Leaving aside the cynicism in some quarters about the Scottish Government's intentions on a plebiscite election (ie. do they genuinely intend to use an election as a de facto independence referendum or is it merely the latest wheeze in the neverending and futile campaign for a Section 30 order?), I'm genuinely puzzled by Angus Robertson's comments on France 24. Even if it was true that the SNP were pulling the wool over Yes supporters' eyes, they would surely want to maintain consistency in their public comments about the pretence. And yet Mr Robertson's comments are quite simply irreconcilable with the position Nicola Sturgeon set out to parliament a few months ago.
He says "a referendum will come, at some stage". The whole point of Nicola Sturgeon's statement was to concede that a referendum may not come for legal reasons (in which event there is supposed to be the Plan B of a plebiscite election), and also to give us the exact date for when it will be held if it does come - with that date being 19th October 2023. There is no longer any "some stage" mystery over the timing. So in the space of just seven words, Mr Robertson has managed to totally contradict Nicola Sturgeon's words not once, but twice.
He goes on to say: "It is going to come. Among the youngest voters in Scotland, so between 16-25, 25-35, support for independence is running between 60-70%. So it's going to come sooner or later." Again, if Nicola Sturgeon is to be believed, a referendum is going to come on 19th October 2023 or not at all. If it doesn't come, there's supposed to be a plebiscite election by 2024 which means that regardless of the result the SNP will stop calling for a referendum for the foreseeable future. So there is no "or later", and it's hard to see what Yes support among under-35s has got to do with the price of fish, at least on that point. It does sound suspiciously like Mr Robertson is talking about a world in which there is no intention of having a plebiscite election if the Supreme Court rules against the Scottish Government, with the real "plan" (if it can even be dignified with that word) being to wait around for a few decades in the hope that the usual demographic shifts will eventually produce a 60%+ majority for independence and thus make a Section 30 order inevitable.
Apart from being a betrayal of SNP members who fully expect their leaders to hold either a referendum or de facto referendum within two years, such a plan would be based on no fewer than two false premises. Firstly, it is categorically not the case that mass support for independence among the young in 2022 will automatically translate into mass support among the general population by 2042 or 2052. People often become more conservative as they get older, and the political context will evolve anyway. It's entirely possible Yes support could stay static or go backwards over such a long period - not least due to a lack of leadership on independence from an SNP that would be tacitly accepting London rule on a long-term basis. And secondly, even if the mythical 60%+ support for independence did eventually arise, how on earth would that make a Section 30 inevitable, or even more likely? It would actually become less likely, because denying one would by that point be the British Government's best and perhaps only shot at averting independence.
The pessimistic side of me wonders if Angus Robertson didn't mis-speak on France24, but instead set out the SNP leadership's private thinking. There would still be the mystery of why he didn't keep up the pretence for public consumption, but maybe it was accidental - as with Mhairi Hunter's tweet, it could be that people close to Nicola Sturgeon are so used to speaking this way in private that it sometimes 'leaks out' in public, and they barely even register that it's happened. If we had genuine journalism in this country rather than a glorified Yoon Gogglebox which is content to passively gloat from the sofa about any hint of a Nat climbdown, the media would be vigorously challenging the SNP to reconcile Angus Robertson's comments with the stated plan, and if they can't be reconciled, demanding clarity on which is the true plan.
Instructions from Labour to the people of Scotland...
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) October 9, 2022
If you want a Labour government: you need to VOTE FOR IT.
If you want to rejoin the EU: don't vote for that. Give up and vote Labour instead.
If you want independence: urgh. Repent, filthy separatist, and vote Labour.
I’m curious - what extra freedoms would Scottish independence bring, that they don’t already have? Don’t shout at me - I’m just trying to understand. #ScottishIndependence
— Sarah Gibbons (@SarahG20123) October 9, 2022
Freedom to get the government we elected, rather than one we voted against overwhelmingly. Freedom to rejoin the EU. Freedom to remove British nuclear weapons from the Clyde. In a nutshell: freedom to make our own choices, which is the only meaningful definition of freedom.
