So I asked a few seasoned conference-goers what they thought the status was of the SNP constitutional conference that I attended as a delegate in Perth today (or technically yesterday as it's now after midnight), and the general consensus was that if the media weren't present, it sounded very much like a completely private session and I therefore shouldn't say much about it at all apart from the fact that I was there. Consequently this is going to be quite a short and unilluminating blogpost, but I'll pad it out with some photos of the impromptu walking tour of Perth that I did during the lunchtime break.
Several people encouraged me a few months ago to rejoin the SNP with a view to actually getting involved and trying to be a voice (or at least a vote) for both internal democratisation and a more radical strategy on independence, so that was certainly my thinking in asking to register as a delegate for the conference. I'm sure you all know by now where I'm coming from on these issues, and that I did my level best to vote for whatever seemed to be the options that maximised democracy and transparency. If anyone else is thinking of rejoining the SNP for similar reasons, although obviously it's a very personal decision for each individual, I certainly think it's well worth considering, because remember this isn't Alba we're talking about - the SNP are the governing party of Scotland, so even if you find yourself consistently on the losing side in internal debates, you're unlikely to look back and think it wasn't worth the bother of trying.
Although this was completely coincidental, I must say there was a neatly ironic symmetry to it - I was expelled from Alba for using my elected position on the Constitution Review Group to push hard for democratisation, and then after rejoining the SNP practically the first thing I did was register as a delegate for a constitutional reform conference.
I loved Perth until I was traumatised as an 11 year old by being shown tripe in the window of a butcher's shop.
ReplyDeletePuts an offal spin on the idiom "how the sausage gets made."
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of which: fight the good fight in the conference, James! As you say, you feel it's better not to share all the details, but I fully expect you'll find there's a paradox in there. You'll have a lot of support from the members, and the things the higher ups say will be in line with this, but eerily and mysteriously, nothing will actually get done about it, no matter how many votes pass.
Do try your best to oppose that awful "only Humza can apply" rule for leadership contests. We all know that's a catastrophic idea that will bind the membership's hands for as long as it's in place.456
How do you nothing will be done?
DeleteCall it an informed hunch.
DeleteWent to my first, post rejoining, SNP branch meeting last week. Within minutes a general discussion on candidate selection for '26 began. One entirely innappropriate, IMO, aspirant was touting for self.
ReplyDeleteFollowing repeated interruptions from same I launched in against with the support of a couple of others. Long story short the aspirant had little content and, at meetings end, had about zero support.
Our constituency is a tough one for a number of baked in reasons so few people want it. The search is now on for a candidate committed to an active strategy for independence and some recognition of elected member accountability.
A tiny, and as yet unconsolidated, success but - progress is possible.
That's ridiculous.
Delete"Progress" will only be possible once you've cleansed the party of its leadership cabal and the gravy slurping careerists that comprise both actual and aspiring political representatives at Holyrood and Westminster.
"Went to my first, post rejoining, SNP branch meeting last week."
DeleteGoing back to the party when they haven't changed their policies, never mind issued a Mea Culpa will be interpreted by Swinney and the rest of the cabal as
'OK, I was wrong you were right'.
Don't expect anybody to listen to you.
Different Anon here, Alt Clut. I think you're doing the right thing.
DeleteThe leadership showed no signs of listening to anyone when they lost 80% of their seats and half a million votes last summer. So it's not like carping from the sidelines is working, either!
No, a party's all about the hierarchy of people holding power, inside it. Do what you can to influence them, from the bottom, from the inside. It won't be an overnight success, but it's the only way we'll ever get them back.
I'd consider doing the same myself, if I weren't in Lib Dem enclave Edinburgh West where the SNP has no chance whatsoever of election (only times they've won in history was in the 2011/2015 tsunami). Our candidates tend to be the very worst kind of muppets with wild TRA views and all the rest of it, so I assume the local party is bonkers and I'd get mouthy and thrown out!
Seriously, though. We need more people doing the simple groundwork like you. Best of luck to you and James!
