Wrongful Political Parties in Scotland?

A couple of days ago I wrote a couple of blog posts on the Union with England Act 1707 and Scotland being Politically Occupied Territory.

Upon finishing these and seeing responses across social media, I wanted to dig a little deeper into what the law states about Devolution, The Union with England Act 1707 and how the Electoral Commission is used to register political parties in the UK via the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000.

Now, I’ll pre warn you, this blog post will be longer than usual but it will be worth the read right to the end.

Hopefully some constitutional experts and some Scots lawyers can glance upon it and comment.

Untitled

Firstly, the Union with England Act 1707 as ratified by the Parliament of Scotland is still current legislation, well part of it is.

Articles 5, 8, 9, 10-15, 17, 22 and 23 have all been repealed or altered by Westminster as late as 1964 and as early as 1906.  This means that it can be repealed in its entirety, which, by my understanding would make the Treaty redundant and the Union obsolete.

Part I of The Scotland Act 1998, Section 37 (Act of Union) states The Union with Scotland Act 1706 (English Parliament Act) and the Union with England Act 1707 (Scottish Parliament Act) have effect SUBJECT to this Act.

I’m no lawyer but that implies that the Scottish Parliament has the ability to dissolve the Act of Union by repealing the Union with England Act 1707 as laid out in Part I Section 37 of the Scotland Act 1998.  If there is no Union with England Act, there is no subject Act of Union to stand against.

Secondly, when we look at the political parties that stand in elections in Scotland we need to look at what is written in the Scotland Act 1998 and the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000.

Part I of The Scotland Act 1998, Section 5, Clause 4 states

Any registered political party may submit to the regional returning officer a list of candidates to be regional members for a particular region (referred to in this Act, in relation to the region, as the party’s “regional list”).

The key word above is REGISTERED.  Now lets have a look at what Registered actually means.

Part II (Registration of Political parties) of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000, in Requirements for registration, Section 22, Clause 6 states:

For the purposes of this Act a person stands for election in the name of a registered party if his nomination paper includes a description authorised by a certificate issued by or on behalf of the registered nominating officer of the party.

Again, a person can stand for election in the name of a REGISTERED party…

Now, we all know that when it comes to the main Unionist Parties, the Conservative and Unionist Party, the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats are the registered names of the political parties that purport to be Scottish.

Part II (Registration of Political parties) of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000, in registration, Section 28 Clause 4 (da) (I and II) states:

Where a party sends an application to the Commission in accordance with subsection (1), the Commission shall grant the application unless in their opinion the party proposes a registered name which—

would be likely, were it to appear on a ballot paper issued at an election—

  • to result in an elector being misled as to the effect of his vote, or
  • to contradict, or hinder an elector’s understanding of, any directions for his guidance in voting given on the ballot paper or elsewhere,

Now, this to me is key.

When the three main unionist parties campaign for election, they all name themselves as ‘Scottish’.  This implies and causes significant confusion amongst Scotland that they are indeed separate parties.  The leaders of the respective parties, Jeremy Corbyn, Theresa May and Vince Cable are also hidden and disguised as Richard Leonard, Ruth Davidson and Willie Rennie.

This is in direct contradiction to the above points I and II and should have resulted in the three main Unionist Parties being denied to stand in elections in Scotland as per the Scotland Act 1998 as the three main unionist parties of Scotland are all purposefully deceiving the electorate in Scotland as to the effect of their vote and to hinder an electors understanding.

Part II (Registration of Political parties) of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000, in registration, Section 29 Clause 2 (ca) (I and II) states:

Where a request is made by a party under this section in relation to an emblem, the Commission shall register the emblem as an emblem of the party unless in their opinion it—

would be likely, were it to appear on a ballot paper issued at an election—

  • to result in an elector being misled as to the effect of his vote, or
  • to contradict, or hinder an elector’s understanding of, any directions for his guidance in voting given on the ballot paper or elsewhere.

Again, the Electoral Commission granting the three main Unionist parties the ability to register emblems that reflect ‘Scotland’, is in direct contradiction to what they state should be prevented in clauses I and II above.

All three unionist parties, which are actually parties registered in England that stand in Westminster, are using emblems and name registrations to directly influence and confuse the electorate in Scotland and are not explicitly telling people they are in fact registered parties of Great Britain, under the leadership of Theresa May, Jeremy Corbyn and Vince Cable respectively.

The Scottish electorate in Westminster stretches to a maximum of 59 MPs and in Holyrood it stretches to a maximum of 129.  The SNP cannot stand candidates in England, however, it appears that because the Electoral Commission do NOT feel that the Conservative and Unionist Party, Labour Party and Liberal Democrat Parties are confusing the population of Scotland, the leaders of the three main Unionist Parties who reside in Westminster are allowed to stand candidates at elections in Scotland and steal seats at the Scottish Parliament too.

Imagine the uproar if the SNP stood candidates in English elections, even if they changed their name and logo and pretended to be parties of and for England?

Why did the Scottish Green Party have to register itself as separate from the Green party? Was that forced upon it by the Electoral Commission?  If so, why did that not apply to the three main Unionist Parties? I’d like to ask Patrick Harvie and Caroline Lucas…

My limited checking of this, and my grasp of the English language leads me to be believe that the three main Unionist parties registered in London are purposefully trying to deceive the Scottish people into voting for them to exercise control of the Scottish Parliament and electorate.

Why have the Electoral Commission allowed this and why has no one challenged it legally in court?

 

Advertisement

10 thoughts on “Wrongful Political Parties in Scotland?

