SOLD BY A PARCEL OF ROGUES

This week’s article from Yours for Scotland regular columnist Mia.

When we cast our votes for the SNP on the general election 12 December 2019 we thought we were voting for independence. We were guided by the words of the cover letter attached to the SNP manifesto and signed by Nicola Sturgeon:

“A vote for the SNP is a vote to escape Brexit.

It’s a vote to put Scotland’s future in Scotland’s hands”

You can only escape Brexit with independence.  Full Fiscal Autonomy (FFA) keeps you trapped in England’s market, trade deals, currency and downgraded standards. With FFA, Scotland’s future is not in Scotland’s hands. It is in the hands of England MPs.

So why is the SNP asking for FFA?

I think if we had full fiscal autonomy, we would be able to respond fully to some of the needs. That’s not what I’m asking for here, but what I’m asking for here is some pretty basic powers and flexibilities around the borrowing issues.” 

Kate Forbes, June 2020

On 12 December 2019 Scotland gave the SNP a mandate and 48 seats to stop Brexit and to put the future of Scotland on Scotland’s hands. Yet, our Cabinet Minister for Finance and Economy 6 months later still begs for “pretty basic powers” when she should be getting ready to handle all our fiscal powers after the SNP should have declared independence after the election.

But it is her mentioning of “FFA” after 5 years of SNP majorities in Westminster that is alarming.

In January 2021 the Scottish government published “Scotland’s Fiscal Outlook: The Scottish Government’s Medium Term Financial Strategy”. 

Ms Forbes tells us in that document that the current fiscal framework for Scotland is insufficient and inadequate. Yet the party refuses to use the mandate gained in 2019 to put Scotland’s future in Scotland’s hands by bringing the powers back.

I now wonder if begging for powers is part of Sturgeon’s SNP culture so when they have been handed a mandate to bring back all our powers, they do not know what to do other than keep begging for more powers.

The Guardian published this headline in September 2014:

“Nicola Sturgeon expected to champion maximum devolution in the UK”  

You would think that after 7 years and 3 majorities in Westminster, Nicola Sturgeon would have moved on fromchampioning devolution in the UK.

In June 2019 this headline was published in the Herald:

“Nicola Sturgeon: ‘Boris Johnson asked me if full fiscal powers would buy off SNP’”

The article claims Ms Sturgeon was offered by Johnson full fiscal powers to “buy the SNP off”, on the 9th May 2015.  This is the day after the GE 2015, when Scotland sent 56 SNP MPs to Westminster and we were expecting negotiations for independence to start.

At no point the article says that she rejected the offer. What the article says is:

“The context around the remarks is not clear, but Ms Sturgeon joked it would be the “starting point” of her relationship with Mr Johnson if he secures the top job”

When you put side by side those past headlines with somebody from the SNP attempting to sneak Devo Max under the radar, with the enabling of Brexit by the SNP, with the fabricated need for an S30, with letting our mandates expire, with the never ending excuses and with Ms Forbes begging for powers and dreaming of FFA, you begin to worry that Johnson might have bought the SNP off that day after all.

But Johnson did not secure the “top job” until 2019.  It is very hard to believe Sturgeon would have been sitting on her hands quietly 4 years holding the SNP MPs on a leash and letting the process of Brexit continue smoothly, waiting for “the starting point” to arrive to number 10, unless some kind of agreement was already on the table.

Just in a few months after the 9th May 2015 the pre-legislation processes for Brexit would have commenced and Westminster needed the SNP to be compliant, otherwise that legislation would have never been passed or Brexit completed in time to avoid the new EU taxdodgers legislation.

The 3 ballot option is not new. On 12 September 2020 The Times published an article stating that “a campaign to give full control over tax and spending powers while remaining in the UK is to be launched” . The article even gives you a hint why Westminster may be keen on it: 

Home rule would give voters the option of Scotland staying in a monetary union with the rest of the UK, while running its own economy and social welfare system.

You do not need to be an economist to realise why England might be desperate to keep Scotland using Sterling. Scotland’s assets not propping Sterling might make it tank. A huge difference in value between Sterling and Scotland’s currency may become an obstacle for England to continue using Scotland’s market as if it was an extension of its own. Because the Bank of England controls Sterling, this would give England full control over Scotland’s currency, interest, markets and ultimately the economy. For Scotland’s banks to issue notes with Sterling value, they have to back those notes with a deposit in the Bank of England equivalent to the value of those notes in circulation. If there is no monetary union, the Bank of England has to return that deposit to Scotland in full.

The campaign for home rule announced by The Times was linked to a book written by Ben Thomson, founder member of the think tank “Reform Scotland”. This think tank is described as “right wing” and linked to conservatives by Wikipedia and Open Democracy. According to the Herald, it was at an event hosted by “Reform Scotland” in 2019 where Sturgeon mentioned having been offered by Johnson FFA on 9th May 2015.

From the speech delivered by the First Minister at that Reform Scotland Event in 2019, this part jumps at me:

That is why I have offered talks to other parties who oppose independence to discuss what powers they think Scotland needs to face the challenges of the future. If substantial proposals arise from that, my hope is that the parliament can present them in a unified way.

Sturgeon could not be pursuing independence in 2019 if what she was seeking was full consensus among diametrically opposed parties before deciding what powers to bring back to Scotland. Can you ever see an agreement from Tories, labour and libdems on delivering all our powers back to Holyrood? I cannot. Sturgeon’s strategy to deliver independence is clearly designed to take a very, very long time.

On the 9th May 2020, Nicola Sturgeon sent a tweet in remembrance of that same day 5 years before, when we sent 56 SNP MPs to Westminster:

The tweet had a picture of her taken from the back while wearing a very smart black outfit with a hat and the following text:“Five years ago in London, on the day after the 2015 General Election.  I was about to go to the service for the 70th anniversary of VE Day (hence the hat).  This is me on the phone to David Cameron.  It seems like both 5 minutes and a whole lifetime ago”

If you do a google search for “Sturgeon and VE Day 2015 and Boris Johnson” and click on “images” you immediately see a couple of pictures where she is wearing the same outfit as the picture in the tweet while she walks and talks with Boris Johnson. It is obvious that something very important for her happened that day which made it stick in her memory and remember it 5 years later. 

Of course a cynic like me might think the tweet might have been some kind of warning to someone that she had been waiting too long and getting inpatient. After all, the word “lifetime” is one unionists love to use when telling us how long we have to wait for the next referendum to happen.

