The last nail in Labour’s coffin

In between Anas Sarwar making promises that are way above his pay grade and Boris Johnson telling us that Scottish independence would be a tragedy for the whole world, yesterday we also had Keir Starmer enthusiastically hammering the last nail into the Labour party’s Scottish coffin and helping to make Scottish independence all the more likely.

Sarwar of course got several minutes of puffery at the top of the evening edition of Reporting Scotland, which uncritically reported his big promise as though it was something that might actually happen. It was in very marked contrast to the scepticism which is characteristic whenever the BBC deigns to mention a pro-independence development. There was no sign of Glenn Campbell looking concerned. Sarwar was later given a few extra minutes to expound further on his non starter of an idea and was allowed to assert without being challenged that Nicola Sturgeon ‘cannot’ use the next UK General Election as a de facto referendum. Last I checked parties can put whatever propositions they want before the electorate in an election, and if the SNP, the Greens, Alba, and any other pro-independence parties say that they are going to use the election to ask the electorate for a mandate to start negotiating Scottish independence, that is a matter for them, not for Anas Sarwar. We already know that Sarwar won’t shirk from denying Scottish democracy and won’t be challenged on it by the BBC, but demanding a veto on other parties’ manifestos is a bit of a stretch even for him.

On Monday Keir Starmer announced that the Labour party will not seek to take the UK back into the customs union or the Single Market and will not seek a restoration of the right of freedom of movement for British citizens. Labour is now a hardline Brextremist party just like the Tories. We already knew that Labour wasn’t going to take the UK back into the EU, but support for a closer relationship with the EU was the one thing distinguishing Labour from the bluekip Tories. That’s gone now. Starmer has vowed to do the same as Johnson, but promises he’ll do it with a sad face. Starmer says he’s going to “make Brexit work.” That’s a lie, you can’t “make Brexit work” because Brexit is fundamentally broken. It’s like saying that you’re going to fill a vase with water after it has been shattered into a thousand pieces.

Now the only way that Scotland can get back into the EU, or even just the Single Market and Customs Union, and have the right to freedom of movement restored is as an independent country. There is no other way. That is a simple truth that cannot be obscured by all the hysterical Anglo-British nationalist scaremongering and SNP bad mud slinging in the world.

While we are on the topic of British nationalist SNP bad mud slinging, can we get one thing straight please – and this is directed at all the Iain Macwhirters, Alex Massies, Tom Gordons and Tom Harrises whose voices are so dominant in the Scottish media – the Scottish independence vote to come, whether that is an actual referendum or a de facto referendum is not going to be about casting a verdict on the SNP’s performance as the governing party in a devolved administration, no matter how much you want it to be. It’s about the people of Scotland deciding whether they want Scotland to become an independent country or not. That’s it, that’s all. An independent Scotland will be a democracy. The government elected by the people of Scotland in that independent Scottish state could come from any of the parties standing, not necessarily the SNP, and that government will be able to implement the mandate given to it by the people of Scotland without the losers of the election appealing to Westminster to tell Holyrood, “Naw, ye cannae.” So how the SNP has performed as the governing party in a devolved administration whose powers and limits are set by Westminster is frankly an irrelevance.

The verdict that will be cast in the independence vote will be a verdict on how ALL of the British nationalist parties have treated Scotland over the decades. It’s easy to see how that would be uncomfortable for those who have built their careers on keeping Scotland under Westminster rule. Mud slinging at the SNP allows them to avoid the core issue of the debate. It’s not about the SNP, it’s about the limits Westminster puts on Scotland, and in recent years it has become clear that it is also about how Westminster is a threat to democracy itself in Scotland. Starmer’s announcement that he will keep the UK outside the single market and customs union and his and Sarwar’s insistence that they will ignore the outcome of Scottish elections if the people have the audacity to vote for another independence referendum tells us that the threat to democracy in Scotland does not just come from Johnson, Ross, and the Tories, it comes from Starmer, Sarwar, and the Labour party as well.

