Latest news with #Ex-Unionist
The National
24-06-2025
- Politics
- The National
Our politicians must commit to trusting the Scottish people
This should have been done at the time of the first Smith Commission in the wake of the 2014 referendum. This referendum on extended powers can be the basis for subsequent negotiations between Scottish Government and Westminster, if they will take part. Resulting legislation, if any, can be part of the status-quo option in an independence referendum or, if necessary, in the next General Election. READ MORE: Ex-Unionist party leader backs Scottish independence referendum Many people in Scotland want a referendum on independence. A two-thirds majority, when asked in polls, want a Scottish Government to have powers in most areas presently claimed by Westminster as 'reserved'. A Scottish Parliament, when acting on a specific electoral mandate from the Scottish people, must have more democratic legitimacy than Westminster and its institutions such as the 'Supreme Court' Westminster created in 2009. A manifesto committing the representatives of Scotland's cause in Holyrood to asserting competence over constitutional affairs can supply that mandate. That would include power to hold an independence referendum. A commitment to a referendum on a menu of specific increased powers for Holyrood to be enacted in the time frame of that Scottish Parliament can also be put in a manifesto. To get that specific electoral mandate, our political representatives need to win back the trust of the Scottish people. Trust in a prospective Scottish Government can be restored when voters feel that government respects the people and will give voters the final say on matters of prime importance to them such as their fundamental rights. READ MORE: Scottish Secretary Ian Murray ends 'lifelong' opposition to nukes Politicians will not regain the people's trust they have largely lost unless they show commitment to trusting the people. There must be a cast-iron commitment to giving the Scottish people a real say on how they are to be governed and ensuring that say is respected. Direct democracy can be part of the legislative process; combined with use of citizens' assemblies to review issues before legislation. The Scottish Government can start now for some 'unreserved' matters, with 'reserved' matters considered after the Scottish election gives a mandate on that. Some assert that this would be to ignore Westminster's Supreme Court ruling that Holyrood could not act on reserved matters without Westminster's permission. Not so; this approach tackles Westminster's attempted roadblock to democracy head-on. Westminster can be notified of our intent as a protocol courtesy. However, any problem with regard to their Scotland Act and a 'transfer of powers' is a problem for Westminster to address, and not a Scottish Parliament with a specific mandate from Scotland's highest legitimate authority – that of the Scottish people. READ MORE: Rob Roy's missing blade feels like an apt metaphor for our situation This is primarily about politics rather than any dispute in law, but Scotland's constitutional traditions and the UN-supported right to national self-determination are on our side. Those seeking election on this basis can ask other parties to state whether they support or dispute the right of the Scottish people to determine, by the result of an election, where responsibility for such constitutional matters regarding Scotland is to be held. This election needs to be made about Scotland's right to choose – or even have a real say over our own future governance. What if the Scottish Parliament is prevented, by what would be widely seen as illegitimate actions of Westminster or Westminster's legal creations, from holding, without outside interference, any referendum where Scottish people determine how they wish to be governed? Then any future national election in Scotland can constitute a de-facto referendum on whether Scottish people wish to declare this Union at an end. Incidentally, the only realistic chance that Westminster will drop its overt attempts to stop a referendum is the certainty that such denial will only increase and strengthen support for ending the Union in another democratic event. By this policy, we can attract the support of the clear majority we want – from those already convinced of the need for independence and some not yet so convinced. The question is, will the Yes movement adopt such a policy and exert sufficient pressure to persuade our politicians to convincingly commit to it? Mike Wallace Edinburgh
The National
24-06-2025
- Politics
- The National
SNP have largely ignored ideas from supporters and ordinary members
Over the years, policy has been decided top-down and the views of supporters and ordinary members largely ignored. Organisations such as Business for Scotland and Common Weal, for example, have put well-thought-out proposals forward to no avail. READ MORE: Ex-Unionist party leader backs Scottish independence referendum It seems that if an idea is not from those surrounding the leadership it won't be considered. No change in approach contemplated, we'll just ask politely of those nice people in Westminster once more. They'll get bored and relent to be off with us and the nuisance we are to them. Independence supporters are getting tired of this approach by the SNP and no longer see the point in voting for them and their inaction on independence. Mitigation of Westminster's policy ills is fine, but when will we have control of our own affairs? The current SNP's answer of 'sometime, maybe ' does not spur interest in voting, never mind campaigning. Drew Reid Falkirk
The National
23-06-2025
- Politics
- The National
BBC accused of 'spurious' defence over Gaza documentary axe
