Judge Judy fortnight 2022

Oh God, just kill me now please, because I really can’t take any more of this royalist sycophantic brown nosing that the British media insists is serious current affairs. It was bad enough last year when Prince Philip finally caught up in real life with all the times that his demise had been trending on Twitter and gave his demise a real reason to trend. The news of his passing was followed by what is known in this household as Judge Judy fortnight as my other half and I fled to the furthest reaches of the EPG in order to escape the 24 hour all channel brown nose fest which had taken over all other programming in a doomed attempt to persuade us that Prince Philip was more than just an over-privileged and obscenely entitled serial philanderer with a line in deeply offensive racist quips who posed as a champion of the environment while blasting as much wildlife as he could to buggery with a shotgun.

This year the BBC is already softening us up for another royalist pukefest in the shape of the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee, during which we are all to be expected to tug our forelocks and celebrate 70 years of Windsor family entitlement, privilege, and vast wealth obtained at public expense. We are supposed to be grateful that we are lectured to on saving the planet and tackling climate change by the likes of Princes Charles and William, who take private jets and helicopter trips in the same way that the rest of us hop on a bus to get the messages at Asda.

We are supposed to celebrate that this disgustingly wealthy family milks the public purse to the tune of millions annually and self-servingly poses as a public institution when it wants to maximise its revenues from the state, as a commercial brand when it wants to boost its revenues from lands and property which it has annexed to itself as private property even though they rightfully belong to the public institution and therefore to the state, and as a private family when it uses that public money to pay for expensive lawyers in order to run to the courts to seek injunctions to prevent those of us who really fund their pampered lifestyles from finding out that their real behaviour falls far far short of the glossy fairy tale image of self-denying saints which is propagated by the gushing sycophants of the British media who do their utmost to prevent us from having a proper grown up conversation about who the Windsors really are, and the influence that they wield behind the scenes, an influence which extends to both the Queen and Prince Charles having the power to alter any legislation which they believe impinges upon their wealth and privilege.

There is an arguable case for the Queen as head of state to have the ability to have a say on any legislation which has an impact upon her in her role as head of state. However there is no case for allowing her to exempt herself from laws which affect her private interests. And there is no case at all for allowing Prince Charles any input whatsoever into any legislation. There is only one head of state, and it’s not him. The way in which Princes of Wales have been allowed since the early 20th century to muscle in on the legislative process by politicians too blinded by deference to stop them is perhaps the perfect example of the fundamental flaw of an unwritten constitution.

In 2022 we will be inflicted with the Platinum Jubilee – marking the 70th anniversary of Queen Elizabeth on the throne – an anniversary reached on February 6, this will then be celebrated in early June with a long-weekend holiday consisting of the usual pageantry, fancy uniforms and Prince Edward weighted down with a suspiciously large number of medals for a man who was only in the Royal Marines for a fortnight.

There will be flypasts, special TV programmes with Nicolas Witchell in full lick-spittle mode on prime time telly, and the BBC will be desperately trying to tout street parties like a multi-level marketer who will be publicly humiliated if they don’t meet their quota of snake oil sales. Which is appropriate seeing as how the Windsors are the snake oil of the British state. And of course it will all be served up with an insistence that we must all share this starry eyed and uncritical view of a family who sit at the pinnacle of the deeply undemocratic patronage at the heart of the British state. We will be fed the hagiographic myth that the monarchy is apolitical, yet the head of the British state is a political role by definition, something we see clearly in a Scotland where many seek to free this country from the rule of the British state.

The Windsors know that they are beyond accountability and behave accordingly, the weasel wriggling of Prince Andrew to use legal technicalities in order to dispose of the court case brought against him by the woman who alleges that he took advantage of her when she was a sex trafficked teenager is merely the latest sordid example of the Windsors acting as though normal standards of morality do not apply to them. For a family which sits at the head of the British class system it is perhaps ironic that the Windsors have no class. Andrew is by no means isolated as a Windsor male who views women as disposable. His brother’s appalling behaviour during his marriage to Diana displayed a similar mind set. Recently social media exploded with allegations, which are strongly denied by Windsor apologists, that Prince William has inherited much the same sense of male entitlement.

