Be on side of politics that's about what you are for, not against
That is, that I believe everyone associated with The National is here for one very good reason. We believe in what this paper has to say.
We believe in Scottish independence. We believe in this paper's stance on Gaza.
We believe in this paper's desire to hold Scottish politicians, whoever they are, to account. We want to talk about what matters.
I believe we do this based on a simple, mutual understanding, which is that we think a better world is possible for the people of Scotland. We are, therefore, 'for' something. We work, we write, we edit, we photograph, we make social media, we agonise and we sweat tears, all because it is our hope that at the end of the day there will be something to show for all this.
You could, of course, argue that given the current state of Scotland – its politics, its economy, and the denial of its freedom – it would be hard for us to think otherwise. But again, I am making the point for a very good reason.
READ MORE: Man charged following crossbow incident at Glasgow hospital
What I see all around me, in Scotland, in the UK, in the United States and beyond, is politics which is, at best, 'against' something and, at worst, based on hate. Labour, like the Tories before them, seem to hate the young; the vulnerable; those with disabilities; people who are without work through no fault of their own; homeless people; children in poverty and their parents; hard-up pensioners; migrants; civil servants and all public-sector employees; anyone who has the temerity to ask for a pay rise; people who raise their voice; anyone who protests, someone who thinks that the future of our planet matters; and a great many others besides.
The list appears to be endless.
Unless you are wealthy, have a very high income, have power and influence, are probably male as a result, and can make a very large donation to a political party of your choice, then it seems that you really do not matter in the world in which the Tories and Labour reside.
They believe in a politics of division, where the vast majority of people are placed by them on the losing side and they then have no intention of helping them.
When it comes to Reform, matters just get worse. They don't just seek to divide society between the ultra-wealthy – who are the only people that the far right ever seeks to serve (as Trump's Big Beautiful Budget Act in the US proves) – and everyone else, they actively hate everyone else except when they might put them into power.
After that, who knows whether they will follow Trump's precedent, which looks very likely to lead to the end of democracy, and so voting, in the US?
These English parties are not defined by what they are for. They are defined by what they are against. Worse, what they are against is most of us. I will be candid, the rise of fascism is scaring me. In time, I suspect it will scare most people, but by then it might be too late. It took seven centuries from the time of Magna Carta until we got a universal franchise in the UK for every man and woman of adult age.
The positive processes of democracy took a very long time to build. I, among others, have related that the process of democracy is being destroyed in the US, is almost over, and all in a matter of months.
This is not a moment for sitting on the side. This is not a moment when waiting to make up your mind is an option. This is a moment when you have to decide whose side you are on, which voices you wish to hear, and what causes you wish to promote.
This is a moment to reject the politics of division, and the politics of hate. This is a moment to be for things.
In that case, it may be just one small gesture among many you might need to take, but might I suggest that if you have not already done so, you might subscribe to The National?
This is a moment when it needs your support. This is a moment when you need to express that support . This is a way of doing just that.
Freedom requires a free press.
The National has shown its capacity to offer opinion free from fear.
That, surely, is a cause worth supporting at this very precarious moment?