Anon at 835: cleanse the party- purify ! purify! until thou do this I shall not join as i am in a huff. I will never vote again to prove my point. Only when the britnats win will we be purified enough.
DeleteGood for you Alt Clut, seems like you are being effective.
DeleteGood for James too.
Echo chambers such as some places are (not this) are the death of advance towards Independence.
"Echo chambers such as some places are (not this) are the death of advance towards Independence."
DeleteWhat advance?
*Psychological Profile of James Kelly:*
ReplyDeleteJames Kelly, author of *Scot Goes Pop*, exhibits traits of high conscientiousness and analytical rigor. His writing reflects a deep commitment to political accuracy and Scottish independence, often characterized by tenacity and emotional investment. He appears highly motivated by justice and democratic fairness, frequently challenging narratives he perceives as misleading. At times, his tone suggests a combative or contrarian streak, likely fueled by strong convictions and frustration with political complacency. His attention to polling and data indicates a detail-oriented mind with a preference for evidence-based reasoning over ideological comfort, suggesting both intellectual independence and emotional intensity.
*Should the SNP Be Worried?*
The SNP should take James Kelly’s return seriously—not with fear, but with respect. His rejoining may signal growing frustration among grassroots independence supporters who feel alienated by the party's recent direction. Kelly is unafraid to publicly critique leadership and could become a vocal internal force for change. However, his analytical expertise and deep commitment to independence could prove invaluable if constructively engaged. If ignored or dismissed, he might amplify internal tensions. Ultimately, the SNP's response to voices like Kelly's may determine whether it rejuvenates or risks stagnation. His presence is a challenge—but also a potential asset.
The AI has the hots for you, James!
DeleteThe radge rev has been busy.
Delete"I therefore shouldn't say much about it at all apart from the fact that I was there"
ReplyDeleteWouldn't your readership be interested to know how it went?
Many left the SNP because they came to the conclusion that it wasn't reformable. Has that changed?
"Wouldn't your readership be interested to know how it went?"
DeleteYes, I'm sure they would, but as clearly stated in the blogpost, I asked people who are veterans of conferences how much they thought I was free to write about, and the response was basically "to be on the safe side, pretty much nothing". Of course I want to be as open as possible, but I can only do that within the rules, or what is perceived as the spirit of the rules.
"to be on the safe side, pretty much nothing".
DeleteThat's applying self-censorship in response to an implied threat.
What's the implied threat? I'm saying I asked for advice, and the advice was given. You're seeing things that aren't there.
Delete"to be on the safe side, pretty much nothing" ... or else (you'll be blackballed, censured, cancelled, made persona non grata etc).
DeleteI get that you were treated (very) badly when at the Alba Party.
But if you can't speak your mind (or feel that you can't) when, as you say, there was no official moratorium on doing so regarding this conference then when can you?
"when, as you say, there was no official moratorium"
DeleteWhat? I didn't say that. What are you talking about? Kindly quote the words I used that you think were equivalent in meaning to "there was no official moratorium", and I'll happily explain why you're wrong.
Anon mistakes camaraderie and working toward a common purpose for a meeting of the Cosa Nostra!
DeleteThe general party membership isnae that bad. It's higher up, behind closed doors, when the (semi-rhetorical) knives come out. Sometimes you really are among friends in politics. Though, aye, keep an eye on your six, just in case!
I am not in the party, never will be, as I am a pure independence supporte but I demand to know what went on.
DeleteIt's also worth some interest as some of the motions to be voted on at the Conference would make the SNP a more undemocratic Party if they were to pass (thus moving in the wrong direction).
DeleteWe're definitely keeping an eye on the leadership election rule change, which would be disastrous for absolutely all of us outside the clique.
Delete"Coronations only" is no way to build a movement.
If there was no ban on talking about the meeting and its content publicly why was it that you "asked for advice"?
DeleteWhy, as somebody who supports transparency, did you not feel able to speak publicly about the meeting?
