As I read of the latest in the continuing series of iniquities visited on Scotland by the British state, I always wonder if this will prove to be the last straw. Will this be the thing that finally goads the Scottish Government into action to save Scotland from further insult? Will this be the thing which at last provokes Scotland’s people to demand that the Scottish Government does something more than bleat Blackford-style every time the UK government flaunts its utter contempt for our nation.
After a time, I dismiss the notion that the final straw has been loaded on the back of that long-suffering camel. I come to my senses and realise that, whatever the iniquity may be, it too will ultimately be borne with what in other circumstances might be regarded as admirable stoicism rather than timorous submission. As the years drag by with no hint of progress for Scotland’s cause, these episodes of misplaced optimism have grown ever shorter until now, the thought has barely reached consciousness before it succumbs to the cynicism inevitably engendered by year upon year of broken promises as abuse is heaped on abuse.
Alister Jack’s seemingly almost absent-minded mention of the fact that the British state is planning to build nuclear power stations in Scotland is a case in point. Given the extent and depth of antipathy to all things nuclear in Scotland, it was only natural to suppose, however briefly, that this might be the last straw. Surely this is a red line not drawn in chalk so that it can be easily erased and redrawn by the SNP so as to avoid confrontation with the British state. Surely this, of all things, is a hill worth dying on.
I was rapidly disabused of such notions. John Swinney made the right noises, much as his predecessors and colleagues have done in relation to countless previous assaults on Scotland’s dignity. But if you pay less heed to the tone of his response and attend more to what is actually being said – or not said – you’ll realise that the imposition of unwanted nuclear power stations is just one more thing that our elected representatives are going to meekly accept while making some token protest.
Before we get to what the First Minister didn’t say, we should note with all due alarm what Governor-general Jack did say. Not specifically about the British state’s plans to force nuclear power plants on Scotland for the purpose of supplying London with cheap power, but a remark that speaks volumes about the British ruling elite’s disdain for Scotland.
I believe that in 2026 we’ll see a unionist regime again in Holyrood and they will move forward with that.
Here we have the British state’s main man in Scotland openly acknowledging that a future “Unionist regime” in Scotland would be expected to do London’s bidding without even the performative reluctance shown by the SNP Scottish Government. He’s not telling us anything most of us were not already well aware of. all of us, that is, except the bumpkins who opine that ‘what Scotland needs’ is a period of Unionist government in Scotland to shake us out of the stupor of colonised minds. I have no doubt that this would be a salutary lesson to those whose blind partisan loyalty and /or dumb complacency has enabled an SNP leadership and Scottish Government that has so signally failed Scotland’s cause for a decade or more. But at what cost!
Read Alister Jack’s words again and, bearing in mind all that you know of the man from his past behaviour, attempt to discern the thought behind the words. It certainly seems to me that he takes it as a given that a future “Unionist regime” in Holyrood would work in concert with Westminster to dismantle Scotland’s democracy, eradicate our distinctive political culture and obliterate our national identity – other than those bits which might be crudely adapted for marketing purposes. Even supposing we were somehow able to subsequently oust the British parties from power after five or ten or fifteen years, what would be left of Scotland to save?
We cannot afford to let the British parties retake the Scottish Parliament. And you may as well start now getting accustomed to the fact that in order to prevent this we may be obliged to vote SNP.
What of our First Minister’s response to Alister Jack’s presumptuous announcement? The first thing to strike me was that John Swinney seemed to be more outraged by the British government’s failure to inform him of its plan than by the plan itself. But it is what he pointedly declined to say that truly angered me. The emphasis is added.
The Scottish Government will not support new nuclear power stations in Scotland.
Note the words “will not support”. Not “actively oppose”. Not “fight tooth and nail”. Merely “not support”. To say that this response is disappointing would be a considerable understatement. Frankly, it reeks of timidity and submissiveness and betrayal.
Could this be the last straw?
Nah!?
Peter A Bell 
The pattern of aggressive British Nationalism continues to accelerate. This started on 19th September 2014 with Cameron’s EVEL speech, continued through the Smith Committee whitewash, onwards to the Internal Markets Act, the construction of the brand new Queen Elizabeth ‘hub’ building in Edinburgh replete with transported Whitehall civil service staff, direct funding of Scottish local authority councils, the setting up of extensive stretches of Scottish territory as ‘Green’ Freeports and Special Economic Zones and the increasing use of Westminster’s (Section 35) veto on legislation passed in the Scottish Parliament.
(Yes, some of us have noticed, even if the Scottish Government, and SNP in particular, haven’t or have looked the other way. The Britz have not been idle, whilst those that claim to advocate for Scotland’s Cause have been busy-bodying on other fringe issues and neglecting the only thing that matters, namely Scotland’s constitutional arrangements).
In the relatively recent past the Britz seemingly felt they had to use bombast when declaring their intent to ride roughshod over Scotland and her people such as when House Jock Jack’s fuckwit colleague Andrew Bowie screamed in 2020 “The UK Government is back in Scotland. Get used to it”.
This week, however, the British Secretary of State for Scotland mentions in the manner of a mere causal afterthought that a new nuclear power station will be built without any reference to whether or not that is what the people of this country want.
What should be a veritable hand grenade is treated as though it’s a damp squib by our imperial masters’ boy in Scotland.
And what about our FM? Well he’s our White Knight. Complete with White Flag.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Who is the SNP defending and what are they trying to protect and why? Because whatever it is the party is prepared sacrifice everything in order to do it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
A colonised people are effectively ‘out of the game’; they are ‘no longer a part of history’ (Memmi).
We will find that many of the richest people in a colony are not from there: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-61513667#:~:text=Danish%20fashion%20tycoon%20Anders%20Holch%20Povlsen%20is%20still,club%2C%20are%20the%20wealthiest%20newcomers%20to%20the%20list.