The Queen is very elderly and recently has started to show evidence that her advanced age is starting to take its toll as the passage of time does on us all. This upcoming Platinum Jubilee would be the perfect occasion to take stock and start to have a proper adult conversation about the role of the monarchy in a 21st century democracy. Sadly it looks as though the BBC and the British media will use it as yet more fuel for a mindless British nationalist exceptionalism. We will yet again be infantilised and treated with contempt, our intelligence insulted and our concerns brushed under a carpet of pageantry and glossy lies.

In this household, as in many others throughout Scotland, it will be Judge Judy fortnight all over again.

My Gaelic maps of Scotland are still available, a perfect gift for any Gaelic learner or just for anyone who likes maps. The maps cost £15 each plus £7 P&P within the UK. You can order by sending a PayPal payment of £22 to weegingerbook@yahoo.com (Please remember to include the postal address where you want the map sent to).

I am now writing the daily newsletter for The National, published every day from Monday to Friday in the late afternoon.  So if you’d like a daily dose of dug you can subscribe to The National, Scotland’s only pro-independence newspaper, here: Subscriptions from The National

This is your reminder that the purpose of this blog is to promote Scottish independence. If the comment you want to make will not assist with that goal then don’t post it. If you want to mouth off about how much you dislike the SNP leadership there are other forums where you can do that. You’re not welcome to do it here.

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

Donate Button

47 comments on “Judge Judy fortnight 2022

  1. The Gillies says:

    A great article Paul. And hopefully a better year ahead for you.

  2. Pauline Gage says:

    …… most excellently put ! Thoroughly appreciate your erudite writings, pleasantly sharp whilst meaningfully to the point.
    Hope you recuperating well and your husband settling well in Scotia x

  3. grizebard says:

    Phew! I bet you’re glad Paul to have got that off your chest! (And not without reason.) The Royal Family has of late become uncannily representative of the moth-eaten and dysfunctional British State, and all too often in ways that we, the humble plebians, regard as less than admirable. With a sycophantic media junket attached, it’s the proverbial putting lipstick on a pig.

    Bread and circuses. (Or post-Brexit, mainly just circuses?) But never fear, Starmer with handy pair of Union Rag props in the background is evidently already gearing up to join in all the fun. Whoop-de-doo.

  4. Derek says:

    William’s lying low a bit, presumably hoping that the story goes away.

    There’s a joke there somewhere, possibly involving William, time travel and going down on the Marchioness.

    Andrew, meanwhile, must be sweating…

    • deelsdugs says:

      Missed the William sycophantasia, anyone have a link? I just shut the whole shit off usually, it’s so boaky and cringeworthy…

  5. Capella says:

    They make life a fairytale – Grimm.

    I like some countries with constitutional monarchies such as Sweden, Norway, Denmark and the Netherlands. There is an argument for a head of state which is stable, predictable and committed to protecting the interests of the people, as spelt out in the Declaration of Arbroath. But this one isn’t and, as the Declaration of Arbroath says, we have the right to get rid of a leadership which won’t protect us and replace it with one who will. Democracy demands it.

  6. Brenda Braithwaite says:

    Meanwhile, we lesser beings, if we are kept in by bad weather and resort to a daytime telefest we are hit by back-to-back adverts for funeral bonds, bespoke burials, equity releases, parties with family where we can eat, drink and be merry while we discuss the joyful subject of our passing on when we have reached what Johnson has decided is enough of a span of life for anyone, except his Dad. This is to keep to what is affordable for us all after we have adopted, an elephant, a white leopard, a penguin, and various other threatened creatures which the upper echelons of society have only now got used to not slaughtering fir sport. Aye it’s a great life if ye dinnae weaken. Keep up the good work Wee Ginger Dug.

  7. Melb Don says:

    Would Scots allow a French person to be head of state? Would Scots allow a German to be the Prime Minister? Would Scots allow a Soth African to be in charge of all our finances? Would Scots allow an American to run our defence forces? The answer to all those simple questions is of course not, they are foreigners. On reflection, All those positions are being held by English upper class persons; all of whom are foreigners. The real question is why do we Scots allow this to happen?

