“Did the SNP just do something right?”

I am not convinced even one bit that they have, nor that this is not another delay strategy and more smoke and mirrors. For example:

1. The question is : “Should Scotland be an independent country?”
What does independence mean in this context and what route is she hoping to follow to reach that independence? The route where Scotland is demoted to the status of Wales and is seeking to secede from the UK so the Uk gov and parliament retain all control over the process, the timeframe and the assets and will send us packing with the bare minimum?
In other words, what does a yes vote lead to, the termination of the treaty or some kind of undefined limbo where we (and our assets) remain at the mercy of Westminster for an undetermined number of years to come?

2. She hopes for the vote to be on 19 October 2023. Wonderful. So what happens after a yes vote? When does Scotland become independent? What kind of timeframe does she have in mind? Does she have any timeframe in mind or her ultimately goal is simply delivering a yes vote and then let Westminster deal with it in the way they see fit?

3. She says the referendum is “consultative”. Excellent. What does this mean in practical terms? Does this mean she might just choose to do the same she did with our 2016 mandate for indyref, to let it expire? Does it mean the yes vote might not be taken forward because Westminster says so?

4. The EU ref was “consultative” as well. The group leave got away with breaking the law and yet the courts ruled the referendum did not need to be re-run because it was “consultative” therefore the government and parliament did not have the obligation to implement it. Is making the referendum “consultative” opening extra doors for the apparatus of the British state to stick its sticky hands and manipulate the campaign and our process at leisure?

5. Nicola Sturgeon mentioned that if the referendum is blocked the SNP will be running on the next GE on the single question “Should Scotland be an independent country?”. We know the key to end this treaty of union lies on the hands of our MPs, just as it has done for the last 300 years. But she is being super careful to avoid mentioning the repealing of the treaty of union by the MPs. If her intention was to include the bit of the general election as a shot across the bows to signify to Westminster that if they don’t concede on the referendum she would follow a more drastic path, then she should have gone the full length and said openly that in absence of a referendum, the next option is to withdraw our MPs from Westminster, reconvene Scotland’s old parliament and repeal treaty of Union and the and Act of union with England. Why didn’t she mention it? Is it because it was only a nice sounding platitude with no intention to be used, but to give the false impression that a real plebiscite election is in her cards? 

6. In the event of having to go to a GE as a plebiscite, what would determine a yes vote, a majority of SNP MPs or them holding the majority of the vote? And what if we deliver a majority of SNP Mps but not a majority of the vote? Does this mean the SNP continues with its union business as usual? Couldn’t this be interpreted as a strategy to ensure the SNP gets a majority?

7. In the event of having to go to a GE as a plebiscite and obtaining a yes vote in such a general election, what would that vote mean? What would SNP MPs do to deliver independence? Continue to beg for recognition by Westminster or would they finally grow the backbone to withdraw from Westminster, reconvene the old Scottish parliament and terminate the treaty?

8. There is a GE in the horizon. What happens if Johnson or the Tories take the rug from under her feet and call a GE before the 19th October and then the English court rules that Holyrood does not have power to call that referendum? What is the plan in that scenario? Continue with the begging for an S30 or directly delay the whole thing to 2026 and beyond?

9. The results from the census 2022 have not been released yet. We now know the Scottish natives voted for independence in 2014 but their vote was frustrated by settlers. What is Nicola Sturgeon going to do to ensure the yes vote from natives and therefore their self-determination is not frustrated by settlers again? Can you even say this referendum is an exercise in self-determination if you are knowingly using a franchise that will frustrate their attempt to self-determine?

10. What about the other loopholes that can be abused by the British state to frustrate a yes vote? Is she going to leave them wide open so they British State can abuse them again?

11. What is she going to do about the UK gov propaganda mouthpiece the BBC?

12. How is she going to stop UK civil servants breaking their code of conduct “to save the union” as many did in 2014?

13. How do we know this move has not been just an strategy by the British state establishment via Nicola Sturgeon (and her handlers) to remove from us the opportunity to use a General Election to issue a mandate to terminate the treaty of union? .
There is far too much uncertainty and vagueness here. It seems more like an appeasing strategy rather than an effective, carefully calculated one. It definitely gives a disproportionate weight to the route where Scotland has to demote itself to the status of a region of Greater England so the referendum can take place under the umbrella of devolution instead of effecting Scotland’s legitimate right to unilaterally ending the treaty.

