Mr Russell is correct about the British government denying the people of Scotland our "basic democratic rights". But it is Section 30 of the Scotland Act which legitimises this denial with authority derived from the Union. He is correct when he observes that this denial of our right of self-determination is "illegal under international law". But Section 30 makes it legal under British law. NICOLA STURGEON SAYS THAT SECTION 30 IS THE ONLY PROCESS WHICH IS "LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL"
Both Plan a and Plan B allow that the British political elite somehow has not only the rightful authority to prohibit the full and proper exercise of our sovereignty but the 'right' to be involved in and largely control the process by which the people of Scotland choose the form of government which best serves our needs, priorities and aspirations.
But the Section 30 process won't work. It cannot provide for a free and fair exercise of our right of self-determination. We know that with such a high degree of certainty that we'd be fools not to treat it as established fact. The British don't want to allow a referendum at all. So what makes anybody imagine that they'd be willing to go along with a free and fair referendum? It makes no sense!
We will only gain the respect of the international community if we demonstrate a willingness to assert for ourselves the attributes of a normal independent nation.
It is futile to try to explain to British Nationalists such as Douglas Ross and Willie Rennie that the choice of whether and when we exercise our right of self-determination is a matter entirely and exclusively for the people of Scotland.
The restoration of Scotland's independence is neither imminent nor inevitable. The complacency implied and fostered by such notions stands as one of the greatest threats to Scotland's cause.
...politicians don't like doing U-turns. It makes them look weak and indecisive and - worst of all - wrong!
Opposition to the Section 30 process has gone from the loony obsession of a handful of zoomers to the stuff of mainstream politics in a matter of months.
From the political perspective, anyone looking to take renewed hope and revived spirit away from this event was bound to feel let down. But few among the more politically aware entertained such ambition. The height of my ambition was that the conference wouldn't be a total disaster. It wasn't. It was only 'nearly hopeless'. But was it dire?
It seems that it has never occurred to Martin Keatings that if the Scottish Government and Parliament have never asked the question of whether the Scottish Parliament can legislate for a referendum without permission from Westminster there might be a good reason for that. Nor does he see the glaring contradiction in his own position. … Continue reading Pointless proceedings