And neither are most of those handed the country’s highest esteemed awards:
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/24325984.royal-conservatoire-scotland-announce-honorary-doctorates/
In a colonial society, whose aim is to widen inequalities, discrimination therefore becomes institutionalised, it is a part of every day life for an oppressed people.
And, as discrimination in a colony is aimed at a particular ethnic group, this means that colonialism is fundamentally ‘racist’ (Cesaire; Fanon; Memmi; Hechter).
LikeLiked by 2 people
I was just saying to a couple of folk only two days ago that we might have to hold our noses and vote SNP at the next Scottish elections. We CANNOT let a Unionist party into Holyrood. I never thought I would think this far less say it.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Same on you, the SNP is the only party keeping Scotland in this union. Its rid ourselves of the SNP who I might no longer supports Independence totally without being tied to this Union.
LikeLike
If I understand you correctly, you would let the British parties take power in Scotland rather than vote SNP.
Personally, I will always vote in the way that I calculate best serves Scotland’s cause. I am resigned to the fact that the SNP is no longer the ‘party of independence’. But they have a secondary purpose – keeping the Brits out of power. As a rational person, that secondary purpose would have to be a factor in my calculation of how to vote.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Lets remember that the SNP has had ten years to deliver on mandates given to the SNP, but party has ignored every single one. If you believe that a Unionist party or Westminster holds Scotland the future on Scotland constitutional question then I’m afraid that even if the SNP lost power in 2026 it wouldn’t make a bit of difference. Even now its the SNP who choosing the path of 1% and denying the other 99% with these odds you destined to lose and lose big, they deserve what they get.
LikeLike
I’m not even sure the SNP has a red line when it comes to what is acceptable as to what the foreign government of England wants to impose upon us in Scotland.
Still we find ourselves now in the position of having to vote for the lesser of two-evils as the saying goes, and it does make some sort of Kafkaesque sense to vote for the SNP to keep the unionists out, because they will do far more damage to Scotland than the SNP.
Christ I can’t believe that I’m advocating to keep the SNP in power at Holyrood, but needs must.
LikeLiked by 5 people
That is the dilemma we face. If there was a genuine pro-independence alternative to the SNP, I’d be tending in that direction. But that party doesn’t currently exist. And it’s hard to see such a party gaining traction before 2026 even if it was launched tomorrow.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Peter.
The ISP has been around for a while now, but unfortunately they don’t have the presence to make a difference in the short term.
I think the unions mask slipped the other day with what Sunak, Jack and Robertson said, they inadvertently gave us a sneak preview of what they have lined up for Scotland if a unionist or coalition branch party at Holyrood gets into power in 2026, I fear they have plans to shutdown any route to independence and to use laws to curb marches and discussions on it, such as what’s happening right now in Europe and the west with Palestinian demos discussion in mind.
The SNP appears to be the best of a bad bunch, and at least the word independence and finger pointing at Westminster along with the odd SNP saying that indy is the way forward on the news or on a political programme (even if they don’t really mean it) keeps the idea alive and in the minds of folk in Scotland until such times as we can do something about it.
I think the real short term problem lies in if the SNP goes into coalition with say Labour at Holyrood, there would be a heavy price to pay for that, as Starmer’s puppet in Scotland Sarwar would seek to undermine any talk on indy and try to force through policies to curb our (publics) desire for dissolving the union.
No matter how the 2026 elections go in Scotland I’m pretty sure the SNP will lose seats, they’ll also lose seat in the coming GE because they’ve governed so badly, is that intentional? or just incompetence? I know what I think.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The pattern of aggressive British Nationalism continues to accelerate. This started on 19th September 2014 with Cameron’s EVEL speech, continued through the Smith Committee whitewash, onwards to the Internal Markets Act, the construction of the brand new Queen Elizabeth ‘hub’ building in Edinburgh replete with transported Whitehall civil service staff, direct funding of Scottish local authority councils, the setting up of extensive stretches of Scottish territory as ‘Green’ Freeports and Special Economic Zones and the increasing use of Westminster’s (Section 35) veto on legislation passed in the Scottish Parliament.
(Yes, some of us have noticed, even if the Scottish Government, and SNP in particular, haven’t or have looked the other way. The Britz have not been idle, whilst those that claim to advocate for Scotland’s Cause have been busy-bodying on other fringe issues and neglecting the only thing that matters, namely Scotland’s constitutional arrangements).
In the relatively recent past the Britz seemingly felt they had to use bombast when declaring their intent to ride roughshod over Scotland and her people such as when House Jock Jack’s fuckwit colleague Andrew Bowie screamed in 2020 “The UK Government is back in Scotland. Get used to it”.
This week, however, the British Secretary of State for Scotland mentions in the manner of a mere causal afterthought that a new nuclear power station will be built without any reference to whether or not that is what the people of this country want.
What should be a veritable hand grenade is treated as though it’s a damp squib by our imperial masters’ boy in Scotland.
And what about our FM? Well he’s our White Knight. Complete with White Flag.
LikeLiked by 4 people
“The Scottish Government will not support new nuclear power stations in Scotland“
I.e., it won’t give PLANNING PERMISSION for them. Planning is devolved, nuclear ain’t.
“Not “actively oppose”. Not “fight tooth and nail”.“
It doesn’t have to. Why do either of them if they just can’t happen?
“And what about our FM? Well he’s our White Knight. Complete with White Flag.“
Your comments about Swinney are, on this matter, totally unjustified.
I won’t support any attempt to make me a Martian. Doesn’t mean I have to mount a white charger with my white armour and carrying a white lance and go tilt at white windmills. It just ain’t going to happen, that’s all.