"It's also worth some interest as some of the motions to be voted on at the Conference would make the SNP a more undemocratic Party if they were to pass"
DeleteI voted against all of those. But if the results of those votes haven't been publicly announced yet, it's clearly not my place to announce them.
"If there was no ban on talking about the meeting"
DeleteSorry, I'm going to have to be insistent and repeat myself here, because you're persisting in trying to put those words into my mouth, even after I corrected you. Where are you getting this thing about "there was no ban", "there was no moratorium", etc etc? You're certainly not getting it from me.
In your comment @10:41 you said:
Delete"I asked people who are veterans of conferences how much they thought I was free to write about, and the response was basically "to be on the safe side, pretty much nothing". Of course I want to be as open as possible, but I can only do that within the rules, or what is perceived as the spirit of the rules."
Were there "rules" that prevented you? If so were you not informed of these rules by the organisers?
Or was it the "spirit of the rules" that prevented you? If so who defined the "spirit of the rules"?
What in heaven's name do you think I asked for advice for? I was asking what the rules were. I didn't ask anyone to invent any rules, and they didn't. If you have any doubt that the conference was held in private session, I'd refer you to the language used on the front page of the Sunday Mail today -
Deletehttps://x.com/Sunday_Mail/status/1903719489599889537
"In a private meeting, the FM said..."
I don't have "any doubt" nor do I have "doubt" about the status of the meeting. I wasn't there and I am not a member of the SNP. Therefore I don't know and passed no opinion on whether or not the meeting was "held in private session".
DeleteYou said "I was asking what the rules were. I didn't ask anyone to invent any rules, and they didn't."
The answer, from your own comments, was "to be on the safe side, pretty much nothing". (Not sure if you're paraphrasing here or quoting literally).
So was/is it the official rule of SNP meetings held in "private session" that meeting attendees should say "to be on the safe side, pretty much nothing" in public about what was transpired?
"Therefore I don't know and passed no opinion on whether or not the meeting was "held in private session"."
DeleteThat is not true. You falsely and repeatedly claimed to know for a fact that it was not a private session and that no rules prevented me from discussing what happened. As you have now belatedly admitted you have no such knowledge, we can draw a line under this ridiculous discussion. I quite reasonably asked for advice on what the rules are, I was given the advice I asked for, and I am following that advice. End of story.
Keep plugging away, James.
ReplyDeleteChanging your chosen Political Party from the inside is always a very steep uphill battle......but is certainly more potentially effective that shouting at it from the outside.
I also agree with poster Alt Clut in their 'head-on' approach when challenging people within the Party you do not agree with and have been very vocal myself with our local SNP Councillors and other Members on various issues
- and this is in spite of my basically shy and retiring nature!
On a brighter note, this is from today's MSM -
"Businesses back SNP for growth as Labour support slides
Survey of 500 employers puts John Swinney’s party top for its investment policies while Anas Sarwar saw support fall by 7 percentage points".
Enjoy yer Sunday.
Me and David Francis agree on something? This is… new.
DeleteThe party needs a lot of reform, and a whole lot more status for the grassroots to have an active voice in policy direction. The SNP's wrong in two distinct but connected respects: dialling back on independence (deeds talk louder than empty campaign rhetoric) and capture by the professional lobbyist class with whole policies written by the likes of KPMG, who operate a revolving doors relationship with the firms they advocate and the Scottish government.
The result is the stagnation and despair we see now, where the weakest British government in generations and the very real prospect of Farage in Number 10 isn't even pushing the SNP vote as high as it was in 2021. The disconnect with the independence movement and the Scottish public at large is all too real.
Dave must have recovered from the battering he took yesterday as he has come sneaking back today without addressing any of his critics on the previous blog. Either that or he has sobered up.
DeleteI like him better, talking sense today. Dinnae get him started!
DeleteAnon Nobody at 12:33
DeleteLol.
Get it through yer amazingly thick skull, that the tiny bunch of Sturgeon-Haters on here - of which you are obviously a member - couldn't 'batter' a fish supper.
As I have said many times previously, you simply do not matter.