She did not convince me at all to get behind this referendum, particularly with the absence of a timeframe, lack of detail of how she expects to actually deliver independence and of course with all the loopholes present in 2014 still being wide open today, particularly now that the “consultative” nature of the referendum will be opening a whole set of extra ones.

I would be more trusting had she been more forceful regarding the plebiscite and stating clearly that a majority of SNP MPs would lead the unilateral revoking of the treaty of union. Westminster only has to shift up a couple of hundreds of thousands postal votes to Scotland to ensure the SNP does not get over 50% of the vote. This will be easy now that we don’t have yet a census to refer to.


As I certainly expected Mia has raised a number of very good points that require urgent clarification from the SNP if they hope to win back trust and respect. Everyone agrees unity within the Yes Movement is vital. This puts a huge responsibility on the SNP leadership to be open and honest in what they propose. They could start by clearing up a lot of the legitimate questions Mia has raised in her article. We are all ears for the answers.

I am, as always



Sadly some websites that claim to be pro Indy have turned out to be only Pro SNP sites and have sought to ban any websites that dare to question SNP Policy or tactics. They seek to avoid the public being aware that alternatives to waiting for Westminster to “grant” Scotland a Section 30 to hold a referendum exist. Issues like the flawed franchise, the Claim of Right route, the work of the SSRG and Salvo fill them with dread. As this blog promotes all routes, including alternatives I am banned from these sites and am therefore very grateful to my readers, who knowing about these efforts to ban and suppress go out of their way to subscribe and to share my articles far and wide. It is a good thing that attempts to restrict free speech and censor are defeated in this way.


Free subscriptions are available on this site from both the Home and Blog pages. This will ensure you will be notified every time a new article is posted. Each article already gets posted to many thousands of people, I hope you will come and join us. You will be most welcome.


  1. I have my doubts as well. What we do have is a date to focus on and a plan B, until we get to the end of the supreme court ruling or 19.10.23 and if by October we are still in the UK then we have to let a Westminster election run its course. NIcola Sturgeon could be running us up the flag pole just to take us back down again, but one thing is for sure Scotland course of direction is to be Independent thats going to happen with ot without Sturgeon. What ever happens from now to any of these events well get a better idea if we are being lead by the UKG or the SG, one way or another we’re not stupid and the picture will become clear.

    Liked by 14 people

  2. Regrettably I cannot trust Sturgeon. Once a person has shown me who they are I can never ignore that. Unfortunately some people wear a mask of deceit as they go through life and it sometimes slips to unveil their real character. Far too many Scots are already fooled by her act. If Independence is achieved it will be be despite her manipulation and misuse of power.

    I will vote for Independence if given the chance. I hope the Indy movement takes the campaign out of the SNPs hands and delivers success.

    Everything she announced Yesterday could have been done to greater effect at the time of the Brexit vote.

    The same message is still loud and clear to Indy supporters…”We don’t want your involvement, this is the SNPs campaign, not Scotlands”

    Trust is earned in spoonfuls and lost in buckets.

    Liked by 23 people

  3. Some very well made points made Mia, and I agree with you. Much against my better judgement I did listen to the speech, although my PC was in great danger of being hurled through the window at times.

    What’s all this about referring it to the supreme court, all that could already have been done. The SG fought tooth and nail to undermine, and bankrupt martin keating when he tried to have this question answered in the courts.

    Also HOPE seemed to be a great word yesterday used a few times. How on earth does she expect to run a referendum when no work has been done on currency, pensions etc. Using the same franchise for voting as last time, well she’s having a laugh with that one. All set up to fail and I also notice that she’s got the excuses in early about failure, oh aye, it’ll all be Westminster’s fault.

    Sorry Nicola, I don’t believe a word you say. You have abused our trust time an time again for your own selfish ends. No more. If and when this magic referendum ever happens, I hope that you and your cohorts of useless baggage are long gone. Until then I don’t see us winning anytime soon.

    Liked by 18 people

  4. Nicola Sturgeon’s speech focused on delivering “democracy”. That is giving the “Scottish People” (undefined) the right to vote either via a referendum or plebiscitary election on our constitutional status. In other words securing recognition of our right self-determination.

    Fair enough.


