We’re Still Here

This really wasn’t supposed to happen. After the Supreme Court ruling the blizzard of self-congratulatory editorial and op-ed flooding from the desks of the scribes that faithfully perform their roles for the Union was remarkable. Then came the change of leadership for the SNP group at Westminster and again the pens were out to write the obituary of the party, Sturgeon’s leadership and the Yes movement (not necessarily in that order). Then Gordon Brown published his plans for a New Britain and once again the eulogies for the independence movement rung out. Who could resist the idea of empowering Mayors or the vision of how Grimsby is reinventing itself? “The constitutional initiative has now passed to Labour” opined James Mitchell gravely. Finally, the idea of a de facto referendum was ridiculed and lambasted as alternatively useless, impossible and unwinnable by an unlikely band uniting left and right.

But as the shrill chorus subsides and the obituaries lie unread, something remarkable is happening. Yesterday new polling from IPSOS announced that: 56% would vote Yes and 44% No in an immediate #indyref2 – Yes up 6 points since May; that the SNP had strengthened its General Election support to 51%; and that there was no indication that a ‘de facto’ referendum strategy would harm the party’s electoral chances. Ipsos’ Scottish Political Monitor suggests the SNP would win 58 seats at the next UK general election, with Scottish Labour on one and every other party facing a wipe-out.

So, what’s going on?

At least three things are worth noticing. There’s a push and a pull that transcends the bleakness of the political landscape and the broken economy – and Labour’s efforts to re-frame the constitutional debate have failed.

First, the idea of a “golden thread of competence” – ie the idea that a nationalist government can ‘prove itself’ as a prefigurative testing ground to win over sceptics has fallen flat. The crowd of critics of the SNP’s time in office is now a deep throng. They can be found on the left and the right and in the middle, inside the party and beyond it. But the core ideas of sovereignty and yes (!) self-determination are motivations above and beyond individual policy failures, deep mistakes and problems in leadership, and the contradictions and hypocrisies of office. It’s not that the many failings of the SNP don’t matter – they most certainly do – it’s just that the idea of creating a functioning Scottish democracy is seen as a higher goal and a more vital destination. That the performance of the SNP has disconnected from the deeper movement for change is a remarkable and a positive thing. It’s a harsh and weird reality that the independence movement is thriving despite, not because of the SNP.

Second, Gordon Brown’s treatise has fallen “stillborn from the press,” not because it didn’t have some good ideas, but because all around us you see the overwhelming evidence, the daily lived experience of a broken Britain. If Brown maintains a position in the imagination of orphaned centrists as a giant figure of the Labour and Trade Union Movement, a man of heft, integrity and intellect, that is not the role he plays-out in the mind of the wider general public. For the clubby commentariat Brown is a harbinger of the Good Ole Days, for many in Scotland he is simply an ex-politician deeply tainted by his time in office and his role in Project Fear. People don’t believe him, and they think Britain is irredeemable.

Third, if the Supreme Court ruling has galvanised rather than crushed the Yes movement, so too has the daily doom-scroll of living in Britain under Rishi Sunak’s government.  If the basic idea of sovereignty is the ‘pull’, living in collapsing Britain is the ‘push’. It’s not just the jaw-dropping hypocrisy of a government spouting about ‘climate leadership’ while opening a ******* coal mine, or the astonishing spectacle of the Michelle Mone corruption scandal unfolding before us, it’s the brutal economic realities.

Back in October Derek Thompson wrote a blistering piece for the American magazine The Atlantic on what he called ‘decades-long economic dysfunction (“How the U.K. Became One of the Poorest Countries in Western Europe“). He wrote:

“When the global financial crisis hit in 2008, it hit hard, smashing the engine of Britain’s economic ascent. Wary of rising deficits, the British government pursued a policy of austerity, fretting about debt rather than productivity or aggregate demand. The results were disastrous. Real wages fell for six straight years. Facing what the writer Fintan O’Toole called “the dull anxiety of declining living standards,” conservative pols sniffed out a bogeyman to blame for this slow-motion catastrophe. They served up to anxious voters a menu of scary outsiders: bureaucrats in Brussels, immigrants, asylum seekers—anybody but the actual decision makers who had kneecapped British competitiveness. A cohort of older, middle-class, grievously nostalgic voters demanded Brexit, and they got it.”