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) October 9, 2022
The vote to elect members of the National Executive Committee will take place during Alba's annual conference, to be held in Stirling on 15th-16th October. If you're an Alba member, I believe it's still possible to purchase a conference pass HERE, and if you're not yet an Alba member, you can join the party HERE.
There will be no referendum. The SNP have given up on independence. The penny dropped for me when they released the Growth Report. They'd clearly spent the least amount of effort possible just to produce some twaddle. The soon to be released new economic white paper will simply be the Growth Report Verson 1.1. For the record, Sturgeon is a liar. An independent Scotland would need UK Gov. approval to use the £, as all banks in an independent Scotland would need reserve accounts in the Bank of England in order to complete all bank transactions. The indy movement have been had by the SNP.
ReplyDeleteIt all rather just feeds into the continued apparent narrative that the SNP think (a) they can say whatever comes out of their mouth on any given day and everyone will just swallow it unquestioningly and (b) that they don't really intend to do anything to achieve independence or make the case for it other than just keeping asking for a S30 until it's granted, even if that takes until the year 3000.
ReplyDeleteAt present I am afraid to say they appear neither competent nor in possession of any credible ideas.
The urgency is a direct result of demographics going against us not with us. English people are moving to Scotland in increasing numbers https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/files//statistics/migration/flows/jul-22/mig-to-from-scotland-tab1.xlsx
ReplyDeleteA net flow of 40k a year, but much higher than that in terms of inflows.
This is being encouraged by sturgeon who in her unionists national economic transformation strategy for the next 10 years wants an additional 100k more above current trends.
The result is the population is being anglicised and 3/4s of these incomers are no voters (or as I prefer nawbags).
They have families, high longevity and high participation rates..
Conversely poorer yes voting Scots have lower participation rates and lower longevity. The youth yes effect has low participation rates and ignores the trend of people to favour the status quo as they age..
Robertson as head of the nawbag fake yes think-tank progress Scotland knows this. Either it's the shittest think-tank in the world or Robertson is a lying kunt.. no hard to work out..
Exactly, the demographics are against us not with us. I call it the "Welsh" solution to the problem - as the British Establishment would see it - of Scotland. They may only be a few years away from finally winning.
DeleteVirtually certain I mean what's stopping them...1. supreme court blah blah nae chance. 2. Fake electoral pleb at wm...wrong election, no yes alliance it's just a chance for SNP to keep their jobs.. 3. Alba..well Alba is the vehicle and salmond is exactly the guy to deliver it but he's hated by fake yes no very bright types which sturgeon has taken advantage of hoorin herself with BBC to insinuate his constant guilt. Alternative really is what Augustine suggests is the majority isn't always right and we must resist...ye ken whit Am sayin like
Deleteye ken whit Am sayin like
DeleteNot really.
James - with regard to extra freedoms from independence that Sarah Gibbons wants to understand, the is one that caps it all for me and I always repeat this: it is the power to decide when we go to war. At the very least, we should be able to decide when to send our young men and women into the battlefield. Iraq, Afghanistan, possibly illegal wars that we sent our young Scots into - look at the Irish, they didn't have to go. It's an easy example.
ReplyDeleteWarning this may cause upset, but you need to know. The New SNP’s position is Union not separation so, if you want Indyref2, stop voting for the people who are denying us democracy (the SNP). The New SNP are only bothered about the party’s bills, power and Westminster MP’s bring in a lot of money to the New SNP coffers. So how else can the New SNP continue to get support? By lying to the Scots about a plebiscite that will never happen, at least not the way it supposed to happen.
ReplyDeleteThe new position of the New SNP is, even if Scots have a vote and win that yes vote it doesn’t mean Scotland will be Independent, I don’t know about anyone else but if 50% plus 1 person votes for Independence it means Scotland is Independent. Lets get rid of the New SNP who’s only goal is to become the New Labour what a thought for someone who’s never voting labour in my life and up until 2018 had only voting SNP.
