Fury as rebel indy plan debate blocked by SNP officials
Members had previously warned that making it - or not - on to the party's conference agenda would be a "litmus test" for the party's internal democracy.
Read more:
They are now furious it has been dismissed by the party's conference committee, the group of officials who help to select what motions get onto the party's agenda for its main yearly gathering.
"John Swinney last year made a point several times that he was going to listen to the membership. But he hasn't done so. There are just under 200 branches, nearly a quarter of all branches supported the resolution, but the party leadership is refusing to listen," said one SNP activist.
"If there is a difference of opinion between the leadership and the members then it should be debated at conference and conference should decide.
"Not to let this resolution being debated at the conference is ignoring the internal democracy of the party."
A second activist, who supported the proposal, added: "I am absolutely seething. I have never known a resolution with so much backing which has been so unceremoniously put to the side."
Alba and the Scottish Greens spoke out earlier this month in favour of the motion.
Kenny MacAskill, the Alba Party leader, who is a former SNP justice secretary, said: "You cannot expect the SNP members to unite behind a strategy when the views of 43 of its branches have been so casually dismissed. This is treating the grassroots of the party with utter contempt and is totally unacceptable in a democratic party.
"This speaks volumes about the SNP's leadership's confidence in their own independence strategy that they will not allow any dissent to be broached.
"The days of open and robust debate at SNP conferences are long gone. In its place we see control freakery and the quashing of alternative points of view.
"This would be wrong on any contentious topic but on its strategy for achieving independence it is a grave error of judgment which will come back to haunt them."
Alba Party leader Kenny MacAskill (Image: PA) According to the rebel plan, a majority of list votes for pro-independence parties in 2026 would secure a mandate for independence negotiations with the UK Government.
The group submitted the following motion for approval by the SNP's conference committee:
'Conference instructs the Party to prioritise obtaining a mandate from the sovereign Scottish people to deliver independence.
'This will be possible by achieving a majority of the popular vote on the sum of the Independence Supporting Parties' List Votes in the 2026 Scottish parliamentary election."
That is a different strategy from Mr Swinney's plan, which contends that a mandate is only achievable if the SNP wins a majority of seats at Holyrood.
The First Minister told the BBC last month: "We [make independence a priority] by electing a majority of SNP MSPs to the Scottish Parliament and then taking forward the democratic path to independence, which will secure the future of our country.
'We only get that referendum if a majority of SNP MSPs are elected next May.'
The rebel resolution, which argues this threshold should be lowered and include votes cast for Alba and the Scottish Greens, was proposed by members in Oban and Lorn, Tweeddale, and Helensburgh.
One national party source previously dismissed the motion, telling The Herald: 'I wouldn't give it much credence. Leadership has already outlined their strategy and this is a contradiction. I doubt it makes it out of the conference committee.'
It is understood the SNP members behind the alternative independence plan will try to get their plan heard by submitting an amendment to Mr Swinney's resolution.
They expect to find out in September if the amendment is accepted for the final agenda for the event which will take place in Aberdeen in October.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Press and Journal
26 minutes ago
- Press and Journal
Ex-oil and gas worker forces north-east Green MSP Maggie Chapman from top election slot
A former oil and gas worker in Aberdeen has forced Green MSP Maggie Chapman from the party's top north-east spot for re-election to Holyrood. The Green politician now faces losing her seat in 2026 after being demoted to second place on the regional list behind her former staff member, Guy Ingerson. It follows a string of controversies in recent months, including bullying allegations made by Mr Ingerson. He submitted an official complaint to the party after claims she contacted his new workplace to complain about him. Mr Ingerson was backed by Green members to take the top spot in the Scottish Parliament election next May, the party announced on Monday. 'It is a great honour and I am overwhelmed by the support I have received,' he wrote in a statement. 'My focus will be on delivering for people and communities across the north-east.' The activist previously worked in the oil and gas industry for a decade, starting off as an administration assistant and working his way up to become a buyer, and then an operations co-ordinator. He now works as an organiser in the north-east for Friends of the Earth Scotland. Five years ago, he featured in the Press and Journal's Generation Next series, which profiled 35 young rising political stars north of the central belt. He revealed how he stumbled into the offshore industry after gatecrashing oil and gas firm Subsea 7's Christmas party in former Aberdeen haunt Tiger Tiger. In an interview with the P&J in 2023, he said the depiction of the north-east as a 'region of petrol-heads' does not reflect the diversity of views in the region. Ms Chapman – an ex rector of Aberdeen University – came under fire earlier this year for branding the UK's Supreme Court 'bigoted', following their ruling on the definition of a 'biological woman'. The MSP was separately caught up in a backlash at an activist's expletive-ridden speech attacking the author JK Rowling for being a 'heinous b***h'. Ms Chapman, who becomes Dundee University rector next month, could be seen on a video on social media behind the protestor, appearing to speak to other members of the nearby crowd while the speech is being made. On the list rankings, Lorna Slater, Green Party co-leader, said: 'Next year's election is pivotal for the future of Scotland and our planet, that's why I am delighted that Scottish Green members have selected such a strong group of lead candidates who will deliver real change in Holyrood.' Regional MSPs are elected based on votes for parties using a form of proportional representation. The more votes for the party, the more candidates can be elected down the list. The Greens have never managed to get more than one in the North East region, with a long drought between 2007 and 2021 when the party had no MSPs elected on the list.