Thompson’s analysis of economic failure and growing deprivation and inequality was echoed by the FT’s John Burn-Murdoch who explained back in September:

“Income inequality in US & UK is so wide that while the richest are very well off, the poorest have a worse standard of living than the poorest in countries like Slovenia. Essentially, US & UK are poor societies with some very rich people.”

Burn-Murdoch’s analysis showed that now “the poorest Irish have a standard of living almost 63% higher than the poorest in the UK.”

One of the most visible signs of Britain’s broken economy is not just the proliferation – but the normalisation of food banks as if they were perfectly natural phenomena. Today Penny Mordaunt has re-dubbed them ‘food pantries’ and boasts that she is opening “three new Food Pantries in Portsmouth North” with the proceeds of her ridiculous book ‘Greater: Britain After the Storm’.

If Mordaunt’s word-games seem obscene, it’s just the latest iteration of Britain as a ‘slow-motion catastrophe.’ In this brutal context we should not be surprised that polling for independence is rising. In fact, it’s rising in unexpected demographic groups:

The latest Ipsos Mori polling reveals that a massive 70% of 16-34 year olds would vote Yes.

Among the 16-24 age group, this rises even higher to 73%. This is significant, as studies of the 2014 referendum show that 16-24 year olds narrowly voted No in 2014.

In the 35-54 age group, support for independence mirrors the national average – with Yes at 56%.

What’s perhaps most noteworthy is the 45% support for independence among the over-65s, the highest result for that age group in any poll in years.

This isn’t an excuse for complacency, nor is it a defence of the SNP. In fact, discussions behind the scenes are ongoing on how to boost the wider movements campaigns in 2023. But these latest polls are a challenge to the people who have routinely stated (in a state of supreme confidence) ‘Now is not the time’ – but added that when it is the ‘settled will’ of the Scottish people then yes of course there must be a referendum. Polling reaching into the high fifties and sixties changes the dynamics of everything and ratchets up the ante for those sitting on the fence, those whose belief in Britain is draining away with every week that passes, those who have grown tired of defending the indefensible. You don’t need to do that anymore.

The 56% is important. We’re not going anywhere. It tells us Yma o Hyd as they say in Wales.








Comments (37)

Join the Discussion

Your email address will not be published.

  1. Dave Millar says:

    And the direction of travel, for the UK, is ominous; plans to make striking illegal are afoot. Slippery slope, slippery slope.

  2. SleepingDog says:

    I would broadly agree with this 3-pronged assessment on constitutional concerns being decoupled from the SNP, the growing rebellion against self-serving political elite ‘solutions’, the endemic corruption and ideological wars on nature (these have a long history in Britain, worth reading up on).

    My sense is that there is a need for an international biocratic policy oversight committee, probably run under United Nations auspices, that national parties can (at this time) voluntarily sign up to, in order to vet proposed legislation and other policies (and recommend them). This would draw on global life science expertise and local testimony, using fast-track methods to veto bad legislation/policy and accelerate/disseminate the good, based on what scientists have already prepared for the Climate and Biodiversity COPs and so on.

    I am also concerned that the SNP-Green government is starting to bring Scotland into disrepute on a world stage, and relinquishing oversight of the relevant parts of its legislative/policy platform to a UN biocratic committee would help restore the kinds of diplomatic relationships so helpful in gaining Independence, and necessary to post-Independence health.

