You really couldn't make this up. Having practically torn their party apart just to keep the loathed and utterly discredited pay-per-vote system for NEC elections, you'd think the Alba leadership would at least have made a big effort to ensure that administratively, the latest pay-per-vote elections this weekend went off without a hitch. But no. Instead those who had purchased a vote were given contradictory information about what time the vote was due to close. They were told by email that it would close at 7pm last night, but the Alba website told them that it would close at 3pm this afternoon. That's a twenty-hour discrepancy, and needless to say the earlier time proved to be the correct one, meaning anyone who relied on the information on the website was at high risk of being robbed of the vote they had shelled out a substantial amount of money for. Anecdotally, it seems that some people were indeed caught out.
Was this cock-up or conspiracy? Although it feels more like a cock-up, it's not hard to see how sowing confusion about the closing time could work in favour of the leadership faction's slate of candidates as long as they made sure their own people were aware of the correct information.
By the look of it, the conference has been a real oddity. Traditionally any political party's annual conference is its shop window - and OK, no TV station is going to clear their schedules for live coverage of the Alba conference, but presumably that was precisely why Alba used to livestream their conferences and make sure the feed was as accessible and well-publicised as possible. These days, it looks like the leadership's paranoia and obsessive secrecy have trumped all other considerations, and although the conference was filmed, probably that was only for the purpose of selecting carefully sanitised short clips for later inclusion in Slanszh Media's little-watched weekly YouTube show Tas Talks.
There's an intriguing point about Slanszh Media. Generally the relationship between it and Alba is considered to be analogous to the relationship in the old days between Sinn Féin and the IRA - ie. it's basically the same organisation with the same underlying command structure, which means that Zulfikar Sheikh's role as director of Tas Talks gives him roughly equivalent status to that of an Alba national office bearer. But would that relationship have survived a Regan/McEleny takeover of Alba? I'm not sure it would have done, but that question will remain unanswered now.
Because of the remarkable secrecy of the conference, I have no details at all about the "constitutional motion" that was apparently debated on Friday. I'm guessing it will have been a heavily debased "reform" package, with all but a few cosmetic changes stripped out, presented to conference attendees on a 'take it or leave it' basis. One thing I did find out, though, was that Craig Murray made a very good speech during the debate in which he basically called on the Alba leadership to stop expelling people, and he apparently mentioned my name and others who have been expelled for equally absurd reasons. Hamish Vernal, the anti-reform chair of the Constitution Review Group, apparently responded to that in his summing-up speech by saying "some folk just put your full patience to the test".
There's no video footage available so I've no idea of the tone of voice in which Hamish said those words. But my guess is that it was a misguided attempt at humour to try to defuse an otherwise unanswerable point - ie. the subtext was "due process is all very well, folks, but some people get on my nerves too much to bother with all of that". I'm sorry, Hamish, but that simply isn't good enough. No serious party can function like that, and certainly not a small party like Alba that is struggling for its very survival. You can't have party grandees, or those who imagine themselves to be party grandees, thinking they have special rights to summarily show the door to anyone they happen to take a dislike to.
Hamish, incidentally, was the front-man for the initial complaint that led to my expulsion. He almost certainly wasn't the real instigator, but he was the secret witness called by Josh Robertson at my disciplinary hearing - although I was never intended to know about that or to know what Hamish said or to have any opportunity whatsoever to challenge it. I only found out by chance. I later saw the minutes of the hearing, which predictably contained only minimal details, but one thing it did reveal was that Hamish had referenced my blogpost of 21st April 2024, entitled 'The case against a small political party treating its own members as the enemy'. He claimed that, although the blogpost started by saying I was bound by confidentiality rules and thus wouldn't be discussing the work of the Constitution Review Group, the contents of the rest of the post went on to indirectly discuss all of the points the anti-reform members of the group (ie. Hamish himself, Chris Cullen, Shannon Donoghue, Robert Slavin, Suzanne Blackley and Daniel Jack) had been making in meetings.
