Not that I expect my opinion to make the remotest difference, but as the Scottish Parliament is about to make one of the most consequential decisions in its history, I thought I'd offer my opinion anyway. I don't know about anyone else, but I find it deeply disturbing that not all that long a period of time before I was born, in the 1960s to be exact, Scotland was still a country in which the state took the lives of its own citizens in the form of capital punishment. I once had a look at the death certificate of Henry Burnett, the last person to be executed in Scotland, and there's nothing all that remarkable about the contents of it - the cause of death is curtly given as "judicial hanging", his residence is given as the prison in Aberdeen, and the informant (who would normally be the next of kin) is the prison governor. Everything about it just says "this is totally routine".
I can't imagine how much more disturbing I'd find it to live in a Scotland where a culture of death has been reintroduced in a completely different but much more widespread form. Death certificates giving state-assisted suicide as the cause of death would become extremely routine, far more so than was the case with the death penalty - 5% of all deaths in Canada are now assisted suicide, and it's likely that we would follow suit. If you could guarantee me that the only people who would die under the new system would be single-minded, determined individuals who had freely chosen to avoid suffering, and who had not been coerced or malignly influenced, either directly or indirectly, then probably my attitude would be different. But anyone who actually believes that is astoundingly naive.
If this legislation goes through, there will be people who die for economic reasons - either because they've been told they are a burden or because they assume that other people regard them as a burden. There will be people who die because of treatable depression or low self-esteem or personality disorders. There will be people who die because doctors actively put the idea into their heads. For the first time since 1963, society and the state will be deciding that some people are better off dead and actually making them dead.
I hope this bill is rejected. If it's not, I'm not sure I'll even recognise this country in the years to come.
Incidentally, when I spoke out a few weeks ago against Ash Regan's bid to introduce the Nordic Model on prostitution law, Stuart Campbell rather outrageously implied that I must have been motivated by self-interest, ie. that I must be someone who pays for sex myself. I'll be interested to see what dark or cynical motivation he'll ascribe to me in this case. It's true that I was brought up a Catholic, and that probably does influence me, because my default setting is that life is sacred unless there's an exceptionally good reason. But I'm not sure that's such a bad principle to live by, and it's fair to say a great many atheists take exactly the same view, even if the terminology they use is different.
The Independence For Scotland party, which until today was one of the three component parts of the Liberate Scotland alliance along with the far-right Sovereignty and "Independents for Independence", has never been noted for being a particularly mainstream organisation or for being in touch with the concerns of the general public. It's been utterly obsessed, for example, with the tedious and unimportant issue of oaths of allegiance to the monarchy. So it would be tempting to characterise their decision to abandon Liberate in much the same way I characterised Allan Petrie's identical decision a couple of days ago, ie. "we can excuse fascism but we draw the line at sharing an alliance with people who do not agree with our views about gender recognition certificates".
But that would perhaps be unfair, because they've actually given specific reasons which are maybe a bit more reasonable. They've pointed out that until recently Liberate was an equal alliance of three parties/groupings, but was then forced to register as a party in its own right because of a ruling from the Electoral Commission. It appears that the leadership of the new party then exploited that situation to bypass their partners when making important decisions, such as allowing Tommy Sheridan and Craig Murray to stand under the Liberate banner. And judging from what Petrie said the other day, that leadership consists basically of the notoriously volatile and short-fused blogger Barrhead Boy, and the maverick former MP for Coatbridge, Phil Boswell (even though ironically neither are among the three officially registered party officers). That ties in with everything I heard about Liberate in its early days - the message was overwhelmingly that Barrhead Boy was the de facto autocrat of the alliance in much the same way that Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh was the de facto autocrat of Alba.
So Liberate is now disintegrating for much the same reason that Alba began to disintegrate in late 2023. However, the situation is even worse for Liberate, because however malevolent Tasmina was, she did at least have credibility as a seasoned politician and lawyer. Barrhead Boy setting himself up as the dictator of a "national liberation movement" is faintly comical in comparison, and calls to mind the old saying about history repeating itself as farce.
The other significance of today's development, of course, is that it by definition moves the centre-of-gravity within Liberate even further to the nativist far-right - assuming Sovereignty are remaining inside the tent, that is.
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.
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.