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Channel 4
19 minutes ago
- Channel 4
National guard in LA as Trump attempts ICE protest crackdown
National Guard troops have arrived in Los Angeles after being called up by President Trump to crack down on two days of protests over immigration enforcement raids. Demonstrators have again clashed with riot police as they tried to stop enforcement officers detaining people. Meanwhile, Mr Trump and his team have launched a war of words with the senior Democratic politicians in California who have been criticising the way the government's immigration policy is being enforced.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
The winners and losers in Labour's first spending review
When Rachel Reeves publishes the government's spending review on Wednesday, the stories the Treasury will want to tell are the energy, transport and other infrastructure projects that will get a share of the big boost in capital funding – £113bn. They will argue that cash, freed up by the change to the fiscal rules in the budget, could only have happened under Labour and was opposed by the Tories and Reform. But the capital spending cannot stop expected cuts in day-to-day spending, meaning extremely tight settlements for departments, with savings expected from policing budgets, local government, civil service cuts, foreign aid, education and culture. Treasury sources said they would still spend £190bn more over the five-year parliament than the Conservatives' spending plans – meaning more than £300bn will be distributed among departments. Real-terms spending will grow at an average of 1.2% a year over the three years that the spending review period covers, a significant drop from the first two years when it will be 2.5%. Even that figure does not tell the full story because of the disproportionate boost being given to defence and the NHS – and has led the Institute for Fiscal Studies to warn that the spending commitments will require 'chunky tax rises' in the autumn, when coupled with other expected priorities such as restoring the winter fuel allowance to more pensioners and action on child poverty such as ending the two-child benefit limit. Here are some of the key offers from the spending review – and the rows over cuts. The biggest row of the spending review has been between Reeves and the home secretary, Yvette Cooper, over policing, which one source describes as being a 'huge headache'. Cooper has brought out the big guns to make her case, first with a letter from six police chiefs who warned that without more funding the government would not meet its manifesto promises on crime. Sir Mark Rowley, the head of the Metropolitan police, and other senior police officers have also written to the prime minister to warn him that investment was need to prevent some crimes being routinely ignored. It is understand the policing budget will not face real terms cuts but the level of spending is still under discussion. The Home Office is under strain as a major spending department that is key to some of the most ambitious manifesto pledges – including halving knife crime, police recruitment, reducing violence against women and girls as well as dealing with monitoring offenders who will be released earlier due to sentencing changes. The other major spending review row is over deep dissatisfaction from Angela Rayner – the deputy prime minister and housing secretary – with the level of funding for social homes in the spending review, making her one of the last remaining holdouts in negotiations with the Treasury over departmental spending settlements. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has been battling for more funding for the affordable homes programme as well as trying to preserve cash for local councils, homelessness and regional growth initiatives. The Treasury had previously put £2bn into affordable housing, described as a 'down payment' on further funding to be announced at the spending review, which Reeves said would mark a generational shift in the building of council homes. However, the next phase of funding has caused a major rift with Rayner – and more so because capital spending on infrastructure such as housing is meant to be a priority. The environment secretary, Steve Reed, is said to have been holding out for a big capital injection to fund flood defences. The autumn budget said the government was facing significant funding pressures on flood defences and farm schemes of almost £600m in 2024-25, and that those schemes would have to be reviewed for their affordability. Sources at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) confirmed a post-Brexit farming fund would be cut in the review. Labour promised a fund of £5bn over two years – from 2024 to 2026 – at the budget, which is being honoured, but in the years after that it will be slashed for all but a few farms. The energy secretary, Ed Miliband, had a long fight to keep cash for a major programme of insulation, which was a key part of the government's net zero strategy. However, there are reports suggesting other schemes could be scaled back to protect the insulation programme. At the October budget, Reeves announced £3.4bn over three years for household energy efficiency schemes, heat decarbonisation and fuel poverty schemes. The government responded to concerns expressed at the time calling the sum the 'bare minimum' and promising a spending uplift at the review. Miliband's department is expected to get significant capital investment in energy infrastructure including nuclear – with the government poised to give the go ahead to the Sizewell C nuclear plant. The chancellor has already announced £15bn in transport spending across the