The Yes movement itself has dreamed up barriers to independence

The National

2 days ago

His perceived problem with the direct route to independence (briefly, making a UK General Election a plebiscite by a simple manifesto seeking a majority of Scottish votes for Scotland to become independent, and undertaking to implement it on such a majority, if necessary by declaration of the Scottish MPs) is that 'Westminster doesn't have to accept our legal argument in that vote, as the election is for a UK Parliament and Scotland would not be able to generate a majority of votes in Scotland alone ... Westminster can in theory prevent us from leaving ... the majority of English MPs have a veto on what Scotland does or doesn't do.'
He simply fails to grasp what the direct route is all about, in viewing it as a procedure of the Union parliament and attributing to England a role and a power which it does not have.
READ MORE: The lesson for the SNP as new poll puts independence support at 54%
Given that a referendum is prohibited, the one and only way which actually exists for the people of Scotland to vote for the country to become independent is by plebiscitary election. If the Scottish MPs, the highest representatives of the people, are elected as indy members by the majority of votes of the people of Scotland, they will occupy virtually all the Scottish seats, mandated by those votes to take Scotland out of the Union. Legal argument does not come into it. It is an election. The purpose and result of an election is the filling of seats. English votes and English seats do not come into it, since their make-up is neither here nor there for Scottish independence, and they have no part to play.
The Scottish members would have the legal, constitutional and democratic right and authority (and indeed the duty?) to fulfil the democratic imperative and carry out their mandate irrespective of other parts of the UK (reversing, this time democratically, the step into union taken three centuries ago by their predecessors). There is no prohibition of such a course. If Mr Potts or anyone else can find one, I would be interested to know.
In those circumstances, the declaration of Scottish independence by its MPs cannot properly be viewed as occurring either while Scotland is part of the Union or while it is independent. It is rather the deed of an instant marking the transition from one status to the other, a normal operation in steps of great legal effect.
READ MORE: Tommy Sheppard: Why I stand by my claim after fierce debate that followed it
I imagine that London will actually negotiate the mechanism and details of independence with Edinburgh, but only after Scotland has voted for it and our representatives plainly demonstrate their resolve to carry it through at their own hand if necessary.
Mr Potts' position is far from unique in the independence movement, most of which may indeed be with him. Heaven help us, but the fixation with English omnipotence and the barriers it can place in Scotland's way is a concoction of the movement itself, as if we were determined not to succeed. No such claim has ever emerged from London, where any rare UK Government statement on the issue has been to the effect that Scotland may go if it no longer consents to the Union.
Alan Crocket
Motherwell
AMIDST the ongoing chaos, let it be known that Scotland's hydro, wind and other renewable energy sources are helping to keep this broken UK afloat. Yet in return, energy-rich Scotland, pays among the highest bills in the UK and indeed Europe.
The SNP and all independence campaigners cannot remain silent about this grossly unfair situation. It's time for the people of Scotland to take back control, believe, stand up and deliver independence.
Grant Frazer
Newtonmore