Will John Swinney's wooing of Donald Trump pay off?
Mr Swinney will no doubt hope that his support for the American president's political rival, Kamala Harris, will be forgotten over a glass of Irn Bru and a fresh Aberdeenshire buttery.
There will be a fine line to balance for the First Minister, who made no secret of his support for Ms Harris during the autumn of 2024.
Last October, Mr Swinney told reporters: 'People in the United States of America should vote for Kamala Harris and I have not come to that conclusion only because Donald Trump is opposed to Scottish independence.'
And, in more recent times, Mr Swinney has suggested that the president's state visit, scheduled for September, should be cancelled after Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy was booted from the Oval Office in March.
John Swinney has agreed to meet with Donald Trump. Of course, Mr Trump, whose mother Mary MacLeod Trump was from Harris, has long cast his shadow over these isles.
The billionaire, who once described Scots as 'tough people' and 'good fighters,' has clashed with politicians and locals for years, ever since he announced plans to build a golf course in Aberdeenshire two decades ago.
Despite the objections of environmental campaigners and aggrieved residents, Trump International Golf Links opened near the town of Balmedie in 2012.
Mr Trump got on splendidly with the late Alex Salmond, that is, until he heard about a Scottish Government plan to build wind farms in the sea off his new estate.
In 2012, he said: "You're going to have riots all over Scotland, because Alex Salmond is going to destroy the natural beauty of Scotland.'
Thirteen years later, the wind farms have been built, and no riots have taken place.
Mr Swinney's government is clearly taking a cautious approach when it comes to dealing with Mr Trump. Who could blame them?
Yet, the Scottish Greens have slammed Mr Swinney's 'tragic' decision to meet with the American president, who they have accused of being a 'political extremist.'
Would Humza Yousaf have welcomed Mr Trump as FM? Their ire has been shared by others in Scotland's progressive left. It's not a coincidence that my most shared post on Bluesky, by far, was a news article announcing the meeting would take place.
One anonymous user, named 'Apples n Spice,' wrote: 'Swinney doing more on-brand Swinney things. Embarrassing for Scotland. It's actually vomit inducing.'
Another user wrote: 'Pretty sure Sturgeon would have been washing her hair that day and Yousaf would have flat out refused.'
That's an interesting point.
It would have been great theatre to see how Nicola Sturgeon or Humza Yousaf, undoubtedly First Ministers with a bit more panache than Honest John, would have dealt with the situation.
Read more:
Protests aside, Mr Swinney is doing the grown-up thing.
According to the Scottish Government, the United States is Scotland's largest trade partner, importing £4b of Scottish goods in 2023.
Around 700 American companies employ 115,000 people across the nation.
If the plan is to secure political points, the easy thing to do, as many in Mr Swinney's base have suggested, is to reject the meeting.
Yet, Mr Swinney has chosen a more difficult path, one which will require cool-headed diplomacy and a twist of Scottish hospitality.
I wonder what they are going to talk about?
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Record
9 minutes ago
- Daily Record
Time to park our fears over Trump and use trip to smooth relations with UK
Record View says Trump won't be President forever - so we must play a long-term game to secure a key international relationship. Nobody should be surprised that President Trump's trip to Scotland will generate protests throughout the country. Now in his second term, Trump is a menace who has caused chaos at home and abroad. His inability to accept defeat to Joe Biden in 2020 undermined US democracy and his support for the January 6th insurrectionists was nauseating. He callously undermined President Zelensky on live TV and his fawning over Vladimir Putin is disgusting. The fact he is a convicted felon is another justification for Scots to take to the street. But we also have to separate the man from the office he holds. Scotland and the UK have strong ties with the US going back centuries. The UK and the US have fought wars together and share security intelligence in a way that keeps both countries safe. Trump was elected by over 70 million Americans and we must respect that. Furthering our economic interests is another reason for Keir Starmer and John Swinney to meet Trump. His tariffs are akin to a wrecking ball and if positive relations with Trump reduce the levies, so be it. Starmer seems to have the ear of the President and using leverage with him on Gaza and Ukraine would be sensible. Trump is a difficult man with a volatile temper who doesn't like being challenged. But the UK is adept at soft power and the five-day trip should be used to smooth relations with the UK, not aggravate them. He won't be President forever so we must play a long-term game to secure a key international relationship. Join the Daily Record WhatsApp community! Get the latest news sent straight to your messages by joining our WhatsApp community today. You'll receive daily updates on breaking news as well as the top headlines across Scotland. No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the Daily Record team. All you have to do is click here if you're on mobile, select 'Join Community' and you're in! If you're on a desktop, simply scan the QR code above with your phone and click 'Join Community'. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose 'exit group'. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. Sort out compo The eye-watering sums paid out by Police Scotland in employment tribunal cases should give cause for concern at a time when it's strapped for cash and making savings. The non-disclosure agreements signed by both parties just adds to the air of secrecy surrounding these claims. The robust nature of police work means there will always be staff grievances and complaints from the public. However Scotland's opposition parties are right to raise concerns that monies paid in compensation mean less cash for frontline policing and crime fighting. While the Scottish Police Federation, which represents most of the claimants, says the force needs to act quicker when they come to it with complaints. The Scottish government in turn insists it brought in new legislation to improve the complaints system. Politicians and police should get round the table and fix this once and for all. We are sure the public would not complain about that.