    • Welsh_Siôn says:

      The real question is why do we Scots allow this to happen?

      _________

      For the same reasons us Welshies do – they also run a lot of our cultural institutions, too, having nary a word of the native language and not caring that they do. Ditto for broadcasting – aided and abetted by a sprinkling of babus.

  8. dakk says:

    Not sure if it’s new money or old score settling from past colonies and ex royals.

    But long overdue scrutiny is being applied to the royals and their role in “their” nations’democracies.

    Even the telly news and papers are struggling to stem the flow.

    Hope the muscle relaxants are helping Paul,and your strength continues to grow.

  9. weefifer3 says:

    There is also this knighthood, the Knight Commander of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, to be given as a personal gift from the Queen to Tony Blair, who should be on trial for war crimes. There is a petition on Change.org demanding this is revoked, with over 500,000 signatures but both the Palace and WM are trying to say it’s not up to them to revoke this knighthood.

    • Golfnut says:

      Well historically ‘ hacking ‘ the spurs of a knight removed the rank of
      Knighthood. Basically the royal household are lying as are the politicians. If the crown can be removed from the monarch and given to someone else then a lowly knight isn’t really a problem.

      • Golfnut says:

        Sorry hadn’t finished.
        Unless your a queen, or an establishment worried that the great unwashed might get ideas above their station.

  10. Maggie Noakes says:

    Today seconded.I think that we should all switch off the TV in June and , if we have not stopped it already, cance our TV licenses.
    Covid permitting I hope to be on an island far away with my phone switched off. Cheers Paul.Take care.

  11. James Mills says:

    Covid has been a b*stard for two years now – but I can’t help hoping that a resurgence ( Boris is doing his best to encourage this ! ) would put a dampener on The Royal Festivities .
    Or is this too much to hope for ?

    • Welsh_Siôn says:

      In the run of things, this is probably small fry – not least we know how the MSM churnalists operate, and this is also from someone who hasn’t lost anyone close to the virus.

      Considering all the thousands of deaths on his watch, a great many of them unnecessary and then the hypocrisy, the Christmas parties and so forth, I was genuinely sickened by that Daily Ex press banner headline:

      “Boris Holds His Nerve”

      How must those who lost their loved ones feel? Those who have been unable to see family members for the last time? Or conduct and attend a funeral for them? How does those working flat out in the health services (all of them) feel – and then for them to effectively take a pay cut?

      It’s enough to make a dragon breathe fire, I can tell you.

      “Boris Holds His Nerve”

      Rant over.

  12. David Agnew says:

    I cancelled my TV license years ago. Never regretted it. Will be watching something else on netflix or perhaps crack open that Rockford FIles box set I got over xmas.

  13. Hamish100 says:

    If Chris Hanlin believes devo plus max, the vow has not been delivered yet, then why would it be in the future?

    Independence is the only option.

    Mr Hanlin should be honest and move to the Labour Party on a fools errand.

    • scottish skier says:

      Salmond was the devo max man originally as per comments in the last article:

      https://bit.ly/3pTWnPg

      It’s a dead duck now because (A) Scots want indy above all, and (B) Devo Max = Brexit even if it was magically granted as foreign affairs would be reserved and Scotland can’t be in the EEA unless it’s independent.

      So when MacAskill proposed it in the summer, he was arguing for Tory brexit. No wonder Chris is a ‘former’ policy chief.

      I would have backed it myself short of indy as within the EU it would have been an attractive proposition. Now it’s just a little more control over the speed at which the ship sinks due to brexit.

    • scottish skier says:

      Interview the Prof Poultice in the National about this:

      https://web.archive.org/web/20220105171105/https://www.thenational.scot/news/19825844.professor-john-curtice-devo-max-scots-want/

      ‘He [Curtice] said a YouGov poll in March had given it [devo max] 21% support, versus 38% for independence and 28% for the current Union. A Panelbase poll in January 2021 had devo-max on 17%, with independence on 43%, and the current Union on 32%.’

