The Trojan horse

Alister Jack, the Viceroy of the Province of North Britain, has compounded his contempt for the Scottish Parliament by refusing to appear before a Holyrood committee to explain his reasons for his unprecedented use of a section 35 order to veto a Holyrood bill relating to devolved matters which was passed by a large and cross-party majority of MSPs, on the supposed grounds, vigorously disputed by the Scottish Government, that the bill has a serious impact on the implementation of the UK Equalities Act.

“That’s not my job,” said Jack imperiously when asked why he would not attend the Holyrood committee on Monday. He then went even further by declining an invitation to appear on the BBC Scotland Sunday Show as the mild questioning he’d receive there would be too much of an insult to his aristocratic haughtiness. In Jack’s patrician view his job is to give orders to the Caledonian peasantry, while they beat grouse for him. Jack belonging to that rarified upper class who employ grice beaters. He is certain far too lofty to explain himself to them, and it is unthinkable that he should be held to account by them. As far as he is concerned that would be like the under-butler in Downton Abbey demanding to know why he has been ordered to polish the silverware and threatening to lay down the silver polish if a cogent explanation is not forthcoming. It’s not an explanation Jack thinks he should give, it’s a jolly good thrashing.

Meanwhile Kemi Badenoch, the UK Government Equalities Minister, has so far not deigned to reply to an invitation from the Scottish Parliament to discuss with Holyrood possible ways forward on the GRR Bill. This follows Alister Jack’s refusal to engage on the matter, saying it is her responsibility, not his. The truth is that the Conservatives despise devolution, despise the Scottish Parliament, despise the democratic choices of a Scottish electorate which consistently rejects them, and they are determined to undo what they regard as a huge mistake made by the Blair administration and to put devolution into reverse.

The power of the Scotland Secretary to veto any Holyrood legislation was always contained within the devolution settlement. It was put there by a Labour party in order to placate Labour MPs who feared that Holyrood might challenge the supremacy of Westminster. It was a ‘get back in your box’ clause, designed to assert the subordinate position of the Scottish Parliament and its inclusion in the Scotland Act was defended by Donald Dewar.

At the time it was inserted into the Scotland Act by Blair and his ministers, it was described by the Conservative Michael Ancram, then the Conservatives’ Constitutional Affairs spokesman, as ‘the Governor-General clause’ and ‘the veto clause.’ Ancram predicted that its use could lead to serious confrontation between Holyrood and Westminster. The option of the Section 35 order has never been used until now in the 35 year history of devolution. It was very much seen as the ‘nuclear option’, only to be employed in extremis and where all other interventions had failed. In a 2012 memorandum of understanding between the British Government of David Cameron and the devolved governments the option of a Section 35 order was referred to in the following terms :

“Although the UK Government is prepared to use these powers if necessary, it sees them very much as a matter of last resort. If formal intervention should become necessary, the UK Government will whenever practicable inform the devolved administration of its intentions in sufficient time to enable that administration to make any representations it wishes, or take any remedial action.” See

What is striking about Jack’s taboo shattering use of the Section 35 order to prevent the Scottish Gender Recognition Reform Bill from passing into law is that it was very far from the last resort. During the consultation period before the bill was voted on by MSPs, and in the weeks and months prior to that final vote and indeed during the three day long debate on the bill, the Conservative government had ample opportunity to inform the Scottish Parliament of its belief that the bill as it stood had a serious impact on the Equalities Act passed by Westminster and of its intention to challenge the bill. It did not do so. The British Government has made no representations to Holyrood on how the Scottish bill could be altered in order to ensure that it conforms with UK legislation.

Neither did the Conservative Government make use of the mechanisms it has previously employed to challenge Scottish legislation which it believes to impinge upon reserved matters such as it did when Holyrood passed a bill to incorporate the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child into Scottish law. Westminster exercised its right to refer the legislation to the UK Supreme Court, which ultimately found in favour of the UK Government.

The thing about political taboos is that they are only taboos as long as the taboo is respected. Until now the use of a Section 35 order to veto Holyrood legislation has been the great taboo in the devolution settlement. However the moment that the Conservatives break the taboo and get away with it, a Section 35 order becomes merely another instrument at the disposal of the Westminster Conservatives for whipping the Scottish Parliament into line and forcing even legislation on devolved matters to comply with the wishes of an English nationalist political party which has been unable to win at the ballot box in Scotland for generations. It negates the very reason and purpose of devolution.