LikeLike
Do you seriously imagine the British state would let planning permission stop it? Dream on, son!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Now you’re just being a paranoid mewling puking infant!
LikeLike
I take it from that you genuinely do believe the British state can be foiled using planning regulations. Which implies that you also believe Alister Jack hadn’t thought of this before he revealed the intention to build a nuclear power station in Scotland. Perhaps you imagine him reading your comment and going “DOH!”.
LikeLiked by 2 people
You take it wrong, your implications are wrong, as always, and as per usual, you project your own beliefs and furtive imaginings on others. 0 out of 10 for comprehension, go to the bottom of the class, laddie.
Did you miss the bit about “Unionist Government in 2026”, which very clearly means them winning the next Holyrood Election upon which they could become the Scottish Government and give planning permission to whatever they want?
Meanwhile, you may not realise that you don’t have to own land to apply for planning permission; you or I could put in a planning application to demolish Holyrood and build a massive 10 pin bowling alley and night club instead – and if it followed all the guidelines it might even be accepted.
OT – don’t you just love water-based paint? This job done, rotted wood strengthened in place, cement painted, brush and hands clean, stuff put away, cup of tea in hand.
LikeLike
Errrmmm…….. a few things. To begin with, you can’t put in a bid to demolish and rebuild a building you don’t own! You’d have to be the local Council, and there would have to be say, a safety concern like for example, Ayr Hotel, and even in that case, the miserable owner has come from nowhere to try stop the demolition of a now, very unsafe building.
Many of us would dearly love to demolish the monstrosity we call Holyrood. That concrete and glass thing should never have been built in the first place.
Calton Hill should have been used, but Labour didn’t want that. Then there is still Parliament House where the Lawyers all hang out.
We could have used that, but Labour wouldn’t have wanted that either. Too much of old Independent Scotland in that place! But Parliament House would be a good choice these days. We can always move the Legal dudes down the hill to Holyrood. Then they can decide to demolish and rebuild whatever they like!!
The other point is that if London wants to stuff a nuclear power station in Scotland (which we would be forced to pay for) then London can.
Simple as that!
Alister Jack doesn’t need to have a Unionist colonial puppet regime at Edinburgh, but it would certainly be much easier if there was one of course, but London can ride roughshod right over anything Edinburgh objects too as it so pleases to do.
What is Edinburgh gonna do to stop it. Do tell us???
For as we have seen with the bottle deposit thing, when London said “No” for pure petty political fun and mischief making and nothing else, tell us,, what did Edinburgh do in turn? Nothing!
In fact, what has Edinburgh ever done since London intervened in Scotland, and certainly after Alex Salmond stood down? Again, absolutely nothing. We saw that very clearly with Brexit, which again, many of us thought just had to be the last straw. We must become Independent over this? But no, we ended up out of Europe, instead!
Actually, I kinda think, Brexit might have been the main reason we saw the tide begin turn against Nicola Sturgeon, as too many became utterly disillusioned with her cowardice in the face of London. She was saved by Covid, I think, from being forced out earlier. The Salmond Scandal, being another factor, but Brexit was it for many, regardless of the Salmond case.
So it seems it will be if London wants these nuclear power plants in our country, and remember, even if it is Labour at the end of this year, this having been suggested, they will be all for it just as much as the tories. I’ve not heard them say otherwise.
And, by the way, as they say, maybe I’ve missed it, but I haven’t heard Patrick Harvie or Lorna Slater, or even Ross Greer, come out screaming from the top of Ben Lomond, declaring this ain’t ever, ever gonna happen. I haven’t heard them condemn Governor Jack in no uncertain terms in such a way we couldn’t possibly not hear it, and with their absolute insistence, Scotland must now become Independent to prevent this ever happening. They will man, (or woman) the barricades, even!
Instead, we hear MSP Slater girn off that SNP is less Green than she would like them to be. Failing to take note, most of us think she is less Green than she ought to be. Her priorities, and Patrick’s, being far, far away from being anything Green, themselves!
So, while we would all like to think Edinburgh wouldn’t allow it, the reality is, they cannot or will not, do a single thing to stop it.
The fact is, only Independence is the answer, but, but, no one in Edinburgh is interested enough to confront London, and its traitors here. Not today, anyway. Still we have to hope for something better, but see the reality in front of us at same time.
If the politicians are unwilling to act, then as Peter has said previously, the people of Scotland has to force them to act. For at present, we don’t see any other way.
Then again, it has occurred to me, just maybe, he isn’t wanting to impose nuclear stations, but is testing the ground to see what opposition even the merest thought it creates, and then, he has other more serious ideas at hand, if he sees such little rebellion.
Now that, I do wonder!
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s getting increasingly difficult to distinguish between mad kites being flown by British Nationalists and the British state’s true plans for Scotland.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Gordon.
“To begin with, you can’t put in a bid to demolish and rebuild a building you don’t own!“
For planning permissions, councils have no interest at all in ownership, nor should they. I happen to know this for various reasons through a solicitor. In the simplest case you can have boundary disputes or even not a clear boundary. Or the land could be subject to sale, but not yet advertised as such, with the potential buyer not interested in buying if they can’t get planning permission for what they want to do. Councils don’t and shouldn’t, care. All they should care about is access roads, environment, health if industrial or commercial.
“For as we have seen with the bottle deposit thing, when London said “No” for …“
Section 35 of the Scotland Act, same as GRR. Upheld in the Outer Court of Session – Scotland’s court. So it was within the law, like it or not.