      Same for the SSAS:

      https://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/how-should-scotland-be-governed-five-options-5/

      To be honest, what’s wrong with using a ‘proud British, mother of all parliaments / greatest country in the world / cradle of democracy’ based FPTP approach? The winning option wins by plurality? 🙂

      Methinks unionists are still in 2014 when devo max would top this. But that’s a long time ago now!

      Devo max is so the Salmond days. Indy is is now what a majority of Scots want!

  14. johndotjones@aol.com says:

    Sad thing is that millions of people will drape themselves in union jacks and “celebrate” every minute of the whole charade.

    • deelsdugs says:

      That makes me shudder with horror…cause they will, and they’ll think they’re worthy of it…

  15. Not-My-Real-Name says:

    Excellent piece Paul .

    The fact that the Queen is to be perceived by her so called subjects aka ordinary plebs within this dysfunctional , delusional and non United country where she supposedly reigns( solely through luck of birth not through achievement) as some kind of superior being who should be regarded by us all as a beacon of virtue and thus untouchable and that she is somehow distant from all the scandals connected to her family is in itself ridiculous and nonsensical.

    Her position and that of all royalty is one of privilege and exceptionalism and the Royals as an institution is the foundation of much that is wrong with the so called country that is promoted as Great , but not really Great, Britain……indeed is she not known as the ENGLISH Queen…..

    The tax payer pays to ensure that they, as royalty, are permitted to play by the rules and standards that THEY , as privileged, pampered and well protected spongers, decide to play by….. which are rules and standards that are distinctly different to the rules and standards mere mortals must adhere to or as mere mortals aka subjects must be expected to pay the price and thus face the consequences…..Rule Britannia and God save the Queen……bit not you or I.

    It is of no coincidence that anything dubious she is mentioned as being involved with is not said in a way that should question her position….such as when she was mentioned in the infamous ‘Panama papers’ as was Prince Charles…The Queen is officially exempt from UK tax laws….It is extraordinary .that her advisers could have felt that it was appropriate – for somebody whose reputation is based so much on setting a good example – to invest in these offshore funds……she was also mentioned in the ‘Paradise papers’…Those documents showed how many of the world’s wealthiest people routinely avoided any type of tax by placing their assets in tax havens – nations or jurisdictions with low tax rates…………….a common practise for those wealthy royals but not for us plebs obvs aka so called subjects……but somehow the media expect us to see the Queen as the exception to other royals who stray from supposedly doing their duty in upholding ‘standards’ by their involvement in scandals……..

    Then there was the news of Buckingham palace banning ethnic minorities from office roles….but we were told this was not for racist reasons……imagine if were reported an individual who owned a business banned ethnic minorities from being employed in his/her business ……how would that be perceived and presented…….well they would not be exempt from judgement or criticism….or perhaps even punishment.

    Then there was the incident of the Queen’s lawyers SECRETELY lobbying Scottish government ministers to change a draft law to exempt HER private lands from a major initiative to cut carbon initiatives…..the SAME Queen who pre COP26 criticized world leaders for climate inaction earlier that month, reportedly saying of COP26: “We only know about people who are not coming … It’s really irritating when they talk, but they don’t do.” …………that’s called hypocrisy and exceptionalism Royal style via the QUEEN……proving she herself talks the talk but, via her position, feels she herself does NOT need to walk the walk…….OK Ya one is above such things.

    Also the same Queen who was FORCED to break royal protocol after the death of Princess Diana………….due to the public backlash of her, the Queen’s, non appearance in the wake of Princess Diana’s death while many who mourned as in ordinary people , who did not personally know Princess Diana, mourned as in their roles as ‘loyal’ subjects and who felt that she , the Queen, should also be shown to be mourning ( but do no mention the adultery committed by both Diana and Charles during their marriage hush hush)……the Queen obviously thought she was exempt from this exhibition of public mourning that had infested the people via the media’s public persona generated around Princess Diana aka the ‘People’s Princess’…….a term tactically used by Tony Blair……..after all Diana was then, like Prince Harry now , the outcast from the institution that MUST be upheld as far as the Queen was concerned.

