SNP could have got the votes to win had they backed this petition
In the run-up to the by-election the SNP leadership played the well-worn Westminster political 'first past the post' tactic. That is, not to try to promote your own policies but to claim that a vote for your candidate will prevent the 'much worse' party winning the seat.
That way there's no need to make any promises or commitments to the electorate, you just claim to be much better than the party you claim is likely to win the seat if your party fails to win it.
READ MORE: Israel launches second wave of major strikes on Iran
John Swinney insisted on claiming that the outcome of the election would be a win for either SNP or the unknown Reform UK candidate, so that voting SNP was required to stop the neo-fascist Farage bunch from taking the seat, and in doing so, getting a foothold in Scotland.
He offered no evidence to back this up, just his own political wisdom and in following this strategy, allowed Labour's 'invisible man' to quietly take the seat with practically no campaign – Labour were probably looking on and thinking it would be rude to interrupt!
We now know that John's political wisdom was widely off the mark, indeed his claim that Reform was doing so well probably played into the Farage media hype, which is the core of the Reform organisation, and to that extent helped them in the election.
This was a disaster for the SNP, losing a seat that they've held since its introduction in 2011. So again, the only winner was political apathy and disillusionment, with a turnout of only 44.2% compared to 63.2% in 2021, John Swinney seemed to imply this was a reasonable result?
I know that in the run-up to this election, the SNP candidate Katy Loudon asked SNP members and the wider constituency for their support. Andy Anderson, the national convener of the Respect Scottish Sovereignty movement, responded to Katy, asking her to give her support to petition PE2135 on Scottish human rights which is currently before the Scottish Parliament. Andy said if she would do this, he would talk to RSS supporters in the constituency and seek their help to get her elected.
RSS has about 7000 supporters in Scotland and hundreds of these supporters are in that constituency, so getting their active support for the SNP candidate could have been decisive in the outcome of this election. So how did Katy respond? She didn't. Andy prompted her again. No response.
It seems it was more important to the SNP leadership to keep their options open to undermine the UN human rights of the Scottish people than to win a by-election.
The Scottish people will not tolerate this, we will persist in our struggle for Scottish human rights and for direct democracy, and this RSS petition is an important part of that struggle.
Apathy and political disillusion will not continue to dominate our electoral system. So, if the SNP want a viable political future in Scotland, they had better pay attention to the human rights of the Scottish people and start to respond to this issue.
Paddy McCarthy
via email
IT is always a good way to finish the working week, witnessing the complete meltdown with associated frothing at the mouth of the extremists, those whot love to label themselves as 'Reform'.
The followers of Farage – yes, he that is nothing more than a 'market-stall Trump' – dislike having their twisted ideology questioned. Which is in itself a classic reaction by those with leanings towards the totalitarian state. Their disdain for human rights, obsession with national security, and want of suppression of workers' rights all point to the fascist way of thinking.
Yet if you were to ask them what their goal is? Their answer is that all they crave is their country back? They are, of course, unable to state where they wish to bring their country back from. But they know that the problems facing the UK could be solved by putting machine guns on the Channel crossing points, kicking out everyone who does not look the same, speak the same, or prays to a different god!
After all, are they nothing more than an invasion force sitting in our midst just waiting for the call? Which is similar to the scaremongering used before the start of the First World War. Then it was directed at the German waiters in London, who were supposedly all serving officers in the Kaiser's army. The rancid press also stated that thousand of rifles with even more ammunition had been pre-placed in the UK for use by the waiters/officers!
Oh, how they crave to have the country returned to a time of smartly dressed obedient children, with housewives equally smartly dressed doing their daily shopping at local shops. A time that did not exist outside of the BBC.
The fascists will not accept that they are being manipulated by politicians who are, by their nature, dangerous, corrupt of ideology, and vile in deed. Scotland as a matter of urgency must separate from that breeding ground of rancid thought that is Westminster.
Only through independence and rejoining our friends in Europe (in whatever form) shall we halt this goose-stepping into the abyss of intolerance and authoritarianism.
Cliff Purvis
Veterans for Scottish Independence 2.0
AN excellent article by Dr Mark McNaught on the advantages of the Efta/EEA over the EU for an independent Scotland (Jun 11). In particular, he calls out the EU's now blatant and highly dangerous military ambitions.
What he doesn't mention, however, is that Scotland would be a net contributor to the EU. Latterly the UK was paying around £9 billion annually, the equivalent of more than £150 per adult.
Given that Von der Leyen and co are hell-bent on admitting the ultimate basket case, Ukraine, that figure would be a lot higher.