»People often become more conservative as they get older […]«
ReplyDeleteI'm not a political scientist by trade, but to the best of my knowledge, that's been conclusively disproven. What actually seems to be the case that one's upbringing and the political environment during one's formative years (around the first time one is eligible to vote) pretty much locks in the political opinions, with minor variations and only rare exceptions. Those rare exceptions *do* tend to go as you described (people getting more conservative with age), but that's only true for a relatively small minority of people.
Of course, this does not contradict your point; all kinds of events could intervene to change public opinion, and a 60%+ majority for independence is by no means assured.
SNP complacency will cost us our independence. They are just another part of the British establishment.
ReplyDeleteNo IndyRef2, no plebicite - you need balls if you want sovereignty - the Brits won't just let it happen.
ReplyDeleteWho moves first and how
Delete" If the Supreme Court rules in our favour then it will be on the 19th of October next year and if the Supreme Court fails the people of Scotland then we will rise to that challenge to and put our case at the next general election whenever that is."
ReplyDeleteMike Russell, SNP President, he of the 11 point plan that disnae get a mention now and of horsebox fame speaking at conference. So how hard is it for these SNP leaders to convey a clear and consistent message on this subject. Well obviously way too hard for them. Are they incompetent or doing it on purpose to muddy the waters?
You would expect the SNP to put their case for independence at EVERY election so why is Russell not just saying we will use the next UK GE to hold a de facto referendum? After all that is what Sturgeon has promised. It's quite easy to say it - I've just done it. So what's the problem Russell?
The truth is the SNP leadership are time wasters who will never deliver independence because they don't want it and it is long past time the numpties woke up.
The Britnat, mad British/Irish liar Skier. a liar since 2013, who never goes skiing approves of Sturgeon and supports the SNP just like the thicko Hamish100, nasty Dr Jim, the Bathtub Admiral and the rest of the numpties on WGD. They are all now devolutionists and part of the British establishment. Sturgeon and the SNP have no intention of delivering independence it's all a hoax to stay in power in the union, REAL independence supporters now grasped this and vote Alba. Vote Alba declare UDI.
ReplyDeleteIf you are going to repeat what I have said try and be accurate - I have never said declare UDI. Of course your posts are not really concerned with accuracy are they. All you are doing is displaying why you are a numpty.
DeleteWhat do you expect from Mr Marmalade? Truth?
ReplyDeleteSalmond says: "We have moved from an electorate not quite ready for independence but with a clear strategy to achieve it, to a people ready for independence but with no convincing strategy. The sovereign people of Scotland deserve better. "
ReplyDeleteWhat you mean Russells 11 point plan and his horsebox isnae good enough. Or do you mean Sturgeons continual begging for permission from the Britnats for a referendum.
TBH - doubt Nicola will stay on much longer after Xmas. Depends what tempting fruits there are elsewhere. So, Angus will be in charge - I think he'll do a good job. It's not the SNP's fault the voters need yet more proof of the Westminster's evil arts; give them 60% and they'll have more courage. Okay, at least 55%.
ReplyDelete"Doing a good job" and "waiting around for an unattainable Yes supermajority in the polls" are mutually exclusive concepts.
DeleteStevie, Robertson has been doing a good job already but for the British state. You seem to have forgotten the polls getting up to 58% not that long ago.
DeleteIncidentally, it's tile to stop using the term nationalists (largely accomplished and use the Quebecer term 'sovereignists')
ReplyDeletePoor Mairi McAllan, Scotland Environment Minister appears on the BBC's Jo (I hate Jocks) Coburn bear pit of a show called Politics Live on screen from the SNP conference. Maybe she expected to be asked about the conference or even something about her ministerial responsibility, Scotlands environment, but no its all about how detestable it is that Sturgeon said that the Tories are detestable. On and on Coburn went about how Sturgeon should apologise. McAllan did reasonably well in keeping her cool.