    Somehow we are expected to believe the Queen is to be pitied and that she has behaved impeccably throughout her reign…..the facts mentioned above prove otherwise and one wonders how much else has been hidden from the public……throughout history royalty has behaved in a manner that should have denied them the position and privilege that they now enjoy but they are the focus for much of the fantasy of British (English) exceptionalism and thus they maintain and sustain the class system that thrives within this ludicrous and corrupt country not a country…….

    The Prince Andrew scandal is just another scandal that through the Queen’s status and wealth is allowing him , like other royals before him, the freedom and privilege they feel they are entitled to in order to try and evade justice, condemnation, judgement and punishment…that is THE reality and NOT the exception but tis very much normal for them to think and behave in this way……..the fact it exists as a reality is itself a reason NOT to be a monarchist supporter but to want to be rid of them……….this is the 21st century but with the existence of royalty it only sustains the regressive class system that dictates everything that is wrong with this fantasy country not a country called the UK also known as Great Britain controlled and dominated by England via the political system and also the top dogs of aristocracy aka the English Royal family……..

    Also very much how the elites, like Cameron and Johnson, who were educated at a elite school gain the undeserved position of PM of this crap country not a country that they like to refer to as Great………….but NOT Great in reality.

    Once again sorry for length of comment.

  16. scottish skier says:

    Can’t say I disagree with a word of this Paul. The sooner we get rid of the biggest subsidy junkies in the land the better.

  17. Not-My-Real-Name says:

    Does anyone see the similarities of the Tories, via Michael Gove’s , Union Unit and Labour’s , via Gordon Brown’s, Union Review.

    Do people know that Labour’s Gordon Brown has met with the Tories Michael Gove to ‘discuss’ the Union and it’s ‘saving’……..and to keep the thread of this post…..lo and behold the Royals, via Prince William, met with Gordon Brown at Holyrood palace to ‘discuss’ aka plan ways that Prince William could help to con the Scots to remain in the non Union and thus help sustain both it, the non Union, and the continued Scottish citizens support (financially and allegiance to maintaining) the institution that is the Royal family….to include Prince Andrew…what a win for us in Scotland………or NOT .

    Does anyone know if the Lib Dems also have their own Union saving initiative on this or will they , as a minor party, latch onto whichever other party plan they see that benefits them politically in England…..which is their usual modus operandi as the scavenger party that is…………

    Seems as if the powers that be ( as in the ones that we do not elect or support here via a majority) are assuming (wrongly) that they get to decide our future as opposed to those of us who vote for a party ,via a majority, who state, as a party, that they exist and are elected to gain independence for us.

    How very Unionistic of them is it not….akin to a dictatorship and not akin to behaviour one would expect in a so called supposed Union with a supposed impartial royal family…….nothing for Scots purr about is it ?………….perhaps more befitting to growl like a Corgi dog.

  18. Tatu3 says:

    My thoughts exactly. A great post.

  19. Not-My-Real-Name says:

    Is anyone else thinking that an Alien invasion would be a welcome respite just now ……

  20. Dr Jim says:

    The most ridiculous and successful lie the “British” have ever pulled off is to convince populations of countries to believe that a Monarchy and a democracy can operate simultaneously

    It’s a nonsense when they did it and it’s a nonsense now, the Royal family has no power, no authority to do anything other than to wield its *class* within its *class* of those who are or wish to be considered the faithful of the *class* elite, the nearest thing Britain has to a Monarch is Baron De liar Boris Harkonnen of the House Harkonnen and the only thing holding him back from absolute dictatorship (which is the definition of Monarchy) is his own courtiers sitting behind him on his back benches

    Actual democracy requires absolute equality of representation and England’s British parliament has never been that, if Westminster were to be an equitable representative parliament of all the countries within the UK then the members of that parliament would be of equal numbers one to another representing all parts of the whole but it’s not, the Westminster parliament reflects the will of the majority population of the country that controls the rest and by keeping the rest or the countries from growing that one country can will and does control all proceedings for all time including the suppression of growth thus maintaining power

