Through A Scottish Prism was supposed to be in recess just like the Holyrood Parliament until 31st August. However, all the machinations around the English government and their decision to replace their First Lord of the Treasury, Keir Starmer, with Andy Burnham cut our summer break short.
Mr Burnham, a local authority Manchester politician until his recent by-election victory, has been crowned the new leader of the English Labour Party, which means that by default he becomes the 7th PM of the UK in the past 10 years. If this post was that of a CEO of a corporation, seven in ten years would tell the shareholders something is intrinsically broken in that company!
It is the same with the governance of the undemocratic UK Union. There is a peculiarly British phrase that applies to this and most other recent appointments to this position: ‘Buggins Turn.’ Buggins Turn is a humorous, disparaging British term for appointment to a position by rotation rather than by merit, so it is with elevation not election that we get this nonentity Burnham as our latest ‘leader.’
There are many reasons that we have independence movements in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. However, the overriding reason in all three nations is that so-called British democracy does not exist. The Celtic nations are there merely to bend to the will of England.
In England, the dissatisfaction of the people with their governance manifests itself in blood and soil nationalism and gives us parties like Reform and Restore. The rabid right-wing media looks for scapegoats to deflect the blame for the continuing decline in England and throughout the union.
Immigrants, the unemployed, pensioners, brown and black British citizens, whining Jocks, Taffies, and Paddies are demonised as the reasons for declining living standards, poor public services, and lack of proper housing or schools, or failing NHS.
Those with a sliver of grey matter know these deflections are nonsense. Forty-six years of neoliberalism and vulture capitalism are never mentioned as one of the core reasons for the shambles that is the UK. Nor would our media or pundits ever dare to suggest that the entire governance of the UK is a farce.
The reality is this: the UK is not a democracy; it is nothing more than a feudal autocracy. It starts at the very pinnacle of Anglo society with their king. This farcical appointment of Burnham started when Starmer went to the biggest council house in the UK at the bottom of the Mall to tell King Charlie that he was chucking the ‘top job’ and that the King of England should invite the ex-Mayor of Manchester, Burnham, to be the new figurehead for the moneymen of the City of London. Be assured EVERY decision and law in this union is to enrich the square mile of London and the elite that run that casino! We do not have a government,we have a crime syndicate in charge!
The UK has this unelected English head of state, Charles Saxa-Gotha- Coburg he in turn beneath him has around 832 unelected peers. Then we have 650 MPs elected by the antiquated and very undemocratic method of FPTP elections. Indeed, only 96 of those MPs secured more than 50% of the available votes in their constituencies! Put simply, the majority of votes cast in any UK election count for naught! That is not even close to democracy. Your vote every 5 years is merely to give the pretence of democracy.
This is amply displayed by unelected Anas Sarwar being appointed a Lord. His replacement in Scotland will be another English nationalist toady and the public will have no say in that selection either. Our corrupt media will play up some list(unelected no mark) as the next JFK to con the Scottish public into acceptance of the status quo. In reality, you will be getting a nodding head,an Anglo sycophant to lead the Scottish branch office. Then they will lie to you telling you they make all the decisions in Scotland. We already know London tells them everything to think say and do!
Then we have the fact that of those 650 MPs, 543 represent English seats! This means the three nations of the union are always in a minority. Simply put, England gets whatever England wants and the Celtic nations just have to suck it up.
This was made abundantly clear on Burnham’s first day in charge. He immediately dictated to Scotland that there would never be any independence referendum on his watch. Indeed, he said quite clearly that all talk of Scottish independence was off-limits! The exact same response as the 6 previous English PMs!
It makes you wonder why the SNP keep sticking with their Section 30 nonsense. The only logical answer to that is, they are in on the act and are protecting English hegemony over Scotland! If you have an alternative explanation, I would love to hear it!
It is clear that despite the democratic wishes of the people of Scotland, Wales, or the six occupied counties of Ireland, England is in charge and the citizens of those nations are held hostage with no democratic escape clause.
In Scotland, Burnham intends to replace Lord Provosts with English-type mayors. That means he is imposing Anglo-type governance against the wishes of the Scottish people as expressed in 1997. The Scottish Devolution Act of 1998, received 74.3% approval by the Scottish nation, is being overturned by this jumped-up English local council ex-mayor and we the Scots get no say in this flagrant undemocratic reversal of devolution.
It merely underlines that Westminster and the English ruling class have no respect for Scotland or Scottish democracy! There is also talk of ending the Barnett formula and treating Scotland and its funding as just another English region, again no Scot will get a say on that matter.
The biggest irony of Burnham and his new Anglo regime is that all his grand plans for the Union is to be funded by Scottish oil and gas reserves in the North Sea. Scotland will be plundered and the people ignored. They do this with impunity, knowing that the Scots are too busy fighting among themselves to be able to do anything to stop the Anglos continuing to pillage our natural resources.