Future battles between Holyrood and Westminster lie ahead. Having used this power once, the Conservatives will use it again and again in order to ensure that Holyrood complies with the Conservatives’ wanton destruction of those European rights and protections which still remain a part of law in the UK, even those relating to devolved matters. This year the Conservatives plan a bonfire of European legislation, much of which relates to devolved matters. Their use of this emotive and controversial issue is a Trojan horse, the Conservatives hope that the highly vocal opposition to the Gender Recognition Reform Bill will help them to get away with this blatant assault on the Scottish Parliament, thus normalising the use of the section 35 order power and facilitating its further use in the future, enabling them to ensure Scotland complies with their right wing English nationalist Brexit.


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

44 comments on “The Trojan horse

  1. Capella says:

    I think the use of their “nuclear” option is a measure of their desperation. All other means have failed and the march towards independence as the “settled will” of the Scottish people is unstoppable. They have identified the one area where a wedge can be driven between the Scottish people, especially the majority female vote, and the leadership. We can expect them to use every means at their disposal to drive that wedge deeper. Our task is to find a way of circumventing this cynical ploy.

    • Eilidh says:

      It will be interesting to see how much of a wedge GRR has really driven between female voters or all voters re GRR at whatever election we have next.

      • Latest Holyrood VI, constituency. Survation, 10-12 Jan 2023.

        49% SNP
        28% Lab
        13% Con
        8% Lib
        2% Other

        42% SNP
        27% Lab
        21% Con
        7% Lib
        3% Other

        This is a something of an outlier though, with unusually high Con/No support amongst men. That said, women are recently more pro-SNP / pro-Yes than men, and that’s been largely the case since brexit.

        Unbelievably, they (and others) are still weighting to 2014. A vote coming coming on for a decade ago now. The targeted unweighted base sample is a little SNP 2021 heavy at 51(+3)% Yes, but claims to have voted 54(+9)% Yes in 2014, and so is heavily weighted down for that.

        • Alex Clark says:

          Those results just don’t look right. We all know that the older you are then the more likely you will be to support the Conservatives and oppose Independence.

          Since women live longer than men I would expect the average age of women in the poll to be higher than that of men and consequently, I would have thought they would naturally be more conservative and opposed to Independence. Yet the results in this poll are skewed much more in the other direction.

          • It’s the same pattern in all polls roughly since brexit. Women are more supportive of indy and the SNP/Greens. I don’t see any reason to question that.

            It’s not age related. People don’t become more conservative with age. That’s a myth. It is generational though. Britishness is stronger in older generations from the post war consensus period. That’s the main factor at play; national identity. Tory unionist support falls with age because of this.

            This one does have unusually low male backing for the SNP/Yes, and all the evidence in had suggests it’s an outlier overall. Sticks out like a sore thumb on plots.

            While 95% of the time a poll should give the same answer if you keep repeating it within +/-3%, 5% of the time it will be out by more!

  2. Dr Jim says:

    In 2014 if Scotland had miraculously voted YES to independence I have absolutely no doubt it would never have happened, England would have denied the result under the waffle that all referendums are advisory and would have only agreed to set up a *talking shop commission* that would still be talking because only the will of the British people in British referendums must be respected, and as Rishi Sunak himself stated very recently the word *British* is in his words “shorthand for English”

    Scotland will be independent, but only when Nicola Sturgeon has fully persuaded the rest of the civilised world to recognise the desire of the Scottish people

    How Scotland goes about doing that is a matter for her and her government, but if the people don’t get behind it we know what England will do

    They’ll take everything we’ve got, parliament and all, apathy is as much Scotland’s enemy as English government is

  3. gerry parker says:

    Hopefully they won’t come away with the “ both votes SNP” nonsense.

  4. Bob Lamont says:

    Not the only Trojan Horse I see….

  5. Hamish100 says:

    Alister Jack
    “ cummoot, cummoot, wherever ye are? the games a bogey, there’s a liar in the lobby”
    I may have from memory got one word wrong although it is accurate.

  6. Not-My-Real-Name says:

    Paul I agree that this is them, Tories, testing the ground for future assaults on our parliament in order for them to ride roughshod over future powers they want control of post Brexit…..they assumed and have been correct that this particular bill that would be presented as controversial mainly because they knew the bill would be misrepresented and confused with parts of the Equalities Act via usual sources……and indeed all blame for it’s passing would be laid at the door of the Scottish government alone and indeed presented as causing ONLY a split within the SNP…..