    Scotland has a serious problem regarding the education of itself on politics, having a document, a letter, an agreement, a law signed sealed and stamped written in blood even by the almighty means absolutely nothing, because Scotland is not part of a democracy and people should really understand this before waving their arms around and shouting about how we have rights to this or that, we have no rights except for those we can make others who have power to support us perceive and accept

    Politics is not about what’s right wrong or fair, politics is about the *Art* of the possible, Scotland must make the case so annoyingly awkward for England by popular support for Independence and the International support of others that they (England) have no choice but to appear to be democratic, something that they are not and have never demonstrated any interest in being

    How many people on the streets of Scotland will it take to achieve Independence? 100.000?, a Million? two Million? for those who think there’s a magic number forget it that’s not how it’s done, sure it’s great to do and whips up the action and pressure but in the end it’s events timing patience and the dogged determination of individual politicians collecting International allies building them up and applying so many sledgehammer loads of difficulties to the opposition that they eventually buckle under the weight, and if the International community agree we’re golden, if they don’t it won’t matter if the entire population of Scotland including our cats dogs and budgies march in the streets, it won’t happen because England is a dictatorship, the end

    Like in Star Wars Nicola Sturgeon is our only hope and that’s why she is the prime focus and target of the English Imperial powers, destroy her, destroy all hope, remember she was never supposed to be FM, 2014 went wrong, Scotland was supposed to lose and that was supposed to be that but up popped an actual threat to England who meant it, they didn’t foresee that

    They see it now

  21. Capella says:

    Five questions for politicians: 1. What power have you got? 2. Where did you get it from? 3. In whose interest do you exercise it? 4. To whom are you accountable? 5. How can we get rid of you?
    Tony Benn

    No 5 is the most important in a democracy.

  22. deelsdugs says:

    ‘… long-weekend holiday consisting of the usual pageantry, fancy uniforms and Prince Edward weighted down with a suspiciously large number of medals for a man who was only in the Royal Marines for a fortnight’. Brilliant Paul! 😂😂

  23. yesindyref2 says:

    There seems to be some loss of memory from some people about the happenings during and before the Indy Ref, in particular with false claims about Salmond in what might be an attempt to blacken his name. This is how history gets altered to suit a narrative, and as Independence supporters and often students of Scotland’s History, we should resist such attempts to alter history with every fibre of our being – we’ve seen examples of this often enough about the last few centuries of Scotland’s History by the “winners”.

    There was a consulation started in JANUARY 2012 “Your Scotland, Your Referendum Consultation [PDF, 804.9 kb: 25 Jan 2012]” (and reported not till October 2012) which you can download from here:

    https://www.webarchive.org.uk/wayback/archive/20170113021423/http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2012/01/1006/downloads

    and with a foreword from Salmond, on page 11 there is the – SINGLE – question proposed by the Scottish Government, with Salmond as FM and Sturgeon as DFM:

    “Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country?” YES / NO

    During months after there was a lot of bluff and double-bluff between the SG and UKG, as anyone who actually followed the progress of the Ref will tell you (I read and commented on the Grun in those days as dadsarmy). There was a concensus that the second question about Devo-Max was a counter-threat, as that on its own was considered by many to be within the competence of the SG without “permission” from Westminster. Indeed, that paper I linked to discusses that precise thing.

    Back during the National Conversation in 2007 and around, the SG actually asked should there be multiple questions – 1 Independence 2. More powers, 3. Status Quo 4. Less powers 5. Abolish. THAT is what a DEMOCRATIC Government sought to find out.

    And lest those same Salmond-haters continue to try to blacken his name, don’t forget it was Sturgeon who very successfully won the negotiations with poor Michael Moore and got exactly what we all wanted:

    1). A single question
    2). Control of that question completely by Holyrood
    3). Control of the franchise and Bill and
    4). Control of the date, subject only to being by 31st Dec 2014.

    History luckily is there in the form of links to offical documents these days.

    • scottish skier says:

      Yes, I recall stories at the time, but these came to nothing and a binary question was what we got. After all, there was no way on god’s earth Westminster would have agreed to devo max even if Salmond had really wanted that. It would have won by a country mile and we’d have been all but independent in the EU. I personally thought the idea of a 2 question ballot had merit, i.e. indy Y/N and if N, then devo max Y/N although had reservations about how Y/N might be affected by people knowing Devo max was definitely going to win.

