I HAVE been reading and thinking about what comes next in terms of where we can go to gain Scottish independence. I am afraid we are at the end of any democratic means of gaining the right to hold a referendum on ending the Union.
Would collapsing Holyrood and having another majority for independence elected achieve any different result?
There are a majority of MPs from Scottish seats mandated to make the referendum happen. According to Margaret Thatcher that is all that is required.
There is already a majority at Holyrood mandated to hold a referendum on ending the Union who represent the “considered will” of the people of Scotland.
READ MORE: Michael Russell: Douglas Ross wants to destroy the Scottish Parliament from within
Westminster can simply ignore this and it is, at every turn, so what will another “democratic mandate for a referendum” change? Nothing.
I think Stephen Flynn and Mhairi Black are a breath of fresh air, but again they will change nothing because Westminster cannot afford to let Scotland go, given the collapse of the jewel in their crown “The City of London” which is losing status, trading volumes and investments on a daily basis. Then there is the economy-killer that is Brexit. So why would a Sunak or a Starmer cut their own political throat by sanctioning a Scottish referendum on the future of the Union?
The only option left is civil disobedience. There is no democracy for Scotland in Westminster, so democratic methods have no traction. The Westminster denial of a democratic resolution heads only one way: to frustration, disorder and then violence.
The boss of Police Scotland has pointed out to politicians that his future concern was for events heading down this route coupled with general anti-poverty and anti-UK Government protests. Folk seemed surprised he actually said it, and the usual Unionist media tried to downplay his comments and blame the SNP’s “separatist agenda” for the rising anger at Westminster.
So what have we left in terms of gaining a democratic solution?
READ MORE: 'Scots should be affronted’: Anger as Lords can run for Holyrood
Appeals to the Council of Europe or the UN to get them to pressure Westminster into delivering a referendum on Scottish independence that Westminster increasingly know they are going to lose?
Or do we simply keep on stamping our democratic feet and saying “it’s naw fair, gies a break, pal” while Westminster laughs up its sleeve at us?
This only leaves Scotland with the nuclear option: UDI. It is the only way left, yet any discussion on this option will get no air time at the “special conference” and be excluded from the agenda. The reality is we will only get an independent Scotland if we rip it from the grasping, choking, venal hands of the English Parliament at Westminster. Nicey nicey is not going to cut it.
Peter Thomson
Kirkcudbright
THE SNP’s independence strategy was formed on the day the party decided to become a fully functional political party instead of a single-objective movement.
Since then the SNP has been getting on with the day job and has now proved beyond reasonable doubt that the devolved Scottish branch of the Westminster Parliament is capable of governing Scotland.
In fact on the whole the Holyrood Parliament is delivering more and better services to the people than Westminster.
The SNP made the right decision; independence would never have come from the presentation of academic debates on the economy of a future Scotland by politicians, it will come when a significant proportion of the people decide that Scotland will continue to evolve into a country where they and their families can enjoy a better future than in the Union.
Recent election results and polls indicate that the day when there is a clear majority for Yes is fast approaching.
John Jamieson
South Queensferry
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel