MIA CONTINUES HER DEBATE WITH GRAEME.
Graeme I am going to be honest. Your comments are painful to read. They are not painful because they are difficult to rebut. They are painful because they are far too easy to rebut and at this point, I have no clue if you are actually writing your own mind or you are following aContinue reading "MIA CONTINUES HER DEBATE WITH GRAEME."
Graeme I am going to be honest. Your comments are painful to read. They are not painful because they are difficult to rebut. They are painful because they are far too easy to rebut and at this point, I have no clue if you are actually writing your own mind or you are following a party script to polish the image of a failed leader who has let down at every possible point. Failed at delivering democracy, failed at respecting the articles of the UN regarding right to self determination, failed to protect Scotland’s assets and rights, including here women’s rights, and failed to deliver the raison d’etre of the party she claims to lead when she was given every majority other pro-independence leaders could only dream of to deliver independence. Sturgeon’s tenure has been a massive and dissappointing failure and there is really not much you can say to erase that from clear view: 8 years of evidence are there in the open for everybody to see.
I see that you dive in and out of ad hominem as a way to discredit my arguments. I assume this is because you cannot tackle them head on. It shows, and believe me it does not give your argument any strength.
You claim I ” bring legal meaning to the vow”. Yes, of course I do. This was promised to us during the purdah period of indyref by every single radio and broadcaster and by Gordon Brown himself. It was signed by the three main representatives of the executive: the PM, the deputy PM and the leader of HM opposition. Because if I do not accept it had some legal meaning, then the alternative I have to accept is that the British estate aka the executive, broadcasting, the crown, with the help of newspapers moguls and minions like Brown, have committed fraud. If I believe the vow has legal meaning, then I can just criticise Sturgeon for being completely useless at forcing them to deliver it. But if I believe they committed fraud, then what I would have to criticise her is for much, much worse, for starters, for allowing them to get away with fraud for 8 years despite Scotland giving her enough majorities to repeal the Treaty of Union 8 times over.
“Her declaration that the Scotland Act 2016 “ extended by an inch the powers of the Scottish Parliament “ is just daft”
True. It was daft from me to say that. I said it extended the powers of the Scottish Parliament by “an inch”. I retract that. It did not extend the powers of the Scottish Parliament at all. Why? Because power devolved is power retained. At all effects, what that act has extended is the illusion of power and the administration of those powers, but not the ownership of them.
And that is what I cannot possibly accept. Those powers are Scotland’s powers, not England’s. Yet devolution somewhat transfers Scotland’s powers into England’s ownership. The proof is how the power of controlling the fishing waters, which was devolved to Holyrood and should come back straight to Holyrood after we exited the EU, went to England MPs instead on their own decision. That is in my view theft, nothing less. But that is the meaning of devolution, so the inch that was extended to Holyrood with that power, was very quickly taken away. And by the way, that theft happened under Sturgeon’s watch and she didn’t even bother lifting a finger to stop it, despite having an absolute majority of MPs. If they are Scotland’s powers, legitimately they must lie on Scotland’s MPs, not England’s ones. Therefore there is nothing stopping Scotland’s MPs renouncing to those powers and sending them to Holyrood in perpetuity. So why hasn’t that happened? Because Nicola Sturgeon and her version of the SNP have no interest in Holyrood gaining powers. They appear to prefer England MPs to exercise Scotland’s powers.
But let’s return to the main point of the discussion:
Who achieved those devolved powers? You claimed it was Sturgeon. I say those devolved powers might have been delivered during her tenure, but were achieved by the actions of her predecesor. There is not a single extra devolved power delivered to Holryood that can be attributed to Sturgeon’s good management of the SNP majorities she was entrusted with.
“Here is a wee list of them”
You can list a thousand powers. It will not change anything:
a) those powers are devolved, ergo not “owned” by Holryood
b) it was not Sturgeon’s good management of the SNP and strategic ability who achieved them. It was Salmond’s . An example of Sturgeon’s mismanagement of the majorities and atrocious strategic ability is the loss of the power about the fishing waters and every other major power she lost us.
c) There has been a consideration of devolving the broadcasting powers to Scotland’s parliament since the 70’s. 8 years of majorities and Sturgeon has not even managed to get that power.
By the way, what does “devolving the crown state in Scotland”?
The crown, through its COPFS arm continues to control the government of Scotland, both by sitting in the cabinet, despite the lord advocate having not been elected by the people of Scotland to represent us in government, and by interacting directly with the UK civil service operating within the “Sgov”. In fact, it was the combination of the COPFS and the UK civil service who actively worked together to frustrate a parliamentary inquiry with the aim to suppress information of fundamental public importance, from the eyes of the public. So, via the COPFS and the UK civil service, the crown appears to control not only the Sgov but also Scotland’s parliament. A case in point is how STurgeon has surrendering our right to bring bills to Holyrood by handing to the crown, in the form of the head of the COPFS, the lady Advocate, the power to decide if the bill for the referendum should be brought to Holyrood or not. We all know this strategy is a delaying tactic. The question is what are they waiting for to happen. Would it be that new constitution Scot mentions below?
When exactly did the people of Scotland nominated COPFS to walk over our democratic rights and hand over to England judges the decision if our bills should be passed in OUR parliament or not?
What is most fascinating is that England and the UK have “separation of powers”. This is from a document that can be accessed from the supreme court website (title of the document: “Separation of powers worksheet for teachers”):
“What is the separation of powers?
