But even if it wasn't a lie to say that the SNP closed off any possibility of a second indyref for the next twenty years and that they aren't allowed to change their minds, it's reasonable to ask: why aren't the Tories held to the same standard? Here are clear statements that Tory politicians have made since 2014 -
* Ruth Davidson, in her capacity as Scottish Conservative leader, said that it would be constitutionally improper for Westminster to block an independence referendum if pro-independence parties won a majority of seats in a Holyrood election on a manfesto commitment to hold a vote.
* Alister Jack, in his capacity as Secretary of State for Scotland, said that the 2021 Scottish Parliament election would determine whether a second independence referendum is held. Just to leave us in no doubt about what he was getting at and the full implications of it, he specified (absurdly) that only an overall single-party majority for the SNP would be deemed a trigger for a referendum, and that a combined majority for different pro-independence parties would not be sufficient.
Why wasn't it the end of history when the Tories made those statements? Why do the media allow them to continue making up the rules as they go on, without holding them accountable for crystal-clear undertakings they have already given? Why, in a nutshell, is it only SNP politicians who aren't allowed to change their minds?
* * *
Talking of glaring contradictions, I was bemused by this summary of Pete Wishart's reasoning for rejecting a 'Plan B' -
"SNP critics of Plan B argue the strategy of holding out for a Section 30 order is working with support for independence at record levels. They contend if the PM is not going to grant a Section 30 he is unlikely to enter independence talks."
The same is true in reverse, surely - if you believe that the PM is unlikely to enter independence talks even if there is a mandate for independence, it's also phenomenally improbable that he will grant a Section 30 order simply because there is a mandate for a referendum and a pro-indy majority in the polls. That makes the case for Plan B unanswerable - if you're conceding that you're going to be facing a brick wall of intransigence in Downing Street, you'll plainly be much better equipped if you have an outright mandate for independence in your pocket, rather than merely a 79th mandate for a referendum.
* * *
If anyone even vaguely mentioned the *possibility* of ending free movement between Scotland and England, let alone waved flags about it and had a party, the Tories would call it "ugly, twisted, bitter, grudge and grievance fuelled small-minded separatism".https://t.co/7CQmrCRBX5
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) November 9, 2020
."Dark cloud over BBC journalism, says Michael Grade."
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) November 9, 2020
These people look at the BBC's antics in the indyref and say "no problem there, we're proud of that", but some incomprehensible rubbish about royal bank statements in 1995 is apparently the end of civilisation as we know it.
Do not enter any deals with Westminster until after the independence vote. THEY ARE NOT TO BE TRUSTED.
ReplyDeleteThe 'No' to an indyref was only a remotely viable (if desperate, last throw of the dice) approach if Scots didn't actually want one / indy. But by saying no, the natural reaction of Scots was to swing behind indy, just as predicted (by all but Cummings the 'super predicter' obviously).
ReplyDeleteSturgeon is right that it's not a sustainable position in a democracy, not when the UK already told the world that Scotland - the country - is in the UK by free choice (see 2014). She's milking it for every vote, just as I would. It's working a treat. Johnson might as well have gone on telly and called Scots unionists 'vermin'. Telling them their support for the union was his rich English Eton choice and not theirs was never going to down well. It might win over the hardcore brits, but not Scots unionists. The more this goes on, the more the UK loses Scotland completely, and rapidly.
Jesus, look at what happened in northern Ireland; and the people there did overwhelmingly want to be in the UK. The UK could actually argue that it was the democratic wish of people there. Imagine if a majority had been pro-reunification Irish with only a minority British.
If England tries to keep saying no, it will need to send in the army; a much, much larger one than was every needed in NI.
Even if the Yes parties were too scared to press ahead, Scottish Michael collins types will appear and take their place. It's inevitable as night follows day. You can't keep a people down if they don't want you there; not without ever increasing levels of force at ever increasing cost.
