A Guest Post by Alf Baird
Scots sickened by political party politics appear to have made an important decision: we hiv tae dae this oorsels. Thus is born the ‘Independents for Independence’ pathway tae leeberation. Nae mair daeless ‘national parties’ takkin us up endless blind alleys. Let’s get independence done oorsels!
But whit wad this look like?
A majority of ‘Independent for Independence’ MPs ‘duly elected’ by the people have no reason to go to Westminster. Their mandate is clear, the people will have spoken. They want independence FROM Westminster. So why go to Westminster?
Our duly elected national representatives should be tasked with finding a suitable room somewhere and to re-establish a Scottish Parliament there and then. Whaur shuid it be? In Scotland, of course. Daes it matter whaur? Mebbe aye, mebbe naw.
Mebbe it shuid be whaur wheens o Scots fowk can gaither ootside? Because Scots fowk will shuirly want tae gaither amang thairsels whan their naition is being re-born! And to laud an applaud oor leeberators.
After taking their oaths in Scotland tae serve anely the soverane fowk o Scotland, one of oor new pairlament’s first maitters o business would be to repeal the Act of Union with England, thereby makkin Scotland have its ain national soverane parliament agin. This would mean the UK Parliament cannae legislate in Scotland ony mair. UK rule wad be ower, feenished, past, ended, finito, and all done lawfully, democratically and, perhaps just as important, quickly.
This wad mak Scotland totally soverane an independent (again), an Scots fowk wad rejyce aw ower Scotland, an aw ower the warld tae for shuir! We might imagine crowded squares in aw Scottish touns an villages as oor auld naition begins to breathe and come alive again; let’s face it, hits been deein for ower chree hunner year!
Whit wad England dae? Sure, oor imperial neebour has options, and delusions still. But that’s a matter for them. The world would be watching, and listening. An Scots wad be watching tae. Whether they want to be a good neighbour or bad is not something Scots can do much about. But fowk will notice, ane wey or anither, whit thay dae, an hou thay dae it. Any nastiness on their part would only drive the desire for independence in one direction.
Whit wad aw oor institutions dae? Thon’s anither very important maitter. Their allegiance, reflecting democratic election results in favour of independence and ending the UK Union, must follow the wishes of the people, and the decisions of our elected national representatives.
The leaders of our institutions must therefore also take an oath of allegiance anely tae a soverane Scottish people. If thay cannae or winnae dae so, then they would need to be replaced by Scots willing to take the oath.
That’s quite a lot for Day 1 of independence. But we are not the first doun-hauden people to reclaim our stolen land and soveranety, and we winnae be the last. But do it we must. We hiv tae brak the colonial chains oorsels.
Sae lats get on an dae it noo, by supporting an ‘Independent for Independence’ candidate in ivery seat in the land!
Alf Says…A majority of ‘Independent for Independence’ MPs ‘duly elected’ by the people have no reason to go to Westminster. Their mandate is clear, the people will have spoken. They want independence FROM Westminster. So why go to Westminster?”
And this has always been my opinion, stand for WM, win the seat, but do NOT take it up…
Then I heard Sally on the prism and her idea of swearing her oath to Scotland. And I thought yes, that would work.. So I decided that instead of spoiling my ballot paper IF I got the chance to vote for an I4I I would vote for them.. Now I am agreeing with Alf.. What is the point of going to WM.. IF we win seats we are sending an even stronger message by NOT taking up those seats. That could be both #NOTMYPARLIAMEN & #ENDTHEUNION messages sent..
The key is in the majority of Indy for Indy elected.
Alf is correct
OR, GO to WM and swear your oath to Scotland and walk the hell out that same day never to return..Show the SNPers how it should be done..
Alf paints a very cheering picture. How I hope it comes to pass soon. But pending having a majority of Independents for Independence, I think Sally Hughes swearing an oath at Westminster to the sovereign Scots is a good move as it will draw attention from the Scottish people to their own power, especially if her oath is not accepted. Sally can have staff there to help constituents in the interregnum but not be otherwise engaged.
I agree, Sarah. I agree with Alf tae! LOL! I’m really switherin’ here because I agree that it seems REALLY daft to go to WM if that is the very Parliament we no longer see as our own. Why go there to follow rules we don’t agree with, to make law that has no bearing on Scots and in fact, isn’t legal in Scotland? Why support a Parliament that actually has nothing to do with Scotland? Unless… you’re only in it for the money, expenses, pension credits., portfolios, ministers’ positions etc.
But on the other hand, I love the idea of Sally’s, to take an oath to SCOTS ONLY. Yep, it is against WM rules, and you can be fined & made to stand down (I’m not sure how that works, given she’d have been elected by Scots, thus she Represents their wishes, so who can deny her position??) but then… nowhere in the Treaty does it say that we have to follow English ‘convention’ or ‘tradition’. It is not our monarchy (in fact it isn’t England’s monarchy either!) and thus, why would a Scots politician accept the archaic rule of touching their forelock to a foreign crown??