This is the scenario for this week’s TASP Special podcast. I am joined by Eva Comrie and Phil Boswell as we discuss what all this means for our nation. We offer alternative scenarios that are available. The question is: will our people finally see the predicament of our nation and unite to rid ourselves of this undemocratic English dictatorship?
Wow comprehensive and to the point. The English colonial rule is on the way out as more and more people see the farce it is.
It takes blogs like yours to get the truth out, well done.
Thank you Ian
To properly address this we must first go to the origin of the treaty itself and the authority that the commissioners has in drawing up the treaty.
In Scotland the monarch is limited and contractual. They can be deposed should Scots decide to get rid of them. A constitution right that has seldom been used but remains nonetheless. The monarch and it’s commissioners only had authority to negotiate a trade pact not an extinguishment or amalgamation. That was and is beyond their legal and lawful limits. With this starting point of the independent sovereign state of Scotland, Scotland would not be approaching the drawing up of the treaty by utilising the ENGLISH CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK in which the English monarch has sovereign authority and can extinguish its statehood and merge itself with another. It would be using Scottish constitutional law. The supreme law of the land. Now, as authority was limited, the trade agreement could be drawn up with only ratification necessary which was the case.
The number of MPs represented the DELEGATIONS from each state that were to sit in the new state Parliament as sovereign legally equal peers. The trade name was Great Britain with its trade flag – the Union Jack – to be put on shipping vessels. Almost all Articles of the treaty discuss trade, trade law and any adjustments needed between the new alliance to bring them into alignment. The remaining Articles discuss how it is to be set up and implemented.
The treaty stipulates categorically that all rights prior to and after the signing are to be upheld indefinitely and that should any infringement upon fundamental rights of either state be incurred by the other that state the treaty is terminated. It was the 1707 version of a termination clause. There is no Government of GB despite discussing the number of delegates and lords, No PM of GB, no constitution of GB, no parliamentary sovereignty of GB. No single vote majority or even political party system. The territorial borders of each state is retained along with the sovereign authority each state possessed.
So how did we get to this point today where a Parliament with less authority than the original European Parliament is viewed as supreme with England having dominion?
Scots delegates happy to appease their English counterparts and facing a civil war at home allowed England to continue using the new state Parliament as its own. What should have been a temporary measure in order to get the parliament up and running and end the economic war became the norm. Instead of the Scots taking their place at the table directly opposite the English government, they sat at the back of the chamber and adopted English parliamentary conventions. Somewhere along the line, perhaps with the civil war and request to curb it which led to banning of all things Scottish, the Scots delegates decided that imposing English constitutional law over Scotland was a price worth paying to ensure their own safety and privilege.
Forward to today and that decision has allowed the PM of England to treat GB as a greater England project. The Scot government delegation continues to impose English constitutional law over Scotland, viewing the monarch as supreme authority and the English monarch’s appointed government OF ENGLAND as the government of GB. As such Scots government delegates and local representatives permitted England to alter the foundational basis of the treaty from that of a trade pact to political. In short, the treaty that was signed in 1707 is NOT the treaty that is supposedly in operation today.
England governs Scotland not through right, nor sheer numbers via MP or population share, not even by single vote machanations as even with all those England’s authority ends at its border. It is governed by England because our own Scot government delegates, their admin and even the Scots themselves impose English constitutional law over Scotland. When discussing GB, as a nation, Scots view the PM of England as the rightful ruler, that the monarch is supreme, that the English government departments renamed UK for political purposes by England, that the English Supreme Court and complete control of the treasury and all matters politically are for England to decide. Talk of matters beyond basic administration in Scotland and Scots cry it is reserved to England. The FM of Scotland, as the face of Scot government could easily assert Scots sovereign authority but even he and every other Scot has been taught from birth to view English constitutional law as the supreme law in clear violation of Scots constitutional law and fundamental rights. When our delegates meet their counterpart they do so from a position of assumed inferiority not sovereign legally equal peers. England control s Scotland not through right, legality or constitutional law but because our very own abdicate their solemn duty, imposed English constitutional law and allowed England to control every aspect of Scots lives including the very media it supplies to the nation.
People like to claim Scotland is a colony but this is not colonialism. It is self inflicted constitutional abdication.
Personally, I am of the view that a greater discussion needs to be had regarding why Scots permit the imposing of English constitutional law in Scotland by our very own Scottish government delegates. Not excuses. Not blaming England who just stepped up and took what was literally handed to them, but a cold hard look at why we permit ours to do so when their entire raison d’etre is to enforce Scots constitutional law, utilise Scots sovereign (supreme) authority In order to protect the country (in all matters) and it’s people whether from inside it’s borders or external forces.