She did not have to wait much longer for the cavalry to arrive, because in July 2020, the political commentary website “Reaction” published an article written by Richard Bath with the title ““Give Scotland Full Fiscal Autonomy and call Nicola Sturgeon’s Bluff”.

The article suggests “Instead of ceding a referendum if the nationalists dominate next year’s elections, the granting of full fiscal autonomy would instantly transform the terms of the debate.

The author also writes in the article “the UK gov should not cede on a referendum, but automatically hand over to Scotland this so called Full Fiscal Autonomy”

A quick look at “Reaction” shows there are an awful lot of Tories, ex ministers of defence, lords, Sirs, Viscounts, political advisors and other rancid establishment types among the board of directors and advisors of this “political commentary” website.

In September 2020 The Times publishes the article regarding the campaign to give Scotland full fiscal autonomy. Since then, different figures in Labour, unions, think tanks and even a former director of Scotland’s Office came to her rescue by embracing the idea of a third option in the ballot.

In March 2021, “The Express” published this headline: 

“Nicola on the brink as new plan that could silence the SNP forever emerges”

This article made reference to the article published by Richard Bath in Reaction 8 months before.  Clearly the Express was amplifying the message.

On 9th May 2021, one year after Sturgeon’s tweet, Andrew Willshire published an article in the Spectator with the title: “How Boris can beat the SNP at its own game”. 

The paper proposes a way to delay independence indefinitely by suggesting the referendum should be offered to the Scottish people only once Scotland is in a position to function as an independent country and is in a financially viable position.

The author assumes the SNP does not really want independence and will take forever to build the required frameworks for this, so he suggests Johnson to hand all the work to the Sgov. But with the caveat that all frameworks and white paper have to be done under the supervision and agreement of Westminster, giving them the opportunity to stall this at every step. Westminster, of course, can find one thousand ways to take control over our assets to make Scotland look financially inviable

If establishment types are attempting to float FFA, unionist rags like The Express are amplifying and normalising the message, an increasing number of unionist politicians are asking for a third option to be included in the ballot and Gordon Brown has been released from the crypt again to talk about it too, you can guess that something nasty is gurgling in the sewers of Westminster.

There is another very interesting point in Willshire’s article.  The author highlights the uncertain position of Westminster with regards to their potential challenge in the courts of legislation passed in Holyrood to hold a referendum without Westminster’s consent.

The author is not convinced the courts would rule against Holyrood. There is a very good reason for this if we look at the ruling on the Keatings’ case on February 2021.

The ruling was that the case was “hypothetical, academic, and premature” and that because Mr Keatings was not a member of parliament, “the pursuer lacks standing to bring it”.

The judge also said “For the reasons given above, I would have reached the same conclusion even if a draft bill were available for consideration”.

From this the assumption is the case was shot down in flames only because there was no firm legislation for the referendum in place. But this is odd because in 2019, during her speech to Reform Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon said this:

That’s why we are laying the groundwork for another choice on independence, through the referendum bill introduced to parliament two weeks ago”

She was referring to the Referendums (Scotland) Bill, which became Act on the 29th January 2020. That was a whole year before the ruling on the Keatings’ case.

When you read the information about the Referendums (Scotland) bill in the Scottish government website, you can read:

“This Bill does not relate to a specific referendum but on 24 April 2019 the First Minister made a statement to the Scottish Parliament called “Brexit and Scotland’s Future”. In it, she said the Scottish Government would introduce this legislation so that giving people a choice on Scottish independence in the current term of Parliament was an option”

So, if this bill was already in place, what made Mr Keatings’ case “premature, hypothetical or academic”? It could only be the lack of a date and the lack of secondary legislation to determine, for example, the question in the ballot. Was it deliberate not passing that secondary legislation to make the court case fail or was left because at that point they did not know if the third option should be included?

The ruling does not say much about the Scottish Parliament not having capacity to hold the referendum without an S30 if the full legislation had been in place. So we are none of the wiser.

Increasing noises and unionist moves towards finding a way to bypass the referendum suggest they are certain Scotland will vote for independence in a referendum where the options are simply yes or no.  They are clearly considering different options, but the consensus appears to be that unionists would do anything to avoid a yes win emerging from the referendum. 

62% in Scotland voted to remain in the EU, therefore Brexit is a huge driver for independence. They have been removing the push for independence from remainers by delaying the referendum for long enough to make Brexit look like the status quo, and by changing our laws to make the return to the EU pretty much impossible in the short term.

If the SNP has settled for FFA, then it makes sense that so many MSPs left before the 2021 election. They knew independence would not be achieved in the next 5 years. It would also explain why it was so important for them to remove Mr Salmond from the SNP and politics.

It would explain Sturgeon fondness for the S30 route, knowing that one will never be granted.  This would give Westminster time to complete the Brexit process while she kept us quiet waiting for the referendum that never arrives.

Settling for FFA would also explain why somebody in Sturgeon’s cabinet was actively trashing the Keatings’ case to stop us find out if Scotland’s parliament might already have the power to call the referendum.  I wonder if the attempt to sneak the English convention of Westminster sovereignty into law with the EU Withdrawal agreement was in preparation for a potential future legal dispute on this. 

An agreement would also explain why Sturgeon refuses plebiscite on independence elections and why Sturgeon prefers Tories and labour in Holyrood than Alba.  

It would explain why the SNP cooperated with Westminster to drag us out of the EU, why they handed our powers to Westminster, why they allowed Scotland to be trapped in this “internal UK market” framework and in damaging trade deals with Australia and New Zealand.

It would explain the recent alignment of the SNP with UK’s foreign policy and why there is no interest in increasing the yes vote, but rather to reverse it.

It would explain why it was considered acceptable to use the 600,000 pounds that went missing for something other than the referendum or why the fundraiser for the referendum was stopped before it reached the target.

It would explain why the Parliamentary inquiry was a farce as it was the investigation in her potential breaches of the ministerial code.

It would explain a lot of things.

All these manoeuvres aimed to stop at all costs a yes win just a few years after 2014, makes you wonder if Scotland might have already voted yes in 2014 but some last minute intervention to correct the result, and I do not mean just the vow, forced the result around.

We all know the powers that be in this union never give in an inch unless the alternative they are facing is worse. Johnson’swillingness to hand Sturgeon FFA one day after the GE2015 suggests they already knew then that Scotland’s settled will was independence, not devo max.  The preoccupation of unionist think tanks, parties etc about finding a way to force on us FFA suggests the same. 