    The usual sources have done their best to ensure the waters have indeed been muddied on the FACTS re this bill and it has now become a politically motivated attack against the SNP and our FM….which then, some hope, impacts the independence argument.

    It is not surprising that a certain member, Susan Smith, from the organisation ‘For Woman Scotland’ (who claim to be a group of women from across Scotland working to protect and strengthen women and children’s rights) is appearing on GB News relishing the opportunity to slate ONLY the Scottish government/SNP ……which is strange yet NOT strange really….. when this bill was supported and passed via cross party support from some members of ALL political parties. ….last night she was on GB News and her opinion was that ” it’s been a shocking reflection of how Scotland is governed”…THAT IS a political statement and goes way BEYOND her and her organisation’s objection to this ONE particular bill as that is clearly a statement that presents the Scottish government as incompetent AS a government in running Scotland…their organisation was founded in 2018 so their support for women did not extend to them deciding to form this organisation prior to this when the Tories introduced the 2015 Rape Clause Bill or indeed the damaging Tory/Lib Dem austerity measures introduced in 2010 that FAILED to , when in force, ” protect and strengthen women and children’s rights” which is their, For Women Scotland’s, supposed sole mission in their organisation…..they have the support of JK Rowling…say no more….perhaps time for another wee ditty from her …though given her LAST wee ditty in 2014 has imploded as far as a her supposed accurate predictions of what will supposedly pass , post a NO vote in 2014 , tis probably best she keeps her wee ditties to herself….to save further public humiliation….

    One of the founders of For Woman Scotland, Marion Calder, was a speaker at the Battle of Ideas….check them out, Battle of Ideas, and see WHO is involved with that organisation and then tell me THIS is NOT a politically motivated organisation….here is some of the Battle of Ideas speakers at a Festival they held ….the Festival was to debate ” Shaping the future through public debate”…..SHAUN BAILEY, EMILY CARVER,ANDREW DOYLE, PAUL EMBERY, SIMON EVANS,CLAIRE FOX, MIKE GRAHAM, MADELINE GRANT,LIAM HALLIGAN,LEO KEARSE, ROD LIDDLE,MARK LITTLEWOOD,JOHN MCTERNAN,ALI MIRAJ, LORD MOYLAN,KEVIN O’SULLIVAN,ALLISON PEARSON, TIM STANLEY, GRAHAM STRINGER,RICHARD TICE,DR STUART WAITON, PETER WHITTLE, TOBY YOUNG and this not a full list of ALL of the speakers but one does get a taste of what their opinions WILL BE and how THEY will seek to “”shape the future” via the participation of GB News hosts and guests, Talk TV hosts, HOL members, Labour party members, an ex Tory Mayor candidate, Torygraph ‘journalists’, ex UKIP and Brexit party politicians and too members of a dubious Think tank whose funding of is a SECRET… WHOSE future are they debating and how do THEY want to shape it……wow great company being kept by someone part of an organisation whose mission is to supposedly “protect women and children’s rights”….selective ones that is …as not much protection on offer via some the above list of right wing propaganda merchants…. of that I am sure…..Alastair Donald and Ella Whelan are co convenors of this…..Alistair Donald….look him up and he too has been on GB News and he ain’t no supporter of Scottish independence or the SNP ….that’s for sure….

    Where is Scotland’s representation and argument in the so called ‘BIG DEBATE’ … it a case of yet again our argument is suppressed as they , as a largely extreme force , debate THEIR (Pro) UK future while assuming we, in Scotland, will comply and submit to their will as per assumed always…..via using ANY political stick to try and beat us with…..including politically weaponising the GRR bill to bring down the Scottish government and thus ultimately STOPPING independence…..I think perhaps certain SNP politicians should reconsider who they are sharing a platform with on this ‘Women won’t wheesht’ campaign…as for me there seems to be an ulterior (political) motive for some within this campaign…..some who need to be told that ‘Independence supporters will not wheesht ‘ either….or refrain from calling them out when THEIR speech becomes clearly politically motivated against the SNP and independence…..

