Mr Heliums

Course it's shite. The 'club' can hardly pick the team. It isn't 1920.

Course it's shite. The 'club' can hardly pick the team. It isn't 1920.

I think that's the crucial thing. It's an argument Hague can't use now without contradicting himself.

That's a fair whack of a fine. Club didn't mess around with this.

But if that's the case, then the evidence surely isn't lacking – it's just disputable. Otherwise you're suggesting that there is evidence, but that it points to nothing serious.

Why do you say evidence is lacking? Just because TV cameras didn't cover it doesn't mean it will be skirted over. Any action would depend on what words triggered the fight, what happened during it and the players' subsequent actions. We don't know what these were, but there may be little dispute about the facts. The club's response could easily be anything from a rebuke and a fine to a sacking.

Don't think many Saints fans mock another team's support, and I don't think that's what he was doing. I think the point being made was that the drop in away support is as clear a reflection as you could want of how disillusioned Hearts fans are. That sort of thing will have to be noticed by the board.

You should put that on your sig and save everyone a lot of time.

Sturgeon could resign and the SNP could vote against any proposed new First Minister, triggering an election. But anything like that would be nuts. If the electorate are a bit fashed with referendums, forcing another election is hardly going to go down well.

It may be talked about, but they'll run into the same problems I've mentioned and that's why it will never happen. Even an unauthorised referendum would be preferable.

I know this. I have no worries about EU accession if Yes wins a second, lawful referendum. But what makes you think a UK that had already rejected a democratic vote by the Scottish Parliament would prostrate themselves to recognise a state that would have to have declared UDI following a Westminster election? And if the UK didn't recognise us, who else would? EFTA and the EU would not want us. And what if the SNP won most seats in a FPTP election, but only won – say, 40% of the vote? That isn't unlikely. Or what if the SNP lost? Dismissed as a single-issue party for a generation, playing right into the hands of other parties up here. Honestly, the whole idea is so daft on so many levels that not only is it not worth arguing about, it would never happen.

There are all sorts of other reasons – it muddies the waters. You'd get people saying they voted SNP but didn't want independence. It polarises the Unionist vote, so if that side won seats you'd get single-issue Unionists meant to represent our interests at Westminster. It just strikes me as totally daft. I can't see why this would be preferred to even an unauthorised referendum. [EDIT: and the Parliament is undermined by others. The SNP holds great stall in it still. That's an important distinction.]

Because you've all sorts of issues – by putting everything on a Westminster mandate, you're undermining the very Parliament you say is important. Plus, such an approach would conflate independence supporters and SNP voters. Nowadays they're not necessarily the same thing. But most importantly, something like this, even if successful, would imply UDI at the end of it. That's one area where Spain would struggle to recognise Scotland, let alone allow it into the EU.

That would be an utterly daft idea. It won't happen.

Couple of things I haven't seen much about: I thought the UK Govt was going to formally respond to the Scottish Government paper. The latest I heard was that they were going to do it yesterday. Have they done so? But I'm most surprised about the lack of media comment about the failure to negotiate a UK-wide agreement before the Article 50 trigger. May was resolute on this point last year, but there's obviously been no agreement with Scotland. What's the position with Wales and N Ireland. Have their views been incorporated? If not – why isn't more being said about this?

I don't think they'll do as disastrously as they might have, thanks to the single transferable vote system, which in today's polarised political environment will surely hamper the SNP. The other side to this is that everywhere is Tory councillors – and perhaps even entire councils – elected with the help of Labour preference votes and vice versa. It will look pretty ugly.

I was expecting a bit of a more mature debate. Where are decent No voters like Skyline Drifter?

It's not a referendum on nationalism. No one cares if you're an SNP supporter, a Green supporter, or just pro-EU. The principle of the thing is that we should decide ourselves.

Isn't dealing with the fallout of Brexit part of the day job, given that it will affect pretty much every aspect of our lives? PS: It was the Lib Dems who insisted on a two-day debate.

You're not answering my question.

I've yet to see any government of any country fulfil every manifesto commitment. I doubt I ever will. That's surely not an argument to dismiss their democratic right to fulfil one?

I really don't understand your problem. The Faslane jobs are public sector. The poster's modest suggestion is that for the money spent, far more jobs could be created elsewhere in the same sector. That surely helps the economy? Equally, the money saved could be used to stimulate industrial growth.

I don't think there's a conspiracy. But when you look at a company like Kodak, which once employed a 250,000 people, being replaced in terms of market value by a company like Instagram – which had 13 full-time employees – you see the direction of travel: more money to fewer people. But I don't think the global elites are stirring it up: people are complicit in narrowing of power. We give Facebook and Instagram the money happily. We walk into Tesco and use the automated checkouts because we think it's easier. The trouble is that when we look for something to blame, it's much easier to look at immigrants as the cause.

I'd dismissed yesterday's Gordon Brown intervention on all sorts of grounds – pointless, shameless and blind to Brexit – but there's a really enlightening article by Richard Murphy of City University on its positive and negative practicalities. Well worth a read from No and Yes voters alike.

He won't be. He'll refuse interviews. He did last time and got away with it. It's scandalous, really.