The Dugcast fae the Dughoose – with Andrew Tickell

Welcome to the July 3 edition of the Dugcast fae the Dughoose. This week I am joined online by Andrew Tickell, otherwise known as Lallans Peat Worrier. Andrew is a law lecturer at Glasgow Caledonian University and columnist for The National. He gives us an explanation of the legal issues around a referendum without a Section 30 order. We also chat about the issues facing British nationalists as they desperately try (and fail) to find a new rationale for the ‘Union’, and a whole lot more besides.

We lost the connection briefly about 10 minutes in but it was soon restored. I hope it doesn’t spoil your listening pleasure too much.

Direct link to the podcast in case the embedding doesn’t work for you – click here :

You can help to support this blog with a Paypal donation. Please log into and send a payment to the email address Or alternatively click the donate button. If you don’t have a Paypal account, just select “donate with card” after clicking the button.
Donate Button

If you have trouble using the button, or you prefer not to use Paypal, you can donate or purchase a t-shirt or map by making a payment directly into my bank account, or by sending a cheque or postal order. If you’d like to donate by one of these methods, please email me at and I will send the necessary information.

Please also use this email address if you would like the dug and me to come along to your local group for a talk.

GINGER2croppedGaelic maps of Scotland are available for £15 each, plus £7 P&P within the UK for up to three maps. T-shirts are £12 each, and are available in small, medium, large, XL and XXL sizes. P&P is £5 for up to three t-shirts. My books, the Collected Yaps Vols 1 to 4 are available for £11 each. P&P is £4 for up to two books. Payment can be made via Paypal.

newbook My new book has just been published by Vagabond Voices. Containing the best articles from The National from 2016 to date. Weighing in at over 350 pages, this is the biggest and best anthology of Wee Gingerisms yet. This collection of pieces covers the increasingly demented Brexit years, and the continuing presence and strength of Scotland’s independence movement.

You can order the book directly from the publisher. Ordering directly means that postage is free. You can order here –

You can also order a book directly from me. The book costs £11.95 and P&P is an additional £3.50, making a total of £15.45. To order just make a Paypal payment to, or alternatively use the DONATE button below. Please make sure to give me your postal address when ordering. Orders to be sent outwith the UK will incur extra postage costs, please email me for details. If you can’t use Paypal, or prefer an alternative payment method, please email

76 comments on “The Dugcast fae the Dughoose – with Andrew Tickell

  1. yesindyref2 says:

    I don’t want to be negative but I just don’t have the attention span, or time, to listen to 48 minutes and 51 seconds, for something in writing where I can speed read in 1 minute flat, maybe spending another 30 seconds over something that’s important to me.

    So – any chance of some kind of brief transcript of these things, as I would be interested in what LPW has to say but life is too short to listen!

    Sorry to be offensive, podcasts and lectures are not my thing.

    • yesindyref2 says:

      Thing is this, last night as well as working on business orders, having found this:

      Wandered around other bits and pieces skimmed back through that article, and put it together a bit in what I laughingly call my mind, with a post elsewhere about it, then caught up on your previous article, saw a link from Golfnut to Michael Gray to this which I read in full:

      Click to access 2020csih39.pdf

      and wandered off to other things plus relating it a bit, miauowing at our cat, finished getting out the order and made a cup of tea before settling down to the recorded series 5 finale – all in way less than the time it would take to listen to one single podcast. Which since I have a poor attention span for the spoken word, I wouldn’t even take in. It doesn’t mean I’m thick, you’d probably call it a minor form of Attention Deficit, ummm …

      • Golfnut says:

        Interesting read, but doesn’t address 2 basic though essential elements, perhaps deliberately.
        I have yet to read or hear any discussion on Parlamentary sovereignty which addresses the issue that Westminster does not exercise sovereignty in law but only by convention.
        That an unwritten constitution has no standing in court.
        A recent poll has shown that half of Tory voters would be happy to end the union. If a referendum was held and England voted to leave the union with Scotland, how would Independence for England be achieved.
        Just a thought.

        • yesindyref2 says:

          A couple of things from the aricle by Iain Halliday:

          “A great deal of deference is afforded to the Scottish Parliament:” [as opposed to the Government, an important distinction]

          and this

          “…the elected members of a legislature… are best placed to judge what is in the country’s best interest as a whole. A sovereign Parliament is, according to the traditional view, immune from judicial scrutiny because it is protected by the principle of sovereignty. But it shares with the devolved legislatures, which are not sovereign, the advantages that flow from the depth and width of the experience of its elected members and the mandate that has been given to them by the electorate. This suggests that the judges should intervene, if at all, only in the most exceptional circumstances” (Axa)

          It seems that, regardless of its intent, Westminster may share with Holyrood that parliamentary sovereignty. Taking that along with the historical Claims of Right? Well, who knows!

          Just as a wee thought, virtually all the opinions we see talk about the Scotland Act 1998. What if that is, effectively, irrelevant?

          • Golfnut says:

            Here’s another, if the Westminster parliament is not sovereign in law, do they have the legal authority to treat the crown and the union as reserved issues.

            • yesindyref2 says:

              Well, yes indeed, that is a question. We may or may not get some sort of an answer with the Keatings case, but courts do have a habit of seeking what they need to answer the actual question asked of them, and leave other tricky points in submissions unanswered – as they did for Miller.