“What is Edinburgh gonna do to stop it. Do tell us???“
No need for disrespectful aggression Gordon. Best leave that to the blogger who uses it to mask his ignorance. As this document says:
https://www.gov.scot/publications/national-planning-framework-4/
“Planning is already a fully devolved function of the Scottish Government.“
Planning is often further devolved to councils. In the case of the planned CCS (which wasn’t even guaranteed 25% CCS) at Hunterston for instance, my council NAC unanimously rejected the application. But that’s the first step, the ScotGov can call in any planning application or permission and override it. Within the Scotland Act as it stands, however, the UK Government – CAN – NOT.
So the UK Government would have to change the Scotland Act to reduce the devolution settlement voted for by 74.3% in 1997, and more latterly supported by around 92%.
Hence why Jack talked about a Unionist Government in Scotland in 2026. he knows the score, and this was a soundbite bluster, designed to provoke and distract. It didn’t catch Swinney, but it did catch others.
Peter Piper
LikeLike
“So the UK Government would have to change the Scotland Act…”
As better-informed people will be aware, that is PRECISELY the purpose of Section 30. It empowers the British government to alter any of the powers of the Scottish Parliament in any way and for any purpose.
“Her Majesty may by Order in Council make any modifications of Schedule 4 or 5 which She considers necessary or expedient.”
Those who have at least begun the process of decolonising their minds recognise that the Union gives the British state TOTAL power over Scotland. That they have in the past chosen to exercise that power ‘judiciously’ tells us nothing about how they might choose to exercise it in the future.
It is NOT safe to assume that the British state has red lines it will not cross in its efforts to preserve the Union. If there is anything even remotely like a faintly pinkish line, it lies far beyond overriding mere planning regulations. If it exists, that loose limit lies just short of military intervention.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“As better-informed people will be aware, that is PRECISELY the purpose of Section 30.”
Dear God Peter, in your attempt to feed your paranoid conspiracy theory you really do fail to do any research at all.
“Section 30 Orders can be initiated either by the Scottish or UK Governments but require approval by the House of Commons, House of Lords and the Scottish Parliament before becoming law.”
Do you need me to explain that to you in words of one sylalable?
LikeLike
A House of Common Library briefing IS NOT legislation, fool. Show me where any of that is included in Section 30 of the Scotland Act. It isn’t! But the British state relies on gullible fuckwits believing its various assurances of respect for either Scotland or democracy.
LikeLike
You really have crossed the rubicon, gone the full tonto. Only you can decide if you want to seek the path back.
Meanwhile, do some research of your own about the S30 and the Rule of Law, and don’t keep expecting others to do your homework. This is not a homework club.
LikeLike
FFS! I have the Scotland Act in front of me right now. I have been studying and writing about it for more than twenty years. NONE of the shit you imagine is there, actually is. If it were, you’d be able to point to it. That’s the first test of reality. The second is to ascertain whether others can also see it. They can’t!
For the benefit of those readers interested in reality, the important bit of Section 30 is ‘Order in Council’. More specifically, a prerogative Order in Council. Which is effectively the executive of the British government – the Cabinet – enacting legislation over the heads of all the parliaments, including Westminster.
It is frightening how many people remain unaware of the power wielded by the British executive. It has accrued to itself power akin to that of an absolute monarch.
LikeLiked by 2 people
You really don’t understand the logic of how this works, do you?
You’re the one making a wacky and unsupportable claim without one single shred of evidence or quoting from any authoritative source to support your wacky conspiracy theorist claim where you darkly mention the British State will do everything short of that big scary military intervention which is surely the only reason you mentioned it to make it sound all scary like “The end is nigh” which you can parade about with on a placard – and you think the onus is on others to find somewhere in the Scotland Act that says “Peter A Bell is wrong and a wacky conspiracy theorist to boot”?
Doesn’t work that way, son.
Anyways, that’s my cup of tea break over after more painting, off to do some more work in the glorious not midday sun.
That’s if the Brits don’t send in the tanks!
LikeLike
The onus would be on you to find in the Scotland Act the stuff you only managed to find in a House of Commons Library. You stupidly claimed Section 30 orders “require approval by the House of Commons, House of Lords and the Scottish Parliament before becoming law”. But there is NOTHING in the actual Scotland Act (which you have evidently never laid eyes on) that makes this so. In fact, the legislation stipulates an Order in Council as the only requirement. And, as I have pointed out in a futile effort to educate you, and Order in Council does NOT necessarily require approval by the House of Commons, House of Lords and the Scottish Parliament before becoming law. A prerogative Order in Council is basically a diktat from the British executive. And even a statutory Order in Council requires only the approval of bodies whose approval the British government can be certain of. Or whose disapproval they can disregard.
I’d provide sources for all of this, but what would be the point. If you won’t even read the relevant part of the Scotland Act, what chance is there you’d look at anything else? For grown-ups, here’s information about Orders in Council.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/what-are-orders-in-council/
LikeLiked by 1 person
The only one talking about tanks is you, clown!
LikeLike
Peter, oh Peter, to cut to the chase, as this is boring.
With all your reading of the Scotland Act, you do realise a section 30 is subject to a Type A?
LikeLike
Oh like wow I just read the rest of your drivel. They’ll send in the tanks? What?
“Head for the Hills lads and lassies, we can all hide in the Coire Gabhail”.
Kewl!
LikeLike
Once again you demonstrate your woeful inability to comprehend written English. I write “just SHORT of military intervention”. You read “they’ll send in the tanks”! Which would require that the red line be well BEYOND military intervention. The diametric opposite of what was written! You really are a fucking dullard!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Do you ever read your own illiteracy?
“just SHORT” compared insensibly with “well BEYOND” and you think this is “The diametric opposite”?
Your understanding of the language you post in is febrile.
I’m going to have to leave you to it in case it’s contagious.
