Tories rage as Scottish school head suggests Union flag is 'sectarian'
Scottish Tory MSPs Jackson Carlaw and Russell Findlay were among those to express anger at the headteacher's letter after it was shared online over the weekend.
In it, the head of the East Renfrewshire primary – which The National has decided not to name – said to families of P7 leavers that the use of a Union flag in images may have been a 'mistake'.
They wrote: 'Thank you for coming along last night to make the P7 leavers a special event in the life of the school. The children looked fantastic and had a great time.
'Unfortunately the use of the Union flag with staff images on caused some upset at the beginning of the evening.
'As a school we promote inclusion and acceptance, actively working against potentially offensive or sectarian messaging. Although we recognise this was not the intent we are concerned that others within or beyond the school community may consider that this is something we would encourage.
'I have spoken with the children about it this morning explaining why it wasn't a good idea:
Using images without permission
The symbolism and association of flags and symbols to different groups of people
Their actions which were contrary to the school values of respect and kindness
'I hope this helps everyone understand where mistakes have been made and we can move on enjoying the rest of the end of term celebrations.'
East Renfrewshire Council confirmed that the letter is genuine.
Scottish Tory leader Russell Findlay shared it online, writing: 'This is what happens when the SNP's toxic nationalism infects schools and councils. Our country's flag is NOT 'offensive or sectarian'.'
And Carlaw, a former Scottish Tory leader, said: 'I am both angry and concerned to learn that an official letter (now confirmed as genuine) issued by the head teacher of a primary school in East Renfrewshire has suggested the use of the Union Flag amounts to 'sectarian messaging'.
'Let me be clear – to equate the Union Flag with sectarianism is totally unacceptable and deeply offensive to people both locally and across Scotland.
'Having spoken with a senior official at @EastRenCouncil this morning, I expect an urgent response, resolution, and retraction.
'As a start, the council must issue an unconditional apology.
'Our national flag is not up for debate – it is a symbol of our tradition, unity as a nation and hope for so many.'
East Renfrewshire Council has been approached for comment.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
Kemi was at her best skewering Labour on grooming gangs
Yvette Cooper had come to the House of Commons to shut, as loudly and with as much gusto as she could manage, a stable door long after the horse had bolted. The government was finally doing what it had long derided as 'a far-right bandwagon' and agreed to a national inquiry into the Pakistani rape gangs which blighted small-town England for decades. On the bench next to her were Bridget Philistine – who branded Tory calls for an inquiry 'political opportunism', Big Ange, whose new rules on Islamophobia would probably have made any of the journalism which exposed the gangs illegal, and Lucy Powell – the tin-eared, suet-brained embodiment of Blob-think who claimed that mentioning the gangs was a 'dog whistle'. To have this cavalcade of guilty women lined up as the inquiry was announced was almost insulting. Mrs Badenoch, by contrast, had turned up in the House of Commons. She was angry The detail was repugnant. Gangs had targeted children as young as ten, specifically grooming those with learning difficulties and those in care. 'Perpetrators' Cooper told us, 'walked free because no one joined the dots'. Or rather, they did join the dots, but the prevailing orthodoxy told them to ignore what they saw for fear of being branded racist? That sounds more accurate. Cooper admitted that the report had 'identified over-representation of Asian and Pakistani heritage men' in the gangs. This was like someone earnestly telling the house that they had needed a lengthy and costly investigation to tell them that the sky was blue. Don't worry though: having finally realised what was wrong, Ol' Sherlock Cooper assured the house that she had a plan of action. Inevitably this looked like mashing the same buttons again and again, like an impatient pedestrian at a zebra crossing. They would be 'new laws' and 'new police operations'. If only someone had tried these things before? Keir Starmer was on his way to Canada for the G7; exactly the sort of self-congratulatory environment he prefers to dealing with the country's problems. Mrs Badenoch, by contrast, had turned up in the House of Commons. She was angry. 'Three times Labour MPs voted against an inquiry', she yelled as the members opposite squealed and squirmed. In parliamentary terms this was probably the best the Leader of the Opposition has been: passionate, coruscating and unambiguously in the right. It's just a shame it took such shameful behaviour from the government to bring it out. The depths had not yet been plumbed, however, until an intervention by Labour MP for Telford, Shaun Davies, who condemned Rishi Sunak for 'refusing to provide a statutory inquiry into' grooming gangs in Telford – before promptly scuttling away. As leader of Telford and Wrekin Council in 2016, Davies himself signed a letter calling for the then-prime minister and home secretary to reject calls for an inquiry into child sexual abuse in the town. There are many things we could say about Mr Davies, a typical Labour 2024 backbencher: so lightweight and ridiculous he might as well be made of helium. We might suggest that his weaselling self-preservation efforts imply a lack of conscience. We might say that his own track record in local government suggests, at best, a lack of competence. We might observe that his attempt today to smear his opponents while simultaneously claiming to 'take this out of the party-political field' suggests that he has no spine. However, one thing we cannot suggest that he lacks, in turning up and daring to speak at a moment like this, is a brass neck.
