This Westminster Election IS Indyref2 352


An SNP Scottish majority at Westminster must result in a Declaration of Independence and that must be made clear to voters. Having tried to refuse Indyref2, Theresa May has arrogantly and opportunistically called a Westminster election. It is time to take advantage of her extreme hubris and use her own momentum to make her fall flat on her face.

Independence is obtained by international recognition by other states and not by any specified internal process. As I have stated repeatedly, the large majority of states, including EU states Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia and Croatia have achieved independence without a referendum as part of the process. Recognition by the UN General Assembly is what brings Independence. Nothing else.

Democratic legitimacy is important but a referendum is not the only way to gain it. Winning an election is a much more established way to gain democratic legitimacy. For Scotland’s MPs to declare Independence following a general election victory in Scotland would be to follow the path by which nations have normally gained Independence. I would prefer, after the June 8 election, a National Assembly to be called consisting of all Scotland’s national representatives – MPs, MSPs and MEPs to make the Declaration of Independence. But Scotland’s Westminster MPs could equally be convened in Edinburgh to do it.

This is a key moment for the SNP. There will never be a time of greater fluidity in the British state; now we must strike to break it up. The SNP can either play Theresa May’s game and fight a defensive election trying to save all those seats and accepting the parameters of the British state as defining the debate. Then if the SNP slips from 56 to 53 of Scotland’s 59 MPs the media will present it as a massive defeat.

Or we can seize this God-given moment and state boldly that a vote for the SNP is a vote for Independence, and campaign on that basis. A simple majority of Scottish MPs should be enough for a mandate – after all a simple majority of UK MPs is enough to give Theresa May vast powers to continue her arrogant style of rule.

We must stay ahead of the game. We must not fight on the enemy’s chosen ground. We can turn this election around and use it to gain our national freedom.


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments will be closed on April 30, 2017.

352 thoughts on “This Westminster Election IS Indyref2

1 2 3 4
  • Ba'al Zevul

    In which Sturgeon reveals herself to be merely a politician, like all the rest.

    Someone’s undoubtedly mentioned this already, but no time to read the previous two pages of no doubt highly original and constructive comments, lol…Sturgeon complains that May is putting the interests of the Tories ahead of those of the country. No argument with that – distasteful as the outcome will be, May wants to consolidate her position, and is justifiably leary of the fixed-term Parliament idiocy which no-one seems to have liked much anyway, and which itself was designed to consolidate Cameron’s position … https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/not-so-fixed-term-parliaments-act ..

    No argument at all. But putting 45% of the Scottish electorate’s (as yet unspecified) interests ahead of those of ‘the country’ isn’t so very different, is it? Particularly if we are – and we’re probably not – talking about the same ‘country’. I mean, if Sturgeon thinks putting the Tories’ interests ahead of the UK’s is so terrible, then what of putting the SNP’s interests ahead of the UK’s? And it’s still the UK, like it or not.

      • Ba'al Zevul

        I have given no advice to the Scots, constructive, original or otherwise. I’m merely pointing out that May is a pot and Sturgeon is a kettle, and both are chromically challenged. But isn’t ‘getting back into a box’ a wonderful description of Scottish independence in the EU?

    • Habbabkuk

      Very well said, Ba’al.

      Your post once again exposes as the foolishness and gullibilityof those who seem to think that SNP politicians belong to a higher moral order than the other politicians.

  • Andrew Nichols

    And true to form the media is campaigning solidly with the conservatives and supporting the Lib Dems as the Opposition. Sh..t they really are determined to squash any alternative.

    • giyane

      The Flip-Flops Dems might start as the opposition and end up being the shoe-horners of the Tories into power. Ne’er speak ill of the dead, IMHO.

      • Sharp Ears

        As they did in 2010. Never ever forgive them and that shallow little man Clegg for their collusion in putting into law the Tory plan for the destruction of our National Health Service.

  • giyane

    It must be spring, because today Corbyn’s Labour put out a tiny green shoot of policy on the news. Even the most redundant of rhododendrons is moved by nature in spring. The fact that the rhododendron was planted round the Green belt country estate of millionaire MP Indian colonel 150 years ago as a status symbol of power and wealth cannot stop it from putting out a new shoot.

    Maybe you think I’m being unfair to compare a political organisation which had its origins in social justice with what the Labour party has become under Blair Brown and Miliband. But the rhododendron had its roots in the slopes of the Himalayas. That vast and irrelevant ego-trip of social policy, Brown’s New Labour, culminated in the biggest, Tory wage-control policy ever, Working Tax Credit, the bed-rock of capitalist, Tory power. The state pays the workers a minimum wage so that the employers can rake in all the profits.

