Former SNP MP in call for independence meeting ahead of national council
In an email seen by The National, Smith told Stirling branch officials: 'The party nationwide is organising a special national council in June to thrash out our options and agree a strategy.
READ MORE: 'A woman is an adult female': Keir Starmer breaks Supreme Court silence
'I think we should do the same in Stirling in advance of this meeting and write to propose the constituency association organise a meeting open to all members to debate and agree a submission from Stirling to the June council.
'I think this will be a useful meeting, as well of considerable interest to members. I have my own thoughts on how best to win, but I am very open to all ideas however unconventional.'
Smith, who is seeking selection as the SNP candidate for Stirling in next year's Holyrood election, suggested inviting experts, such as Bruce Crawford (above), who was 'instrumental' in cementing the Edinburgh Agreement, which paved the way for the 2014 independence referendum.
The former MP added: 'I think the party needs to remember why we're here – to deliver independence.
READ MORE: 'Important milestone' as SNP launch new disability benefit across Scotland
'How we do that given the unreasonable and undemocratic intransigence of the UK Government is a challenge, yet independence has a higher support than ever. I think this could be an energising meeting and a significant step in upping our activism.'
In a separate email to SNP members in Stirling canvassing support for his candidacy, Smith argued that agreeing a constituency position on independence strategy could make the city – which has strong historical connections with the cause – the 'epicentre of the national fightback'.
The SNP's Stirling branch was approached for comment.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
25 minutes ago
- Spectator
Jess Phillips: ‘I'm being controlled by aggression and violence'
Jess Phillips begins her interview with Iain Dale at the Edinburgh Fringe with a meandering homage to her hometown, Birmingham, which is still in mourning for Ozzy Osborne. 'Birmingham is like a village. I can link anyone in my family to someone in your family in three steps. Barbara Cartland is from Birmingham. Lawn tennis was invented on the Cartland estate. I grew up around Ozzy Osbourne's first son, Louis. I count them as good friends. My son went to the funeral procession. And Sharon is a lovely, lovely woman.' Phillips makes a promise to her host. She offers to recruit Sharon as part of his All Talk line-up at next year's festival. 'We could do a double header,' she says. Phillips seems to prefer the company of her family and her old social circle to her political allies. After entering parliament, she told her best friend, Amy, that she'd appeared on Question Time. 'Did you win?' said Amy who assumed that Question Time was Mastermind. Phillips jokes about her popularity. 'In Birmingham, I am quite beloved. I'm like Birmingham royalty. But it's a very low bar, isn't it?' Then they get down to politics. Dale asks about Phillips's resignation from the shadow front bench in November 2023 over a motion tabled by the SNP calling for a ceasefire in Gaza. She couldn't support the motion without returning to the back benches which she found agonising. 'I had to stake my life's work on it.' But she faced loud calls from her constituents to support the ceasefire. 'The clamour got considerably strong. And the pressure.' Dale asked her to specify. 'Pressure? What do you mean?' She chooses her words carefully and doesn't mention that her constituency is 45 per cent Muslim (according to the 2021 census.) 'I've always known it mattered greatly to my constituents. Some are of Kashmiri heritage. And there are Irish communities and I'm Irish myself. And both communities understand the idea of annexation. They understand that lines drawn on a map can lead to violence. … The pressure was in no way aggressive,' she adds, 'in no way aggressive.' A moment later, she qualifies this and admits to 'a smattering of aggression.' She explains that passions are likely to run high when controversial issues are aired. She praises the Labour whips who helped her to manage her departure. 'I didn't peacock about it.' And she was rewarded with a return to the front bench when Labour won power last July. Keir Starmer expressed his support for her in public. 'He made a bee-line towards me across a very busy room and gave me a cuddle.' She needed that cuddle. The battle for her seat in 2024 was mired in controversy. 'I've never known a breakdown of democracy like it.' She says that her opponent, 'the independent candidate,' brought in external canvassers. 'From London,' she believes. 'We couldn't advertise where we were going. They were haranguing voters. There were fireworks thrown, tyres slashed and constituents threatened at polling stations. And I have to say they were almost exclusively men.' She told her sons, aged 16 and 20, to keep away from the count. 'I thought, I'm being controlled by aggression and violence.' She won by 693 votes but her opponent asked for a recount. The returning officer refused. 'She was incredibly professional,' says Phillips. 'And absolutely tiny. About five-foot nothing. And she was encircled by men, shouting at her. It made me fucking furious.' After the count, Phillips exchanged a handshake with each of her defeated opponents. 'The independent candidate refused to shake my hand. Petty little idiot.' Jonathan Ashworth had a similar experience in Leicester South where he narrowly lost to the independent, Shockat Adam. Phillips now regrets her decision not to publicise her opponent's tactics for fear of tarnishing the image of her constituency. 'Lots of journalists came and I kept them away. I didn't want the people who live there to look bad.' Dale moves to lighter matters and asks about her experience with civil servants. 'You have to be careful what you say [inside the department.] If you say 'tag all men' someone will draft a paper about it.' On her first day, she was asked if she preferred the stairs or the lift. She chose the stairs and a note was duly entered in an official file. 