  3. Radio Jammor says:

    I was disappointed in the SC decision, as I had held out hope that the case that the legislation was not self-executing would be regarded as sufficient to get through the quagmire of the Scotland Act. Alas, no.
    It was interesting, as David Allen Green pointed out, that the ruling effectively gave referenda a special status or consideration. That didn’t exist before the ruling.
    I was therefore also disappointed with the hand-wringing from some sides of the movement calling the outcome ‘inevitable’. The fact that it had to go to the SC, the fact that the matter had been debated for years without consensus, and that the SC view of referenda was not predicted, had all said otherwise. This was wisdom after the fact and it stank.
    The SNP response was a light show. Get the people out to rallies – which I went to – and show your determination to continue. Fine. But where was the prepared response to this decision?
    Like the candidate who prepares a victory and a defeat speech, we should have had such from the SNP, with the ‘what we do next’ to be laid out, but instead we got a “attend the rallies”, then a wait and then the announcement of a conference or convention in Aberdeen in February, at which we will get a response. Well …ok. *Twiddles fingers and thumbs*.
    Ipsos and ITV were smart to run a poll. They could announce how Scots have taken the news. I wonder how surprised they were at the findings. I can’t say as I was, except perhaps by the extent of it. Quite the shift.
    A couple of others seem to have been more prepared than the SNP to respond to the outcome as well. The Change petition, “The People of Scotland Demand the Right to Vote on Their Own Future” was put up by Bill Cruickshank, to petition the UNPO Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organisation, and a petition to the UK Parliament, “Grant a Section 30 Order to enable a Scottish Independence Referendum… The UK Government should grant without delay a Section 30 Order under the Scotland Act…” was put up by Andrew Moran.
    Not sure that a petition to the UN will work, as cry as we might, we do not qualify in their eyes as a colony. This ruling won’t change that – but I applaud it nevertheless as a point worth raising and to see what the outcome is.
    The Parliamentary petition is a different beast. This *should* get the response it calls for by right, but we know they tend to be ignored. But Parliament does have to respond (if you get 10,000 sigs at least, and may even debate it at 100,000), so at the very least it forces Parliament to address the matter, even if it is to say no. At least this time they would be saying no to the people and not just the politicians.
    And who knows, by the time we get there, maybe events will have taken a turn and they may relent and give the S30.
    I might suggest then that whilst we wait for the politicians to get their act together, we concentrate on getting people to sign those two petitions and show that the people of Scotland are,. as the polling suggests, unhappy at being told they cannot have a referendum without Westminster’s agreement, on top of being ready and willing for Scottish independence.
    Petition links:
    PS – I should warn anyone about commenting on the petitions to the effect of ‘Westminster will ignore it’, ‘why bother’, ‘let’s do something else instead’, kind of comment. The petitioner has been known to respond to such personally, and it can be quite entertaining to watch, if not be on the end of.
    He basically says, that’s how they want you to respond; with apathy, with disdain, with a lack of action, or by advocating something daft which they can happily shoot down. And this isn’t a competition. We can do both the above, and be open to other ideas, too. So let’s not give up before we start, nor plump for just one thing. Let’s be happy to attack on more than one front and keep the momentum going and the pressure on the politicians up – ‘ours’ and ‘theirs’.

  4. JP58 says:

    Many of the opponents of independence in Westminster. Holyrood and media are both ignorant and arrogant about Scottish electorate.
    Anyone with any understanding of Scotland voters would understand that not only SC ruling and then revelling in fact that electorate in Scotland require permission of Westminster (effectively electorate in England) was going to be badly received in Scotland. I am sure Scottish Government appreciated this when they decided to take this route.
    Ironically the No’s side best (only?) option to significantly reduce push for independence was to agree to 2023 referendum which they may well have won. The longer they refuse a Section 30 the more the Yes side will benefit and the increased chance of Yes winning next Referendum which will come at some juncture.
    The No side actions are driving up support from soft No’s it is now time for SNP and Yes side to help firm up this support by dealing with issues of concern with a positive and realistic plan as well as governing in an effective open manner, clearly identifying effects of limitations of Holyrood powers and not getting dragged into controversy around issues of little concern to majority of voters.