The only way they can fool the electorate in Scotland now is by getting us to accept FFA without giving us the option to vote for yes.  They cannot keep telling us that what the majority wants is FFA if yes emerges as the winner, or force on us FFA after we have issued a yes vote and still claim Scotland’s is voluntarily in the union.

My bet is they are going to attempt at all costs to force FFA on us and change the constitutional agreement quickly before we have any opportunity to vote for independence

I am, on behalf of Yours for Scotland.

.MIA

MY COMMENTS

Once again Mia’s research into this raises even more doubts about the commitment of the Sturgeon Government to further the Independence issue. it is a very sad day indeed when the very people who were entrusted to take Independence forward are now the group suspected of doing their best to delay and obstruct progress.

BEAT THE CENSORS

Sadly some sites had given up on being pro Indy sites and have decided to become merely pro SNP sites where any criticism of the Party Leader or opposition to the latest policy extremes, results in censorship being applied. This, in the rather over optimistic belief that this will suppress public discussion on such topics. My regular readers have expertly worked out that by regularly sharing articles on this site defeats that censorship and makes it all rather pointless. I really do appreciate such support and free speech in Scotland is remaining unaffected by their juvenile censorship. Indeed it is has become a symptom of weakness and guilt. Quite encouraging really.

FREE SUBSCRIPTIONS

Are available on the home and blog pages of this website. A subscription ensures you will be notified of all future articles and you will be joining thousands who have already done so. You will be very welcome.

62 thoughts on “SOLD BY A PARCEL OF ROGUES

  1. I think Mia’s thesis has a ring of truth about it. HOWEVER –

    What is full fiscal autonomy? Or at least what is it when Westminster/SNP talk about it? How can you have FFA when you don’t control the currency, money supply or monetary policy?

    Does FFA get us back in the EU or even just the single market? Does FFA allow us to negotiate trade agreements? Does FFA allow us to control foreign policy and prevent us entering illegal wars? Does FFA get Trident out of Scotland and out of our balance sheet? Would any “agreement” for FFA require the agreement of English population? (Let’s be honest they don’t gaf about Wales and NI!). Who decides how much the payment for “retained” services are?

    What is the price? An agreement like Catalonia. Accept FFA (which they are nearer to than us) BUT Spain is indivisible and independence (or secession in their case) is illegal. That is Spain will never accept an independent Catalonia.

    I don’t doubt there are some in the SNP that are aiming for FFA or rather the crumbs that England will offer. But as we have seen with the travesty of the Scotwind giveaway, they can’t organise a piss up in a brewery. Frankly Westminster would see us coming.

    So that’s a no from me. However the Yes movement needs to prepare for this eventuality and make sure no-one is fooled again by a How Now Brown Vow.

    Liked by 12 people

    1. If they offer anything it must be the Crown Dependency with a clear list of amendments to retain our status as a country. Anything else will contain one poison pill after another.
      The better option by far is independence and the only barriers are Sturgeon and our own Stockholm syndrome. Unfortunately Sturgeon has now done so much damage there is a good change any “devo max” will be the choice made so we really do have to pay close attention to this. Both Westminster and Sturgeon want us to become Catalonia.

      The last hope we have is ALBA. I hope with all my heart that May sees ALBA elected and the SNP eradicated.

      Liked by 11 people

      1. I agree with you Marion. FFA/Devo max all traps to bind us. I don’t know enough about Crown Dependency status to know whether it’s acceptable. But then nothing less than indy is acceptable as far as I’m concerned.

        I hope the Alba and indeed ISP do well in the elections, However I fear they won’t. MSM will team up with the SNP to deprive them of any publicity bar bad. Still fingers and toes crossed.

        Liked by 8 people

      2. Only independence works Panda – agreed – the only sane, usual condition. My fear is that we will be trapped in this “devo max” by the voters experience of Sturgeons awful administration and our flawed franchise. We have to make sure the poison pill of removing our ability to leave in future years in not slipped into this “devo max” that will ,without a doubt, be a trap – and one that our flawed franchise may rush into without thought.

        Liked by 3 people

    2. PP:

      You asked “What is full fiscal autonomy? Or at least what is it when Westminster/SNP talk about it? How can you have FFA when you don’t control the currency, money supply or monetary policy?”

      I don’t know what “Full Fiscal Autonomy” is as it has not been defined.

      But, speaking as an economist, fiscal policy covers two main government controlled economic levers, namely public expenditure and taxation. This allows the government discretion over where, when and how much spending or investment of public money is carried out. This covers public services like health, education, welfare and industrial support. Taxation is the revenue raising powers of the government via direct levies like income tax and indirect instruments such as value added tax. The government can decide to run a budget deficit (spend is greater than income), surplus (income is greater than spend) or a neutral budget where spend and income are balanced.

      In reality I suspect “FFA” would be some kind of hazy fudge … much like devolution with power being retained as always by London, the “unwritten constitution” etc. It’s the British way after all!

      The other half of macroeconomic management relates to monetary policy. This covers the using a central bank to either carry out ‘open market operations’ in order to directly control the money supply or employed interest rates to regulate the demand for money. By managing the supply of, and demand for, money circulating in the economy the government can target the rate of price inflation and levels of unemployment. Interest rates also impact the exchange rate as the higher they are the more overseas investors are likely to purchase your currency in order to gain a return. This improves the ‘capital account’ of the balance of payments. Of course, it makes exports more expensive so this will tend to reduce these such that the ‘current account’ of the balance of payments erodes.

      It is the lack of monetary policy which means our independence is hamstrung: we’d have no influence over inflation, imports/exports and inward investment as our central bank would be the Bank of England which would manage supply of, and demand for, the common currency in line with the requirements dictated by the UK government of the day. In turn this would reflect England’s requirements.

      Liked by 9 people

      1. Thanks Duncanio

        That’s the expert detail that my one liner “How can you have FFA when you don’t control the currency, money supply or monetary policy?” was getting at. I don’t have your expertise and knowledge* but it’s obvious to me that FFA wouldn’t work whenyou have Westminster in charge of monetary policy.

        I don’t agree with you that FFA would be a fudge – it would be quicksand designed to sink us much like the bear traps in the fiscal framework are.

        I think I’d urge people to beware of Old Etonians and Troon Tabards bearing gifts…

        * We are a clever bunch btl – the knowledge and breadth of expertise of commenters never ceases to impress me!

