Swinney says sorry to Gypsy Travellers for ‘trauma' of the ‘tinker experiment'
Scotland's First Minister has apologised to Gypsy Travellers for the 'unfair and unjust policies' that caused them 'trauma' in what was known as the 'tinker experiment'.
John Swinney made clear that the treatment of members of this community in previous years had been 'unacceptable'.
Between 1940 and 1980, the so-called experiment – supported by councils and the UK government – attempted to strip away the nomadic lifestyle of Gypsy Travellers, providing rudimentary and often cramped huts for people to live in.
When families became too big to be housed in the huts, children would sometimes be taken away.
The Scottish Government has been carrying out research into the impact of what happened.
And Mr Swinney, in a statement to Holyrood, said he hoped his apology could be the 'beginning of a new conversation' with efforts to improve the lives of Gypsy Traveller community in Scotland.
The First Minister told MSPs 'without ambiguity' that 'what happened to Gypsy Traveller communities in Scotland was unacceptable'.
He added: 'It is clear to the Government that stark prejudice and lack of cultural awareness led to a series of unfair and unjust policies.
'These policies resulted in children being removed from families, and families were forced to live in substandard accommodation and degrading conditions.
'The trauma that this has caused to individuals, families and groups, including those who regard themselves as 'victims of tinker experiments', is significant and lasting'.
With Gypsy Travellers in Holyrood's public gallery, Mr Swinney continued: 'As First Minister of Scotland, I want to say this directly to Gypsy Traveller communities: the 'tinker experiments' should not have happened.
'These policies were wrong. And we recognise how much it is still hurting so many.
'And more than anything else I want to say this – on behalf of Scotland, we are sorry.'
Mr Swinney added that although Scotland had 'come a long way since the 'Tinker experiments', there was 'still much to do' in tackling the prejudice the community continued to face.
And while Holyrood ministers published a new Gypsy Traveller action plan last year, the First Minister said the experiences shared as part of the government's work 'underline the urgent need for systemic change, greater accountability, and a shift in attitudes at every level'.
He declared: 'We must do better.'
Stressing the need for 'meaningful action' he highlighted the importance of 'challenging stereotypes, confronting everyday discrimination, and committing to long-term efforts that promote understanding, respect, and equity for Gypsy Travellers'.
He stated: 'Our hope is that we now have a foundation for continuing to build trust and fostering renewed relationships with all those who have been impacted by historical policies.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Welfare reforms could push 150,000 into poverty, official modelling suggests
Around 150,000 people will be pushed into poverty by 2030 as a result of the Government's welfare cuts despite Sir Keir Starmer being forced into a partial U-turn. The figure is down from the 250,000 extra people estimated to have been left in relative poverty after housing costs under the original proposals. Modelling published by the Department for Work and Pensions said the estimate does not include any 'potential positive impact' from extra funding and measures to support people with disabilities and long-term health conditions into work. Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall announced last week that changes to the personal independence payment (Pip) will only apply to new claimants from November 2026, and ministers also rowed back on plans to cut the health-related element of Universal Credit after 126 Labour MPs signed an amendment that would have effectively killed the Government's Bill. The changes will reduce the amount of money the reforms will save, adding to Chancellor Rachel Reeves' headaches as she seeks to balance the books for day-to-day spending.
2 hours ago
Iranian hackers 'may still conduct malicious cyber activity,' US agencies warn
Iranian-affiliated cyber actors and hacktivist groups "may still conduct malicious cyber activity," according to a joint bulletin from U.S. law enforcement agencies. "Based on the current geopolitical environment, Iranian-affiliated cyber actors may target U.S. devices and networks for near-term cyber operations," the bulletin from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), FBI, NSA and Defense Department says. "Defense Industrial Base (DIB) companies, particularly those possessing holdings or relationships with Israeli research and defense firms, are at increased risk. Hacktivists and Iranian-government-affiliated actors routinely target poorly secured U.S. networks and internet-connected devices for disruptive cyberattacks," according to the bulletin. All of this comes after Israel and Iran "declared ceasefire and ongoing negotiations towards a permanent solution," according to the alert. "Over the past several months, Iranian-aligned hacktivists have increasingly conducted website defacements and leaks of sensitive information exfiltrated from victims," the alert says. "These hacktivists are likely to significantly increase distributed denial of service (DDoS) campaigns against U.S. and Israeli websites due to recent events." The alert says that it hasn't just been over the past few months that Iranian cyber actors have been active. The agencies point to numerous instances in 2023 and 2024 when the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) compromised Israeli-backed technology, and after the start of the conflict between Hamas and Israel, IRGC-backed actors carried out cyber attacks as a form of protest. "Activities like website defacements, leakage of sensitive information, and distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) campaigns against U.S. websites have been common attack methods in the past," the alert says. In a statement, the agencies say they haven't seen any malicious activity, but are issuing the warning for critical infrastructure organizations to be on alert. "We strongly urge organizations to review our joint fact sheet and implement recommended actions to strengthen our collective defense against this potential cyber activity," the statement says.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump tried to fire them. But these Democratic appointees are still on the job.