Until a genuine discussion on this happens England will continue to do as they please and lord it over Scotland as there will be no consequences to their actions.
Excellent posts, Gayle.
” ….. Scots permit the imposing of English constitutional law in Scotland by our very own Scottish government delegates……”. I couldn’t agree more.
It’s no mystery, really, why most Scots themselves have come to take it as some kind of ‘ natural order ‘ or at least an immutable fait accompli that the main locus of power is WM – and, of course, they are correct in that, for the reasons you delineate; in simple terms…..because generations of Scots’ ( supposed ) Political Representatives have submitted to the notion of WM + The Crown as having dominion over Scotland: an idea reinforced also for generations by England and it’s Establishment themselves assuming this * inherent * superior power.
This is one of the reasons why I can barely stand to see, hear or read anything emanating from the spineless frauds that have the nerve to still call themselves the Scottish National Party. It is merely a continuation of the centuries-long betrayal of Scotland by those claiming to be it’s defenders
Thanks, Robert.
It is indeed a betrayal of the highest order and one that seriously needs addressed perhaps via a live or something to genuinely discuss why Scots accept their own imposing English constitutional law over Scotland. I honestly think it would be an eye opener to many.
As a matter of interest how practically exactly can Scots oppose this imposition ?
BHB,
There are a number of ways to fight this. Our grassroots movement brings together people from all walks of life and backgrounds. Practically speaking, we could organise genuine mass protests – not polite requests with deadlines- at both Holyrood and the state Parliament.
The goal is to actively confront the Scottish government delegates, their administration and representatives. We shouldn’t just ask them simply WHY they are forcing English constitutional law onto Scotland. We must demand that they cease and desist with immediate effect, and fully implement Scots own constitutional law and sovereign authority right now.
We can organise on-the-spot protests for war, taxes, and countless other issues- so why not for our actual constitution? Have we ever even tried? We know that our delegates can take immediate action when they want to. We saw it when they marched out of the state Parliament, only to walk back in a few hours later as if nothing had happened. The point is, they CAN move quickly when it suits them. This time we will not accept business as usual.
Our delegates, administration and representatives must be seen actively enforcing Scots constitutional law. They must exercise our sovereign authority by taking their rightful place at the table as equal peers. This means removing English government control over Scotland and over our state departments, including the treasury. Yes, this will cause a massive uproar from the state Parliament, England’s establishment, and their media-but you don’t create real change without bold action.
While these protests are happening, the movement can simultaneously launch legal challenges against Scotland’s delegates, administration, and institutions for actively imposing England’s constitutional law over us.
These are just a few practical steps, and greater minds than mine can certainly build on them. But until we have this genuine discussion first and foremost, nothing will change. Too many people in Scotland are focused on the wrong target, looking to England to make a change. That is never going to happen. They are not answerable to us; they are answerable to England’s monarch and England’s people. We need to actively address our own representatives and force them to take immediate action.
Furthermore,
To move past annual marches and misdiagnosed arguments, our grassroots movement must pivot toward these immediate, practical steps:
Audit Our Representatives: Stop looking at England. Build a public register tracking the actions, funding, and foreign oaths of Scotland’s own delegates. Expose their dual allegiances every time they prioritize England’s laws over our own supreme law.
Issue Directives, Not Requests: Organize local citizen assemblies across Scotland to draft formal “People’s Directives.” Hand these directly to our local representatives. Shift the tone from asking why they are doing this to demanding they cease and desist immediately.
Launch Targeted Legal Challenges: Simultaneously hit Scotland’s administration and institutions with domestic lawsuits challenging the active, unconstitutional imposition of foreign legal frameworks over our sovereign state.
Demand Equal-Peer Representation: Force our delegates to take their rightful place at the table as sovereign, legal equal peers—meaning the immediate removal of England’s control over Scotland’s state departments, and treasury.
Brace for the Establishment Backlash: Expect a massive uproar from the state parliament, England’s establishment, and the mainstream media. Real constitutional change is never comfortable, and it is never achieved through business as usual.
We have the numbers, the passion, and the talent within our grassroots networks. But until we stop treating this as a festival of identity and start treating it as a serious constitutional fight against our own captured institutions, nothing will change. England will never hand us a solution because they do not answer to us. It is time to actively address our own representatives and force them to act.
This is all very exciting, interesting and credible. How far along are you your preparations to implement all of this? Do you have others committed and helping you? Do you have any meetings or forums in operation?
Any successes to date that can be shared?
Once again, excellent series of suggestions in reply to Roddy’s question, Gayle.