I was contacted earlier today by a member of the Alba Party, who I think was genuinely quite shocked that a controversial fellow member and convicted criminal called Dave Llewellyn had posted on Facebook to threaten physical violence against the person (and I genuinely have no idea who that person is, by the way) who made an audio recording of Corri Wilson revealing that Alba has £200,000 liabilities, and which was then leaked to Scot Goes Pop. The Facebook post also called me the C-word (which I've partly blanked out below). However, there was an even greater level of shock that the threatening post was liked by none other than Susan MacAskill - the wife of the party leader. Llewellyn dares people to "call the polis" on him, and frankly he should count himself very lucky if nobody heeds that advice.
Incidentally, although it's rather sweet of Iain Cameron to imply that I'm having some sort of role in the destruction of the Alba Party, the objective reality is that Kenny MacAskill, Corri Wilson and others are very deliberately and determinedly destroying it themselves, and they didn't require any cue from me to start that process. That makes it hard to understand why Dave Llewellyn is so upset about the leak to Scot Goes Pop, because from what I can gather he is part of a 'realist' faction that accepts what Kenny MacAskill is doing is unavoidable. The leak actually assists MacAskill in that task, because it confronts people with the full extent of the party's liabilities, which after all is the main reason Alba will have to be dissolved.
When I was expelled from Alba on ridiculous trumped-up charges just over a year ago, I made abundantly clear that the loyalty I previously had to the party completely ceased at that point, and I don't see how anyone can realistically have any complaints about that, given the mind-boggling number of people in the Alba elite (both past and present) who were involved in the malicious action against me in some shape or form: Alex Salmond himself, Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh, Corri Wilson, Chris McEleny, Hamish Vernal, Shannon Donoghue, Chris Cullen, Suzanne Blackley, Daniel Jack, Robert Slavin, Yvonne Ridley, Josh Robertson, Robert Reid, Christina Hendry, Jackie Reid, Geraldine Harron, Debbie Ewen and John Caddis. (And that's not even an exhaustive list.) I would have thought it's a statement of the obvious that I now believe that it would be in the best interests of the Scottish independence movement if Alba were to depart the stage permanently - the corruption and nepotism just runs far too deep, and I don't see how that can ever be rectified to make Alba a force for good.
I do know some good people who remain in Alba and who take a different view and want the party to continue. I suspect that even they will eventually look back on Alba's destruction as a positive moment, because it will probably lead to them pursuing the same objectives under a different political branding, which will almost by definition be less toxic than Alba's.
I've been sent an audio recording of Corri Wilson, matriarch of Alba's Corri Nostra faction and also the party's "Director of Operations", addressing what appears to be some sort of internal party meeting. Beyond that I've no idea what the context is, although I presume her comments were not previously in the public domain, because a) they're fairly incendiary, and b) if they were already public knowledge there'd have been no point in sending me the recording. Here's the full transcript -
"It's not just the finance, I mean we've obviously had the McEleny struggle for a year, and it is far from over as well. The reality is we have few active LACUs and very little activist activity. We have been, due to all the briefing against the party, which you were informed about on 10th January, we have been haemorrhaging members, and the majority of our members pay £1 a month, so you can do the maths yourselves. There's just no money coming in. We live in Twitter-land, where thanks to the negative press we are just no longer rated.
The ordinary folk on the street havnae heard of us. There's too many people don't even know Alba exists. They just don't. We exist in a bubble, but they don't know we exist. Wednesday's poll showed us at two per cent. We need to be realistic. TWO PER CENT. We have insurmountable liabilities, and the reality for a Holyrood campaign is we've got no activists, limited impact. The social media campaign is absolutely hampered by all the negative social media, and you know, Kenny met with you guys on 10th February, laid out the situation, spoke about the briefing against him and the party, and said at that point, either we get together, get behind and do all that Braveheart stuff, or it's going to have an impact, and here we are.
The reality is every single one of us who has stood as a potential candidate, you're standing for a leadership position, and as a leader, sometimes you have to make difficult decisions, and quite frankly we have to act responsibly. You need to remove your heart, I want to stand, we all want to stand, we all want independence. For someone who has spent a year, working night and day to keep this party alive, this is gutting, right? But the responsible thing to do is to get out when we can, holding our heads up high. The reality is Kenny's spoke about people saying if you want to come forward, and he'll sign over the liabilities. I have done a quick calculation on these liabilities, and what you're signing in for is nearly £200,000. That's what you'd be signing up for. Thanks."