So would would happen if Sally won (oh, I do hope so!)? She’ll take it to Court. And I’d see that as one step along the ‘repeal the union’ road. Proving that she owes NO allegiance to an English crown, means pulling out the Treaty of Union from the dusty shelf & proving to a court of law that it is STILL a legitimate constitutional source, that the rules state clearly Scots are Sovereign & I believe many other parts of it will be thrust into the limelight that WM may not want to re-examine. But they’ll be forced to, if they wish to win their case. The trouble I see here is – Sally finding legal Counsel willing to run with this whole thing. Scots legal eagles don’t seem to have been encouraged to research how Scots laws came into being, what they mean & how they are applicable but simply to use the laws already written, already used and make their case based on the arguments of here & now, rather than past truths. I see Sally not being represented properly… BUT – taking it court would be a real game-changer, I believe.
Thank you, Alf. Sounds good to me……… Common sense, in fact!
I have no idea what form it will take Alf has laid out a few options in his inimitable style.. My mind falls instantly as he asked the question “what form would it take ?” Well in all the unknowns we know the one thing it will not be if it’s a government best suited to Scotlands needs because the only thing we know now is that it needs to be as opposite to Westminster as is humanly possible and that means turning the Scottish parliament out it’s own front door and getting rid of ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING of Westminster. These questions will have have.ro answered by higher intellects than I but even as ,I say that it also instantly removes the moribund SNP who have had the power all along to do this but have decided that it was better to fossilise their fat lazy arses to the seats of the gravy train . So this will require the much promised Constitutional Convention who can draw up clear wind ideas , drawing on the history of Scots pioneers and inventors and artists as well as a few industrial philanthropists allegedly. Unfortunately Scotland gave seen the exact opposite in my lifetime. We will have one chance at this to get it right so Scotland can be good for business but we should never again be hostage to billionaires living in Monaco and saving as much in unpaid tax as would keep our last colonial oil refinery open. Finally , there are so many nodes out of joint in Scotland this week it’s starting to look like the Knesset. So we don’t all agree on everything. In GMKs world we probably don’t agree on anything. NO matter how far we all fall out with each other WE NEED TO TALK TO GET THIS DONE. LETS DO IT
Reply to Dave Llewellen –
iagree with what you say regarding Westminster, but we also need to do differntly from the current Holyrood Parliament, set up by a Westminster Labour Government to keep us in our place, while stopping us grumbling about democracy. Weel, that hasnae wirked! We’re still here and aye no happy aboot the lack o a say in oor ain affairs, wi Lunnon still takin oor resources an failin oor folk wha havnae the siller tae pit meet in thir bellies nor tae heat thir hames.
We need a different system with members swearing an oath to Scotland rather than Charles III and perhaps a different system of voting rather than one that lets parties based in another country not just put up candidates but organise it so that a considerable number of them are elected from a list chosen by such parties and not by the electorate.
We also need a system to call our representatives to account if they try to pass laws the majority of us do not agree on and must be able to have elections at least every foiur years as was originally agreed.
I could carry on but that will do for openers. I am sure others can suggest more,
We should make a lot of noise in support of alfs message here. If we can rally folk to stand as i4i and get people rallied to vote for them then we have the foundations for the new Scotland that is in our hearts. Heck, i would even try to stand if this was the case
Short extract from the Declaration of a Sovereign Scot – would need amended for those seeking election to Westminster:
” … and demand that any Oath of Allegiance to be sought from, and given by, a potential Member of the Scottish Parliament recognises the Sovereignty of the Scottish People in the following terms: “By this oath, I acknowledge that if elected as a Member of the Scottish Parliament, it will be as a result of votes cast by Sovereign Scots, and I do solemnly swear and affirm that my allegiance is, and will remain, to the Sovereign people of Scotland.”
NB1: Would you vote for a ‘candidate’ – in advance of any election – who did not swear allegiance to the people of Scotland?
NB2: The full Declaration has already been signed by Scots from all over Scotland over the past 3 years and all signed Declarations conveyed to the HQ of the UN for safe-keeping
If that is the official Liberate Scotland ‘plan’ then it only confirms my low opinion of them. There is an inter-galactic void between this stuff and real-world politics. I almost wish there could be “majority of ‘Independent for Independence’ MPs ‘duly elected’” in 2029 (or whenever) so we could watch the farce unfold.
I’m not sure it’s worth taking the time to pick it all apart. But if anybody is taking it seriously then I will gladly do so.
Your opinion, like yourself is irrelevant. Keep howling at the moon.