However Starmer is still no closer to getting into Downing Street. Starmer’s big problem is that the Brexiteers in England won’t believe him – and the English remainers will be disappointed and probably will not vote or work for Labour. Labour is now contesting the same crowded electoral ground as the LibDems, who have also abandoned any idea of rejoining the EU, and the Conservatives. The last nail in Labour’s coffin is the last nail in this so-called Union’s.

Meanwhile in Scotland it is merely confirmation that we cannot look to Labour to protect Scotland from the Tories because the only way that Labour can get elected is to ape Conservative policies and to promise not to undo the damage caused by a Conservative government. The tragedy of the UK is that a party which wishes to form a British government can only do so by appeasing the xenophobic third of England. This is the Britain that Labour wants to keep Scotland a part of and for which it is prepared to destroy Scotland’s ancient sovereignty and its right to national self-determination. We know now that there is no space in the British body politic for a distinctively Scottish perspective. It’s independence, or being wheesht forever.


Many thanks to everyone who kindly supported the annual fundraiser. It’s always a nerve wracking time, I’m literally asking people to put their money where my mouth is. I’m delighted to say that the target of £5000 wasn’t just reached, it was smashed. From all sources, the Gofundme page, PayPal donations, and direct donations by cheque or into my bank account, the grand total raised was an incredible £11,094. In my wildest dreams  I could not have expected it to go so well and my deepest thanks to everyone who contributed.  It is heartening to know that so many people value my writing and that there is still an appreciative audience for a positive pro-independence message that concentrates on making the case for independence and debunking the arguments of the real enemies of Scottish independence, the Conservatives and their little helpers.  That’s what I will keep doing thanks to you.

albarevisedMy 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 (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 and send a payment to the email address 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

102 comments on “The last nail in Labour’s coffin

  1. deelsdugs says:

    Nae wheeshtin’

  2. Philip says:

    What has happened to Mcwhirter he used to be a good journalist, the last article he wrote was almost, “its really going to happen and I have to stop it”

    • yesindyref2 says:

      He’s maybe taken in by the below the line comments which have been almost totally unionist plus an upvote refresh upvote clique of supporters, and a couple of fake Indy supporters who act extreme to put off normal people. Just a couple of genuine Indy supporters who are swamped by the rest.

      He’s quite gullible for an educated man.

      • Legerwood says:

        Mr McWhirter’s musings started to go downhill after Ian Bell died. I think the standard set by Mr Bell kept Mr McWhirter’s output ‘honest’. I used to enjoy reading both but after Mr Bell died there was a subtle change in Mr McWhirter’s output which with the passage of time became ever more obvious that it was on a downward trajectory. Have not bothered to read anything by him for some time.

    • Eilidh says:

      I used to think McWhirter was an Indy supporter going by some of the articles he used to write. Now I think he is just another lying b*stard journalist. Sadly there are very few journalists in UK I now trust. Far too many of them would sell their soul for a pay packet

  3. Sublime, Paul.
    Emily Thornberry was on the BBC Brexit this morning declaring that the Dec ’19 election was a ‘single issue election’; Brexit.
    Ergo, Starmer will stand on ‘Making Brexit Work’, as his ‘single issue election’ vow.
    Sarwar is as ‘lightweight’ as Ross and the Tailor’s Dummy. Their English Puppet Masters don’t even include them in anything nowadays.
    Thornberry came out with the tired old trope. ‘The British people voted to leave the EU>’ No, 17, million, and change voted for Xenophobia England.
    Up Here,not so much.
    So Starmer will fight a ‘single issue’ fight at the next UKGE.
    Sauce for the goose, comes to mind.

    • Drew Anderson says:

      Both Corbyn, at the dissolution of parliament, and Johnson, during the campaign used “once in a generation” almost verbatim to describe the 2019 election.

      More non gender specific sauce there.

  4. James Mills says:

    Sarwar , Starmer , ”Scottish ” Labour …turkeys voting for Christmas !