    1. Alex McCulloch says:

      Your last paragraph is spot on!
      Well said.
      If only we could break the addiction to complaining about Union and SNP and actually campaign, describe and promote a positive alternative we might move beyond levels of support previously reached.

  5. gavinochiltree says:

    Be happy. Be glad. But be aware that the fight is yet to be fought.
    The media manage and manipulate the news right now…….when it comes to IR2 they will be like the media in Russia or China.

    I am not in favour of mob rule, but would like to see Starmer and Sunak being confronted by hundreds of polite, respectful pro-democracy Scots with banners, any time they have a day trip north (of the North) to Bluster for Blighty. Be a bonus if accompanied by DRossie or Starwars.
    Let them know how we feel.
    Let the Westie Bubble media know how we feel.
    Let them try to explain away democracy protesters in the UK.

  6. MacGilleRuadh says:

    This is something of an aside but I’ve always been puzzled as to why the great intellect Broon is such a subservient lap-dog for the British State establishment. He must surely, deep inside, know how the same establishment despises him and his ilk, how he is tolerated for his perceived usefulness in defending the position of the British state and nothing else. Surely his treatment during his miserable time as PM would have made that clear to him? And yet he seems to stretch every sinew to try to preserve this self-same state. I wonder why this is. Does he genuinely believe that Scots, in the long term are best served by being part of the UK (in my view wrongly)and that he is motivated by a desire to do the best for the people of Scotland? Or is he really just a died in the wool British Nationalist who revels in the very idea of Britain, blind to any notion that its days might be numbered? This is a genuine question, I am really puzzled by his attitudes and behaviour. Does he not imagine how he is thought of in those London establishment clubs and circles after he is wheeled out in yet another impassioned plea for the British State?

    1. ben madigan says:

      No matter what objections to a federal UK (and there are many) Gordon Brown is totally convinced HIS plan is wonderful/perfect/solves all problems because HE thought of it –
      He can’t resist the chance of getting it implemented through a future Labour Govt in Westminster

    2. SleepingDog says:

      @MacGilleRuadh I once saw Gordon Brown on home turf, apparently surrounded by a surprisingly large number of sycophants. I think that would have a distorting effect on anybody’s judgement. I think it would be unfair to imagine Brown’s concerns to be limited to these isles. I think he may have been genuine about international debt relief (Scottish financial institutions cannot be guiltless of neocolonial practices, after all), even if the campaign may have been ameliorative instead of world-changing.

      However, Brown (whose Labour administration continued British imperial foreign policy) seems horribly out of step with the times. I have been watching some movies made recently (past four years) in China and India, which feature British colonialists (corporate like the East India Company as well as imperial) as the bad guys, in historically-realistic evil mode (so evil that some of their activities have to be hinted at and take place off-screen, or the producers would never get their desired censor rating). None of these feature on Wikipedia’s page (my guess is there are a lot more): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_featuring_colonialism
      The British Union Flag, bright herald of atrocity, must be one of the most loathed in the world. Perhaps some have been confiscated at this World Cup. I find it difficult to imagine that raising it in many places abroad can be without risk of jeers or worse. But worse than that for Unionists, the status of the British Empire/UK/Windsor-theocracy has continued to nosedive, with it reputation for functioning diplomacy apparently trashed. Embarrassing colonial stories emerge at an ever-greater rate propelled by popular anger and demands for real history and justice. Foul covert wars and disgusting arms dealing, truly evil threats to nuke the world, the unnatural crimes of the turd-flood tax-stealing Tories, the supine irrelevance of Labour… The Sex Pistols sound like sober and research-led political scientists now.

  7. Wul says:


    Get it right fuckin’ round ye, apologists for this sorry mess of a “union”. How dare anyone tell us we can’t hope and campaign for something better.

