Never let it be said that I don't take my SNP membership seriously, because I've given up on watching the rugby today in order to attend the SNP campaign conference in Edinburgh. (And there's precious little chance of doing a Whatever Happened To The Likely Lads by avoiding the result until I can watch it on catch-up, because ironically the rugby is one of the main topics of conversation at the conference.). While I've got a moment, I just wanted to apologise to some of the readers who have emailed me over the last few days, because I've been so rushed off my feet with the constituency profiles and whatnot that I haven't managed to reply to everyone.
One message I did reply to, though, was alerting me to the latest Scotland In Union propaganda poll, which I hope to cover later, because I'm afraid it sounds very much like Survation have moved up a gear in the assistance they're willing to give to Scotland In Union by subverting the polling process and knowingly producing misleading results.
Until today, when he suddenly left the party after an angry tirade, Allan Petrie was the designated Nominating Officer of the "Alliance to Liberate Scotland". (Indeed he technically still is, because any change takes time to go through.) That is one of the three key party officer positions officially registered with the Electoral Commission, and is the same one that in Alba was held by Chris McEleny, including for several months after his expulsion.
And yet just two days ago, Petrie - who I have never met and have barely interacted with online - was bombarding me with tweets of the following ilk:
"Oh dear wee jeemie I see your research skills haven't improved much possibly because you don't get out of your bedroom much, tell us why you are in a party responsible for putting rapists in female prisons wee man"
Leaving aside the obvious immaturity and childishness of his tweets, does that look to you like someone in a leadership position within a party that should be taken seriously - not only one that can win seats but that in fact will lead Scotland to independence? However preposterous that boast may sound, it's what Liberate Scotland claim to believe about themselves and certainly want other people to believe about them. Even if in their heart of hearts they know it's not true, they'd presumably at least want to project an image of seriousness and credibility that would look congruous with their mission statement, and you really do have to wonder whether they have the self-awareness to understand just how far short of it they're falling. Alba was a complete and utter shambles, and yet anyone who moves from Alba to Liberate will quickly realise they've just suffered a massive downgrade.
So what triggered Petrie so much that he forgot he was supposed to be a leading figure within a "national liberation movement", and then instantly reduced him to chucking puerile insults at me like a random drunk bloke in a pub? It was simply because I had pointed out in a blogpost that his party is in an electoral pact with a far-right party called Sovereignty, and that as yet nobody has a credible answer as to why that's OK. Liberate clearly have an agreed position that if anyone asks them about Sovereignty's extremist policies, they will refuse to answer substantively and will just trot out vacuous slogans like "independence nothing else nothing less". The most you'll get out of them is an explanation that independence is the only thing that matters for now and that discussion of the merits and demerits of all other policies, including Sovereignty's extremist ones, will have to wait until after independence. In other words, an independent Scotland established by Liberate might be a fascist ethnostate, but there again it might not be, we'll just have to wait and see, and what an exciting magical mystery tour that will be. Yup, that sounds like a totally credible position, one that will be easily defensible in the heat of an election campaign.
But rather deliciously, Petrie's stated reason for flouncing out of Liberate today exposes the whole holding position of "independence nothing else, no other policies matter" as having always been a complete sham anyway. He can't accept the fact that Craig Murray, who does not share his gender critical views, has been newly taken on as a Liberate parliamentary candidate. It crosses a red line for him, apparently, even though the trans issue has got nothing to do with independence, the one and only thing that is supposed to matter. Now I hold gender critical views too, and I don't doubt that it's an important issue, but I don't think it's any more important than opposing Sovereignty's policies on banning all economic migration, or on having an ethnically-based Scottish citizenship, or on withdrawing from the European Convention on Human Rights. If I and others are not allowed to regard fascist policies as a red line or to even ask about them, it's hard to see how Petrie can justify getting a special opt-out from the general "independence nothing else" principle that allows him to have a red line for his own personal hobby horse.
My suspicion is that Petrie and the others have been caught in their own bubble for so long that they can't even see the contradiction. The independence issue and the gender issue have become weirdly fused inside their heads and they've literally forgotten that the two things are actually separate.
LOL. I did predict a civil war, but even I thought it might take a bit longer than two days. https://t.co/Whyp5Z1tst
It’s not a laughing matter James - it’s actually quite tragic! As long as self serving grifting charlatans put their interests first Scotland will never achieve independence - far too many livelihoods rely on the “independence industry” for it to ever be achieved.