Times
38 minutes ago
- Times
Trans guidance from equality watchdog may foster distrust, SNP warns
Proposed transgender guidance from Britain's equalities watchdog will foster 'distrust' and lead to 'social policing of bodies', the SNP has warned. Ministers said the draft changes to the code of practice from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), made after the Supreme Court ruling that women are defined by biological sex under equalities law, 'may lead to abuse'. In a submission to the EHRC's consultation, the Scottish government repeated its acceptance of April's Supreme Court judgment, which came after it lost a legal challenge brought by campaigners. However, it raised concerns about proposals of how it should be implemented in practice, leading For Women Scotland, the group that won the case, to accuse the devolved government of echoing messaging from 'transactivist groups it heavily funds'. The EHRC draft guidance includes a biological definition of sex and states that this should be the basis for granting access to single-sex facilities and services. In practice, this would mean trans women being barred from female-only spaces. In the submission, the Scottish government said: 'We note that the impact of the guidance may lead to situations where some members of the public will take it upon themselves to judge appearances and assume someone's sex based on their perception of that person's sex or gender identity. 'This sense of distrust in others and social policing of bodies is detrimental not only for trans and non-binary people, but for those who are born male or female who may not fit into society's current expectations of what a man or woman looks like, which change over time, and in different contexts and places.' The SNP has faced criticism for its failure to implement the Supreme Court ruling, with a series of policies that allow gender self-ID still in operation throughout the public sector. These include guidelines for teachers, which state that biological boys should generally be allowed to participate in girls' sports and workplace guidance, which says trans staff should be allowed to use the toilets or changing facilities they feel most comfortable with. Ministers pledged to act once the final guidance is published, but faced claims they were attempting to delay a politically contentious issue until after next year's Holyrood elections. The submission added: 'Encouraging a situation where authority is given to question someone's biological sex and ask for proof thereof may lead to abuse if not done appropriately. 'At the same time this places an undue burden on individuals, requiring untrained staff or providers to make assumptions or judgments about whether a person appears to present as trans, which is potentially discriminatory and unfair.' The submission called for an emphasis on 'inclusion as opposed to exclusion,' noting that examples provided in the planned code update mainly 'provide guidance on where and how transgender people can be excluded from services and associations'. Trina Budge, a For Women Scotland director, said: 'This is a substandard response from the Scottish government, which fails to address the EHRC's specific questions, choosing instead to focus on areas raised by the transactivist groups it heavily funds. 'The government says it has accepted the Supreme Court's ruling and it may have done so far as keeping women's representation on public boards for biological women only, but it seems to be expecting the EHRC to tell it how to shoehorn men who say they are women into any other single-sex provision allowed under the Equality Act. 'We're not sure if the government is wilfully misunderstanding that this is not legally possible or if it intends to continue to defy the judgment of the Supreme Court. ' Tess White, the Scottish Conservative equalities spokeswoman, accused the SNP of putting 'women and girls in danger'. She said: 'The SNP aren't just failing to implement the Supreme Court's verdict, they now appear to be criticising the EHRC. 'The judgment from the UK's highest court was crystal clear, yet the nationalists are still desperately stalling for time and trying to pass the buck. This doesn't just send the wrong message, it puts women and girls in danger. 'The Sandie Peggie case shows exactly what happens when organisations pander to gender extremists instead of standing up for women's rights. 'Scots won't be fooled by the SNP's blatant attempts to run down the clock. John Swinney must act now and order all public bodies to follow the law and provide single-sex spaces.'
