It was, a absolute pleasure to chat with Angus this week. He was candid, open and extremely interesting guest. He, like me has little belief that an Independence Referendum will take place in 2023. We agreed there just has not been enough indeed, any preparatory work done to enable that to happen. He does not hold back or hide his belief in the need for a Plan B. We do not agree entirely on what that should exactly be however there is enough debate to allow you to make up your mind.
This, again shows that pro I dependence people can get together to discuss what is in Scotland’s best interests. While some small minded players only seem capable of hurling insults, Angus exemplifies what the adult and nature wing of the YES, Movement think United we are stronger!
Later I am joined by my two commentators, SNP’s Phil Boswell and Alba’s Iain Lawson. Again showing that adults can come from different parties and unite to support Scotland’s Independence. This cannot be stated often enough.
From Noon Sunday here is the link.
Dead duck leader Sturgeon needs removed. No vision No drive No comment.
As usual… left wanting more!
Scottish Budget: In the light of Graeme MacCormick’s proposals on AGRFF, would the underfunding of Local Government point to an opportunity to raise the alternatives to Council Tax, and move the debate to Scotland’s future. I’m sure the public would be better informed. Endless debate about indyref/plebiscite does not move us forward, however interesting.
Neil nothing including full implementation of AGRFF is possible without independence. The raison d’etre of Alba and ISP is independence. The same is supposed to apply to SNP. Ridding ourselves of the monarchy joining EFTA increasing pensions, unemployment abd sick pay. Eradicating poverty none of that can happen without independence. I am sorry you find the endless debate about independence so boring. As the opening sequence says ‘Everything we, say and everything we do is about Scottish independence and seen through a Scottish Prism.
Neil nothing including full implementation of AGRFF is possible without independence.
Roddy: AGFRR (my error) is a proposal that was passed by SNP Spring Conference in 2017 as party policy. Dereck MacKay referred it to the Scottish Land Comission (SLC), who comissioned a Reading University report, which has been delivered, but the SLC have so far not fully dealt with.
So this is a matter which could be progressed now, before independence. It has implications with Local Government reform in its importance as indicated by Graeme.
My intention in comment was exactly something the electorate might expect scotgov to do to improve Local Government.
As I said earlier it cannot be implemented in its entirety without independence.
Angus is correct about Holyrood being a Westminster agency, but in the beginning, just after Holyrood was set up, I think there was uncertainty about that, and a great deal of ambiguity and wriggle room.
For those who followed my argument on Wings, I advanced an argument that Scottish Sovereignty was “red” sovereignty because it came from the red blood of the people, while Westminster Parliamentary Sovereignty was “white”, because it was divine and from the heavens. I then asked the question whether Holyrood’s veins ran with red sovereignty, white sovereignty, combined “pink” sovereignty, or a raspberry ripple type of amalgamated sovereignty.
It wasn’t an academic argument. Yes, Holyrood quite obviously did engage with Westminster’s white sovereignty, and of course, Holyrood’s small “c” constitution was the essentially colonial 1998 Scotland Act, a Westminster Act of Parliament. – White sovereignty everywhere you look.
But! That wasn’t the end of the matter. The people delegated to serve Scotland’s interests within that “white” Holyrood Assembly, those people elected to hold a seat in it, had a covenant that came directly from the sovereign people. Westminster had no input to their candidacy or selection, so Scotland was left with the awkward paradox of a “white” institution staffed by “red” members. In other words, Holyrood was Westminster’s forum but it contained Scotland’s MSP’s. The Constitutional ambiguity was very real.
Thus, for 20 years, I believe everything was there to play for, in what should have been a Constitutional stalemate – red vs white. Had Scotland’s elected “red sovereignty” MSP’s steadfastly and resolutely defended Scotland’s Constitutional Sovereignty, I firmly believe it would have been the doctrine of Westminster’s white sovereignty which would have withered, through the fundamental weakness of it’s Constitutional doctrine.