The Herald Scotland
2 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
John Swinney looks to the past as he plans for the future
Just to impress how important the First Minister's speech was on Monday, introducing him, Kate Forbes told the great and the good of Scottish public life—squeezed into Glasgow University's Imaging Centre of Excellence—that her boss was about to make a 'landmark speech.' On Sunday, the Scottish Government told journalists it was a 'major speech,' while the previous day, John Swinney's official spokesman described it as a 'keynote event.' Was it really that big a deal? Well, it might be—if it works. Read more from Unspun: The SNP leader told us the status quo is no longer sustainable—that demographic pressures, fiscal constraints, climate change and rising demand are leaving public services straining at the seams. He said bold, collective action was needed—that there had to be a fundamental shift in how public services are designed and delivered. Central to this transformation, Mr Swinney said, were four key elements: 'empowerment, integration, efficiency and prevention.' They were, the First Minister reminded us, the four principles of the Christie Commission. Fifteen years ago, you might remember, the Commission on the Future Delivery of Public Services in Scotland, chaired by Dr Campbell Christie, was tasked by Mr Swinney with examining the long-term challenges facing public services—including budget pressures, demographic change, rising demand and persistent inequalities. The Commission's report—let's call it a landmark report—called for community-driven, preventative and collaborative approaches to address these systemic challenges. Key recommendations included prioritising prevention to reduce long-term costs, enhancing performance through technology, and closer working across sectors. Sign up to Scotland's top politics newsletter and get it directly to your inbox. Perhaps the biggest example of post-Christie reform was replacing the country's eight police forces with one. Mr Swinney pointed to it on Monday as a success: 'The creation of a single Scottish Police service has led to over £200 million in savings over legacy arrangements, while crime has continued to fall to near record low levels.' But it's fair to say, progress has been uneven at best. (Image: Damian Shields) Tickets for Unspun Live at the Edinburgh Fringe are available now — click here to book your place. In a 2021 blog post looking at Christie ten years on, Audit Scotland said there had been a 'major implementation gap between policy ambitions and delivery on the ground.' They gave a number of examples, including the paltry progress on closing the poverty-related attainment gap. Dr Christie was quite clear that one of the biggest stumbling blocks to reform was that 'institutions and structures resist change, especially radical change.' Is that still true? In his speech, Mr Swinney told the public sector leaders he wanted them to leave with a clear sense of his ambition and commitment 'to this national project of renewal.' 'I want you to feel enthused, but more importantly empowered. This will only happen if we, if you, make it happen. 'People often tell me that they feel as though they do not have permission to deliver the change in their organisation that they know is needed. Well today, let's give each other that permission.' John Swinney's right that the Christie principles are more relevant than ever, and maybe with modern tools, like AI, the implementation gap can be overcome. What was interesting was how receptive the audience was to the First Minister's message—but also how sceptical they were that he could deliver it, that, as one questioner put it, the lofty goals would "bump into reality." A landmark speech? Perhaps. Now he just needs to stick the landing.
