Absolute gutter journalism.
No one 'that I know' that wants Scotland’s liberation hates English people - they are our friends, neighbours & even family members.
Wanting to run your own country, free of oppression doesn’t make you anti-English - it makes you anti-colonial.
Regardless of the source, this should be the headline news on BBC Reporting Scotland & @STVNews. These are direct British nationalist threats to the Scottish Parliament. To ignore it is also a direct threat and should also be addressed @BBCScotlandNews https://t.co/TqmkSDbwbW
Poor show when BBC UK News mentions (the UK national team) England's women football team getting beaten by Spain but no mention of Scotland beating Israel, but BBC Reporting Scotland also doesn't even mention Scotland's women beating Israel 6-0.
LET’S HAVE A NEW UNION?..
The Parliament will be in Edinburgh and England will be allowed 45 Members.
The New Parliament will control ALL of England’s money and Assets but after about 300 years England will receive an allowance.
Shall I go on?..
Scotland has no say over trade. Westminster sets trade policy
This is detrimental to Scotland's economy, for Scottish business and for Scotland’s people. An independent country would be able to build on Scotland’s great resources and business culture to build prosperity.
Colin Beattie gave a specific assurance: the Referendum Appeal Fund, he said, had a current balance of £593,501, "earmarked for the referendum and are ready to be fully deployed at a moment’s notice."
Stating the sum to the pound, this was a very specific statement from Mr Beattie. Yet it was clearly a falsehood, made in breach of his fiduciary duty and designed, for whatever purpose, to deceive. Those who gave to this fund on the assumption of good faith have a right to know why and at whose behest Mr Beattie made such a statement.
Dear @uartlach I write as an academic and political commentator with a longstanding interest in SNP financial accountability, author of 'Scotland Undone'. The following questions arise purely from the public record, and I would welcome your clarification.
In October 2020 you stated the indyref2 fund held £593,501, earmarked for the referendum and ready to deploy at a moment's notice. Your successor Douglas Chapman resigned months later stating he could not access the financial information required to carry out his legal duties as National Treasurer.
You returned to the role. Within weeks, the fund you had described as referendum-ready was being characterised as having been spent on "independence related campaigning."
With that sequence in mind:
1. When you returned as National Treasurer in May 2021, did you have access to the party accounts that Douglas Chapman stated he had been denied?
2. If so, at what point did you become aware that the £593,501 you described as ready to deploy in October 2020 had been spent — and on what?
3. Your June 2021 statement referred to funds spent on "independence related campaigning." Can you identify specifically what expenditure that describes, and when it occurred?
4. Douglas Chapman resigned citing statutory obstruction. You returned to a role he found untenable. What had changed?
I appreciate your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Dean MacKinnon Thomson
Author, Scotland Undone
Lecturer, Beijing Normal-Hong Kong Baptist University
"Look, I'm a nationalist, and I want to see independence for Scotland. But for me it's country before Party. We cannot have this level of corruption in Scottish public life without looking into what happened and making a firm purpose of amendments to try and sort it out in the future."
- Joanna Cherry KC
Each and every Scottish nationalist should be saying what Joanna Cherry says here - for me, it's country before Party.
Are we going to content ourselves with a Scotland aping the corruption of the Westminster PPE fraud, the £37bn test and trace scandal and putrid HS2 rail contracts? If so, what is the point?
@JohnSwinney has done nothing but shiftily stonewall the valid question being put to him. He can do nothing with this Party to advance Scotland's cause as long as he's dousing the stink with perfume.
This is just the beginning
A there is a clear, documented list of times since 2020 when the UK Government has overridden, blocked, or bypassed Scottish devolved decisions.
Confirmed UK overrides of Scottish devolved decisions since 2020
Section 35 veto of a Scottish Bill (first time ever)
UK Government legislating in devolved areas without consent
(9 times since Brexit)
The Scottish Parliament withheld consent, but Westminster legislated anyway.
EU Withdrawal Act
UK Internal Market Act
Subsidy Control Act
Retained EU Law Act
Professional Qualifications Act
Trade Act
Agriculture Act
Fisheries Act
Levelling Up and Regeneration Act
Scottish Nat...
This is a major breach of the Sewel Convention.
Internal Market Act overriding devolved laws
This Act allows UK‑wide “market access” rules to neutralise Scottish laws.
It has been used to.
block Scotland’s Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) by refusing an exemption for glass.
Scottish Nat...
This is the clearest example of the UK rewriting devolved policy.
UK Government bypassing Holyrood on spending
Since 2020, UK ministers can spend directly in devolved areas, bypassing the Scottish Government.
This includes
Levelling Up funds
Shared Prosperity Fund
Community Renewal Fund
This removes Holyrood’s control over devolved‑area budgets.
Supreme Court rulings restricting devolved law‑making
The Court struck down parts of
UNCRC Incorporation Bill
Local Government Bill
Because they were judged to “affect” Westminster’s power.
This created new uncertainty about what Holyrood is allowed to legislate on.
UK legislation reducing devolved regulatory powers
The UK Government has taken powers to
set UK‑wide standards
regulate subsidies
override devolved rules
impose common frameworks
These powers sit at Westminster, not Holyrood.
Summary list (clean, simple)
Since 2020, Westminster has
Blocked a Scottish Bill using Section 35 (first time ever).
Legislated in devolved areas without consent nine times.
Overrode devolved law using the Internal Market Act (DRS example).
Bypassed Holyrood on spending in devolved areas.
Had the Supreme Court strike down devolved Bills (UNCRC, Local Government).
Centralised regulatory powers over standards, subsidies, and frameworks.
have the Supreme Court restrict devolved legislation
pressure the constitutional space Scottish courts operate in (as seen in the Craig Murray / Palestine Action case)
This means Scotland’s ability to act independently has been significantly reduced.
☮️🌏🤔🏴⚖️
UNIONISTS CANNOT UNDERSTAND..
That with over 300 years of intense propaganda.. they STILL can’t convince Scots that they need to be ruled by another Country’s Parliament.
We were told the Union protected Scots law, Scotland's institutions and our constitutional traditions. We were told the people of Scotland were sovereign.
Yet when Scots repeatedly elect governments seeking a referendum, another parliament simply says No.
So when exactly did Scots agree that their sovereignty, rights and protections could be vetoed by Westminster?
Not when did Westminster claim the power...
When did Scotland grant it? @iScotNews
HAVE YOU NOTICED..
The closer Scotland gets to LEAVING the Union..
The more INTENSE the propaganda becomes.
Don’t fall into their traps..
The Scottish people will decide our future.. and nobody else.
In 2014 the British controlled the narrative and we were sucked in.
NEVER AGAIN