What follows is an extract of an exchange from this website’s comment column between Mia and a Davey Tee 19 who is also a regular on this site.
“If they’re sovereign, they can exercise their sovereignty either to leave or remain in the United Kingdom”
That sovereignty was exercised in 1706 by Scotland’s representatives when the Treaty of Union was passed in the parliament of Scotland, and can be exercised again by our MPs repealing that treaty and Act of Union,
“As to equal partners, yes the Scots wanted to retain their sovereignty, etc, but the parliamentary records to which you refer were not reflected in the actual Treaty or Act”
That depends how you look at it. The crown of Scotland remains in Scotland for a reason. The royals have different titles in Scotland for a reason. The Claim of Right became the fundamental document that underpins the Treaty and remains extant today.
“The sovereignty and independence of the Scots crown and monarchy was not reserved”
For as long as the Claim of Right is extant, yes it is.
“There’s nothing about Scotland being equal”
There is nothing about Scotland not being equal. That record clearly shows the mind frame of Scotland’s MPs when they voted for the article and they reserved to themselves the sovereignty and independence of the crown of Scotland and the Kingdom.
“In fact, not much of the stuff in that record was actually carried through into the Act”
The fundamental part which was the Claim of Right and that enshrines the sovereignty of Scotland and the constitution, was. You cannot uphold the treaty without looking at the circumstances in which it was approved. You cannot ignore the frame of mind of the MPs when they voted for it. Article one was passed under those circumstances and those circumstances and conditions cannot be ignored.
“All Laws and Statutes in either Kingdom so far as they are contrary to or inconsistent with the Terms of these Articles or any of them shall from and after the Union cease and become void”.
If the Claim of Right becomes void the entire treaty folds.
“But does it matter?”
Well, of course it does.
“Scotland has never been an equal partner and never could be”
Scotland has always been an equal partner. A different matter is that England MPs and shamefully Scotland Mps have not treated it like one.
“To base an argument on Scotland’s being an equal partner will inevitably fail”
In the same way you cannot simply ignore Hansard, you cannot ignore the parliament records of Scotland. Those records are clear.
” If Scotland had genuinely been an equal partner it would have had the same number of MPs as England”
That is a very poor argument. Take a look at the countries of the EU. They are all equally sovereign, yet they do not have the same representation in the EU parliament, do they?
“English MPs have always been able to out vote Scotland”
Because Scotland’s Mps have never been really acting on behalf of Scotland and exercising its sovereign right. It has always been about preserving the union. As per lords, it seems that only those who support the union are appointed. None of this mean that Scotland MPs can at any time of their choosing exercise that sovereignty and reject being outvoted and that is, quite frankly, what they are expected to do. That is precisely why it feels so wrong that 56 SNP Mps instead of ending the union abused our pro indy votes to preserve it.
“Scotland has always accepted that”
Err, speak for yourself. I am beyond outraged that Sturgeon has used my pro indy vote to preserve the union still of terminating it as she should have done in May 2015.
“But not being an equal partner in fact surely strengthens Scotland’s right to independence”
Sorry, but Scotland is an equal partner. It is clear as day in that parliamentary record that that was the frame of mind of the MPs when they voted for the first article.
“Westminster will always be able to tell us what to do because we are not an equal partner”
No. Westminster will only be able to tell us what to do for as long as our MPs continue to sit there like amoebas and give England Mps the legitimacy to do so in order to preserve this union instead of exercising Scotland’s sovereignty to protect Scotland’s interests. It is not the treaty what made us an unequal partner. Those records make it clear. It is the Mps that Scotland has sent to Westminster for 300 years what has done so by allowing Scotland to continue to be humiliated and exploited as a colony. Goodness, looking at those records from 1706 made me realise those MPs on the day had far more gumption than, bar a very few, all the MPs Scotland has ever sent to Westminster put together. It is embarrassing quite frankly.
I am sure others will have thought about some of the comments and doubts Davey Tee has raised. I thought it worthwhile to publish them and Mia’s answers. When you read them it seems obvious that if our MP’s were using these different tactics the Union would be facing much more serious problems than comforting themselves over Nicola’s view that Westminster must grant a Section 30 before anything can be done. Where is the legal advice that we as taxpayers paid for.? If that legal advice agreed with Nicola it would have been published the day after it was received. The fact it remains hidden from public view and the Scottish Government are continuing to resist instruction to make it public tells me it must be politically embarrassing. We know, as in the ferry contract documentation and the Salmond Enquiry, what can happen these days when potentially embarrassing documents are requested. The situation today is very different.
It is only since 2015 that Scotland has elected a majority of Mp’s who claim to want Scotland’s Independence. Before that the majority that were elected were Unionists intent on preserving the Union. They would never use the Claim of Right. The ” mystery” is why our MP’s have not recognised what a huge difference that majority of Scots MP’s makes, and the staggering failure to use it in Scotland’s benefit to deliver that Independence.
I am, as always
Yours for Scotland.
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 attempted censorship.
Are available easily by clicking on the links in the Home and Blog sections of this website. by doing so you will be joining thousands of other readers who enjoy being notified by email when new articles are published. You will be most welcome.