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Trump targets Ivy League colleges after $220M Columbia deal
His administration's unprecedented deal with Columbia University in New York City has put many of its Ivy League peers in a tough spot. To shake the target off its back and unpause research funding, Columbia agreed on July 23 to pay fines of more than $220 million (and signed on to a sprawling list of other concessions related to admissions, academics and hiring practices). The accord has unnerved leaders at college campuses across the country. "This has opened up a Pandora's box," said Scott Schneider, an attorney and expert in higher education law. Read more: The details of Columbia's extraordinary $220 million deal with Trump, explained Trump, who has halted billions in research grants to a slew of schools, has said he envisions the Columbia deal as the first of many such agreements. His education secretary, Linda McMahon, called it a blueprint for other institutions to follow. Read more: After $220 million Columbia deal, Trump promises more to come "Columbia's reforms are a roadmap for elite universities that wish to regain the confidence of the American public," she said in a statement. While it's unclear whether the agreement has set a new precedent, the Trump administration is pushing for other colleges to pay similar types of fines, a White House official confirmed to USA TODAY. Some onlookers, including Larry Summers, a former president of Harvard, have lauded the deal. He called it an "excellent template" for resolutions with the administration. But critics such as Brendan Cantwell, a higher education professor at Michigan State University, believe the short-term benefits of conceding to broad demands from the Trump administration are not worth the long-term implications of redefining the relationship between the federal government and higher education. Still, he understands the arguments of people like Summers. When colleges choose to fight, he acknowledged, "individual people are going to be hurt." "And maybe that's an unacceptable cost," he said. Trump's other deal: the University of Pennsylvania Columbia isn't the only Ivy League school to strike a deal with the Trump administration this summer. On July 1, the University of Pennsylvania, the president's alma mater in Philadelphia, entered into an agreement ending a civil rights investigation brought by the U.S. Department of Education. In February, the agency accused Penn of violating Title IX, the primary sex discrimination law governing schools, when it allowed Lia Thomas, a transgender swimmer, to compete in 2022. By March, professors were told their research projects had lost funding. The school's president said $175 million in grants and programs had been jeopardized. As part of the deal, the White House said it would restore Penn's research funding. In return, the university apologized to cisgender athletes who swam against Thomas. The university also agreed to ban transgender women from sports. (Trans women athletes have been banned from competing on women's teams at National Collegiate Athletic Association schools since February, when new rules were imposed, although the NCAA's policy permits trans men to compete in men's sports.) Read more: Lia Thomas, Title IX and $175M -- why Penn struck a deal with Trump Weeks after the deal was announced, many Penn faculty members remain in limbo, unsure about which grants have been revived. "Nobody really knows what was cut and what was restored," said Jonathan Zimmerman, a professor who studies the history of education at the university. "It feels like the theater of the absurd." Harvard keeps fighting Harvard, unlike the other Ivy League campuses immersed in similar conflicts, has continued to battle the Trump administration in court. At a key hearing in Boston on July 21, the university's lawyers urged a federal judge to force the White House to restore billions in funding for the school. Harvard has asked the judge to reach a decision by Sept. 3. But the White House's attacks on Harvard have extended far beyond money for research: The Trump administration has threatened to revoke its tax-exempt status, tried to ban its ability to enroll international students, warned its accreditor, and considered placing a lien on the university's assets. All the while, Trump has hinted he believes Harvard may still be open to coming to a deal. Other colleges in limbo Of the eight schools that make up the Ivy League, only two - Dartmouth College in New Hampshire and Yale University in Connecticut - have avoided targeted federal funding freezes. At Cornell, the government paused more than $1 billion. At Brown, it froze $510 million, and at Princeton it stopped more than $210 million. Asked whether their university leaders were negotiating with the Trump administration to restore their funding, spokespeople for Brown, Cornell and Princeton declined to comment or did not respond to requests for comment. Additional agreements with those schools (and others) could happen before the start of the year, according to Robert Kelchen, a higher education professor at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. Trump, plagued by heightened attention to the president's reported ties to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, may be looking for ways to change the narrative, Kelchen said. And some schools might feel incentivized to resolve funding problems before students - and protests - return to campus for the fall. "The whole Epstein thing really has the potential to swamp the administration," he said. "They want victories they can point to." Zachary Schermele is an education reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach him by email at zschermele@ Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and Bluesky at @