Sadly however, or rather we should say disgracefully, the very reverse has happened. Under Sturgeon’s inept and Constitutionally illiterate regime, Scotland’s MSP’s have been utterly craven and spineless in defending Scotland’s Constitutional Sovereignty, and worse still, have actually capitulated and surrendered to Scotland’s wholly unconstitutional colonial subjugation through our forced Brexit. Utterly, utterly shameful.
The argument has thus been solved, and very dangerous precedents have been set which will now be very hard to reverse. Does Holyrood have red, white, pink or raspberry ripple sovereignty in it’s veins? Sturgeon has arbitrarily decided for us all that Holyrood is Westminster’s white Institution, subservient to Westminster rule, and Scotland’s red sovereignty has been left in the wilderness, totally abandoned.
What Sturgeon’s strategy of capitulation has done is to supplant Scotland’s ancient Constitutional Sovereignty asserted in the 1320 Declaration of Arbroath, and all subsequent reaffirmations of the Claim of Right, and replace Scotland’s rights as a sovereign Nation with the mickey mouse 1998 Scotland Act, the small “c” constitution of a devolved assembly.
Sturgeon has forfeited Scotland’s constitutional integrity as a sovereign nation, and replaced it with the Scotland Act “rule book” for Holyrood, which allows Scotland’s sovereign people to be subjugated by Westminster enjoying a Section 30 veto over Scottish democracy.
With just a little courage and backbone, Holyrood could have been our democratic route to sovereign Independence, but alas, with Sturgeon’s cowardice, feckless incompetence and fealty to Westminster, I believe it is now fitting that both Sturgeon and Holyrood should be impeached, and no longer considered as the defenders of Scotland’s Constitutional interests.
Until Scotland convenes a new Constitutional Grand Committee which sits outside both Holyrood and Westminster with pure red sovereignty running in it’s veins, and hopefully uses that platform to dissolve the Treaty of Union, then Scotland should consider itself as essentially being without a Scottish Government.
Sturgeon has simply wrecked the Holyrood vehicle, pulled it’s wheels off, and it is no longer any good to us.
I’m sorry to say, whenever I now hear a Scottish MP or MSP mention the word “referendum”, even an ALBA supporter, I fear their strategy is dangerously outdated and obsolete. We MUST have more faith in our Nation’s sovereign constitution and defend it robustly without compromise.
Breeks as usual I agree with you , but unfortunately it is not just sturgeon who has capitulated to WM , the snp are traitors to independence , but the other unionist parties are traitors to Scotland and Scots THEY are the ones who OPPOSED every proposal put forward in the 1998 Scotland act , THEY are the ones who have hobbled Scotland to THEIR WM
Sturgeon has and is FAILING us because she has NEVER challenged WM on anything , she has capitulated or embraced WM diktat , the ONLY thing she or her minions do is to WHINGE and MOAN not one of them apart from Jo Cherry has done ANYTHING to counteract or challenge WM sovereignty , she did it once , won , and then sat back down silent
I applauded Angus Brendan’s stance and outspoken views before but he is one voice talking against the tide and unless others break ranks amongst the messiah’s sycophants and cultists that will not change
Roddy put forward that there has been NO WORK done to convince undecideds or soft no’s to the benefits of independence which we have been saying for years yet Angus , maybe facetiously says maybe we will all be proved wrong about 2023 , and this to me is the nub of the matter , we all sit round while this narcissistic lunatic BAITS US with maybe 2023 or depending on covid , whilst all the while the unionists and their merry men create havoc and mayhem that frightens the shit out of any undecided or soft no thinking of independence and reinforces their better thegither pish
Perhaps a more sinister component in this bourach is the part played by Westminster, who have without question been much more astute and constitutionally adventurous in the way they have surreptitiously entrenched their colonial beachhead in Holyrood, forever tightening their colonial grip and reinforcing the Unionist doctrine of Westminster’s Convention of Parliamentary Sovereignty at every opportunity.