I'm afraid after Allan's childish antics two days ago (openly cheerleaded by you it has to be said) I'll have to strongly disagree with you here, Heather: it's absolutely bloody hilarious. Petrie's position is literally "I can excuse fascism but I draw the line at sharing a...
Meanwhile, as expected, Tommy Sheridan and his wife Gail were today also unveiled as defectors to (and candidates for) Liberate. As I pointed out in my blogpost the other day, that will trigger a civil war within the party, because even those who don't immediately follow Petrie out of the door will soon find themselves in a battle for control with Sheridan, who always seeks to be the dominant force in any party or political project he is part of. And although I don't believe in the 'horseshoe' theory of politics (that the further you go to the left, the closer you get to the far-right), Sheridan the Trotskyist is not exactly doing much to dispel it by going into alliance with Sovereignty without a second thought.
A week or two ago, our old friend Stew said as a 'joke' that he was almost tempted to endorse the SNP for the Holyrood election after all, because if they won an overall majority that would put John Swinney on the spot and require him to try to deliver the independence referendum that he has promised would follow in those circumstances. Like a lot of Stew's intended jokes, that's a lot more significant and revealing than he realised when he said it, because the logic is actually watertight. Even if you genuinely believe that there is only a 10% chance of Swinney doing what he's promised, the rational thing to do is vote SNP and at least give that 10% chance an opportunity to play out.
After all, what brilliant alternative independence strategy would you be giving up by doing that? None. If you vote Liberate, you'll be voting for a party that has not only become an embarrassing circus, but that will probably get only 0.1% or 0.2% of the list vote. That's a complete and utter waste of time that cannot possibly achieve anything. Alex Salmond only got 1.5% of the vote with Alba, and he had the sort of charisma and strategic nous that Barrhead Boy can only dream of. The only charismatic potential leader Liberate have got in its ranks is Sheridan himself, but if he takes over it will become the Tommy Sheridan Party, ie. Solidarity Mark II, and we all remember how Solidarity Mark I fared in repeated Holyrood elections.
Give independence a chance. Vote for an independence party that the general public will actually vote for. And yes, that means the SNP, or if there's some particular reason why you can't bring yourself to vote for them, the Greens are also a pro-indy party that will win seats. No other pro-indy party will even get close.
Far right? Farage is far right. Maga is far right. Are you seriously smearing fellow independence activists with British tropes? I doubt anyone inside the Swinney version of the SNP is in any way "to the left" in politics.
Apologies, Gordon, I didn't see your tweet until now. Yes, I absolutely am describing Sovereignty, one of the key components of the "Liberate Scotland" alliance as far-right, because that is what they are. Read their 2024 manifesto - it speaks for itself. Farage is to their left.
Later in this video, I also provide some more information / offer some thoughts on why YouGov may be systemically underestimating independence support in their full-scale Scottish polls.
But yeah, Allan, it *was* actually pretty rude of you to make Stew's involvement a condition of you taking part if you hadn't even bothered to check with him whether he was willing to do it. Hopefully you can think of a suitable replacement, but for heaven's sake: this time, ASK FIRST!
Or to put it another way: hey Stoo, Stoo...who's the REAL moderator?
Allan, I understand why my post hit a raw nerve, given that you are an officer of Barrhead Boy's party, putting you in alliance with the far-right. If you want to ask me silly questions, I'll make you the same offer of a video debate I've made to others. Doubtless you'll refuse.
Oh dear wee jeemie I see your research skills haven't improved much possibly because you don't get out of your bedroom much, tell us why you are in a party responsible for putting rapists in female prisons wee man
That would be a question for you to ask me in a debate. For some reason you seem to be so reluctant to take that opportunity that you're studiously pretending not to notice the offer. Wouldn't be worried about making your party look ridiculous with the "wee man" sneers? Hmmmm.
Certainly we can have a neutral arbiter. Stuart Campbell is not such a person, but I will accept him because he's been refusing to debate me himself - it's an elegant solution. So my answer is YES, Allan! I accept your terms - LET'S DO THIS! What date? What time?
You might remember that Barrhead Boy wrote a furious rant about me a few months ago, simply because he was so angered that I had pointed out the inescapable truth that his "Liberate Scotland" alliance includes a bona fide far-right party. Sovereignty want to literally ban ALL economic migration, which even in this day and age of MAGA and Reform is an extremist position - as far I can see there are only two countries in the world that actually do it. The fact that this is fully intended to produce an ethnically "purer" Scottish society is demonstrated by the fact that they also want to introduce a "right of return" for the "Scottish diaspora" - I mean if you genuinely believed a country is "full up" and that immigration is putting too much pressure on public services and infrastructure, you wouldn't exactly be proposing to throw open the door to potentially tens of millions of random Americans who have no connection to Scotland other than a great-great-great grandmother born in Buckie in 1834.
