SNP rebels challenge John Swinney with radical independence plan
They have unveiled a plan to open independence negotiations with the UK Government if nationalist parties get a majority of the popular vote in next year's Holyrood election.
A motion outlining the plan has been submitted for discussion at the SNP conference in October, and has been backed by 43 regional branches, The Herald reported.
If selected for discussion, it will rival Mr Swinney's motion outlining his new independence plan, which the First Minister unveiled earlier this week.
Mr Swinney said the SNP winning an outright majority at Holyrood should force Sir Keir Starmer to drop his opposition to allowing another independence referendum.
He argued a precedent had been set at the 2011 election, when Alex Salmond led the SNP to a majority win and David Cameron, the then prime minister, authorised a vote.
But Alex Neil, a former SNP health secretary, told The Telegraph Mr Swinney was 'living in cloud cuckoo land' given the current level of public support for the SNP.
It has previously emerged that some of the rebel group of SNP members want to oust Mr Swinney as party leader amid concerns he is not doing enough to achieve independence.
The motion setting out their alternative blueprint is a direct challenge to his authority by the rebel group, which will meet in Perth on Aug 9.
It invites the conference to instruct 'the Party to prioritise obtaining a mandate from the sovereign Scottish people to deliver independence.'
This will be possible if the independence-supporting parties – the SNP, the Greens and Alba – together achieve a majority of the ballots cast in the regional list vote for Holyrood, it states.
Graeme McCormick, one of the people behind the strategy, told The Herald: 'If we get a majority of pro-independence votes on the list, we'll open negotiations with the UK Government around independence. If the negotiations aren't successful, then we'll move to dissolve the union. It's perfectly legal to do so.
'Our plan is coming from members with experience of how states work – we aren't just dewy-eyed 'the dream will never die' nationalists. We've invited John to come and speak with us, and look forward to discussing this with him. I think the strength of what we have requested is clear.'
But a party source predicted that the motion would not be selected by the party's conference committee, which decides what will be discussed at the Aberdeen gathering.
The provisional conference agenda will be published on Aug 8 after the committee has considered all the submitted motions.
Successive UK governments have repeatedly turned down SNP calls for a second referendum, with the UK Supreme Court ruling in 2022 that only Westminster can allow another poll.
Sir Keir said last month that he could not imagine another referendum being staged while he is prime minister, and an SNP victory in the May 2026 election would not change his mind.
When she was first minister, Nicola Sturgeon claimed there should be another referendum if there was a majority of independence-supporting MSPs, including SNP and Green members.
But Mr Swinney's new benchmark of an outright SNP majority is much more difficult to achieve under Holyrood's electoral system, which is partly based on proportional representation.
Rachael Hamilton, the Scottish Tory deputy leader, said: 'This spat just demonstrates how out of touch John Swinney and the SNP are with ordinary Scots. Under the nationalists, our public services are in meltdown and taxes are sky high. But instead of fixing the mess they've created, they're fighting about how best to push their independence obsession.'
Alastair Cameron, the chairman of the Scotland in Union campaign group, said: 'Imagine if the SNP spent as much time exploring how to save the NHS rather than fighting over different wheezes for an unwanted second referendum. This is a party that has lost its way and is detached from the people of Scotland.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
11 minutes ago
- The Independent
Flares thrown during protest outside Canary Wharf hotel housing asylum seekers
Flares have been let off and an arrest made during a demonstration outside a hotel used to accommodate asylum seekers in London. A mixture of men wearing face masks and families with children waved flags and listened to speeches outside the Britannia International Hotel in Canary Wharf on Sunday. Protesters jeered at people going in and out of the hotel, and officers were forced to step in after flares were let off in the crowd, the Metropolitan Police said. A man was arrested on suspicion of assaulting an emergency worker after an officer was pushed. Onlookers chanted 'shame' towards the police as he was carried away. Tourists, shoppers and guests at a nearby hotel stopped to take pictures of the demonstration. A spokesperson for the Met said: 'At one point, officers intervened after flares were let off in the crowd. Several people were searched. No further flares were found. 'One man was arrested on suspicion of assaulting an emergency worker after an officer was pushed. He was taken into custody. 'Officers remain in the area to provide reassurance to local residents and businesses, to ensure that any further protest takes place peacefully, and to respond to any incidents.' It is the latest in a series of demonstrations over the use of hotels to house asylum seekers. On Saturday, the force made nine arrests after rival groups gathered outside the Thistle City Barbican Hotel in Islington, north London. A protest and counter-protest also took place outside the New Bridge Hotel in Newcastle and four people were arrested on suspicion of public order offences, Northumbria Police said. Scotland Yard said plans were in place to 'respond to any protest activity in the vicinity of other hotels in London being used to accommodate asylum seekers'. Elsewhere, Essex Police placed a number of restrictions on a planned protest in Epping on Sunday evening. The force ordered that the demonstration should finish by 8.30pm and must take place in designated areas outside the Bell Hotel, which has been the focus of a series of protests over the last few weeks. Police have also placed requirements on the removal of face coverings until 3am on Monday and have the power to direct anyone committing or suspected of committing anti-social behaviour to leave the area until 8am on Monday.