  8. Alvin Vertigo says:

    Imagine knowing in 1984 that by 2022 the Tories would be hell bent on trying to open a coal mine, while Labour strongly opposed it. It would have been harder to believe than flying cars.

    It makes one wonder if some deranged Tory strategy group has dreamt up the idea, believing it will turn voters in ex-mining villages in the north of England off Labour. “See- they don’t want you to have your livelihoods back.”

    What a world!

  9. Adam Ingram says:

    4 days ago you gave us all the distinct impression that you’d given up and were in despair for the cause. Now you appear to have revived with the publication of the latest Ipsos poll. Not exactly a display of steely determination is it?
    I joined the SNP in 1983 with the party at the nadir of its fortunes. Forty years of activism and countless ups and downs along the way and here we are on the brink of achieving our ultimate goal. I find the disparagement of the party in these columns grossly insulting. Any fool can criticise sitting on the sidelines. Observing and commentating is no substitute for actual engagement with the cause. Educate ,agitate and organise is as relevant a dictum today as it was in Keir Hardie’s time.That’s what the SNP has been doing in my time. Of course it’s not perfect. No human organisation can be. But one thing I can be damn sure about is there would be no independence movement without the SNP.

    1. Hi Adam – I don’t apologise for sharing feelings of despair – we all have them (I think) – nor for being buoyed by recent polls. I remain s supporter of no political party and will be critical of the SNP or any other political party. Credit where credit is due. That’s what journalists do.

    2. dave. says:

      Well Adam, you better check your facts. There would be independence if Alex Salmond was leading the party as he already forced one referendum. As an ex Sturgeon SNP er I’m dammed sure that with Sturgeon’s SNP there will never be independence. Please post Sturgeon’s accomplishments towards Indy. Just one to start.

      1. Me Bungo Pony says:

        What were Salmond’s achievements towards independence? He had a referendum forced on him by a Tory PM calling his bluff …. and lost it. Salmond didn’t want a referendum until 2017 at the earliest. Sorry, but Salmond is a busted flush. He deserted the ship after the referendum, lost his seat at WM and fast became the most unpopular politician in Scotland. He could not possibly have delivered independence at any point in his career.

  10. Alan Bissett says:

    Bang on, Mike.

  11. dave. says:

    Hullo Mike. The 56% to Unionist Sturgeon’s S.N.P. means nothing for independence. We’ve been there before and were told by that same Sturgeon ‘ this is not the time’. I find it difficult to believe that the 56% is being lauded as an increase for independence by the Sturgeon S.N.P. followers. It simply is not going to happen. The ‘leadership’ change at Westminster also means nothing for independence. Sturgeon’s dictatorship will never allow any strong ‘stand up for Scotland’ by her S.N.P. MP’s. Her current de facto tactic simply delays for another 2 years and we all know will be rejected by Westminster. Here is what should be said Vote for British Sturgeon and live as your are, a poor colony of England. She recently warned that the Scottish NHS may not be sustainable because of a lack of cash. Well of course there is. Why? Because she made it that way by keeping Scotland only receiving the pathetic small amount of money from the British Gov’t through Westminster’s Barnett Formula as billions of Scottish money is collected by Westminster and stays in England. Sturgeon is not the leader of the Independence movement.
    If we do not get behind ALBA and ISP the true leaders of independence now we will waste the opportunity to be independently wealthy and run our own affairs. If any poster disagrees with that then please advise all Bella Caledonia posters of what Sturgeon has done for independence in the last going on 9 years. Just one will do to start.

    1. James Dow says:

      Dave, Nichola has never stated that she is the leader of the independence movement, however she does lead the largest party whose stated aim is to restore Scotlands Sovereignty. Some people within all the political parties support independence. As for the Labour Party they seem to have forgotten that their very existence was brought about by one of Scotlands finest sons Keir Hardie through his desire for Home Rule. Perhaps the Scottish Labour Party should change their name to the Scottish Betrayal Party, an honest reflection of their true status. They have obviously lost all awareness of the Scottish psyche.
      Labour Pains
      Scots are loyal never betray their trust
      For you’ll never return before you are dust
      James Dow.