'Minister likes to use the stairs.' Now she can't enter the building without being ushered away from the lift and towards the stairs. 'But I don't like to use the stairs!' Dale suggests that she might be offered a job at the foreign office. 'I don't think so. And diplomacy needs to change,' she says. 'It should be more about doing down the pub together.' He asks her if she's met Nigel Farage. She hasn't but she praises the Reform member, Nora Kamberi, who stood against her last year. 'Lovely woman.' Encouraged by Dale, she goes off on a tangent about Boris Johnson. 'He's nothing like he is on TV. Nothing like that. He's nervous and awkward, like a shy boy. He wasn't unpleasant or anything but he was like a kid. Kicking his feet.' Phillips briefly stood for the Labour leadership in 2020. Does she still dream of forming her own administration? 'It's a hard job, being prime minister. I wouldn't boss it. I absolutely wouldn't boss it. I think I'd be a basket-case after about 15 minutes. And I'd drink a lot. But it would be entertaining.' Dale asks her to name her favourite Tory MP. 'Simon Hoare,' she says, 'and Priti Patel.' The second name elicits a gasp of horror from the Edinburgh crowd. Phillips explains that Patel was deeply affected by the assassination of David Amess who represented an Essex constituency close to her own. After Amess's death, Patel telephoned Phillips every Sunday evening 'to see if I was all right.' Patel was home secretary at the time. This gesture meant a lot to a safeguarding minister who believes her job should not exist. 'I hate that there's someone with the words 'violence against women and girls' in their title.' Dale ends with the 'Angela Rayner question.' It's a challenge rather than a query. Earlier in the day, Dale tried it with Rachel Reeves by innocently asking her to name the most outstanding member of the Labour cabinet. Reeves stayed loyal to Starmer and nominated the colourless environment secretary, Simon Reed. Dale frames the question differently and asks Phillips if Labour has a successor to Barbara Castle. Phillips spots the trap and steps over it deftly. 'We've had numerous successors,' she says. 'Margaret Beckett, Margaret Hodge, Harriet Harman and Yvette Cooper.'
The National
an hour ago
- The National
The Scottish Government has a moral obligation to break the law
It depends upon the Scottish National Party, and, it depends upon the Scottish National Party. On the one hand, the SNP are the only viable political party likely to gain independence, and on the other hand, the leadership of the [[SNP]] has decided that independence depends upon their ability to govern and their record. This is essentially what John Swinney has said multiple times. This is not a good strategy for gaining independence. Few political parties in power in a democratic state continue to gain increasing popularity over time; the opposite is usually the case, since any party in government is liable to be blamed for all the faults in the country. This is particularly true in the case of the [[SNP]] where the mainstream media is more than willing to pile on when the government makes the least misstep. Relying upon the record of the party has already proved to be a failed strategy as the recent Hamilton by-election proved. A party that can do little more than point its finger at the failings of other political parties is hardly in a robust position. We have also seen in polls that while support for independence is just over 50%, support for the [[SNP]] hovers around 30%. Is there another way forward to independence? Yes. If support for independence remains robust, it is quite obvious that all groups and parties supporting it should get together and work together. The SNP were never meant to be a party of right or left; their only goal is independence and to veer from that goal is undermining the party. Trying to prove competence in governance in a divided electorate is a recipe for failure; doubly so, when the party becomes embroiled in identity/gender politics and veers to the right on economic policy. Believe in Scotland introduced a plan for a Citizen's Convention which would pull all Yes groups together and create an inspirational plan for an independent Scotland. Then, with the combined support of pro-independence groups, including the [[SNP]], would use the next election as a de facto referendum on independence. Why the [[SNP]] are reluctant – in fact, resistant – to this idea is worrisome. Another option that is worth a shot is for the Scottish Government to adopt the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) which is being pushed by Respect Scottish Sovereignty (RSS). If adopted, this provides an international legal right to self-determination and the right to launch a referendum. Why the [[SNP]] are reluctant – in fact, resistant – to this idea is also worrisome. The [[SNP]] have missed major opportunities to make a break with Westminster with the backing of the Scottish people. The most obvious case was over Brexit. But more recently, the genocide in Gaza, which the UK Government has been complicit in and supportive of in providing weapons and intelligence to Israel, is another opportunity to break with London; break while having the support of the majority of Scots and by taking the moral high ground. This would require breaking the law – the terms of the Scotland Act. However, in the face of British complicity in genocide, the [[Scottish Government]] has a moral obligation to do so. Passing a resolution in Holyrood condemning the Prime Minister for his involvement in genocide would be a start. Then, more recently, we have the case of the [[UK Government]] proscribing a pro-Palestine group as a terrorist organisation despite the fact that its members haven't harmed a fly. The [[Scottish Government]] once again has a moral obligation to denounce this authoritarian abuse of power and protect the people of Scotland from the regime in London. This could be accomplished