        Liked by 10 people

  2. We also know that Westminster will manipulate a situation to suit themselves. Is FFA a carrot which can be given but taken away a a later date. That is the way of the British state.

    Liked by 11 people

  3. In her guts Sturgeon is not a nationalist, she has protested dislike of terms containing «nation» even to the extent of dissing the party moniker. Her cabinet entourage may well share her revisionist views.
    Thus the party of independence is currently hobbled by a sentiment that contradicts the purpose. Like Robert de Brus going into battle with the words «now guys remember do no harm to those Anglo-Normans, I might just be related to them».
    Sturgeon and her cooks couldn’t make an omelette even with a library of recipe books.
    Just go break some eggs FM!

    Liked by 12 people

  4. Excellent article Mia, if one thing is clear in all of this, its that Sturgeon isn’t on the side of independence, and that we must not vote for her or her party. It was a shocker to me when I found out the Scottish government and the Lord Advocate were actively working against and trying to block Mr Keatings, that in itself should’ve halted us from voting for the SNP in May.

    There’s an abundance of evidence to show that Sturgeon isn’t interested in freeing Scotland from this rancid union from the fit up of Alex Salmond, to trying to save England from Brexit instead of saving us from England, to selling off our assets for a pittance. Her track record suggests she’ll continue to do damage to Scotland and the indy cause, and maybe even find a away with the help of Westminster to trap us in this union forever, God forbid.

    We must vote for the Alba party in May and push for the next election 2024 I think a GE to be a plebiscitary one, we must demand it from her party. How much more damage she does to Scotland and the cause between now and then one can only speculate.

    More assets stolen.

    As Scotland’s energy is set to be pillaged by a plethora of foreign countries, sold by Sturgeon for a pittance. The London ran OFGEM has gotten into the act by launching a tender process to own and operate connection links for Scotland’s largest offshore windfarm, called Seagreen Phase one-its situated off the coast of Angus.

    Between Westminster and Sturgeon, one stealing the other one giving away our assets, is there anything left in Scotland that’s still to be stolen by England or given away by Sturgeon

    Liked by 17 people

  5. If the Sturgeon is not an agent of MI5 – She’s doing a bloody marvellous impersonation.

    It is the cowards who are the SNP MSPs and MPs that need to know that they are finished. And I think that message is getting through.

    Liked by 16 people

    1. There was a blog written prior to 2014 that identified SNP politicians that were very friendly with the media in 1999. That those MSPs were still in a position of power and courted the media together. By a matter of elimination, it was easy to get down to 2 SNP members that fitted the description of events at the time. Unfortunately, I can’t find that article but I do think it would be very relevant today. This would fit into your accusation.

      Liked by 4 people

  6. «They have exiled me now from their society, yet I am content. Mankind only exiles the one whose large spirit rebels against injustice and tyranny. He who does not prefer exile to servility is not free in the true and necessary sense of freedom.»
    Kahlil Gibran,
    1883-1931 a nationalist, internationalist and cosmopolitan.

    Liked by 12 people

  7. 56 out of 59. It’s an incredible result. And did the Westminster Parliament recognise it. I’ll bet you they did because it’s majorities of MPs that form governments, and it’s a majority of Scottish MPs that can, despite the nonsense to the contrary, call time on the Union. Thatcher herself even said so.

    However, the SNP and the SNP MPs didn’t recognise it. In fact the SNP have not recognised any other mandate ever since. Voting SNP is an utter waste of time. They are a unionist party, Sturgeon is a filthy corrupt traitor in the service of the Union.

    And like Ireland the people suffer as the colonial corporate masters rip the guts out of Scotland, oil, gas, water, a place to put their nuclear weapons, huge sea resources,

    And now, with rampant inflation, the destruction of savings for those who have savings, the under indexation of pensions, the wage increases below inflation – the shit show is really going to begin. Ah well let’s pile on the misery, cold homes, no money, failing health care. The pleasure will be all theirs.

    That is unless we do something about it. Well for a start we could send a message in May and vote em out. Every single one of our useless SNP councillors and instead vote Alba, ISP or good sound independents.

    Liked by 16 people

    1. Well said Willie. In decades to come if Sturgeon and/of other like her are in power they will be selling off licences to access the water in our lochs to satisfy the needs of the thirsty English. The SNP have shown that they are just colonial governors. Backford even said today to Johnston you have presided over the deaths of 150,000 of OUR people. OUR people!!!!!!!!!!

      Liked by 10 people

  8. Devo Max, FFA. What’s next? Sturgeon and Westminster seem to be working their way through every option to see what works. They are trying to find a way to fool the majority of Scots. Once they think that they have found it then it won’t be long until we have a referendum.

    Independence probably won’t even be on the ballot paper. We will be told that this is the best that can be done. If they fool enough people that will be that, and the gravy train can rumble on unhindered.

    Liked by 12 people

  9. A numbing explanation of the events of the past 7 years. Every bullet point strikes at the heart of Scots who desire to be free from the all-encompassing 1707 Treaty of Union which first colonised then wreaked destruction on our nation.
    Nicola Sturgeon is no Joan of Arc. I am minded to say that in her time as leader of the SNP she has flattered and failed on any occasion where her leadership of a Party committed to independence has been tested. She really is a nippy wee sweety with a political and social record that needs to be exposed for the pervading hypocrisy that consumes it.

    Liked by 16 people

    1. CJ, I wid go further and say Sturgeon is a Narcissistic Sociopath who has sold her soul to the Devil and this country of ours to the wolves, and yet aw we dae is greet aboot it. Nae wonder we are in the state we are in fer want o’ belief in oor ane sel!

      Liked by 8 people

    1. The only two words in that link address of any relevance are ” global ” and ” agenda ” .

      I wonder where the cave Gordian Broon hangs upside down in before being summoned to echo-locate a microphone is . Probably somewhere near Davos

      Liked by 4 people

    1. Alastair: predatory capitalism is in the driving seat. I suspect that Sturgeon knows that. The ten-year economic plan tells us all we need to know about how she and her cohort view the future. We were always going to be sold out. We are a tiny cog in a very big wheel. I doubt whether even the Tories understand how they, too, are being manipulated, as are Labour, the Lib Dems and the Greens. We don’t matter in Scotland except as the vehicle for the next phase of this heinous project. We need to stop being distracted and head straight for independence at the next election, having first torn down the pseudo woke citadel. Think of the German defences and how they had to be overcome in order to enter Germany at the end of WW II. There was no way round them if the war was to be concluded. An opponent, especially one that wishes to harm you terribly always has to be defeated before you can hold out the hand of magnanimity and friendship.