George Morton
Rosyth
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Powys County Times
an hour ago
- Powys County Times
Government plan to keep Pip payouts for 13 weeks ‘not very much', says MP
A Labour MP has described the Government's plans to avert a rebellion on welfare cuts as 'not very much really'. Dr Simon Opher, a GP and the MP for Stroud, told the BBC he is 'going to rebel' in a vote and 'a number of colleagues are in the same situation'. The 'non-negotiable' protections that Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall is to include in the Welfare Reform Bill are understood to include a guarantee that those who no longer qualify for personal independence payments (Pip) will still receive the payments for 13 weeks. Speaking to BBC Radio 4's Today programme on Saturday, Dr Opher said: 'It's a slight delay in the disability cuts – it's 13 weeks rather than four weeks – so it's something, but not very much really. 'And it doesn't change the basic fact that they're… planning to cut disability payment to quite a lot of people really. 'So not terribly impressed, but it's something at least.' The Government has faced a backlash from its own MPs over the package of measures, aimed at reducing the number of working age people on sickness benefits. Dozens of Labour MPs last month urged the Prime Minister to pause and reassess planned cuts, saying the proposals were 'impossible to support'. Asked whether he would rebel if the measures came to a vote in the Commons, Dr Opher told the programme: 'I am going to rebel. 'And this comes hard to me, I've never actually voted against the Government and I know a number of colleagues in the same situation. 'So I just urge the Government really to just consider parts of this again.' A Green Paper laid out proposals for a 'transitional protection for those who are no longer eligible for Pip', but the Government's plans revealed this week clarify the 13-week length. Ms Kendall told The Guardian earlier this week: 'When we set out our reforms we promised to protect those most in need, particularly those who can never work. 'I know from my 15 years as a constituency MP how important this is. It is something I take seriously and will never compromise on. 'That is why we are putting additional protections on the face of the Bill to support the most vulnerable and help people affected by the changes. 'These protections will be written into law, a clear sign they are non-negotiable.' A Government impact assessment published alongside the reforms warned that 250,000 people, including 50,000 children, across England, Scotland and Wales could fall into relative poverty after housing costs as a result of the changes.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Does Dumbarton fate prove Scottish game needs independent regulator?
And, as administrators for Dumbarton prepare to dissolve one of Scotland's oldest clubs and start again as a newco, years of mismanagement of the League Two club have reinforced the conviction of the local MSP that football clubs should be offered some form of protection from rapacious owners. Whether they want it or not. 'My experience with Dumbarton Football Club strengthens the case for an independent football regulator. 'In the past few years, Dumbarton has lost out to too many owners whose true interest lay beyond the club itself. 'I would like, at the very least, the SFA to be given greater responsibility and power to clamp down on speculative owners. However, inaction by the football authorities makes the case for an independent regulator stronger.' While independent regulation is common in other industries, the Scottish football authorities are member organisations run by clubs for clubs. And those same clubs don't care for the idea of an independent regulator telling them how to run their business. Owners and directors might be subjected to fit and proper checks more stringent than a self declaration form or the limited rules set down in Article 10.2 of the SFA handbook. Clubs might see a light being shone on their darkest alcoves. The game might be forced to confront sectarian singing or bottles, vapes and fireworks being lobbed around grounds by adopting strict liability, a justice system clubs virulently oppose. There might even be a review of the decision by Premiership sides to ban artificial pitches in the top flight by season 2026/27. Addressing Holyrood's health, social care and sport committee in December 2023 Scottish FA Chief Executive Ian Maxwell flagged up the significant differences between the game north and south of the border and described Scottish football governance as "robust" when it came to dealing with financial issues. A regulator, he argued, was unnecessary. Since then Dumbarton and Inverness Caledonian Thistle have endured insolvency events. Livingston have been embroiled in a lengthy court battle with their shareholders and Hamilton Academical have been docked 15 points and incurred the wrath of fan groups for announcing plans to leave their home town and move to Cumbernauld instead. The SFA and SPFL argue that the levers are already in place to to deal with rule breaches and misbehaviour. Hamilton's application to move 14 miles to Broadwood is under review while the league recently handed Celtic and Rangers suspended punishments for unruly supporter behaviour at the Premier Sports Cup semi-finals. The SFA have introduced measures to deal with misconduct at domestic cup games. Clubs which suffer an insolvency event as a result of financial mismanagement, meanwhile, can expect a 15 point deduction. Simon Barrow, co-founder of the SFSA and lead author of the 2023 report 'Rebuilding Scottish Football', which led to a parliamentary debate last year and the establishment of a Scottish Government-hosted roundtable on the development of the game, believes football is tinkering while Rome burns. 'With clubs like Dumbarton and Inverness Caledonian Thistle going into administration and the need to strengthen and invest in the game from the grassroots upwards increasing in urgency, effective transparency and accountability in financial and related matters is crucial,' argues Barrow. 'It is important to see through the cloud of dust that can easily be thrown up by the issue of whether, like England, Scotland should move towards having a statutorily backed regulator for football. 