LikeLike
The important word is ‘SHORT’, you oaf. The red line being SHORT of military intervention PRECLUDES such intervention. The red line being BEYOND military action makes it a distinct possibility. THAT is the “diametric opposite” referred to. Happening as opposed to not happening! Opposites! In any fucking language!
I should just ignore your fuckwittery. But when you straight-out lie about what I’ve written (or any commenter), you cross one of MY few red lines.
LikeLiked by 1 person
What if it’s in a Green Freeport?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Good question!
LikeLike
What Swinney HAS done is cleverly use this to show that the UK Government cares absolutely nothing about “inter-governmental co-operation” despite its hypocritical propaganda saying it does.
And THAT was the substance of his aggrieved complaint.
LikeLike
Meanwhile, as opposed to a “continuity” FM, Swinney has just effectively told his Ministers to shape up, or ship out.
https://archive.is/xhkOF
LikeLike
Or as the herald puts it:
“Swinney: Concrete actions not strategy documents needed to boost economy“
Cracking day. Time to do more work on the rotting windows. Lucky they haven’t already set sail for Ireland.
LikeLike
Unless I’ve misunderstood much of the writing posted here, or external articles linked here, the SNP / Scottish Government is the native elite branch of the British establishment; the Scottish traitors doing the bidding of the British state whilst pretending to be on the side of Scotland.
The SNP / Scottish Government is NOT on the side of Scotland. It is the British establishment in Scotland.
When you add in the rest, I sometimes call them the Scottish establishment but I understand the Scottish establishment to be a junior subset of the British establishment, in the same way as I understand our devolved parliament to be a child of the Westminster parent.
The SNP / Scottish Government/ Scottish establishment is devolutionist. The British Government / British establishment is devolutionist. Devolution is a branch of Unionism.
I’m surprising myself as I write this as in my mind these self-evident truths have been blatantly obvious for almost 10 years already. Yet here I find people talking about voting SNP in the absolutely ridiculous and forlorn hope that an dishonest set of devolutionists pretending not to be traitors is somehow better than an honest set of devolutionists who tell us straight that they are devolutionists.
I’ll say it again, devolution is a branch of Unionism. The SNP / Scottish Government is the native elite colonising minds. Therefore, SNP supporters have had their minds colonised! Breaking free the SNP / Scottish Government is the first step, or if not first,van essential step required asap.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The choice is NOT between two sets of devolutionism. The choice is between nominal Scottish nationalism and explicit British nationalism. You seem to be implying that you find the latter a better option. That you would vote to let British nationalists control Scotland’s government.
It’s not clear how a vote intended to give British nationalists power can be reconciled with support for Scotland’s cause. But, of course, Scotland’s cause is not your priority, is it? Your overriding motivation is humiliating the SNP.
LikeLike
It’s not going to work, Alister.
LikeLike
What’s not going to work, yesindyref2?
Stopping SNP supporters being fooled by the SNP into voting for devolution is working.
It’s already worked for the SNP supporters who have switched or are intending to switch to Alba, then there’s independents for independence, Peter’s own campaign to repurpose votes to #endtheunion, and, as I’ve been told on here by Alf, other options NOT nominally pro-independence whilst actually devolutionist.
I think Eva Comrie and Sally Hughes have a good chance of winning against incumbents Jon Nicholson and Pete Wishart respectively.
Neale Hanvey should be a shoo-in. I understand he’s highly regarded in his constituency and has already won his seat by standing as an independent, so why not Alba!?
Beyond all of the not nominally pro-independence candidates in the coming year, in 2026 Alex Salmond has targeted 15% and 20 seats. He has a track record of leadership and growing support by 15 to 20 points. Why would you doubt him or want him to fail?
Much depends on when, or if, Alex gets justice. We know justice moves slowly and the Unionists / devolutions have no motivation to expedite matters. However, I believe more and more people are realising how important justice is to not only what remains of Yes but to the whole of Scottish politics and Scotland overall. I assume you want to see justice done, or are you too far gone?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Admin.
You’re not seeing the bigger picture as Peter pointed it out.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There’s absolutely no need for me to humiliate the SNP, Peter.
My motivation is to stop the SNP fooling their own supporters.
I absolutely believe that the SNP / Scottish Government are bed-blocking the independence space in our democracy. A nominally pro-independence party fooling their own supporters into voting for devolution versus honest devolutionists is six and half a dozen.
I’m saying vote for Alex Salmond, the only accomplished, talented and charismatic leader on the horizon or anywhere else. I suspect I’ll say that whatever Alex’s vehicle is, Alba or something else.
LikeLike
Try a straight answer to a simple question. If the choice was between voting SNP and letting the British parties take power, which way would you go?
As for Alex Salmond, much as I admire him I am not besotted with him to the extent that I’m blind to his faults. Some of his following are as bad as the Sturgeon cult. I take a much more pragmatic approach to politics. Voting for Alex Salmond – by which I take you to mean voting for Alba Party in 2026 – is not going to achieve anything for Scotland’s cause, and might do great harm. It’s not even sending a message. Unless you’re aiming to signal your approval of a ‘strategy’ of deferring to Westminster in the same way the SNP does.
When discussing SNP loyalists and Alba devotees, I always feel a sporting analogy is called for. But I am not sufficiently informed about current sports celebrities to coin the appropriate simile. I’m not regretful. I have better things to do with whatever intellectual capacity I may possess than squander it on hero-worship.
LikeLike
SNP-hater, now hero-worshipper. Such labels are of about as much relevance to me as a hypothetical choice between more devolution and devolution.
I actually don’t know who I can vote for as I’m a bit out of touch with Dunfermline and Dollar. It’s a newly redrawn constituency and I’ve not been there much recently.
As I said before, I’m a former trade unionist from a non-party political trade union.