It's the puzzler that has gripped and perplexed fashionable salons like no other since the Schleswig Holstein Question: are Alba branches accounting units in their own right? Does their money belong to HQ or could it be seized by Christina "Of The Blood" Hendry and her thrillingly quarter-Trotskyite Junta?
As a 1990s Scandinavian singer once reminded us, it's all 'bout the money. It's all 'bout the dum dum da da dum dum, in which 'dum dum da da dum dum' is perhaps unlikely to refer to Scottish independence.
"Dear Treasurer/Convener
Thank you to those of you who have already replied to my previous email and engaged constructively. I appreciate the time taken to respond, particularly given how difficult and unsettling this period is for us all.
This is not an easy moment for the Party. Many of you know that over the past year I have worked relentlessly to ensure the Party was kept operational, compliant, and able to continue the fight for independence. That work has not stopped, and neither have the responsibilities that come with it.
The reason for this communication is straightforward. As responsible officers of the Party, we must prepare for all eventualities. While our focus has always been on the fight for independence, that commitment has to be balanced with our fiduciary and legal responsibilities as Party officers. This is about good governance, compliance, and protecting individuals as well as the Party.
Your LACU is not an accounting unit in its own right. This means that any money held in the LACU bank account is party money, not LACU money. It forms part of the Party’s overall accounts and must be treated as such at all times.
If, and I say if, the Party is wound up or deregistered, LACUs do not have any legal entitlement to retain, spend, redistribute, or repurpose funds held locally. Those funds must be returned to Party HQ so that liabilities can be settled and final statutory accounts completed.
As LACU Treasurer, you are acting as a custodian of party funds. Retaining or using funds without authorisation places responsibility on you personally, not on “the LACU” collectively.
Failure to comply may result in:
Breaches of electoral law and regulatory requirements
Personal liability for repayment of funds
Recovery action for breach of fiduciary duty
Potential escalation where funds are knowingly retained or misused
Good intentions or the fact that funds were raised locally do not change this legal position.
Accordingly, you are required to:
Ensure that all LACU funds are preserved intact
Cease any spending without explicit central authorisation
Prepare to transfer any remaining balances to Party HQ if and when instructed
If you have any questions about the process, or if funds have already been spent or committed, you must notify HQ immediately. Early disclosure is always preferable to issues emerging later through audit or regulatory review.
Please treat this matter seriously and as a formal compliance instruction.
I've rarely before had much sympathy for the views of the self-styled "straight-talking totally unfiltered independent woman" Shannon Cullen (formerly Donoghue), but I checked her Twitter account last night, and it confirmed the impression given by the MacAskill email that she and the rest of the Corri Nostra faction are loyally taking the view that Alba's death must be allowed to run its course under the constitutionally-legitimate current leadership of the party. This may seem surprising (especially given that I recall her being as thick as thieves with Junta member Suzanne Blackley when we were all on the Constitution Review Group together in 2024) but everyone has a deeper loyalty, and I suspect Shannon's deepest loyalty of all is to her bank balance and to the avoidance of bankruptcy. Once she twigged that she as an NEC member is personally financially liable for potentially vast sums, it was strictly no contest - Alba had to die so her chances of going shopping could live.
She will therefore be appalled at this message that has been sent out under the names of her old chum Suzanne, Christina "Of The Blood" Hendry and the rest of the wannabe Junta, and that was forwarded to me this morning. I can't quite work out the method by which it was sent out - it seems to be formatted like an email, even though the Junta have been complaining all along about their inability to email the Alba membership directly with their plans for revolution.
I must just note the supreme irony of the Junta resting their case partly on legalistic arguments about the current NEC not being properly constituted. Similar arguments have been made since Alba's earliest days - even when I was on the NEC in 2021-22, vacancies were not always filled by the correct constitutional process, and sometimes were not filled at all. Similarly, there was never any constitutional basis for the stuffing of Conferences Committee meetings with non-elected individuals, but we were told it was fine because the NEC had the right to "interpret" the constitution in any way it pleased. Blackley and Hendry were always totally unconcerned about these sleights-of-hand in the past (not least when Salmond unconstitutionally appointed Blackley herself to an office bearer position that should have automatically been filled by someone else), but suddenly, when it suits them, it becomes an issue.
