Latest news with #AlexSalmond
The National
2 days ago
- Politics
- The National
John Swinney SNP Holyrood majority bid branded 'self-preservation'
On Monday, the First Minister insisted that a majority of SNP MSPs at the Holyrood 2026 election is the only route to achieving a legally recognised referendum. He cited the election result of 2011, when Alex Salmond led the party to a historic majority of 69 MSPs. This included 53 constituency seats and 16 regional seats. Swinney is urging Scottish voters to back the SNP on both the constituency and regional lists. READ MORE: Donald Trump 'knows where I stand' on Scottish independence, says John Swinney This move led to criticism from Scottish Greens leadership candidate Ross Greer, who said that a vote for any pro-independence party should count 'whatever the First Minister says'. Former SNP MP Joanna Cherry said the strategy was 'back to the future'. Meanwhile, Unionist politicians accused the First Minister of being 'obsessed' with Scottish independence. In a statement, Greer said: 'This is not a strategy to secure Scotland's independence, it's a plan for self-preservation by the SNP and, ironically, it is profoundly antidemocratic. "Every vote for pro-independence parties next May is a vote for independence, whatever the First Minister says. 'We need to demonstrate that independence would make people's lives better and build a fairer, greener Scotland. That's how we secure clear and consistent majority support.' 'The current Scottish Government is constantly reducing its ambitions for Scotland,' he added. 'Less action on equality, less effort to tackle the climate crisis, less activity to advance the cause of independence itself.' Writing on X, Cherry said the strategy wouldn't work the same as it did in 2011 when 'so many have lost faith in the SNP to govern well or deliver'. 'Good strategists evolve their strategy to deal with changed circumstances,' she added. READ MORE: Donald Trump responds to John Swinney's indyref2 plan 'Alex Salmond recognised this with his super majority strategy designed to recognise all votes for pro-Indy parties. This strategy looks like a cynical attempt to maximise the SNP vote in an election they know they cannot win outright.' Alba MSP Ash Regan also accused Swinney of pursuing 'the most cynical side of politics'. 'SNP were given power to deliver independence, they abused that trust, especially with women yet have the audacity to be back, nine months from the next election, begging for more from independence voters,' she wrote. Jackie Baillie, Scottish Labour deputy leader, said the [[SNP]] had 'lost its way and ran out of ideas'. 'Despite that, John Swinney can't end his own obsession with division and today has confirmed he'll put Scots second to appease his own party,' she said. (Image: STEVE WELSH) 'From the crisis in our NHS to the violence in our schools, the SNP has left every institution in Scotland weaker. 'This is not as good as it gets and in 2026 Scotland will have a chance to put a stop to SNP decline and vote for a fresh start.' Alex Cole-Hamilton, leader of the Scottish LibDems, said the [[SNP]] took an 'almighty beating' because voters were 'tired' of the party's obsession with independence. 'It seems like John Swinney is a glutton for punishment,' he said. 'Perhaps rather than focusing on what the SNP membership cares about, he should focus on what the country needs.' READ MORE: Keir Starmer cuts off Donald Trump after Scotland trade deal comment Rachael [[Hamilton]], Scottish Tories deputy leader, claimed Swinney is 'like a broken record'. 'In a bid to silence internal critics of his weak leadership, he has thrown diehard nationalists some more red meat on the one issue they all agree on: independence,' she said. 'Ordinary Scots are sick and tired of the SNP's obsession with breaking up the UK.' Meanwhile, Transport Secretary Fiona Hyslop wrote on X: 'Winning independence by winning a majority in 2026, winning the arguments with a positive vision of a fairer, prosperous independent Scotland and winning the right of the people of Scotland to decide their own future with one million people having never had that chance in next term.' We told how the FM insisted there is 'no shortcut' to independence at a media event in Falkirk on Monday. 'We got a majority of SNP MSPs into the Scottish Parliament and a referendum, and I think we have got to take bold action to break the log jam,' he said. This is a move away from his predecessor Nicola Sturgeon's position, where she said a joint pro-independence majority of [[SNP]] and Green MSPs was a sufficient mandate for a second referendum.
The National
4 days ago
- Politics
- The National
Why didn't the SNP act when they had power in the UK?