People rise up, first peacefully, then with increasing force if you try to put them down. And that happens even if the government is your own (like in Belarus); god help you if you are an occupying force.
This is always how things work. If people don't have a democratic right to independence, they have a right to take it by force if needed. Just as Scots liberated France, they can liberate Scotland if needed.
But were are not going to end up there as Britain is far far weaker than it was in the glory days of the Empire when the Irish kicked it out with minimal hassle.
We'll have our referendum when Scots are ready for it. The big coward in No. 10 will fold because it's his only hope of saving the union, which wiser heads know to be the case. I'm not worried about that.
Seems they are getting ready now and if so, they will firmly deliver that message in May 2021 for all to see.
As for using the election to get a mandate for indy. Well, with two votes it's complicated. And what if the SNP only get 49.9% of the constituency vote? Are we counting Greens too? What if the turnout is low? This needs careful thought, as its not as easy as it looks because elections are not referendums; voters decide what they are, not parties, just like curtice says.
Johnson et al. are too used to a unionist Scotland. The No S30 was based on that long held belief; that Scots were pro-union and the nats a minority.
DeleteYes becoming a majority changes everything. The situation becomes all but reversed politically in Scotland. Even the BBC is starting to wake up to this.
Unionists in Scotland know it. Even Alistair Jack and his will flag pillows.
The Brits have been through this before. They always make the same mistakes then fold. It's why there's no empire left.
'wee flag pillows'. I won't delete and repost to correct that mistake as some folk get all paranoid and freaked out when I do that.
DeleteSSS - two of his personalities responding to one of his other personalities - sad - but must be hell of a confusing state to be in - pretty sure one of his personalities thinks he is Pete Wishart because that same personality wants us to wait and wait and wait and then wait a bit longer just to make sure. The plan is working - SSS says - it just needs more years and years and years just to make sure. Yeh more decades of Tory rule is what SSS is advocating.
DeleteOf course SSS is against using the May 2021 election to get a mandate for independence - what if it fails he wails - it is not the same as a referendum - well no shit - did you learn that at uni did you. All just pathetic reasons to delay delay delay delay because he is a Tory. He even quotes the Britnat Sir John Poultice.
Using an election is as democratic as a referendum. SSS says no an election to vote for independence but then advocates violence if a referendum is not forthcoming. All these multiple personalities = a confused person.
Is Pete Wishart even a Scot Nat. He doesn't think like one for my money.
ReplyDeleteOh and what if all those Scottish??? opinion polls are wrong? They got another US Presidential Election very wrong again.
Oh and right now the SNP are colluding with the Brit Tories in denying us a peaceful Democratic route to Independence. I want a Plan B. I am not going to waste my time putting a peg on my nose to vote for them again if there isn't one.
Counting isn't quite done yet, so declaring the polls wrong may be premature. The USA has this weird thing called the "electoral college" which distorts the popular vote such that it is possible for someone who loses it to win anyway.
DeletePollsters said Biden would win the popular vote. He did. Ditto for Clinton in 2016. Granted, they seem to have used up the entire margin of error this time.
I agree with your article James.
ReplyDeleteI would also add the following:
1. The MSM do not hold the Britnat politicians to account because they collude with them as they are Britnats themselves.
2. You could have also added that the Smith Commission (signed off paper) states quite clearly that there is nothing to stop Scotland progressing to independence if it so wishes.
3. So just why do so few SNP politicians call out this lie of once in a generation when it is raised by Britnats. In particular, Sturgeon did not call it out in Johnson's no to sec 30 letter by sending him a clear and unambiguous repudiation of the lie by reply.
Point 3 above. On Scotland Tonight the Tory adviser strongly punts the once in a generation lie. Shona Craven of the National says nothing.
DeleteIt's not worth even answering, just as Prof Curtice says. Only unionists think it needs a response.
DeleteWho is the response for? Not the Scots electorate; it's them that the decide when they are ready to vote again and nobody else.
Incidentally, it was Salmond that said it. He is responsible for them asking.