  5. barpe says:

    Labour just can’t help themselves – if there is a way to lose even more votes for themselves, they manage to find it.
    Great ammunition for us Indy voters.

  6. Melvin says:

    Superb Paul, Labour really know how to shoot themselves in the foot, abdomen and temple, just to make sure that they are electorally dead in Scotland. RIP Scottish Labour.

  7. Luigi says:

    Excellent article. Contrary to myth, the Labour party does not need any Scottish votes to win a UK General election. However, it does need English brexiteer voters to do so. That much is clear. The next GE will be as much about English nationalism is it is about Scottish nationalism. The “One Nation” sentiment is dead in the water.

  8. bringiton says:

    The trick for the unionist parties in Scotland has always been to hide the fact that English parliamentary sovereignty and Scottish people’s sovereignty are mutually exclusive.
    This has now been fully exposed and the result of our coming referendum will be one or the other in our country.
    Scotland,to be or not to be.

  9. yesindyref2 says:

    From the Herald:

    AN independent Scotland may be blocked from joining the European Union [and NATO] if it insists on removing Trident before the UK finds an alternative base for the nuclear missile system, according to one of the world’s leading defence experts.

    Professor Malcolm Chalmers, deputy director general of the defence and security think tank the Royal United Services Institute in London, gives the assessment in an article to be published later this week in The Herald as part of the latest instalment of our Scotland’s Future series.

    Chalmers is indeed influential, and actually relatively sensible these days. He started off very UK-centric in 2012, claiming a cost of £50 billion to move Trident but by August 2014 had reduced that to about £8 billion. Since then work has been done on both Faslane to give – temporary – berth to the Astutes, and to Devonport to have a dry dock. It might be less than £5 billion by now.

    What this article later in the week will show is the following:

    1). It is accepted by the more sensible heads in “the establishment” that it’s very likely Scotland will soon be Independent.

    2). Sensible establishment figures are already pre-negotiating, whereas in IR1 there was to be none – basically because the establishment was so cocksure it would win, and then got a big fright in the event.,

    3). The establishment accepts that Trident will have to be moved.

    4). He says it shouldn’t be moved before a base is ready, and the converse of that is if it’s moved at a more sensible pace so that the rUK doesn;t lose its deterrent, then everything is OK. And incentives are always better than threats, and those incentives can be negotiated.

    5). It won’t be long now.

    • Lochside rental is very expensive these days. Runs into the 10’s of billions.

      • yesindyref2 says:

        There’d be a charge to cover costs at least, but I’d think it would be more payment in kind, as in terms and conditions.

        Even being able to impose a fast conclusion of major negotiations, like a few months not years and full support for transitional arrangements in Scotland’s favour for a change. Without that “goodwill” then get tae at midnight 🙂

      • Danger / being a target money on top.

        In the end, it’s up to Scots. They will decide at the ballot box. The SNP could strike a deal to keep it forever and Scots could simply overturn that at the next election.

        Not that I think it would happen as the Scotgov will look for an option the electorate will be satisfied with.

      • uno mas says:


    • yesindyref2 says:

      Oh right, he already said that about the incentives:

      “If Scotland were provisionally prepared to accept longer-term (though not indefinite) Trident basing, it would have an immensely strong bargaining card,” he writes.

      Good. And note he said “immensely strong”. I agree and always have. Immense, enormous, huge, galactic, quite big really!

    • yesindyref2 says:

      As far as I can be bothered thinking today, “Stewart McDonald, the SNP’s defence spokesman” – his response is word perfect.

      • Golfnut says:

        Was there not a vote at the SNP party Conference which set a time limit of 3yrs from a YES vote, which means if the referendum vote happens in 2023, Trident will be gone by October 2026.
        Which seems a fairly reasonable starting point for any negotion, problem is we are unfortunately dealing with undoubtedly the most untrustworthy bunch of right wing nutters posing as parliamentarians in our southern neighbours government and parliament. It depends entirely of course on the date set for independence, Trident like the BOE is a uk asset of which we are part owners. England’s position on the BOE will determine our position on Trident.