Maybe an independent candidate will stand, ideally someone who wants to see justice done in Scotland. We urgently need both social justice and justice in our courts, especially for members of the Scottish establishment who are alleged to have committed horrendous crimes, including alleged criminal negligence and alleged criminal conspiracy, or similar crimes. I forget the names used in Scots Law. Maybe Culpable and Reckless Conduct Causing Actual Harm / Death or something. The maximum penalty in Scotland for such a crime is life imprisonment.
It’s truly tragic to say that justice for Alex Salmond isn’t even top of my justice list. My top priority is justice for the often old and vulnerable care home residents allegedly wronged during the COVID pandemic.
I hear further evidence is being presented on May 22.
Anyway, enough about me. Are you still advocating repurposing votes? Marking my ballot #endtheunion is an option should I fail to find an independent for justice.
LikeLike
You didn’t answer the question.
LikeLike
I’m treading carefully. Any suggestions that you’re defending the SNP must be avoided.
LikeLike
That would be best. Because it would be a lie. Recognising the SNP might be the only thing standing between us and the British parties is nothing more than political realism. As things stand – and I stress AS THINGS STAND – the SNP WILL be the only viable means of keeping the Brits out in 2026. It’s all very well saying there are other nominally pro-independence parties out there. But in terms of Scotland’s cause, there are no parties that are any more use than the SNP. And in terms of blocking the British parties, there is no party with a realistic chance of winning sufficient seats to be able to form a government, even if it could forge an alliance with other pro-independence parties. Which, given the state of relations between and among those parties, looks unlikely – AS THINGS STAND.
Of course, circumstances may alter dramatically over the next 12 – 18 months – which would be a realistic timescale if the change were going to affect the election in 2026. It is possible to imagine all manner of things. If one were so inclined, one could imagine an internal revolt in the SNP that transformed it into a real ‘party of independence’. If that seems unlikely, then so does a dramatic surge of support for Alba Party, putting it in line to win a dozen or more seats even without the idiocy of expecting other parties to ‘gift’ them any seats.
We could imagine Alba’s conference forcing a reluctant leadership to adopt a genuine #ManifestoForIndependence. But the fact that the part has recently expelled some of the more vocal proponents of a more ‘assertive’ approach to the constitutional issue (who hadn’t already been driven out), this too seems highly improbable.
There is an enormous difference between what it is possible to imagine and what can be SAFELY assumed. It is perfectly legitimate to vote for a dream, of course. All meaningful social and political reform begins with a dream. But does an intelligent person vote for what they know to be an impossible dream at the cost of precipitating a certain nightmare?
LikeLike
“If one were so inclined, one could imagine an internal revolt in the SNP that transformed it into a real ‘party of independence’. If that seems unlikely”
Peter.
There is on small sliver of light at the end of what is a very dark tunnel, and that is that Police Scotland (Operation Branchform) arrests and rearrests those SNP tMSPs who were complicit in a number of crimes and the COPFS charges them and they have to resign from the party.
This could leave the door open for say a faction within the party that actually wants independence who have been keeping their powder dry for such a moment to seize control and put indy front and centre of the party once more.
As long shots go its a long one, but hey here’s hoping.
LikeLike
Thanks for your reply. Interesting points.
Whether we recognise it when it occurs or not, there will come a point where the SNP / Scottish Government hits rock bottom.
How damaging and dramatic rock bottom is probably depends on the justice I was talking about earlier. For me, that’s the one obvious game-changer out there.
We know Operation Branchform is progressing and there are all sorts of other possibilities. A dose or several doses of justice could see the SNP mired in disrepute and effectively finished as a political force or rejuvenated under new leadership.
It’s such a volatile situation, anything is possible.
The one certainty is rock bottom and it’s ALL the SNP’s own doing. No blaming the Brit Nats on this one I’m afraid. If they get in I’ll know where to point the finger.
LikeLike
We can also imagine – all too easily – the “rock bottom” scenario you describe. I can even imagine the SNP reaching a point where they cease to be any kind of option for thoughtful voters. The trouble is what may be true of individual voters is never true of the electorate as a whole. The electorate is best thought of as a dumb beast. It goes in the direction it is driven and is slow to turn in any other direction. Inertia may be the most significant factor in deciding the behaviour of the electorate. That political anoraks see things a particular way cannot safely be assumed to imply that the electorate sees things in an even remotely comparable way.
AS THINGS STAND, the likelihood is that the 2006 election will result in a wounded SNP struggling to form a government and with no allies to turn to. I continue to maintain that there is a strong possibility of the British parties forming an alliance to oust the ‘nationalists’. Which may be what Alister Jack had in mind when he spoke of “a unionist regime again in Holyrood”. It isn’t at all difficult to imagine such a ‘Grand Alliance’ of British parties. One might even suppose the Scottish Greens would climb aboard if the parliamentary arithmetic made their participation helpful. All it would take is a sniff of the upholstery in a ministerial car.
This is why we should be wary of the SNP waving polls indicating they would be the largest party. It is NOT only the second largest party – all but certainly BLiS – that should concern us. What we should be watching is the polling for all the British parties in aggregate. If they are within striking distance of forming a viable government, who can doubt that the Better Together band would be only too eager to get back together again.
It is in such circumstances where I would have to set aside my distaste for the SNP and ‘play safe’. I would do so fully aware that I was not voting for the primary imperative of progressing Scotland’s cause. There being no way to do that, I’d be resorting to the secondary imperative of keeping the Brits out. That is what I mean when I speak of being realistic and pragmatic.
LikeLike
All good points. Low information voters is a massive problem, largely contributing to a parliament that, apart from a period of respite under the leadership of Alex Salmond, has damaged Scotland immeasurably.
I understand why people take little or no interest in politics and I don’t blame the people.