Scotland’s response to this colonial encroachment has been pedestrian, dim witted, and Constitutionally inept. That might find some excuse in Unionist Parties, but it’s surely inexcusable in the SNP.
Truth be known, I think there are fundamental elements of simply having a Holyrood “Parliament” at all, which have been Constitutionally dubious from the outset, and like the Union itself, these elements are simply irreconcilable beside the popular sovereignty of the Scottish people.
Many people who were very dubious about Devolution might yet be proved absolutely right. It is quite possible that the whole exercise in Holyrood Devolution has actually been a Trojan Horse which smuggled the doctrine of Westminster “sovereignty” inside Scotland’s defences… right down to us welcoming it with open arms.
It’s a glib thing to say perhaps, but sadly true. The first Nation which needs to extend International Recognition to Scotland’s Constitutional Sovereignty…. is Scotland. I see no prospect of that happening for as long as we’re barking up the Referendum tree, and especially the Holyrood Referendum tree and Section 30 of the Scotland Act. For a Sovereign Nation, that meek subservience is so dumb and parochial it’s just embarrassing.
To secure Scottish Independence, we need to wise up and stop playing the game like amateurs, and start acting like we actually ARE a sovereign people.
O/T Roddy.
We’re running out of time.
https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2021/12/12/this-is-scary-very-scary/comment-page-1/#comment-22972
What a real pleasure to hear Angus speak. All very reasonable… Except the bit about ALBA being responsible for being democratically ignored during May.
There were press releases. There were complaints. There were appeals.
The state would not tolerate the very real prospect of a Super majority.
That wasn’t ALBA’ failing. It was Scotland’s.
Other than that, enjoyed his every word. And the Gaelic lilt.
Respect.
We try to bring you interesting guests and topics. Glad to hear you enjoyed it
Thanks for today’s Scottish Prism.
I’d love for all of Scotland to be independent again tomorrow, but I agree 2024 would be the next realistic timescale, what with the way political cycles usually work and travel. We’re almost finished 2021… 2022 will be promoted as the ‘year of recovery’ by politicians and the press and when 2023 comes and goes and no further progress made or sign(s) of indy… it will be better for a challenging party to have had such a plan in place for when that time comes to pass.
’24 follows ’23… and the longer 23 is put off by the serving FM, the closer it gets to “Scotland24”.
We need to reconvene the Councillors for and of Alba’s Scotland.
#indyscotvote2024
The Independence movement will unite very quickly once we have a true “leader”. It may or may not be from a political Party. It could be a new Jimmy Reid or a new movement yet unborn.
The trigger will be the Sturgeon’s Cult tyranny. I am confident Scots will call enough is enough at some point.
I look back at how Labour collapsed. It was very quick in political timescales and people will not go back to those cretins.
Unfortunately it my take another few years to happen but it WILL happen.
The People are Sovereign and will demand better than what we have.
However time is NOT on our side and Sturgeon has wasted the best opportunities provided.
Angus certainly does not exemplify what is “Adult and mature” , his plan to hold an Indy Vote on the back of a Holyrood election is just completely nonsensical and he knows it , but he also knows he has nothiing else to offer his supporters back on Lewis so has to make up something to keep both them and the other restless natives placated and hopeful so making something up is all he has to offer. Suggesting a Hollyrood Vote to be used as an Indy Vote is merely a way of trying desperately keeping people voting for the SNP for as long as possible by trying to avoid admitting there isn’t going to be another Indyref for a Generation, its just a way of trying to stop Labour Converts to the SNP in the last 15 years from drifting back to Labour at the next GE which quite possibly be as soon as next year. The EU wouldn’t ever take Angus’s plan seriously, its the number of individuals Votes that matter to build an Independent country not the number of MSP’s in Holyrood, Holyrood Votes are only for one thing and thats for the Government of Scotland and will never be a vote for anything else so people have to stop allowing others to fill their heads with such ridiculous childish fantasy. If such a thing was legal Alex Salmond would never have asked for a section 30 for the original Indyref, this really isn’t hard to work out for anyone surely.
