Well, if Downing Street can send out a flunkie to talk to the media, Swinney can give it more authority and politeness and more statesmanship, by doing it himself:
'The First Minister told Bauer Media on Wednesday that he expects to meet with Keir Starmer, following a phone call between the two leaders following the Holyrood election, which returned a record majority of pro-independence MSPs.
Swinney said that the request will be “fortified and strengthened by the democratic view of the Scottish Parliament”.
They're not messing with just Sturgeon or Swinney now, they're messing with the whole Scottish Parliament. Wha daur meddle wi' it.
Yes it was a sidekick who was claiming to speak on Starmer's behalf - that person stated:
“The UK Government does not support independence or another referendum."
(Starmer hasn't since contradicted so presumably the anonymous spokesperson has his sanction to speak for him.)
So not an outright "No!".
It's difficult to see how even a politician as slippery as Starmer can argue that his spokesperson actually meant "Yes!" in his statement ... fortunately.
You're right. Disrespectful as it is, the refusal is better than the alternative. If Starmer had signalled that he was open to talks on the matter, I'd be seriously worried.
First step. More polite than I would have been, but I'm no politician.
If he is serious, every step will have as its audience, not so much the colonial overlords and overladies, but the Scottish public - and the eyes of the world.
Internal (to the UK state) route to self-determination first, then onwards and upwards if (when many would say) that fails.
Yawnzzzzzzzz wake me up when we're independent ...
I for one will eat humble pie when the Westminster regime officially confirms that Scotland has no democratic way out of the Union and John Swinney reacts to that by seizing the initiative.
All he would have to do would be to announce that the Section30 route is dead and that the Scottish Parliament will act to ensure that the Sovereign Scottish people must decide their future.
Aye. But for the fact that he has declared the Section 30 process to be the only democratic way to have a referendum. And Swinney also just conceded the UK government's 'right' to veto the will of Scotland's people. As ever, most of the independence movement will be 2 to 5 years late in realising the damage Swinney has done. At which point, they'll blame the people who tried to warn them about what Swinney proposed to do.
Whit! Stammer said naw....canny be true Peter...They are a foreign country ....they canny tell us whit tae dae....Wait a minute tho'..oor beloved leader has a secret plan...we've tae moan and mimp an bore the foreign b*st*rd english intae daein' whit we want..( laughter off stage)
Reminds me o' the Bruce at Bannockburn......'right men the foreign b*st*rd english have refused tae leave oor beloved Scotland....so we might as well gang hame ..hand in yer lochabers at the burn...all pikes to be redeemed ower there......cos the gemme's a bogey...
Haud oan!... a' wis jist kiddin'...we didnae get dressed up fur nuthin' ( ref Braveheart).. here's ma secret plan....Kill the foreign english b*st*rds...aye that's it..kill the foreign english b*st*rds...
cos the foreign b*st*rd english are once again raining oan oor parade IN OOR COUNTRY...jist a minute men..while I tak' de Bohun's heid aff wi ma wee axe ..right that's done...haud oan!....jist gie ma axe a wee wipe....noo tidy up yer schiltrons ... pikes at the ready.....an' intae battle FOR SCOTLAND!
..if only Mr Swiney..if only...
For OUR Scotland and her weans still lookin' fur a fight....
"End the Union" eh? Good message. I would vote for that!
Or I would, if only there was some way that I could. :-(
Like at least a million other YESsers!
There was a gathering outside the Holyrood Parliament building yesterday organised by
Lesley Riddoch / Time for Scotland and it achieved its aim of utilising the presence of the mainstream media to make the point that the YES movement are still here and people demand some route forward towards achieving Scotlands Independence.
There was an item on the channel4 news from their reporter against Scotland during their 7pm program.
Also there was a short recap on just how badly the SNP under Peter Murrell has treated members and the YES movement over the years and some trenchant criticism of what has happened now and needs to happen if the YESsers beyond the party faithful are to reassert themselves from Lesley and Fraser on the The Lesley Riddoch podcast.
I would recommend that anyone who reads Peters blog should go and listen to that short 29 minute episode entitled "Lies and corruption....how do we move forwards?". [1]
As for looking forward to the next British General Election, and thinking of Harold Wilson who is quoted as having said that "a week is a long time in politics", then to plan for how things will look in the run up to the next GE is to attempt to look beyond a distant horizon.
One might easily expect that the 'new' parties like AtLS might want to begin electioneering for that.
The SNP / Believe in Scotland Ltd. certainly will.
I have the strong suspicion that those who seek to become elected will not like the idea of admitting that a Westminster election is an 'away fixture' and the combination of circumstances that the media will be dominated by England and British party political issues will make it all but impossible to utilise that event to achieve any meaningful advance for our cause of Scottish Independence.