    There was, as Mia has pointed out, nothing about how we actually become Independent i.e. how we actually restore Scotland’s statehood in the event of a Yes vote in a referendum or a “win” – seats or votes?, SNP only or all pro-Indy parties? – in a plebiscitary election.

    It would seem that the means has become the end.

    Liked by 15 people

    1. This has just been reported and published in The National:

      “Asked directly if a majority of SNP MPs at the next General Election would represent a mandate to begin independence negotiations with Westminster, the deputy FM replied: “That is correct, yes.”

      However, shortly afterwards, Sturgeon suggested that a majority of votes would be required, as opposed to a majority of seats.”


      1. As clear as mud.
      2. Why exclude Scottish Greens, Alba and ISP?
      3. As British Parliament General Elections are based on FPTP what’s the volume of votes got to do with it?

      Liked by 12 people

      1. Seems Sturgeon is being exposed as the the agent of the dark state many of us think she is. I don’t think she always was but at some point in those cosy wee chats with the Queen it feels like things changed.
        The deputy FM was correct. If the SNP believe in this push for independence then they need to get Sturgeon redeployed to the UN asap

        Liked by 7 people

      2. I think Sturgeon referred to the GE as a de-facto referendum and the civil service said referendums were won on a majority of votes?
        Sturgeon may need to watch the language.
        The SG need to be clear it is a majority of seats.
        If indyref2 happens then it is a majority of votes cast – same as the Brexit referendum.

        Liked by 6 people

      3. Oh no – it seems dark state Sturgeon has indeed lined up her cult on ‘most votes’ and we can expect she will allow that to be over 70+% of all those eligible to vote. I can only hope that Alba step up and say it is a majority of seats – and if we return Alba MPs then negotiations will open.

        Our hope lies in the fact the SNP are no longer the only YES game in town.

        Liked by 7 people

  5. She did not convince me at all to get behind this referendum, particularly with the absence of a timeframe, lack of detail of how she expects to actually deliver independence and of course with all the loopholes present in 2014 still being wide open today, particularly now that the “consultative” nature of the referendum will be opening a whole set of extra ones.

    I would be more trusting had she been more forceful regarding the plebiscite and stating clearly that a majority of SNP MPs would lead the unilateral revoking of the treaty of union. Westminster only has to shift up a couple of hundreds of thousands postal votes to Scotland to ensure the SNP does not get over 50% of the vote. This will be easy now that we don’t have yet a census to refer to.”…

    And that MIA sums up exactly how I felt about this announcement, too many open goals, it was just a plea for Scots to rally around the SNP once more in the next GE. To keep the settlers happily settled. I also believe this was in many ways her resignation speech. She has made herself SOUND good, (as great LIARS do) So that when she walks off to that TOP Job that is already awaiting her, she will be able to leave saying she tried. The HELL she did, she could have as you said thrown everything at WM, The Treaty, The Claim of Right, And why sticking with the same franchise for a referendum when she knows Scotland can never win a referendum with that. More so after 2014.

    Too many HOPES, Pleas, & I and MY PARTY.. That very DIG in regard to holding a plebiscite, she made it clear it was to be “MY PARTY” if she was serious about INDY there would be NO ” I ,ME,or MY,” She would have pulled in the other INDY parties to ensure that they all do what UNIONISTS to to defeat Nationalist..(that really would put the frighteners on WM, but she is NOT serious about INDY) The offer to work together to ensure the BIGGEST turn out, to take the largest number of Seats in her so called Plebiscite election.Then NOT take up the seats, END the bloody TREAT with our Claim of Right..With ALL Indy parties under that one umbrella. That would also be the show the rest of the world needed to see. Thanks Mia for another great post..

    Liked by 17 people

  6. I’ll restrict my comments to the plebiscite election since this is the only realistic outcome.
    Clearly I’ll be swimming against the tide of sentiment here judging by comments so far.
    Only one in twenty of us expected a clear commitment to a plebiscite election (WoS poll).
    Clearly Sturgeon has exceeded our expectations. Some community acknowledgement of that would be “nice”, otherwise we’re liable to come across as bitter naysayers.
    No, I don’t trust her but she has painted herself into a corner with the commitment to a plebiscite GE.
    Yes, she didn’t explicitly state that the SNP would stand at the next GE on an abstentionist platform. If she did we’d be criticising her as being dictatorial when the details of that move should be rightly debated and resolved at conference.
    Taking an abstentionist position should be debated in great detail over a reasonable period of time. Should the MPs be abstentionist regardless of the outcome of the election (Sinn Féin position)? Should the MPs abstain only in the event of “victory”? How is “victory “ defined?
    Never dismiss the utility of “constructive ambiguity”. Many English based pundits predict the Tories to loose an outright majority at the next GE. The implication being that Labour, the LibDems and the SNP could pass a Queen’s speech and Budget. This could leave the SNP with the whip hand.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Oh I have lived so many times through the “next Westminster election” might present opportunity for the SNP to hold the “whip hand” It never happens and never will. We need to take the matter into our own hands and convince Scots to act. Our future in our hands, not relying on how people in other countries might vote.