However, if it makes you feel better to continue yer wee rants against that particular Ex-FM, feel free to do so.
I have scraped FAR better than you and yer ilk off the sole of my boots many a time.
At the risk of repeating myself - poor, wee, completely irrelevant Wingnuts/Albaists, as well as being the source of neverending mirth, are THE most inconsequential Dummies in the Yes Movement and wider Scotland.
Enjoy.
Can’t find anything to disagree with in what you say. I ripped them a new one yesterday for being liars and fantasists. I got the usual abuse and lies and misquoting of what I said. They are now busy creating a new narrative which can best be summed up as “ah but”. Laughable.
DeleteAs much as this may surprise you, anon, there is more than one anon who posts at SGP. Strange, eh? Those differences of narrative may be different folk at large. For instance, I wasn't here yesterday.
Delete'Liars and fantasists' - the new slogan for the easily spotted thickest poster on SGP. Dozens of uses in the past few days to replace his old classic 'silly billy' - he thinks it sounds more mature🤣🤣🤣
DeleteDave, touché (or should that be touchy?). You certainly don't respond well to criticism. Is that why you haven't returned to yesterday's blog to pursue your arguments?
DeleteAnon @ 1:10 PM
DeleteAre you the Anon who said that the police were sent away & couldn't find anything and when someone mentioned Peter Murrell you essentially went "ah but" there won't be any successful prosecutions!
If so you made yourself look like the silly billy as if the police didn't find anything no one would have ended up in court
Dave Francis, "as I have said many times, you simply do not matter". Don't do irony do you, Dave?😂😂😂
DeleteAnon at 1.45. Clearly getting to you. The delicious irony in you calling someone thick. You’ve been called out for the liar and fantasist you are. They do say truth hurts. Take an aspirin and lie down.
DeleteAnon at 1.27. That is possibly the most stupid post ever on SGP and that’s a high bar. What a moron.
DeleteAnin 3:58, Liar and fantasist - the thickest poster on SGP strikes again. Buy yourself a dictionary and expand your vocabulary you silly billy.😂😂😂
DeleteThe wingbats are britnats.
ReplyDeleteThe level of spelling, punctuation and general grammatical correctness combined with a highly restricted vocabulary o
DeleteIn these responses make one wish to scream.
Indubitably, doctor. Where’s their perspicacity? Deleterious!
DeleteAnon at 2.19. You really can’t stop lying can you. I have said for weeks there will be no successful prosecutions. To date there have been none, and two out of the three have already been completely vindicated. It’s not difficult to understand, except for you it seems. You are a liar. You lied about N S and C B. You are desperately trying to deflect. Bottom line. You are a nasty wee WOS liar. You could be one of the homophobic misogynistic racist ones as well , who knows. In any event you are a lowlife, and you will be called out each time you come on here and lie.
ReplyDeleteMate you keep trying to dig yourself out of a hole.
DeleteYou constantly contradict yourself and claim people misquote you when they literally just copy and paste your own comments. It's laughable to read, in the last blog post you posted something and then claimed you didn't say it a few comments later.
You claimed the police didn't find anything and tried to wash their hands of it...now you're using the Donald Trump method of deflecting, calling everyone else a lier and saying you've always been right when people call you out on your bullshit. It's tiring.
It's amazing. He claims to know who all the anons are and what they have posted yet hides behind anonymity himself so he can deny it when he's caught in a lie. And he calls everyone else a liar and a fantasist!
DeleteAnon at 5.58. I’m not your mate. Irony not your strong point? You made at tit of yourself with you direct allegations about N S. Give me one example where someone has actually copied and pasted me. In your own time. You make things up and claim other people said them. You lie, and you spew hatred and vitriol. Give it, and us, a rest.
DeleteAnon at 6.43. Where did I claim to know who all the anon are. In your own time. What’s that. Oh you can’t. Liar. Away to WOS.
Delete3.55pm says anon @2.19. Where is this anon?