Really, Hamish? If you truly believe that the contents of that blogpost indirectly revealed what anti-reform members of the group were privately saying, that must mean that they were saying that rank-and-file members of the party couldn't be trusted with any power to make decisions about how the party is run or about its policies. It must mean that they ludicrously claimed that it didn't matter that Alba members don't get to elect the Conference Committee because "everyone on the Conference Committee is an Alba member anyway". It must mean that much of the discussion on the group focused on how Alba could "protect itself" from its own members, who were regarded as a bunch of filthy "infiltrators". It must mean that the anti-reformers were insistent that Alba members shouldn't even be provided with any information about decisions taken by the NEC, because such matters are the preserve of the party elite only.
Frankly, Hamish, if you're telling us that these are the the things being said in private by the small group of people who control a purportedly "member-led party", that's of far, far greater concern than the fact that I wrote a short and innocuous blogpost. The extreme lengths you and others were prepared to go to in order to hush all of this up, and to crush any calls for internal reform and democratisation, have certainly "put my patience to the full test" along with the patience of many others. In fact that's the understatement of the century.
The circus rolls on.
ReplyDeleteAt least it keeps most of the clowns busy where they can do little harm.
Delete🤡Coco? No, just Jobby.
DeleteTime the curtain came down permanently. Just seems those persons who think they are important- to ALBA- are shouting in an echo chamber with the lights off.
ReplyDeleteNobody seems to care that I'm sitting on a train stuck at Liège Guillemins Station looking at Belgians in their allotments. My god its tragic.
DeleteBelgians still have their allotments. Ponder that for a bit. What did they do? And what didn’t we?
DeleteSlainte!
ReplyDeleteC’mon, don’t turn against Gaelic like Stu. It’s not the language’s fault they’re a dodgy outfit.
I'm not mocking Gaelic - which as you know I'm a great enthusiast for. I'm mocking the way they mangle the word.
DeleteGabhaidh mi thu aig do fhacal.
DeleteYou’re right that Gaelic mangling seems to be a national sport across the political divide. The irony of Slaintè media’s name being that it’s supposed to mean “healthy media” which, yeah, fails on several levels…
Cus dhaoine ag ithe cus ìm!
DeleteSpeak the Queens Englush you haggis munching yokel.
DeleteAnonymous at 1:35PM.
Delete"Gabhaidh mi air d' fhacal thu."
@Our unionist friend. There is no queen now. Just a used consort with too much mileage on the clock.
DeleteHo'rth duh iren gladabh Calath! Mihr voith fra cuhm noi garbraidh y d' sith thou.
DeleteDinnae mention the fairies when you’re telling us to wheesht! Have you any idea what they’ll do?
DeleteWhy would people complain about the way people speak the Gaelic language? we're up against the English who can't speak any language including their own
DeleteIt seems the Albanites are tired of being criticised. Too bad should have thought of that when you attacked the snp constantly and their leadership but offered nothing.
ReplyDeletePathetic
DeleteYet true.
DeleteWhat does this Yes movement 'do'? What does the entire Scottish public think it does - if it has in fact even heard of it? It complains full-on that the SNP doesn't pack in working with it's hands tied behind its back trying to keep the country afloat in hellish time - because the Yes movement thinks the SNP should be out campaigning 'for' the Yes movement - whoever the Yes Movement is. I was told a few years ago by an ex very smart Salmond SPAD that 'there is no Yes movement' - it had turned into a vehicle merely to take over the SNP and plotted to have Joanna Cherry replace Nicola Sturgeon and have Ms Cherry play legal stuff to get rid of whomever Mr Salmond's mind convinced him had plotted to get him jailed. Which they didn't, but it helped give Mr Salmond and fresh coat of paint and ensure that Yes movement would help him make sure that nobody would achieve independence but him - because 'he deserved it' and nobody else did.
ReplyDeleteSo what on earth is the Yes movement now? All it seems to talk about is taking over the SNP, controlling the SNP - and presumably creating a clone of Alba as a Scottish Government if it rips out the SNP. Designed for chaos, lots of big symbolic Scottish history talk, lots of bloviating Braveheart, MacAskill and Cherry concentrating on the next 'justice for Alex' court thing - and just more bring down the SNP ScotGov and leave ALL of Scotland with Labour ruling the roost. All for 'the cause' - whatever the cause is supposed to be. Can't say that ALL of Scotland gives a dingoes kidneys given its domestic priorities right now.
