AT long last, a letter in The National (Nov 4, from Andy Anderson in Ardrossan) that covers the misdirection of those – and there are many of them – who believe the nonsensical claims, often repeated in political discourse, that Scotland needs to negotiate its way towards independence. The fact is that the Scottish people are sovereign and consequently no negotiation is required with anyone else, including England, on our journey to that goal.

This matter was partially dealt with in my letter to The National on September 20 under the heading “Dissolution of treaty must come before any negotiations”. Just imagine, if you can, the nightmare of a Scotland trying to negotiate its independence from England with the current treaty still in place. Everything to Scotland’s advantage would quickly be turned to England’s by the English government’s instant creation of new laws, like the Internal Market Act of 2020, which restricts the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament, and everything to England’s advantage would be magnified without any need for recourse to their parliament.

READ MORE: I’m proud of Scotland – but we could be so much better

There will be a need for Scotland to negotiate with other foreign countries, including England, but dissolution of the Union must take precedence. The UK Supreme Court (UKSC) stated the following in 2016: “When the UK Supreme Court has to speak of UK constitutional law it enters perilous waters because of the two constitutional narratives and traditions to which the UK is heir – the English historical myth emphasising the sovereignty of the governing institutions of the state (the Crown and the Crown in Parliament) and an unbroken continuity since Magna Carta in 1215 CE, and the Scottish tradition, since at least the Declaration of Arbroath of 1320 CE, of the sovereignty of the people limiting the powers and rights of the Crown (and Parliaments) – may pull in different directions, but yet have to be reconciled if this union polity is to survive.”

As it takes two to tango, there has been no sign of reconciliation so far. The current and previous Westminster policy is to keep a wealthy Scotland poorer than it should be and deny its parliament any opportunity to make things better by misappropriating its God-given assets.

READ MORE: A vote for the SNP should be a vote to rescind the Treaty of Union

The UKSC also recognises that before the Union, Scotland put into place “measures intended to protect – and indeed to strengthen – other aspects of Scotland’s distinctive continuing nationhood.” Among those was embedding its Claim of Right in the articles of the Union, and that was successfully done and ratified by the English Parliament in 1707. So according to the Treaty the Scottish people are sovereign, and yet England managed to superimpose its parliamentary sovereignty over Scotland and Lord Reed, president of the UKSC, backed that and stated in 2022 that England had sovereignty over Scotland. It may have, but that is because of a blatant breach of an international treaty, and international law is entirely different to domestic law.

That is where Salvo comes into play. Salvo is a non-political organisation with the main aim of restoring Scotland’s constitution and it is free to join. If necessary, they are quite prepared to go to the International Court of Justice in The Hague with a list of flagrant breaches by English governments of the international Treaty of Union between Scotland and England of 1706/7. The UK Supreme Court is a domestic court and international treaties are beyond their competence so they can have no part in that. The restitution of Scotland’s constitutional law can have a large part to play in Scotland’s road to independence. Please go to to learn more.

Bruce Moglia
via email

I WOULD like to thank Andy Anderson for his comments on my use of the word “negotiate” in my earlier letter and wish to assure him that I in no way intended to mean negotiate to be allowed our independence. Nothing will shake my belief in our sovereign right to take it, but sadly, there are still some to be persuaded.

My use of the word referred to the need, after gaining independence, to agree terms on a variety of matters, such as a justifiable demand for restitution of at least some of the oil wealth stolen from Scottish waters over the years. 

READ MORE: UK Government to brand those 'undermining' Britain as 'extremists'

As I probably have a limited time at my age to see independence, I at least want to know that my children and grandchildren will enjoy and benefit from it. Nothing would please me more than to see our FM tomorrow present documentation to the UN of all the instances where Westminster has contravened the legal terms of the 1707 Treaty and ask them to declare it null and void and to recognise Scotland as an independent country. Only one of the possible routes, I believe, towards exercising our sovereignty.

I must add that I look forward to Mr Anderson’s letters and normally agree with almost all he writes and am sure we could have some interesting discussions if we met.

P Davidson

HOW interesting this week to hear Kezia Dugdale, former Leader of Scottish Labour in the Scottish Parliament and now director of the John Smith Centre at the University of Glasgow, pontificating about the need for better standards in public life.

READ MORE: STUC ‘open’ to taking part in constitutional convention

This is quite audacious on her part considering that while she was a well-paid MSP her duties were not sufficiently onerous to prevent her taking part in I’m A Celebrity and earning her a sizeable sum of money, later admitting that while she donated some to charity that she used the remainder to help her buy a property.

Some of us do not have short memories. John Smith must be birling in his grave. Political integrity has to be earned.

Jim Park