    • grizebard says:

      Oh, the real thinkers are already getting their act together (just in case, y’know). I can see that NATO might have a concern, being a military alliance and such, but it’s got nowt whatever to do with the EU (which has no nuclear policy). Though it would be a tad awkward, even for Bitter Together remade, to be trying to tell the referendum electorate that NATO wouldn’t let us in at all and that NATO would only let us in if we agreed to give some leeway for (non-EU member) England to do a military flit.

      They’re getting more nervous, and painting themselves into an ever-tighter corner every day, these real thinkers.

      • yesindyref2 says:

        Well, tangentially but relevant, there’s an excellent article on UKDJ about the RAF overflights of Ireland and fast jet interception, which cuts through politics and some myths.

        This also mentions their geopolitical position, and from that point of view comparisons with Scotland are obvious.

        Ireland has no fast jets, and to develop that intercept capability isn’t just a case of buying a half dozen Gripens and sitting back snug as a bug in a rug. We are in a bit of a different position, as we share the capability with the rest of the UK at the moment.

        I’m going to cheekily suggest that if Ireland increases its defence spending as is being mooted, it goes for an improved MPA capability, and then considers anti-sub ships as well as an airborne anti-sub capability. Denmark converted its Absalon support frigates, to anti-sub, and Ireland could consider some sort of relatively cheap anti-sub frigates, or even OPVs. They already have some nice OPVs, built in Devon by Babcock Appleyard.

        • yesindyref2 says:

          Just looking at the comments on that, as I have done before, and one or two splitters, one or two Kremlin plants, but this is what I like to see and agree with:

          Wrong to help Ireland with their defence capability? How? That is what allies and neighbours do, if asked.


          • Golfnut says:

            Not that long ago that neighbour threatened to starve Ireland and bomb our airports. If necessary I’m sure France or any other of the EU counties with an Air force could provide the same service.
            SNP Conference starts 29th July, on the agenda is Defence structure, Currency and I think transition.

  10. Bob Lamont says:

    As an EU resident having gone through all the repercussions of Brexit, I’ve had my share of answering “Why?”, and enjoyed many a supportive response to Scotland’s ambitions for Independence
    – Needless to say I didn’t get a vote on Indyref nor did millions of others, yet “The Nation of Scotland had spoken”.
    – Nor did I nor millions of others get a vote on Brexit, yet “the nation had spoken”, even if what they had spoken about about and voted on took 5 years to actually define.
    – Nor will I get a vote on Indyref2 when the Scottish Government bypasses “The Scottish Nation are not allowed to vote/speak”.

    Those are the rules, and I have to accept them –
    What I do NOT have to accept is a partisan media calling itself impartial despite a decade and more of relentlessly attacking the majority elected parties to the Scottish Government under the guise of fair criticism (incontinent pigeons anyone ?) even during a pandemic.
    What I do NOT have to accept is that a millionaire from Glasgow can speak with a millionaire from Surrey and agree a plan for Scotland and call it Labour Party policy.
    A proper Labour Party will be recreated as it once was following Independence, Sarwar, Baillie, etc, need not apply….

    • Capella says:

      Spot on Bob. The sooner independence comes the sooner a real Labour party can be set up in Scotland. Keir Hardie must be birling in his grave at what has become of his party.

  11. Margaret Noakes says:

    Hear ,hear Paul.You are now officially the voice of comm

  12. yesindyref2 says:

    You have to wonder if Labour in Scotland, and the Conservatives and LibDems, are deliberately destroying themselves so they can say “Oh look, it’s a one party state”.

    As for Starmer he’s a rich toff, not a gram or imperial oz of working class.

  13. grizebard says:

    It’s now clear to anyone with a functioning cortex that the interests of England and the vital interests of Scotland are fundamentally incompatible, and no-one in the English body politic is going to do a blind thing about it. Nor anyone in the alleged “Scottish” Labour alleged “leadership”.

    There is no “UK”, there is just England with badly-applied face makeup. And it’s time the Macwhirters and the McLeishes confronted that reality, and put their actions where their principles supposedly are.

  14. This is a wonderful critique of the current situation,

  15. Dr Jim says:

    The unionist UK position rests on an old Sicilian proverb: “Don’t ask for what you can’t take” and they’re counting long term this proves to be the case

    Fortunately this is 2022, this is an old proverb and there are other ways

  16. JockG says:

    True story

    A few years back I once say opposite Iain Macwhirter on a train from Edinburgh to Dundee. It was a beautiful summer afternoon with amazing views up and down the River Tay as we crossed the rail bridge. I didn’t say anything to him. He seemed to enjoy looking out the window so it seemed a shame to distract him.

    “The next stop is Dundee” said the automated voice as we approached the station.

    Our carriage pulled up directly opposite the sign that said “Dundee” at which point Iain Macwhirter looked up and asked me in a tone of voice approaching panic:

    “Is this Dundee? I’m supposed to get off here!”

    After that journey I gave up believing that he had anything meaningful to say.

  17. James Mills says:

    It must be so galling for old , traditional Labour to see the direction that ”Scottish” Labour has taken under Sarwar and his Yes-men .

    Dyed-in-the-wool stalwarts of the party like Lord Robertson , Lord McConnell , Lord Reid , Baroness Liddell , Lord Foulkes must be sh*tting in their ermine robes at the separation of their beloved party from its working class roots by this millionaire wide-boy Sarwar .

    It’s enough to make a true-blue Labour man want to burn down the whole edifice and start again – send for Lord Watson !

  18. stewartb says:

    ‘Triangulation’ to achieve power in Westminster leads Starmer to distance Labour from its exclave of Edinburgh South, preferring to court Brexit-supporting British/English nationalists.

  19. Welsh_Siôn says:

    Onward Labour lemmings

    Onward Labour lemmings,
    Marching o’er the cliff,
    With the mark of Sarwar,
    Leading them skew-whiff.
    Anas, chief of numpties,
    Heads his band of woe;
    Forward into hist’ry:
    See those bampots go!


    Onward Labour lemmings,
    Marching o’er the cliff,
    With the mark of Sarwar,
    Leading them skew-whiff.

    [With acknowledgements]

    Songs for the New Politics

  20. wm says:

    The English Labour Party now depends on the English Brexit vote to win a GE, there is not the width of a fag paper between them and their unionist partners. They left Scottish Labour when they became “New Labour” but didnae tell anybody.

  21. Drew Anderson says:

    I’ve had a comment pulled, on the Guardian, where I described Simon Jenkins’ sorry excuse for an article today as: “lazy, ill-informed musings that don’t bode well for his forthcoming book”.

    I wasn’t exactly happy about it, then I read this review:

    It’s about as comprehensive a takedown as I’ve ever read. Clearly I wasn’t wrong.

    • weegingerdug says:

      Oh God, I see Jenkins is touting the “English was spoken in Britain before the Romans” fairy story again. It’s an idea which is linguistically illiterate and utterly bereft of any evidence that stands up to examination. In any event, even if it was true – which it isn’t, it’s got absolutely nothing to do with the modern political movements for Scottish and Welsh independence or Irish reunification.

      • Dr Jim says:

        I had an English Mum and if she were alive today she wouldn’t want me to be wanting independence for my country so *I give up* also my dog is Spanish so I’ve definitely no right to impose that on him, so considering all these much more important circumstances we might as well all just stop it now and behave

        Oh well we tried

      • Welsh_Siôn says:

        This the latest from Jenkins:

        Wales joined the union ‘peacefully’ says Simon Jenkins

        05 Jul 2022 3 minute Read

        Guardian columnist Simon Jenkins has said that Wales “came into union peacefully” – despite being the subject of a Norman conquest.

        Wales was conquered by the Normans between 1067 and 1083, culminating with the death of Llywelyn ap Gruffudd (‘the Last’) and the building of the castles of Edward I.