      But in the end any type of devo isn’t Scotland’s decision; it is one for all the union. Independence is the only choice we can make along (or certainly should be left alone to freely make).

      Anyway, I was very puzzled why Alba MPs / Salmond side kicks are putting it forward now (e.g. MacAskill https://archive.is/FhO2d ) when it’s what the unionists must now be looking at desperately as the only thing they think might save the union short of going all Chinese / Belarusian on us. But the devo max ship sailed with brexit. It is now consistently the least popular option, with indy well out in front when three options (indy / max / current devo) are offered up. When Hanlon – one of the ‘rebel’ group of which many defected to Alba I understood (?) – brought it up again, it reminded me MacAskill in the summer.

      For now I’ll wait and see of Salmond proposes it from a blurred out park next to Lambeth Bridge as a way of ‘healing our divided nation’. 😉

      Nothing surprises me these days!

      • yesindyref2 says:

        Chris Hanlon is some guy, one of the good guys, and he’s certainly stirred up some porridge, as well as bubble and squeak from the unionists.

        Thing is his triple lock actually gives Holyrood Sovereignty, which means it can take its time with Indy Ref 2, and make it absolutely impossible for the Union to survive meantime. The “DevoMax” is sleight of hand as much as anything else, the speed of the hand deceives the eye. And it’s a near certainly to get enough votes on an STV.

        Oh, and it’s quite easy to resurrect the original English and Scottish Parliaments – they just both pass a Bill with limited time for a limited purpose, and QE1 gives it Royal Assent. Job done. It’s likely that’ll need to happen after a YES vote and before Indy anyway.

        • grizebard says:

          “And it’s a near certainly to get enough votes on an STV.” True, which in actual fact would preserve the Union – with no real difference in our (lack of) sovereignty, and still keep us internationally isolated along with England – so how you think that would “make it absolutely impossible for the Union to survive meantime” is a complete mystery to me. And if anything it doesn’t so much “give us more time for IR2” as defer the issue indefinitely.

          Besides, the current lot in power in England can read the runes, and they regard devolution as a dastardly Trojan horse, so they’re not in the least likely to oblige with that ploy anyway. Like Cameron, they might prefer to take their chances with another binary vote. They could still squeak that without making any concessions, just like last time.

          • yesindyref2 says:

            It’s not the “DevoMax” that’s the interesting bit, it’s the bit just about everybody seems to have ignored completely. As Hanlon puts it in his article, the triple lock:

            “A guarantee the permanence of the Scottish Parliament. Holyrood cannot be closed, overruled, or have its powers reduced without the consent of a supermajority of the Scottish People in a referendum.

            A guarantee of the supremacy of the Scottish Parliament on devolved matters. The UK Parliament may not pass laws that affect Scotland in devolved areas without a legislative consent motion. Ever.

            A guarantee of the voice of the people of Scotland. Holyrood can call a referendum by simple majority to amend the Scotland Act that is implemented based on a simple majority of the Scottish people approving it.”

            • grizebard says:

              And you think that the current BoJo English Nationalist regime would happily cede that significant degree of their preciousss sovereignty with the near-certainty of a win for it in an STV vote…?

              That is a good leg-pull by somebody, for sure! {grin}

            • Hamish100 says:

              …and the tories say no…. Next move please.

      • scottish skier says:

        When a number of ‘rebel’ folks resigned from the NEC and Hanlon stayed, I thought to myself ‘that’s a better approach, i.e. not just quitting, but staying and trying to get things done’. Saying so got me some grief from some ‘real indy supporters’. 😉

        I was joking above about doing the three way by FPTP above, but STV actually makes sense. However, the concern I had in 2014 remains, i.e. if the wavering think ‘devo max’ will definitely get the biggest support, then they put that first and indy second, putting Yes in serious danger of falling short of 50%+1. After all, a lot of Yes have come from those giving up on devo max / more.

