"It's bizarre how in Westminster elections parliamentary majority is invariably cited as mandate, yet in Scotland, the yardstick is vote share."
A majority of seats in a Westminster GE does not confer any authority with which to change the UK Constitution either. Hence, it's nonsensical of Sturgeon to threaten to turn any future GE into a de facto referendum.
GEs is only about sending Parliamentary representatives to the Westminster Parliament.
The Westminster Parliament remains the Supreme Authority as the UK Supreme Court upheld in regards to the Brexit negotiations which meant Belfast, Cardiff and Edinburgh had no legal Constitutional right to enter into negotiations whatsoever.
The Constitution is a Reserved Power.
"Regardless, the question of numbers is largely immaterial in any case, given that the SNP/Greens form the SG thanks to parliamentary numbers, and therefore are in the position whereby they can act on manifesto pledges. Perhaps you'd rather elections were run on the basis that if a party wins they should have to implement the defeated parties' policies instead?"
Firstly, you compared a General Election with a Referendum. This is an absurd comparison to make since a GE is strictly about choosing a national and sovereign government. It is NOT about making constitutional changes which is the function of Referenda.
Indeed, Sturgeon herself has had to admit that "a vote for the SNP is not a vote for another referendum". That's a crucial point here.
Sure, the SNP can ask the UK Government for consent via a Section 30 Order to hold a referendum on independence. That's democratic.
But what the SNP cannot do is attempt to bypass the UK Government and the Westminster Parliament by trying to use Holyrood as a means to hold this referendum.
Regarding the Referendums (Scotland) Bill, the Scottish Government's own website states:
"The Bill would only allow for referendums on issues which the Scottish Parliament has responsibility for. These are known as a ‘devolved’ matters."
The powers of the Scottish Parliament is already set out in the available legislation dealing with this.
And constitutional issues is NOT one of them.
Of course, the SNP has been deliberately misleading the people in Scotland over the actual contents of their Referendums (Scotland) Bill. Tut, tut.
"As for your nonsensical claim that the SNP are attempting to act outwith their competence; the fact that they are currently in the middle of a Supreme Court case precisely to establish exactly where competence begins and ends would rather seem to contradict that."
Not so. If you can point to the available legislation dealing with the devolved powers of Holyrood which states that Parliament can have the ability to hold an independence referendum irrespective of Westminster.....I'm all ears!
Bringing a case to the Supreme Court does NOT in and of itself mean there's some ambiguity as to whether the SNP have the power to hold an independence referendum. There's no ambiguity.
All it means is the SNP want to try pushing their agenda in this direction, but they clearly are not remotely confident the UK Supreme Court will rule in their favour.
The SNP thought they were on to a winner regarding Brexit negotiations until the Supreme Court ruled otherwise. Your logic doesn't hold up there as bringing a case doesn't confer legitimacy on your own claim.
Hence, Sturgeon's nonsensical threat to turn every General Election into a de factor referendum. It really wouldn't translate as one by any means. It just sounds desperate.