I see that penny is also dropping for others now as well.
https://peterabell.scot/2021/12/12/time-for-a-change/?fbclid=IwAR2_aFx-UTukK_TuBqsZin_4OF3RvAUTd_V5EVt6BphNPWVUhh9VngpX7yc
You are missing the point completely nobody now with any brains or political nous thinks or believes an independence referendum is a sensible tactic. That was then, this is now. Angus like so many of us knows a plebiscite election is the best way to achieve our goal. It was SNP Policy from 1934 till 1999 after all. Could I also politely sugfest trying to hold up anything of Peter Bell as back up to your misconception is akin to wearing a Celtic scarf in the Copland Road end! The Unionists fear a Plebiscite Election more than anything gand that is why the unionist trolls attack it but you knew that eh Chris?
“What Sturgeon’s strategy of capitulation has done is to supplant Scotland’s ancient Constitutional Sovereignty asserted in the 1320 Declaration of Arbroath, and all subsequent reaffirmations of the Claim of Right, and replace Scotland’s rights as a sovereign Nation with the mickey mouse 1998 Scotland Act, the small “c” constitution of a devolved assembly.”
I hate to have to point out that the 1998 Scotland Act has been superceded by the 2016 Scotland Act that Alex Salmond and Eslie McSelfie both Signed. ps the Declaration of Arbroath you are being misled on , it was nothing to do with the Independence of Scotland as a country but merely it was a letter to the Pope of the day asking for him to recognise Robert the Bruce as King, so instead of being about Sovereignty of the Scottish people it was really about asking “Gods spokesperson on Earth ” to support the Scottish King. The Declaration of Arbroath isn’t a constitutional document.
Nobody has been suggesting the Dec.of Arbroath is used in this battle to rid Scotland of its imperial parasitic southern neighbour. The Claim of Right and the unwritten constitution of our undemocratic neighbour will be deployed as the weapobd to end this undemocratic corrupt Union.
I’m running behind on my prisms but having just seen last week’s, whilst I’d like to see more granular detail on AGRFF. I’m not against the idea of taxing land, where this policy falls down for me though is I heard nothing about mitigations for the poorest in society.
It was often described in the programme as progressive taxation, it’s not – it’s deeply regressive taxation. Progressive taxation takes account of someone’s ability to pay (as opposed to willingness to pay!). This doesn’t. Regressive taxation is a flat rate tax.
AGRFF a flat rate tax and all flat rates taxes hit the poorest worst especially when it’s on something that is essential to life like a roof over your head or food (that’s why most food is VAT exempt). Council tax currently has up to 100% reductions in Scotland for those on the lowest incomes. Anyone on 100% reduction doesn’t receive enough money to pay any income tax so abolishing this makes no odds to them. Introducing this in an devolved Scotland would mean someone on £75 pw ESA/JSA/UC (controlled by Westminster) would have to now pay AGRFF with no increase in their income. If they owned their house having lost their job or are too ill to work but couldn’t sell it within 3 years (and some places sit unsold) it gets taken from them? If they don’t own it but can’t pay the tax, where do they live once evicted? (I’m assuming renters pay something for the “roof” part). Universal basic income at £10,400 might sound nice as an extra but if you are disabled and can’t work and that’s your whole income then have to pay AGRFF when you’ve not had to pay council tax before…
Maybe Graham’s paper considers these issues but all I heard was sell your big house. What if you don’t own it? What if you do and it’s not that big but actually your income is just very small? What if you’re disabled and you need special adaptations or a spare bedroom for life saving equipment and the smaller properties available aren’t suitable?
I really think it sounds good for business rates and unused land/absentee landlords/overseas etc. It has the advantages of reducing tax avoidance and land banking and forcing the private equity groups to invest in ports etc. That aspect intrigues me and I can definitely see the advantages.
However I do fear that for domestic taxation unless it has safeguards built in (e.g. reductions for low income, protections for the disabled etc), this could be awful for the poorest in society in a domestic setting.
