Former SNP MP in call for independence meeting ahead of national council
Alyn Smith, the former MP for Stirling, has called for the local branch to meet up ahead of the SNP's national council meeting in June, where strategies for achieving independence will be debated.
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
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
UK urged to reverse ruling on litigation funding, introduce 'light-touch regulation'
LONDON, June 2 (Reuters) - Britain should urgently reverse a landmark ruling that threw third-party funding of lawsuits into disarray, an influential advisory body recommended on Monday in a report which was welcomed by funders and industry critics alike. The Civil Justice Council (CJC) also called for "light-touch regulation" of the litigation funding sector, which is currently self-regulated, particularly where funding is provided for class action-style lawsuits or to consumers. Monday's report comes after Britain's funding industry was dealt a surprise blow in 2023, when the UK Supreme Court ruled that agreements used to fund many mass lawsuits were unenforceable as they did not comply with rules on so-called damages-based agreements. The CJC said the government should pass legislation to overturn the Supreme Court's decision "as soon as possible", citing the importance of funding for access to justice. Britain's previous government, which asked the CJC to review the sector, said last year it would reverse the Supreme Court decision, before the current government put legislation on hold pending the CJC's report. The Ministry of Justice said in a statement that it welcomed the report and would "outline next steps in due course." The CJC – which advises the government and judiciary on the civil justice system – called for some regulation, including requirements for funders to have adequate capital and provisions to prevent conflicts of interest. It also recommended that class action-style cases need court approval of funding agreements, to allow the court to consider whether the funder's return is fair, just and reasonable. The report rejected, however, the introduction of caps on funders' returns, which the CJC said could not properly take account of the risks of funding cases and was unnecessary for consumer protection if courts had to approve funding deals. Neil Purslow – chair of industry body the International Legal Finance Association, who also founded litigation funder Therium – welcomed the CJC's recommendation to legislate to reverse the Supreme Court ruling. Seema Kennedy, executive director of Fair Civil Justice, which has called for greater regulation of litigation funding, said the CJC's call to regulate the industry was "long overdue". She said: "Proper oversight is essential to protect consumers, ensure transparency, and restore public confidence in a sector that currently operates without sufficient safeguards." Litigation funding is increasingly used in Britain, with the CJC citing figures that funders in England and Wales had assets of 2.2 billion pounds ($3 billion) in 2021. English courts have repeatedly recognised the need for funding to bring mass lawsuits, where the case's total value is often in the billions but payouts to individual consumers can be as low as double figures. The CJC report comes after court approval of a 200 million-pound settlement in a case against Mastercard, despite the opposition of funder Innsworth, which stands to receive around 68 million pounds.
STV News
2 hours ago
- STV News
SNP and Reform UK candidates clash ahead of crunch by-election
The SNP's and Reform UK's candidates for the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election have gone head to head on STV's Scotland Tonight. SNP candidate Katy Loudon questioned Reform UK candidate Ross Lambie on previous comments made by his party leader Nigel Farage regarding the introduction of 'insurance-based' healthcare. The former Tory councillor hit back at the decision made by the SNP government to downgrade the specialist neonatal intensive care unit in Wishaw. Voters in the constituency will go to the polls on Thursday after a by-election was triggered following the death of the SNP's Christina McKelvie in March. Scottish Labour, the Scottish Conservatives, the Scottish Liberal Democrats and the Scottish Greens were all invited to participate in the debate but declined the invitation. Each party was offered an interview for the programme. STV's political editor spoke to the candidates willing to give interviews: Scottish Labour's candidate Davy Russell was questioned on why he was not taking part in the debate and the UK Labour's government decision to cut the winter fuel payment. Scottish Conservative candidate Richard Nelson was asked about his membership of the Orange Order. Scottish Liberal Democrat candidate Aisha Mir was questioned on whether her party would save their deposit in the by-election. Candidate name Party Collette Bradley Scottish Socialist Party Andy Brady Scottish Family Party Ross Alexander Lambie Reform UK Katy Loudon Scottish National Party (SNP) Janice Elizabeth Mackay UK Independence Party (UKIP) Ann McGuinness Scottish Green Party Aisha Jawaid Mir Scottish Liberal Democrats Richard Nelson Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party Davy Russell Scottish Labour Party Marc Wilkinson Independent Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
Belfast Telegraph
3 hours ago
- Belfast Telegraph
Peers who ‘make great sacrifices' hike their own overnight allowance by a fifth
Members of the unelected chamber, who Parliament heard 'make great sacrifices', waved through the allowance increase of more than a fifth without a vote. Changes made to the remittance system last year enabled peers living outside the capital and attending the House of Lords to claim £100 towards the cost of 'hotels, clubs or similar accommodation' on production of receipts. This was on top of the daily attendance payment that can be claimed of up to £361 and travel expenses. The overnight allowance was automatically uprated in line with inflation to £103 a night and after approval by peers will now swell to £125 – a 21% rise. In a further change to the system, a payment will also be made available to contribute towards other London accommodation costs that may be incurred to attend sittings at Westminster, such as for those who rent or own a property that is not their main address. This has been set at £63 or half the overnight allowance after rounding up. Outlining the proposals in Parliament, Lords leader Baroness Smith of Basildon said the existing overnight rate of £103 'is not a realistic reflection of the cost of hotels across the capital'. As such the House of Lords Commission, on which she sits, recommended this was increased to £125-a-night. Lady Smith added: 'As previously, claims are linked to attending the House on a sitting day, and receipts must be provided.' On the proposed flat-rate allowance for alternative accommodation in London, the Cabinet minister said: 'This will again be tied to attendance in the House, with a robust system of verification. 'For members whose main address is outside London, they would be able to claim £63-per-night to spend at a designated property in Greater London where they stay and are responsible for the costs. 'To claim, peers must have stayed in the property the day before or the day after attending the House, and the finance team will require documentation to support the claim.' Her Conservative counterpart Lord True, who when in Government introduced the overnight allowance last year, said: 'It is always difficult to strike a balance, and I think that the commission… has struck a reasonable balance which will support people who come to this House from all over the country, who wish to work hard on behalf of the House and on behalf of the country.' He added: 'There is a lot of loose talk outside this House about people in this House being lazy and lining their pockets. 'You do not become rich by becoming a member of the House of Lords. Many people here make great sacrifices. 'We should not claim that we are poor or that we are underprivileged, but it is right that the House makes provision to enable those of us who come here to do a hard day's work to enable us to do so in the most reasonable fashion. 'Obviously, there is a duty on us to behave with honesty and clarity, as we all do and will all do, I have no doubt, under these new proposals. I support them.'