      Liked by 17 people

      1. Jay – you could well be right. This is a very authoritarian regime and has evaded both transparency and accountability. The justice system sits in the pocket of the SG. We may yet need to go onto the streets. People get the democracy they deserve – lets ensure our kids have a modern, free democracy no matter what is asked of us to reach that point.

        Liked by 9 people

      2. Let’s assume the next Westminster election becomes a plebiscite electon and Yes wins.
        What happens next?

        Is there a procedure? Will Scottish MPs abstain fron going to Westminster? Has abstentionism been discussed?
        Will the MPs stay within the Scottish parliament and form a Provisional Government?What are its tasks?What is their role?
        Has a negotiating team been nominated to broker the independence settlement?
        Are they busy studying and preparing to secure Scotland’s best interests against all eventualities?
        Have Scotland’s must haves, nice to haves, could do without been identified?

        I could keep going on but you get the message – sliding these nuts and bolts into place is crucial for the success of Independence

        Liked by 4 people

  7. MY PARTY – not Scotland’s desire to be independent or otherwise . MY PARTY , what happened to the “PEOPLE of SCOTLAND ” be they SNP, Tory, Labour ,Liberal ,Alba, ISP ,Green or no political affiliation at all ?
    Do we all have to vote for a discredited party to secure indy? I think not.

    Liked by 13 people

  8. Well yes, a lot of those questions struck me too. As others have said the trust is gone and the wary now parse her sentences for loopholes and get-outs.

    “And what if we deliver a majority of SNP Mps but not a majority of the vote? Does this mean the SNP continues with its union business as usual? Couldn’t this be interpreted as a strategy to ensure the SNP gets a majority?”

    That was my first thought. Gravy training or is it gravy bussing? First of all, it’s not only the SNP votes that should be counted – it should be an party that says ” a vote for us is a vote for independence” but she’ll either try to force them to stand done OR the msm will say that it’s only SNP votes that count because reasons… I think she’ll try to get all other yes parties to stand aside except the Greens – they’ll count according to her because they are part of the Scot Gov.

    Meanwhile a reason will be found that the plebiscite isn’t good enough and the SNP MPs will have another 5 years of excellent salaries and pensions achieving hee and haw for Scotland.

    I can live in hope, but fear instead disappointment.

    Liked by 13 people

  9. I suppose what will happen is, the SNP will get a majority of MP at the next Westminster election and on the opening of the English parliament the SNP leader will stand up and say to the Speaker of the house that the Scottish MP’s are withdrawing from Westminster and returning back to Scotland to convene Scottish parliament in full and to restore Scottish nation.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Mia makes very good points and I am sure Sturgeon wants to wriggle out of this – this is driven by Alba on her heels, nothing more. And in the next GE there will be two parties standing on the singe ticket of independence: the one that states clearly that a majority of their MPs will mean and end to the union will be the one that wins. My take on this is that Sturgeon is now flying before the storm that is Alba.

      Liked by 6 people

      1. Sturgeon has fired the starting gun and I don’t doubt it was against her will. We must be ready campaign and then remove the SNP from leading it when they try to march back down the hill – or corrupt the mandate as Sturgeon already has in saying a majority of votes is needed – anyone who has connections with – or is part of – the SNP leadership should skin her for that.

        Liked by 5 people

      2. As I think about this Iain I wonder if this is the last treacherous act of Sturgeon: an s30 order can be denied to Holyrood. If Sturgeon succeeds in changing the mandate of the MPs from a majority of seats to a majority of votes then she has set the bar in this occupied country too high to reach. I hope Alba slap her down hard – for all our sakes. Hell mend this wretch.