Maybe you could raise these and similar points with him in future prisms?
As I touched on in the Ground Rent Prism. Political decisions can and most likely will be deployed just as they are today with council tax. Exemptions and reductions will apply.It would be insanity for any administration not to do,therefore I suggest it is a progressive tax in that those that now get tax relief for tree planting or keeping the land fallow have to pay up just like the rest of us. They cannot hide their land in a Swiss Bank or in Trusts. Pay your fair share or lose your land simple as that.
In principal annual ground rent appears a simple tax. But then you need to add roof and floor area. And that immediately changes the tax from the Annual Ground Rent tax it is headlined to be.
Consider next the classes of land. How are they established. What exactly are they supposed to be. How many classes. And by what yard stick do you categorise them. Can categories be changed. And does a change in one bit change the whole bit.
And how do the categories relate in terms of rates to be charged. How are these rates to be determined. Should the land on which a house sits be the lowest rate whilst a mountain area has the highest square metre rate. Or should it be the reverse and or what should the ratio of rate bands be one to the others.
And how does the distribution of income tumble out compared to where money is spent. Not a lot of money needed to maintain the Cairngorms mountain range but a lot needed to maintain Glasgow or Edinburgh and it’s one and a half million residents. Or does that matter since the Cairngorms and Monaliadh mountain ranges will pay for all of the populous city area needs.
And if after three years, yes three years not one or two or five. If someone doesn’t pay AGFRR then the land or is it property is to be confiscated by a state agency and given away to somebody else, whoever that somebody else is. Passed off as being similar to not paying one’s mortgage, the comparison is fascile, whilst the concept absolutely frightening.
But I come not to destroy Caesar. No form of taxation is perfect. All havexadvantages and disadvantages and AGFRR may have some advantages. Indeed, the Poll Tax had some advantages, but that of course is very much a matter of political opinion as many of us all too well understand.
Devil and detail. It was always thus and then there is political complexion. Or should we say political axes to grind.
More detail therefore please, more debate, more analysis before everyone jumps overboard in joy at the new tax proposal made in heaven. And as for the land confiscation, are we proposing to confiscate the huge tracts of land in Scotland owned by companies in faraway tax havens.
Otherwise, have a read of Graeme’s book. It’s a very interesting read and he has to be complemented for the effort he has put into developing this concept, and for tirelessly promoting it to a party that has steadfastly stuck with the status quo.
There’s a lot needing fixed in Scotland.
Lots of sensible thinking there that will go over the heads of most people , as always the AGFRR is merely a carrot in the Sky for people who like simple solutions like pots of Gold at the end of Rainbows they will never ever find as well. Politicians make lots of attractive promises to the gullible Scottish voting electorate , they are designed to be simply for winning votes for the sake of obtaining money and power and can surely be seen for the deliberate Con trick they always surely were. https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/16123031.snp-tories-join-forces-green-plan-abolish-council-tax/
There is no such thing as Free money or Free Public Services yet there are no end of the number of Charletans who try to sell Scots such things. “But one thing is absolutely certain.The claim that that MMT means that a future government can dodge hard choices about how to pay for decent public services is just plain nonsense.” https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/economics-and-finance/nonsense-economics-the-rise-of-modern-monetary-theory
Unionists tend to have that no can do attitude, no you cannae, no you willnae no you won’t. It is really depressing just like most things unionist including their media.
What makes you think that nicola sturgeon and pete wishart will offer out thier hands to the yes/independence movement is it not obvious by now thats not what they want otherwise it would have been offered before. It will never be offered as i have said before sturgeons job for her london masters is to
Destroy Alex Salmond
Destroy the Yes movement
Destroy the snp
Destroy the Scottish economy
Destroy the apetite for independence
Votes 1 and 2 for snp was enough to make that clear, only when sturgeon is gone/removed and the unionist gatekeepers around her are gone also can Scotland move forward.
I’m very late to the party, just catching up. As ever good discussion by all. One small point: Wales might have voted Leave, but the Welsh born voted Remain.