    2. Wul says:

      Dave, you said:
      “…Unionist Sturgeon’s…” The leader of the party promoting Scottish independence is a unionist? Eh? Whit?

      “…Sturgeon’s dictatorship…” She is the leader of a democratically elected political party. You do know what a dictator is, don’t you?

      Posting counterfactual bile like this just marks you out as someone unhinged from the real world. You are wasting time and energy criticising the SNP and insulting those who vote for it. How is that helpful? Your time would be better spent making the case for independence, especially to soft “No’s”. (If you can do that without insulting them, in which case don’t engage.

      Remember that the SNP are the party in charge of actually governing Scotland day to day. They govern for all the “No” voters and unionists too. You can’t expect them to behave like a campaigning opposition movement. It’s not what they are.

      Best to direct your energies in a positive way, rather than endless attacks on one woman politician. It’s not a good look and is very unlikely to attract people to the party who’s cause you promote.

      1. dave. says:

        Wul. Please give one example of how British Sturgeon has contributed our independence over the las t nine years. You resort to insults instead. You and others are still confusing voting for Sturgeon’s vision of Scotland being ‘always part of Britain’ as she has stated with Independence. You are comparing apples to oranges. I wait for your examples…If you mean begging to Westminster and asking the English Supreme Court to rule under English law then just say so. Or is it that you are afraid to wake up to reality.

      2. JP58 says:

        I am afraid you are wasting effort with Dave posting a reasonable view.
        Dave is probably more upset that recent polls show high support for SNP and especially Nicola Sturgeon than the SC ruling.
        The polls show that Alba continue to have minimal support and Alex Salmond continues to be very unpopular regardless of how much he has contributed to independence movement over the years.
        I am afraid to many,Dave and similar correspondents appear to have gone down a rabbit hole where they are the true believers and only they know how to achieve independence. To describe Sturgeon as a Unionist is a bizarre accusation that will have >99% of population shaking their head in disbelief.The problem they have is that their obvious bitterness is very counterproductive to the case of independence as to the vast majority of Scots they appear stereotypical rabid nationalist who would alienate many from independence cause. I fully expect that when independence is achieved Dave and his type will be complaining it is not the true, pure independence- a bit like some Brexiteers with a bit of Life of Brian Peoples Front of Judea thrown in.
        The SNP are not wonderful and many of us who have never been members of any political party now vote for them primarily because they are still the best (only?) political party to ultimately achieve independence via.
        You are absolutely right when you say that all our energies should be concentrated on making the positive case for independence as the SC ruling has made many Scot’s more willing to listen to the independence case now.

          1. dave says:

            Hullo B.C. Editor. I am not sure what your AMEN to JP58 means. JP58’s last paragraph says we should be concentrated on making the positive case for independence as the SC ruling has made many more Scots more willing to listen to the independence case now. The case for independence has been made already as Scotland is a sovereign country and therefore the SG (Sturgeon) only has to declare it. So she now is working on her 2024 de facto project which once again is only for England’s permission to hold a referendum and we all know that will be refused.
            It is Alba’s ‘stand up for Scotland’s Independence at Westminster which has pushed the yes to 56%. The electorate in Scotland have seen what about 1 & 1/2 years of 2 Alba MP’s can stir up while Sturgeon’s MP’s just sit accepting insults and being laughed at by the English MPs. Nine years of absolutely nothing will now increase by another 2 years or so. under Sturgeon then what? JP58 agrees with Sturgeon. How can anyone claim to be an independence supporter and accept more delays? Could they themselves be unionists?