I also gather there's a question mark over whether the Junta are being honest in signing off the message with the words "NEC member" against their names, because apparently some or all of them have resigned from the NEC. But perhaps like all true revolutionaries they regard the body they've resigned from as "illegitimate", and the body they've unilaterally set up to replace it as the real thing. Hendry is Of The Blood, remember. She has the right to do these things.
"Subject: Formal Demand For An All Members Ballot on the Future of ALBA
Dear Colleagues,
It is 4pm on Friday, 27 February. Candidate registration deadlines are running. A membership ballot can be live within two hours if staff are permitted access to NationBuilder. That access must be granted immediately.
THE DEMAND
Hold an emergency membership ballot tomorrow, Saturday 28 February 2026.
Question: Should Alba Party contest the regional list ballot in the Scottish Parliament election on 7 May 2026?
YES – Alba fights. The party contests every regional list ballot on 7 May 2026 under new transitional leadership, giving pro-independence voters a home and building the Parliamentary Mandate Westminster cannot dismiss.
NO – Alba folds. The party de-registers, withdraws from May, and ceases to exist as a fighting force for independence.
Ballot opens: 10:00 Saturday 28 February
Ballot closes: 18:00 Saturday 28 February
Result announced: Saturday evening, publicly, binding on all parties.
WHAT MUST HAPPEN TODAY
1. reinstate suspended staff and permit immediate access to NationBuilder to set up the ballot. This takes two hours. There is still time.
2. issue voting instructions to all paid-up members by close of business today.
3. halt any de-registration process with immediate effect.
THE CONSTITUTIONAL POSITION
We have taken legal advice. The position is unambiguous.
The constitution contains no provision granting the NEC authority to de-register or dissolve the party. Section 5.1 defines National Conference as the supreme governing body. Section 14.5 requires a two-thirds majority at National Conference to change the constitution. De-registration is more consequential than any constitutional amendment. You have no authority to impose it without a membership vote.
Furthermore, the NEC may not be properly constituted. Section 12.4 requires vacancies to be filled immediately from the most recent ballot. That has not happened. An improperly constituted NEC cannot take binding decisions on behalf of this party.
THREE QUESTIONS – WRITTEN ANSWERS REQUIRED WITHIN 24 HOURS
1. Under what specific constitutional provision does the NEC claim authority to de-register the party without a membership vote?
2. How many NEC vacancies exist, when did they arise, and why have they not been filled under Section 12.4?
3. Will the current leadership halt de-registration and permit the ballot to proceed tomorrow?
Failure to respond will be treated as confirmation that no constitutional basis exists for your actions.
LACU FUNDS – NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION
We are aware the current leadership is attempting to claw back funds from Local Authority Campaign Units. We say clearly: there will be no taxation without representation of the membership bodies of the Alba Party.
LACU funds are controlled by LACU signatories – not HQ. We have taken legal advice. An improperly constituted NEC has no right to access or direct those funds. We are advising all LACU treasurers and convenors accordingly. No transfers should be authorised until the membership has voted.
Any attempt to access LACU funds before the ballot will be reflected in the legal action we are prepared to take.
Should the ballot not proceed and our questions remain unanswered, we will have no option but to invoke our constitutional right as serving NEC members to call a Special National Conference, with a vote of no confidence in the current leadership as the first item of business.
WE ARE PREPARED TO ACT
We have sought legal advice. Every lawful avenue is being pursued.
The clock is running. Permit the ballot. Let the members decide.
Hot off the press, here is Kenny MacAskill's latest email to Alba members, in which he gives short shrift to the presumptuous notion of the self-appointed provisional "Junta" (ie. Christina "Of The Blood" Hendry, Tommy Sheridan, Angus MacNeil and Suzanne Blackley) that they will soon be in control of the party to stop the current leadership killing it off. I've noted before that MacAskill's discourse of doom about his own party's prospects has become a highly entertaining new art-form, and this latest offering doesn't disappoint - he signs off with "sadly, humans and parties are mortal" in big bold letters.