I blame the parliament for taking advantage of the disinterest, the lack of scrutiny, and the unaccountability.
I also blame the media as they fail to fill the gap.
The lack of scrutiny and accountability issue is exasperated by a badly designed committee system, mostly dominated by the ruling party or parties, and the lack of a second chamber.
Yet another exasperation is the list MPs who are directly accountable to none of the electorate.
Suffice to say the parliament / devolution has been a disaster, mitigated only by Alex Salmond’s time as first minister. The charade should be ended asap. Until it ends Scotland is likely to be immeasurably damaged.
LikeLike
Peter.
Reading the latter end of the joust between you and yesindyref2, it got me thinking of what’s happening in New Caledonia, specifically the French’s ability to change election laws at will for the New Caledonia.
Could the Westminster government of the day along with an unionist elected government at Holyrood work hand in glove to do something similar at Holyrood, after all if BLiS gains a majority of seats at Holyrood the Westminster government of the day could proclaim that Scots (or not a significant enough amount of) don’t want independence.
We know the MSM is unionist so a BLiS win followed by Scots don’t want independence would be reported widely and regularly in Scotland.
LikeLiked by 1 person
We have to proceed on the assumption that the British state can and will do whatever it takes to preserve the Union. That is the only safe assumption.
LikeLiked by 2 people
On your reply Peter and with this in mind.
“I believe that in 2026 we’ll see a unionist regime again in Holyrood and they will move forward with that.”
Remember Tory Peter Lilley’s IDOX system was used in the 2014 indyref, and with consecutive UK government dabbling in foreign elections the best known is that of Kenya’s, was it just wishful thinking from Jack or as Sherlock Holmes would say Is there something afoot for the 2026 Scottish elections?
In my opinion as you say all options are open to Westminster and we are at their mercy.
LikeLike
Please don’t get into the rigged count conspiracy shite.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So basically speaking Peter has been proven wrong about the Section 30 – a draft requires to be laid before and approved by both houses and our parliament before going to the Council.
But you’ll see for yourselves – he won’t admit it, nor will he apologise for his off the scale outrageous behaviour. Oh well, nevermind. Nothing new there.
LikeLike
The cleft stick we’re currently being impaled upon , ie to SNP , or not to SNP makes it very difficult to answer the most fundamental question – the one which informs all your thinking , Peter , my own and the readers of your work also – ” What is in our country’s best interest ? ” .
It should be a no-brainer electorally – * obviously * even a nominally pro-Independence Party is preferable to a Unionist one .
Except , such is the degraded ( and degrading ) state , the whimpering embarrassment of a once great Party that is the current SNP , it is not at all obvious they’d be preferable to a Unionist ScotGov : that they would do less damage .
The post-Salmond SNP have done incalculable harm to our country – I needn’t list examples , we’re all too aware of the litany of stupifying decisions/policies/inaction , and , by association , the cause of Independence itself . Mercifully , such is the strength of it’s premise , polling indicates support for Independence is holding strong ; though , more concerning , not increasing as we * should * expect given the utter horror-show of Westminster rule .It appears we still await that ” straw ” . The ” last ” one .
That said , it’s hard to disagree that a Unionist ScotGov ( and what a oxymoronic designation that is ) would likely – very likely – be disastrous for us – ‘kin hell even the thought of perma-skelped-arse-faced NeoLib/Con Globalist catamite Starmer in WM & ( yet another ) Hutchie Halfwit – Sarwar in Holyrood induces shudders .
The only * advantage * I can see is that the inevitably calamitous Government-by-Remote Control under BLiS would have is that their fuck-ups could not be used to smear/undermine the case for Independence ; could – possibly – strengthen that case .
Again , though , hard to disagree with your point about the risk involved in a Unionist take-over of Holyrood , P .
FUCK ! What a godawful mess the Sturgeon tenure has bequeathed us – abetted by her faithful retainers , ie the arse-kissing coterie of fellow-failures , and a somnambulant/mesmerised membership . Brought us to the point where voting for the SNP is such a morally questionable decision . THAT is her Legacy .
Personally , I can’t do so and not because I’m such a high-minded individual , rather , because I can’t stomach the idea of giving my – even tacit – support to utter wastes-of-space who think they can hold us to ransom , attempting to emotionally blackmail us into voting for them when we KNOW all they’ll do is spend another five years wallowing in the WM/HR mire , inflicting their lunatic Gender Ideology on us whilst passively allowing the further plunder of our country . NAW . Ye kin aw get tae .
Needless to say …..that applies to all the Unionist balloons too . None of them will EVER get my vote .
As ever , Bobby D says it best …….
” Pointed threats, they bluff with scorn
Suicide remarks are torn
From the fool’s gold mouthpiece the hollow horn
Plays wasted words, proves to warn
That he not busy being born is busy dying ”
LikeLike
Time to wrap up this Section 30 thing. Have there been a few Orders Made under Section 30(2) of Scotland Act 1998? Yes there have – 16 of them.
https://www.gov.scot/publications/foi-201900005928/
Taking one not the IR one, almost at random, the 2006 one “The Scotland Act 1998 (Modifications of Schedule 5) Order 2006“, go to “Opening Options on the left, click, click on “Open whole instrument” (it’s a Statutory Instrument) you get:
“This Order is made by Her Majesty in Council in exercise of the powers conferred by section 30(2) of the Scotland Act 1998(1).
In accordance with section 115 of, and paragraphs 1 and 2 of Schedule 7 to, that Act, a draft of this Order has been—
(a)laid before and approved by a resolution of each House of Parliament; and
(b)laid before and approved by a resolution of the Scottish Parliament.“
OK, so you open the Scotland Act – doing similar with Opening options except it’s “Open whole Act” and you have to click “Continue to open” as you no long have your 28.8 something modem or a dial-up connection.