Sovereignty also appear to want a Scottish citizenship based on bloodline (although admittedly they're short on specifics about how that would operate in practice) and want to withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights. These are absolutely astounding positions for anyone who imagines themselves to be in the mainstream of the independence movement to find themselves allied with, and I remain of the view that otherwise serious figures like Eva Comrie must have some sort of knot in their thinking which means they somehow just can't see the gravity of the error they're making. It might all be marginally more understandable if Sovereignty were only a very minor part of the Liberate Scotland alliance, but that's not the case at all - they're one of the three main component parts of it.
Officially, according to the Electoral Commission website, Hazel Lyon is the party leader of Liberate Scotland (Eva Comrie and Allan Petrie are the other registered party officers), but from having spoken to people with inside knowledge a few months back, the overwhelming message was that Barrhead Boy himself was the de facto leader, and that he was calling all the shots - including on the alliance with Sovereignty - from his luxury pad in Barcelona, as a "control-freak autocrat". In one sense, the foolishness of his decision is not a surprise, because he's on the record with downright dodgy views of his own about stripping voting rights from English people, so to him Sovereignty's policies may not look so abnormal. But it's the fact that he's managed to coax one or two more sensible people to come along with him for the ride that is so concerning.
Eva Comrie actually joined in with a Twitter pile-on against me at the time of Barrhead Boy's first rant, so I took that opportunity to question her about how she could justify an alliance with Sovereignty and its extremist policies. I thought it was incredibly telling that all I got back from this usually forthright and articulate politician was vacuous, near-cretinous sloganising about "independence nothing else nothing less" rather than substantive answers to my questions. To me that suggests that a) Eva knows perfectly well that the alliance with Sovereignty cannot be rationally defended (in which case good luck as soon as you come into contact with professional journalists) and b) she had accepted instructions to only answer in slogans, either from a group collective or from Barrhead Boy himself. The latter possibility must be taken seriously given what I've heard about his "control-freak" leadership approach.
Today he's gone off on one yet again. My first reaction was that the following was probably partly or wholly about me, possibly because he was triggered by my video from last night explaining why the dissolution of the Alba Party is good news for the independence movement. But the more I read it over, the less sure I was, because some of the claims of fact here do not tally up with reality:
"Sadly, after all the optimism of 2021 and the formation of Alba, a steady decline set in as bad actors took hold of the party. I will not go over the events of the Alba National Conference in 2023. Other less scrupulous bloggers – or should that be – blaggers have done that, and they weren’t even involved in the events of that day. All to get what more hits on a website or to satisfy some revenge for being rejected? For sure it was not done for the good of the cause; I was directly involved, and I will not elaborate further on matters apart from saying I and many other independence supporters left the party at that time."
If that is partly about me, he's having a pretty major memory lapse there, because I certainly was "involved in the events that day" - I was present at the conference (and provided photos on this blog) and I was also standing as a candidate in both the nullified office bearers' election and in the delayed election of ordinary NEC members. Although he also seems to implicitly acknowledge that the person or people he's accusing were candidates, otherwise how can he claim that they were "rejected"? So it's a very confusing and contradictory rant even by his standards.
What I will say here is that very few people (other than the sycophantic usual suspects) interpreted the bizarre silence Barrhead Boy kept about his reasons for storming out of the Alba Party in 2023 as being motivated by scruples or by discretion or by "what's good for the cause". The most common interpretation was instead that it was a mixture of petulance and haughtiness - ie. he regarded himself as a cut above the little people who had no right to know what was going on. When a year later I was finally able to publish some of the details of what had happened around the time of the 2023 conference, many Alba members reacted with immense relief, because it was literally the first time they had even begun to make sense of what had seemed like an utterly inexplicable and almost random sequence of events. They were conscious of the fact that they had been kept in the dark in a very calculated way by Barrhead Boy and others, who apparently thought they shouldn't know that industrial-scale vote-rigging and bullying had been occurring. (That said, if it was widely known who most of Abdul Majid's voters had voted for with their third preferences after giving their second preferences in bulk to Hamish Vernal, perhaps the reticence from Barcelona would be a tad easier to fathom.)
With absolutely no sense of self-awareness, Barrhead Boy signs off with a familiar refrain: "We are all on the same side, now unity is what we require for Scotland, not tribal politics."