    Working Tax credit is a wage control policy that even swivel-eyed die-hards of Thatcherist bollocks have had to maintain, in spite of forcing disabled people into poverty, suicide and despair. Wages are so low compared with the expectations of managers that one is forced to enquire how these managers and other administrative functionaries spend their working hours. Making spreadsheets of projected growth of…. the sweat of far Eastern labour, holding meetings about ways to regulate under=paid UK workers, ticking boxes to save their necks or ‘due diligence’ and last but not least swanking around in brand new executive cars.

    If the Labour party has nothing to say on these matters, call in the bulldozers. There might be space on the foothills of the Himalayas for exotic flowers, but not here.

  • Hieroglyph

    So, the CPS may be prosecuting no fewer than 30 Tory MP’s, and Ms May decides to call a snap election?

    Move along now. Nothing to see here.

  • DavidH

    An admirably stand-up plan, Craig. If the SNP were a stand-up kind of party dedicated to independence and the best interests of the Scottish people.

    Unfortunately, the SNP have already been shown to be no such thing. They are politicians like any others, out for their own best interests and survival. This is why they had no interest at all in letting Craig anywhere near an elected position, and they’ve done nothing to fix things that have been under their control for many years like education and public housing in Scotland.

    This is something I’d like to read Craig’s opinion on: the SNP’s record while they’ve been in power on the nuts and bolts of making things work for the Scottish people, and their proposals for the future. I know Craig has some very practical and radical ideas of his own, but how does that compare with what the SNP have done, what they said they would do, and what they say they will do? Sure, “power” such as the SNP has had has been with all the strings attached from London, and nobody should believe without checking the UK media’s poor view on the SNP’s achievements. But still, you’d think there would be some shining examples of school policy, policing plans or housing projects that have really helped and would give a clue as to what the SNP, in an independent Scotland, could do for their people. Craig, I think your independent investigative skills and powers of analysis are called for on this one.

    • giyane

      The BBC makes sure we are aware of the scandal of shoddily built Scottish schools. It requires quite a lot of political corruption at the top to persuade an engineer to construct something which is unsafe, Fukushima being the most notorious example, and the Rover car.

    • Iain Stewart

      David, it is generally thought that the SNP would split into its natural component parts after obtaining home rule. So, to destroy the SNP, you should support independence.

      • DavidH

        @ Iain
        I’m not sure I want to destroy the SNP. I agree with Craig, they should stand firmly on their independence platform for this general election and it will, in effect, be IndyRef2. I also think they should make clearer what plans they have for after independence: what expertise they offer to do better for Scotland? what track record they have to support that? If they are just another bunch of self-interested politicians it makes little sense for the Scottish people to risk independence for more of the same. It they truly are people with ideals and a fresh vision it might be worth the plunge.

        • Alcyone

          Apparently they need not a month full of Mondays to figure out what the currency will be, but a year. I propose to mark these historic times, it should be called a Scottish Trump. The pence can stay.

        • stephy

          “If they are just another bunch of self – interested politicians it makes little sense for the Scottish people to risk independence…”
          Indy is about more than the SNP. Remember the quip about redecorating the new housr after you move in? The possibilities are endless, and how we choose to move forward will be decided by Scotland’s voters. Democracy.

  • Alcyone

    Craig, you sound desperate enough to want to ram things through raising my suspicions of a degree of intellectual dishonesty in citing varying examples.

    At *best* the support for independence is 50%, with the support of younger people, the future, likely being (much) less.

    Would a responsible Scot want to start afresh in a state of deep conflict? Isn’t that what you are inflicting on your own people by going on and on banging the table? Is that the way of so-called human-rights-activists? I’m tempted to observe, you are more of a former Ambassador than a human rights activist. Your blog here over the last year or two would likely measurably support that.

  • Sharp Ears

    War mongering from a self described ‘Christian’, Alistair Burt, yesterday. He recommended **the same mode of death for President Assad as was handed out to President Ghaddafi. Note that Johnson does not rule out an air attack. He is also a member of Conservative Friends of Israel.

    ‘Alistair Burt (North East Bedfordshire) (Con)
    I thank my right hon. Friend for his statement and for the tone with which he made it. One of the purposes of the American action the other day was, as it would have been in 2013, to demonstrate to President Assad that he cannot militarily subjugate all his people and, therefore, to give force to negotiations in which he will actually have to concede something. The difficult question is this: had the US Secretary of State asked my right hon. Friend for some sort of support that evening, what would have been his answer? Do he and the Government consider themselves bound by the decision of the House in August 2013 and David Cameron’s statement afterwards? If so, does he intend to return to the House to discuss the matter further? If not, what might the United Kingdom be able to do to demonstrate its force and resolve against such actions as those we saw from President Assad the other week?