              Anyways, here’s yet another opinion, this being the O’Neill one for the Keatings case though it may have been amended after the first session. I have skimmed it, but am now having another look, as whenever you read such a thing you often have something you’re looking for, but what I’m looking for here is whether in fact and how much it goes beyond the Scotland Act 1998. it does as a background, and I think in a way it does for argument, and I still have more to read:


              “2.9 The fact that the 1800 Union between Great Britain and Ireland (just as the 1707 Union between the Kingdoms of Scotland and England) was described in its constituent documents as being for “forever after” is shown,by the concluding of this new Irish-British Treaty,to have been the language of aspiration rather than binding obligation.” [1921 “Articles of an Agreement for a Treaty between Great Britain and Ireland”]

              I’ve no doubt, by the way, that having a legal person as FM is a distinct advantage, because the logic and semantics would tend towards a legal solution, even if done politically! Compare Sturgeon’s cool paper of December, with BoJo’s assertions. And that 1921 agreement which I never thought about in itself, as opposed to another step for Ireland, has got me thinking.

              Anyways, I’m done in zzzzzzzz

              • Golfnut says:

                Thanks Yesindyref2, I’ve gone through it before, but stupidly didn’t save, I’ve done that now.
                Prof John Robertson recently opined when speaking about journalism that, and I apologise to Prof Robertson if I’ve misinterpreted the thrust of his comment, journalists were schooled into a particular mindset. I believe that also in my opinion is the problem with the legal profession. A glaringly obvious example contained in the opinion by O’ Neill is the continual reference to the crown in Parliament, that the Scottish Parliament doesn’t enjoy that privilege, making of course Westminster supreme. That assumption is completely at odds with Scots Constitutional law, its never challenged.
                Anyway, I’m done. Nice to see you back in the comments, stay well.

                • yesindyref2 says:

                  You too, it was good to have a civilised conversation.

                  Too many people are rude, and it can be contagious unfortunately, which isn’t a good look to the non-activist undecideds and soft NOes. Specially if people call them Yoons, BritNats or British Nationalists in an insulting way and then call them stupid, naive, cowards or worse, for having used their democratic choice to vote NO. Even if they’re writing to say they’re now YES, as we get in The National occasionally. The YES movement seems more interested in insult than inclusive conversation, which is probably why it’s taking so long to get to 54% YES.

                  But I digress 🙂

              • Shagpile says:

                You can’t compare 1707 and 1800. One was an international treaty, the other was not. 1800 was dressed up as a treaty, but the fact remains, it was an internal act to abolish the devolved legislature of a British territory albeit with the consent of that legislature, which legally was not required. A political exercise in smoke and mirrors.

                • yesindyref2 says:

                  Shagpile, it’s a new one to me.

                  I’m more used to patiently telling people that, no, the UK was NOT formed in 1800, the UK of GB was formed in 1706/7, and here’s the quotes (from the articles). That 1800 added on Ireland though it could be said to be in already in some ways, and that for those that read carefully, the 1800 Act is not even legally competent in its semantics, including as it should, the 1707. So yes, it does need thinking about.

    • weegingerdug says:

      No, I’m not going to sit down for three hours to transcribe a podcast for you.

      • yesindyref2 says:

        Well, a somewhat more sensible idea would be to ask LPW to provide a written article.

        Back in around 1996, someone posted on demon.homepages.authoring or, I forget which, asking for some help with Jaws. It turned out this transcribed text into sound for the blind! A forerunner I guess of some of the speech to text and vice versa converters people can get these days.

        As well as trying to help him with his query I went back over my webpages to make sure they were spelt right, ahd good grammar, and even found out about accesskeys. So as to make them available to as many people as possible, regardless of disability. I’m a bit dyslexic, so the spelling otfen goes a bit agley. I ran them then through Bobby.

        Then along came the DDA, and its successor, the The Equality Act 2010.

        Seems some people still haven’t caught up with the notion of equality for all,

  2. Alex Clark says:

    Thanks again Paul and Andrew for the very interesting discussion. Not everything can be separated into black and white, complicated issues are almost always a shade of grey and that’s why they are complicated.

  3. Petra says:

    I’m really interested in what Andrew Tickell has to say, and will listen to the podcast later when I have the time. I particularly want to hear if he agrees with Joanna Cherry when she says, ”from time to time activists send me lengthy legalistic arguments about Scotland’s nebulous status in the Union which they believe, if ventilated in “the international courts”, would lead to Scotland’s independence. I’m afraid that belief is misguided. There is no legal shortcut to independence. The route to independence is through the ballot box.”


    I watched Nicola Sturgeon’s CV19 briefing earlier and by God does she put that cabal in London (and Holyrood) to shame. Standing there day after day clearly stating her position on protecting Scotland and having to deal with a crowd of sh*t stirring, Westminster supporting journalistic buffoons. She’s putting up with no nonsense and this crisis, hellish as it is, has afforded her the opportunity to show that she’s a highly intelligent, extremely competent and compassionate leader. And if watching on CH 9 they’re not in a position, as is / was the norm, to edit or lie about what she’s said, cut her off and / or talk over her.

    The focus of journalistic questions today was, surprise, surprise, on the air bridge list (over and over again). Nicola Sturgeon explained, over and over again, that the Westminster ”air bridge” list had been changing on a daily basis. At one point it had changed within a half hour period and that the ScotGov would make a decision when they had perused the final list (whenever that will be).