Welcome to Media Watch. This week we look at the BBC's decision to axe a documentary on Gaza's health service as well as a Sky News reporter being accused of 'parroting propaganda' in his questioning of the Israeli ambassador to the UK. BBC's 'spurious' defence after axing documentary THE BBC has come under fire for 'censoring' the accounts of medics and aid workers in Gaza after axing a documentary about Israel's brutal bombardment. Gaza: Doctors Under Attack explored the destruction of the health service in Gaza and was reportedly ready to be broadcast in February. We told how the documentary was shelved last month following the controversy around How To Survive A Warzone, which featured the son of a Hamas official. The production firm behind Gaza: Doctors Under Attack, Basement Films, said at the time that the BBC had postponed airing its film until after a review into How To Survive A Warzone is complete. However, despite the fact that this review remains ongoing, the BBC has now officially scrapped plans to show the documentary after concluding that it "risked creating a perception of partiality" over the corporation's coverage of Israel and Gaza. READ MORE: Ex-Unionist party leader backs Scottish independence referendum Tom Chivers, who works for the Media Reform Coalition, said the BBC's excuse for shelving the documentary was 'spurious', adding it had 'abandoned any pretence' that it gives 'equal regard' to the lives of Palestinians. He told The National: 'This is only the latest failure by the BBC to provide accurate, impartial and independent reporting on Israel's siege in Gaza and the appalling humanitarian crisis it has created. 'By censoring these accounts from medics and aid workers in Gaza, the BBC has abandoned any pretence that it gives equal regard to the lives and experiences of Palestinians. 'The BBC's excuse for refusing to broadcast the documentary rests on a completely made-up phrase. A 'perception of bias' has no basis whatsoever in the BBC's editorial guidelines. 'If this 'perception' test was applied to other topic of reporting, it would be impossible for the BBC to broadcast any news at all. 'This spurious, unjustifiable defence proves that the BBC is completely cowed by, and overly sensitive to, the objections of Israeli officials and those who wish to ignore or silence any reporting on the atrocities taking place in Gaza.' The BBC said it was transferring ownership of the film material to Basement Films, and that the documentary had "not undergone the BBC's final pre-broadcast sign-off processes", as some reports had suggested. Basement Films said it was 'relieved' that the BBC has released the film back to the company 'so that we can release it to the world'. The company said the BBC had confirmed the film had been approved for broadcast and gave out six different release dates before eventually dropping it. A Basement Films statement said: 'We would like to thank all the BBC people who worked on this film, those who approved it, those who praised and lauded it, and the scores of BBC staff members; on air editors, correspondents, producers, managers, technical staff and freelancers who told us to keep fighting and gave us sound advice, wrote group letters to their bosses, and asked us to keep fighting to have the film released as approved. 'Although the BBC are now taking their names off this film, it will remain theirs, and we hope it serves to open up the debate on how the nation's broadcaster covers what is happening in Gaza, and that people feel free to speak up and speak out, rather than stay silent or leave, and at some point get the journalistic leadership they deserve. 'But most of all we would like to thank the doctors and contributors and survivors, and to apologise for not believing them when they said the BBC would never run a film like this. It turned out they were right.' Sky News reporter slated for Israeli ambassador interview Elsewhere, Sky News reporter Wilfred Frost has been criticised for an interview he carried out with Israeli ambassador to the UK, Tzipi Hotovely. Frost challenged Hotovely about Gazan children dying amid Israel's assault on the enclave. Tzipi Hotovely: "We are not there to kill anyone, rather than the terrorists, but in the end of the day its Hamas that is creating this horrible architecture of children & people as human shields" Wilfred Frost: "I think there's no doubt about that & I'm not questioning that" — Saul Staniforth (@SaulStaniforth) June 23, 2025 But he has been slated for suggesting he was 'not questioning' a statement by Hotovely that Hamas is to blame for using 'children and people as human shields'. Appearing on Sky News on Monday, Hotovely said: "We are not there to kill anyone, rather than the terrorists, but in the end of the day it's Hamas that is creating this horrible architecture of children and people as human shields.' READ MORE: UK not selectively applying international law, Labour minister insists Frost replied with: 'I think there's no doubt about that and I'm not questioning that" Also in the interview, Frost said 'we can both agree resoundingly about that' when Hotovely said 'they need to blame Hamas for creating this reality for the Palestinians'. On the exchange, Chivers told The National: 'It's not the job of reporters to demure to government officials and repeat their propaganda, their job is to challenge them and report the truth.' TV producer Richard Sanders described the interview as 'appalling'. He said on Twitter/X: 'This is absolutely appalling and Sky should retract. 'There is not a scrap of evidence Hamas uses civilians as human shields. There is a mass of evidence that Israel does precisely this. 'We dealt with this issue at length in our Al Jazeera Investigative Unit film GAZA. This lie continues to be the principal justification for the slaughter of civilians in Gaza.' On social media, Frost was accused of 'parroting propaganda', while one user said it was an example of 'why people are losing faith in traditional media'. Sky News has been approached for comment.