President Donald Trump has fired a host of Democratic appointees at independent boards and commissions across the government. There's just one catch: Some of them are still working. More than a dozen leaders of independent federal agencies received terse emails from the White House purporting to fire or demote them shortly after Trump's inauguration, despite the fact that their roles are governed by laws that bar termination without cause. Many of them decried Trump's summary termination notices as illegal and made various attempts to remain in their posts, including suing. Their efforts have proven largely futile against the administration's brute force strategy: The overwhelming majority have in fact left, accepted new jobs, dropped their lawsuits, or been otherwise forced out — quite literally locked out of their former agency offices in some cases. The Supreme Court, meanwhile, has signaled that it will continue to expand the president's power to fire board members who run regulatory agencies. Yet a handful of officials have successfully resisted, either because they were reinstated — at least temporarily — by lower-court judges, or because they have simply managed to maneuver around the White House's orders and directives. Those officials' resistance could end up shaping how courts view crucial, pending questions about the hiring-and-firing powers of the presidency, and whether Congress can create federal agencies with some degree of independence from the chief executive. Trump fired three members of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which oversees PBS and NPR, in April. But those members participated in two CPB board of directors meetings this month. Diane Kaplan, Tom Rothman and Laura Gore Ross made motions and voted on issues before the board on June 10 and 11. Former President Joe Biden appointed Rothman and Kaplan to the CPB. Trump appointed Ross during his first term, and Biden reappointed her in 2021. White House spokesperson Harrison Fields said Trump 'exercised his lawful authority' to remove the members because the CPB 'is creating media to support a particular political party on the taxpayers' dime.' Similarly, Rochelle Garza, the Biden-appointed chair of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights whom Trump purportedly demoted in March, has maintained her role without interruption. The civil rights board investigates discrimination and guides the development of civil rights laws. Garza presided over multiple commission business meetings since March, including a meeting last Friday, where she voted on several motions. The CPB members and Garza have hung on to their roles by simply resisting the White House's directives — and with the support of some colleagues. The CPB quickly changed its bylaws after being targeted by Trump, adding a provision that bars removing directors without two-thirds approval from their colleagues. Garza said in April that she invited a vote on her purported demotion, but her colleagues on the bipartisan commission have not taken up the matter. Other officials have scored temporary wins in ongoing court battles. Three members of the Consumer Product Safety Commission who were fired in May are back in their roles after a federal judge reinstated them, said Nicolas Sansone, a staff attorney at the advocacy group Public Citizen, which represents the officials. Mary Boyle, Alexander Hoehn-Saric and Richard Trumka Jr. have conducted substantive business at the agency since they were reinstated on June 13, including convening meetings and voting on matters. The same goes for two Democrats on the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board whom Trump claimed to fire in January. Ed Felten and Travis LeBlanc have remained in their roles by virtue of a federal court ruling in May. U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton held that the board's mission — to monitor whether government surveillance efforts infringe on civil liberties — 'is incompatible with at-will removal by the President' because that would make it 'beholden to the very authority it is supposed to oversee.' Attorneys for the members told the court last month that they have been 'back at work' since May. The White House didn't respond to follow-up questions about the broader group of commissioners and board members who remain in their roles despite a purported firing or demotion. Don Kettl, former dean of the School of Public Policy at the University of Maryland, said fundamental questions about the president's authority over independent regulatory bodies remain unresolved, even as some courts have recognized that the president has wide removal powers over the executive branch more broadly. Trump administration officials have urged the Supreme Court to overturn a 1935 precedent that upheld Congress' power to limit the president from firing leaders of some executive branch agencies. And the justices indicated in a preliminary order in May that they will likely curtail that precedent. For now, though, the issue remains in flux. 'I think some commissioners, as a matter of principle, are hanging on by their fingernails waiting for courts to decide, but also as a way of creating a series of legal challenges that forces them to frame the questions' differently, Kettl said. 'It's a shadow-boxing match at this point,' Kettl added. 'All sides are feeling each other out and trying to find a way to frame the ultimate legal questions in a way that's more likely to produce the results they want.' The officials who have maintained their jobs are exceptions in Trump's firing spree. The president fired more than a dozen inspectors general at major federal agencies during the first week of his second term, bulldozing through legal requirements to provide 30-days notice to Congress and explain the terminations. And the White House has terminated or demoted numerous political appointees — almost all Democrats — across the government since then, often bypassing term limits and other job protections. Indeed, the administration has been remarkably successful in its broad campaign to consolidate Trump's power over the executive branch. Ellen Weintraub, a former Federal Election Commission member Trump attempted to fire in February, said at the time she would remain in her role, calling the move illegal. By May, Weintraub said she was officially leaving. This month, she announced that she was taking on a new role at a campaign finance reform group. Perhaps the most illustrative case involves former Federal Trade Commissioners Alvaro Bedoya and Rebecca Slaughter. Slaughter and Bedoya sued the president after receiving termination notices in March. They also fought to continue exercising their authority as commissioners — but they struggled against the practical powers of the White House. The administration revoked their access to agency offices, emails and resources. And officials reassigned or placed much of their staff on leave. Bedoya and Slaughter continued trying to decide cases and weigh in on matters — but they were limited to doing so via social media and the FTC's public comments portal. They also made public appearances as commissioners, but the agency has indicated that their 'time in office' ended in March. Earlier this month, Bedoya told the judge he was formally resigning, adding that he has a family to support, and that the government has stopped paying his salary. 'As a result of these actions, I have been unable to fulfill my duties … with over a year remaining in my term of service,' Bedoya said. For the time being, the handful of targeted appointees whose resistance has been more successful remain defiant. 'Our bylaws prohibit any person, including the President of the United States, from removing a director without a two-thirds vote of the other directors,' CPB chair Ruby Calvert said in the latest board meeting this month. 'We will continue our mission, because the importance of a vibrant, independent public media system … is needed more now than ever.' Ultimately, the White House appears poised to win the fight — judging by the experiences of the broader group of appointees Trump has already removed, and the early signs from the Supreme Court. Still, the resistance by the handful of 'fired' appointees who remain in their seats could end up shaping the courts' views on the issue.