        Liked by 6 people

  10. Questions stolen from my mouth
    Looks like Sturgeon has found another way to stay in power “For the people of Scotland to have their say” that has no hope of giving the people of Scotland a say on anything.

    Just suppose the Supreme Court did say “Yes Scotland can have their wee referendum (on anything) Westminster would simply appeal the decision of the Supreme Court, giving them time to amend the law (I seem to remember they did this before, when the Scottish Parliament tried to get the better of them.) Dead End

    Or just supposing the Supreme Court said yes, and Westminster said Okay go ahead, it would not be a referendum it would be a poll of how Scots felt about independence and since neither of the other parties will take part, it is really a poll of what SNP voters want, and at the end of the day even if the yes vote was 100% in favour of independence but less that 50% of the population of Scotland then the Tories will say the People of Scotland have once more voted in favour of staying in the Union. Dead End

    The SNP stand at the GE on a platform of independence and win ever seat in Scotland, and march off to London to take there seats (once more) nothing has changed. Labour will not back an independence bill, and since fifty odd new Scottish MPs are not Labour (the opposition) Boris will remain in power at Westminster so nothing has changed.

    Sturgeon get what she wants, she keeps her party in well paid jobs and all the perks for a further five years at Westminster.

    So what’s the good news – independence has moved from the back burner and onto the front, and the Yes campaign has a voice once more. At the Holyrood elections the cat will be out of the bag, The Scottish people “had their say” and it was trumped at every turn. No more will sturgeon get away with both votes SNP to send a message to Westminster – on independence Westminster is not listening. Scotland can not swallow this same old line from Sturgeon, they must not give both votes to any one party and let the Tories into the Scottish parliament (even if that means voting for a dozen new parties so long as they are all on a platform of independence or reform). I say reform because if I were Labour I would be looking at way to give the Scottish people full fiscal control over their own affairs, yet still affiliated to the Union getting themselves back into power at Westminster. If not Boris will win the next and possibly the GE after that, Labour needs the Scottish votes, and by keep refusing to even conceded the Scottish Parliament having full control of tax and spend, and control of the waters around their shores then Labour will always be out of power at Westminster and Scotland will always be controlled by Boris (or his ilk) from Westminster.

    Liked by 5 people

  11. Uhu, Mia. Too many questions and few answers, I agree. I may be a total cynic, but I think this has been driven by panic in the face of Alex Salmond’s daily drip-feed of nuanced threats that something must be done or the SNP will pay the price. This is why they tried to take him out of the picture: they know he is the only politician who can do this. He is careful never to confront Nicola Sturgeon directly, and that is probably sensible.

    Do I, personally, think this is a genuine, wholehearted drive for independence? No, not at all. As I said in another blog, this is the same script that women were given in relation to the committee evidence for and against reform of the GRA (self-ID) – which it would be because it is the same people behind both the GRA reform drive and the attempts to delay and/or destroy independence. We are being suckered again, and it will be a lot of money spent for no reward. The Supreme Court has already ruled that, in accordance with the Scotland Act, Holyrood is a creature of Westminster, and its powers strictly limited.

    She can go ahead and hold an advisory referendum (dead end) or talk about a plebiscitary election, but that would also be a dead end if she insists on only the SNP/SGP being eligible. If it is not held under a secure coalition of parties, groups, movements, etc., all espousing independence, what would it achieve? It would achieve another secure term of office for Nicola Sturgeon and her cohort of ‘wokies’ to impose even more deviant policies on us, all the while paying lip service to independence as they have been doing for the past nearly eight years. The passing of the GRA reform will be just the start of their mission, which is to overturn every sexual law in Scotland, including, and especially, those that protect children. Independence would put the brakes on that which is why they don’t want it, and they have served the cause of the secret devolutionists (foot-draggers) well, whose whole philosophy is: ca canny and gies oor salaries an pinshuns.

    The latter are exactly like the Irish Party before it was superseded by Sinn Fein: drawing fat salaries and nothing sweet fanny adams to enhance and advance actual independence, playing within the Westminster rules, never challenging anything with any degree of effort. The only way any of this will ever see the light of day is if we keep on the pressure with ALBA, and refuse to be fobbed off. Anyway, whatever happens now, she has crossed the Rubicon and burned her boats, if you’ll pardon the mixed metaphor. If she lets us down again, she is mince. Meanwhile, we should be building our case based on the Scottish constitutional tools and challenging the Treaty because it is illegitimate in the form in which it was incorporated through the Acts of Union into domestic law. It will simply not be enough to revoke the Act of Union because the Treaty (international law) cannot be superseded by domestic law, and we are going to need to understand how the Treaty Articles, their undermining and breaching, afford us a strong hand in the post independence negotiations, assuming we get that far. Independence itself is just the beginning of the journey.