Also interesting to note that although MacAskill seems to now be in a state of all-out war with the Sheridan faction and the Of The Bloods, he actually seems to have the Corri Nostra and Debbie Ewen on his side as he seeks to bring the party to an end (which may mean that Tyrannical Tas, aka "Cruella", is also on board - although apparently she's been steering well clear of NEC meetings since resigning as Party Chair). And there is a clear implication that Christina Hendry and her aunt Moira Salmond are now firmly on opposite sides of the fence.
Last but not least, I gather that part of MacAskill's email may refer indirectly to Alba HQ's former wonderbairn Robert Reid, who non-coincidentally is Christina Hendry's boyfriend.
"Dear Friend
I wrote last week detailing the precarious financial position our Party faces as a result of a fraud perpetrated upon us and which is now the subject of a police investigation. I also advised that senior Party colleagues and I had met with the Electoral Commission who were reflecting on issues before returning to us with their advice. We have a duty to lodge audited accounts with them, and which are already late due to the circumstances we have faced. Indeed, we have been struggling to lodge those for 2024 which are with the auditor and lack the funds to instruct an audit for 2025. I said I would keep you advised.
A week is a long time in politics, it's often said, and this week has sadly proved no different. As we awaited further discussion with the Electoral Commission, a barrage of press releases, public comments and claims were made by some individuals within the Party. Whilst we have often sought publicity as a Party and been denied it, this was neither welcome nor helpful. Quite the contrary as a result we have endured the following.
The loss of hundreds of members who contacted us to resign with more anticipated who will simply cancel their direct debits, and which will come to light shortly.
Several candidates for the coming election have already intimated their withdrawal given the behaviour last week with another withdrawing due to a family tragedy.
Despite protestations of fundraising by some individuals only very limited donations have been received by Party HQ and which will not offset the loss of income lost through a drop in membership. Any funds received must be applied first to meeting existing liabilities.
As a consequence of the reducing income, declining membership and existing and future liabilities we have both moral and statutory obligations towards staff. We have therefore started redundancy consultations.
Attempts were made by individuals to circumvent the Party's data control and individuals sought to restrict the Director of Operations access to IT and social media outlets. These have been reported to the Information Commissioner.
Draft Party accounts which are yet to be signed off by either the Party Treasurer or even the Auditor were publicly circulated by one of those members and entirely false interpretations made regarding the Party’s financial situation.
It was suggested by four members that they were going to take charge of the Party. There is neither any democratic basis to do that nor any constitutional legitimacy for it. They were asked to provide that but declined preferring to simply speak to the media. They also advised that they had provided an indemnity for NEC members who face personal liability for the Party debts. That is simply not true. They wished to take charge but to leave the financial debt to be faced but not able to be resolved by others.
As a consequence of the foregoing, the Party finds itself in an even worse position than it was last week, along with the damage done to the wider Independence movement through their behaviour. More importantly, it has resulted in the Party Treasurer, a professional accountant not an elected Party member, and the Auditor, an accountant based in Northern Ireland now considering whether they can sign off the Party accounts without a declaration of them being on a “break up basis”.
That in a business concern would mean facing insolvency. The situation faced by our Party is similar. We have liabilities that exceed our income and with little likelihood of that gap being closed. Moreover, we have potential claims of a significant scale which may require to be met. This was not the previous position of the Treasurer or Auditor, but last week’s events require them to reconsider. We are meeting with both early next week to discuss.
The Electoral Commission had hoped to return to us this week, but they have also deferred it until next. I am therefore unable to give a precise position on the Party’s situation with the Electoral Commission as to whether we will require to de-register or even be able to re-register as a Party which requires to be done by 31st March.
I am sorry not to be able to provide greater clarity but have been as frank and detailed as possible. I cannot understand the motivations of individuals who whether through self-aggrandisement or political ambitions are making an already desperate situation worse for our Party and damaging the cause of independence.
I am though grateful to the senior management team of Corri Wilson, Director of Operations, Neale Hanvey, Deputy Leader, Debbie Ewen, acting Chair and Jim Eadie, Communications Director. They have been to the fore in seeking to address the existing crisis which we face whilst also requiring to deal with matters which are further imperilling the situation.
