I really and truly cannot get my head around this relationship we have with England.
Historically, Scotland signed up to the Union of the Crowns on the strict understanding (to appease widespread and often violent opposition) that it would be an “equal and honourable partnership”.
This declaration was signed and sealed by both parties to act as the very foundation of the new constitution. So at what point in this 300-year-old agreement was there a distinct change that allowed England to move from equal to dominant partner?
Where did this authority come from that has led eventually to Scotland being relegated to mere colonial status?
What strangulation of logic now allows England to refuse Holyrood’s requests for more powers?
They do not have and never had such an authority. Yet even a request for broadcasting rights to be ceded to Edinburgh saw Westminster pout the petted lip and stamp its anger into the school playground before striding off in a monumental huff, furious at such an outrageous demand.
Frankly, if Holyrood’s requests for further powers are not met in full and with good will, Westminster should be dismissed utterly and the breaking of the Treaty of Union immediately referred to the Court of Human Rights.
What if the referendum result was not legal? In other words, if it was shown that it was obtained under false pretences?
The “vow” offered in the last few days before the poll persuaded thousands to vote No. If its promises are not delivered, it is hard not to conclude that there was an intention to deceive and, accordingly, that there is just cause for the result to be declared null and void.
We must have honesty, even in politics, and not lower ourselves to accept standards which result in the electorate being cheated.
Let us have an honest referendum.