SSS - or one of his personalities quotes the Britnat Sir John Poultice. A Britnat called SSS quoting another Britnat called Sir John Poultice to say it is not worth answering😂😂😂😂😂😂. Next thing he will be quoting Johnson.
Delete"Only unionists think it is worth a response" - pathetic comment by one of triple S personalities.
"Incidentally, it is Salmond that said it." Says SSS - so there you are the Tory Britnat saying what Tory Britnats say. SSS spreading the once in a generation lie. not only does he not want anyone to refute the lie SSS is actually spreading the lie himself.
Scottish Skier Stalker (SSS)- with multiple personalities has at least one personality who is a Tory Britnat.
If someone is to rebut the whole 'generation thing', surely it should be Salmond himself?
DeleteYou would agree that Sturgeon and the SNP don't speak for Salmond right?
Personally I don't think it needs rebuttal, but if you insist that's required, then Salmond's the man as he can explain best what he meant and speak for himself.
SSS says " Petsonally, I don't think it needs rebuttal, ...". well you would say that since one of your personalities is a Britnat Tory and another is a Britnat Labour.
DeleteAny democrat never mind an independence supporter should call it out as it is undemocratic nonsense. Only Britnats like triple S think it is just fine to leave it unchallenged.
If an idiot in the street rants nonsense at you, do you feel the need to rebut that or just ignore it and get on with your life?
DeleteOnly unionists think the 'generation' thing needs explaining.
SSS - his multiple personalities do make a nonsense of his posts.
DeleteIn one post he is saying Salmond should rebut the once in a generation claim.
In the very next post he says only unionists think it needs rebutting.
It must be a very confusing life in the SSS mind.
You two idiots SS & IfS, are making a mockery of this site and it's comments section. Both of you should f@*^!~n grow up. These sort of rubbish comments add nothing to the discussion, and are just the two of you dick-waving. Get a life or GTF, or make sensible non-confrontational comments.
DeleteWhin................. "or make sensible non- confrontational comments." You mean like your comment just above😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
DeleteTo answer your question James - it’s because they have a partisan position on the issue of independence. They betray everything that young journalists probably dream.
ReplyDeleteIt is possible to use a democratic election as a referendum.
ReplyDeleteThey key is that the electorate want you to do that. If they don't, you'll lose.
If Yes parties make 2021 a vote for them a vote for independence, which vote is used? Constituency? List? Both?
If Yes parties get 51% on the constituency and 45% on the list, does this count? the list is PR and not subject to tactical, so arguably it's 'proportionally representative'. It's the more democratic bet. It's why unionists want to you try and vote tactically on it to split the vote.
If No parties get 51% on the constituency, and Yes get 51% on the list, what then?
If Yes parties get 49.999% of votes on both ballots and polls show 60% for indy, what then? No indy? No referendum? After all, indy parties made the vote a vote on indy and the people said No....
Yes parties have yet to get more than 50% of votes in a Scottish election.
It would be a lot simpler if we just had a single vote. UKGEs would be a good way to do this. Also voters care less about using it for something else as Scots MPs are just excluded like lepers anyway.
Unionists are very keen to tell Scots to forget a referendum and instead go for much less clear approaches which could more easily be lost by Yes or contested as not representing the will of the people.
A Scottish election approach is possible, but needs a coordinated approach from all parties with exactly the same commitment in manifestos. It realistically needs Yes parties to top 50% on both votes, otherwise it will be contested.
And remember, if Boris is refusing to recognize election results and grant a section 30, he can just ignore one that gives a mandate for indy. Scotland can't force England to recognize it.
So you need the result to be recognized by the international community. A re-run of 2014 with a clear Y/N question makes sure of this, even if England is objecting.
SSS - says "a re- run of 2014 with a clear Y/N question makes sure of this, ..." - what absolute nonsense. Only a Britnat would think the 2014 referendum was acceptable - the Britnats broke the Edinburgh Agreement and introduced the INFAMOUS VOW at the last minute. This muddied the waters as to what a no vote meant - nothing clear about the question at all.