      Liked by 13 people

  10. Chis Hanlon is on Independence live tonight at 7pm pushing Devo Max everybody get on tonight and let the Strugeonites know we are not wearing it.

    Liked by 12 people

  11. “… Just in a few months after the 9th May 2015 the pre-legislation processes for Brexit would have commenced and Westminster needed the SNP to be compliant, otherwise that legislation would have never been passed or Brexit completed in time to avoid the new EU taxdodgers legislation… ”

    Not trying to be the dog in the manger, Mia, but I doubt that Johnson would ever have offered FFA because it would have allowed the SG to put brakes on both Brexit and the intended Internal Market Bill to the Tory One Nation State. What did happen in 2015, which very few give any credence to, but which was much bigger than any of the other things that happened that year: the huge movement from Labour to the SNP, in Scotland. That alone would have precluded any major move on the part of the Tories to subvert Scottish independence.

    We had already lost the 2014 referendum and the country was subdued; however, with the Brexit vote now looming, it was another bite of the cherry for Scotland. Then the euphoria when all those former Labour people moved over, taking with them the snake in the Garden of Eden, the far left – always to be guaranteed to throw open the door to the right and the Tories. The pseudo ‘wokerati’ had arrived and independence was nowhere on their agenda: they need the SNP to be in control in Scotland as the vehicle to take their project forward to the next level. We were, and remain, the lab rats for a social engineering never seen before in history because it was not the accidental and unforeseen consequence of another event, such as the stripping of the rural areas in favour of the towns during the Industrial Revolution, for example.

    If only people would read the Denton’s document, look at what has happened in Canada, America, New Zealand, Ireland, Australia, et al, and extrapolate why Scotland was chosen to be the lab rat for a project that was going to be rolled out across the UK as a whole. Nicola Sturgeon, long before she came to power, had been clocked as the perfect ally – lukewarm on independence, a natural devolutionist/ditherer, a capitalist mindset, a ‘do-gooder’. Yes, independence is crucial to our future, but, unless we get a handle on what is happening in Scottish politics, then we will be completely unable to counter the very thing that can derail independence forever. This thing is much bigger than Scotland, bigger even than the UK, and it will ensure that independence cannot b achieved no matter what we do if we allow it a free rein now.

    You are right, Mia, 2015 was the crucial year, but not for the reasons so many believe. The question we should be asking right now is: why is so-called progress always regressive for everyone apart from the elite? The answer, lies in the end part of your quote above. Everything is about money. Everything is a commodity now. Everything has a price tag attached. Everyone but the elite must shoulder the burden. A full hormones/surgery treatment for one so-called trans person costs in the region of three-quarters of a million dollars, mainly paid by the state. Folks, work out the implications for the NHS and for society, and for the predatory capitalists who back this stuff on the back of the collapse of both the NHS and the state as a civic entity. Then, join the dots and work out why we did not get independence. I cannot stress enough: this goes way beyond the independence movement whose ambitions are dwarfed by it. We did not get independence in 2019, or any other year after 2014, for exactly the reasons stated.

    Liked by 9 people

    1. Spot-on Lorna . We only need to remember Sturgeon’s personal plea to the group of spoiled brats who in a laughable display of infantile pique threatened to leave the Party ( maybe that should ready ” party ” , as inclusion into the heart of the SNP has provided them with endless fun harassing anyone deemed one of the multitude of off-message * phobes ” ) if their every wish was not granted to realise the degree to which the Gender voodoo has captured the SNP .

      No * unscripted * ( lol ) video message for the 1000s of members who’ve left the Party since her tenure began

      Liked by 5 people

  12. Really interesting analysis, Mia, which seems to confirm all of the suspicions about Sturgeon’s real stance that have developed over the years. It chimes with her obvious lack of enthusiasm or commitment to real independence, which I think for her is too radical, too scary and fraught with risk, and just too challenging. Plus her stated aversion to nationalism anyway. She has allied herself with that modern brand of neoliberal globalism which pervades the institutional bias she has succumbed to, and of course been well rewarded for. Thus lack of concern for real control of Scotland’s economy over its resources, land, energy, skillbase etc

    From her point of view, she has a lot of what she wants – power, control and a highly lucrative lifestyle. Why would she risk that, in pursuit of something she never had any great belief in? Instead it looks as if her real goal is the super max of FFA, or as I prefer to think of it, FFS. That way things stay much the same, she gets more control and can boast of increasing the power of Holyrood over our economy. You can see the attraction for her of having that on the ballot, enabling her to escape independence while once again pulling the wool over Scots people’s eyes.

    The alarming part of it is that her economic competence and basic understanding of the subject is rock bottom, as we have amply seen recently, so that the attraction for Westminster is that they will be able to pillory her for economic mismanagement (while quietly pulling the powerful strings they will retain in order to undermine it), further damaging the case for real independence. It’s a win-win for both sides, and a lose-lose for Scotland. FFA within the straitjacket of the UK economy planned from Westminster and a global corporate framework. isn’t very much autonomy at all. But economic literacy, or even curiosity, isn’t a quality you could lay at her door.

    It also, as you say, explains the venom reserved for supporters of independence who might gain some traction outside of her gullible, obsequious lapdogs of her own party. As we know a hollowed out party which cannot hold its leadership to account, nor even mandate policy. It is this reaction to those outside of her control which seems to provoke her most while revealing where her true animus lies. And of course she can continue use gender reform as a useful diversionary way of being seen as ‘socially progressive’, bogging down discussions endlessly in that debate, and posing as ‘radical’ in her pseudo Clintonesque way.

    It’s a perversion of what the SNP was set up for. It is now a party of management, without accountability. That is where she has led it.

    Liked by 11 people

  13. This makes a lot of sense actually – in essence it is very close to the SNP’s version of independence. The faithful SNP rank and file seem to have accepted Andrew Wilson’s (Ex RBS) wholesale adoption of uk banking regulations – devastating to society over the past 4 decades and obviously the adoption of sterling making Scotland a currency user rather than a currency creator. Their plan would leave iscotland very exposed, as many commenters have rightly remarked.

    So selling it to the SNP membership would be very easy. ALMOST the same powers without the risks – Still having the Bank of England as guarantor (LOLR) and not having to ‘pay back’ Andrew Wilson’s insane solidarity payment.