The Herald Scotland
39 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Nicola Sturgeon: How I ruined her referendum campaign
As we donate well-thumbed copies to the charity shop (having first erased any sarky notes in the margins), I think we can agree it's been fun delving into the past, but let's get back to the here and now. Except not everyone is ready to retire from the fray just yet. There was always a danger that Ms Sturgeon's memoirs would bring grievances to the surface again. The combative personality of the author and the turbulent times she was writing about, particularly the referendum, made that inevitable. Even so, some of the reaction has been fairly shocking in its intensity. We are now 11 years on, but if you look on social media or any comment forum it is summer 2014 all over again, and not in a good way. Was that really us? Did we say that, do that, think that? And if it was as bad as it looks, should Scotland follow the example of Ms Sturgeon and seek counselling? BTW, I thought it a poor take on her fellow citizens when she revealed her initial reluctance to ask for help. 'I'm from the West of Scotland,' she told the Sunday Times. 'We don't do things like that! Working-class west of Scotland, Ayrshire, my God, I would never have.' Actually, Nicola, I think you'll find times have changed and here in the west of Scotland we are hoaching with therapists. Counselling is now seen as part of taking care of yourself, like going to the gym. As any therapist will tell you, the first step in tackling any problem is acknowledging you have one. JK Rowling - you knew she'd turn up at some point - had a few things to say on the referendum and other matters in her review of Frankly. In her opinion, both Ms Sturgeon and Alex Salmond made great play of the idea that Scotland produced 'a kinder, better type of nationalist'. 'Oddly,' she added, 'this message didn't resonate too well with No voters who were being threatened with violence, told to **** off out of Scotland, quizzed on the amount of Scottish blood that ran in their veins, accused of treachery and treason …' There is more, but you get the idea. Contrast this with Ms Sturgeon's breezy assessment of the campaign as 'in the main, positive and good-natured'. How can two such opinions meet in the middle? Even if they could, there is plenty of beef between those two to keep them fighting till both receive birthday telegrams from the Palace. Speaking of reactions, I had an odd, Zelig-like experience while reading Frankly. You might say I was 'triggered'. Whatever the term, I was left with a face redder than one of the jackets Ms Sturgeon swears by when she needs a confidence boost. There I was, innocently reading the section on the referendum when the author mentioned a programme I had worked on and what an awful time she had on it. Cue the beamer and a cold sweat. Oh no, I thought, what was she about to say? She acknowledged her mood that day wasn't great, and it was made worse by patchy briefings on key issues such as the currency and EU membership. Anyway, she rocked up to the Question Time-style debate and everything went downhill from there. 'The audience's scepticism quickly became obvious,' she wrote. As she left the BBC that night, something was bothering her, a worry that turned into 'a significant problem' as the campaign went on. 'There was a palpable imbalance in how the British media, the BBC in particular, covered the referendum.' So there you are, it was my fault. Like Eve in Eden, the rot started with me and the rest of the team. I had ruined her night, and her referendum. But no, hang on, here's Ms Sturgeon again in another of her short-lived changes of heart. 'I am not claiming that journalists were biased,' she says, before doing precisely that. 'In a sign of what was to come,' she concluded, 'all of the set-piece audience questions in that BBC debate were, from the perspective of independence, loaded and pejorative.' If she had known the lengths to which the programme had gone to ensure balance she might have thought differently. Every person in that audience had been quizzed and quizzed again to establish their position, if they had one, so that the audience could fairly represent Scottish public opinion. Most importantly, the questions were written by audience members. Not framed, not edited, all their own doing. The lesson that Ms Sturgeon should have taken away was that people were genuinely concerned about the currency, EU membership and other issues. As becomes clear elsewhere in the memoir, they were right to be sceptical. According to Ms Sturgeon, Alex Salmond had only read 'bits' of the White Paper before it was published, a claim his supporters have rubbished. This is the same White Paper, it should be said, that caused her to have a panic attack. The stakes were high, of course they were. People were being asked to decide the future of their country. They wanted to know if their families and homes and pensions would be safe. The questions were not 'loaded and pejorative', they were direct and sincere. As it turned out, Ms Surgeon wasn't the only one who was unhappy after the programme. All the politicians had a moan about being given a hard time. I took that as a good thing. Others may disagree. That's the point. Everyone had their own experience of the referendum. For some it was exciting, the time of their lives, but that was not the case for everyone. Do we need to talk about that? Do we want to? Let's park it till the paperback comes out. That's one position we can all get behind.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Joanna Cherry could be called in Moira Salmond legal case