I don’t blame Roddy/ATLS for inaction, they are the only * party * that offered any kind of alternative to the duplicity and mandate ( yet one more ) – squandering uselessness of the SNP+Green’s kid-on Independence advocacy: but it’s very telling that neither those latter two joke-parties NOR ALBA ( when it was extant ) ever even suggested any of the proactive moves you mention, let alone organise any of them to occur. If Scots ever had a instinct for justified Civil Disobedience, they seem to have lost it along the way; though, to repeat, this situation could be understood as a consequence of glaring lack of boldness on the part of our * leaders *.
Come on, Roddy, is it necessary to take that ” well show me the proof ” kind of attitude to Gayle’s suggestions? What can one person do in the face of the so-called ” Party of Independence’s ” dominance of the Independence demographic and that demographic’s seeming inability to see any further than the very entity that is refusing to do anything to progress the cause it espouses; other than in the few weeks preceding elections?
Look at how little impact your own and ATLS admirable efforts to generate momentum had just a couple of months ago; and even the similar attempts to make progress by the Salvo/Liberation ensemble are not making much tangible difference – albeit they are coming from a different – not GE/SE focused – direction.
There are formidable obstacles to overcome before we can hope to see progress – the Brit State may not even be the most difficult: it could be argued that the stranglehold/spell the SNP still casts over the * Movement * is just as intractable and paralysing; in fact, perhaps more so due to it’s insidious, unrecognised ( by the majority ) nature. When people can’t see the true nature of the entity that is posing as it’s salvation nothing productive will be possible.
No flowers can blossom from poisoned roots
I think you should read again what I wrote. I am genuinely excited at such an initiative. I was trying to see where and how I could get involved. I practise what I reach and believe in unity of purpose.
BHB,
It’s still in the initial stage but I aim to bring it to fruition. There’s a lot of planning and organising to do but it is worth it. I can reach out to some within the movement but I honestly believe having the discussion is necessary.
Give me a shout if there is anything I or my colleagues can do to assist once you are up and running
Aplogies, Roddy; I misread/interpreted your comment. Glad you’re positive about Gayle’s suggestions 🙂
Thanks, will do. I think organising teams across Scotland would be the way to go so it is coming from the community of the realm. There are a few different areas where people might want to take part or have a particular skill that would be useful such the data collection and auditing, legal challenges, community focused meets and directives, protests here and in England etc The greater the reach the better. I welcome your input and help.
” We have concluded given other evidence that the party is captured at the highest levels so that the very, very thin appearance of indy support along with predictable and outwork rhetoric masks a much deeper compromise with the British state. Just one example, I was read the content of some emails by Iain Lawson some months before his death, These were passed to the police and then held in confidence pending an inquiry (never completed).
They included a discussion on how gender policy could be used to drive out the independence ‘die hards’ from the SNP. We are talking high level, trusted party members and elected representatives here. ”
Never more accurate words spoken, The SNP post the 2014 referendum had to be stopped, And it was. It was turned with the dark hands of the British state. The security services know all about politicians and things that the would they would rather not have exposed. And then there is entrapment. Another British state tactic. Together the threat of exposure, or the benefit of ” protection ” brings compliance. And then there is the bribery. Money, good job after politics, public recognition that’s all in the playbook. And political, if not actual assassination another tried and tested tactic. And then with the aid of the compromised the insertion of the loon balls and the loon ball policies – as Iain Lawson was aware of.
Its all much more anodyne and insidious than bombing a populace into submission. But you know what for folks that know about Northern Ireland, they didn’t call it a Dirty War for nothing. Assassination using counter gangs armed and targeted by the security services. State agents advancing timers on bombs, setting off bombs to kill and maim to influence hearts and minds, destroy support, its all in the playbook.
So no surprise then at how the SNP was turned. And Sturgeon, if she opens her mouth she could find herself like Diana in a car crash or having a heart attack. A bit like Willie McCrae shooting himself.
So yes, who controls Scotland?
Oh and Alba. Anyone know what really happened to that. It started with a great surge and influx of dedicated independence campaigners.
The party also had a great leader who took us to the point of referendum success. And the 2021 strategy of SNP1 and Alba 2 would have delivered an absolutely thumping majority in Hollyrood with Alex back. Instead with SNP 1 and SNP over 1,092,000 second SNP votes delivered 2 seats whereas cast for Alba the votes would have delivered somewhere between 25 and 20 seats to give a super majority.
As someone said before its demise the party didn’t know who the loon balls were and who the Brit agents were.
Anyway, its all part and parcel of how a hapless nation walks into the gas chambers to use a 1930s analogy. If UK can go into Iraq with a million dead, what’s a wee bit of insidious dark behaviour in Scotland.
Hi, BHB,
I sent you an email and a pamphlet regarding the Community of the Realm Initiative.
Robert, thank you.Your support is greatly appreciated.
If you are interested in the initiative please let me know. Looking to form regional teams so that it is truly nationwide.
Got it 👍 shared it with my colleagues on Prism and in ATLS
Thank you. Much appreciated.