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.
In the second half of this video, I also take a look at the story in the Daily Record about a nameless former member of the Alba Party's Finance and Audit Committee, who suggests the party wasted £50,000 on air travel expenses for Alex Salmond between 2022 and 2024. As a former member of the Finance and Audit Committee myself, I reveal who the source most reminds me of and consider what that person's agenda might be.
My series of Holyrood constituency profiles for The National has continued today with Angus South, which can be read HERE.
The dam has well and truly burst with Alba - over the last few days I've been receiving emails containing nuggets of information from multiple different sources within the party, including some I haven't been in contact with before. Patience has snapped right across Alba's ranks, and people just want the full truth to come out.
Some of the emails have been harder to interpret than others. There was one a few hours ago accusing the rebels (ie. the wannabe Junta of Hendry, Blackley, MacNeil and Sheridan) of lying about their willingness to take the party's mammoth liabilities off the hands of other NEC members. A quote was supplied from the Junta's promotional website, but initially I couldn't work out what the lie was. However, I think I've belatedly twigged what is being referred to (correct me if I'm wrong). Here is the quote -
"The following members of the National Executive Committee (“NEC”) of the Alba Party (an unincorporated political party registered with the Electoral Commission, reference PP12700), namely, Angus Brendan MacNeil, Christina Hendry, Suzanne Blackley and Tommy Sheridan (the “interim leadership”) hereby guarantee that they will fulfil all of the functions, duties and responsibilities of the NEC as specified in paragraph 7 of the Constitution of the Alba Party until such time as the National Conference of the Alba Party elect a new NEC; and that the following members of the NEC shall hereby immediately resign and vacate their Alba Party office, namely, [presumably you Kenny and Neale but you will have to insert the names of the other existing NEC members who like you want to fold the party and do not want to stay on and fight]; and that the interim leadership undertakes to indemnify all NEC members against any liabilities that may arise from their decisions and assumption of NEC responsibilities commencing from the date this guarantee and indemnity is signed; but excluding any liabilities that have arisen or been intimated before the date this guarantee and indemnity was signed.
Signed on X date
By the interim leadership
Signed on X date
By retiring members of the NEC
Note: The document invited the outgoing leadership to insert the names of those who wished to resign. The brackets above reproduce the original text exactly as submitted."
I presume the point is that the Junta are only promising to cover liabilities incurred from the date on which the agreement is signed, which is utterly useless to the current leadership because it excludes all of the £200,000 liabilities identified by Corri Wilson in the secret audio recording that was passed to Scot Goes Pop on Saturday. All of the current NEC members would still be left personally liable for those, with all of the consequent dangers that Shannon Cullen might not be able to afford to get her nails done.
I must say it's also bizarre that the Junta are repeatedly accusing the MacAskill leadership of breaching the party constitution, given that they themselves want to drive a coach and horses through the constitution by getting the NEC to unilaterally hand the party over to an unelected "transitional leadership". Having sat on Alba's Constitution Review Group for those few traumatic months in 2024, I can say with some authority that there's no constitutional provision that would allow anything even remotely like that to happen.
As regular viewers of my YouTube channel will recall, the little-known Alba businessman Abdul Majid has an exciting habit of doing things in bulk. In 2023, he was one of the five clear beneficiaries (along with Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh, Christina Hendry, Hamish Vernal and Marjorie Ellis Thompson) of the blatant rigging of the Alba NEC elections. He topped the first preference vote on the male ballot by an insanely wide margin, and was purportedly the first choice of an extraordinary 34% of Alba conference delegates despite having barely troubled the scorer the previous year.
Today, though, we must salute him for his tremendous sense of restraint. So far, 244 "people" have signed a pledge swearing loyalty to the quarter-Trotskyite, quarter-superior-DNA "Junta" that is improbably seeking to reanimate Alba's corpse, in spite of the "insurmountable" £200,000 liabilities revealed by Corri Wilson in a secret audio recording leaked to Scot Goes Pop two days ago. And of those 244 signatories, a mere three are Abdul Majid, if we're charitable enough to assume he's only been signing under his own name.
*. *. *
As Alba members ponder where that lost £200,000 actually went, here's a little thought for the day (click on the video if it doesn't auto-play).
Just a reminder that I'm continuing to write daily constituency profiles for The National - the two in today's paper are Almond Valley and Angus North & Mearns. Unless I'm looking in the wrong place, I don't think the latest batch are on the main part of the website, but if you're a subscriber to the digital edition (which is identical to the print edition), you can find them there.