        Owain Glyndwr also launched an unsuccessful war of independence from 1400 to 1415.

        However, while conceding that Wales “was forced to join in 1536” with the Acts of Union Simon Jenkins said that “Wales came into union peacefully” – perhaps neglecting the fact that it had already been conquered and split between a principality and marcher lordships centuries earlier.



        I’ve always maintained that Oxbridge types generally tend to be clever people – but lacking in basic intelligence.

      • Drew Anderson says:

        Yes Paul, its right up there with the piece I read in the Times by Melanie Phillips a few years ago.

        The one where she claimed there was a “United Kingdom, dominated by England” before the Romans arrived. Completely evidence free, just a fantastical notion that suits the idea of English supremacy.

    • “This is not just a bad book, it’s a nasty one.”
      You’ve got to ‘laff’,

  22. Hamish100 says:

    WS – you are too generous. I thinks some are “thick as mince”.

    • Welsh_Siôn says:

      I’ve married into a nest of them, Hamish100.

      I can only say, you might think that. I couldn’t possibly comment.

      However … My mother-in-law was an Admissions Tutor at one of the prestigious colleges and was astounded to learn that Scotland was not a region.


      • Dr Jim says:

        When I first went to Spain to live and work primary school children were being taught that Scotland was a peninsula of England

  23. Statgeek says:

    “referendum is not going to be about casting a verdict on the SNP’s performance as the governing party”

    Indeed. I look forward to the splintering of the SNP post-Indy into two or more parties. it’s a broad church as it is. No doubt Anas and co will be there, trying to register a new Scottish Labour party, with no shred of irony as to its rejection by the voters in Scotland since 2007.

  24. yesindyref2 says:

    Possibly one of the most idiotic and uniformed pieces of anti-Sturgeon rhetoric this year, and that’s saying something. From the Herald:

    In a withering assessment, the Lord Advocate said she “does not have the necessary degree of confidence” that Holyrood’s powers alone are enough to hold a re-run of the 2014 referendum.

    In an 18-page submission to the Supreme Court, Ms Bain has warned that she needs to have enough confidence in Holyrood’s powers to hold a referendum.

    Umm, why on earth otherwise would the LA have made a referral to the UKSC, and in addition, it’s a reason WHY it makes it far less likely the coourt will reject the reference,, with a draft Bill, as it relates to her introducing that bill in the first place.

    Anyways, when I’ve time I’ll find it and read it. Lovely jubbly 🙂

    • yesindyref2 says:

      Mmm, a comment there btl sums it up perfectly:

      There is a “lack of confidence” because it hasn’t been tested yet. Are you unionists so desperate that you now deliberately misinterpret anything written in this “newspaper”. The fact there is uncertainty is the reason it has been placed in the hands of the Supreme Court. Once the decision is announced THEN there is certainty. I think your celebration is somewhat premature. Bubble burst. Again.

      Just as well perhaps I can’t post there any more, I’d have been far less polite.

    • Golfnut says:

      There are 3 points put forward by the Lord Advocate, the third is the real issue. That it was the Scottish people who basically authorised the referendum. Sure it’s about the Scotland Act, the Constitution and reserved powers, but maybe it’s about where sovereignty actually lies.

      • yesindyref2 says:

        Indeed. Sounds a bit silly, considering Bain was picked because of her great experience, but it seems to me to be an incredibly able reference, it’s got it all in including the off the cuff and perhaps hasty remark by the Lord President prejudging any future case which is naughty, and then this:

        The answer to the question referred will determine whether the Scottish Parliament can debate and vote upon the Bill which is the subject of a manifesto commitment

        which, it seems to me, should pre-empt the possibility of the reference being thrown out because it’s a draft Bill – the Catch 22 situation described by Cherry.

        That’s (5) as far as I’ve got so far 🙂

  25. Alex Clark says:

    Savid Javid has just resigned from the Cabinet, how many will now follow?

    • Welsh_Siôn says:

      The public rightly expect government to be conducted properly, competently and seriously.