          2. “It is Alba’s ‘stand up for Scotland’s Independence at Westminster which has pushed the yes to 56%.”

            Dave, have a wee lie down mate.

          3. dave. says:

            Ah dinnae need a wee lie doon bit thanks. I’m not against the S.N.P. party but as their ‘media’ the National said ” Nicola Sturgeon is in complete control” right after the Westminster change. I have asked all the posters for examples of Sturgeon’s push for independence and as always they can’t give even one. Perhaps you can Mike. I can give a page full of things Sturgeon has done to the detriment of independence. I was an S.N.P.er up until a few years ago when it became painfully obvious that Sturgeon was a unionist which later she herself stated that she is British and Scotland would always be part of Britain which we all know is England. A Brit leading the break-up of Britain? I will vote for the party
            which will deliver independence and that is Alba. Please advise how Sturgeon will do that with her de facto 2024 begging to Westminster tactic for permission to hold a referendum which will be refused as we all know.

          4. In the 2022 Scottish local elections Alba received 0.7% of first preference votes, in the 2021 Scottish Parliament election the party failed to win any seats in the election, after attracting only 1.7% of the vote. How does that voting record suggest it’s a force for significant change?

            Were the votes rigged? Is the storm coming soon?

          5. dave. says:

            I don’t know if the votes were rigged or not. It depends on who ran them. I will say this about Alba and the IPS, they get no coverage from the self-called Scottish ‘ Only independence National Media ‘. This National media is majority owned by the same English-owned, anti- Scottish Glasgow Herald. To top that off their board of directors are ex Board of the BBC directors. These directors switch back and forth. The National, Sturgeons S.N.P. and Business in Scotland have an alliance. All 3 have the same message: Criticize the English (British) Gov’t and their policies but never ever
            mention Scotland’s enormous wealth or demand a declaration of independence. Also never touch the fact that Scotland is a sovereign country with its own laws while Sturgeon only quotes English law. So the SG gov’t runs Scotland under English law. Let’s not forget it is Sturgeon who went begging to the British gov’t and ESC for permission to hold a referendum. So why on earth would any true independence-minded person vote for her? A vote for Sturgeon is a vote for her policy of keeping Scotland an English colony. How can it be anything more? At Westminster 2 Alba MPs have stood up for Scotland. How many Sturgeon S.N.P. MPs have ? Zero. So if we compare the all the Scottish Westminster MPs based on the number of votes then the S.N.P. MPs should have been standing up at least once in 9 years.
            The truth is they have done nothing. They don’t even question the ridiculous GERS numbers.

          6. You don’t know if the votes were rigged?

          7. SleepingDog says:

            @dave, so what is the Alba Party’s own assessment of its impact on Scottish politics? I had a look on their website, perhaps it isn’t finished yet (the Events page was empty, for a start). I do agree with some of their platform, like abolishing the monarchy.

            Alba’s National Council seems to be pretty happy with at least two initiatives from the First Minister and the Scottish Government:
            “National Council welcomes that the First Minister has recently launched the Scottish Government’s new Scottish independence campaign and that the Constitutional Secretary has confirmed that the referendum will be held in the month of October in 2023.
            “Council welcomes that the Scottish Government will publish a series of documents proclaiming the case for independence but it is also crucial that the SNP/Green Coalition Government articulate a clear pathway and timetable towards Scottish Government’s Vow to hold an independence referendum in 2023.”

            BTW, has anyone looked at the Alba Pairty page on Scots Wikipedia? I didn’t know that ‘pro-unthirldom’ was a term for pro-Independence until I did.