ReplyDelete"Even if England is objecting" - more nonsense from SSS - it cannot be a re-run if England is objecting - SSS just posts a lot of inaccurate drivel.
What if you want independence, but are an eg labour voter who likes their local constituency msp? You planned to vote lab-snp like you always have, in the hope of Iref2.
ReplyDeleteWont engage in stuff about who's an under cover Brit Nat and who's a proper independista or not - futile !
ReplyDeleteBut, please, please let's not delude ourselves about history. Yes, Ireland did get rid of Brit imperialism by combined political and military struggle but that victory cost the people of Ireland an arm and a leg.
Home rule was heavily circumscribed for many years by the terms of the treaty and the northern question remains today.
Yes, the job was done but let's not kid ourselves. If we're forced down that route it will be hard and grim.
Yes, it was in the days of Empire with no UN, no EU, no ECHR....
DeleteBrits were still chickens that ran away from a rag-tag army of 'potato farmers'.
Things are very different today, with most of the empire gone, in all the most recent cases by peaceful, democratic means.
Scotland almost left by that route 6 years ago, but its population chose not to, sadly.
But let's not kid ourselves that England is going to try and forcibly occupy Scotland if Scots no longer want to be part of the UK. That is what will be needed if it doesn't want to continue down the democratic route. It would come to English soldiers on Scots streets, just like in NI.
ReplyDeleteAfter the 2014 loss, the SNP have consistently said 'To get independence we need more people to support indy'. I can't understand why people don't agree with this. We need Scots to be in majority Yes and permanently so. Then independence will follow. Yes has little to no hope of winning 2014; it just wasn't the will of Scots, yet. It was too early. But what could the SNP do but try?
Simply having a campaign won't ensure a Yes majority. In 2011, polls were about 45% yes. Then they fell to 35% or so, before recovering back to 45%. In reality, the campaign just firmed up support that already existed. The campaign didn't really progress the cause much at all. I fully expected Yes to lose although I always hoped that maybe, just maybe...
Since 2014, we have moved slowing upwards in the longer term. However, if we are going for indy, we need Scots fully on board for the long term. The last thing we need is them voting for indy narrowly, then undoing it in the next election. For example, unionists could argue that >50% for them on the list cancels the indyref. They managed that in the past 2 elections, so be carefull about giving them justification for standing on such a ticket. Two can play at that game.
It looks like our baseline Yes has now moved to >50%. The people that flirted with the idea in 2016 have steadily moved across, the age demographics chipping away at unionism. I feel yes will not drop back below 50% again now.
Yes is becoming established as the majority position and no English MP nor court will be able to stop independence in the face of this, not without going down the Belarus route.
It doesn't mean we have to wait for 60...70% that's nonsense. What we need to wait for is people smelling the coffee / hearing the fat lady warming up. That Scotland, including its media, now sees itself as independence supporting and no longer unionist.
That includes indy supporters, many of whom are still stuck in that world.
When the BBC has started publishing articles about scotland now being pro-indy, the writing is appearing on the wall.
'The settled will of the Scottish people'.
ReplyDeleteIf Scots are majority pro-indy, its media will follow. Its media was unionist because Scots were.
Even employees at Pacific Quay are now starting to ponder a future where the union jack no longer flaps outside in the breeze, knowing that it pays (your salary) to be on the right side of history. Any good careerist is a weather vane.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54879211
Indyref2: Scottish battle lines drawn again in run-up to May's election
Supporters of the Union are nervous.
A number of recent polls on Scottish independence suggest there is now a majority in support of leaving the UK. The SNP have started calling independence the "settled will of the Scottish people".
You are only nervous if Boris saying no isn't remotely viable.
BBC Scotland politics has 3 new front page articles today about the thing everyone can just forget about because an Englishman says no.
