John Swinney playing 'old tune' on Scottish independence, claims Lorna Slater
The SNP is playing an 'old tune' on independence, Scottish Green leadership candidate Lorna Slater has claimed.
First Minister John Swinney used his regular column in the Daily Record to announced on Monday that a majority for his party at next year's election should be enough to secure a second vote on independence, as it was for the first in 2014.
Slater – who was launching her campaign for re-election as Green party co-leader in Edinburgh today – said she does not expect an SNP majority next May.
"This is an old tune that the SNP have been playing,' she said. "There are several pro-independence parties in the Scottish Parliament – the Greens have been there all along, from the beginning.
"John Swinney, I think, is being a little disingenuous. We had a successful pro-independence majority with the Bute House Agreement that the SNP decided to end.'
On her ideas for forcing the UK Government to allow a second referendum, Slater said it is up to those who believe in independence to 'build support' for it.
"We do that by setting out what independence looks like and why it's important,' she said. "We hear all the time how Brexit has damaged Scotland, it hurts our labour force, meaning business cannot hire employees that they need, it hurts our NHS, we cannot get the carers and workers, and it hurts all of us in our pockets.
"Scottish independence would allow us to build a compassionate asylum system, it would allow us to rejoin the EU, it would allow us to rethink our taxation of wealth, for example.
"Instead of waiting, waiting, waiting for the Government in Westminster to decide what to do, we could make those kinds of decisions here in Scotland, and that's how we win Scottish independence, by getting more people to share that vision.'
Swinney said in his Record column: "For us to achieve that independence, the first step is to secure a legal referendum recognised by all. In 2011 we secured that reliable and dependable route when the SNP achieved a majority of seats at Holyrood.
"That is the only mechanism that has been proven to deliver such a vote - so that is what we need to deliver again.
"That is why I have submitted a motion to the SNP conference proposing that we work to deliver a majority of SNP MSPs in the Scottish Parliament to secure that referendum on Independence.
"The SNP has high ambitions for Scotland, and we must be bold to deliver on those ambitions. We must be ready to follow the path which we know can lead us to an independent state."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Statesman
a few seconds ago
- New Statesman
What John Swinney gets right about Scottish independence
He came, he saw, he putted. Donald Trump's visit to Scotland was the expected whirlwind – a golfing trip during which he fitted in some diplomacy (if that's the right word with this president) with the leaders of the EU, the UK and Scotland. Trump clearly enjoyed himself, to the extent that he suggested he could become first minister once he's done with the US and the rest of the world. That joke raised quite the entertaining vision, as did his description of Scotland as a land of 'no crime, no muggings. You don't have people being hit over the head when they are not looking with a baseball bat, they're not pushed into a subway.' Not at the five-star Turnberry resort, anyway. John Swinney had two chances to beard Trump, at a dinner and then at a head-to-head, and spoke to him about whisky tariffs and the ongoing crisis in Gaza. For all Trump's unpopularity, meeting the leader of the free world is the kind of moment that elevates any first minister. The far left carps, as the far left does, but Swinney was right to take his opportunity. He behaved like a grown up. That, so far, has been the mark of Swinney's time in office. These things are relative, but he has been a moderating force, dragging his party back to the centre ground after the leftist administrations of Nicola Sturgeon and Humza Yousaf. Much of his attention is on fixing the NHS – he has a plan, and we will see whether it bears fruit (it had better). There is also a focus on growing the economy. To many, these are obvious priorities for government activity, but it has not always been like that in Scotland. There is a limit to how long any SNP leader can get away with talking about anything other than independence, of course, and the First Minister is as committed to his party's raison d'etre as the most passionate activist. It is his life's work, and even his moderation is merely a means of achieving that goal. Whatever an SNP government does, it is always based on what it thinks will best advance the cause of breaking up the UK. True to form, Swinney has now unveiled the latest strategy for getting to indy. There have been so many of these in recent years that voters are understandably confused about what the offer is. A de facto referendum, 60 per cent backing for separation in the polls over a sustained period, a majority of Scottish seats for the SNP at Westminster – each has been proposed as a route since the turn of the decade. None has lasted. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Swinney has, in effect, returned to 2011. That was when Alex Salmond won a surprise overall majority at Holyrood, providing the legitimacy and momentum that led David Cameron to accede to the 2014 referendum. The SNP is going back to the future. The First Minister said that, once again, securing a majority in Edinburgh is the way to a second referendum. There are 129 seats at Holyrood, meaning the party would have to win 65 of them. The alleged transformation of Scotland that would come with independence 'only happens if we have that referendum and we only get that referendum if a majority of SNP MSPs are elected next May,' Swinney said. He insists independence will be at the heart of his party's election campaign, but it's hard to see his strategy as anything other than kicking the can down the road. That's certainly how the hardliners are viewing it, lining up to criticize the FM's approach as weak and defeatist. Alex Neil, a former SNP health secretary and a critic of the administration, said it was 'more about trying to save the SNP's bacon'. This is probably true, but that does not mean it lacks sense. Swinney has an election to win, which would take the Nats into their third consecutive decade of governance, and he will not do so with alarming promises of constitutional upheaval whatever the outcome. Sturgeon tried that, and it helped do for her. Voters – or most of them – are not looking at next May as a chance to refight the independence battles. They are worried about the cost of living, the state of the health service, jobs, transport and other policy areas that impact their day to day lives. They are nervous about the international climate, and are seeking security. They are fed up with politicians of all stripes. They are exhausted by the indy permawar, and would appreciate a break from all politics having to be squeezed through that funnel. Swinney's mature approach is to understand this, and to attempt to meet the electorate on its preferred terrain. A wise leader knows which fights to pick, and when. This is not the moment for William Wallace and saltire face-paint and screams of 'freedom'. It is not the time for 'one last push'. The SNP will not win 65 seats next May. It will be an unprecedentedly divided parliament, with Reform joining its ranks. There will be a minority administration, which will be formed by either the Nats or Labour. Swinney's independence plan is really an attempt to draw as much of the separatist support to the SNP, away from the Greens and Alba, so maximizing his party's performance. For the independence movement, if its members would only accept it, this is a time to regroup, rethink, and play a longer game. The First Minister, at least, seems to see this clearly. [See more: Maga zealots want to redraft the Civil Rights Act] Related
Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
Brian Cox: Trump talking 'b*******s' on Scottish independence
Why you can trust Sky News Hollywood actor Brian Cox has told Sky News that Donald Trump is talking "bollocks" after suggesting there should be 50 or 75 years between Scottish independence referendums. The US president said a country "can't go through that too much" when questioned by reporters during his visit to Scotland this week. The Emmy-winning star, who is an independence supporter, has hit back, branding him "that idiot in America". The 79-year-old told Sky News: "He's talking bollocks. I'm sorry, but he does. It's rubbish. Let's get on with it and let's get it [independence] done. We can do it. "It's been tough as there's a great deal of undermining that has gone on." 2:13 SNP fraud probe causing 'harm' Mr Cox said the police fraud investigation examining the SNP's finances has done "enormous harm" to the party and wider independence movement. Nicola Sturgeon was arrested as part of the long-running police probe but cleared of any wrongdoing earlier this year. The former first minister's estranged husband Peter Murrell, who was SNP chief executive for two decades, appeared in court in April to face a charge of alleged embezzlement. He has entered no plea. Brian Cox is preparing to return to the Scottish stage for the first time in a decade in a play about the Royal Bank of Scotland's role in the 2008 financial crash. Ahead of the Edinburgh festival performances, the veteran actor told Sky News: "I think it's a masterpiece. It's certainly one of the best pieces of work I've been involved in. 'My friend Spacey should be forgiven' The Succession star was also asked about his "old friend" Kevin Spacey. The former House of Cards actor, 65, was exiled from the showbiz world in 2017 after allegations of sexual misconduct. Spacey has admitted to "being too handsy" in the past and "touching someone sexually" when he didn't know they "didn't want him to". Spacey stood trial in the UK for multiple sexual offences against four men in July 2023 but was acquitted on all counts. Mr Cox told Sky News: "I am so against cancel culture. Kevin has made a lot of mistakes, but there is a sort of viciousness about it which is unwarranted. "Everybody is stupid as everybody else. Everybody is capable of the same mistakes and the same sins as everybody else." Asked if he could see a return to showbiz for Spacey, Cox replied: "I would think so eventually, but it's very tough for him. "He was tricky, but he has learnt a big lesson. He should be allowed to go on because he is a very fine actor. I just think we should be forgiving."