Scotlands domestic priorities are only ever going to be met by an SNP govt, but the current one really doesn’t seem to get the urgency of the situation. Depressing.
DeleteThere’s understandable frustration in what you’re saying. Yes, parts of the movement are a mess. Yes, there's been far too much focus on personality politics and settling scores.
DeleteBut most folk who are disillusioned aren’t looking to tear the house down—they’re just tired of a strategy that’s gone nowhere for years. The problem isn’t that people are criticising the SNP, it’s that they feel the SNP stopped leading on indy a long time ago.
There’s no grand conspiracy here, just a growing number of people asking: what now? And if we don’t answer that with something more than “keep voting SNP and wait,” we’re going nowhere.
Independence isn’t something the average man in the street talks about these days. They see far more important issues here in Scotland and worldwide.
DeleteThose “more important issues” can and should be framed through the lens of independence.
DeleteIndy isn’t some bonus prize we get once everything else is fixed—it’s the tool we need to fix those things in the first place. Independence should be presented as the way we actually take control and do things differently.
Look at the rise of Reform in England. It’s primarily fueled by frustration with the status quo and the sense that nothing ever changes. In Scotland, we’ve got a different answer to that same frustration. But right now, we’re not framing it that way, and that’s a huge missed opportunity.
I think that is the point most of the reasonable posts on here are making. We know what the SNP should be saying and doing but they are not. And I do not understand why, when it’s so obvious to the rest of us. Depressing.
DeleteThat obviously is the root cause for many of the recurring arguments we often see: Disillusionment with the SNP, no solutions being proposed and at the same time being told we all need to keep voting SNP regardless.
DeleteWe obviously don’t want Unionists taking power, but if the only motivation is “stop Labour/Tories/Reform" that’s not going to inspire anyone. It doesn’t speak to hope, change, or a better future, it just maintains a holding pattern and people are tired of that.
It’s easy to understand. Judge them by their actions, not their words. They act like a devolutionist, comfortable, even Labour Scottish Executive. And they will resemble that even more so when they ally with Labour after the election next summer.
Delete“Indy has to take a back seat to keeping out Farage.” They’ll say.
Then in 2029 they’ll have him ruling over them from Number 10 anyway.
Sarwar will get the full Harvie makeover at the National. Wee Ginger Dug will wag hail for him too. It’ll be lovely. “Grown up politics at last.” While they fiddle with the deckchairs, red white and blue.
DeleteHis tail autocorrects to hail now. Are you taking over Apple’s onscreen keyboards now too, Elon? You naughty nazi you.
DeleteI dinnae like Kavanagh’s blinkers for criticism of his beloved party’s catastrophic leadership these last 10 years and counting. But keep the Hitler stuff for where it belongs: God’s Own America.
Salmond was the devolutionist, devo max please David
DeleteWe have always been at war with Eurasia.
DeleteMaybe they had to be held in secret in order to thrash out the timing of the big reveal.
ReplyDeleteWould be interesting to get a post on the likely upcoming Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election. It looks like a difficult one to call, but that Labour really need to win it to have any chance of taking back the narrative from the SNP.
ReplyDeleteYeah. But I'm a bitch and I'm in charge. Eat the beans cowboy. It's over.
DeleteAnon at 5.48. Grow up and away back to WOS.
DeleteAre you more tiresome when you’re saying away to Rev. Stu’s bathroom or when you’re typing zzz and peeing yourself to tears?
DeleteAnon at 7.42. The impact one letter has had on you is truly amazing. It is, as I explained to you previously, intended to enrage the mouth frothers, and obligingly up you pop, yet again. There is a way you can avoid showing yourself up as a bit of a fanny. Have a wee think about it. But do it over on WOS.
DeleteRage? You just have wanker’s cramp, Zizzy.
DeleteBack to the by-election, apparently Reform could be the wild-card in the election and Labour are worried that they could cost them any chance of winning the seat.
DeleteAt the very least though it will be the first indication of the state of play before 2026. Polls can only tell us so much.