ReplyDeleteSSS - now says we shouldn't get independence via an election because - wait for it - wait for it - a Britnat labour voter might not be happy about it.
ReplyDeleteYep SSS actually argues that we cannot vote for independence because it might upset some Labour Party supporters.
For goodness sake triple S now has a Britnat Labour personality as well. Just how many multiple personalities does SSS have.
If you are an independence supporter you will vote for a party that has ACTUAL independence in its manifesto. If the SNP is THE party of independence then that is what they will do.
Scottish Skier November 10, 2020 at 11:37 AM
DeleteWhat if you want independence, but are an eg labour voter
Before, you sounded like a unionist troll. Now you just sound like a total fanny.
Historically, around 1/3 of Labour voters back independence. Only unionists would throw insults at these people in the way you are.
SSS - if you want independence you vote for it - I would never call you a fanny because I have no idea which of your many and varied multiple personalities I would be referring to.
DeleteYour second sentence above you say I am not a Unionist troll but a fanny.
In your third sentence above another of your personalities say I am a Unionist troll.
Life must be very confusing with all these multiple personalities washing about in your head. Sad.
"if you want independence you vote for it"
DeleteYes, in a referendum that applies. For an 'indy election' the choice is between independence and party for a large section of the electorate, not a straight choice between indy and the union.
Would you vote Tory/Labour/Libs to achieve independence?
If the SNP stand on an indy ticket, they will lose a lot of voters who don't back Yes but still vote for them. They will gain some Yes voters who normally vote for unionist parties to offset that, but it's not clear how much either way.
Maybe James can poll this.
Sensible heads would try to understand what would happen before going ahead with what is a much less clear cut approach.
If you want independence you will vote for it given the chance.
DeleteWho is currently preventing a vote on independence - the current leadership of the SNP.
The SNP seem to be doing a lot more to get independence than you IfS.
DeleteUnless you are maybe standing for election rather than just sitting around on your lazy ass demanding that others do things for you in exactly the way you want?
SSS - crikey not even a Sturgeon ultra like triple S can say any more than:
Delete"The SNP SEEM to be doing a lot more to get independence than you ifs." SEEM hardly a glowing endorsement.
Of course anyone with a quarter of a brain would be able to work out that a political party that has a large fund for indyref2 (or does it?) and lots of members ( how many exactly seems to be a SNP secret) should be doing more than me to get independence but Sturgeon ultra triple S can only muster SEEM. Pity triple S has not got a quarter of a brain but he does have multiple personalities.
The SNP have a large membership + income because they are doing a lot for the cause of indy.
DeleteYou have neither because you are not, but just complaining about them on the internet.
SSS - "The SNP have a large membership". - so pray tell what is the number of SNP members?
DeleteSo what desk drawer does Colin keep the indyref2 fund stashed away in. I hope he locks the drawer - we wouldn't want it disappearing and ending up woven somewhere.
SSS - you really really are bad at reading. I complain about the current SNP leadership not the SNP. Do try and keep up. I know it is difficult for you with all these multiple personalties floating about in your head.
I see the Welsh have gone big with exams cancelled for this summer. Full marks I say. I think mr swinney will have to do same for highers here.
ReplyDeleteMultiple isolations for teachers and students is problematic and becoming more so.
Calling Grizebard. Calling Grizebard. Calling Grizebard.
ReplyDeleteNot missing you on this site.
One Sturgeon fanboy like SSS with multiple personalities is enough. So I'll help you out - I am not davidwferguson. But like so many others you cannot handle the facts and just resort to insults and sticking your head in the sand.
Lowest number of new reported covid cases today in over a month.
ReplyDeleteLast time it was less than 800 was 5th October.
In other good news, the recent fall in the number of new daily positive covid cases is now apparently feeding into hospital admissions.
ReplyDeleteAfter rising consistently since the middle of September, growth has stopped, with no increase in hospital cases for over a week.
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1632/idt2/idt2/6d5c354a-45a6-454b-8b5a-0fac4ed9312a/image/816