Those who do not forget history will remember that the SNP had 56 Westminster MPs and did nothing with them.
"to plan for how things will look in the run up to the next GE is to attempt to look beyond a distant horizon."
How much do we need to know to start a 'repurpose your ballot' campaign? If the SNP etc. can start campaigning, why wouldn't the thinking part of the independence movement do likewise?
"why wouldn't the thinking part of the independence movement do likewise?"
The thinking part of the independence movement should be having this discussion.
Openly. spiritedly. honestly. Now.
It may indeed transpire that the action for which you advocate now may become the obviously optimal one as we approach that distant horizon and the future landscape as we approach that destination comes more into view.
The way to have a successful mass campaign is to get as many participants on board BEFORE the result of the deliberations is announced.
Otherwise the lone originator is likely to be portrayed as some sort of self important egotistical grand wasir in some fantasy ivory tower.
Perhaps it would be better if you were to listen to the podcast and reflect on what other people have to say before announcing the optimal conclusion.
On occasions in the past Ms Riddoch has expressed some mild criticism before slinking back behind the party machine and its message.
So, has she changed her mind? Is there any acknowledgment that perhaps, maybe, it was wrong to unquestioningly go along with whatever Sturgeon/Yousaf/Swinney was saying?
OT - "Famous Glasgow whisky bar The Bon Accord closes"
I knew it more for its real ales back in the day.
Well, if Downing Street can send out a flunkie to talk to the media, Swinney can give it more authority and politeness and more statesmanship, by doing it himself:
https://archive.is/CY0X2
'The First Minister told Bauer Media on Wednesday that he expects to meet with Keir Starmer, following a phone call between the two leaders following the Holyrood election, which returned a record majority of pro-independence MSPs.
Swinney said that the request will be “fortified and strengthened by the democratic view of the Scottish Parliament”.
They're not messing with just Sturgeon or Swinney now, they're messing with the whole Scottish Parliament. Wha daur meddle wi' it.
The predictable pantomime performance duly delivered.
And immediately and equally predictably rejected by Starmer.
Now Swinney gets to whine, whinge and wail for a bit before throwing up his hands in faux dismay and saying 'oh well, I did what I could'.
Job done.
But it wasn't Starmer who rejected it. Even the flunkie didn't actually do that.
Yes it was a sidekick who was claiming to speak on Starmer's behalf - that person stated:
“The UK Government does not support independence or another referendum."
(Starmer hasn't since contradicted so presumably the anonymous spokesperson has his sanction to speak for him.)
So not an outright "No!".
It's difficult to see how even a politician as slippery as Starmer can argue that his spokesperson actually meant "Yes!" in his statement ... fortunately.
You're right. Disrespectful as it is, the refusal is better than the alternative. If Starmer had signalled that he was open to talks on the matter, I'd be seriously worried.
It was just some nameless pencil-necked dude said some dribble. In response to the democratically elected Scottish Parliament though, not just the FM.
Trick will be to get the House of Commons to say NO.
It was Swinney's motion. The whole thing was his idea. He doesn't get of the hook that easily. He shouldn't get off the hook at all.
First step. More polite than I would have been, but I'm no politician.
If he is serious, every step will have as its audience, not so much the colonial overlords and overladies, but the Scottish public - and the eyes of the world.
Internal (to the UK state) route to self-determination first, then onwards and upwards if (when many would say) that fails.
Yawnzzzzzzzz wake me up when we're independent ...
I for one will eat humble pie when the Westminster regime officially confirms that Scotland has no democratic way out of the Union and John Swinney reacts to that by seizing the initiative.
All he would have to do would be to announce that the Section30 route is dead and that the Scottish Parliament will act to ensure that the Sovereign Scottish people must decide their future.
Simple really.
;-)
Aye. But for the fact that he has declared the Section 30 process to be the only democratic way to have a referendum. And Swinney also just conceded the UK government's 'right' to veto the will of Scotland's people. As ever, most of the independence movement will be 2 to 5 years late in realising the damage Swinney has done. At which point, they'll blame the people who tried to warn them about what Swinney proposed to do.
Ah there you go with fact based reasoning again Peter.
It's not popular you know!
People don't want to hear it.
Mostly they just want to have faith in the dear leader and hope everything will work out allright in the end.
:-(
Indeed. As long as the motion was just the first step in what could be a fairly long campaign (hopefully just months).
Whit! Stammer said naw....canny be true Peter...They are a foreign country ....they canny tell us whit tae dae....Wait a minute tho'..oor beloved leader has a secret plan...we've tae moan and mimp an bore the foreign b*st*rd english intae daein' whit we want..( laughter off stage)
Reminds me o' the Bruce at Bannockburn......'right men the foreign b*st*rd english have refused tae leave oor beloved Scotland....so we might as well gang hame ..hand in yer lochabers at the burn...all pikes to be redeemed ower there......cos the gemme's a bogey...