I will return to you as soon as I am able with further information.
In the interim, we will continue to support Moira Salmond, who has been understandably angry and upset by the events of this week. She fully supports myself and the Leadership Team in our efforts to act responsibly and in the best interests of the Party. We will also continue to support the ongoing legal action to ensure justice for Alex and progress plans for establishing a Foundation in his memory.
Finally, Alex’s strategy for a supermajority in 2021 was correct and Scotland would be in a better place now had that been achieved. Similarly, our call for a plebiscite election this year is the route to Independence. But events and individuals have conspired against us. Our support for independence remains undimmed as our cause is eternal even if sadly humans and parties are mortal.
Yours for Scotland
Kenny MacAskill
Alba Party Leader"
*. *. *
You can read my thoughts on the historic Green victory in the Gorton and Denton by-election, and what it may mean for Scotland, in an article I've written for The National HERE. I've also written Holyrood constituency profiles for Aberdeenshire East and Aberdeenshire West.
So a couple of 'quick notes' for you today, because I have two new articles on The National's website. First up is the constituency profile of Aberdeen Donside, which you can read HERE. I've also done some analysis of the Stonehaven MRP poll for the Times showing the SNP on course for an overall majority, which you can read HERE.
Incidentally, I can't remember previously being aware of Stonehaven, despite them enthusiastically billing themselves as "the most accurate pollster in the 2024 general election". I checked the British Polling Council's website, and they aren't listed as a member. I then double-checked with Grok, who to my surprise told me they are a BPC member. I asked for an explanation of the discrepancy, and Grok said it might be due to Stonehaven's acquisition of the BPC member Public First, ie. they might have decided Public First's membership was enough to cover both firms. All very confusing, and it leaves me a bit unsure as to whether Stonehaven are bound by BPC disclosure rules or not.
There's a bit of chaos going on at home at the moment, so I'm not sure whether I'll be able to make proper videos for a little while. (I know some of you will regard that as a great relief!). So it'll probably be either audio commentaries to tide things over, or a brief return to conventional blogging.
Later in this video I also make an offer to Sara Salyers of a video debate, given that she and her supporters suddenly seem to have such an almighty bee in their bonnet about me. But I strongly suspect that, just like Stuart Campbell when I made him an identical offer a few weeks ago, she'll mysteriously find that she's too busy washing her hair or something.
The first of my 73 constituency profiles for The National (Aberdeen Central) can be read HERE.
I was half-thinking of making a video in direct response to the unhinged personal attack Sara Salyers of "Salvo" launched against me earlier today, but in spite of the character limit on Twitter, I was able to fit most of what I wanted to say into the tweet below. (By contrast, Salyers' own attack tweet had busted the character limit many, many times over, which presumably means she has no scruples whatever about sending a regular subscription fee to the far-right Elon Musk.)
Was Salyers "a typical mooth doing the British state's job for it" when she stayed silent on the good independence supporters (and I'm simply one of dozens) who were trampled over by the Alba leadership? On her own logic I suppose she must have been. What a pathetic hypocrite. https://t.co/nRkd8SsRoe
I must say it's something of a relief to finally have such a demonstrably strong reason for not taking one of the noisiest figures from the nuttier fringes of our movement seriously anymore. I've had to bite my tongue any number of times over the years when people have invited me to treat Salyers and her batty prospectus as some sort of passport to the promised land. You'll have to forgive me, but as a baptised Roman Catholic with ancestry that is two-thirds Irish and one-eighth French-Canadian, I have no great interest in Salyers' preposterous, offensive and quasi-religious belief that Scotland's right to choose its own constitutional future is not granted by modern concepts of democracy and international law, but instead by the almost random existence of a racist, bigoted 17th Century document that spends half its time wittering on about the supposedly self-evident evils of "Papists". It really isn't that far from Salyers' belief-system to Benjamin Netanyahu's conviction that Israel must rule the West Bank because it was promised to them in a sacred book 3000 years ago.