    Yes, it makes sense. Create an incredibly bad version of independence which gets shot down in flames, then show the FFA card which is a ‘more sensible and risk free option for the Scots’. You can imagine kenny farquarson would now be able to ditch his viagra supply.

    So perhaps this is why Chris Hanlon has made the intervention when he has. As he states, full autonomy has to give you the option to leave whenever you want it. Of course that option won’t be in there and the SNP negotiating team will be as rigid as a paper bag in a gale.

    Now imagine if all pro-Indy parties ran on a GE mandate of ‘independent Scotland in the single market’. It’s a no-brainer. I have heard the detractors say “WM won’t honour the result” and “we need international recognition”. Well if the most recognised platform for democracy is ‘not recognised’ on the international stage, we have a BIG problem.

    I have asked the ‘anti-plebiscite’ folk about how we would handle any gerrymandering and cheating in the lead up to a London sanctioned referendum. What would happen when we lost it, in part, due to breaches in the lead up to the vote following a S30 (a bit like 2014)? Who do we complain to? The EU? No. They would rightly say that this was an internal matter agreed between Edinburgh and London. Instead it would be years in the courts – if the Scottish Government had the stomach – which they don’t.

    Well done again Mia.

    Liked by 13 people

  14. This betrayal here could easily be on the scale of oil and gas – industrial development, technical development, massive loss of revenue. Its theft. The SG utterly despise us. It can’t be any other way.

    Getting access to our resources is justice for us. It always has been, screwed over oild and gas renewables was our governments opportunity to build something. THey had a a perfect oppostunity to do that even under devolution. Fairly certain we have been sold out on a massive scale here. Any lawyers out there think its challengeable in court?

    Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com/) Secure Email.

    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

    Liked by 7 people

  15. “I doubt that Johnson would ever have offered FFA because it would have allowed the SG to put brakes on both Brexit and the intended Internal Market Bill to the Tory One Nation State”

    Foreign policy is not “devolved” under FFA , this means Brexit would still remain under the domain of England “as the UK” government and parliament, as it would be the case for every single toxic trade deal made with Australia, New Zealand , USA and every other country in the world.

    Under FFA the control of our borders is not devolved either. You would need this in order to enforce different standards in Scotland from those of England. Without control over our standards, we cannot remain close to the EU no matter how much we wanted.

    Under FFA we do not have control over immigration policies, meaning that we cannot control either who comes into Scotland. England “as the UK” would control that, so we would not be able to align our immigration policies to the EU.

    Under FFA we would not have control over our currency, which we would need to take control over our markets, exports and imports. Again, this would remain under the control of England as “the UK” for the benefit of England.

    FFA is just a ruse. A form of augmented devolution specifically designed to give the illusion of autonomy by removing from us the main levers of control that we need to remain close to the EU, to decide what trade deals to take part in and how to govern ourselves. FFA specifically takes away from us foreign policy, control over our borders, control over immigration into our country, control over our territorial waters and land, and control over our currency and markets.

    With regards to the internal market bill, England’s ruling elite wants as much the control over Scotland’s assets as they want full control over Scotland’s market, which they see as part of England’s domestic market. FFA is nothing but devolution, therefore we would still be part of the UK state under UK state laws and the UK state constitution. As we have known for the last 20 years, power devolved is power retained. FFA or not, if England as the Uk wants the market bill, for as long as Scotland remains in the uK union, they will have it.

    Under the treaty of union I suspect it would not be possible to add any barrier to the free flow of trade between Scotland and England. Different standards, different currency, different foreign policy, different treaties, control over the borders and different immigration policies would immediately add a huge barrier to that market. FFA gives the illusion of autonomy without giving us autonomy.

    FFA is designed to make us think that we walk with some form of a deal in exchange for 7 years of pro independence votes, when in reality those rogues who were meant to represent us have sold us down the river and given away our main levers of power making taking control over our destiny impossible. It is unacceptable. Nothing but independence should do. The SnP under Sturgeon will go down in history as the biggest political pygmies Scotland has ever seen. With their woeful performance in the last 7 years, they have made the rogues who sold Scotland in 1706 look as honourable.

    The Scottish government under Sturgeon has proven to be as useless as a zero to the left without a dot behind. What could, can and should have put a break on both brexit and the market bill were the useless charlatans taking our MP seats in Westminster. They did not need FFA for that, they only thing they needed were the balls and the commitment to Scotland to do it.

    If the SNP would have ever wanted to stop brexit, the only thing they had to do was to walk out of the England as the UK parliament and from then on deny consent on behalf of Scotland for that parliament to act as “the UK” parliament until a plebiscite on independence had taken place an a no vote had won again.
    That was what they were expected to do. Instead, they chose to legitimise the England as the UK parliament so it could continue stealing from us our assets and our main levers of power.

    “We had already lost the 2014 referendum”
    This is the thing. I don’t think we did. If we had, the entire England as the UK establishment and their useful idiot currently in control of the SNP would not have gone to the lengths they have gone for the last 7 years to stop a referendum, never mind independence. The pathetic attempts to steal our assets to make us look poor so they can foist on us FFA with less resistance is another sign that we never lost that referendum, as it is their disgusting attempts to remove Mr Salmond and Alba from front line politics.

    Hell mend the lot of them. They have become an embarrassment to Scotland.

    Liked by 15 people

  16. The problem for Sturgeon is still the missing £600,000. The money was raised and ringfenced {later earmarked} for an independence referendum. Either she has to hold one – in order to spend it – or she has to return it. Either way she has deal with the money. There’s the problem.

    Liked by 5 people

    1. WT.

      The ringfenced indy funds were spent on legal fees and doing up the SNPs HQ, that’s why the cash cannot be produced.

      Liked by 4 people

      1. Spending fundraising money on something it was not intended for is very bad. But what would be even worse is to call a fundraiser for an independence referendum when those calling it know the referendum is not going to happen in the foreseeable future.

        Spending the money in something else would suggest they did not intend to hold the referendum any time soon.

        Liked by 7 people

      2. Mia .

        I can go one better than that the SNP Treasurer Mr Beattie said in the media the other day that funds will need to be found for the up and coming council elections. Talk about taking us for fools.

        “Despite this, the SNP has said the next fundraising effort they conduct will be to put towards the local elections in May, and not another referendum.”

        https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.heraldscotland.com%2Fpolitics%2F19849995.snp-transparency-row-refusing-explain-600k-indyref-cash-whereabouts%2F

        Liked by 7 people

    2. Holding one is not a problem. The problem is making it fair to the Scots’ natives in a way that their vote is not balanced out by those coming from elsewhere and the vote is not rigged.