  1. A great piece of work which gives food for thought. Could it be that the Electoral Commission is run by Unionists? I’m guessing that even if these parties registered n Scotland they would still act the same as they do now and serve the interests of Wastemonster instead of Scotland.

    I really do hope that we can repeal the Treaty and make the Union obsolete, and soon.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. I think that if they have to register in Scotland as separate parties, there will be funding issues. Great idea! I’ve wondered this for a long time, but thought it would only hit on Independence Day. I hope we get legal answers. Nothing would make me happier than having only Scottish parties in Scotland!

      Liked by 3 people

  2. So this is the response to the SNP losing 21 seats and 500k voters last year? Comb through legislation, ignore the spirit of the law and attempt to use the letter of the law, to try to get the other parties (who 65% of your fellow Scots voted for) somehow declared illegitimate or not quite Scottish enough? That joyous civic nationalist respect for democracy again………who are you kidding, the indy movement has flat lined way below the necessary levels for any meaningful advance and this bollocks shows just how desperate you are.

    Like

  3. Ignore the spirit of law? What do you mean by the spirit of law? Do you mean just ignore it if people are breaking it but its find because no one else notices? Tommy, your comment is exactly why it needs clarified…you claim 65% of people voted for them, how many of them voted for them under the thought that they are actually Scottish parties, or that they are actually parties at all and that their leaders are in fact Ruth, Richard and Willie?

    It is indeed joyous civic nationalism that respects democracy because, my blog post is endearing to enable legal democracy by allowing people the ability to see (or potentially see) how Devolution and the Scottish Parliamant (not independence) is being undermined…

    p.s. it is also your right to be able to ask questions and confront difficult issues. Thats the joy of living in a democracy!

    Like

    1. I enjoy many of your articles Mac, but this is howling at the moon. What is you aim here? repeal the Act of Union? Delegitimise political parties who are pro-union? Not a chance.

      Scotland is currently in the grip of a minority nationalist movement who have a slender majority within the political apparatus. I can remember when Quebec was the go to scenario for the
      Scottish Nationalists, for good reason, there are a number of similarities. By
      the late 20th century the Quebec Nationalist party were polling in the 40’s and
      had gained control of the political apparatus, but they could not quite gain
      the required majority for ‘independence’. They used their political position to
      centralise and politicise everything they could, particularly in the field of
      language and culture. (sound familiar?) Try as they might, they could not
      convince the majority that partition of Canada, tearing Quebec from a large
      diverse democratic economy was in the cultural, political, social or economic
      interests of the people of Quebec or the people of Canada. For over 20 years the nationalists
      obsessed over a constitutional question whilst the economy became stagnant, with
      little investment coming in and worse still investment flowing out. Thousands
      of people and businesses relocated to escape the turgid reality and uncertainty
      of neverendum. This situation became so dire by the mid 90’s the SNP quietly dropped any talk
      of Quebec, and switched affections to Catalonia….how is that working out? Yet
      another minority nationalist movement who ignore the wishes of the majority,
      force through an illegal referendum and the Catalan economy faces capital
      flight, political paralysis and a grim outlook for the future, with their
      leadership now jailed facing charges of sedition. The UDI was greeted with
      indifference across the EU, no significant support anywhere least of all in Spain,
      whilst in Catalonia itself the mass mobilisation of civil action has simply
      failed to materialise. All this so that a few emotional fanatics can march
      around, singing songs and waving flags in a state of arousal?

      Odds are the Scottish situation will end in similar fashion, if there is another indyref the people will again reject it.

      Scotland is now in a neverendum situation, over a decade of
      constitutional bun fighting, technocratic managerialist centralisation, complete
      with re-branding into a moribund language, gleefully led by cynical self-interested politicians, with mood music provided by similarly self- interested artists, writers and poets.

      If the campaign for indy is now reduced to hunting for legal technicalities, as this piece appears it really is in a poor state of health.

      Like

      1. Tommy, i appreciate you taking the time to reply.

        The campaign for indy hasn’t started yet. This blog post is my own research, not part of any official movement, based on my understanding of how the UK Government maintains a grip on Devolution.

        Scotland is in a unique position globally, with NO other nation/region or whatever in a similar situation, and no other prcedent to compare against.

        Scotland is not a Qubec, or Catalonia because Scotland is in a state of independence alreayd, the only ‘hitch’ is purley its political unity with England. The only reason a referendum is being used is because the Government in Scotland understands that simply repealing the Union with England Act (Not Act of Union) could cause bigger problems.

        When independence comes (of that i am sure as Devolution is stripped and Brexit impact felt), you will see that the way ‘independence’ is decalred, is that the Union with England Act will be repealed and that will nulify the Act of Union.

        I don’t have time to reply to your full comment, but again, thanks for writing it and thanks for reading the blogs that i post!

        Liked by 4 people

  4. very interesting article , i complained sometime ago to the electoral commission in regards why the british labour party could call itself scottish labour which was intended to decieve the electors as to it being a scottish party and the reply i got was that they were allowed to call themselves whateverv they wanted

    Liked by 1 person

  5. You are indeed correct Mac, in that it’s a deception to lure the “busy” voter who hasn’t the time to research, they think they’re getting a party that cares for Scotland and that’s so obviously not the case. The London based political parties should be reprimanded for this and stopped, it surely breaks electoral rules to put misleading names on campaigning leaflets.
    Whilst I respect the fortune tellers opinion above, the comparison with these other movements is nonsensical, different times, different circumstances.
    We can always be sure of Naysayers, especially if they’re from the opposite side, but we can also be sure of gaining our Independence too, not long now.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s