In layman's terms, here's what unfolded in the House of Commons today, and why what Hoyle did was so egregious. Normally, the process for handling motions in the House of Commons is straightforward: the motion as presented by a party (this time by the SNP) is voted on first in its original form.

Subsequent votes on any amendments aim to alter the wording of that original motion.

@Jimmieintherain It's sitting in the bank waiting to be used. New powers were needed to force buildings to be remediated. The bill for it - Housing (Cladding Remediation) Bill 2023 was officially put to parliament on 2nd November. @Jimmieintherain Unfortunately, the wheels of politics grind slowly and for something of this magnitude, there are A LOT of moving parts. The number of people involved just in the consultation phases is staggering.

NO SUCH THING AS "BRITISH VALUES" The concept popularly termed "British Values" is, upon scrupulous scrutiny, a fallacious construct, more akin to an illusory figment than any verifiable cultural ethos.

Keywords in the Nicola Sturgeon arrest reporting "she was the last name on the AUDITED ACCOUNTS". In other words, she's been arrested so they can question her under caution because she signed off and was named on AUDITED ACCOUNTS. Let's just say that again (and remember I am no fan of Nicola) - She's been arrested and is being questioned because she signed off on the last AUDITED ACCOUNTS. The reason you hire an auditor is so you can sign them off knowing they are correct at the time you sign.

Today's supreme court ruling in a nutshell - A UK institution states we don't have the right to vote on our own futures, and you know what? That's absolutely fine because at least now we know exactly where we stand in the grand scheme - we're second-class citizens, prisoners. Two things I will say on that front. (1) It's the duty of every captive to escape; and (2) The politicians had their chance, it's time for them to be reminded they work for us. So! What to do? Simple!

"It is not for the pursuer to stand in the shoes of parliamentarians". These were the words put forward to the court by the Lord Advocate on behalf of the Scottish Government in the #PeoplesAS30.

What it was meant to convey to the court was that despite the fact I.... ...was standing as pursuer for 10,000 members of the Scottish Electorate backing the case, I did not have the right to ask a simple question about our own parliament because I am NOT A MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT.

These constant punchup between SNP1/2 advocates and alba advocates (and I don't mean those who actually debate in a robust but congenial fashion) - please leave me out of it. I don't care if someone is snp, green, alba, independent, or another denomination, I'll work... ...with them, if they are pushing forward the cause of independence. Bickering, arguing, slagging each other off - I have no interest in it. I'm interested in only two things: (1) Furthering the cause of independence; and (2) Trying to improve the lives of people in...

SNP 1/2 advocates going nuts about my post earlier about Mid-Scotland and Fife - but they can go as nuts as they want to - it doesn't change the maths and I only have to ask one single question about Mid-Scotland and Fife to prove my point. How are the SNP going to gain an additional 46000 votes in Mid-Scotland and Fife (minimum) over and above their 120000, just to get their first seat on the Mid-Scotland and Fife regional Ballot?

Lord Advocate has gone rogue again - Backers of #PeoplesAS30 check your emails please. For everyone else here's the breakdown. Yesterday, the Lord Advocate (Yes! The person who is supposed to defend the Scottish Parliament and who is a member of the Scottish Government) took it upon himself to lodge documents with the court with regards to a case brought in the high court of England...

Update on #PeoplesAS30: It would seem that the UK Gov is trying to enter irrelevant rulings into the case after the hearings. A case under English law (so different jurisdiction) on a judicial review (ours is not a judicial review).... ...in which the people's action is mentioned. The substance of the case submitted is wholly irrelevant to the people's action.

This whole #GetOutOfMyPub incident just goes to show how angry the hospitality industry is and people will say that closing pubs was necessary, and they'd be right....the first time round. However, we live on an Island. Had the UK Government setup proper track and trace... ...with testing at the UK's ports and airports, they could have gone for broke like the likes of New Zealand and eradicated this virus from the UK mainland. Testing would have seriously mitigated the chance of COVID coming back with a vengeance and disruption...

A very stark opinion from a friend in medicine this week who's been reviewing my medical notes and believes that as a child I might not just have had "balance issues" which you've already seen me talk about previously... ...instead, combined with medical issues in adulthood, they believe I may have dyspraxia (or similar). It not only explains my medical issues which appeared 15 years ago but also explains something more worrying. Nobody picked up on it, and because...

The policy of the greens that they would seek to use the powers of holyrood to get rid of trident is complete and utter nonsense. There's only one way not to have trident in Scotland and that is NOT TO BE in a nuclear state like the UK. Trident can only be removed from our shores by one means - independence followed by a direct order to the UK Government to remove its nuclear garbage from next to our second-largest city with a deadline after which we'll dump it on WM's front porch.

I'll not be opining on the death of Philip. This is because I do not believe in monarchy. I see them as having no right to a higher station than any other person. I consider everyone to be equal. To me this is a case of a normal 99-year-old person who has had a good run in life, passing away. I have sympathy for his family for their loss, as I would for any person who has lost a loved one. But not knowing Philip personally, I can opine no further than that.

Aidan O'Neill QC commences his submission to the court by referencing the declaration of Scotland (Arbroath) on the day of its anniversary for its absolutely unequivocal assertion and statement that in Scotland,
sovereignty rests with the people. Aidan O'Neill states that it is fascinating to compare the Claim of 1689 to the English Bill of rights.

Comon people! it's this sort of thing that just ends up screwing us all. Sure it's awesome to get out of lockdown but all you're doing is causing cases to go through the roof again and into another lockdown. It's not a winning strategy! All it does is put case's back up and give the politicians more excuses to curtail more of our civil liberties. Now that lockdown is ending, how about we not all screw ourselves. Let's just keep distance, wear masks, and clean hands.

Wow! Wow! Wow! Wow! Wow.

Just reading the documents for the #PeoplesAS30. The Lord Advocate actually says, and I quote: "The pursuer contends that the Scottish Government has given an "undertaking that it will introduce and promote it as Government Bill before the next Scottish Parliament" and that this undertaking constitutes an enforceable legal promise.

For 22 years, politicians have failed to answer a simple question. When 10,000 ordinary people sought to have it answered, they proclaimed that only politicians should be allowed to answer the question they have failed to. We live in a nation where the people are supposed to be sovereign. The literal definition of sovereignty is "where power is derived". Telling 10,000 people and their representative you don't have the right to ask a simple question about your own country is not respect...

Politicians make promises and often they break them. I don't. I made a promise to do everything I possibly can to protect the peoples action and to push for the voices of the 10,000 who backed it. It's extremely easy to criticise when you're not in full possession of the facts, and trust me, if you were, your hair would probably curly. I've asked people to give me a better option. They haven't. I therefore must take the least bad option to try and protect the case.

To be clear - my primary message in Mid-Scotland and Fife is going to be this:

1. Vote SNP on the constituency ballot.
2. In each household place one vote to Alba and One to me as an independent.

So if there are 4 in a house. Thats 2 to ALBA and two to myself. With a large enough swing of Yes Voters in Fife. That's more than enough to ensure the election of me and multiple ALBA candidates.

My announcement today has annoyed people - and I want to be upfront and tell you I understand completely. I also want to be upfront and tell you it is that I tried and failed to find a win win option. The only thing I could do, and which seems to be a recurring theme in the UK, is to select the least bad option.