DeleteAnon6:59 You do it all the time, you imbecile. Telling people they have to apologise for what they've said about Sturgeon and how they're all refugees from WOS. You're so thick, you're still doing it in your reply to me! I'd go as far as saying that you're a liar and a fantasist and a silly billy, but most of all you're as thick as two short planks.😂😂😂
Delete"Police sent papers in and sent away to try to find something . Still couldn’t. Then the unprecedented public washing of hands by Police Scotland."
DeleteThat's a direct quote from one of your comments on a previous blog post. Same one referenced above you're claiming is a lie that you never said.
David Francis comes across as someone with a high opinion of himself.
ReplyDeleteAs does Stu Campbell. I don't know why.
DeleteAnyone who uses the royal “we” is a tosser. Including Chaz, ofc. So there’s that.
DeleteRev Stu has a small team hence he says we.
DeleteA small team of one does not justify "we". It might justify "wee".
DeleteWhatever happened to IFS ?
ReplyDeleteWhatever happened to you?
DeleteHe's campaigning for the ISP, Scotland's only hope 😉
ReplyDeleteHe’s manning his binocs, watching out for numpties.
DeleteTrouble is you’re too close!
Anon at 4.31pm I would be grateful if you could stop posting lies about me.
DeleteI was delighted to read that Reform have run into choppy waters by trying to disassociate themselves from overt bigotry and discovered that it makes up the bedrock of their support (like the rest of us didn't know already).
ReplyDeleteGrass roots Reform members are seething because a brown man (Zia Yusuf, the party chairman) doesn't want them pouring out bile in support of Tommy Robinson on Twitter and he's threatening to expel the worst offenders.
Are Reform about to do an Alba and publicly destroy themselves?
Honest question: who let “Zia Yuzuf” anywhere near a position of authority in a budding fascist party of government? That’s as self destructive as the high profile unionists in the SNP. Madness!
DeleteGood evening to all my fans who have been crying out for me to post. It's just so rewarding and heart warming that I am loved so much on SGP. I've been on holiday and having a nice time but I have had a lot of laughs since being back reading the posts made in recent days on SGP.
ReplyDeleteSome poor anon troll even thought I had gone away for good. Strange person that troll. He spends day after day, week after week, and month after month telling me to go away and then when I go away on holiday he is desperate for me to post.
In summary, there are a lot of weird disturbed posters commenting on this blog. Since so many of you nutters are so concerned about me posting or not posting please note I will be going off to Lazarote on holiday in the very near future so try not to exercise yourself too much if I do not post again for a period of time. I will be back.
Also do not fret yourself I will post about Sturgeon soon and it will not include any apology to Sturgeon the Betrayer or Swinney the Redactor or any anon nutters or the bampot calling himself David Francis.
PS: some of you anon nutters could do with taking a holiday you sound more and more crazy with each comment you post.
Welcome back IFS. The site went into meltdown yesterday when Dopey Dave Francis took the huff at people laughing at him and ran away.
DeleteIfs - maybe an apology to the ex FM would be a start but I suspect you aren’t up to being a grown up
DeleteAnon Tit at 7 : 42
DeleteThis one is especially for you -
🤡🤡🤡😂😂😂🤡🤡🤡😂😂😂
Anon at 8.47pm - read my post. I said there would be no apology from me. Why on earth do you think I should apologise to Sturgeon or Yousaf?
DeleteAnon at 7.42pm David specialises in coarse abuse. Surprised the SNP condones it's members to behave like that. Assuming Dave is an SNP member. He is very shy in saying what his branch is.
DeleteAny inconvenient fact or question David does a runner and hides till the next article is published by James.
Lol 🤡🤡🤡😁😁😁
ReplyDeletePoor wee soul David still cannot put his reply in the correct place.
DeleteThe blog does it automatically
DeleteNo need to call David a blog.
DeleteWelcome back master! We missed you so. 🤡🤡🤡
ReplyDeleteSo I make a genuine comment on a certain other blog, get attacked, and then the blogger attacks me, and puts my reply in moderation.
ReplyDeletehttps://archive.is/xTHxW
I have of course cut and pasted it into a text file, so it will be interesting to see if it does appear.