The former First Minister raised a compensation claim of £3million against SNP ministers almost two years ago over a flawed sexual misconduct investigation by the Scottish Government. A Holyrood committee investigated the mishandling of the complaints and also found that there were serious shortcomings. The legal case concerns possible "misfeasance" - a civil law term meaning the wrongful exercise of lawful authority - by officials while Nicola Sturgeon was First Minister and was paused following Mr Salmond's sudden death in October last year. READ MORE: On Sunday, it emerged that Mrs Salmond's resolve to proceed with the case was strengthened by attacks on her late husband in Ms Sturgeon's memoirs, Frankly, published last week. Writing on X, Ms Cherry, who was a close ally of Mr Salmond and is a prominent critic of Ms Sturgeon, welcomed the report that the case is to resume. "It's important that this action continues," wrote the former SNP MP on X. "Misfeasance in public office is a very serious matter. The Scottish Parliament inquiry was hamstrung and partisan politicians had the wool pulled over their eyes. A court of law will be very different." Ms Cherry revealed last week that she is writing a book about her time in frontline politics when Ms Sturgeon was First Minister. The manuscript is due to be completed this autumn with the book due to be published next year. Referring to Ms Sturgeon's government's policies on gender self-declaration, which she opposed, she wrote: "I have a lot more to say about this in the book I'm currently writing although my take is slightly different." She later continued: "In her political afterlife as in her political life Nicola evades scrutiny. For those hoping to understand better what was really going on behind the scenes during her leadership, this memoir will disappoint. It will be left to others to spill the beans." A family friend told the Sunday Mail that Mrs Salmond was "upset and angered by the continued attempts to smear Alex in the book" with "ridiculous and inaccurate" allegations. "It has only strengthened her resolve to make sure the full truth comes out and Alex's name is cleared," they told the paper. Now executor of Mr Salmond's estate, his widow has assembled a legal team including a KC and two junior counsel and has raised money to fund the case. The friend added: "Her case against the government is now live, the legal team is in place, the finance in place and this will be going ahead, no question of that. "Alex may not be here to defend himself but his family are determined to stand up to those who continue to attack him." Ms Sturgeon's book includes strongly disputed claims Mr Salmond opposed gay marriage, failed to read the 650-page independence white paper and that he or an aide acting on his behalf may have been responsible for the leak to the Daily Record about the Scottish Government investigation into complaints against him. She also denied there had been any "conspiracy" to ruin Mr Salmond's reputation - a claim the former Alba Party leader maintained until his death at the age of 69. Ms Sturgeon said her former mentor "would have rather destroyed the SNP than see it succeed without him". She also claimed he "impugned the integrity of the institutions at the heart of Scottish democracy - government, police, Crown Office", adding: "He was prepared to traumatise, time and again, the women at the centre of it all." Ms Sturgeon and Mr Salmond fell out dramatically in 2018 after it emerged her government had investigated misconduct complaints made against him by two female civil servants. Mr Salmond had the probe struck down at the Court of Session as unfair, unlawful and "tainted by apparent bias", and was awarded £512,000 in legal costs. He was later cleared of 13 sexual assault charges at the High Court in Edinburgh in 2020. He launched the Alba Party as a rival to the SNP a year later. The former First Minister, who admitted he could have behaved better towards women on occasions, had always denied any criminality. He sued the Scottish Government in November 2023 alleging there had been misfeasance by various civil servants under Ms Sturgeon and sought damages of around £3million. Promising a "day of reckoning", he said at the time: "Not one person has been held accountable. With this court action that evasion of responsibility ends." In a Court of Session hearing last August, Mr Salmond's lawyer said the police were probing whether one senior civil servant "gave a false statement under oath" to a Holyrood inquiry that was probing how the sexual harassment claims were handled. The civil action was frozen when Mr Salmond suffered a fatal heart attack in North Macedonia. But Mrs Salmond's legal team is now reactivating proceedings. A spokesman for the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service told The Herald that the case had been "sisted" until 19 September. He added: "Following this date the parties would advise the court, if they are ready to proceed or if they are requesting a further sist to the case." The Scottish Government has previously vowed to defend itself "robustly" in court. Last night a Scottish Government spokeswoman said: 'It would not be appropriate to comment on live litigation.' The SNP was approached for comment.