    The dregs of UK journalism will be racing off now, as fast as their wee legs can carry them, to report that she’s just stated that, HA HA, ”she will not be dragged along by another Government’s shambolic decision making, restrictions on travel should have been made much earlier by the UK Gov, she will not put Scotland at risk when the infection rate in Scotland is 5 times lower than it is in England and that there is no real lack of communication between Holyrood and Westminster it’s just that they, Westminster, make the decisions and then expect Holyrood (Wales and NI) to just rubber stamp them.” She also pointed out that when people like her and Mark Drakeford (and NI) seem to be on the same page you’d think that he (Johnson) would question how HIS Government is operating.

    She’s slapping these journalists down too. One tried to make out that projects in Scotland were not on track. You know the usual Scotland is sh*t generalisations. She immediately said, ”what projects are not on track?” Name ONE. He started to mumble .. mumble .. mumble and couldn’t name anything at all. Fiona Hyslop followed up by outlining that everything is on track, the amount of money being made available to different projects and that Westminster still has control over particular areas. The latter, areas reserved to England, being something that they want to hide from the Scottish public, no doubt.

    When asked how the public would know what changes she was making (dummies!), Nicola Sturgeon said, that she could make the statements but it was their job to report on them ”factually”, as she hoped would be the case tomorrow. Haha!

    All in all another good day’s work. Great performance from the First Minister of Scotland. How lucky are we to have her. Just imagining what this would have been like with Davidson, Carlaw, Leonard or Rennie dealing with this crisis, whilst taking their orders from Boris the Butcher. The death rate here in Scotland would have been, would still be, going right through the roof. Just imagining too what it would have been like if Scotland had been an Independent country right now. Comparable to countries with a much lower death rate? … Iceland (10), Greece (192), New Zealand (22), Greenland (0), Denmark (606), Norway (251), Finland (328) and Australia (104). Meanwhile the UK features as having 43,995 deaths on this chart but as we all know that is just another case of Westminster massaging the figures (lying).

    Experts state that the UK’s excess death rate, well over 60,000 now, is the worst in the world when adjusted for population. It’s in fact still the worst in the world if you take the 43,995 figure and adjust it for population. Let’s see what it’s looking like following Coco’s announcement that pubs in England can open from 6am come this ”Super Saturday.”

    • weegingerdug says:

      Petra – we did discuss Joanna’s point about ‘experts’, and he shares much the same view as she does. There is no clever clever interpretation of the Treaty of Union that can be exploited to magic Scotland into independence.

  4. Tam the Bam says:

    Sorry Indyref 2….like you I dont have time to peruse endless scrolls of legalese…..much prefer to be entertained and informed by Andrew and Paul….nothing personal.

  5. Brian says:

    That’a a pity, as I think this was one of the best Dugcast’s yet. Andrew had my attention all the way through 🙂

    • Brian says:

      For avoidance of doubt, that was a reply to Yesindyref2 on his inability to listen to a 48 min podcast.

      • yesindyref2 says:

        Brian / Tam. Different strokes for different, errr, people. I read all his legal articles in The National, and used to on his now comatose blog.

  6. Tam the Bam says:

    Noticed my post didnt pass moderation Paul…..did I say something disrespectful?…..I’m none the wiser?

  7. Doug Aberdein says:

    I know that people have a preferred method of receiving and processing information, but I find the Dugcasts fascinating to listen to. I am always disappointed when they end and I was surprised that today’s lasted over three-quarters of an hour – it didn’t feel like it!

    As I live in Englandland it is a real pleasure to listen to Scottish people discussing politics in a calm, effective and humorous manner. It is a welcome change to sit back, relax and listen to these discussions – I love your daily blogs too, but it my Friday treat to not have to stare at the screen and have the content delivered to me in a friendly way.

    Thanks again to you and your guests, keep up the good work and all the best to Ginger.

  8. Jacksg says:

    In relation to Petra’s post. The experts say when adjusted for a population the excess death rate is well over 60,000, if that is the case why would any reasonably competent government allow pubs to open in such a haphazard manner.

    The excuse today for the 6am opening was ( i kid you not) that they were worried the pubs would open at midnight FFS 😠 It’s a total dereliction of duty on the part of the WM government. They have the bloody cheek to criticise our FM and her advisors for using the science to protect Scotlands citizens.

    I really feel sorry for some English cities and counties when the pubs open. It’s worth remembering That the pub-goers tomorrow would at this point in the summer be clogging up the bars and clubs of Spain. Next month it will be Spain’s turn.

    • If only one person dies through drink related violence in England, their blood is on Scots Brit Nats hands as well as their English Masters’.
      Upon his own admission towards the end of his broadcast, young Tickell conceded that he had been known to ‘bore for ..oops, .’not’ Britain.
      That he is a lecturer in law came across and his target audience is by definition educated Scots listeners.
      The 320,000 Scots children in English engineered poverty, the half million Scots living in Brit Nat policies poverty would be somewhat surprised that joint household incomes of £60,000 a year were prevalent, and that by dint of enjoying the wealth of Scotland, the I’m All Right, Jackers, would vote for continued colony status.