      I recognise this may be my last ministerial job, but I believe these standards are worth fighting for and that is why I am resigning.

      HIS letter to the PM:

    • yesindyref2 says:

      Johnson can’t survive Sunak going.

  26. Capella says:

    Well Liz Truss will have to go too if she’s going to sand as leader. Another photo op beckons. 😱

  27. Alex Clark says:

    Ben Wallace to be next?

  28. Welsh_Siôn says:

    I hope everybody’s already stocked up on the popcorn.

    Blink and we’d miss the next thrilling (well … erm …) installment.

  29. Capella says:

    As the Johnston government draws majestically to a close – the BBC Scotland crew try to suggest a rift between Nicola Sturgeon and Dorothy Bain, the Lord Advocate. They imply that the LA referred Indyref2 to the SC because she lacked confidence in Holyrood’s competency. Dear oh dear.

    The only question now is – who will grant the S30 order?

    • Alex Clark says:

      The media reporting of the Lord Advocates’ presentation to the Supreme Court is utterly pathetic. The LA knows that the most likely reason for the Supreme Court to refuse to hear her argument was to say that it was hypothetical until it was voted on in parliament and had become an Act.

      This statement aims to get clarity from the SC before it becomes an Act, no idea, if that will work or not but her point, is clear, she cannot advise the Scottish Government on the competence of the Bill without Supreme Court guidance.

      If they now rule that the bill first has to be passed by parliament then that effectively allows the Lord Advocate to go ahead and agree it’s within competence because they haven’t ruled that it was outside competence until it becomes an Act. Bit of a catch-22 situation for the Supreme Court this is.

    • It’s natural that matters of the union be reserved to Westminster. Of course Holyrood should not be able to change the law across the UK, i.e. English/Welsh/N. Irish law.

      But this referendum will not even change anything in Scots law, never mind the law in another nation of the UK or the latter as a whole. It’s no different to asking Scots via the 2020 referendum act whether they’ve ever drunk Irn Bru. Even if the bill legally bound the Scottish government to Act on the referendum result, still that would change nothing in Scots Law; only them passing indy legistlaiton would. And even indy legislaiton would change nothing in ‘union’ law. The law in the rUK would remain completely unchanged; Westminster would just cease to produce laws for Scotland any more. Britain leavling the EU was a legal matter for the UK, not the EU. EU law jurisdiction just ended for the UK; it was not changed for other members.

      I think it’s pretty plain that Scottish independence isn’t a union matter, it’s a purely Scottish one. Hence it’s called ‘self-determination’ rather than ‘Scots determining the future of other nations’.

      I’d honestly be surprised if the Supreme Court doesn’t rule that Scots can be freely consulted on this just as the Scottish government plan. However, because there is all this talk from unionist about it being illegal, then it makes absolute sense to have this checked, particularly in the absence of a Section 30. The latter is not ‘permission’, it is designed to stop potential legal challenges, be these from opposition parties, members of the public.

    • Oh and it was almost beyond doubt that someone would refer the bill to the Supreme court, so it was wise advice from Bain for the Scottish Government to just go ahead and do this themselves.

    • Dr Jim says:

      Mischaracterisation is the BBCs stock in trade, report a thing that was already known but reinterpret the original story to make it sound new and completely different to give themselves and their allies the opportunity to fault it over again
      They were caught with their pants down and their faces were shut and this is their attempt at reopening the same issue

    • yesindyref2 says:

      The cruncher is this really, for the pig ignorant BBC:

      5. The Lord Advocate considers:
      (1) There is a genuine issue of law that is unresolved

      which genuinely means she doesn’t know the answer.

      And before that, this:

      The First Minister, recognising that the question of whether
      a Bill providing for an advisory referendum on independence relates to reserved matters is contested, asked the Lord Advocate to consider making a reference under para.34 of Schedule 6. Having given this matter detailed consideration the Lord Advocate has decided to make a reference.

