ISN’T Nicola Sturgeon’s refusal to countenance a Plan B route to independence somewhat disingenuous? Doesn’t her position, in the absence of any alternative tactic, open up the possibility of a simple refusal by Westminster ending the independence drive? How can that possibly be right?

I understand her comparison with Catalonia, where a referendum without national government sanction couldn’t deliver independence, but can’t agree that such a referendum in Scotland wouldn’t win international recognition.

READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon: Plan B for indyref2 is unionist trap

I contend that Scotland is not Catalonia. It is a long-established nation in its own right which entered into a union with England and Wales to form the UK. We have an inalienable right to resile from that union should we decide to do so, and any peaceful method we choose to decide the issue, through General/Scottish Parliamentary election or referendum, would legitimise independence and assert our international right to it.

As for her telling Corbyn not to even pick up the phone to her without agreement of a Section 30 order, shouldn’t it now no longer be about a single Section 30 order? Rather, shouldn’t the imperative be to repeal Section 30 and settle the powers in Holyrood?

Jim Taylor