I'm concerned about the SNP's strategy for Hamilton by-election
READ MORE: Scottish Labour councillor defects to Reform UK
I am both concerned and fascinated by the strategy that seems to be driving the SNP's campaign. Instead of leading on the positive case for independence, which already enjoys 50% support, John Swinney has been promoting the negative idea that Labour have already lost and their supporters should vote SNP just to keep Reform UK from winning the seat. This is a very dangerous strategy. There is a serious chance that some Labour voters will see Reform, and not the SNP, as their second choice.
The bookmaker's odds on Reform winning the seat have shortened from 10/1 to 4/1. The SNP have everything to lose. Reform will claim even a moderate increase in their vote as a victory.
John Baird
Largs
I THINK the SNP must put indy first in 2026 for two reasons.
1. It would virtually guarantee a win for the party.
2. It would show the world the desire is still there.
I know we would have to win in a Westminster election, so that General Election vote would be confirming the 2026 result.
If SNP don't do something major on indy, they will pay a heavy price for decades.
It's time to act. I hope the party gets it but I have my doubts.
They don't want to mention it.
Bill Robertson
Fife
READ MORE: I was blocked from asking Keir Starmer a question. This is what I wanted to say
SO, Starmer thought he'd been given a political gift horse after Farage decided to veer away from the ranting gripe-fest that has made him popular and actually comment on economics.
The PM said Farage's policies would create a huge deficit (£50-80 billion) with Truss-style chaos.
My question would be – who does Starmer think is listening, among the rabid anti-migrant ranks (the ones he's been openly courting)? These are folk who were happy to trash the entire economy for a blue passport and some xenophobia.
Starmer's gift horse is a political turkey – like the one Brexiters voted for…
Amanda Baker
Edinburgh
THANK to Robin McAlpine for taking our Scottish Government and its processes to task (All the reasons why approving Flamingo Land's plan is wrong, May 27).
Can I add a wee bit to the arguments? Robin failed to mention one of the 'voices behind the throne' – Scottish Enterprise. The 'arm's length' government body renewed its exclusivity agreement with Flamingo Land (for the second time) just in time for the developer to lodge its appeal at the end of December last year.
However, Scottish Enterprise seems to be a law unto itself AND has no remit to consider communities or our environment.
Willie Oswald
Blanefield
RECENT statements by Bono and Thom Yorke condemning Benjamin Netanyahu's government as extreme are welcome, but come far too late to carry moral weight. The extremism in question has been entrenched for years – in law, in policy, and in the lived experiences of Palestinians subjected to blockade, occupation, and systemic violence. To speak up only after catastrophe has unfolded is not moral courage; it is moral caution.
Thom Yorke's questioning of why Hamas has not released all remaining hostages is similarly misjudged. It fails to reckon with the parallel reality of Israel's own extrajudicial detentions: namely, thousands of Palestinians held without charge or trial, many of them children, activists, or people merely caught in the gears of occupation. Calls for accountability must run in both directions if they are to carry credibility.
READ MORE: Nigel Farage denies Gaza genocide and backs weapons exports to Israel
The goal must not be a mere halt to hostilities that locks in injustice with a quieter tone. A political stand-off where we say 'we've gone too far, let's just stay here' would condemn future generations to a fragile, poisoned peace. What's needed is something more demanding and transformative:
– the safe return of all hostages and detainees held without due process, regardless of nationality;
– the dismantling of illegal settlements and a full withdrawal from occupied Palestinian territory;
– international reparative investment to rebuild the homes, hospitals, water systems, and lives shattered by siege and bombardment;
– and most crucially, a truth and reconciliation process, grounded in justice, equality, and shared humanity.
Only this kind of reckoning can break the cycle of vengeance and ideology. And only a peace unsullied by religious nationalism – of any and all hues – can be called just.