    Liked by 11 people

    1. ‘Appeasement’ came to mind with me as well but who or what is she appeasing? Can’t be the Yes movement that she has done everything to antagonise surely? I think somewhere down the line the picture might become clearer and we might discover then what has caused this seeming ‘Damascene’ conversion. The devil is in the detail and as other commenters have said, there is damned little detail. The impression is already being given that this is all being formulated hurriedly. Do we believe that a party leadership so hostile to these same ideas are the ones we trust to carry them through with conviction?

      The motivation by her political ‘advisers’ might well be to have such a campaign brought forward with people so lacking in statecraft and surefootedness that they wreck any chances of independence. The one caveat is that a narcissist with a fragile ego might not wish to head up a campaign bound to end in failure. But there again, there might be a golden parachute waiting to whisk her away before things really fall apart. Other politicians have survived such reputational disasters (like Hillary Clinton, Tony Blair, for example) but thrive with the international elite.

      The thing is, I can’t trust her to see this through. The timing is questionable, for instance, with so many more favourable moments squandered in the past, why now with the larger independence movement fractured and alienated? I can’t help but be suspicious. She is not a gambler but this looks like the last throw of the dice in some opaque game.

      Liked by 5 people

      1. I am hearing the legal dept and Lord Advocate would not pass her Referendum Bill, so it could not even be presented to the Presiding Officer. Referring it to the Supreme Court therefore avoided the embarrassment of revealing that. I think that could be the reason for the speed.

        Liked by 9 people

  12. In the Westminster simple majority system the holder of most seats, not votes, is the power base. Sturgeon knows that. In 2015 UK GE the SNP had half the vote and all but three of the seats, a gifted opportunity for decisive action not seized. The same irresolute set is still in situ. Once, twice bitten, beware.
    Ultimately, inevitably there will be a conflict of Scottish v English/British state interests especially as the latter makes grand assumptions based on its perceived material and cultural contribution to the United Kingdom.
    We do need people in charge who are prepared to thoroughly and with full force, cold shower such hubris.
    In this power game the rules of the court room hardly apply.

    Liked by 5 people

  13. The matters raised are tactical, and the response to whatever the UK government does depends on many “what-ifs”. A good leader doesn’t show her hand when it doesn’t need to be shown. The current state of the UK is very fluid. To answer all what-ifs is to get bogged down in the mud . Better to go with the flow!


    1. A good leader doesn’t show her hand when it doesn’t need to be shown.

      I might question who this good leader is, maybe one that’s simply holding the cards (all jokers) dealt to them.

      Someone said, only dead fish go with the flow, think on the uncaged salmon.

      Liked by 9 people

    2. And eight years it has taken us precisely nowhere. What was said yesterday could and should have been said back in 2016 off the back of a Brexit vote. I for one will not be hoping for another Nicla secret plan. Not ever!

      Liked by 11 people

  14. Much to think about, many moving parts. Another great article by Mia.

    For my part, I think Nikla will be moving on soon, then there will be months burnt with a ‘leadership’ contest in the SNP, then a repeat down south with the Tory Party.

    Add to the mix, the potential for one of the ambitious SNP candidates to leak damaging info on the SNP dirty tricks, and, the auld mantra, ‘we need to give the new leader time to steady the ship/settle in/develop their secret plan’ and you have a recipe for unco-ordinated campainging (to say the least) and a discredited party limping towards another election.

    None of which is good.

    But on the bright side, fuel bills are sky high, everyone is hurting because of it. and a Date has been set. All the time, since ’14, the mantra has been we can’t campaigne without a date. Well we have it now. And if we can mobilise the Scots who bailed last time round, then we will win.

    As for the Plebicite GE and the argument it must be over 50% of the votes…. bollox. That is not the way that election works, quite specifically so. For example, even in England the Tories do not have 50% of the votes, are they going to step down because of it. No way. Westminster GE’s are not proportional representation, and that is just the way they like it. We should not entertain this argument and allow them to change rules in mid stream.