The National
2 hours ago
- The National
The SNP's current strategy is political suicide – what needs to change
THE independence movement is at a critical juncture. The SNP, as its leading political arm, is struggling to convince even its most loyal supporters that it has a serious plan for delivering independence. Yet, because the SNP dominates the movement so completely, to the average voter outside the independence bubble, the SNP is the independence movement. This creates a dangerous negative cycle: when the SNP fails to visibly campaign for independence, voters subconsciously reduce the independence cause to whatever policy debates the SNP is currently mired in, such as gender reforms, ferry delays, court cases, or bottle return schemes etc. The SNP then conducts polls to gauge the public's priorities and finds, unsurprisingly, that immediate governance issues and hardships like the cost of living crisis dominate voters' concerns, not independence. So, the party campaigns on those issues and reinforces the perception that these are what the independence movement stands for. READ MORE: Why using sterling after independence would be huge strategic mistake As a result 'Now is not the time to talk about independence' becomes a self fulfilling prophecy, and the SNP loses because it campaigns on the wrong issues. That is why a focus on good governance alone can't deliver independence. Majoring on devolved governance keeps the ambitions of the nation small and limited to the powers of Holyrood, so the people look for small solutions. The Scottish Government must engage the nation in a new national conversation, a Citizens' Convention, to craft a compelling vision of a better Scotland. We need to raise the Scottish peoples' ambitions to those of a people of a sovereign independent nation. A Crisis of Faith in the SNP Turnout among pro-indy voters falls if independence is not the central issue, conversely UK-wide politics then becomes the focus. If voters think in Westminster terms about 'stopping Reform', then Labour becomes the answer, just as they were seen as the solution to getting rid of the Tories in the last General Election. Keir Starmer won the 2024 General Election campaigning on an anti-Tory messageThe SNP's current strategy of prioritising good governance under devolution is failing because, without linking it to the bigger prize of independence, it limits ambition. It reduces Scotland's political discourse to managerial tweaks rather than transformational change. What's needed is a reset. A Citizens' Convention and a renewed national conversation about Scotland's economic, social and environmental wellbeing must become the focus, not to endlessly debate independence, but to shift public imagination toward the kind of future only independence can deliver. The SNP's Make or Break Moment The next few weeks will be the most critical for the independence movement in a decade. If the SNP missteps at this weekend's National Council meeting, the independence cause will be set back by at least five years, and Anas Sarwar will be in prime position to become Scotland's next First Minister. On June 21, the SNP National Council will meet, and John Swinney will outline his vision for delivering independence. The meeting will conclude with a 'no holds barred' debate, which may reveal just how out of step the SNP leadership is, not just with voters, but with its own activists. Doubling Down on a Losing Strategy Even since Labour's Hamilton by-election victory, the SNP leadership seem determined to cling to a strategy that has already failed. First Minister John Swinney stands in front of a poster of SNP candidate Katy Loudon (Image: PA) After the loss, Martin Geissler confronted John Swinney with a glaring contradiction: while independence polls consistently sit above 50%, the SNP secured less than 30% of the vote. Swinney's response? 'My challenge is to turn the public's aspiration for independence into real political action.' Great – we can all agree. But then, he added: 'And that comes about by the SNP performing much better, of getting into a commanding position in Scottish politics, and making sure that we can deliver on the expectations and aspirations of the people of Scotland.' This is the fatal misread that opens the door to a Labour win. The polls overstate the SNP vote because fewer independence supporters than predicted will actually bother to vote. Why Good Governance Alone Won't Win Independence Politics has changed. Policy statements no longer inspire; emotions drive votes. A government can tick every box on paper and still lose if voters don't feel the difference in their daily lives. Joe Biden tamed inflation and grew the US economy, yet voters punished the Democrats because their own lived-experience did not improve. I've said it publicly – and also privately to SNP leaders: campaigning on 'good governance' under a devolved system, one that stifles ambition, restricts budgets, and limits power, is political suicide. Independence is the Radical Change Scotland Needs People see the global political and economic order crumbling. They feel the bite of austerity and despair for the future. They are desperate for change, and desperate voters will rally behind whomever offers radical change. In England, Reform now fills that void; in Scotland, the SNP is increasingly seen as offering nothing but managed decline. For two Hamilton by-elections in a row, the SNP missed the opportunity to motivate its activists and get its vote out by making the contest about independence. There was almost no mention of independence from the SNP or candidate Katy Louden in either losing campaign. READ MORE: Kenny MacAskill: Alexander Dennis is just the latest chapter in Scotland's stripping Where was the call to arms for the Yes movement? Where was the message that voting Labour isn't the answer, because only independence will end austerity and the cost of living crisis for good? Where was the 'golden thread' of independence that is supposed to run through every SNP campaign? The Missing Link: A Citizens' Convention Hundreds of activists pounded the streets of Hamilton for independence, and I feel gutted for them as thousands of independence voters sat on their hands and didn't vote. But has the SNP got their message? The party refused to centre the campaign on independence, the radical change people are crying out for. Without that galvanising message, why would pro independence voters turn out for the SNP? Labour Will Win Holyrood 2026 Unless the SNP Offers Radical Change. The analysis everyone seems to have missed is this: if the SNP fails to offer radical change through independence, voters will drift to Labour. Why? Because they will mistakenly believe that a Scottish Labour first minister might wield some influence with an all powerful Labour Government in Westminster – unlike the SNP, which is simply ignored. The SNP's choice is stark: refocus on Scotland and the benefits of independence, or risk losing Holyrood 2026 to Labour and Sarwar. The clock is ticking.