Ron Lumiere
via email
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
27 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Jenrick hits back after Farage labels him a ‘fraud' in row over migrants
Robert Jenrick has hit back at Nigel Farage after the Reform leader accused him of being a 'fraud' over his role in commissioning asylum hotels as an immigration minister. Reform politicians including Mr Farage, the party leader, have posted excerpts from a video from autumn 2022 in which Mr Jenrick, who was then immigration minister, pledged to ramp up the number of hotels for asylum seekers. In a video posted on X, formerly Twitter, Mr Farage said that under the Tories, when Mr Jenrick, now the shadow justice secretary, was responsible for immigration, the number of migrants in hotels hit a record 56,000. Speaking in the wake of a High Court ruling to shut an asylum hotel in Epping following local protests, Mr Farage said: 'He put more people in hotels than even this Labour Government. 'And here we are, three years later, and he turns up [at Epping] and says, 'I'm on your side.' My advice to you would be to say, This man is a fraud. This man is not to be trusted, and certainly his party aren't either.' However, Mr Jenrick rejected the 'nonsensical argument,' where his comments about 'ramping up' the number of asylum hotels were published out of context without taking account of the crisis the Conservative government faced at the Manston migrant processing centre, near Dover. 'The camp in Manston was out of control, complete chaos. In fact there had been an attack on the reception centre at Dover. So we had to do something in that moment to get some of the migrants out, and we didn't want to just let them loose on the streets of Kent,' he said. 'But by the time I left office a year later, when I resigned from the government because Rishi Sunak wasn't doing enough, I had set in train the closure of 100 of those hotels – more than anyone had done previously, more than anyone's done subsequently. 'Why? Because I actually got the number of people coming on small boats down by more than a third. They'd risen massively in the years before then, and they've risen massively since then.' He said he had closed the Bell Hotel in Epping in spring last year, only for Labour to reopen it a year later. 'I don't want to see a single hotel in any community in our country,' he added. 'That's ultimately why I chose to resign from the government, because I thought this was a disgraceful policy, and I was so sick to death of seeing this and the harm that it's causing to communities.' He urged all councils in the country to follow Epping's lead and seek injunctions to shut down asylum hotels and offered, through his office, legal advice for any local authority or community group that wanted to do so. A Tory source said: 'It's absurd. As if Rob wanted migrants in hotels? They seem to have lost their minds in the August heat. 'Perhaps they saw how well Rob polled with their voters and regretted not going to meet the protesters in Epping. The British people want this farce over, not false and petty attacks. 'We need to bring maximum pressure on Starmer to get the law changed, and then deport all illegal migrants. That's what Rob has spent years fighting for – he's not going to stop now.'
The National
38 minutes ago
- The National
Could Scotland challenge hotels housing asylum seekers? Legal insights
On Tuesday, the High Court granted a temporary injunction to Epping Forest District Council, blocking refugees from being allowed to stay at a former hotel. The ruling blocks asylum seekers from being housed at the Bell Hotel in the Essex town, and current residents must be removed by September 12. While the court ruling that asylum seekers be removed from a hotel in Epping, Essex was won by the council against the hotel over the breach of planning rules, Reform UK and far-right protesters are taking the injunction as a "victory" for them. READ MORE: 'Emboldened' far-right advertise Perth asylum seeker hotel protest Nigel Farage has stated that the Epping community "stood up bravely, despite being slandered as far-right, and have won". He has further called for peaceful protests outside hotels housing asylum seekers "across Britain" to put pressure on local authorities. Questions are being asked on what the implications of the ruling are for Scotland, and whether Scottish councils could take similar action. Nick McKerrell, senior lecturer in law at Glasgow Caledonian University, told The National that his view was that Scotland is unlikely to see councils block hotels housing asylum seekers, despite the potentially landmark ruling in Essex. What happened in the Epping ruling? The ruling from Mr Justice Eyre is significant but framed in "quite a specific way in the framework of English planning law", McKerrell explained. "Essentially the argument of Epping Council is that the hotel, by housing asylum seekers, is no longer acting as a hotel therefore it is in breach of the planning permission that was granted to allow it to operate in such a way. 'In legal terms, the council are arguing there is a change of use but not only that there has been a 'material' change of use – which means the change is so significant that it requires a new planning permission application if it wants to house asylum seekers." READ MORE: 'This rhetoric leads to firebombs': Humza Yousaf issues warning over asylum debate McKerrell added that a significant point was that the court did not make a ruling on whether they agreed with the council's position. The interim injunction (a court order banning behaviour – an interdict in Scots Law) is about the use of the hotel until a resolutions at a later hearing. "So he is saying that he will not make a ruling on whether the hotel is breaching planning law but it is saying that because of the broader issues raised it should not operate as a location for asylum seekers in the interim." Ultimately in his ruling on Tuesday, the judge conceded that "housing destitute asylum seekers is an important public policy," McKerrell summarised, "but there is also a public interest in ensuring that planning control is followed within local authorities which are ultimately responsible for it." Could Scotland challenge hotels housing asylum seekers? The judge in the Epping Forest case was keen to emphasise that his decision was very 'fact sensitive' so could not be seen as a precedent, McKerrell stressed. "He actually outlined a number of different contradictory decisions in the English courts on whether using hotels to house asylum seekers is a 'material' difference from operating 'usually' as a hotel. Scotland also has its own planning laws. 