    Meanwhile, speaking personally, I have a plan B, it’s called the Alba Party, and I fully intend to do my bit to ensure well kent local, electable people are in place to step into the fold, should the SNP officials drop the ball.

    It’s not so much a call of, ‘Yes We Can’ anymore. This time out, its, ‘Now We Must’.

    The Alba Party is having a WAB event on 14th July 7pm at the Royal George Hotel. Alex is speaking. All welcome. No tickets or fee.

    Liked by 10 people

    1. 100% Correct Mia!! The Yes campaign must not let her lead the show in anyway and hold her and her lackies to account. Nothing will convince me that she is NOT under the control of the british secret service, of course she is!!

      Liked by 8 people

  15. “And what if we deliver a majority of SNP Mps but not a majority of the vote? Does this mean the SNP continues with its union business as usual? Couldn’t this be interpreted as a strategy to ensure the SNP gets a majority?”

    In one fell swoop she’s commandeered full control of the indy movement. Fiendishly clever you have to say. It’s now definitely Nikla’s way or the highway. No referendum and we move to a plebiscite GE where the only hope is to vote SNP. Less than 50% of the vote and they stay on the gravy train for another 5 years. Even with more than 50% of the vote I wouldn’t be surprised if the SNP conceded a required percentage based on turnout. In short, I don’t trust them an inch. Yesterday was more to do with self preservation along with who and what’s breathing down their necks.

    Liked by 10 people

    1. It is becoming cleat it is about the nuSNP and making sure Scotland can never reach the bar for independence so the UKG will sanction her coveted job with the UN. We need to stop this treacherous liar in her tracks.

      Liked by 9 people

  16. If the SNP are driving with the brakes on, then we just have to push all the harder. A refusal or ruling by an English court against indyref ends the union – that’s quite simple and it can no longer be referred to such. The London registered parties then become occupation parties and Scotland a London colony. That’s when we absolutely MUST apply for decolonisation status via the U.N. That could be done by a group of elected officials.

    If there’s a snap general election before any court ‘ruling’ then the SNP need to be pressured bring forward legislation to change the holyrood parliamentary term back to 4 years, since it was only changed to 5 due to the fixed term Parliaments act. That would mean an HR in May 25 which in itself would be a plebiscite.

    And YES a majority of MPs elected at WM is the trigger of independence as thatcher stated.

    Liked by 9 people

    1. Perfectly content to wait see what transpires. What else can the ordinary punter do when he does not believe a single word of the latest scheme? Who knows? Some way or other, somehow, Scotland might end up on surer path at the end of this.

      Liked by 3 people

  17. I’ve just been told that Dominic Raab admitted today in Westminster that we are‘better together “because Scotland has all the resources”.

    Liked by 2 people

  18. Was busy today so have just read the post – what part of 10/10 is not correct ? Absolutely spot on
    – i think “real independence “ would scare them to bits – the pretender stuff is just fine !

    Liked by 3 people

  19. Mia has it right. I had a period after Nicolas statement where I thought she proposed a proper plebicite where a majority of indy MPs would be enough to treat for Independence….and a recal of Scottish MPs to convene in Edinburgh. . ..and thats what most of us including John Swimney thought….which raises the issue of the plan was Nicolas alone….not discussed in cabinet even. She is a Dictator and without the balls to use any Yes to the next step. Watching her flounder today it’s clear to me she has no plan when Westminster says No. She is a small town lawyer…incapable of any response other than whining about la ck of democracy ffs…she doesn’t realise she is dealing with the last Empire loyalists and we are the last colony. She knows she has queered thebpitch by her diktat that the GE should be a majority of votes…making it harder for her replacent to change that.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. Yes it should be a majority of MPs. If WM wants it to be a majority of votes, they need to repeal the voting system to that of PR.

      Liked by 2 people

  20. Valid questions especially what kind of indy does that question give us? Scotland is already independent within GB so will it be the exact same or Devo max (minus really)? Why is the question not: Should Scotland reassert its full statehood? That is what we are actually seeking. There is no confusion or misinterpretation over what that means.

    Another good article from Mia. I just wish the word England and English were used instead of Westminster as the treaty is between Scotland and England. It needs to be phrased accordingly. So long as they can hide behind the term Westminster folk will not fully appreciate the situation Scotland finds itself in.

    Liked by 2 people

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: