember that, in a colonial society, an “independence movement depends on the solidarity of the oppressed ethnic group” (Hechter), and that all the country’s institutions will be colonial in nature:
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m afraid I can’t help you with that. There is absolutely no cause for optimism. Humza Yousaf intends to pursue a ‘strategy’ that will set Scotland’s cause back by decades. And nobody is even trying to stop him.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I am in serious need of some optimism re the constitutional situation.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The best I can do in the way of optimism is to say that there is now a much clearer idea of the way forward. Unfortunately, this intelligence has yet to penetrate the bubble wherein resides the Scottish Government.
LikeLiked by 3 people
“Scotland’s cause might yet be rescued from the hands of an SNP leadership which, to put it mildly, has let us down.”
Too much booze there Peter, we’ve not a hope in hell of the SNP actually doing anything really positive on the indyfront, oh well at least you had a good time.
Macintyre-Kemp is charlatan when it comes to promoting independence.
LikeLike
You will always look like fool accusing me of posting while intoxicated. As people who know what they’re talking about will testify. Maybe leave the playground ‘debating’ tactics alone. You’re just not very good at it.
LikeLike
Sign the petition to repeal the Hate Crime Laws.
Sign the petition: Repeal the Hate Crime Act – ALBA (albaparty.org)
LikeLiked by 2 people
So it seems according to Axiom and Roddy Dumlop KC, that the Hate Crime Act can in theory have worldwide scope, and even in extreme cases, be pursued by Police Scotland etc. And the Scottish Courts. That’s with an Act that apparently has full Legislative Competence.
So what’s needed is for Holyrood to pass a Bill and then Act, that prohibits interference with a referendum IN Scotland, and prohibits interference with any Independence IN Scotland. But similar to the Hate Crime Act 2021 fails to limit its territorial extent for perpetrators in any way at all
Voila, Job Done. I delegate the exact details to my 129 MSPs. Go now, do it.
LikeLike
The page 6 Axiom opinion jpg by the way, mostly.
https://wingsoverscotland.com/a-thousand-paper-cranes/
LikeLike
Just #ScottishUDI with added superfluous complications.
LikeLike