      The First Minister … asked the Lord Advocate

      The BBC is illiiterate at best, on the other hand, there is a brain for the BBC but we don’t know who’s got it this week …

      • yesindyref2 says:

        Just to make the point clear for the moronic media and BBC:

        Having given this matter detailed consideration the Lord Advocate has decided to make a reference

        So she didn’t have to do it, but decided she would, which means in her capacity as LA, not a stooge of the ScotGov, she decided there was a case to pursue.

  30. Welsh_Siôn says:

    It will be all over when the fat tosser at No. 10 sings.

  31. Alex Clark says:

    Nadine Dorries gets my vote to replace Sunak as Chancellor of the Exchequer 🙂

    • Welsh_Siôn says:

      I raise you ‘compassionate’ Patel at Health.

      • Alex Clark says:

        You might laugh but it has been reported that Nadine Dorries has just gone into No 10 with the chief whip. Are they both getting getting a promotion LOL

  32. Legerwood says:

    The pound I’d dropping. Now the pound buys $1.19

  33. Hamish100 says:

    Alister Jack stays and supports Johnson


    Douglas Ross says Johnson can’t go – Putin will win!

    • Welsh_Siôn says:

      Simon Hartless of Wales says he’s staying too.

    • Welsh_Siôn says:

      And yet:

      Reacting to news of the double Cabinet resignations this evening, the leader of the Scottish conservatives, Douglas Ross, said his views had not changed since he voted against Boris Johnson in a confidence vote last month.

  34. Alex Clark says:

  35. Hamish100 says:

    BBC Scotland will come out with “ how could a country the size of Scotland govern better than omnipotent Westminster…….……………. “

  36. Welsh_Siôn says:

    Live ‘stream’ from ‘Drowning Street’:

    (You can see what I did there)

  37. Alex Clark says:

  38. Welsh_Siôn says:

    Conservative vice-chair resigns live on TV

    Bin Afolami MP has announced his resignation on TalkTV:

    He said: “I don’t think the prime minister no longer has not just my support, but the party and the country.

    “And for that reason I think he should step down.”

    On his own position, he said: “You have to resign, I can’t serve under the prime minister.”

  39. Welsh_Siôn says:

    PM’s trade envoy quits over Pincher last straw

    Andrew Murrison has resigned as Boris Johnson’s trade envoy to Morocco.

    The Conservative MP for South West Wiltshire has formally served as a minister for the Foreign Office and the now-defunct Department for International Development.

  40. Dr Jim says:

    Can Scotland resign? it seems only fair if they don’t want to co-operate with him why should we be made to

  41. Alex Clark says:

    Rees-Mogg is fully behind the Prime Minister because “he wins elections”.

    • Welsh_Siôn says:

      For all you Classicists out there:

      Brutus was “right behind” Julius Caesar, too, was he not?

      Caesar soon got the point of that …

  42. Welsh_Siôn says:

    Weak Coffey not intending on making a stir, allegedly:

    Work and pensions secretary Therese Coffey is not resigning from Boris Johnson’s Cabinet, a source told PA.

  43. Alex Clark says:

    Keir Starmer has called for a General Election, if it happened soon then it would not be the de facto referendum this time around but might serve as a barometer of a real one.

    • Welsh_Siôn says:

    • James says:

      That’s more to stop Johnson going full nuclear and triggering a snap election to try and hang on. Now that Starmer is supporting one even Johnson’s most loyal MPs won’t.

      Remember if Starmer gets a fine he will be gone too.

      • Alex Clark says:

        I agree, there could only be a snap election with Johnson still in charge, any new leader will go nowhere near one before having a chance to bed in. Johnson simply won’t be in charge long enough now or have the support needed to call a snap election.

        He will have to walk the plank sooner rather than later.

  44. keaton says:

    I’m resigning.

  45. Alex Clark says:

    Johnson can’t hang on as there is no one at all who can replace Sunak as Chancellor without the £ tanking. The end.

  46. Alex Clark says:

  47. indy2019 says:

    Nadine Dorries is to be made Deputy Rear Admiral of the Imperial Fleet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s