      With the greatest will in the world, Tickell will never reach the former labour heartlands audience.
      Eloquently, Andrew confirmed what we all knew; England need merely say No, even if 59 SNP MPs are returned, if every voter in Scotland voted for Independence parties next May, because it’s a reserved UK matter; we would not be ‘allowed’ to leave the UK because Mark Francois said so.
      Is the only route under ‘international law’ therefore civil war?
      Do we form a Scottish Liberation Army, bomb UK military bases, kill Brit soldiers, set fire to English owned holiday homes, and descend into darkness and terror, killing and bombing each other in our cloistered Nats and Unionist strongholds?
      How about bombing Canary Wharf?

      Oh how the Loyal Sons Blackshirts would love that.
      Just like the good old days in Norn Irn.

      WE are of course not going to descend into darkness and civil war.
      Equally we are not going to sit on our hands and play out the farce of achieving a landslide victory in May 2021, only to have sub lieutenant Bowie and Carjack Lawson laugh their heads off when England says Fuck off, back in your box, Jocks.

      For starters, some may wish to take a leaf out of France’s activists’ protest handbook.
      How about three lanes of HGVs travelling up the M74 from today, creating 20 mile caravan tailbacks in Cumbria?
      Not that I’m advocating such action as it is probably illegal, lest some English Homeland Security Thought Police decide to knock on my door and frog march me off to a Reorientation Centre in darkest Cumbria.

      I listened to the full broadcast, and it flew past, but then again I am an anorak.

      No mention of No Deal Brexit, and its devastating impact, which will be a massive game changer, even for the almost mythical £60k pa households.

      There are many of us who will not hang around until May 21, whatever alternative strategy to wait and see which that entails.

    • fergusgreen says:

      Am I correct in thinking that England, with 0.8% of the world’s population has 12% of the planet’s coronavirus related deaths?

  9. Eddie Mc says:

    Another thoroughly enjoyable and interesting podcast Paul and I could hear what Andrew Tickell was saying very clearly but unfortunately had a lot of difficulty in hearing your side of the conversation. I appreciate you are a quietly spoken young man but could you turn up the volume a wee bit ? Thanks

  10. You look down that list of 59 countries and think, ‘which country is it that presents the greatest risk to us?’ That’s right, one of the ones not on the list, the excluded ones such as India, Brazil, USA and RSA; the one with which we share a land border. Don’t know how the presstitutes missed that…

  11. And today’s number – 137; RIP all.

  12. Dr Jim says:

    The problem with the law has always been lawyers, because amongst the populace there’s a misconception that the law and justice are the same thing or a desire to achieve justice, if that were the case then the law would be simple, there’d be right and wrong and everything would be hunky dory, and that’s where the lawyers come in to complcate the law to such a degree that they and only they can adjudicate on their own concotions of it, which in turn creates employment for life as long as the lawyers continue to add complications to aready complicated systems

    As it happens I do agree with Andrew Tickells explanation of the use the UK government would put the law to unless something magical happens, which invariably never does, so we’re dependent on politics

    Nicola Sturgeon has always been right on this, we can’t just shout loud and bluff our way through because the UK can and will just lawyer up and do what they want, we need more people pressure

  13. Margaret McAuslan says:

    very informative dugcast today, thank you

  14. Bob Lamont says:

    Most enjoyable, even if your audio was muted due to feedback, somebody will appear shortly to explain the in-built solution…
    Fascinating and equally frustrating listening to Andrew as his verbals raced off to catch up with thoughts, was he on a Lidl checkout in student days by any chance… 🤣
    Superb break for the weekend…

  15. Hamish100 says:

    Good podcast. With all the talent around a new Scots radio or TV channel would be possible.Of course the Westminster govt would not allow that!

  16. Liz g says:

    What I’d have been interested to know is *Would a Referendum on the Treaty of Union ( I don’t mean a clause or magic of otherwise 🙂 ) it’s self be as dubious as an independence referendum*

    EG…Do we keep the Treaty as it is…Or do we want to end it and explore if we could renegotiate a new one!
    I know some will say that’s independence by the backdoor but it seems to be a legal way to force our Constitution into the political sphere!

    There’d either be a New Treaty that Scotland and England would have to vote through or there wouldn’t but all the referendum itself would do is demonstrate that the majority of people in Scotland no longer want to be bound by the Terms and Conditions of the 1706/1707 Treaty anymore?

    • Petra says:

      I’m not sure about that Liz, many Scots know little of Scotland in the here and now never mind what went on 300 years go. I also reckon that many would think that voting on a 300 year old Treaty (bit of paper) would be a load of stuff and nonsense. Better to stick with the status quo I reckon. Keep it simple, ”Should Scotland be an independent country.” Yes or No? …. YES …. OK.

    • yesindyref2 says:

      Interestingly Liz g, even with an S30 Edinburgh II, a YES vote and acqujiescence by the (r)UK Government, I think there would indeed need to be a new treaty – that being one between two Independent and separate states, both recognising the right of the other to exist peacefully!