    Boris Johnson
    As my right hon. Friend knows and as I said, we were not asked for specific support, but it is my belief—I stress that no such decision has yet been taken—that were such a request to be made in future and were it to be a reasonable request in pursuit of similar objectives, it would be very difficult for the United Kingdom to say no.’
    https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2017-04-18/debates/44BA2CB7-F44F-4AA5-9E80-861781949F82/SyriaAndNorthKorea

    **
    ‘Burt insisted the British government “knew exactly what would happen if there was not a strike against Assad over chemical weapons. He goes on. And the only thing that would deflect this man and this regime is if they fear they are going to end up in a storm drain with a bayonet up their backside. If they don’t fear that, they will go on killing as many people as they need to stay in power.”‘

    Alistair Burt reveals anger over Syria vote at Westminster
    Former minister says the decision to defy David Cameron on military action created a ‘constitutional mess’ https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/dec/30/alistair-burt-anger-syria-westminster

    Bloodthirsty.

    • Alcyone

      Burt shares with Assad the feature that they are a family business:

      “Burt married Eve Alexandra Twite in 1983 in Haringey. Eve works as the MP office manager for Alistair Burt. ”

      I wonder if he has to pay his wife outside the office too and whether she shares the same despicable imagination.

      • giyane

        Burt was , somewhat disgustingly, but in his mind no doubt not sinfully, fantasising about Gaddaffi’s fate, in public , in the House of Commons. Yes, they use parliament to waft the stench of their private deviances, while being paid to engage in political debate.

        If friend of Jimmy Savile Thatcher managed to in-learn the lesson of two world wars, that the UK has to treat its own citizens and also other countries with due respect in the space of one generation, why cannot Tory traitors to the UK forget the lessons about Blair and Iraq which prevented Cameron from attacking Syria in 2013, in one generation?

        With these completely depraved slaves to neo=conservatism, they never learned the lesson from any mistakes in the first place. They didn’t think Blair’s invasion of Iraq was a mistake. It after all destroyed Israel’s greatest challenger in the Middle East. Now we know why Mrs May has called an election, don’t let’s forget it. Boris Johnson is a venomous snake.

        • giyane

          Un-learn. I think this typo is in-built into the predictive text. I typed UN-LEARN which it changed to in-learn and I typed UN-BUILT on purpose, which it changed to in-built by itself.

  • Roy Moore

    Methinks the author is being carried away here, possibly on a combination of too much shortbread & single malt. The notion that UDI can be declared because Scotland returns a large majority of SNP MP’s is patently absurd. The author is suggesting HardIndy. A leap into the Really, No Really, Unknown. Scotland, like it or lump it, is, at present part of the UK. Only a majority vote in a legitimate, legal referendum can provide the route to independence, This is so basic, it should not have to made clear to anyone with any interest in the subject. Any serious attempt to follow the roadmap the author suggests is counter productive, provides plenty of ammo for the better together mob and would make Scotland the laughing stock of the international community. Rightly so.

    • Iain Stewart

      What is patently absurd to you, Roy, is perhaps not so obvious to all of us, particularly after reading the article itself and the various examples which it gives. Could you possibly explain further the utter ridiculousness of the idea, and dispel some of our foolishness and gullibility which Habbabkuk so tirelessly reveals?

      • Roy Moore

        For a kick off don’t get carried away by the number of SNP Mp’s. In the last UK general election, the SNP may have gained 95 percent of the seats but only 50 percent of Scots voted for them. Some of them voted for the SNP despite being against independence, never mind UDI. The idea of the author seems to depend on these guys “declaring independence” I don’t think many would risk their seats by printing that on their leaflets! He also calls for a “National Assembly” of Msp’s Mp’s & Mep’s. Who’s to say those of the other party’s would agree to take part? Are you going to go ahead without them? Way to go for a one party state. Ask Nicola Sturgeon about this idea. I’m sure she could demolish it far more competently than I ever could.
        But lets look at a scenario. Best outcome from the author’s perspective is lots of Snp Mp’s, and, at some point a Majority Snp government in Holyrood (unlikely) Then Udi declared as the article suggests. What then?
        Oh, yes, presuming we still live in a democracy, there will be at some point further elections to Holyrood. Imagine the chaos if anything other than a majority SNP government were to be elected. Who opposed Udi from the get go. No, it won’t do. There’d be more flip-flops than on a Benidorm beach in July. The referendum in 2014 has set a clear precedent. Anything else is the equivalent of a coup de tat. And I, as a supporter of Legitimate Independence for our country will have hee haw to do with it. It’s a fantasy. A poor one at at that. Want independence? Make the case & persuade the electorate. And stop handing out freebies like this to the Unionists. The MSM would have a field day with it.