          8. dave. says:

            Thank you SleepingDog for your post. With reference to the Alba National Council being happy with Sturgeon’s (S.G.)recently launched new campaign referendum I draw your attention to the following header: Please scroll down to ‘ THEREFORE the NATIONAL RESOLVES.
            1) Calls on the SG-Sturgeon to explain the strategy by which they intend to bend Westminster to the will of the S.G. to agree to a referendum or spell out another way of asserting the sovereignty of the Scottish people.
            2) Name the actual day in October 2023 when the referendum will be held.
            3) Commits Alba to work alongside with all pro-independence parties and groups.
            Because of Alba’s “standing up for Scotland” is so strong, after only a year or so, the around 50% of undecided Scots have noticed that there is no Indy forward movement in 9 years under Sturgeon. Now SleepingDog do you really think that Sturgeon’s new campaign will ever see the light of day? Point number 1 above forces Sturgeon to explain what her new campaign is. Apart from de facto in 2023 which is another begging programme to Westminster for permission to hold a referendum what other campaign does she have?

  12. John Robertson says:

    First, the idea of a “golden thread of competence” – ie the idea that a nationalist government can ‘prove itself’ as a prefigurative testing ground to win over sceptics has fallen flat. The crowd of critics of the SNP’s time in office is now a deep throng. They can be found on the left and the right and in the middle, inside the party and beyond it.’

    Really? The empirical evidence? Not in the polls. Deep Throng? A handful of social media activists or the latest porn film?

    1. I think its fair to say there’s a fair amount of criticism of the SNP. That’s not really debateable is it?

  13. SleepingDog says:

    @James Dow, planning a series of colonial wars, are you?

  14. Iain Macphail says:

    An excellent precis.
    The only thing I’d have added (and I’d acknowledge the article is probably stronger for its absence) is how counter-productive it has been for social media algorithms to allegedly flood people’s timeliness with These Islands nut-jobs & the Real Stephen Kerrs and Anas Sarwars of this world.
    When they speak, a Don’t Know decides to vote Yes (it would seem)

  15. dave says:

    JP58 & Wul. Please post just one initiative for our independence from Sturgeon. I requested that before but you resorted to insults as you tried to deflect all posters away from your inability to provide even one. The 56% has nothing to do with Sturgeon but because of Alba’s continued push for our independence at Westminster which is being noticed by many more true independistas. The efforts of 2 Alba MPs for independence against all other British MPs including Sturgeon’s S.N.P.s is noticed. Sturgeon’s S.N.P.s have never backed Alba’s efforts in fact the opposite. As for your deliberate attempt saying ‘ keep voting for Sturgeon’, you might as well throw in the 3 English Branch supervisors at Holyrood. After all, Sturgeon does recognize them as her equals while ignoring the 2 legitimate independence parties Alba and IPS. Or could it be that both you, JP58 and Wul, are unionists and you both know that Sturgeon is as well? Your attacks against anyone who is a true Independent supporter of Alba and IPS does indicate that.

  16. dave. says:

    Hullo Mike Small. The header ‘ S.N.P. to give Power to Holyrood the 2nd Indy referendum Blocked by MPs by 265 to 42 ‘ is in the National media to-day. It seems to be a surprise to the S.N.P. supporters easily identified by their humble posts in the National. Another waste of Independence time and really just another Sturgeon beg disguised as a strong stand-up for Scotland which it is not. But that is Sturgeon’s deception to keep her in Holyrood and Scotland to stay as an English colony ruled by British aristocrats in London.
    42 MPs cannot outvote 265 MPs. Scotland is a sovereign nation and only has to declare independence however Sturgeon only quotes English law and is able to con her supporters into accepting English law. She never quotes Scottish Law and blacks it out just like Scotland’s tremendous wealth and resources.

  17. James Dow says:

    Who would have thought that in less than one lifetime the only things left that might be considered distinctively English would be the Royal Family and the Rolling Stones.

Help keep our journalism independent

We don’t take any advertising, we don’t hide behind a pay wall and we don’t keep harassing you for crowd-funding. We’re entirely dependent on our readers to support us.

Subscribe to regular bella in your inbox

Don’t miss a single article. Enter your email address on our subscribe page by clicking the button below. It is completely free and you can easily unsubscribe at any time.