      • Liz g says:

        I’m coming more from what Andrew Tickel was saying about the Courts.
        That there is no clear “law” around referendums when it could be argued that it’s on a reserved matter….But there is a clear Treaty and polling the Scots opinion on that allows the Judge’s to bat the issue back to the politicians which they’re probably going to try to do any way and we’ll get no clear answers.
        Saying that we ( the Scottish people ) are not satisfied with the current Treaty arrangements and want to explore a new one doesn’t say anything about independence but it will likely result in independence anyway
        If we are going to be blocked from a vote on independence itself at every turn then the “Democratic Event” that needs to happen has to come from somewhere .
        There’s already a group of Lords trying to write new “Articles” of Union and want it through Westminster on the down low so to springboard from that on to “we should have a say if they are changing the arrangements” is no such a leap. …E.G. we’ve voted on EU treaty changes …..while it is a change of discourse to be sure we need to push through a vote somehow… it plan C 🙂

        • yesindyref2 says:

          It’s always difficult making guesses Liz G in case we happen to hit the nail on the head and give away the “secret plan”. Only when someone else says it, or writes it, like Aidan O’Neill did in his adivce to Keatings do I feel comfortable. Then it’s not my fault! I didn’t watch (see above), but LPW doesn’t really think out of the box.

          But here’s another step, and the comments below are simply delicious. The more the merrier as it might convince Westminster! But we knew this was coming, and before the end of the transition period. It just takes one interim interdict to delay that for BoJo so hey BoJo, just expedite that S30 old chap, there’s a dear. We can be gone by 31st Dec. No, that’s no problem, that £100 billion will do very nicely, want a receipt? I might be bluffing or running interference of course …

          “Tomorrow’s front page: Holyrood to battle every step of the way as Westminster moves to grab devolved powers back”

  17. The phrase ‘The Thick of it’ took on new meaning today during the FM’s Daily Covid19 update.

    Are our Hack Pack really that individually and collectively thick?

    It would seem so.

    Maybe a dozen questions on the air corridor and how Scotland could enforce Scots quarantine laws on Scots flying back to Newcastle and nipping back into Scotland?

    How could we stop them?

    Well, many may recall earlier stories of curfew breaking.

    Cumbria Police stopping a Birmingham lass who had come to Glasgow to buy designer hand bags in an uninsured untaxed Beamer.

    They confiscated the car, and sent her packing back to England’ s ‘Midlands’ with the appropriate FP points on her licence. Good luck her when she applies for car insurance.

    Or the 4 Bold Boys who drove from Glasgow to London for a family birthday celebration?
    Ur Nicked!

    The technology and police diligence are there to catch selfish Scots bastards who readily break the rules, cause deaths of their fellow Scots citizens, and think that we will just wring our hands in helpless frustration.

    The hacks would have us believe that we are frightened to intervene for fear of these thug sun worshippers beating us up.

    So might is right, just like the Loyal Blackshirts romper stomper rampage through the Mad King’s Square the other day.
    Idiots peddling fascist dross of course.

    I’d argue that any idiot who wants to fly off to Spain and sit poolside with a face mask getting burnt doesn’t deserve public consideration.

    14 days quarantine upon return; end of story.

    But the assembled Hacks today are on the side of the law breakers.
    It will be impossible to enforce (which is a lie) so we must let anarchy reign?

    Enforcement of face masks in shops is impossible. Staff will be assaulted if they try to intervene.
    Better to be terrified of ugly law breakers and say or do anything to prevent them from shopping in your store.

    I think that I’ll visit a store tomorrow without a face mask, munching on a Big Mac dripping mustard and ketchup on the shop floor, rifle my greasy fingers through racks of clothing, light up a post prandial Embassy Regal, puff away to my heart’s content, stub the fag end underfoot on their nice polished Covid 19 sanitised floor, and indulge in a little shop lifting, stuffing my pockets with goodies and strolling past the shop staff and into the daylight, oblivious to the shrill beeping of the alarm at the exit.
    As I observe, are our hacks really thick or terrified that if they don’t attack Sturgeon, theirs will be one of the 12 being sacked by Newsquest ‘because of the Covid crisis’?

    NS ripped the last journalist a new backside when she asked him to be specific and name infrastructure and hospital build projects in limbo.
    To quote Nick Robinson; ‘He did not reply.’

    You are five times more at risk contracting this deadly virus in England than in Scotland.
    Overnight, 1 death, 11 new cases, and 10 in intensive care.
    Yet the Scots hacks are worried about Jocks flying off to get rat arsed for a fortnight in Ibiza.

    Not a word I use a lot, but, scum.

    • Bob Lamont says:

      Having just caught up with it on Youtube Jack I must completely concur, as shabby shower as always largely singing from the same hymn sheet (collusion?), but so refreshing to see a more feisty response to the nonsense trotted out as propaganda rather than genuine interest….
      Terry Murden from Daily Business as the finale was truly priceless, utterly floundering to specify a particular project and left with his derriere in a sling…

  18. Arthur Thomson says:

    An interesting Dugcast Paul.

    Within the conversation I was interested in the points made about discussing Scotland’s independence in England. I have lived abroad – in England – for a long time and the matter has arisen occasionally and briefly.

    Most recently, at Christmas, I was at a do with a group of 20 or so decent lads whom I presume are all English. I stress that they are, so far as I have experienced, decent blokes who invited me into their group through a common interest in golf.

    Anyway, the first question I was asked, after preliminaries about eating, was what I thought about independence.

    My loud and clear answer was: “I first joined the SNP when I was sixteen and I am still a member today.” There was a momentary silence and then the topic of conversation changed. That was just as well because I have no intentions – ever – of justifying my view. To me it should be patently obvious why I am committed to Scotland’s independence. It isn’t conditional, it is absolute.