Without a shadow of doubt he is one of the most divisive pro-independence figures - he does not regard us as "all being on the same side", quite the contrary in fact, he regards the vast majority of the movement as "SNP devolutionists" who he is in a state of all-out war with. He is hell-bent on splitting the pro-independence vote by putting up candidates, many of them quasi-fascists, against the SNP on the constituency ballot where it has the potential to do the most damage. And yet he castigates anyone who opposes his project of division as "splitters" or as "damaging unity" - by which he means that they damage his attempts to unite the 5% on the fringes of the movement for a war against the 95% in the mainstream of the movement.
If this spectacle wasn't producing splendid entertainment, I think we'd have a right to be a bit offended by statements of such brazen hypocrisy, frankly.
Incidentally, Tommy Sheridan approvingly retweeted BB's rant, and the rant itself was clearly intended to coax Alba defectors to throw in their lot with Liberate, so it's not hard to guess where this very public display of flirting may be heading. That being the case, I think it's fair to gently point out that it's unlikely Liberate is anything like big enough to accommodate both of their egos for long. Tommy Sheridan ultimately wants to control any political project he's part of - even in Alba, I think he was playing a long game and saw himself as Alex Salmond's eventual successor. I doubt if he'll show anything like as much patience with somebody he'll perceive as a bit of a non-entity.
Barrhead Boy may think he's cutting a deal with Sheridan, but at best he's paving the way for a Sheridan takeover, or at worst he's triggering the next civil war that will tear Liberate Scotland apart in much the same brutal way that Alba was torn apart.
Kenny MacAskill's latest email to Alba party members:
"Dear Friend
I refer to my two previous communications detailing the financial crisis afflicting our party following a fraud perpetrated on it, and as a result the severe challenges faced meeting the statutory requirements of the Electoral Commission. As I advised you, we were meeting with both our Auditor and the Electoral Commission. I can confirm that the meetings took place on Tuesday and the NEC met earlier today and I now write to advise you of the outcomes.
As detailed in my last email our Treasurer, and the Auditor had been considering whether they could sign off the accounts on any basis other than on a “break up basis”, which in reality means that the Party is no longer a viable financial concern. However, the challenges, not just of the financial situation that Party found itself in but worsened by a declining membership and consequently reducing income, with both accelerating due to adverse publicity, saw them adamant that professionally they could do no other.
It was on that basis that we then met with the Electoral Commission, who have been as helpful as they can be in the circumstances, but who have statutory obligations. With the Party requiring to lodge these accounts which are for 2024, never mind being unable to fund audited accounts for 2025, they intimated to us that we could either de-register voluntarily or would face statutory de-registration. It was that invidious choice which the NEC met to address earlier today. Before I do let me address some comments which have been made in social media and the press by a so-called Alba Continuation Group.
They claimed £20,000 had been raised. I can advise that not one penny has been received by Alba HQ from them despite our dire financial plight. In any event any sums raised could not go for election campaigning but would require to meet existing liabilities. Irrespective of that nothing was ever forthcoming from them.
They wished to take over the Leadership of the Party. They were advised that they should specify the democratic basis and constitutional authority for doing so. No answer was ever provided.
They indicated that they had provided an indemnity for the NEC for sums due by the Party for which members remain personally liable. That is just not true. Neither a legal indemnity nor any indication of the credit worthiness of those proposing to provide it was ever forthcoming.
The NEC faced that choice with the backdrop of membership continuing to hemorrhage and income plummet. In no small part due to the acrimony generated by those claiming to have the party’s best interests at heart though seemingly more intent on pursuing their own political ambitions. Current liabilities far exceed both cash at hand and projected income. In these circumstances the party entered into statutory redundancy talks with staff.
The Audit lodged with the Electoral Commission was equally stark in its assessment.
“Over the past two months but more significantly since 21 February, a sustained internal campaign of disruption and repeated press briefings and significant negative media coverage have inflicted serious reputational damage on the Party. This has resulted in a marked decline in membership and income, to the extent that the Party can no longer be considered a going concern. While the most recent audited accounts appeared, on the face of it, to show improvement compared with the financial position in 2023, they are now over fourteen months out of date and do not reflect the current financial reality. It is also important that the figures are viewed in the proper context. The reported surplus of £1,741 for 2024 must be considered alongside LACU income, both of which were supported by exceptional crowdfunder receipts linked to the General Election. That financial year also benefited from Policy Development Grant funding and a period during which two staff members were on half pay. These were not recurring conditions. Throughout 2025, the Party has faced ongoing monthly uncertainty regarding its ability to meet current and historical liabilities, with little financial resilience. During this period, cash flow pressures were at times alleviated by the receipt of a personal loan – which has still to be repaid - and redundancy of a staff member. At present money lost to alleged fraud perpetrated on the party is unrecoverable.”