        Of course in such a situation Westminster would be all vow#2, saying they now know that change is needed etc until the votes are counted, Yes loses, and we get smith #2 crap. Scotland endorses Tory brexit, just with more devo.

        So I remain really suspicious of any three way vote proposals. If I was No. 10 and playing catch up, I’d be looking at that approach now. It wasn’t needed in 2014 because they were sure – rightly – that yes would lose. Now it appears almost a foregone conclusion that Yes will win. So out comes devo ultra super shiny max. The waters are being tested IMO.

        Anyhoo, on the topic of the article, I plan to save the climate by buying my own personal diesel train to travel around in. For the shops, I’ll take my twin-turbocharged, 6.75-litre V8 engine Bentley to reduce my emissions!

        • yesindyref2 says:

          Anyways, it’s a great way to start the year – passions rising about Indy and Scotland. And I have to admit it’s giving me a great laugh 🙂

  24. Capella says:

    SNP Policy Development Convener Toni Giugliano – rules out Devo Max.

  25. Dr Jim says:

    Oh dear more arguments only posed and created by Unionists deliberately to create confusion where there would be none
    “There are different rules in Scotland compared with England and that’s confusing” they say, well of course it’s not confusing at all is it, it’s the mental refusal to accept that Scotland is a country so create confusion by saying it and writing it then before you know it people in general are saying they’re confused
    It’s politically motivated promoted and carried out deliberately, especially if the reported differences are by someone you heard of or someone you might think you respect, so my word it must be true

    History for the most part is never total truth whether oral or written by anybody, especially when there’s political capital to be made from it, there has to be winners and losers because no side wants to be the loser or appear to be made less in the eyes of anybody, especially the voters

    Every day the political argument over Covid rages because that’s what it is, political, the government in England must win at all costs above any other considerations, because if it doesn’t there’ll be elections that they could lose by lack of confidence in them as administrators, so nothing matters, nor human life, not cost, not disruption, nothing, because the Covid history will be rewritten sculpted scripted and used as the next greatness tool to employ upon the electorate to win power and the only thing that stands against that will be the decision of the unelected government of the UK, the media, to decide whether they’ve had enough of backing one side or the other, scribble it up and report it differently however they choose to do and we’ll believe it or believe it not

    Not a single soul do you ever hear complaining about nipping over to Ireland let’s say, and moaning about differences between England or Scotland or even Timbuktu because folk accept differences and have no problems with them because they know these places are *other places* with other rules, my goodness some even have different currencies, can you believe it?

    Still confused? of course you’re not, because most people once informed are not idiots, they’re made idiots by the powers who go to great lengths to control and convince them they are idiots while simultaneously praising their intelligence for choosing those powerful liars to keep controlling them

    Covid is only a pandemic affecting us the plebs our health and welfare in the now, those who desire power for powers sake are thinking about tomorrow and how to navigate their strategy towards winning that and they’ll change colour method and tone faster than chameleons on speed to achieve that end

    We in Scotland have one and one only politic to decide, let governments play their games, let the internet be rife with bloggers and commentators splurging their diatribes and rewritten character build ups or assassinations all over the place for their own political end, but when it comes right down to it do you want to run your own affairs in Scotland irrespective of who’s in the top job or do you stay imprisoned in a colony with rules decided by another country you don’t live in

    My agenda has always been clear, I like appreciate and admire the current FM of Scotland but tomorrow and the next day there’ll be another who I’d hope to feel the same about but that can only happen if we choose it and allow ourselves to control our own destiny, if we don’t we will have processions of English chosen losers lying to us for generations to come

    The person who coined the phrase “if you’re not for us you’re against us” wasn’t wrong

    Every diversion for whatever concocted excuse ( we must think about this or that) (we must be careful of something or other) ( we mustn’t make this mistake or that) (we must take our time) (this was a good person or a bad person) is created to slow us down and inevitably be against us

    We don’t have to be told we have to settle for the promise of a weekend in Butlins when we can afford a fortnight in Barbados if we want and earned it

    Only Unionists come up with excuses, sling all of them a *DEEFIE* and let’s get on with it

Comments are closed.