Yup - anything can be changed and challenged, otherwise we would have some very odd institutions.
Hoepfully he'll be in full Braveheart war paint for that authentic look!
The 1707 "Anchluss" is hardly comparable with the upcoming vote which is being conducted in a Democratic manner.
Mind you "The English Gold" in the form of Devo-Max seems to be the modern substitute for overt coercion of a "Post Darian" virtually Bankrupt State.
Yes, this is a fatuous statement. In an election, we are not really meant to be voting for a government, but a representative, our MP. That MP is meant to represent the views of his constituents. OK, the party system prevents much of this. But why should anyone expect that, just because they vote for a party, they should be governed by that party which will universally do what they want.
It is refreshing to see Plaid Cymru point out this week that the Barnett formula has already been favouring Scotland over the rest of the UK, including England, for years. If this is oppression, can we have some, please!
If the UK government is even half-competent they will already have well-prepared plans to take him into custody immediately upon news of the referendum proposal being rejected at the ballot box.
Could be quite interesting. If there is a "Yes", while, of course, Scots would still be a part of the General Election, would anyone trust a Labour government to handle the negotiations fairly when a sizeable proportion of their MPs would likely be Scottish? And, if, as seems likely, the outcome is another nearly hung Parliament, the West Lothian issue becomes massive.