As I have said many times in these pages and to SNP leadership, when we had a majority of SNP MPs at Westminster, and were the third-biggest party there, that if the FM spent less time strutting around like a world leader, distracting from the job at hand, and allowed the SNP group at Westminster to actually do their job, we could have had either independence or another referendum by now. As I said, in my simplistic view: 1. In 1707, it was Scottish parliamentarians who voted to unionise with England, not through a referendum or public opinion which was very much against it at the time. 2. The [[SNP]] in 2011 achieved what was meant to be improbable, due to the way the proportional representation system was set up at [[Holyrood]], and won a majority. Independence polling was in the low 30% at the time and [[Westminster]] thought they would lay to rest once and for all Scottish independence and reset the narrative. READ MORE: 'Not in our name': Hundreds gather in Scottish cities to protest Donald Trump Scots sensing freedom rallied around the cause as the polls rose, only for Westminster to panic and reach out to the vast Union media to spread doom and fear about Scotland's chances to surviving on its own (see point 5). Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon were not prepared for the referendum fight that ensued, failing to deliver on the big questions in debates. Which isn't surprising because the [[SNP]] were probably taken aback when David Cameron said yes to a referendum, the [[SNP]] hadn't done all the preparative homework (ie currency, pensions, trade, the border, etc) to allay the fears of Scots never mind that of Scottish businesses and institutions. Even now, they are not prepared 11 years on and the SNPs hierarchy of 'it's my way or the highway approach to independence' is a flaw in their DNA. Scots' democracy is a consensus-based system, that's how the convention brought about devolution, and it's about time the SNP woke up to this fact. The SNP hierarchy don't even listen to their own rank and file or their activists! Even Swinney's recent independence reset is so bland, it wasn't worth the airtime. The concern of independence voters is who will be their political voice, certainly not the SNP at this time, the reason more than half a million voters failed to vote for them last time not many of these voters jumped the divide to Labour if you look at the voter breakdown. Worrying times indeed for both the SNP and independence voters. The independence voter churn is likely to continue. (Image: PA) 3. [[Westminster]] and the House of Lords (monarchy) demand power and obedience to rule which make the privilege richer and give the middle and lower classes just enough to keep them in line. So, the [[SNP]] need to be strategic and be prepared to gamble all to deliver independence. They had a whole parliamentary term when they were in the ascendancy to do this and failed miserably, partly due to internal squabbling at [[Westminster]] and interference from the FM and the FM's inner circle who acted as though [[Holyrood]] had political precedence and would deliver independence. Oh how wrong this attitude was, and it's been a slippery downward slope ever since. The best they could do was ask 'please sir can I have one more referendum?' and their reply was 'more, you had your day and the people of Scotland voted to remain, now is not the time for another referendum'. 4. At this time, the SNP should have shaken this up by electing a 'majority Scottish leader' at Westminster. Reintroduce the Scottish Grand Committee to review all Westminster's reserved matters like the constitution, eg another independence referendum or to vote on the impact of Westminster land-grab legalisation the 'Internal Market Act'. To vote on these and relay to the speaker of the house and the government the Scottish MP majority outcomes are token and disruptive gestures maybe, but it does echo the Scottish electorate will to the Parliament. More importantly, at this time the UK was out of Europe, a fundamental material change from the referendum debate of 2014 where membership of the European Union was one of [[Westminster]]'s key fear strategies, and from a democratic perspective, the [[SNP]] were the third-largest party at [[Westminster]] (unheard of achievement), the biggest party at [[Holyrood]] and biggest party of elected councillors in Scotland. If I was in charge at that time, I would have given the Westminster government the simple either/or ultimatum; to grant a second referendum or Scotland will unitarily leave the Union based on the elected mandate. The latter throwing the UK into a constitutional crisis, spooking the Bank of England (not UK!) and the financial markets. I am sure this would have led to a lot of activity behind the scenes as when the city of London catches a cold, Westminster sits up and takes note and then there is the probable granting of a second referendum. As I said, gamble big, better than the limp approach to the English Supreme Court approach! 5. Many countries have successfully left British rule and never looked back. As stated at point 1), Scots parliamentarians decided to join England in an Union, so it is not unrealistic to do the same in reverse, irrespective of the language of the treaty. Labour rules the UK with only 33.7% of those voted, so having greater than 50% is not necessary. Also, when a small group of Tory MPs like the 1922 club can oust an elected leader that won them a general election, it just goes to show how democracy works for English privilege and not for the democratic masses, like for Scotland. Also, when a Westminster party comes to power, there is no penalty or forfeit for not following their manifesto, so just because the SNP manifesto didn't explicitly say Scotland would leave the UK, anyone that votes for the SNP knows their DNA is independence, so shock horror if they deliver on it. From an European perspective, precedent was set when the Slovakian party announced the