    • deelsdugs says:

      Seems to be a fest for the greedy being needy in a quest for furthering academic accreditation to slot in their cv’s…

      • Not-My-Real-Name says:

        @ deelsdugs @ 2.23pm

        “FREE TICKETS FOR SCHOOL PUPILS”……aye indoctrinate the young… that when they grow up they too can aspire to be , as you correctly say, the “greedy being needy”…..which includes demonising the REAL victims in society while promoting a selfish money driven section of society that seems to never have enough. Hence why they have forums for debate such as this one i.e. ‘Battle of Ideas’ …restricted to only SOME ideas (theirs), that allows them to have an extensive, varied and constant platform for their Freedom of speech. Debates that involve them attacking those who have an opposing position to theirs and thus sees THEM given the freedom via many forums and platforms to both ridicule and attack those who have OTHER ideas…..and too who have an alternate vision for THEIR future…..a supposed UK forum for debate on a future for their UK but not a UK that includes any positive input for Scotland and it’s future….going by it’s contributors it will certainly NOT include , in the debate, a POSITIVE case for independence for Scotland , indeed I anticipate the opposite will be the case……an extension of Scotland in Union in all but name……

        When will the actual WAR against THEIR Ideas begin….or has it already begun.

    • Alec Lomax says:

      Not so much Battle of Ideas as battle of right wing nutters. Stuart Waiton Lol. Is he still around?

  7. Dr Jim says:

    When Liz Truss made her statement about ignoring Nicola Sturgeon, what she meant was ignoring Scotland, now we have Rishi Sunak’s (government) declaring they will *work with* *co-operate with* the FM and Scottish government at every opportunity

    Let’s just take a quick look at how that’s actually being done
    First the so called levelling up agenda has been used to completely bypass the devolution settlement and Scottish government by distributing finance to certain councils for certain projects directly in opposition to the devolution settlement

    Second the Gender bill, again Sunak promised total transparency and full co-operation with Holyrood, so far the secretary of state Alister Jack has refused point blank to even come to Scotland let alone be questioned by a Holyrood parliamentary committee on the subject stating “it’s not my job to explain the decisions I make”

    So OK let’s have the womens equalities Minister for the UK government Kemi Badenoch come and explain their rationale behind their refusal to co- operate, and guess what? she’s just refused to deign to come to Scotland also, so who’s coming to Scotland’s democratically elected parliament to make the UK government’s case?


    Does any of this look like co-operation to anybody? or does it look very much more like Liz Truss’s policy of ignoring Scotland ?

    Sunak’s policy is the same as Boris Johnson’s policy is the same as Liz Truss’s policy is the same as every English government that has ever existed, they ignore what they don’t like and ignore what they think they don’t care or have to worry about

    This is a display of the sniveling type of cowardice that England is famous for, they have no case to negotiate upon, no grounds for argument, no grounds even for disagreement, so they ignore and smile patronisingly while they do it

    The great British English empire at their best, they don’t even have the guts to fight their corner because they know they’re wrong, so they use their state controlled media to do it for them

    Don’t mention Brexit, don’t mention Scotland unless it’s bad, keep Scotland off the national news, treat Scotland as a local unimportant region of their whole *country*

    If Scotland doesn’t shake itself out of this apathetic *it’ll never happen state* it’ll be too late to even beg Germany to lend us some of those Leopard Tanks, because England is rolling their invisible red white and blue camouflage * Ignore Scotland class* tanks right over us now

  8. Ken says:

    The Tories will be gon3 before long. Into oblivion. People in Scotland who support Independence need to go out and vote at every election, A highe4 turnout and vote for Indepence supporting Parties. To get rid of the opposition. Take another to vote too.

    • Old Pete says:

      Well said Ken.

    • grizebard says:

      The Tories may be gone soon, or they may hang on regardless, who knows? But let’s not kid ourselves, that shower being replaced by English Labour won’t serve our interests much better. They’ll sacrifice us for England’s interests, just as they always have done. And when England gets tired of them, we’ll soon enough have the Tories back again.

      High time we all realised that the only sure way to escape this perpetual clown roundabout is to be independent. Then we can vote for whom we want, and get them, not have anyone else foisted on us that we never voted for, and doesn’t give a damn for us either.

  9. Bob Lamont says:

    Let’s be very clear here, the Minister for Flounce for Scotland has left the building as he’s being fitted for his “ermine” outfit for elevation to the lords, why should he have to explain himself to any plebs about anything, he’s a free bird until he hears a bang and falls to earth.

  10. Legerwood says:

    Shona Robinson has written to SoS Jack. It is a very interesting and informative letter well worth a read and bookmarking.