It was with that financial backdrop that with regard to the options posed by the Electoral Commission that the NEC decided that it was better that we should withdraw with some dignity rather than unceremoniously being removed. As the Audit also detailed
"There was a strategy and genuine belief that a positive campaign, focused messaging and strong candidates might have provided an opportunity to secure one or two seats, however, polling has consistently sat at approximately 2% and more recently declined to 1%. At that level of support, electoral success is not a realistic prospect. The leadership has worked tirelessly over the past fifteen months to stabilise and sustain the Party, inheriting a precarious financial and organisational position with no margin to absorb further shocks. The deliberate and sustained internal actions and negative briefings of recent weeks have ultimately compounded that fragility. It is therefore necessary to state plainly that the conduct of certain individuals during this period has caused profound and irreversible harm to the Party from within. Therefore the Officers and Treasurer of the party do not believe the accounts should be prepared on a going concern basis and have prepared them on a break up basis.”
That was not where the NEC wished to be, but circumstances left us with no other choice. The financial situation is such that we just cannot continue to trade whilst insolvent as would be the terminology with a business. Moreover, there is neither time nor funds to convene a party conference. The Audit required lodged and the Electoral Commission operate to strict electoral deadlines. The NEC accordingly required to make a very difficult decision but did so on the basis of clear professional advice and working within the options available from the Electoral Commission.
The party will require to continue operating for a limited period as we seek to address our debts and alleviate any personal liability for NEC members, many of whom have young families or other significant personal commitments. In these circumstances if you were prepared to continue your membership dues for this month it would be appreciated. Office bearers will also have to continue to address the ongoing police investigation and give evidence on behalf of the party at any future trial.
However, in the absence of income and staff the ability to operate ceases, never mind the absence of the party’s purpose of contesting elections. It is a tragedy that our journey begun in 2021 by our founder Alex Salmond should end this way but those culpable will be brought to justice. Alex was right in 2021 when a Supermajority would likely have seen our country independent by now. Similarly his strategy which we were following of a plebiscite election in 2026 remains the solution in this ever more dangerous world.
We will just need to see what the election on 7th May brings. We had been asked to retain or pass details to other independence groups, but we cannot do that due to rules on information retention or passing. I can only suggest that those seeking to regroup after the election do so by contacting existing or new groups which may arise. Communications with members recently being issued other than through Alba HQ are a breach of data confidentiality which is being investigated.
Finally, I wish to express my thanks to colleagues in the leadership team who have strived to keep the party going in very difficult circumstances and to those who have been in contact to express support for their attempts. But most of all I wish to thank you for your membership and efforts for our party and our cause. It has been a privilege to work with you, and we can be proud of what we sought to achieve and also the support which we gave to our Founder in his time of need.
We will continue to support Moira Salmond, assist those pursuing justice in the courts for him, and launch an Awards Foundation in his memory for the benefit of young people.
The dream shall never die, parties as with individuals are mortal, but our cause is eternal.
Yours for Scotland
ALBA Party Leader
The ALBA Party"
I once joked that the Alba Party was so addicted to expelling people that it would eventually expel itself, and that's pretty much what has happened.
I literally burst out laughing a few minutes ago after clicking a link on the MSN homepage which read "Labour receives formal complaint over claims of voter irregularities in Holyrood selection contest", only to be taken to an article containing a photo of Alex Salmond and Kenny MacAskill standing on a hill with an Alba banner. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, Alba are now so synonymous with vote-rigging and corruption that even vote-rigging in the Scottish Labour Party somehow ultimately seems to trace back to Alba.
Basically the story is that the former Alba candidate Irshad Ahmad defected to Labour and immediately got himself ranked top of Labour's regional list for Edinburgh & Lothians East, ahead of far better known candidates such as Daniel Johnson and Martin Whitfield. There are, shall we say, suspicions about how he may have done that. It's all rather akin to how Abdul Majid came out of nowhere to score a landslide victory over people like Craig Murray and Barrhead Boy in the 2023 Alba NEC elections.
I mean, we scoff at the Alba Continuity Junta's boasts that they will take Scotland to independence, but who knows, maybe they're onto something. Abdul Majid might get himself elected as Deputy Leader of the Labour Party or something, and then we'll be pushing at an open door. Independence, the Alba way, one rigged vote at a time.