Scroll down to Section 115:
“115 Subordinate legislation: procedure.
(1)Schedule 7 (which determines the procedure which is to apply to subordinate legislation under this Act in relation to each House of Parliament and the Scottish Parliament) shall have effect.“
Then go to Schedule 7 and I can’t bebothered with this wordpress italic nonsense any more:
“Provision of the Act – – – – Type of procedure”
Section 30 – – – – Type A”
Scroll down and you find:
“2 The types of procedure referred to in this Schedule are—
Type A: No recommendation to make the legislation is to be made to Her Majesty in Council unless a draft of the instrument —(a) has been laid before, and approved by resolution of, each House of Parliament, and(b) has been laid before, and approved by resolution of, the Parliament.“Now, that was tedious to type but not hard to follow the chain.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And what it means is:
1). No section 30 order can be made by the Council without active democratic and legal permission of both houses at Westminster AND the Scottish parliament
2). The UK Government can NOT force ridiculous terms in any draft Section 30, as the Scottish Parliament just refuses to accept them, and they do NOT then get presented to the Council
AND THAT IS BY LAW
LikeLike
Prerogative order.
I doubt if many here will lend a sympathetic ear to your pleas on behalf of the British state.
LikeLiked by 2 people
You said a Section 30 many times. but now you can’t even admit you got that TOTALLY WRONG, you fool. So instead you panic and move onto Prerogative Orders, which are largely primary legislation, not secondary (subordinate).
You’re just an ignorant clueless stupid fool. And I finally realise you’re all bluster, not a clue in the world, not worth bothering with.
LikeLike
The English Government can do whatever it likes in Scotland, regardless of the Edinburgh Parliament voting against.
There’s no need for Section 30, for anything. No need for Edinburgh to agree on anything, London simply does whatever it wants.
We need only look at Brexit, which Scotland didn’t vote for, and was bitterly opposed at Edinburgh. And still, we ended up out of Europe.
And London is doing what it wants, because none of our politicians ae prepared to stand up to London.
Not yet anyway..
LikeLiked by 3 people
It’s what we voted for in 1997, Gordon. It’s what the SNP actually care about.
Nicola Sturgeon loved going cap in hand to be told no. She loved sooking up to the King across the road from Tappies Toories in Dunfermline, and writing him that grovelling letter of loyal subservience.
It’s why the continuity candidates exist.
It’s the reason for Pete Wishart talking about independence in the UK.
The native elites of the British establishment aka SNP Government are cementing the colonised minds in place. They’re busy creating legal and physical barriers to protect devolution, including court cases that are bound to lose and freeports.
We voted for this. Not only in ’97 but in every vote cast for the SNP con artists post-2014.
The gullible are still defending it. Some actively supporting it. Some post on here telling us they are experts on the subject. You couldn’t make it up.
LikeLike
I wouldn’t go as far as saying we voted for it.
Well, Yes and No, sorta thing.
Yes,, we voted for Devolution, mainly in the hope both to stop the worst of London rule, and a way to Independence.
And No, we didn’t vote for what we’ve ended up with!
By which I mean, most of us voted SNP with the understanding they were all out for Independence. .Mind, we had promise after promise from them on that basis.
So, I wouldn’t blame voters for going by those promises, but I do blame SNP,, especially since the Sturgeon era, for a total betrayal.
Now, as has been discussed here, we may have to vote for them again, because the alternative is much, much worse!
LikeLiked by 4 people
“because the alternative is much, much worse!”
There is an argument that ‘indirect rule’ may ultimately lead to more oppression than ‘direct rule’, as we see when a compromised national party starts to attack the independence movement using colonial ‘forces’. It is now ‘condemned by its own hypocrisy’ (Cesaire).
LikeLiked by 3 people
Prerogative order.
LikeLike
https://privycouncil.independent.gov.uk/meetings-and-orders/
“Statutory Orders are made under any of the numerous powers contained in Acts of Parliament which give His Majesty a power to make Orders.“
Like the Scotland Act.
“Prerogative Orders are made under the inherent power of the Crown to act on matters for which Parliament has not legislated.”
Not like the Scotland Act.
Your desperation is embarrassing. I feel sorry for you.
LikeLike
Idiot. You just highlighted the words that prove your slavering a load of pish. AGAIN!
LikeLike
According to my bills, if you live in Edinburgh the majority of electricity is from nucluer power. There doesn’t seem to be much public antipathy to that.
LikeLiked by 2 people
What would be the point of complaining? The legacy nuclear generating capacity is there and – shock! horror! – it is still being used. It’s not clear why this should have any implications at all for antipathy to new developments in Scotland or to nuclear generating in general.
The only way you could tell if there was antipathy to being supplied with electricity from nuclear generating plants would be if there was a way to opt out of it. The growth in demand for green energy would seem to suggest a lot of people want to get away from nuclear.
https://www.msn.com/en-ie/money/other/explosive-growth-how-green-energy-fuels-the-economic-boom/ar-AA1nirHA
LikeLiked by 2 people
Scotland exploited in a UK regulated energy market suffers from what are probably the highest electricity prices in western Europe, which are four times as high as Norway, and many times higher than most other energy rich nations. Its therefore no wonder our country is not industrially competitive.
Which also no doubt explains why 90% of new cars bought in Norway are electric, only around 10% here, and why Norway has over 100 hybrid-electric ferries, whilst Scotland has just 3, the latter using older (i.e. outdated) heavy battery technology.
A plundered colony is always left under-developed, though maintenance of the Union hoax obscures reality meaning the people do not yet appreciate their ‘condition’. If they did, they would rapidly shift towards independence.
LikeLiked by 3 people