dissolution of Czechoslovakia, resulting in the separation in 1992 and the resultant independent sovereign states of Slovakia and Czech Republic where future EU ascension wasn't an issue, so why would Scotland's independence be a roadblock to independence or EU ascension, certainly not now after Brexit? A Wilson Stirlingshire THE Government has recently announced changes to the Contracts for Difference scheme, with a view to speeding up the development of renewable energy projects across the country. One of the new changes to the scheme is to extend the length of contracts for onshore and offshore windfarm project development. This provides an incentive for developers bidding for new contracts, as it gives them more time to recoup their costs. The new cycle for applications to the scheme opens on August 7, 2025. This incentivising highlights the point that Pat Kane made in his article on July 12, titled 'Scotland is heading back into a cycle of 'extraction without consent'', that after oil comes wind power. He also made reference to Lesley Riddoch's equally excellent article of June 19, about the multiple windfarm applications which are currently being made across the Highlands and Islands of Scotland. Kane reflected back to a time when the play, The Cheviot, The Stag And The Black, Black Oil, by John McGrath dramatised the issues surrounding oil extraction in Scotland's waters, and went on to ask rhetorically, 'What kind of single dramatic 'representation' could take purchase?' in relation to the issues surrounding renewable energy generation in Scotland today. He lays down the gauntlet when he suggests that: 'Creatives worth their salt should rise to the challenge'. In the comments section at the end of his article, I did point out that in terms of dramatising the issues surrounding renewable energy being generated in Scotland, much of the problem creatives like myself face is getting our work heard. It's not that we are not offering a commentary, or perspective, on these issues, but without the following which the celebrity cult seems to generate in today's publishing world, it is hard to get your work noticed. Oblivious as to whether or not I am one of those who are 'worth their salt', I had just started the process of uploading, finalising and then releasing my latest humorous novel, An t-Eilean Dorcha (The Dark Island) at the time of his article. This was finally released in paperback on July 21 on Amazon. The novel focuses on a renewable energy project which is proposed for a small island, and the community has to evaluate its impact and consider how best to respond. My hope is that as well as providing the reader with some light entertainment and an escape from their day-to-day life, it will also, give voice to the very real concerns people have expressed about renewable energy resource generation in the Highlands and Islands. Gordon Ian MacLeod via email MUCH angst has been expressed recently about the high cost of electricity in Scotland. Hardly surprising in the UK's cradle of green, affordable generation. Disgruntled consumers may hold meetings, march, post banners and write letters – all protesting against high charges. The privatised electricity companies will ignore them, assuming that people will pay up for this essential necessity; and most probably will. In 1915, at the height of the First World War, greedy landlords in Glasgow increased rents beyond what was reasonable. Already poor people were incensed, but didn't know what to do about it. That is until local woman Mary Barbour stepped in and created an army which united in a rent strike. They surmised that if they hit the landlords in their pockets they would soon begin to squeal – and indeed it was not long before they did back down, realising that some rent was better than none. All the passive actions I mention above will not disturb the power companies one iota, so I suggest that folk in the Highlands and Islands emulate Mary Barbour's army, and refuse to pay their electricity bills en masse until they are charged the same per kilowatt that Londoners pay, backdated to 2020. Yes, the companies will hold out for as long as possible, they will take a few people to court, and as with any strike there will be folk who capitulate. But with solidarity, mutual support and determination, I believe the people will prevail. Richard Walthew Duns THE article in the digital edition reporting on the sale of an estate near Fort Augustus indicates that there will be a lot of interest from overseas. If this parcel of Scottish land is sold to an overseas buyer then there should be a hefty tax burden on the buyer and they should only be allowed to purchase it if everything is transparent so that the people of Scotland know who owns the land that should belong to the people of Scotland. Audrey Maceachen via email YOUR article on the electric super highway mentions a subsea cable from Fife into England. Meanwhile, Scotland is faced with giant pylons ruining the land? Our 'green' electricity, for which we are charged extortionate rates, being fed into another country. Has Mr Swinney and the [[SNP]] anything to say in this? Or is this robbery getting the silence that Grangemouth got. Jim Butchart via email
The Sun
4 days ago
- Politics
- The Sun
Our political party system is shattering and Britain could soon become ungovernable