by passing a resolution in [[Holyrood]] condemning the proscription and the law threatening Scots with imprisonment. There is no guarantee that a constitutional crisis and rift with London would be successful. It doesn't have to be. It has only to be the spark that will set a fire under the people of Scotland and shed the SNP of their establishment image. However, none of the above actions are likely to occur. It appears certain that the current SNP leadership is fixed on a failed course; one lacking imagination and courage. One where they appear to be afraid of using the power of nationalism – not by releasing the full and dangerous powers of nationalism based on hatred and resentment, but rather releasing a small dose – a nationalist spark based upon pride, respect, inspiration and love of one's country and goals for Scotland we all want to aspire to. These are the emotions that will never be instilled in the population with the SNP's current policies of being good managers. Without the backing of the SNP, the only viable independence political party, is there a way to proceed? One answer is for the SNP rank and file to rebel and depose the current leadership. That doesn't appear likely currently. Another plan may be to force the SNP into taking a more assertive stance. This could be accomplished if all other Yes groups proceeded with the Citizen's Convention as previously mentioned and outline all the inspirational policies that are currently impossible due to the Scotland Act. Then proceed with a referendum presumably without the involvement of the SNP. The referendum need not be 100% perfect and it would not be legally binding, but the point is to shift the needle and force the SNP into either supporting the Yes movement or declining to do so, in which case the only answer would be decapitating the SNP leadership through a grassroots backlash. None of these plans discussed above need to be immediately successful. That's not how history works. The goal is to ignite a spark that will lead to a conflagration across the country. We must create a wedge between Westminster and the Scottish people – with or without the SNP. If the SNP are persuaded to become the guardian of Scotland, willing to fight for her honour, all the better. But we can't wait for them. Malcolm Smith via email
Scotsman
2 hours ago
- Scotsman
Flamingo Land: SNP ministers accused of falsifying documents in controversial Loch Lomond resort case
SNP ministers are being accused of 'unlawful and biased' conduct over the calling-in of the Flamingo Land planning application. Sign up to our Politics newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... The Scottish Government is being accused of falsifying key documents in the handling of the Flamingo Land resort on Loch Lomond. SNP ministers are being accused of 'unlawful and biased' conduct over claims they have made a series of 'deeply questionable' decisions in handling the planning application for the £43 million resort in Balloch. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Green MSP Ross Greer has lodged a letter of complaint through his lawyer raising the fear of falsified documents. His lawyer has also submitted a separate letter to Scotland's chief planner warning that ministers' handling of the planning application appeal appears 'unlawful'. An illustration showing what Flamingo Land at Loch Lomond would look like | Contributed Mr Greer said the sped-up draft planning agreement led by Flamingo Land's developers was among the 'deeply questionable' decisions the Government had made in handling this case. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad This comes as principal reporter David Buylla was reappointed to organise the case and make recommendations to ministers, despite being the civil servant to originally approve the controversial resort. Speaking to the Sunday Mail, Mr Greer said: 'They refuse to hold any public hearings and have asked the same official who tried to approve the plans to mark his own homework by making recommendations for a fresh decision. 'Now they're asking Flamingo Land to draft their own planning conditions or their own terms against the wishes of the national park. Is it any wonder the local people get the feeling that the cards are being stacked against them?' Flamingo Land protestors outside the Scottish Parliament with Ross Greer MSP. | Andrew Milligan/Press Association Only last week lawyers for the national park criticised the new process as 'highly unorthodox'. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Ian Cowan, Mr Greer's lawyer, has also warned ministers are not following proper procedure. He said the handling of the called-in appeal 'appears to be both unlawful' and 'tainted by bias'. Mr Cowan said the process should be 'abandoned' and replaced with a fairer one. 'My client does not question Mr Buylla's professionalism, but the recall of the appeal should have meant that he played no further part in it,' he said. Mr Cowan also questioned 'anomalies' in key files published by the government's appeals division last month. A 'minute of appointment' reappointing Mr Buylla to prepare a report for ministers was published on July 4, but reportedly signed off by senior planning officials on June 24. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The document does not carry the official's digital signature. The document's properties show it was created on July 4 - just 15 minutes after a letter from Mr Buylla setting out the new process was published. Mr Cowan has questioned officials on why the document appears to be backdated. Mr Greer said: 'I hope there is a simple explanation for this inconsistency in the date of the official's appointment, because it is hugely concerning. There needs to be full transparency here if the public are to have any confidence in this process.' The Scottish Government said it recalled the application approval as 'the proposed development raises issues of national significance'. A spokesperson said: 'As this is a live planning appeal, it would not be appropriate to comment further.'