      I am not sure about the rest of the people in this forum, but since 31st January 2020 I do no longer trust this woman and her sycophant enablers in the SNP with anything at all. The more I have read, the more I have realised she never had Scotland’s best interests at heart and by the look of it, she might have been lying to us and deceiving us for seven whole years.

      The SNP MPs and MSPs are now irreversibly tainted by association in my eyes: instead of stopping her and forcing her to deliver on independence, they enabled her to waste seven years of our time, our mandates, our majorities, they enabled the English establishment to force brexit on us and they enabled them to steal our powers and assets. They have proven beyond any reasonable doubt to be completely useless.

      For this reason, seeing this woman and her carcass of a party anywhere near the control of the franchise for that referendum, the question in the ballot, the campaigning or the counting of the votes is a clear sign to me that it will be rigged. I would not trust the result. Just as I do not trust the result of the last Holyrood election nor the indyref2014 official result.

      As for the £600,000, in my opinion the key would be finding out for sure and being able to demonstrate that she made some kind of deal for some form of augmented devolution with the British state immediately after the 2015 GE or even before then. Or alternatively finding some declaration where she rejects independence that could prove that they were calling a fundraiser for indyref in March 2017 when they already knew indyref was not going to happen. That would be make the fundraiser a way to deliberately deceiving people into donating money for something you know is not going to happen. That would be akin to fraud. But I am sure if that kind of evidence ever existed, the British state would have quickly put it in their blackmailing safe deposit box, with all the other stuff they can release on demand when the next SNP useful idiot in line to take over from her has been fully trained and rehearsed to deliver their fake performance in the mockery of democracy that is Scotland’s politics.

      Liked by 10 people

      1. ” I am not sure about the rest of the people in this forum, but since 31st January 2020 I do no longer trust this woman and her sycophant enablers in the SNP with anything at all. ”

        I wouldn’t trust this mob to tell me the correct time of day and the idea of them delivering , or even getting us closer to , Independence is the stuff of fantasy only the likes of WGD and his collection of N.I.C.O.L.A adoring sycophants could give credibility to .

        As for FFA , apart any other consideration as to why it should be resisted at all costs ( mainly because it would be a gin-trap that would spring shut the moment accepted cutting-off the blood supply to Independence once and for all ) can you imagine the disaster they would make with even more money to squander ?

        Liked by 3 people

    3. WT: I think Peter the merkin is goin’ tae Cop his whack for that lot. Whit wan o’ her ‘tour’ buses he goes under only time will tell.

      Liked by 6 people

  17. Nicola Sturgeon on security.
    “In terms of security and intelligence, I would envisage Scotland having independent domestic intelligence machinery in Scotland sitting alongside our police service but working very closely – given our sharing of an island with the rest of the UK – with the UK and making sure we are sharing intelligence and sharing our response to some of these threats.” (UK Parliament 2013: 23).
    What constitutes a threat?
    Some UK partisans consider the Scottish independence movement has its drivers in Moscow. After independence the UK would cease to exist as a legal entity, in itself sufficient reason for intelligence services to get involved.

    Liked by 7 people

    1. “given our sharing of an island with the rest of the UK”

      I have heard the SNP saying this expression “the rest of the UK” over and over again and drives me mad. If Scotland ends the treaty of union, there is no rest of the “UK”. What is left is the Kingdom of England and its annexes.

      With regards to Sturgeon saying “working very closely…with the UK”, again, if Scotland becomes an independent state and ends the treaty of union, there is no UK to share intelligence or to work with. Either it is England what she had in mind or she never envisioned the UK to end, in other words, when she was saying that she never saw Scotland’s independence as a reality.

      I have always found that insistence of the Sturgeonites in continuing to indulge the Kingdom of England by giving it the status of “UK” irritating and an indication that they believe the whole “England as the UK” mantra and see Scotland as an annexe of England. You cannot be a nationalist if you see your country as a region of another.

      Liked by 9 people

      1. Independence for the present order seems to be a matter of rearanging items of furniture, the externals, rather than a complete rebuild and a new psychological perspective. I do not believe the current political dispensation has fully internalized that radical re-ordering. so many seek the easy option, a sovereignty without responsibility for occasionally upsetting England. Sharing an island does not mean you must always aim to be best mates, certainly not in the light of Scoto-English history.

        Liked by 3 people

  18. Sturgeon and her cabal have taken us for Mugs, The SNP have morphed into the new Labour party. I was listening to Chis Hanlon tonight on Independence live who tried to sell the Devo Max shite . This is the party that claims to represent us, it left me with the impression they are out of control. They think we are all stupid and as long as they pretend a referendum is around the corner they think they are safe, that we’ll vote for them. Mandate after mandate wasted while the supreme leader becomes the lovee of vogue magazine and the guardian newspaper. Does that not tell you something in itself. The British establishment are embracing her ,there media protects her, while she plots and stuffs us , kicking the can down the road again. Now is not the time , shut you eyes, you think your listening to Teresa May. All my life I have been an independence supporter, my father was a Member since 1948 he would turn in his grave to see what they have now become. What’s worse we have MPs and MSPs that remain quite they say nothing about Sturgeons tyrannical rule, her hidden agendas. I now want these traitors punished, they stole my dreams my hope’s my freedom they have become our colonial masters quisling government.
    Alba must now stand candidates against the SNP . The SNP are not fit to run Scotland , I will never trust them again. Vote Alba.

    Liked by 7 people

  19. In simple terms, Full Fiscal Autonomy means that defence policy and foreigns affairs authority rests in the hands of the UK gov’t , meaning Boris Johnson, and his likely successor. And we will be billed for our “share” of these defence and policy cost – Gers arithmetic anyone? Happy with that?

    Example.Why in the hell is the “UK” sending anti-tank missiles, and training experts to the Ukraine? Would an independent Scotland?

    In my opinion there is only one sensible satisfactory solution, independence. But, how to achieve independence?

    Via politics? I gave my vote to the now Central Ayrshire SNP MSP – I have never heard from her since, In fact I cannot remember her name.My MP Dr Phillipa Whitford who I campaigned for, and drove her around during campaigning I haven’t heard from in over two years.

    So seems to me that politics, SNP or whatever, is not the vehicle that will deliver us to independence.

