MSP demands Donald Trump pay up to cover costs of policing for Scottish visit
An MSP has demanded Donald Trump stump up to cover the costs of policing the President's recent visit to Scotland.
The Republican leader jetted into Prestwick airport on July 25 before spending the weekend at his Turnberry Hotel and golf resort, where he held a rambling 60-minute press conference with Keir Starmer.
Trump then flew to Aberdeenshire where he dined with John Swinney and later formally opened a second golf course at his Menie Estate.
An estimated 5,000 Police Scotland officers - working 12 hour shifts - were involved in policing the duration of the President's four day visit, which was classed as a "private" trip. The New Yorker will return to the UK again in September for a formal state visit, where he will be an official guest of the King.
John Mason, an independent MSP, has now lodged a motion in the Scottish Parliament claiming there is "no justifiable reason for either the Scottish or UK public to subsidise the private travel or commercial activity of the President".
The controversial member for Glasgow Shettleston, who was booted out of the SNP last year over remarks about Gaza, said he "hopes to see the recovery of public expenditure from Mr Trump or his associated business interests".
Mason's motion states that Trump's visit "focused on time at his golf courses in Ayrshire and Aberdeenshire, required a substantial deployment of Police Scotland and other police officers, as well as other public service resources".
It claims "as the visit was not undertaken in any official capacity, the significant costs involved should not be footed by Scottish or UK taxpayers".
The motion has so far only been supported by two MSPs from the SNP, Christine Grahame and Kevin Stewart.
The cost of policing Trump's visit became a major talking point last month after the Scottish Police Federation (SPF) warned response times could double as a result of the force being overstretched.
Asked if the quality of policing will be impacted by the visit, SPF chief David Kennedy said: "It will be seriously affected, it has to be. There's not enough police officers for it not to be affected."
He added: 'We want the president of the United States to be able to come to Scotland. That's not what this is about. It's the current state of the police service and the numbers we have causes great difficulty."
Mason was ejected by the SNP last year for a social media post in which he claimed there was "no genocide" in Gaza. He previously caused controversy in 2017 when he suggested some people view IRA killers as "freedom fighters".
The veteran MSP for Glasgow Shettleston will retire from the Scottish Parliament next year and currently sits as an independent.
He previously admitted his stance of speaking his mind had got him "into a lot of trouble" during his career - but insisted "we could do with a bit more of it".
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
6 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
TOM UTLEY: I was once fiercely proud of being a Londoner born and bred. But as Sturgeon seeks greener pastures and after nine years of the Khan Terror, Mrs U and I are thinking the unthinkable...
Blow me down, who would have thought it? Nicola Sturgeon, the nationalist former First Minister of Scotland, who has spent her entire political life fighting for Scottish independence and slagging off evil England, now says she's thinking of leaving her native land. And where does she plan to move to? Unbelievably, her destination of choice appears to be... evil England! More specifically, she hints strongly this week that the ideal place she would like to escape to, at least for a 'wee while', is my own native London – capital of the kingdom she has tirelessly campaigned to leave. 'This may shock many people to hear,' she says, 'but I love London... So, yeah, maybe a bit of time down there. Who knows?' But will she really find the capital as pleasant a place to live as she seems to imagine? Or will she find that in moving from her own party's Scotland to mayor Sir Sadiq Khan 's Labour London, she'll just be swapping one nightmare terror for another? I'll come back to that question in a moment. But first, I'll let Ms Sturgeon explain why she's tempted to move. In an interview to promote her self-justifying, self-pitying new memoir, she tells the BBC: 'I belong to Scotland, it's my home. But I think being physically out of Scotland for a period might just help to reset my perspective and, to be more selfish about it, just remove me a little bit from that goldfish bowl scrutiny that I still live under in Scotland. 'I don't mean that as a complaint, it's just the reality that Scotland's quite a small country, it's quite a small body politic . . . Suffocating is maybe putting it too strongly, but I sometimes feel I can't breathe freely in Scotland.' Of course, Ms Sturgeon will hardly be the first Scot to head south in the hope of breathing more freely. Indeed, my own Scottish mother-in-law made that same move more than six decades ago, taking her five Ayrshire-born daughters with her, including the future Mrs U, who was then only five years old. Like Ms Sturgeon, she had recently separated from her husband – and like her, too, no doubt, she wanted to escape from her tight-knit, gossipy local community, where all her neighbours and relations knew or wanted to know everything that was going on in her life. Mind you, I suspect that the number of Scots who yearn to move south has grown ever greater since Ms Sturgeon's SNP came to power in 2007, and set about turning the country into an oppressive socialist stronghold, in thrall to mad, woke ideas. Thanks largely to England's generosity, we learned this week, every year Scotland now receives nearly £2,700 a head more in public funding than the UK average – an extraordinary £21,192 per person, compared with £18,523 in the kingdom as a whole. Yet in spite of this, Ms Sturgeon's party has managed to wreck Scotland's