Read on Twitter
Plan A - A referendum with a section 30 : Keep asking Westminster for a Section 30 despite them saying no twice (dead as the proverbial dodo now that Westminster are behind in the polls).
Plan B - Putting the question on the ballot paper which would require us waiting until May 2021. This is in my view too long a period and is in opposition to the specific mandate that the SNP were given to hold it BEFORE the end of this parliament. A good backup plan.
UDI - Should ALWAYS be the last choice. Out of 26 nations who've declared UDI only half got international recognition. The half that didn't, ended up with economic collapse. Out of the half that did, only 2 managed it without armed conflict.
UDI should ONLY be considered when you have tried everything else first, at which point you have a clear case to go to the international community showing you tried everything else first. This should therefore be THE LAST OPTION.
The Peoples Action on Section 30, however, gives a good plan and for reference, I am going to refer to it as "Plan A+"
Why is am I calling it that? Simple! Because it is a referendum BEFORE the end of the parliamentary term AS PROMISED by the SNP.
Why is am I calling it that? Simple! Because it is a referendum BEFORE the end of the parliamentary term AS PROMISED by the SNP.
However, it does not require the permission of the UK Government to hold that referendum.
Plan A+ also lays the groundwork for the legal legitimacy of plan B to be a backup plan.
Plan A+ also lays the groundwork for the legal legitimacy of plan B to be a backup plan.
In simple terms it works like this. A referendum is lawful if it is confirmed to be lawful.
In December 2019, I gave instruction to one of the top solicitors in one of the top law firms in Scotland (Elaine Motion, Balfour and Manson).
In December 2019, I gave instruction to one of the top solicitors in one of the top law firms in Scotland (Elaine Motion, Balfour and Manson).
She then instructed one of the top QC's in Scotland who has set many of the recent precedents on constitutional law in the UK, Mr. Aidan O'Neill, to write a formal opinion on the Scottish Parliament holding a second referendum by way of legislation WITHOUT Westminster consent.
This opinion was release publicly by us on the 17th of January and you can read it for yourself here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/1bkihw5dbltfwpv/Advice%20of%20Senior%20Counsel%20%28FINAL%20at%2014-01-2020%20at%201218%29.pdf?dl=0
Out of all the different routes being talked about, ours is the only one with a solid legal opinion.
Out of all the different routes being talked about, ours is the only one with a solid legal opinion.
We then took this opinion and we sent it to the Advocate General. That is to say, the UK Governments highest legal team in Scotland who advise them on matters of Scottish Law.
We put to the AG that it is constitutional for the Scottish Parliament to legislate on a second referendum without Westminster's consent under the law as it already stands. Do you agree or disagree? They obviously disagreed.
The letter: https://twitter.com/PeoplesAS30/status/1223297675082260485
The letter: https://twitter.com/PeoplesAS30/status/1223297675082260485
With formal disagreement, we then summonsed the UK Government to court and that action is now underway (we also invited the Scottish Government into proceedings for any representations they may wish to make on behalf of the Scottish Parliament).
Summons: https://twitter.com/PeoplesAS30/status/1240970469630783488
Summons: https://twitter.com/PeoplesAS30/status/1240970469630783488
This case will appear in court in a little over a month. We are not "asking" the court "if" Scotland has the power to hold a referendum without consent. We are "stating" that it does and daring the UK Government to prove otherwise.
If we gain a ruling in our favour then there would be no "wildcat" referendum or "unlawful" referendum. As Nicola Sturgeon said in an interview the day after we sent the summons, if the court says it's lawful, then it would be a "lawful" referendum. Period.
And so, like Plan A, if plan A+ gets a positive ruling in this case, it would allow a referendum to be called before the end of this parliamentary term. All that would be required is the SNP to have the will to do so and put through a bill for it quickly.
Plan A+ gives the same benefit of being a clear and concise referendum but without requiring the consent of Westminster. It would be wholly a matter for the Scottish Parliament, not for Westminster.
@Sandybbfan wanna do the honours?