Days before the 2015 General Election, then Prime Minister David Cameron tweeted: 'Britain faces a simple and inescapable choice - stability and strong Government with me, or chaos with Ed Miliband.' Given the decade since: six Prime Ministers, four elections, Brexit gridlock, a pandemic, a cost-of-living crisis, partygate and the mini-budget, many rightly wonder: if that was stability, how bad could chaos have been? 3 But at the time, Cameron's pitch worked, partly because many Brits feared Labour might end up governing in a three-party combo with the Lib Dems and SNP, with the late former Scottish First Minister, Alex Salmond calling the shots. Unlike our neighbours on the Continent, we aren't used to coalitions and dislike the idea of smaller parties potentially holding the Government to ransom. Fast forward to 2025 and it looks like Brits might have to get used to coalitions. Our political map has been reshaped. Fewer than half the public now describe themselves as strong supporters of any one party. The days of being 'a Labour family' or voting for 'anything with a blue rosette' are over. Voters are now far more promiscuous, shopping around to see what they like best. 3 As recently as 2017, the two main parties took over 80 per cent of the vote. That plummeted to 57 per cent in last year's election, a post-war low and our polling suggests it's fallen further still since - just 43 per cent now say they'd vote Labour or Tory. Instead, voters are turning to new emerging parties on the right and left. Last year's General Election was the first time post-war that more than three parties each won over ten per cent of the vote, and more than four won over five per cent. Why is this happening? More in Common's latest report Shattered Britain delves into what's behind our growing fragmentation. Simply put - it finds the old dividing lines of left and right no longer cut it. New political fault lines are emerging. These include whether we can fix a country many feel is broken by improving our institutions or, as 38 per cent think, we need to 'burn them all down'; whether the answers to our problems are common sense or complex; whether diversity strengthens or erodes British identity; and crucially whether we trust mainstream news or prefer independent voices online. Just as our politics is fragmenting, so too is where we get our information with a knock on effect on politics, reducing the stranglehold the big two parties have in communicating with the public. 3 None of these divides map neatly onto our existing political landscape and our First Past the Post system is struggling to cope as these new fault lines scatter Britons votes across multiple parties. More in Common's latest MRP - a model for projecting what the next Parliament might look like, helps to show how this might all play out: it suggests an election tomorrow could deliver a political map we've never seen before. Reform UK would come first on 290 seats, Labour trailing on 126, Tories barely third on 81, the Liberal Democrats snapping at their heels on 73. With 325 seats needed for a majority, the likeliest outcome would be a Reform UK–Tory coalition. But how comfortable would the Conservatives be as junior partners to Farage's Party, given the bad blood between them? Even those headline numbers hide more turbulence beneath the surface. Nearly 100 seats could be won on under 30 per cent of the vote and small shifts could flip many of them. Sixteen- and seventeen-year-olds, voting for the first time at the next election, will make up just two to three per cent of the electorate, but in tight races, that could make all the difference. With only a modest Labour recovery from midterm blues and a Reform dip, we could end up with the only viable option being a five-party coalition: Labour, Lib Dems, SNP, Greens and Plaid Cymru. How's that for a stable Government? And that's before factoring in Jeremy Corbyn's newly announced party, which our polling suggests could take 10 per cent of the vote, further muddying our electoral waters. At this stage it's fair to ask will the next Parliament be ungovernable? Maybe, but we've been here before. In 2019, the Brexit Party was topping the polls, the Lib Dems surged, and the two main parties were barely registering a third of the vote. Come election day, Boris Johnson won a stonking majority. In the early 1980s, the SDP–Liberal Alliance looked set to reshape politics, only to fall back. Still, as Britain drifts into uncharted political waters and the two main parties continue to struggle, it might be wise to use our summer holidays on the Continent to pick up a few tips on coalition-building from our European neighbours. THE UK used to be known worldwide for its stable, two party political system. The choice was binary: Tory or Labour. Elections nearly always delivered a majority government. But all that could be about to change. Old party allegiances have shattered. Our political system has become fragmented. Nigel Farage and his Reform Party have redrawn the political map and decimated the Tory vote. On the Left, Labour are being challenged by the rise of the Greens and creation of Jeremy Corbyn's far-left party. But that begs the question: is Britain about to become ungovernable? We are not used to Coalition governments - but all the evidence suggests we are about to get one. Pollsters say the most likely outcome is a Reform Tory Coalition. But can we really imagine Nigel Farage and Kemi Badenoch in bed together - after they have spent five years at each other's throats? The alternative is a rainbow coalition of Labour, the Lib Dems, SNP, Greens, and Plaid Cymru. That's a dizzying mix. I doubt a government stuffed with so many different political personalities and policies would last five minutes - let alone five years. The result would surely be another snap election and yet more political turmoil? The next general election is still four years away and much can happen in that time. One thing is clear - voters are desperate for Britain to break out of its current quagmire. They want politicians who can actually get things done and aren't held to hostage by their backbenchers. It's why they gave Boris Johnson a majority to get Brexit done - and took it off him again when the Tories sank into civil war. It's why they handed Keir Starmer a landslide - then sent his poll ratings tumbling when he failed to come up with a big package of reforms. If the polls stay the same then it looks like Britain is heading for more political turbulence and a coalition. But who knows? Voters may decide to gamble big and hand Nigel Farage a majority next time. I wouldn't bet against it.