The doctrine of the separation of powers requires that the principal institutions of state—
executive, legislature and judiciary—should be clearly divided in order to safeguard citizens’ liberties and guard against tyranny.”
“According to a strict interpretation of the separation of powers, none of the three branches may exercise the power of the other, nor should any person be a member of any two of the branches.1 By creating separate institutions it is possible to have a system of checks
and balances between them”
Clearly, when Westminster designed Holyood’s parliament it deliberately left those powers united, perhaps because “safeguarding citizen’s liberties and guarding against its own tyranny” was never the objective. By putting the Lord Advocate right in the cabinet and by allowing this continuous connection between the COPFS and the civil service of her government, it seems STurgeon’s main aim is not safeguarding our liberties and protecting us from tyranny either.
“For each of the three branches, name the main organisations or bodies considered
part of that branch
In the UK, the executive comprises the Crown and the Government, including the Prime
Minister and Cabinet ministers.
The legislature; Parliament, comprises the Crown, the House of Commons and the House of
The judiciary comprises the judges in the courts of law, those who hold judicial office in
tribunals and the lay magistrates who staff the magistrates’ courts”
So, from the above, it seems that the Crown is stuck in both the executive power and the legislative power. But because the judges are appointed by the crown as well, it seems the crown is stuck in everything. That does not look much like a monarchy with very limited powers, does it? So let me ask you again, what exactly has the crown devolved to Scotland?
You also talk about devolution of police. Well, how does that work when you have one the crown’s arms the COPFS, dictating Scotland’s police who to investigate so they can prosecute afterwards, when the procedure should be the other way round? Wasn’t that what happened with Mr Salmond?
“Of course they don’t include all the powers of an independent state as I campaign for”
Graeme, those Acts do not include ANY of the powers of an independent state. Those acts “lend” Holryood “the use” of a power, not the ownership. An independent state OWNS its powers, does not lend them from somebody else.
“they are inconsequential just doesn’t bear independent scrutiny”
It may not bear YOUR scrutiny because you seem to have a strange fondness for devolution. I loath devolution because it is both, a way to deny us the powers that belong to us and a way for England MPs to self-award themselves ownership of Scotland’s own powers. For as long as those powers are retained in Westminster, they are inconsequential because the only thing our representatives are doing here is to “administer” them, not exercising them.
“While recognising the steps the SG has taken to use some of these powers to mitigate the worst effects of Westminster rule”
Can you not see the problem with this?
Why should Sturgeon and the SNP waste 8 years of our time and assets by “mitigating” the damage inflicted by a foreign government when they could have STOPPED that damage by repealing the treaty of union?
You are trying to justify the unjustifiable, Graeme. You are trying to justify Sturgeon’s appalling waste of majorities, time and resources preserving Westminter’s perceived supremacy over Scotland for 8 years instead of terminating it.
“Using my model Devolution”
Your model of “devolution”, Graeme? We have sent continuous majorities of anti-union MPs for 8 years and all what you aspire is “a model of devolution”? Forgive me but I have to ask: are you really seeking independence as a goal, Graeme or just the feel you can be seen as pursuing Scotland’s independence forever?
“The 2016 Act created the opportunity to offer these significant increases”
The majority of SNP MPs in 2015 created the opportunity to terminate the treaty of union and rid for once and for all of the toxic rule from Westminster.
“I suspect that is something the negotiators for the Union and Independence haven’t realised yet”
Do we have any “negotiators” for independence at present? It is hard to believe after watching the SNP and Sturgeon wasting us 8 years of possibilities to repeal the treaty of union, don’t you think?
MIA and Graeme are both strong Independence supporters but with very different views on the way forward. Graeme is ultra loyal to the SNP Leadership. For the life of me I find this very hard to understand. Graeme has campaigned for years for the replacement of many taxes with a form of Annual Ground Rent. Anyone who has been at any of his presentations cannot fail to be impressed. In the last few years he has been a member of the SNP NEC but his ideas and plans have not been able to attract any support from the SNP Leadership or even get onto an agenda for Conference. I am glad that they are now in debate with on wider matters. Let’s see what develops.
I am, as always
Yours for Scotland
BEAT THE CENSORS
The purpose of this blog is to advance Scottish Independence. That requires honesty and fair reporting of events and opinions. Some pro SNP Indy sites have difficulty with that and seek to ban any blogger who dares to criticise the Party or its leader. As Yours for Scotland will not bend our principles and allow this attack on free speech to be successful we rely on our readership sharing and promoting our articles on a regular basis. This invalidates the attempts at censorship and ensures the truth gets out there. I thank you most sincerely for this important support.
Are available from the Home and Blog pages of this website. This ensures you are advised of every new article published on Yours for Scotland. Join the thousands already subscribed and be the first to get the news every day. You will be most welcome.
This site has never sought donations, indeed we have a £3 limit alongside a message further explaining that donations are not required. That has now changed as the costs of running this blog for 2022 have already been raised in donation, therefore for the remainder of this year all donations made to this site will be forwarded to Salvo to help them educate Scots on the 1689 Claim of Right. This is vital work and we must all do what we can to support it.
It is time to fight back! Attend YESTIVAL in Freedom Square in Glasgow on the rescheduled date of 8th October Let’s get the show back on the road.
JOIN THE SCOTTISH LIBERATION MOVEMENT
Sign up at Liberation.Scot. Check spam folder if verification message does not arrive within a couple of minutes.