Given the circumstanves, it's way too early to be thinking in any detail about the by-election. But a quick back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests the SNP would need to be around twelve points ahead nationally to hold the seat on a uniform swing. So even after the recent recovery, it's a vulnerable seat.
DeleteThe SNP will win the Hamilton seat at a canter
DeleteAnon at 8.15. You didn’t spend enough time thinking. You certainly have something of an obsession for wanking. That perhaps explains a lot. Give up on here. You fit in best with your fellow frothers. Bye.
DeleteYou type a lot for someone winning the supposed argument, Ziz. You don’t need to go anywhere, you can toss yourself off again right here. What you won’t get though is respect.
DeleteSaying ALBA and the SNP are the same is none-sense.
ReplyDeleteAnon@4:21, A perfect example of what 3:42 was talking about. More concerned with attacking fellow yessers than facing up to the apathy and disillusionment that has set in. Where do we go with people like that on our 'side'?
ReplyDeleteThe comment you're referencing at 3:42 seems to have vanished.
DeleteYeah, so does the one at 4:21. Something tells me I shouldn't have bothered.😉
DeleteThere are no yessers in Scotland, there are only whining moaners without the guts to do anything else, that's why England laughs at Scotland
DeleteDo you hear them laughing at Ireland? not on your life they won't
Oh aye, the English always take the Irish so very seriously.
DeleteNaebody in England even thinks about independence any more. It was over in 2014, far as they were concerned.
The trouble is: the SNP agrees.
I'm entering the nutrition conversation and I'm hoping to lean into solutions that can impact on the uptick in the giving journey. All in.
ReplyDeleteI'm a very interesting person. I could have my own website that would interest people because I've achieved a lot and it would be nice for people to know more about me.
DeleteAtm it just seems like we have multiple camps trading snipes and bitchiness.
ReplyDeletePlenty of “it’s your fault we’re here,” “I’ll never work with so-and-so,” and demands to vote a certain way, often backed up with insults toward anyone who dares question the party line.
One side also treats the disillusioned as irrelevant, despite their party sitting in the 30% range in the polls (a far cry from the 50%+ support we’d actually need to achieve indy).
The Yes movement needs parties & organisations willing to work together, rebuild trust, and offer a credible, united vision that can actually grow support, because without that... we’ll never see indy in our lifetime.
What “we” need above all else is a first minister and Scotgov actively interested and working towards independence.
DeleteThis isn’t cosy old 2012 any more. The UK is in deeper crisis than anyone imagined back then. So why has Indy been given up on by Swinney and the SNP? Why?
Without that sorted out, it doesnt matter what you, me, James, Robin McAlpine, Craig Murray, Stu Campbell, Peter Bell, IfS or KC say about independence. We are nobodies without a campaign to join and fight and win.
I added KC just to take the piss, but presumably he’d be weaponising his excruciating Nessie references for No given his chance, too. Good luck to him, he’ll need a miracle in Loch Ness to keep this union together, when democracy has a chance again.
DeleteYou had your chance in 2014, and the country gave a resounding NO!
DeleteTime to get over it and move on. The majority of the country are more interested in important issues and are fed up to the back teeth of this independence nonsense.
If we're being honest Swinney is probably a better option than Sarwar. But just keeping the unionists out or deciding who will be the least worst option to run a devolved administration isn't why most of us are politically engaged.
DeleteThe SNP was initially successful because we knew what they stood for and what they would do if they came to power. But now many of their supporters essentially say we need to vote for them for the hope of what they might do somewhere down the line... that kind of vagueness doesn't inspire anyone or win elections.
The lack of a viable alternative isn't a reason to vote for them either, that's just entering excuses territory to deflect from the poor offer they're presenting atm.
So vote for an English nationalist party, is that what you're saying?
DeletePeople who support independence need to do something about it, but they won't because Scots are gutless
DeleteDo it the Irish way, they're independent now you know
"So vote for an English nationalist party, is that what you're saying?"
DeleteThat’s a pretty common deflection: implying that any criticism of the SNP must mean support for Labour or some “English nationalist” party. It’s a way to shut down discussion instead of engaging with what’s actually being said.
If the SNP wants to keep pro-indy voters engaged, it needs to offer a clearer reason to support them—something more than “we’re not the unionists.” That line might buy time, but it doesn’t win elections, and it definitely doesn’t build momentum for indy.
