FLAK and chaff were being thrown out in great quantities prior to and after the announcement on the independence road map and date.
Unionist are in a tizzy: “It isn’t within competence”, “now is not the time”, “Scotland will be bankrupt”, “there is no mandate”, “Scotland does not want a divisive referendum”, “there is a war on”, “there is a cost-of-living crisis”. All of these are true in that they are being shouted from the rafters.
Lets look at each in turn.
“It isn’t within competence”. The UK doesn’t have a written constitution which explicitly denies a referendum. To deny one can only be described as a deliberate attack on democracy.
READ MORE: Labour call for top law officer to take questions over indyref2 bill
“Now is not the time”. This statement implies that there will be a correct time. It would be handy if the people making this statement could actually define when they believe the time would be correct, otherwise it is another deliberate attack on democracy, meaning “at no time is the time”.
“Scotland will be bankrupted”. Scotland is stacked full of resources: human; environmental; financial; fishing; farming; tourism and innovation. Currently many of its population are forced to use food banks, increasingly since the austerity imposed by the Conservative 2010 Cameron/Osborne, but it stems from the ideologues back in the 1980s destroying societies.
READ MORE: John Swinney says SNP majority in UK election would be independence mandate
“There is not a mandate”. It is a democratic principle that every population has the right to determine is own future. So said the PM in relation to Ukraine’s bid for freedom from the grip of Russia, also Liz Truss repeated the same thing this week.
“Scotland doesn’t want a divisive referendum”. That is not true.
61% of people asked said that they want a referendum at some stage in the future.
“There is a war on and a cost-of-living crisis”. Issues like these are liable to occur at any time, and will require action. As an informed commentator stated,the “hinges of history are opening dramatically”. This is the time for change.
Alistair Ballantyne
Birkhill, Angus
SO, there we have it, the future of democratic choice and free will is in the hands of the Supreme Court.
If the court determines that the referendum is legal, then it will leave the Unionists with egg on their face, having spent the last few weeks trying to advise everyone that it would not be lawful.
READ MORE: Ian Blackford in feisty indyref2 row with Dominic Raab after 'in his place' jibe
If the court decides that we cannot hold a referendum, then they confirm that the UK is not a union of consensus. If it is the first one they decide, then it is up to every single member of the Yes movement to get out and persuade one voter who wanted to stay in the Union to change their mind.
If the court rules against us, then that puts us into uncharted waters and to my mind, colony status, but I am no expert on that. Whatever the outcome, Johnson will end up being he at the tiller when the plague ship Britanicus founders on the rock of legal precedent.
Cliff Purvis
Veterans for Scottish Independence 2.0/SNP Armed Forces and Veterans
SEEMS to me that straight-forward ignorance is the greatest hurdle we have to clear in order to gain Scotland’s independence.
On a largely dreich summer’s day, with Nicola Sturgeon’s entire speech screened UK-wide on BBC News and BBC Scotland, this presented a relatively unique opportunity to relay a strong message to anyone in doubt regarding the finance available to the Scottish Government to fully service Scotland’s responsibilities. I reckon a sizeable portion of those against independence have no idea that Scotland relies on a fixed sum, without opportunity to borrow as the Westminster Government is free to do when circumstances require.
READ MORE: Legal expert explains when and how Supreme Court will rule on indyref2
Yet the door was left wide open for Ross, Sarwar and Cole-Hamilton to regurgitate their mandatory questions regarding need to focus on services – education, health service, ferries etc. One after another they dragged up our stretched services without mention of our financial constraints. Yes, the First Minister responded mentioning our budget, but without clarity of difference between now and what is possible, the rationed resources we rely on now and the portion of what we send south to what we receive in return. Even the simple fact that we cannot borrow when required, despite our huge resources, was not mentioned.
Apart from those points, the immediate attempt to gain Supreme Court approval toward a fixed-date referendum, or de facto referendum if not forthcoming, is as much as could be expected on Tuesday and we must make the best of it.
Tom Gray
Braco
IN Wednesday’s article Kevin McKenna appears to suggest that the current proposed process for achieving independence should have started in 2019 and concluded in 2021 with the Scottish Parliament elections. Did I miss something, or is he seriously suggesting that this could have happened during serious Covid lockdowns?
McKenna is no friend of the independence movement, as he appears to be solely focussed on criticism of the SNP – the only political party capable of bringing about the conditions for independence.
READ MORE: Kevin McKenna: Better late than never on indyref2 announcement
The day after the First Minister laid out a route map to independence, his response is to pen an article criticising her, her party and her government.
You could almost believe that he is a Unionist plant.
David Howie
Dunblane
TYPICAL Kevin McKenna. What was wrong just once with saying “Well done Nicola! We’re all behind you and ready to go”? But no, too much to ask. We’ll I’ll say it: “well done, Nicola, you caught them all with their pants doon.”
Ken McCartney
Hawick
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here