    • Dr Jim says:

      So it was OK before, just not OK now, legal before but not legal now? within competence before, but not now?
      The question to the sec of state: can you explain please? the answer from the sec of state, NAW!

      • Legerwood says:

        About the size of it. The GRA 2004 had no effect on the Equalities Act 2010 but change the process, note the process, by which they get a GRC and suddenly it affects the EQ Act yet the GRC allows the same things whatever the process the person goes through. Hmm!

    • Alex Clark says:

      It couldn’t be clearer. Westminster had no intention whatsoever in working with the Scottish Government on this bill and the intention all along was to allow it to pass and then invoke the Section 35 order vetoing the bill from gaining Royal Assent.

      As this article says, this is likely to be just the beginning, they are not after this bill in particular, it was chosen as the bill to be targetted because the Tories believed it would bolster support among the more rabid of their support and at the same time create division between supporters of Independence.

      This is pure and simply an outright attack on devolution and just the first step towards completely undermining the Scottish Parliament altogether in order to further their goal of scrapping devolution entirely.

      We need to be very clear, this is about the democratic right of the Scottish Parliament to make laws in devolved matters. This is NOT about the SNP picking a fight with Westminster. Quite the opposite, this bill has the support of more than 2/3rds of MSP’s in all parties but just as importantly the letter by Shana Robison makes clear who the party is that are spoiling for a fight.

      I think though that once again they have misjudged what they believed was a big advantage to them in picking this fight. This has the potential of really coming back to bite them on the bum, especially if it does go to court and they lose.

    • stewartb says:

      It’s an excellent letter from Ms Robinson to Mr Jack – to the point and well argued. I note especially these sections (with my emphasis):

      ‘My immediate concern, however, is to CLARIFY CONTRADICTIONS in your letter and statement.

      ‘You have said that you hope we can work together to find a constructive way forward which respects devolution and the operation of UK legislation. THIS SEEMS UTTERLY INCOMPATIBLE WITH YOUR APPROACH OF WAITING UNTIL AFTER THE BILL HAS BEEN PASSED TO IMPLEMENT A POWER OF VETO NEVER USED BEFORE, WITH NO WARNING COMMUNICATED ABOUT THE USE OF THAT POWER OR PRIOR ATTEMPT TO ENGAGE ON THE DETAILED ISSUES NOW RAISED. Please would you clarify how the Scottish Government can work constructively with you under these circumstances.’


      ‘This is IN DIRECT CONTRADICTION of the position set out in the UK Government’s 2018 consultation on gender recognition reform, which stated:

      “Gender recognition is devolved to Scotland. THAT MEANS SCOTLAND CAN HAVE ITS OWN SYSTEM FOR GENDER RECOGNITION IF IT WANTS TO. Some areas dealt with by the GRA are not devolved, however, such as pension and benefit entitlements. The Scottish Government consultation clearly sets out what is and is not devolved with respect to its proposals and where, in the future, they might have to work with the UK Government.”

      Ms Robison in her letter adds: ‘I will also note that THE POSITIONS OF THE UK AND SCOTTISH GOVERNMENTS WERE BROADLY CONSISTENT, WITH EACH PROPOSING SIMILAR REFORMS, UNTIL SEPTEMBER 2020 when the UK Government announced it would not take forward the proposed reforms set out in its 2018 consultation, DESPITE 64% OF RESPONDENTS AGREEING THAT THE REQUIREMENT FOR A DIAGNOSIS OF GENDER DYSPHORIA SHOULD BE REMOVED. That was the point when it became clear that there would likely be different approaches within the UK – over two years ago.’

  11. Dr Jim says:

    In a shock horror announcement the Labour party admit the UK government has political control over BBC output

    Well bless my soul and jump back reeling from this news, the whole of Scotland will be stunned and amazed at how such a thing could possibly have come about

    Meanwhile DRoss denies this and claims the BBC in Scotland are bias in favour of Nicola Sturgeon’s SNP, and goes on to quote the flood of complaints over a BBC journalist in an interview with Rishi Sunak identifying the FM as “our leader”

    Following DRoss’s complaints to the BBC over this issue the BBC replied “we only record complaints if they exceed 100, in this case they did not”

    In a nation of 5.5 million the Tories consider less than 100 complaints to be a *flood* but over 62% against Brexit or 55% for independence does not register for consideration

    Maybe those 100 people identified as British, indicating that DRoss only represents them and not those who identify as perhaps Scottish?