north of England, funds which she said fulfil promises made by the Conservatives to the country but which the party had no way to pay for them in its own plan. Wes Streeting's department is set to be one of the big winners of the spending review and it will lay the groundwork for the NHS 10-year plan, which will be published imminently after the spending review. The department will get one of the biggest boosts to funding as others face real-terms cuts. The funding for the plan prioritises three key areas, moving care from hospitals to communities, increasing the use of technology, and prioritising prevention. No 10 and Streeting hope that the 10-year plan will contain major commitments and a positive story that the government will finally be able to tell properly on improvements to the health service – though any good news could be scuppered by the ballot for strike action by resident doctors. Still, Streeting's department was one of the last to settle formally with the Treasury due to negotiations over drug prices, though departmental sources downplayed any specific row. Any child in England whose parents receive universal credit will be able to claim free school meals from September 2026, the government has said. Parents on the credit will be eligible regardless of their income. The government says the change will make 500,000 more pupils eligible. A Department for Education (DfE) source said it was the best measure outside welfare changes to address child poverty and that the education secretary, Bridget Phillipson, had consistently fought to protect school food programmes through each round of spending negotiations. But schools budgets will be squeezed. Teachers will get a 4% pay rise next year, with additional funding of £615m. But schools will still have to fund about a quarter of the rise themselves – a total of £400m from their current budgets. Phillipson has tasked the DfE with finding savings in schools budgets, such as energy bills. Savings will also come as the government is removing public funding for level 7 apprenticeships, which has drawn criticism from skills experts. The justice secretary, Shabana Mahmood, was one of the first to reach her settlement to allow her to announce a £4.7bn plan to build three new prisons starting this year, part of a 'record expansion' as the government attempts to get to grips with the prison crisis. The early announcement was essential because it came alongside an announcement that the government would put a limit on how long hundreds of repeat offenders can be recalled to prison amid Whitehall predictions that jails will be full again in November.
STV News
an hour ago
- STV News
Reform voters in Hamilton by-election ‘angry', not racist, says Swinney
John Swinney has said Scots who voted for Reform in a by-election last week were 'angry', not racist. The First Minister was asked on the BBC Scotland's Sunday Show if those who backed Reform were 'gullible' or 'racist' – a term the SNP leader has previously used to describe the party. Swinney said the 7,088 people who backed Reform – more than a quarter of the vote – in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse ballot were 'neither', but were instead 'angry at the cost-of-living crisis'. He added: 'I think that's what motivates the Reform vote. People have got poorer because of one central thing – Brexit, and the author of that is (Reform UK leader Nigel) Farage. 'I'm standing up to Farage. I'm going to make no apology for it.' PA Media John Swinney said those who voted Reform in Hamilton were 'angry' (PA). He said the SNP is 'in the process of recovery' and he had come into office as First Minister a year ago 'inheriting some significant difficulties' within the party, and that it needs to get stronger before the Holyrood election in 2026. He said voters are 'having to work hard for less' and are concerned about public services, particularly the NHS. Swinney was asked about comments he made prior to the vote saying 'Labour were not at the races' and claiming it was a 'two-horse race' between the SNP and Reform. Labour's Davy Russell gained the seat from the SNP with 8,559 votes, while SNP candidate Katy Loudon came second on 7,957, ahead of Reform's Ross Lambie. The First Minister said that since the general election campaign last year, people he has met have pledged never to vote Labour due to the winter fuel allowance being cut, while Reform's support increased. PA Media Reform UK came third in the by-election (Jane Barlow/PA). Swinney said: 'People were telling us on the doorsteps, they were giving us reasons why they weren't supporting Labour. We could also see that Farage's support was rising dramatically and that's happening across the United Kingdom, it's not unique to Hamilton. 'I positioned the SNP to be strong enough to stop Farage, and that's what we were determined to do.' Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar has branded the SNP's campaign 'dishonest and disgraceful' and said it had put the spotlight on Reform. Those comments were put to the First Minister, who said he had previously been allies with Mr Sarwar in a campaign to 'stand up to far-right thinking'. Swinney said: 'That was months ago and then we found ourselves in the aftermath of the UK local authority elections, the English local authority elections where Farage surged to a leading position and won a by-election south of the border. 'So the dynamic of our politics change in front of us. 'I've been standing up to Farage for months, I've been warning about the dangers of Farage for months, and they crystallised in the rise of Farage during the Hamilton, Stonehouse and Larkhall by-election.' 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