Daily Mail
6 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Salmond cleared of historic sexual assault claims as police end probe
Police Scotland are to take 'no further action' over a historic sexual assault allegation levelled at Alex Salmond after his death. The force received a complaint about the former first minister shortly after he suffered a fatal heart attack in North Macedonia in October aged 69. After investigating the report, the police have now cleared the former Alba leader. In a statement, the force said: 'Following a report of a non-recent sexual assault, enquiries were carried out and no further action will be taken.' Mr Salmond, who led the SNP for 20 years and was first minister from 2007 to 2014, was cleared of 13 sexual offence counts at a trial at the High Court in Edinburgh in March 2020. Earlier misconduct claims made against him by two female civil servants led to a massive falling out with his protégé Nicola Sturgeon and a split in the Nationalist movement. In 2018, Mr Salmond resigned from the SNP after the claims emerged and challenged a Scottish Government probe into them. His successful judicial review showed the in-house inquiry had been unfair, unlawful and 'tainted by apparent bias', and he was awarded £512,00 in legal costs. He launched Alba on the eve of the 2021 Holyrood election as a pro-independence rival to his old party, but it has remained a political minnow and has yet to have a candidate elected. Alba MSP Ash Regan welcomed Police Scotland's decision. She told the Daily Record: 'Alex Salmond died with his reputation intact as a titan of Scottish politics. Alex can no longer defend himself, yet some remain determined to smear his name. 'It is time to let him rest, grant his wife Moira and his family the closure they deserve and draw a line so his legacy can be remembered with dignity.' Dr Nick McKerrell, a senior law lecturer at Glasgow Caledonian University, told the paper that investigating alleged crimes by dead people was 'not without precedent'. 'While the police 'obviously have difficulties with the absence of the key participants, there still can be public interest in carrying it out even though there can be no prosecution'.
Telegraph
6 days ago
- Politics
- Telegraph
Alex Salmond cleared of historical sexual assault claim
An allegation of historical sexual assault against the late Alex Salmond has been dismissed after a police investigation. Police Scotland said no further action will be taken following a complaint made last year in the wake of the former first minister's death, aged 69. Mr Salmond, who left the SNP in 2018 and later established the pro-independence Alba Party, suffered a heart attack and died while attending a conference in North Macedonia in October 2024. One month later, the national force said it had received a report of a 'non-recent sexual assault'. It is understood that the case has been closed owing to insufficient evidence. A report was not submitted to the Crown Office. Mr Salmond served as first minister under the SNP from 2007 to 2014 and led the party through the independence referendum. He resigned from the party in 2018 when allegations of sexual misconduct emerged and ultimately set up the Alba Party in 2021. His latter years were, however, dominated by claims and counter claims about his conduct. In 2019, Mr Salmond successfully sued the Scottish government, led by his former protégé Nicola Sturgeon, for its handling of an investigation into complaints of sexual harassment made against him. 'Tainted with bias' He was awarded £500,000 after the inquiry was ruled to be 'tainted with apparent bias'. The former first minister was subsequently charged with 13 sexual offences, including attempted rape, but was acquitted on all counts after the 2020 trial. During his evidence to the court, Mr Salmond said he had a 'sleepy cuddle' with one complainer in his official residence. However, he described the claims made about his alleged conduct as 'deliberate fabrications for a political purpose' or 'exaggerations'. Mr Salmond's lawyer told the court the former first minister 'could certainly have been a better man' but had not committed any crimes. He said that his client had sometimes behaved badly, calling him 'touchy-feely'. A Holyrood inquiry into the government's handling of complaints against Mr Salmond found Ms Sturgeon had misled MSPs over a meeting with her predecessor in her home in 2018, but cleared her of breaching the ministerial code. Following the trial, Mr Salmond repeatedly claimed that many in his former party had colluded against him in an effort to block his return to frontline politics. On Thursday, a Police Scotland spokesperson said: 'Following a report of a non-recent sexual assault, enquiries were carried out and no further action will be taken.'