Freedom of speech? Not if you disagree with the posting. Only echo chamber agreement is allowed. And that's a major major problem for Independence - as it is for Independence supporting parties.
"We are the Borg, resistance is futile, you will be assimilated."
No. No I won't. I am o' independent mind.
I saw that. I've always had the view that people who are pathologically averse to criticism and intolerant of dissent must actually be very unsure of themselves and their opinions. Paul sometimes writes good articles but the btl is just nonsense. Playground gang stuff. Best avoided.
Delete@Jakey
DeleteHis articles have disimproved as well; I think he's been influenced by the small handful of posters (maybe 6 at most) who control the narrative. And most of them are way out there.
I posted occasionally in the vain hope it could help improve the articles, but particularly in the hope the SNP would read some points and someone somewhere might think "Yeah, I'll suggest that to John".
In that case though a supposedly respectable blogger is going out of his way to antagonise Police Scotland, the COPFS, by reflection the whole of Scottish legal, and the people they're married to, kids or parents of - and friends and neighbours - with his wacky conspiracy theory nonsense. Which indeed largely comes from btl and 3 or 4 of the bully gang.
What a way to win hearts and minds to advance Independence.
I couldn't let that rubbish stand unchallenged.
Mr Kavanagh in his latest nicophantic article states:- " The news that Police Scotland had failed to find any evidence of wrong - doing by Nicola Sturgeon ". Just how does Kavanagh know this. Has he seen the report sent to COPFS? I very much doubt it. He does not quote a reference to it. Kavanagh just posts his opinion and dresses it up as fact.
ReplyDeleteDo the Police send reports to COPFS to tell them a person has done no wrong? All that has happened is COPFS have decided not to prosecute. Kavanagh once again posts opinion dressed up as fact.
Mr Kavanagh also says: " Peter Murrell made a private and routine appearance in court in Edinburgh". Kavanagh tries to dress up Murrell being charged with embezzlement and released on bail as if he is taking a walk down to his local newsagents. Incredibly Kavanagh tries to spin a court appearance for embezzlement as routine.
Indeed. Enjoy your holiday in Lanzarote. It won't be the same here until you return ...
DeleteQuite.
DeletePaul Kavanagh is on the make and an SNP propagandist.
These two traits tend to go together.
I had to laugh at the nerve of Kavanagh saying that many of the accounts re Sturgeon could be liable for defamation. Sturgeon is the person who used Covid daily briefings on National TV to regularly trash the jury verdict in the Salmond trial and say he was guilty. Disgraceful conduct by Sturgeon.
DeleteKavanagh also claimed that Sturgeon " had been cleared of suspicion". Speak for yourself Kavanagh. The Police or COPFS said no such thing. Only a proper trial would do that.
Unbelievably Kavanagh wants her to change her mind and stand as an MSP again.
The numpty says independence is the only option but then says nothing about the SNP doing nothing to achieve independence.
Afore I go, something that's not widely understood is that contempt of court can relate to publications which undermine public confidence in the administration of justice. It's called "scandalising the court".
Deletehttps://www.beltramiandcompany.co.uk/news/criminal-defence/the-law-on-contempt-of-court
"Another aspect to the common law of contempt of court was the doctrine of “scandalizing the court” which, in contrast to the sub judice rule, which is only applicable to pending legal proceedings, this form of contempt of court is applicable at any time. ...
‘Scandalizing the court’ is a convenient way of describing a publication which, although it does not relate to any specific judge, is a scurrilous attack on the judiciary as [a] whole, which is calculated to undermine the authority of the courts and public confidence in the administration of justice.”
I kind of know a bit about these things because in the past of socialising with solicitors and other legal bods like PFs through hill-walking and skiing. It's a fool who doesn't pay attention enough at least to think about and check it out for themselves. But I seriously wonder why I bother at times. Perhaps in the interests of Justice and the Rule of Law!
This popcorn tastes great😂😂😂😂😂😂
ReplyDelete