    • Legerwood says:

      Yet there was ONE complaint about Prof Sridhar reading a few sentences from her book Preventable on 19th April 2022 when it was Radio 4’s Book of the Week.
      The section complained about mentioned Dominic Cumming’s escapade to Durham & Barnard Castle. According to the complainant this could have influenced the local elections that were taking place in Scotland at the time.

      The complaint was upheld!!!.

      I bet Prof Sridhar never realised she would have the power to influence the outcome of elections in all 32 Local Council areas by reading a few sentences from her book

  12. yesindyref2 says:

    Sturgeon from the Herald: “ “There’s no precedent to look at in terms of how to challenge that.”

    The FM said that there “might be no other option” than to seek a judicial review in the courts but added that the Scottish Government is “looking to see whether” an alternative challenge “is possible”.

    Well now that makes me think that – what is the purpose of any Act? It’s usually laid out in the Introduction, or very close to the beginning. For the Scotland Act it’s this:

    An Act to provide for the establishment of a Scottish Parliament and Administration and other changes in the government of Scotland;

    But willy-nilly use of the Section 35 could completely negate that, making the whole Act useless. Well, seems to me that whenever there is a conflict between the whole Act and one of its many clauses, the offending clause is struck out.

    Make it so.

    • yesindyref2 says:

      Another possibility of course is as I suggested before. The S35 has the Silly Sausage against Scotland tell the PO not to send the Bill for Royal Assent. Well, just ignore the silly sausage and send it anyway.

      What yer gonna do Jack, jump around the room emitting sparks?

  13. Dr Jim says:

    Brexit cause a massive loss of care and health workers in Scotland due to many of those folks returning to their countries of origin or other EU countries
    The cost of agency nursing staff is now between £600 to £1000 per shift

    Now you know how the Tories are going about forcing private healthcare on every country of the UK, if we don’t get out of this England forced dictatorship PDQ there’ll be no NHS or care homes as we know them, they’ll be charity hospitals and poorhouses

    Seen quite a lot of private healthcare insurance adverts lately? now you know why

  14. Alister Jack is a lazy elitist placemat.
    He’s doing his job; playing the role of Upper Class Twit for England.

    Many of our fellow citizens have spent years poring over GRR issues, taking into account views and preferences from masses of interested parties to eventually arrive at thepoint where a Bill has been produced and passed in our Parliament.
    The work gone in to bringing this bill, indeed any bill, to the house is complex, expensive, and ultimately, ground breaking.
    The idea that this gentleman farmer has the power to say ‘No, Scotland. Suck it up’, is ridiculous, and laughable.
    I no longer recognise the English Parliament.
    He is doing his English Masters bidding.
    Tell the Jocks to feck off, Al.

    I no longer recognise the phony SoS for Scotland set up.
    We are past the point of no return.
    Like Ian Murray and Liar Carmichael, Jack, and his handful of Clingers On have no authority from the people of Scotland to exert their colonial power over us.
    We shall be free.

  15. The state of play. The Survation from 12 Jan looks like an outlier, but up on the outlier from Yougov (45%) last year, so consistent with the decade+ trend.

    Latest is the Findoutnow at 54% Yes (18 Jan), which shows no change on their previous (8 Dec).

  16. Alex Clark says:

    This is good.

  17. Ken says:

    Ledingham & Chalners profits. 2021. On a turnover of £12 Million. £4Million profit. £450 an hour. Don’t do legal aid

  18. Ken says:

    McRoberts 17% increase in profits on a £20million turnover, increased 10%. Partners distribution. £6.9Million. Legal aid? Probably not. Fees £450+ an hour 2021

  19. Ken says:

    Shepard & Wedderburn Increased profits 4% to £59Million. Partners distribution13% higher £25Milliom.

    The list is endless.

  20. Ken says:

    Many Tory MP’s work in legal practices.

  21. Sophie Grace Chappell says:

    Know how many people there are in prison in Scotland?
    Know how many trans people there are in prison in Scotland?
    Fifteen people = 1 constitutional crisis?
    This is absolutely ridiculous.
    PS The trans proportion in Scottish prisons is 0.2%. The trans proportion in the Scottish population at large is 0.5%. That means that Scottish trans people are *two and half times* more law-abiding than other citizens.
    Suck it up, cis dudes.
    PPS Not really–15 people is too small a sample for reliable statistics 🙂

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