I'm just going to point out that with both leaders of both pro-indy parties now confirming legal challenge of the referendum bill by Westminster is likely if its constitutionality without a section 30 order remain in doubt; and testing that in court being, in Patrick Harvie's...
...own words "a perfectly legitimate approach to take". - Why then has no politician put their neck on the line to test it - because this mere pleb has - taking a year of abuse I might add AND facing financial ruin to do it.
I really don't think I am out of line to say that parliamentarians are missing something - a spine!
Both announcements have been EXACTLY on par with what I have repeated over and over again for a year - and both announcements also confirm that the #PeoplesAS30 is wholly justified! And I'm sorry, but I am damn angry with the lot of them!
Except of course for Neale Hanvey and Douglas Chapman, local MP's who are backers of the case and Andy Wightman, Angus MacNeil and Kenny MacAskill who all signed affidavits of support. The rest were silent!
The funny thing is that Patricks comments today actually look as if they were lifted from our pleas in law in the court case. Its almost verbatim what I have been saying for a year.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
On the matter of the dismissive "pop-up party" comments that keep getting made by certain people. Two things I will say - AFI is not a standard party - it's an alliance of many under one name on the ballot paper.
The second thing is the term "pop-up" - that's a falsehood. The term pop-up literally means denoting an organisation that OPENS UP QUICKLY in a temporary location and is intended to operate for only a short period of time.
AFI did not "open up quickly". The team of AFI spent months and months before going for registration building processes and procedures, standing orders, and a massive chunk of the same infrastructure that major parties have.
The Scottish National Party could cut the UK Government off at the knees over legal action tomorrow if it wanted, by supporting the #peoplesas30. Or at the very least having their parliamentarians do it personally. Instead, they've chosen to stay silent on the very court case...
....which would not only ensure the Scottish Parliament could legislate for indyref 2 without Westminster consent, but also prove the legitimacy of their own bill, so when it goes to Holyrood, the UK Gov would have nothing to challenge.
Instead, they have chosen to remain silent, and are now advocating using taxpayers money to defend a challenge that would be unnecessary if they had backed the people's action. It's absolutely mental!
10 years as a full-time carer 24/7 for my mother and I just managed to stay afloat and no more. However, this pandemic has now officially wiped me out - financially and mentally. It's just not sustainable.
The problem is, the UK treating the 2 million full-time carers the way they do (and the UK parliament), namely treating them like a slave labour force, keeping them on 1/3 of the income of public and private sector carers and building a health and social care system on their....
....backs, means that there's very little chance to escape if they wanted to - and at the same time, even if they did escape it would take years for them to recover financially if they ever did.
So here's what's going to happen next if the #PeoplesAS30 doesn't establish the right of Scotparl to legislate for a second referendum. Nicola will ask boris for a sec 30 again. He'll say no.
The SNP will then lay their bill before parliament and the UK Government will immediately challenge it preventing it from gaining royal assent.
Because it doesn't have royal assent, it wont be a law. The UK Government will use the time in court to modify laws at Westminster to undermine the bill and that will take it out of competency of the Scottish Parliament and we'll be stuck.
Em. Am I missing something (genuine question)? Because the pics I have seen are of a piece of black slate with some white writing on it about women rights. I'm assuming the slate intended to represent a gravestone and the name of the person being women's rights?
I'm only asking for peoples opinion on this because if that's inappropriate behaviour/vandalism, I am really in trouble because my first experience of politics was as a 5-year-old carrying a banner through the streets of hawick....
which was black cardboard in the shape of a coffin and it read in white writing "R.I.P Hawick, Dying due to Tory Cuts!" - So I am (and this isn't me being obtuse - I am genuinely asking) if I have missed something here? Can someone explain?
Good Morning Scotland! Good Morning World! Good Morning GCHQ! We start today with an article about the greens which simultaneously made my left eye twitch and also ended up me pebble dashing my PC monitor with my cup of tea. Thread 👇
For the eagle-eyed 10,000 backers of the #PeoplesAS30, your eyelid may also now be twitching. "We'll test the matter in court" to "legislate without a section 30"...... This is literally the point of the Peoples Action - to establish that it is legal for Holyrood to legislate...