A more concise way of putting the two options I mentioned in the first paragraph is that we can have a Scottish referendum or we can have a British referendum. One or the other.
"Onward and onward! Then onward some more!"
Why would we, in one breath assert the sovereignty of the people of Scotland and in the next allow that the British state has the rightful authority to question the choices made by the sovereign people of Scotland? What kind of 'sovereignty-lite' does the Reverend Campbell envisage? Is this conditional sovereignty conceptually similar to the idea of 'managed democracy'? I think we should be told before we commit to anything.
Given that no credible process for a free and fair referendum exists within the legal and constitutional framework developed by the British state for the purpose of preserving the Union at any cost to the people of Scotland, the party must commit to creating such a process immediately upon being elected to govern. Only be having a commitment to the Manifesto for Independence well in advance of the election can the Scottish Government have an unassailable mandate to take the action which will be required when the inevitable confrontation with the British state happens.
Only if Boris Johnson had developed a conscience since the last time he was denounced for having done something unforgivable might he now be wounded by a fresh denunciation for some new unforgivable act.
BE THE BREAK! STOP THE VIRUS GETTING TO YOU! STOP THE VIRUS GETTING FROM YOU TO SOMEONE ELSE! DO THIS ALL THE TIME FOR AS LONG AS IT TAKES!
Oversight of broadcasting is a signifier of the nationhood that the British are determined to deny to Scotland.
I confess that despite my extensive reading on the subject since the pandemic started, I had not realised how severe and how common are the mental symptoms linked to Covid-19.
We are entitled to ask why powers over broadcasting are being withheld from Scotland's democratically elected parliament. The only parliament with democratic legitimacy in Scotland. The only parliament that truly speaks for the people of Scotland. The reason cannot be that having powers over broadcasting held by a parliament furth of Scotland and not elected by the people of Scotland and unqualified to speak for Scotland results in a better service for Scotland. Not only is this jarringly counter-intuitive it is most definitely not borne out by the evidence.
The closest thing to information Keith Brown might impart to these eager new arrivals on the Yes side is that it depends. Whether and when there is a referendum depends. What form the referendum takes depends.