If Sturgeon’s premise is correct and in the event of independence …. and using the same argument , would she agree to Shetland’s independence from Scotland . The truth is that Sturgeon has claimed every election including the UK referendum and local elections as a mandate for an independence referendum. Clearly that is not the case . It is simply grasping at straws . More importantly the SNP since they took control of Scotland have not proved that they are capable of running the country …..had they done so their case for independence would be much stronger .
Great report. WM needs to point out that this Indy is going no where. Put the mad foul mouth woman in her place. Play her at her own game and start undermining her instead of pussy footing around her. The majority of the Scottish voters are sick of this nonsense. It is damaging to our relationship with England and also Scottish business. Sturgeon knows she is losing but as always it is never her fault.
Westminster needs to put an end to all this nonsense and say once and for all that 2014’s result stands and there’ll be no other referendums. Then do as Stephen suggests and legislate that the UK is indivisible. Scotland can’t survive much longer with this uncertainty, division and nastiness in its body politic.
The UK has probably gone too far along the path of recognising potential independence for Scotland for central government to take Stephen Daisley's advice, but the UK Government and Parliament should revisit the question of accepting a one-off bare majority vote as doing the trick. Watch out for my take on this issue next week on the London School of Economics' British Politics and Policy blog.
This is the most specious nonsense. The UK constitution is unwritten, but does recognise the legal right of Northern Ireland to self-determination--England, by dint of its size, could also secede from the Union in law. "Sovereignty of Westminster" is an invention of 19th century England; it has no equivalence in Scottish judicial tradition and though it will be acceded to by the Supreme Court, will not end the argument. Anglo-British nationalism rests on the terms of the Scotland Act, not on the Treaty of Union, which took two independent countries to implement. Now, the argument goes, one of those countries has total authority over the other. It will not wash, and a century ago, Ireland refused to bow to the same "English" bullying, and was lost.
We need less bland, less inauthentic explanations of why Scots shouldn’t decide their own future. If we can’t explain properly why they can’t decide what to vote on or whether or not to rule their own country they’ll end up working out that they are being conned…
Were we not supposed NOT to talk about the referendum?
Anyway, there are exceptions to your argument. Yugoslavia, USSR, Czechoslovakia. Not to mention Finland and Ireland. Now even the EU is pressing for Kossovo.
This doesn't mean that Sturgeon 's pretend argument isn't fatuous, but that yours is not strong either.
It’s about time Westminster stepped up to the plate on this issue. They really do need to be more assertive as suggested in this article.
If Sturgeon’s premise is correct and in the event of independence …. and using the same argument , would she agree to Shetland’s independence from Scotland . The truth is that Sturgeon has claimed every election including the UK referendum and local elections as a mandate for an independence referendum. Clearly that is not the case . It is simply grasping at straws . More importantly the SNP since they took control of Scotland have not proved that they are capable of running the country …..had they done so their case for independence would be much stronger .
Great report. WM needs to point out that this Indy is going no where. Put the mad foul mouth woman in her place. Play her at her own game and start undermining her instead of pussy footing around her. The majority of the Scottish voters are sick of this nonsense. It is damaging to our relationship with England and also Scottish business. Sturgeon knows she is losing but as always it is never her fault.
Well researched needs further publication
Westminster needs to put an end to all this nonsense and say once and for all that 2014’s result stands and there’ll be no other referendums. Then do as Stephen suggests and legislate that the UK is indivisible. Scotland can’t survive much longer with this uncertainty, division and nastiness in its body politic.
Bullseye! This should be read by every Scot.
Very informative — I didn’t know any of this before reading Stephen’s article.
I guess independence isn’t as ‘normal’ as we are all constantly being told it is
Brilliant piece Stephen,exactly what we need
Straight to the point,giving them food for thought 👏👏👏
Outfuckingstanding! Many thanks.
Boris Johnson is now resigning . This puts Nicola Sturgeon in a very difficult position ….who is she ( and Blackford) going to to despise now ?
The UK has probably gone too far along the path of recognising potential independence for Scotland for central government to take Stephen Daisley's advice, but the UK Government and Parliament should revisit the question of accepting a one-off bare majority vote as doing the trick. Watch out for my take on this issue next week on the London School of Economics' British Politics and Policy blog.
This is the most specious nonsense. The UK constitution is unwritten, but does recognise the legal right of Northern Ireland to self-determination--England, by dint of its size, could also secede from the Union in law. "Sovereignty of Westminster" is an invention of 19th century England; it has no equivalence in Scottish judicial tradition and though it will be acceded to by the Supreme Court, will not end the argument. Anglo-British nationalism rests on the terms of the Scotland Act, not on the Treaty of Union, which took two independent countries to implement. Now, the argument goes, one of those countries has total authority over the other. It will not wash, and a century ago, Ireland refused to bow to the same "English" bullying, and was lost.
We need less bland, less inauthentic explanations of why Scots shouldn’t decide their own future. If we can’t explain properly why they can’t decide what to vote on or whether or not to rule their own country they’ll end up working out that they are being conned…
Were we not supposed NOT to talk about the referendum?
Anyway, there are exceptions to your argument. Yugoslavia, USSR, Czechoslovakia. Not to mention Finland and Ireland. Now even the EU is pressing for Kossovo.
This doesn't mean that Sturgeon 's pretend argument isn't fatuous, but that yours is not strong either.
Another bought and paid for piece by the tax dodging billionaire’s Daily Mail scribbler.
None of that means he’s wrong, though.