public services, including an education system that was once the envy of the rest of the UK. In 2006, for example, the nation achieved by far the UK's best results in maths, as measured by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's rankings. By 2022, it had plunged to second worst, a long way behind England and ahead only of Wales. Meanwhile, the number of NHS patients who have to wait more than two years for treatment north of the border is almost 100 times higher than in England, while Scotland still holds the unenviable record of having the highest number of drug deaths in Europe. Indeed, Ms Sturgeon and her party appear to have tested to destruction the theory that the way to solve social problems is to hurl ever greater quantities of other people's money at them. Then there was the debacle over the former First Minister's crazy plan for gender self-recognition, which would have allowed male rapists to serve their time in women's prisons. Add Ms Sturgeon's little local difficulties with her husband and the police, and perhaps it's no wonder that she wants to make herself scarce for a while, away from the scene of all the destruction and chaos her party has wrought. But back to that question: will she really find London any better? If you'd asked me that a few years ago, I would have had no hesitation in saying it was the best place to live on the planet. I was fiercely proud of being one of the few London residents I know who was born and brought up in the capital, while most of my neighbours and colleagues were drawn to it by its job opportunities, innumerable amenities and other attractions. In the words of the wartime song, I used to 'get a funny feeling inside of me/ Just walking up and down/ Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner/ That I love London town.' But I can't say the same any longer. After nine years under Sir Sadiq Khan, in cahoots with my disastrous Labour council, shoplifters and fare dodgers abound, the streets reek of cannabis and deliveries left on my neighbours' doorsteps are stolen within minutes. Yet there's never a copper to be seen, except for those flashing past in their cars, with sirens blaring (perhaps to arrest someone suspected of tweeting something disobliging about Hamas). At the same time, driving and parking in London have become all but impossible for the rest of us, as Khan and his party's councillors carry on their war against motorists, with their Ultra Low Emission Zones, cycle lanes, Controlled Parking Zones, Low Traffic Neighbourhoods – hated by all except eco-zealots. Then there are the endless road closures for minority religious festivals, celebrations of LGBTQ+ Pride, and the like. Since Tony Blair threw open our borders, it has also becoming increasingly rare to hear an English voice on the bus or the Tube, in a city where already 60 per cent of live births are to mothers born outside the UK. Meanwhile, many London schools have become battlegrounds, where teachers face a daily struggle simply to keep their pupils from each other's throats. No, the fact is that the London where I live today has become almost unrecognisable as the city I used to love. Sadly, two of our four London-born sons have already moved to the West Country, driven away from their birthplace by the hope of a better life and the impossibility of finding an affordable home in the capital. A third speaks of moving to Liverpool, and I don't suppose the fourth will remain in London for much longer. Now, for the first time in all these decades, my wife and I are seriously tempted to follow their example. The only question that remains is where, in this benighted kingdom, is the best place for an ageing couple to settle, most untouched by the blight of woke socialism? One thing's for sure. After Ms Sturgeon's long stint in power, not even the beauties of the scenery will tempt us to move to the land of Mrs U's birth.
Leader Live
17 minutes ago
- Leader Live
Starmer could attend second US-Russia meeting on ending Ukraine war, says Trump
On the eve of the summit, Mr Trump said leaders from Europe, which could include members of the so-called 'coalition of the willing' that have supported Ukraine, could attend a subsequent meeting if the event in Alaska on Friday is successful. The Prime Minister has been a key player in the group which has also included French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office at the White House, Mr Trump said: 'We have a meeting with President (Vladimir) Putin tomorrow, I think it's going to be a good meeting. 'But the more important meeting will be the second meeting that we're having. We're going to have a meeting with President Putin, President Zelensky, myself, and maybe we'll bring some of the European leaders along. Maybe not.' He added: 'I think President Putin will make peace. I think President Zelensky will make peace. We'll see if they can get along. And if they can it will be great.' Mr Trump said the summit aims to bring peace to Ukraine, and 'save a lot of lives'. Earlier this week the US leader told his European counterparts that his goal for the summit was to secure a ceasefire. Sir Keir chaired a meeting of the 'coalition of the willing' on Wednesday – a European-led effort to send a peacekeeping force to Ukraine to monitor any deal – and said there was a 'viable' chance of a truce. It came after Sir Keir and Mr Zelensky met on Thursday at Downing Street, where they said there was 'strong resolve' for peace in Ukraine. The two leaders embraced as the red carpet was rolled out for Mr Zelensky's arrival in Downing Street, and they later had breakfast. They expressed cautious optimism about the prospect of a truce 'as long as Putin takes action to prove he is serious' about ending the war, a Downing Street statement said. In a separate statement, Mr Zelensky said there had been discussions about the security guarantees required to make any deal 'truly durable if the United States succeeds in pressing Russia to stop the killing'. But concerns linger over the prospect of Kyiv being excluded from negotiations over its own future, and pressured to cede territory, after Mr Trump suggested any agreement may need to involve 'swapping of land'. Ukraine has already rejected any proposal that would compromise its borders. In a readout of the morning meeting between Sir Keir and Mr Zelensky, a Downing Street spokesman said: 'They had a private breakfast where they discussed yesterday's meetings. 