    This links to my view as to how Scotland will become independent. It will only happen when a majority of people living in Scotland have the same absolute commitment to it. Then and only then will the craven elements in Scotland, whose values centre on money and sadomasochism, wither on the vine. A majority of ordinary Scots have to become sufficiently confident and committed to be open, upfront and matter of fact about where they stand. From that will follow the open, public disdain and contempt for the union that is essential to create the conditions in which it will ultimately end by mutual agreement.

    We have some way to go and are going to have to be patient.

    As has been said by others, independence will come from political pressure rather legal argument. But that said, there is definitely a part for legal actions to play – in generating the outrage and political pressure in the face of being cast as political prisoners in a malign British regime. That has to become the mindset of a majority of Scotland’s population.

  19. Dr Jim says:

    The FMs of both Wales and Scotland condemn the UKs behaviour in this matter but Johnson still stands at his podium and lies that there’s co-operation and we all want the same thing, yet still the media arrange the presentation of their *news* as if the fault lays at the door of Scotland by bookending the report with complaints about the FM and Scottish government

    When this pandemic is over the UK under Dominic Cummings will come after Nicola Sturgeon and Holyrood probably even before the elections because they know the SNP are set to sweep the boards clean of Unionist parties in Scotland and that may be their mistake too far if we have the support we hope we have

  20. Alba woman says:

    I really enjoyed the dugcast today …very civilised discussion about important matters.

    I watched FM briefing today and was totally briefed and informed about Scotland’s realities in this pandemic.

    Question time was a total farce…actually more than that it was a disgrace

    Who are these rude ignorant people purporting to be journalists. They were like vultures swooping on their prey.

    Nicola was brilliant. I loved the way she ticked each one off her list as they faded into insignificance.

  21. Kenzie says:

    An observation Paul, not a critique, but LPW came across loud and clear. You sounded as though you were whispering and I had to strain to hear you.

  22. Ken2 says:

    Virus at Trump rally. Family member

  23. Ken2 says:

    Trump’s son’s girlfriend has the virus. They were going to attend a rally at Rushmore with him. They are now self isolation

  24. En passant, Johnson is to introduce twice daily Trumpese Press Briefings to assembled Pet Hacks in No 10 from August, to be fronted by the not yet appointed Press Officer.
    Laura Kuennesberg?
    All those cosy walks and chats with Johnson about to pay off?

    • Sandra hunter says:

      I see Johnson’s ‘press briefings’ plans as what was really behind Murdo Fraser tweeting that the First Minister’s daily briefings should no longer be broadcast. He says they are a Party Political Broadcast. Oh the irony. It very much looks as if No. 10 appointing an ‘experienced broadcaster’ to be the ‘front’ of UK Gov – as well as the televising of the press lobby briefings are intended as a Party Political Broadcast for UK Gov/Boris. Murdo and Scottish Conservatives – and No. 10 – I suspect would be wanting the No. 10 briefings to replace Nicola Sturgeon’s briefings in order that viewers in Scotland ONLY get UK Gov and NO Nicola Sturgeon.

      It will be an absolute disgrace if BBC/BBC Scotland enable this disappearing of the First Minister for viewers in Scotland.

      Listening to LBC and other media south of the border yesterday, Nicola Sturgeon is not unique in describing UK Gov’s ‘air-bridges’ list of countries as a complete shambles. Boris Johnson has been absolutely hammered on the air waves for UK Gov’s messy briefings and I noted on social media that the numbers have really ramped up south of the border who tune into Nicola Sturgeon’s briefings and are very favourable towards her.

      This is what is bugging Murdo Fraser and the Scottish Conservatives. They want Nicola Sturgeon to have no exposure to a Scottish audience.

      Excellent podcast with Andrew Tickell – and I agree with his view that Plans A and B are pretty much the same, and that there is no magic legal fix to secure independence.

      And interestingly – listening to LBC Sat a.m. speaking to Sean Tipton from ABTA – re ‘air-bridges’ and who the public should look to for travel – he recommends they listen to their ‘local governments’. Wise advice.

  25. Ken2 says:

    Very interesting podcast. Very civilised. Very informative,

  26. To underscore how nasty our Jock Press Core really are, after yesterday’s Daily Update farce, Professor Robert West Epidemiologist was on the English BBC Breakfast this morning and casually quotes ‘20,000 infections a week and 1000 deaths’, in England, and lambasts Johnson for his photo op standing next to a pub landlord with a pint, while the alarming failure of England’s Trace and Test efforts is now common knowledge.
    On the same programme the lass representing the Licencing Trade, when discussing the ‘guidelines’ as opposed to laws surrounding the reopening pubs in England, seemed to say that if a customer refused to provide name and address details, vital in the event of any outbreak, then, they would still be served?

    Up here, our landlords and staff regularly ask for proof of age, and refuse to serve fresh faced revellers if said proof is not provided.

    Oh, England, you are drowning in in your own greed.

    In Scotland we had one death, and 11 new infections yet the Jock Hacks want to open up Scotland to plague level infection flushed into our land in a tsunami of English tourists dripping with this deadly infection?

    England has 20,000 new cases a week, 1000 deaths.
    Yet Torcuil Crichton of the Daily Record labels Scotland’s Wales’ and N Ireland’s quarantine rules a ‘shambles’?
    Some would calls these people enemies of the state.

    Close the border now.