Criticism isn’t betrayal—it’s a demand for better. And right now, a lot of people want to see exactly that from the party that claims to lead the Yes movement.
DrJim @ 1:21 - feel free to lead by example and start shooting people.
DeleteThe idea that it’s the SNP’s supporters or their scunnered former voters who are to blame…
DeleteJohn Swinney is in the hotseat. Strange how it’s never down to him.
The rev has just raked over two year old ashes to excite and incite the mouth frothers. Reporting at its best/worst. You decide. Come on guys, send him more money. Living costs are going up in April. That lovely big house won’t heat itself.
ReplyDeleteHe could downsize to a pile in real Somerset, outside the disagreeable conurbation of w*ke c*nts that is urban Bath. Real England suits him better.
DeleteIt sounds like they are going to be elected to government yet again on 30% of the vote. Their level of competence seems to amount to scaring people about smoke detectors and home insurance without bothering to read their home insurance policy. etc, etc, etc. There is no end to it. Good on people getting involved in politics, but it would be nice if they had an IQ above 50 and weren't run by big corporations.
ReplyDeleteFive more years of bald Starmer. Oh great. At least the SNP MSPs will be so depleted that half of them can't be government ministers. Actually maybe all of them will be government ministers. My favourite is the minister for victims. At least the minister for The Pledge got abolished.
ReplyDeleteLabour will be filling up the cabinet positions in the coalition Scotgov, don’t you worry. It’ll make you look back on Pint Sized Patrick and Learning Support Lorna with unexpected fondness!
DeleteI find it hard to believe that they could be worse than heat pumps Harvie and bottles Slater.
DeleteProfessor Kezia will be there to advise them, and her partner, right across the invisible aisle. It’ll be smashing. Like the McConnell days again, finally back to being grown ups and not even having to pretend they’re about to capsize the UK.
DeleteEverything it takes to keep those filthy Nationalists out. Dreadful bunch, the lot of them.
Please bring back Kezia Dugdale, Jack McConnell and Douglas Alexander.
DeleteWendy too. And Jim Murphy.
DeleteIt worked great to keep out AfD in Germany…
I'd say that Jim Murphy was a thoroughly decent and intelligent guy. I guess he has a proper job nowadays.
DeleteIf you lived in Arden at the time you wouldn’t say that.
DeleteKezia isn't a Labour party member anymore
DeleteThe government does feature one person with a doctorate but the minister in charge of abolishing Dundee University is a dingbat. She also featured in not building boats but buying the shipyard.
ReplyDeleteShe did take over from someone who likes buggering boys and put a £90 million liability on the taxpayers with a two-sentence e-mail. How bad do these people have to get? Do you just get away with everything by saying 'independence'?
DeleteGibberish from an ignoramous
DeleteDrink up, Reverend Jolly.
ReplyDeleteI'm shattered but still buzzing after the Alba Conference.
ReplyDeleteLook! Over on the left! It's the Shares porcelain factory. How lovely. 🤔
DeleteFrankly, Mr Shanks...
DeleteSo this idea of a member led political party, who and when did people get the idea Alba was ever supposed to be one of those things?
ReplyDeleteI don't think Alex Salmond was around in the days when the Greeks invented that idea
This might give people ideas:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwyq40yz70qo
Yes as leader of her party she was found guilty as opposed to there is no evidence, as in innocent full stop.
ReplyDeleteMarie Le Penn found guilty of embezzlement in France. Obviously she didn’t have the person in charge of prosecutions in her pocket.
ReplyDeleteHow do you know? Spin unfounded allegations is all some of you guys are good for.
DeleteOh we are back to this one. Pathetic but not surprising. The straw clutching is great to see.
DeleteHow come it took COPFS about 8 months to review the “ no evidence “? Do you think they just stuck the file at the bottom of a pile of other cases?
DeleteOne of the under the radar changes to the constitution I noticed was scrapping the rule that members should be over 16. So now you can register eg your toddlers as members and get them a vote. Does beg the question though, in a tight leadership result how many votes went out to “members” that were really the children of the payroll vote paying £1 a month for their sprogs who constitutionally should not have got votes as they should not have been members. The Corri nostra no doubt had more than one vote each to cast on their children’s behalf.