'They agreed there had been a powerful sense of unity and a strong resolve to achieve a just and lasting peace in Ukraine.' During the meeting on Thursday, Mr Zelensky urged the UK to join PURL – Nato's Prioritised Ukraine Requirements List initiative – to provide weapons to Kyiv. 'It is important that, within the framework of the coalition of the willing, we should all be able to achieve effective formats for security co-operation,' he later said. 'We also discussed the continuation of support programmes for our army and our defence industry. Under any scenario, Ukraine will maintain its strength.' The Times reported that Britain was planning to scale back its plans for a military peacekeeping force in Ukraine. UK military chiefs are said to be considering air reassurance over western Ukraine, training support to the Ukrainian military and the clearance of mines from the Black Sea. The Government has been contacted for comment. Further sanctions could be imposed on Russia should the Kremlin fail to engage and the UK is already working on its next package of measures targeting Moscow, the Prime Minister said. 'We're ready to support this, including from the plans we've already drawn up to deploy a reassurance force once hostilities have ceased,' Sir Keir told allies on Wednesday. 'It is important to remind colleagues that we do stand ready also to increase pressure on Russia, particularly the economy, with sanctions and wider measures as may be necessary.'
North Wales Chronicle
19 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Starmer could attend second US-Russia meeting on ending Ukraine war, says Trump
On the eve of the summit, Mr Trump said leaders from Europe, which could include members of the so-called 'coalition of the willing' that have supported Ukraine, could attend a subsequent meeting if the event in Alaska on Friday is successful. The Prime Minister has been a key player in the group which has also included French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office at the White House, Mr Trump said: 'We have a meeting with President (Vladimir) Putin tomorrow, I think it's going to be a good meeting. 'But the more important meeting will be the second meeting that we're having. We're going to have a meeting with President Putin, President Zelensky, myself, and maybe we'll bring some of the European leaders along. Maybe not.' He added: 'I think President Putin will make peace. I think President Zelensky will make peace. We'll see if they can get along. And if they can it will be great.' Mr Trump said the summit aims to bring peace to Ukraine, and 'save a lot of lives'. Earlier this week the US leader told his European counterparts that his goal for the summit was to secure a ceasefire. Sir Keir chaired a meeting of the 'coalition of the willing' on Wednesday – a European-led effort to send a peacekeeping force to Ukraine to monitor any deal – and said there was a 'viable' chance of a truce. It came after Sir Keir and Mr Zelensky met on Thursday at Downing Street, where they said there was 'strong resolve' for peace in Ukraine. The two leaders embraced as the red carpet was rolled out for Mr Zelensky's arrival in Downing Street, and they later had breakfast. They expressed cautious optimism about the prospect of a truce 'as long as Putin takes action to prove he is serious' about ending the war, a Downing Street statement said. In a separate statement, Mr Zelensky said there had been discussions about the security guarantees required to make any deal 'truly durable if the United States succeeds in pressing Russia to stop the killing'. But concerns linger over the prospect of Kyiv being excluded from negotiations over its own future, and pressured to cede territory, after Mr Trump suggested any agreement may need to involve 'swapping of land'. Ukraine has already rejected any proposal that would compromise its borders. In a readout of the morning meeting between Sir Keir and Mr Zelensky, a Downing Street spokesman said: 'They had a private breakfast where they discussed yesterday's meetings. 'They agreed there had been a powerful sense of unity and a strong resolve to achieve a just and lasting peace in Ukraine.' During the meeting on Thursday, Mr Zelensky urged the UK to join PURL – Nato's Prioritised Ukraine Requirements List initiative – to provide weapons to Kyiv. 'It is important that, within the framework of the coalition of the willing, we should all be able to achieve effective formats for security co-operation,' he later said. 'We also discussed the continuation of support programmes for our army and our defence industry. Under any scenario, Ukraine will maintain its strength.' The Times reported that Britain was planning to scale back its plans for a military peacekeeping force in Ukraine. UK military chiefs are said to be considering air reassurance over western Ukraine, training support to the Ukrainian military and the clearance of mines from the Black Sea. The Government has been contacted for comment. Further sanctions could be imposed on Russia should the Kremlin fail to engage and the UK is already working on its next package of measures targeting Moscow, the Prime Minister said. 'We're ready to support this, including from the plans we've already drawn up to deploy a reassurance force once hostilities have ceased,' Sir Keir told allies on Wednesday. 'It is important to remind colleagues that we do stand ready also to increase pressure on Russia, particularly the economy, with sanctions and wider measures as may be necessary.'