  27. Oh, and while I’m at it, Kirsty Wark and Newsnight were ‘live’ in Belfast last night, as the City opened up its pubs 24 hours before England. The landlord of the Bullit Bar, in close up, regaled the success of the start up, with about 100 revellers off camera sipping quietly and obediently, as opposed to the normal 300 footfall on the night.
    I’ve been to the Bullit (yes it’s really called that. In Belfast!). It is part of a hotel posh restaurant bar hotel complex where a steak and chips will set you back £40.
    There is a lane at the back of the property with an expansive open air ‘smoking area’, with the de rigeur heaters and giant canvas parasol thingies.

    Even on Andrew’s £60 k a year wage, you’d not be wining and dining here very week end.
    You have to be filthy rich to dine there every week. (My mother in law’s 90th was the occasion of our one, and only, visit to the eaterie.)

    Newsnight could of course have visited Lavery’s Bar, a student haunt, or the White Fort, up in Andietown, two joints that would be ‘jumpin’ in the ‘old normal’ day….but they chose a Posh Nosh Eaterie…with no shots of diners or drinkers, the message being? Look, all that fuss about nothing?

    Well, think Blackpool’s Miracle Mile, or Canal Street in Manchester tonight.

    20,000 cases a week, and 1000 deaths.

    It’s enough to make anybody turn to drink.

  28. Ken2 says:

    Royals back at Birkhall,Deeside. Wondering about all over. Have they got their masks on? and social distancing etc.

  29. Hamish100 says:

    I forgot about Crichton. A bit like Clegg and Hutcheon. They keep moving the pack. Labour acolytes and unionists all.

  30. Ken2 says:

    In England(Wales?) 500,000 (elderly) deaths a year. 1/2 million. Mainly old age.

    10,000 a week on average. More in winter than the summer, on average.

  31. Ken2 says:

    Average income £29,000. Take off the tax etc for net.

    Local educational authorities are marking pupils as absent. If they are not doing home schooling. Then harassing the parents. (Phone/e-mail). That is really unfair in the circumstances of extreme stress and anxiety. Putting more stress on the families and students. Without adequate connectivity and equipment.

  32. Ken2 says:

    Pub/restaurants make their profits on food not drink. On average. Drink can be a ‘loss leader’. Hospitality and hotels. Make profits on rooms, (availability}.

  33. Harry Bickerstaff says:

    Hi Paul,Tried hard to follow the broadcast, but honestly, the two voices were so different, that I gave up.I tried simply turning up the sound (obviously!) but the difference between your voice and Andrew’s was too much.I really wanted to hear what Andrew was saying, but because your own voice is deeper, I found it very difficult to hear you.There was no way (for me) of separating the sound, so I could turn you up, in relation to Andrew.What I could get was extremely interesting and my criticism is in the hope that future broadcasts would be more balanced (in sound – of course!)Hope the little problem can be solved, as it was a pleasure to (almost) hear what you both had to sayThanksSaor Alba!Harry Bickerstaff

  34. Great interview, Paul. Always enjoy listening to LPW. Very knowledegable.

    “There is no legal shortcut to independence. The route to independence is through the ballot box.” – Joanna Cherry.

    I think this needs clarified. Certainly a majority of the people of Scotland must vote for independence before the ScotGov can commence negotiations with WM. That’s basic democracy. However, given The Clown’s refusal to transfer the necessary power to Holyrood to hold a referendum, then getting the people of Scotland their democratic right has thus become a legal issue. Even Nicola Sturgeon has hinted at this. Do we have the right to unilaterally ask ourselves a question about our own future?

    Well, I think we do have that right and I do not see anything in the Scotland Act that says we don’t. No ‘effect’ is enacted by merely asking the question. Simply asking the question cannot be deemed ultra vires since only WM can effect the outcome of the referendum.

  35. Bob Lamont says:

    O/T – A comment on Twitter made me chuckle, Stanley Johnson broke both the laws of Bulgaria and Greece in his little stunt in the sun, and breached UK advice on banned travel..

  36. Ken2 says:

    Johnston is likely to be gone before long. Not interfering in Scotland. 2+ years. Nicola will still be here. Murdo is getting desperate.

    Support for SNP/Independence rising. Over the tipping point. If people vote for it.

  37. Petra says:

    Excellent interview Paul and just to mention that I had no problem hearing what either of you had to say. Thanks too for managing to get such interesting people on board.

    Well it looks as though plan B isn’t without its challenges either (much of a muchness in relation to outcome with plan A, as per AT) and the ”oversights” that were made in relation to the Scotland Act 1998 continue to have long term consequences for us. Any chance of amending parts of it Andrew, lol? The UN ”self-determination” route looks to be closed off to us as is the EU route, as expected, that Pete Wishart was proposing … the EU to sanction a referendum.

    Andrew Tickell’s legal opinion seems to be in line with Joanna Cherry’s when she says that, ”there is no legal shortcut to independence.” If nothing else maybe this will put paid to some of the guff that’s being spouted elsewhere.

    I was hoping that Andrew Tickell was going to explain how we get out of this h*llhole. Wave his magic wand, and all of that, but it’s not to be so what do we do now? Back to using the 2021 election with as Joanna Cherry says, ”the route to independence is through the ballot box.”


    The latest on the Martin Keatings / Section 30 case. Will it make a difference if we win it? And if we lose it?

    ”By way of an update on the case. The Advocate General (UK Gov) has assigned its team. We have the pleasure of them sending not one, but two senior advocates and a junior. Lord Keen ) the AG) seems to have declined to argue himself.