'That is clearly a backstop. But it does not have to be the starting point for discussion. We should first agree the principle that a public facing industry in receipt of the public's money in a variety of ways should be publicly accountable. 'Independent scrutiny is the way to achieve that. It is also essential for building confidence and trust in Scottish football, and for encouraging people to put money into its future. It's a win-win situation. Dumbarton Rock towers above Dumbarton Football Stadium (Image: Christian Cooksey) Read more: What future for Albion Rovers, a storied name of the past? Scottish football needs to say no to newco and get 'robust' governance 'What it means is qualified assessors having the power and information to examine who owns and runs the game, how public interest can be made central, and how Scottish football's finance, governance and conduct can be improved and strengthened. 'Practically, there are a variety of ways that independent scrutiny, short of a statutory regulator, can operate. That is what the conversation should be about.' Critics of an independent regulator argue that the scheme is an expensive and unnecessary layer of bureaucracy. Some of the issues which plague Scottish football – such as pyrotechnics and missiles - are matters governed - in theory at least - by the criminal justice system. Clubs pay Police Scotland good money and expect them to earn it. Speaking after a Hampden AGM where clubs signed up to tougher rules around crowd disorder for cup games governed by the SFA CEO Maxwell acknowledged that football had to do more to combat anti-social behaviour in the stands. The Scottish Government, meanwhile, are scheduled to host another Round Table to discuss some of the issues surrounding the game. The implied threat underpinning the talks is clear. If football fails to clean up its act then the politicians reserve the right to step in at some unspecified date in future. Even if the will to do so is weak. One senior figure – speaking on condition of anonymity - told Herald Sport that an independent regulator in Scotland had always been an idea promoted by former first minister Henry McLeish as a vehicle for Henry McLeish. 'The regulator down south was a tool to stop the Super League, something which was never relevant in Scotland. To stop heritage assets being removed like changes to colours and crests, which has already been achieved through the SFA and to get 20% of income through to the lower leagues, which is roughly where we are in Scotland anyway. 'Clubs like Dumbarton, Inverness and so on are where they are because of their own individual circumstances. It has nothing to do with anything that a regulator could change. All a regulator brings is bureaucracy, costs and administration paid for by the industry. 'All we will see down south is a rising number of legal fights between clubs being regulated and the regulator.' Legal disputes in football are now commonplace. Last season the English Premier League spent £45million on legal costs due to various disputes and arbitration revolving around financial fair play regulations. Cases involving Manchester City, Everton, Nottingham Forest, Chelsea and Leicester City demonstrate that wealthy owners of football clubs don't care much for external scrutiny of how they spend their money. Some believe that the main benefactors of a football regulator will be lawyers. In Scotland, at least, the issue is hypothetical because there is currently no plan for a Football Governance Bill. Unless Labour secure power in the Holyrood elections next year there appears to be no political will to introduce a regulator in Scotland. 'The row over the Offensive Behaviour in Football Act put the SNP government currently in power off the idea of legislating football,' says Paul Goodwin, co-founder of the Scottish Football Supporters Association in 2015. 'I think we are still in a recovery period from that.' A critic of the SFA and SPFL Goodwin senses no real movement towards an independent regulator in Scotland, but believes there should be. 'Part of the challenge football faces is the history of being anything but open and anything but transparent. There are conflicts of interest everywhere. 'I am not saying that an independent regulator will go in and say, 'you can't get your league structures right, I am going to fix it.' 'But what an independent regulator might do is look at the financial distribution model and say, 'why is Scotland the only country in Europe where solidarity money coming from UEFA is not filtering down to the lower levels of the game? 'The problem here is that the SFA, like the SPFL, is run by the clubs for the clubs. It's self interest that dictates everything. 'The SFA should be overseeing the governance of our game but they come under so much influence from clubs in the SPFL. And, let's be honest here, turkeys do not vote for Christmas.'
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Labour ministers have no grasp of even the most basic facts on migration
That this Labour Government has no useful ideas for resolving the migrant crisis can be taken as a given. What has been harder to explain has been its lack of enthusiasm for finding viable solutions beyond simply repeating a vague pledge to 'smash the criminal gangs'. A curious statement from Darren Jones, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, has offered a potential explanation: it may simply be that nobody in the party has bothered looking at who is actually crossing the Channel. Appearing on Question Time, Mr Jones claimed that ' the majority of the people in these boats are children, babies and women '. This is wrong. In the latest 12 months of data, 74 per cent of those arriving in small boats have been adult men over the age of 18. Given that the British state's ability to assess the age of arrivals is not entirely uncontested, and the advantages to asylum claimants who fall just below that critical threshold, this may well be an understatement. If senior figures in the Government believe the inflow to consist of vulnerable women and babes in arms, a great deal of policy decisions begin to make more sense; the lack of concern at distributing unvetted arrivals throughout the country, the apparent confusion that locals may feel threatened or unsafe as a result, and the apparent refusal to countenance any policy that might realistically see arrivals removed. When challenged on his claim by Reform's Zia Yusuf, Mr Jones doubled down. His Government may wish to do some research before doing so with its current, failed approach.