'Here it would require a local authority to challenge a hotel for breaching planning law. Scots planning law uses similar terms to those argued in the English court over change of 'material use'. Generally though that would be difficult in this context given councils in Scotland generally have been involved in discussions with the Home Office and contractors to agree to bring asylum seekers into the local area." He added: "A group that was angered by asylum seekers being housed for example as seen in Falkirk at the weekend would not be able to raise such an action." 'In England the numbers of asylum seekers are much greater and enter into direct contracts with the hotels which may not involve the council as can be seen in Epping where the District Council brought the action'. How many asylum seekers in the UK in 2025? The most recent Home Office data showed there were 32,345 asylum seekers being housed temporarily in UK hotels at the end of March. This was down 15% from the end of December, when the total was 38,079. New figures – published among the usual quarterly immigration data release – are expected on Thursday, showing numbers in hotels at the end of June. Figures for hotels published by the Home Office date back to December 2022 and showed numbers hit a peak at the end of September 2023 when there were 56,042 asylum seekers in hotels. How many hotels are in use for asylum seekers? It is thought there were more than 400 asylum hotels open in summer 2023. Labour said this has since been reduced to fewer than 210.
Western Telegraph
44 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Former Salmond staffer rejects Sturgeon claims in book as ‘obviously false'
Geoff Aberdein, who worked for Mr Salmond when he was first minister, hit out at Ms Sturgeon, saying: 'I was brought up that you didn't speak ill of the dead. 'But I think if you're going to speak ill of the dead, at least make your claims accurate.' Former first minister Nicola Sturgeon with her memoir, Frankly, which was published last week (Jane Barlow/PA) He told the Holyrood Sources podcast that Mr Salmond's widow Moira was 'particularly upset and frustrated at a lot of what has been said' about her late husband, who died suddenly in October 2024. Mr Aberdein continued: 'I think it was important to set out and correct the record not just because Alex is not in position to defend himself, but for myself as well and the series of other officials and civil servants that have contacted me.' Claims that Mr Salmond was the person who leaked the story of the sexual harassment allegations against him are 'obviously false', Mr Aberdein insisted. He said that when his former boss took the phone call to say the story about the allegations was being published by the Daily Record he was actually meeting lawyers to 'draft a legal summons to prevent Nicola Sturgeon's Government from making the allegations public'. Mr Aberdeen said: 'To suggest Alex was simultaneously leaking documents deeply damaging to his reputation whilst at the same time paying lawyers a lot of money to get a court order to prevent publication of the same material is just utterly absurd.' Mr Salmond went on to be acquitted of all the charges against him in a court case in 2020. Mr Aberdein also dismissed claims by Ms Sturgeon that Mr Salmond 'didn't read' the white paper on independence which had been produced by the Scottish government in the run up to the 2014 referendum. In her recently published memoir, Frankly, Ms Sturgeon spoke out about her 'cold fury' with her former leader over his 'abdication of responsibility' on the key document. Mr Aberdein – who said he would not be reading the book – accepted that his former boss 'delegated the responsibility for drafting the white paper to Nicola Sturgeon'. Mr Aberdein said he wanted to 'correct the record' following comments made about his former boss, Alex Salmond (Andrew Milligan/PA) However he insisted: 'To suggest, as I think was the purpose of this story, that he wasn't engaged in the process of a prospectus for independence is utterly nonsense. The former Salmond chief of staff also rejected claims that Mr Salmond was 'apparently against same-sex marriage' – saying that this was 'demonstrably false'. Mr Aberdein told the podcast Mr Salmond had 'declared his personal support for gay marriage for the first time' in a newspaper article in April 2011. And he added that while the SNP election manifesto that year had pledged to consult on the issue Mr Salmond 'chose to come out… excuse the pun, the turn of phrase, ahead of that result, to say that he personally supported it.' With the SNP having won the 2011 Holyrood election, Mr Aberdein recalled 'being in the room with advisors, civil servants and indeed ministers about how we would go about reassuring different sections of our society about that legislation, particularly religious leaders and other civic leaders'. He also made the 'obvious point' that 'if Alex Salmond didn't want legislation to be progressed, he was the first minister of a majority SNP government, it wouldn't have been progressed'. Mr Aberdeen said: 'The point falls down on that alone.'