    • Petra says:

      ‘Joanna Cherry urges Nicola Sturgeon to plan legally binding indyref2 without S30 order.’

      ..”Writing in The National, the SNP MP points to the First Minister’s Brexit day speech in January where she suggested a second referendum may be within the remit of Holyrood and that such assessment has been made by a range of constitutional experts.”..

      ..”She adds: “The argument that the Scotland Act could be read in such a way as to allow Holyrood to hold a referendum on the question of independence is well established. In 2012, before the Edinburgh Agreement was reached, seven legal academics including three distinguished professors published a paper challenging the view that only Westminster has the authority to call an independence referendum.”..

      ..”For the record, I have not endorsed the Plan B advanced by Angus Brendan MacNeil and Chris McEleny. I am not sure that plan has been fully developed or addresses how you bring the UK Government to the negotiating table, which will be vital.”..


      ‘Open Letter on Scottish Covenant.’

      ..”There is no possibility that ‘Plan A’ will be enacted through Boris Johnson granting a section 30 order, and ‘Plan B’ through electing a pro-independence majority will not be recognized by the UK government.”…

      • yesindyref2 says:

        Thanks for the update, interesting Keen isn’t going to be there though he’s probably saving himself for the appeal – if allowed of course, but that’s another story. Here’s those 7 2012 academics incuding Aileen Mcharg but also Mullem, Tierney and Walker:

        • Petra says:

          Thanks for the link, yesindyref2. Interesting and any idea as to how we should go forward with this?

          ..’The risk to the authority of the courts – a risk which, it should be noted, would not be avoided by taking refuge in a literal interpretation of the Scotland Act – therefore suggests that the UK and Scottish Governments would indeed be wiser to agree on an express transfer of powers. Nevertheless, because of the fundamental nature of the issues at stake, and the inherent contestability of constitutional law questions of this kind, it is important that any such agreement should be not taken as an unequivocal endorsement of the view that Westminster alone is entitled to authorise a referendum on the constitutional future of any part of the UK.”

          • yesindyref2 says:

            I think sit and watch the Keatings case for the time being, and if people are getting hot under the collar about this or that, just direct them in its direction and try to get them to be patient for the few weeks of the case. That case though seems to be predicated on the Scotland Act 1998, and it does seem to me that O’Neill with his background is suggesting another tack, so maybe that’s to follow. The thing about that is that the Scotland Act approach is within current constitutional understanding, and a ruling in either direction just affects a referendum.

            Taking the other more historical tack actually could undermine the Scotland Act which a few think is illegal in the first place in terms of the Treaty and Acts of Union (I’m in two minds), but also just dispose of the Union – but also its known Rule of Law. That could be enough to bring BoJo out of his fridge, even if dragged by anyone with any sense left in the Tory Government. Or the Queen. But I could be talking mince and tatties.

            Meanwhile a certain Anonymous posted that part you posted, two in a row, in a thread way back in 2014, on a somewhat despairing article by the subject of this article – LPW. Note my comment about “Cheer up! All is not lost :-)” Thing is, of course, if I can see this, and O’Neill can see this, and it is indeed a build-up of foundation bricks, then it’s pretty clear those in charge can see it. So yet again, it is a case of “patience” and also of course, trust, but not blind trust.


            So what do we do next? Keep on with the encouragement 🙂

            • Petra says:

              Thanks for the reply yesindyref2. I’ll check out that link later. Meanwhile I’ll (we’ll) keep on with the encouragement …. ‘winky wee face.’

  38. Petra says:

    It’s no wonder that people like Tory Murdo Fraser wants to shut Nicola Sturgeon up. Her comments about Coco’s governance being shambolic is being highlighted on a daily basis.

    ”In the list of over 70 countries UK provided to us on Wed evening, a minimum of 8 Countries have a higher point of prevalence (proportion of population that is infectious) than Scotland. This could be as high as 18 countries as we don’t have full data for all Countries.”

    ”UK Govt have just sent on further revised list of countries, Countries in Amber category have once again changed from list they wanted us to sign up to, provided on Wednesday.”

  39. Petra says:

    The BritNats are going after Devi Sridhar now. Brian Wilson having his say in the Scostman. I wonder if the Scotsman has been / is reporting on Valance and Whitty’s diabolical performance?


    Devi Sridhar hits back.

    ”She replied: “I’m trying to find some humour in entire situation. My friends start laughing when I tell them about these attacks.”

  40. Petra says:

    Dumfries and Galloway is still being restricted to the 5-mile limit.

    ”The 5-mile travel limit for leisure travel has now been lifted for most of the country
    You can now travel further afield to visit other parts of Scotland for leisure purposes, as the 5-mile travel limit has been lifted. Self-sustained holiday cottages, lodges and caravans with no shared facilities can also now re-open, while the rest of tourism is set to fully re-open from 15 July. This doesn’t apply to parts of Dumfries and Galloway, highlighted below, where we’re applying precautionary measures to contain a local outbreak and prevent any further spread of the virus. The Scottish Government will give a further update on that on Monday, July 6.”


    One for you Welsh Sion …

  41. Petra says:

    Check out Ann’s latest links on the Indyref2 site.


    One for a laugh. What are we like, eh?

    ”Yesterday, a tadger removed the cone from the statue. Today, Glasgow responded.”

  42. Ken2 says:

    Great links. Brilliant

Comments are closed.