ReplyDeleteI take it that using the word detest is acceptable to Robertson and his AIM people who want us to be nice to Britnats or will Robertson give Sturgeon a good talking to.
Sitting on Coburn's panel today like many other days is a representative from the Spectator. The Spectator, of course, printed that Scots are verminous people and should be put in concentration camps and exterminated. Coburn sees nothing wrong with inviting representatives from such a publication but using the word detestable well that is just not cricket.
If the SNP had any intention of delivering independence then they would resign from government and use a holyrood election as a plebiscite and NOT a westminster election which the media will frame is all about Labour v the Tories in England with the SNP getting 5 minutes here and there. It won't feel like a referendum and the SNP won't get more than 50% of the vote at a time when Labour is in the ascendancy. Yes supporters will vote Labour to get rid of the Tories in a way they don't in Scottish elections.
ReplyDeleteA holyrood election not in the usual cycle would look and feel much more like a plebiscite. The westminster election is just not a serious attempt to deliver in dependence, it's one more mandate and about as useful as MIke Russell's 11 point plan and his horsebox of horseshit.
Perhaps you are right Independence for Alba but perhaps there are other ways of delivering independence , your view might well be a good way but other ways might be as good or better.It’s too late to change things for indyref2 we have to go with SNP and NS and if it doesn’t work out it’s NOT the end , WE GO AGAIN and again and again if necessary .
DeleteWe WILL get our independence
I see NS is being criticised for saying she detests the Conservative and Union party some saying it’s racist to English people , I suppose NS detests the English Welsh Scottish and Irish Conservative and Union party.Some people speak as if the Conservative and Union party is not a construct of actual “ people” they some how see the detesting of the Conservative and Union party as different to detesting the very people who support and vote for the Conservative and Union party , ITS NOT.
ReplyDeleteIf you vote for something awful you are to blame for the outcome of that awfulness.
That old accusation of somehow being racist because you dislike people who vote for and support terrible treatment of you and yours is just crazy
English people know full well , just as you do , that voting for a Conservative government is voting for punishment of the poor and further enrichment of the already wealthy, you don’t have to be a bright spark to know this and if you vote for it you know you are supporting the mistreatment of other people.Selfish.
English people know full well that Scotland never votes as a majority for the Conservative and Union party they know full well that Scotland never gets the government it votes for unless they, English people ,by chance vote for the same party, at the same time ,which is rare.
Do English people do anything to correct this ? No , they don’t , otherwise something would have been done by now they’ve had long enough to make changes if they were interested in doing so.
English people care first and foremost about England so let’s not feel sorry for wishing to correct the current injustice where Scotland is controlled by England.
If you wish to pretend that the Conservative and Union party is not controlled by English people you are are deluded.
If you wish to pretend that the Labour Party is not controlled by English people you are deluded.
If you think either care about Scotland or Wales or Ireland as much as they care about England you are deluded.
English people are doing what people all over the world do they are protecting what they have got and if that includes things that belong to others you will have a hard time getting it back be it your independence your land or any other treasures and artifacts , it’s not racist to call out people who do not right the wrongs .
Sturgeon today said she intends to go on for a long time yet. Pretty much what Thatcher said as well - she didn't go on and on.
ReplyDeleteIt reminds me of the infamous board of directors vote of confidence for the football manager.
Why raise the subject.
WGD numpty Don McKillop complains about the mad liar Irish Skier being described as a liar. So we have to assume Don agrees Skier is mad. Don says we have no evidence to make such a claim. Sorry Don but I proved he was a liar. In reply Skier says he is not bothered by comments on SGP. And that is because he knows his previous behaviour on SGP was unacceptable. Don states he is from Victoria. Can it be the same Melbdon who used to post on SGP? In a spirit of goodwill Don I will stop saying he is mad - how's that.
ReplyDelete