The National
an hour ago
- The National
Force the 1% to cough up for their climate damage
Land ownership in Scotland is incredibly concentrated in a small number of hands. Fewer than 500 people own more than half of our private land. This motley group includes our own aristocrats, whose families have owned huge estates for centuries and whose wealth is often a result of their forebears' brutal actions during the Highland Clearances. But in recent decades they've been joined by a new group, the elite of global capitalism. The biggest landowner in Scotland used to be the Duke of Buccleuch, but now it's Danish billionaire Anders Povlsen. And the ruler of Dubai, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum isn't far behind. READ MORE: More Scots need to benefit from Scotland's screen industry, John Swinney says And he might not be in the same league as Povlsen or the Sheikh in terms of hectares, but Scotland's most infamous landowner is undoubtedly Donald Trump. Thankfully, the US president has now returned home after a brief stint of shaking hands, being drowned out by bagpipes and teeing off at his Scottish golf courses. Last year, I proposed a private jet tax which would see Trump and his cronies charged a 'super rate' of up to £250,000 every time they fly here for non-government business. This is something which should be within the powers of the Scottish Government, but is now a decade overdue. In the aftermath of the independence referendum, all parties agreed to devolve air passenger duty to the Scottish Parliament. An Act was passed by MSPs to replace it with a new Scottish air departure tax. But it can't start until the UK Government resolves an issue with the exemption for lifeline island flights – and neither they nor the [[Scottish Government]] seem to be in any rush to do that. If this was resolved, the Scottish Government could immediately bring in a super-tax on private jets, reflecting the fact that they are about twenty times more polluting than regular flights. Personally, I'd rather ban most private air travel. It is the perfect example of how the world's richest 1% are disproportionately responsible for the climate crisis. Unfortunately, full powers over air travel are still reserved to Westminster for now. Trump doesn't care about the climate, but he would care about the £250,000 tax bill every time his huge private plane arrives here. Some super-rich elites would undoubtedly take the financial hit and still fly here anyway, but the money raised could at least then be used to fund climate-friendly policies like cheaper buses and trains. And private air travel is just one example of how the super-rich play by different rules to the rest of us, all whilst avoiding paying their fair share. For too long, they have been allowed to avoid not just paying their fair share in tax, but also having their often deeply damaging activities scrutinised. All while ordinary people suffer the consequences of budgets for schools, hospitals and social care being squeezed. Tax is the price we pay for living in a civilised society, one with public services capable of meeting all of our needs throughout our lives. But the richest among us do not pay nearly enough towards maintaining the services needed for that kind of society. The Scottish Greens have long called for a wealth tax, one which would see the richest 10% of people who hold almost half the total wealth of the country taxed fairly. Introducing just a 1% annual tax on all wealth and assets above £1 million would massively boost the efforts to create a fairer, better Scotland for everyone. For context, the other 90% of Scots households hold nowhere near enough wealth to be considered for such a tax, with the average having about £214,000 in assets. This would be an extremely well-targeted tax, raising billions from those who can more than afford to pay. We are not the only people calling for a wealth tax. Just this week, leading economists from across the world have called on Labour to introduce a UK-wide wealth tax to tackle extreme levels of inequality and poverty. They have warned the Government what the Greens have argued for years: that far too much wealth is concentrated in the hands of far too few people in the UK, and it is damaging society at large. Sadly, Labour seem determined to rule this out. It is time for Keir Starmer to seriously rethink his approach and what he wants his legacy to be: a society where everyone has what they need to get by, or one where far too many children are left in desperate poverty whilst a tiny number of people hoard more wealth than they could spend in a thousand lifetimes. The Scottish Greens are clear on what we need to do: tax the super-rich now, for the good of people and planet.