    I grew up in the era of full employment and council houses. Now I see foodbanks, and seemingly uncontrolled energy costs.And etc etc unfairness.

    any solutions?

    Liked by 8 people

  20. The Primary threat to Independence is no longer Westminster directly. London has cultivated the Sturgeon desire to be a “local hero” with a comfortable life style.
    I do feel it is as simple as that.
    Whitehall set up the D’Hondt system to keep Unionists in charge at Holyrood. They only needed to tweak the model a little to accept the “harmless” NuSNP to rule. They have no real powers and they know that SNP funding, pensions and careers have bought them just as effectively as a bribe. The NuSNP is an irritant to Whitehall but will not impact on the bleed of assets or long term colonisation.
    The NuSNP are like the local Civil Servants who ran India for the Empire. A comfortably life and they sometimes get invited to tea with the real rulers.

    Remember that Sturgeon took down the Saltires in Bute House when Boris visited. She knows her place!

    Liked by 9 people

    1. And used the International stage provided by COP 26 to add a few more celebrity selfies to her extensive collection , and not one reference to Independence . Nothing more than an audition for a ( much desired by her ) place in the Globalist Elite

      Liked by 3 people

      1. La Sturgeon buzzed frantically around the honey pot but it was still COP 26, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
        Good networking ploy though.

        Liked by 3 people

    2. India is interesting in the balance between Brit administrators and Indian «civil servants».
      Without the latter cooperating and the «loyalty» of the Indian army the Brits would have been out far sooner than 1947. The severity of Brit response to what they called «the mutiny» had a profound psychological impact. Serving England became a honorable profession.
      In Scotland the military had the benefit of suppressed Gaels and landless Lowlanders to fight England’s wars.

      Liked by 3 people

  21. Sorry to return to the missing £600,000 for a second: I do realise the money has been spent on other things but the problem she has – I believe – is that it was raised as a ringfenced/earmarked fund solely for an independence referendum. If the money is not used for that purpose then – I believe – this would be fraud. This was not money raised from SNP members, this was open to all independence supporters. She HAS to use the money for this purpose or return it. There is the problem.

    Liked by 5 people

    1. I think there has been some internal reorganisation at HQ and they have created an Independence unit. A number of staff wages have been transferred to this unit from the regular wage bill and therefore they can claim, over time, to have used it for Independence purposes. That is only a guess but I would be confident about it.

      Liked by 2 people

  22. Sorry Mia I believe you have mentioned the fraud aspect further up. However, I do believe this is a problem that will not be easy for those involved to move away from. The wording of the fundraiser and the subsequent changes to the wording still make it difficult for her to shape-shift through this. Simply, if you raise money for training guide dogs then you have to use it for training guide dogs

    Liked by 5 people

  23. How can we turn this around? What are the options available? Can we reach out to pro indy types who are not as engaged as those on social media indy platforms? How best can we convince SNP members yet to be convinced?
    I am not as politically erudite as those commenting on this blog but I do feel we need to mount a sans politician campaign to get the message across to as many members of the public as possible.

    Liked by 5 people

    1. We all need to know how power works in this land. Very little is being made of the latest sell out in our press. Perfectly happy for us to be a region of England of course. Therein lies our problem. The contempt the Scottish Institutions have for the people is intense. Our crown office, Press, the civil service, the contemptuous political class at Holyrood. They utterly despise us. It cannot be any other way.

      To answer your question we need to take to the streets. I don’t see any other way. AUOB are an established vehicle for that. It is one place that information can spread where we can make a public demonstration for our rights. We can all agree that we oppose those who would sell out Scotland for personal gain,.

      This site and others do an excellent job but The National and some of the other bloggers and websites are in the SNP leadership pocket. it is only a matter of time before staying in the union becomes financially beneficial to these types.

      Liked by 6 people

  24. ‘A cynic like me” says Mia. And what do we hear on the news today, MPs being threatened with blackmail over “PM” Johnson’s plight. Oh dear!

    know, I’m repeating myself, “On my word as an Englishman” is in effect a threat.Their words are meaningless deceptions for the gullible.Like Mia, from experience, I cannot accept that the English establishment did not interfere in the voting results of the 2014 referendum. With their resources to hand, it would be “a piece of cake”.

    “Get Brexit Done”, Has it been done? Not yet, but note how inflation, fuel costs, food costs are being reported in the press as a global problem. Do you have any way to accept or deny that analysis/statement of a global problem – via the UK press? Reference to Brexit seems to be forbidden to the UK’s fearless press.

    Fuel costs, heating bills, electric power bills: Anyone recall ex PM Cameron’s slip regards North Sea oil and gas revenues – not verbatum – “well for a population of 5 million yes substantial, but for 55 million not so significant”.
    And generated electrical power. The license sell-off declared yesterday joyfully by Sturgeon is an astonishing sell-out.

    Public demonstrations for independence via AUOB are the answer, politicians are it appears, the obstacle to independence.

    Liked by 5 people

  25. Elected politicians are there to SERVE the people who have voted for them… Politicians are both servants and – occasionally – respectable advisers?
    Bear in mind that Scotland’s Royalty gave up its supreme power and/or authority; thereafter, the nation’s population are actually sovereign people!

    By comparison, England’s parliament is recognised as being a Sovereign Parliament… The supposed UK presently has a Royal Queen (Figurehead?), and thereby lies an entirely different story, which is beyond my understanding; so I’ll simply close with a small poem…

    Unrealistic 🙃

    It was unrealistic to expect changes,
    UK’s really that Unraveling Kingdom;
    Westminster’s lunatic style deranges,
    Past the time for Scotland’s freedom!

    © Ewen A. Morrison

    Saor Alba 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    Liked by 1 person

  26. What makes it hard to bare is those that see this nonsense a first hand , they see Sturgeons deception yet do nothing.
    If the MSPs and MPs really care about independence about Scotland, DEFECT AND GOIN ALBA.

    Liked by 1 person

  27. Reading the comments on this Herald article
    https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/19557178.snp-deputy-says-party-must-publish-spending-plans-600k-fraud-probe/#comments-anchor
    I came across this opinion:

    “So, not a big fan of the SNP, then, Bob?”

    “Neither are the Murrell’s by the looks of things, in fact the impression I get is that they look upon the rest of the SNP as the ‘hired help,’ these days.”

    I couldn’t agree more. They believe that the SNP membership is there to serve the Murrells not the other way around.

    Liked by 2 people

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: