Thursday, 30 August 2012

Westminster's Little Big Horn moment ...

(For Custer, read Scottish Secretary Moore; for Seventh Cavalry read Bitter Together Campaign) 

The story so far - Custer and the Seventh Cavalry have been patrolling through Scotland and have become increasingly worried about the rising level of hostility and rebellion pointed at their civilising power influence coupled with the growing desire of the natives for their land back.

Custer has informed his superiors in head quarters of the state of affairs and has been told, in no uncertain terms, to get the Scottish Reservation back under control, so far Custer and the Seventh Cavalry's attempts have been met with a withering fire of contempt from the natives (Get tae 'F' ye big jessy, yer aw Tory bampots, why don't you get a proper job sonny ...). Today Custer is making a last stand, along with the Seventh Cavalry, on the legal equivalent of the Little Big Horn (sections 5 & 30 of the 1998 Scotland Act) here's why it will end up with a massacre for Custer and his men as history repeats itself .....

Lord Cooper (1953) - There is no such entity as the 'unlimited sovereignty' claimed by Westminster in Scots Law and constitutional practice, it is a purely English legal and constitutional construct.

Lord Cooper (1953) - The independence of Scots Law is protected by the Treaty of Union for all time.

Lord Cooper (1953) - For 'all time' means exactly that

Lord Cooper (1953) - Westminster has no powers to alter, ammend or adjust the conditions of the Treaty of Union; only the sovereign parliaments of Scotland and England have such powers - the legal point was conceded on behalf of Westminster by the Lord Advocate.

Lord Cooper (1953)
- Scottish sovereignty is limited by the considered will of the Scottish people.

UK Supreme Court (2010) - The UK Supreme Court has no right to alter any Act, Bill or Statue of the Scottish Parliament which reflects the considered will of the Scottish people.

The SNP Government were elected to Holyrood in part to reflect the considered will of the Scottish people for a referendum to either withdraw from the Treaty of Union and return to independent nationhood or to seek a radically new Union settlement (Devo-max).

If Holyrood passes the Scottish Referendum Bill (2014) then Westminster can not challenge the 'legality', under section 5 or 30 of the 1998 Scotland Act, as the UK Supreme Court have already stated they have no rights to set aside any Bill, Act or Statute of the Scottish Parliament which reflects the considered will of the Scottish people.

Westminster has no 'rights' to enforce its will on Scotland as that assumes it has 'unlimited sovereignty' a concept not recognised in Scots Law or constitutional practice as sovereignty in Scotland is limited by the will of the people. (Lord Cooper/ UK Supreme Court)

What is true is that Westminster can not negotiate Devo-max with out gaining the approval of the sovereign English Parliament as Westminster has no powers to change, ammend or alter the Treaty of Union which is what Devo-max requires (Lord Cooper 1953). Westminster does not want to be bound by a referendum on Devo-max by the English electorate or, even worse, a recalled English Parliament both of whom are most likely to reject the Devo-max proposition which means Scottish independence by default.

All that is now left to Westminster is to have a screaming hissy fit, throw all their toys out of the pram and go off in a huff .... which is exactly what Moore, Davidson et al are doing. On the other hand Micheal Forsyth will be shouting out - I told you so, I knew this would all end in tears ... and the massacre is well under way at Little Big Horn the sequel.


  1. Not a good analogy to draw.

    What happened to the Sioux Nation after the battle?

  2. Custer and the Seventh stayed dead - it took a massive level of military asset to bring them back in check one Westminster will not expend because its skint :-)