        • giyane

          Roy Moore

          I like your phrase HardIndy because Craig has, like May with Brexit and the EU, postulated many ethical reasons for separating from UK foreign and domestic policy. But like May and her business opponents to her hard Brexit, we see little evidence from SNP MPs that they share or understand Craig’s ethical stance. If we saw some genuine opposition to neo-con or post Thatcherite policy from SNP MPs, it wouldn’t look so fluffy.

          Right now it looks to me as though this general election has been called in order to achieve a Fluffy Brexit, after Mrs May has deceived the racists and her own Tory nutters that she has tried her best to achieve a hard one. There is no place for racist nutters in UK politics, either in the Tory party or Ramsagate High Street. Politics is 20% posturing and 80% direct lies. Why should Indy politics be any different?

  • anon

    i have never been a member of a political party and only a few years ago viewed the idea of Scottish independence as “a nice idea” but it would never happen. I have nothing but huge admiration for the men and women (mainly of the SNP) who have managed to bring such an idea to the brink of happening…the effort to sustain and develop such a dream however I look at where we are and agree with your comments… surely there will never be a better opportunity to cross the finishing line but I ask…why do we play by Westminster’s rules and would simply comment as follows:
    ++ Mrs May will win a landslide and have no apologies for implementing her programme with anything from +37% of the vote
    ++ why why why not play the game…declare that it’s a waste of time and effort to have an election and then a referendum….now is the time!!
    ++ like Mrs May (changing the rules to suit her own position) this would mean fighting FOR INDEPENDENCE on a 1st past the post basis but….crucially
    ++ don’t do it as the SNP but as “the SNP / National Alliance” bring the Greens in and independence supporting Labour voters (as the UK right wing media destroy the Labour party over the campaign) and see if the Unionists could match that with an alternative offer of 15 years of hard right government
    ++ declare that after an interim period…2 years?? there would be fresh elections to a sovereign parliament where the voter can choose Tory / Labour / SNP etc. but…..GET THE JOB DONE
    ++ in the background can we secure EU recognition for the declaration after the legitimate election
    ++ the alternative is simply too laborious
    I am simply a layman but cannot see this as anything other than the best route and sadly I’m beginning to think the unthinkable that are the SNP now the establishment and happy to run Scotland as it is?? Although…I’m wondering if Ms Sturgeon is again playing Mrs May at her own game and will come out with something like this 2 weeks or so into the campaign i.e. have a change of heart and mind and realise she has to do this, change her mind, it’s been forced upon her to save the future of Scotland.
    Fingers crossed!

    • Papko

      “I am simply a layman but cannot see this as anything other than the best route and sadly I’m beginning to think the unthinkable that are the SNP now the establishment and happy to run Scotland as it is?? ”

      you may well be a layman, but your analysis is spot on.

  • Stephen Park

    Absolutely correct.SNP are doing us a disservice by compliance with the Tory agenda. That is the wrong way to run a rebellion…As far as I am concerned SNP already have the mandate. How much clearer do the Scottish people need to be to get it across to them?

  • Calum Carlyle

    Twenty years ago (1997), the SNP manifesto said the following (below). Do the SNP have any plans to include a similar commitment in their 2017 manifesto?
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~
    “Scotland can regain its independence at any General Election. After the election of a majority of SNP MPs, the SNP will immediately initiate negotiations for independence with the UK government. In parallel with these negotiations, we will initiate talks with the European Union in order to facilitate the right conditions for independent representation. At the conclusion of this period (which is likely to take between six and twelve months) the people of Scotland will be asked to approve the “independence settlement” in a simple one question referendum. On achieving the assent of the people of Scotland, independence will be declared and, after the formal establishment of an independent country within Europe, a fresh General Election will be held to elect a new government.”

  • kashmiri

    To be very honest, as much as I second Scotland’s independence with all my heart, I think this is a rather bad moment in history. In today’s situation, even if May brought the military to crush any dissent in Scotland, very few in England would blink their eyes. We are now having Hitler moment: there is a leader who takes people across a stormy ocean, and people long stopped questioning where they are going. Blind trust rules.

    I bet if you run a poll on how many in England and Wales would support using the military to secure unity of the Island, the percentage will be in high 70s.

1 2 3 4