Incidentally, my message to Salyers above is much the same as to anyone else who claims that nobody is allowed to criticise the Alba Party because it is nominally "pro-independence". OK, if you spoke out at the time against the McEleny purges of good independence supporters, if you took to social media to denounce the Alba leadership's appalling treatment of independence warriors such as Eva Comrie and Denise Findlay, if you wrote to Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh to tell her in no uncertain terms how outraged you were by her sinister actions against the impeccably pro-Yes Alan Harris and Morgwn Davies simply because they had insisted on due process in Colin White's disciplinary case, then fine, you have credibility on this matter, you deserve a hearing, and I'll give you one. But if you instead sat back and allowed all of that to happen without comment while continuing to mindlessly applaud the perpetrators, then I strongly suggest you stop being such a ridiculous hypocrite and just pipe down.
You can see the video that triggered Salyers so much below -
This is the email Kenny MacAskill has just sent to Alba members, who yet again have been made total mugs of by a self-appointed and self-serving party elite -
"Dear friend
Let me, firstly, thank you for your support for our Party over these past years. It has been gratefully appreciated. We were formed by Alex Salmond when the SNP faltered and fell by the wayside on pursuing the cause of Independence, compounded by their shameful treatment of him which disgusted so many of us.
It hasn’t been easy given the Party’s launch during Covid and the hostility of the SNP throughout. But we persevered. We were then though struck by the grievous blow of Alex’s tragic and early passing. Notwithstanding that we rallied in his memory and to maintain his dream which we all share.
However, as I mentioned in the last email financial irregularities have come to light since the dismissal of the General Secretary for gross misconduct. These have been reported to the Police and an investigation which we are assisting and fully cooperating with is ongoing. Matters are with the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, and I expect matters to progress further shortly. This was compounded by Ash Regan MSP, our former colleague, who despite being advised of the concerns we had, instead chose to give employment to the former General Secretary thus given credence to his denials of misconduct.
I can assure you of integrity of current staff and elected office bearers but neither that nor justice being done addresses the perilous financial position which we find ourselves in as a result. Despite the sterling efforts of Corri Wilson, our Director of Operations, in stabilising and then seeking to turn matters around our financial position remains acute.
We have been in touch with the Electoral Commission who have shown great forbearance in the late lodging of audited accounts and even been helpful in our dealings with the former General Secretary who has continued to seek to damage the Party. But we face a financial situation where we simply cannot provide the further accounts which they require, along with meeting staff wages and covering other costs which we are either tied into or are required to meet. In these circumstances fighting an election is simply beyond our resources.
Even the willingness of a hardy band of activists whose efforts I am truly grateful for does not address the immediate crisis which we face. To contest an election a Party requires to be registered with them. We require to formally reregister by the end of next month. We have met with the Electoral Commission who are reflecting on the issues we have raised and the information we have provided.
However, I have to advise that it looks likely that we will not be able to register and therefore even to contest the election. That brings also into question the viability of a Party which neither has financial resource nor the ability to contest elections.
I know this will come as a bitter blow to you. It is a feeling shared by those of us who have shared your journey and have tried to steady the ship when torpedoed by the actions of an individual. But we have a duty to staff and to office bearers and members of the NEC who could face personal liability for incurred debt.
I will keep you advised as matters will be clearer in coming days. In the interim we will be continuing to support Moira, assist the court case to ensure justice for Alex and launching an award scheme in his name for young people to ensure his memory is forever maintained.
Our Party may have difficulties, but our cause is eternal.
The dream shall never die.
Kenny MacAskill"
The point is of course that the leadership knew about all of these issues when they hiked the membership fees only a few weeks ago - they knew there was a significant chance they wouldn't be able to re-register or to contest the election, and yet they went right ahead and hiked the fees anyway. And what on earth was the circus over Alba's candidate selection for Holyrood all about? It's been pointed out that it was a bit silly that Debbie Ewen brought the party to its knees over her bruised ego after being ranked second on the Lothians list rather than first, because the first-placed candidate had no realistic chance of being elected anyway. But if none of them were actually going to be able to even stand in the election, what in heaven's name was she doing?
It sounds very much like MacAskill is softening members up for the likely total dissolution of the Alba Party (which by this point should be regarded as a tremendous relief), which begs the obvious question - will refunds to members be provided?
Just a quick note to let you know that I have a new article at The National about the freshly-released More In Common poll, which has the SNP on course for 64 seats - the same as in 2021, but on a significantly lower share of the vote. You can read the article HERE.
