A bad day to bury bad news.

I'm referring to Wednesday 8^th Feb when we saw the House of Commons with that massive majority of 372, (thank you Labour! ) vote to give a third reading to Article 50. Bad enough, yes, but that was the same day the Dubs Amendment was scrapped and the figure of 3,000 (child refugees) was slashed to 350. 

Was that sufficient for one day of infamy? NO, the rUK govt went for broke by refusing to support and guarantee EU citizens in the UK. It would appear then that child refugees are no more than casual statistics and EU citizens are clearly to be bargaining chips in the months to come, along the lines of ‘reciprocal’ when considering ‘Brits abroad’. 

What a shameful period in our history! 

There may be some redress in the coming months, and I believe our MPs will continue the fight in Westminster, but nothing will erase the stigma of that particular day and the actions of government and those pretendy, opposition parties. 

Both sides of the House appear more interested than ever before in appeasing the Brexiteers, especially with those two by-elections later this month. Should Labour lose one seat to the Tories, that will be bad enough, but to lose two, with the other going to UKIP  would clearly signify long years in the wilderness with no hopes of governing. 

So, how much longer will voters in Scotland believe the posturing of  Dugdale and her call for  new Act of Union?  

I’m not alone in believing it’s better to revoke that Union, and most definitely not renew it by rewriting it! 

How long will there be in a belief in Davidson and her ability to flip her flops in line with Tory HQ requirements, as opposed to getting on with her real, day job job namely as an MSP, fighting  for the economic, fiscal, social well being of Scotland?  

Hopefully our May elections will send a clear message to the Unionists’ parties and their HQ’s by Scotland clearly setting out  our direction of political travel in the coming months ahead. 

And now that we have Nutt True seeming to have joined the pantheon of alternative facts, economical with the truth  and project fear, then we need to be prepared for all that and more,  and worse: 

the resurrection of the Browns, the Murphys , maybe even some luvvies all telling us how better off we’ll be in a union bent of self destruction from within. The irony of the Labour party unable to oppose a destructive government, trying to tell us to stay with them, is obviously lost on them.

But as we already know Bettertogether2 will be potentially astoxic for political parties in the coming months as it was in 2013-14  let them fight that one out amongst themselves. 

Our challenge is bigger: ensuring the ‘when’ we leave this union and that day is the day when we can shout the good news.

👀    .............................................

Nutt True:  The National Feb 15th 2017  www.thenational.scot/

alternative facts ....... used by U.S. Counselor ( to President Trump ) Kellyanne Conway during a Meet the Press interview on January 22, 2017. She defended White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer's false statement about the attendance numbers at Donald Trump's inauguration as President of the United States.

'economical with the truth '  ....comes from a statement given in evidence by Sir Robert Armstrong, British cabinet secretary, in the 'Spycatcher' trial (1986), conducted to prevent publication of a book by a former MI5 employee, 'It contains a misleading impression, not a lie. It was being economical with the truth.'

project fear  ...1 and 2! The first was set up  in 2012 and ran thru 13-14 . Set up with support of the three main pro union political parties in Scotland: Labour, Tory, Lib Dem, as an inti independence platform, and the 2nd was a prime factor in the EU referendum held in 2016. Both gave out bad news, very bad news stories  
18 Sep 2015 / Andrew Learmonth, Journalist / @andrewlearmonth      www.thenational.scot/

Now's the time.....

.......... to prepare, and be bold enough to believe in ourselves and the future as we determine…not as some after thought  hitched up to Westminster.

PM May has boxed herself, and by implication, us, into a tight corner, sealed with a couple of handshakes, Trump, that visit, Erdogan in Turkey and that arms deal. It cannot be anything other than sheer desperation brought on by  a lack of economic pre-planning for a post-Brexit state, that caused PM May and her government to push for an early state visit by President Trump. And the notion of ‘unintended consequences’ never once crossed the mind of anyone in the rUK government?

No matter that the national petition to withdraw the invite has forced its way on to the  Parliamentary timetable, the date for the debate being set as February 20^th, it will be very difficult if not impossible for the UK government  to downgrade the visit from ‘state’ to ‘official’. From what we have seen of Trump, a ‘carrot’ of the state visit postponed until later will be unacceptable.  So, the UK is stuck with him, his entourage, his demands: no to Prince Charles, but yes to the obligatory horse drawn carriage. Perhaps HM has some old nags somewhere (no I am not referring to family hangers-on) that can do no more than amble along at a very slow pace, up the Mall, that tree lined avenue crowded with protesters and their placards. You must admit that many of those seen on Monday 30thth January across Scotland (and yes, the rest of the world, too) were real crackers. Have those same powers-that-be considered the other ‘unintended consequences’ of potentially exporting Trump up to us and Balmoral? Have they forgotten Farage on the High St in Edinburgh, the pub and taxis fiasco? I can see a wee daunder up to Balmoral, placards, protesters and more pussy hats: a fine walk in the country side you could yet provide us with, PM May!

But whilst this is of importance, the EU question is more so when set in the context of the love-in trade deals being pursued by the PM with Trump and Erdogan. Where next one fears, with whom, and what would we be offering up this time?  It’s a sair feicht right enough when we see the likes of Ken Clarke in Parliament, 31^st Jan, outlining why he will vote against the government and with the SNP. This is what a sound opposition should look like, seeking consensus, building allies, pursuing common interests. It is was correctly rumoured that even Ian Murray would vote against his party whip, leaving just wee Mundell running after his London masters.

The Scotland we want to be in the future with regards our socio-economic well-being and international positioning is obviously at odds with Westminster and won’t  be achieved within this unequal union. As we continue to see our nation disregarded, thrown some ‘scraps’, a Commission here or there, now and then, some glib phrases and empty promises,  the point is...when will we say enough is enough?

That second referendum is coming, have no doubt. But if pro inde parties need to wait for the starting gun to be fired, we don’t. Those meetings, assemblies, discussion groups, that grass roots movement, need to regain that earlier momentum. We need to take the vision of our inde Scotland, and demonstrate across the whole spectrum including  the £, our foreign policy, a food policy, a citizens income even, that a different Scotland is possible.  

We have to be bold enough to evidence and deliberate alternatives that show a Scotland changing for the better as shaped by us, and not Westminster can be gained. So now, it’s time to challenge those who don’t agree with us to demonstrate what their vision of a future Scotland looks like.

They can’t and they won’t, since they know full well that our future will be no more than a forgotten foot note, the negated part of an unbalanced union. Very scary since that means:  even more bleak now compared to the past.

So, as  rUK scrambles for an identity and the fiscal means to sustain itself, it’s  time to remember other (former) colonies as they watched their resources continue to be plundered, their people continue to emigrate, their aspirations wither, their determination falter.

That second opportunity when it comes is all that we will have. Indeyref2 is it…we’ll be laughed off the pitch if we vote no and then try a third time…..**remember Quebec. October 30, 1995, and that slim majority that said 'no'!

Now’s it's our time to prepare, and be bold enough to believe in ourselves and our future as we determine…not as some after thought  hitched up to Westminster.

** Quebec sovereignty referendum 

Do you agree that Quebec should become sovereign after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership within the scope of the bill respecting the future of Quebec and of the agreement signed on June 12, 1995?
Acceptez-vous que le Québec devienne souverain, après avoir offert formellement au Canada un nouveau partenariat économique et politique, dans le cadre du projet de loi sur l'avenir du Québec et de l'entente signée le 12 juin 1995?

	October 30, 1995 Results
Results Votes  % Yes 2,308,360 49.42% No 2,362,648 50.58% Total votes 4,757,509 100.00% Registered voters/turnout 5,087,009 93.52%