ReplyDeleteIs SSP more of a bet as a mini party of a mini group than ALBA. The Greens look huge in comparison
ReplyDeleteI'd rather vote SSP than Green on the list, as things stand now. And this is from someone who voted Green from 1999 to 2016. In 2021 I voted Alba, the only time I ever had them on the ballot.
DeleteHarvie and Slater (and Greer and Chapman) are simply awful. No chance I’m voting for them. The Greens are still as awful as the SNP was in the tail end of Nicola's leadership. They have learned nothing and will not get my vote without a lot of change.
Now, if Andy Wightman were back in the party again, and leading them on land reform, I'd change my tune.
I agree with you and am sad not to be voting green but the current greens are doing huge damage to the credibility of the party. I think they are in for a real shock. Alba will achieve nothing. A genuine list only Indy party would do well in current circumstances.
DeleteInteresting points but how about this to put the cat among the kettles.
DeleteIf Alba are holding a meeting in a hotel, attend the hotel in an informal yet far from casual mode. Address the receptionist in a distant yet far from haughty tone in a slightly foreign accent. Use some words in a strange way, like 'chamber' rather then 'room' and laugh blushing at your faux pas.
I wouldn't see eye to eye with SSP on one or two things.
DeleteBut well done to them in going from 2.2% to 7.2% in Glasgow Southside.
It's what Alba and the ISP should at least be doing on a regular basis.
1:51 here again. I can't see the SSP doing well in a general election. I'd like them to. They're always present on AUOB marches, always there with us proles in the movement, always a fixture. But even as I’m voting for them, I strongly doubt they'll get far beyond 1% of the vote on the Lothians list. How would the public know they have a chance? Their heyday was back under Tommy Sheridan, who the media loved in 2003.
DeleteThe SSP's still around, but the attention… isn't.
As for the Greens, I bet they do okay. Why? Same reasons they did okay in 2021. The public doesn't know that much about them besides the nudge-wink they have with the SNP as Holyrood's other "Yes party". Oh, they were hideously incompetent in coalition but they're viable, they're Yes, and they're (nominally) Green. It's a winning combination. Well, enough to win seats in each region.
Now, if Patrick had been caught at swingers parties, meanwhile…
Try explaining that again.
ReplyDeleteAnon responses was to 346pm. As to 3:51 agree that the smaller of the smaller parties should coalesce around “ Independence” and could pull in voters unwilling to vote SNP or Green on the List vote.
ReplyDeleteDepending on area of Scotland I could imagine some SNP or Green would still vote to try and get 1/2 pro Indy on the list.
ReplyDeleteI bet the Greens do fine. (As I just said above.) Not because they deserve it, but because they're already viable and they are the Yes alternative.
DeleteI also bet turnout goes down as scunnered folks like me don't turn up in the first place to vote SNP on the constituency ballot. The SNP vote falling like that will affect the Green transfers on the list, similarly.
Now, the stronger the Farage bogeyman is played up by the BBC, and Holyrood 2026 becomes a… sigh… "Referendum on Farage" then turnout might go up again as there's more of a sense of urgency, if the public buys that dismal idea.
I, for one, will not be voting SNP just to show my disapproval of a foreign politician, however. Farage is England's business. If we want to change that, INDEPENDENCE is ours!
You and your pathetic ignorant parasite motherland are the lunacy we have to live with unfortunately
ReplyDeleteLOL
DeleteWhat you prattling on about?
DeleteWhen will Nats finally get the message they’re in a minority?
DeleteWhen oh when will the penny finally drop??
When will KC finally get the message nobody is listening to him.
DeleteThe SNP need to stop promoting SNP 1&2 as an election strategy. The second votes are wasted in d’Hondt. The 2nd vote needs to go to another pro-Indy candidate.
ReplyDeleteSalvo/Liberation are now at the UN C24 committee, set to establish Scotland as a non-self governing nation. If they do, Scotland will be entitled to a referendum on self-governance, supervised by the UN - as many other countries have done before.
ReplyDelete