Haud oan!... a' wis jist kiddin'...we didnae get dressed up fur nuthin' ( ref Braveheart).. here's ma secret plan....Kill the foreign english b*st*rds...aye that's it..kill the foreign english b*st*rds...
cos the foreign b*st*rd english are once again raining oan oor parade IN OOR COUNTRY...jist a minute men..while I tak' de Bohun's heid aff wi ma wee axe ..right that's done...haud oan!....jist gie ma axe a wee wipe....noo tidy up yer schiltrons ... pikes at the ready.....an' intae battle FOR SCOTLAND!
..if only Mr Swiney..if only...
For OUR Scotland and her weans still lookin' fur a fight....
Good graphic Peter.
"End the Union" eh? Good message. I would vote for that!
Or I would, if only there was some way that I could. :-(
Like at least a million other YESsers!
There was a gathering outside the Holyrood Parliament building yesterday organised by
Lesley Riddoch / Time for Scotland and it achieved its aim of utilising the presence of the mainstream media to make the point that the YES movement are still here and people demand some route forward towards achieving Scotlands Independence.
There was an item on the channel4 news from their reporter against Scotland during their 7pm program.
Also there was a short recap on just how badly the SNP under Peter Murrell has treated members and the YES movement over the years and some trenchant criticism of what has happened now and needs to happen if the YESsers beyond the party faithful are to reassert themselves from Lesley and Fraser on the The Lesley Riddoch podcast.
I would recommend that anyone who reads Peters blog should go and listen to that short 29 minute episode entitled "Lies and corruption....how do we move forwards?". [1]
As for looking forward to the next British General Election, and thinking of Harold Wilson who is quoted as having said that "a week is a long time in politics", then to plan for how things will look in the run up to the next GE is to attempt to look beyond a distant horizon.
One might easily expect that the 'new' parties like AtLS might want to begin electioneering for that.
The SNP / Believe in Scotland Ltd. certainly will.
I have the strong suspicion that those who seek to become elected will not like the idea of admitting that a Westminster election is an 'away fixture' and the combination of circumstances that the media will be dominated by England and British party political issues will make it all but impossible to utilise that event to achieve any meaningful advance for our cause of Scottish Independence.
Those who do not forget history will remember that the SNP had 56 Westminster MPs and did nothing with them.
[1] https://lesleyriddoch.com/podcast
[edit] "Independence rally held outside Holyrood after Section 30 vote"
https://www.thenational.scot/news/26140814.independence-rally-held-outside-holyrood-section-30-vote/
"to plan for how things will look in the run up to the next GE is to attempt to look beyond a distant horizon."
How much do we need to know to start a 'repurpose your ballot' campaign? If the SNP etc. can start campaigning, why wouldn't the thinking part of the independence movement do likewise?
"why wouldn't the thinking part of the independence movement do likewise?"
The thinking part of the independence movement should be having this discussion.
Openly. spiritedly. honestly. Now.
It may indeed transpire that the action for which you advocate now may become the obviously optimal one as we approach that distant horizon and the future landscape as we approach that destination comes more into view.
The way to have a successful mass campaign is to get as many participants on board BEFORE the result of the deliberations is announced.
Otherwise the lone originator is likely to be portrayed as some sort of self important egotistical grand wasir in some fantasy ivory tower.
Perhaps it would be better if you were to listen to the podcast and reflect on what other people have to say before announcing the optimal conclusion.
Lesley Riddoch has been an SNP apologist for years. Believe in Scotland has been their mouthpiece.
As a result they both lack credibility, at least in my book.
Has there been a change of heart?
"Lesley Riddoch has been an SNP apologist for years."
Perhaps you should listen to what Lesley Ridoch has to say.
Then you might change your opinion.
If you do not listen then you will not be giving yourself the opportunity to have a change of heart.
As I said she lacks credibility.
That is why I asked you the question.
On occasions in the past Ms Riddoch has expressed some mild criticism before slinking back behind the party machine and its message.
So, has she changed her mind? Is there any acknowledgment that perhaps, maybe, it was wrong to unquestioningly go along with whatever Sturgeon/Yousaf/Swinney was saying?
Neither you nor I can know what was in anothers mind.
What I do know is that there are many who form opinions without establishing what can be known first.
I do not believe that you are one of those lazy thinkers.
Listen to what Lesley Ridoch has to say.
For once she is forthright rather than chosing to be circumspect.
What that means is for you to judge.
I think she wanted to stand as an SGP candidate.
Yes, I know that Greens are her favoured party overall but her stance on the question always mirrored that of the SNP (possibly the Greens too).