Telegraph
11 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Palestine activists must not be permitted to flout the will of Parliament
Ever since the October 7 pogrom of 2023, Saturdays on the streets of London and other British cities have been sullied by so-called Palestine solidarity marches. Too often the police have stood aside when chants of dubious legality – coming uncomfortably close to outright praise for the proscribed terrorists of Hamas and Hezbollah – have been declaimed by some among the crowds. The police have responded to criticism by stating that what has been witnessed is ambiguous. Next weekend there will be no such ambiguity. After Palestine Action claimed responsibility for breaking into RAF Brize Norton and vandalising two jets in June, Parliament voted in July to proscribe this organisation too – in the Commons, by 385 in favour and 26 against. Expressing support for Palestine Action is now a criminal offence punishable with a term of up to 14 years imprisonment. Campaigners are planning for a mass flouting of the terror laws, with 500 or more activists openly and unambiguously planning to proclaim their support for Palestine Action next Saturday. Their tactic is that the police will have to charge so many with terrorism offences that the courts will be overwhelmed – or else that the law will not be enforced and that it will thus become a dead letter. If trials follow, the campaigners will seek to turn them into spectacles where Israel too rather than just those accused are in the dock. This is now about more than just the rights and wrongs of Israel's response to the Hamas murderers. It is about whether the will of Parliament is enforced on Britain's streets or whether random self-appointed tribunes can overturn laws they do not approve of. It is essential that the police enforce the law to its full extent next weekend. To the demonstrators' favourite chant of 'Whose streets? Our streets', the only correct response is that the streets are not the domain of those who have brazenly come to endorse a group that our elected representatives have deemed to be terrorists. This could not be allowed to happen at the time of the Troubles in Northern Ireland and it cannot be allowed to happen in London now. It is an indictment of the state of our court system that it may not have the capacity to cope with a few hundred arrests, but enforcing the law comes first.
Daily Mail
24 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Diane Abbott suspended AGAIN by Labour after repeating belief that anti-Semitism is less serious than racism endured by black people
Diane Abbott was suspended by Labour for the second time in three years today for claiming anti-Semitism is less serious than racism aimed at people because of their skin colour. The veteran backbencher lost the whip after using a BBC interview to say she had no regrets about her 2023 claim about anti-Jew and anti-Traveller discrimination. And she reiterated the opinions aired in a letter to the Observer two years ago that led to her losing the whip and making a public apology. Speaking to BBC Radio 4's Reflections programme, she said: 'Clearly, there must be a difference between racism which is about colour and other types of racism because you can see a Traveller or a Jewish person walking down the street, you don't know (what they are). 'I just think that it's silly to try and claim that racism which is about skin colour is the same as other types of racism. 'I don't know why people would say that.' Her reiteration of her views heaped pressure on Sir Keir Starmer to take action against her as he did in 2023. A party spokesman said: 'Diane Abbott has been administratively suspended from the Labour Party, pending an investigation.' It comes a day after he stripped the whip from four leftwing labour backbenchers for 'persistent breaches of party discipline' while blocking his welfare reforms. After today's comments, a spokesman for the Jewish Labour Movement said: 'Anti-Semitism is anti-Jewish racism. 'It targets Jews regardless of how they look, and many of our community are visibly Jewish and suffer racism for it. 'We are disappointed that Diane Abbott MP has doubled down on comments she previously appeared to apologise for, and are pleased to hear that Labour are looking into them.' The Hackney North and Stoke Newington MP was suspended by the Labour Party in 2023 after suggested that Jewish, Irish and Traveller people experience 'prejudice' but 'are not all their lives subject to racism'. 'They undoubtedly experience prejudice,' Ms Abbott wrote in the Observer. 'This is similar to racism and the two words are often used as if they are interchangeable. 'It is true that many types of white people with points of difference, such as redheads, can experience this prejudice. 'But they are not all their lives subject to racism. In pre-civil rights America, Irish people, Jewish people and Travellers were not required to sit at the back of the bus. 'In apartheid South Africa, these groups were allowed to vote. And at the height of slavery, there were no white-seeming people manacled on the slave ships.' Ms Abbott issued a public apology in 2023 to 'wholly and unreservedly withdraw my remarks and disassociate myself from them' She later issued a statement to 'wholly and unreservedly withdraw my remarks and disassociate myself from them' as she blamed drafting 'errors'. But Labour pushed ahead with action against the ex-shadow minister in any case. She was given the whip back before the 2024 election but was at the centre of a fresh party row then when attempts were made to stop her from running for re-election in her north London seat. She eventually was allowed to stand as a Labour candidate and won with a much reduced majority of 15,000 in one of the party's safest seats. The longest-serving female MP in the Commons, who entered Parliament in 1987, told the BBC last night she got a 'bit weary' about people labelling her anti-Semetic and said she had 'spent a lifetime fighting racism of all kinds'. She said she was 'grateful' to be a Labour MP but was sure the party leadership had been 'trying to get me out'.
