SNP World of Treachery; Nationalist NEC rule change works to benefit Nicola Sturgeon ally, Angus Robertson, SNP make their selection process so unfair that sitting SNP MP Joanna Cherry is forced to pull out of Holyrood candidate bid, the war to get rid of Nicola Sturgeon will have to be fought on a different battlefield where Sturgeon’s SNP don’t control the rules.

Dear All

A long time ago, I blogged on the Court of King Alex and the Court of Queen Nicola, after losing the indyref in 2014, Alex Salmond was shuffled off to Westminster, and the Sturgeon Empire emerged. Rather than be yesterday’s man on the backbenches of Holyrood, he founded the Court of King Alex. Kingship secured he packed his bags and headed down south, and was content. He had a Court of newbie MPs dazzled by the bright lights of Westminster, and was seen as the leader, until he lost his seat. If he had stayed in Holyrood every time Nicola Sturgeon made a decision, every one would have turned their head to look at Salmond. So for political expediency he had to go. When the noises started that Salmond was considering a return to Holyrood, this set the alarms bells ringing in the Sturgeon camp. The Sturgeon camp comfortable with their new found power and status dreaded the prospect of losing their position. In a world of treachery and deceit which is the SNP, Salmond had to be stopped from coming back. Salmond if allowed back into Holyrood would eventually challenge Nicola Sturgeon for the leadership because since she took control, the failures of her government have been laid bare over time.

But before Alex Salmond could make a return to Holyrood, the rules in the Scottish Government were changed so that complaints against former ministers could be investigated. This led to the farce of what many people thought was a ‘stitch up’ against the former SNP leader and First Minister. I met Alex Salmond many times, and when the allegations came out, I was shocked; I struggled to think that they could possibly be true. Although it was said by many he could be tough and hard work, in his interactions with me and others on the campaign trail, he was what I expected a leader to be. Salmond gave the impression that we were all in this campaign together, something which Nicola Sturgeon could never do when I campaigned for her.

The Scottish Government rules were successfully challenged by Alex Salmond in a judicial review and he won his case. People were angry because they had a right to be angry, the process was unfair and designed to find him guilty. You can read more about this online and why after reading the details, many people were disappointed and called this a stitch up. And that is what the Scottish Government complaints procedure was designed to do, stitch up a person and deny them a fair hearing. Having lost that battle to destroy Alex Salmond, something unusual happened next. The emergence of what some people called ‘The Alphabet Women’ came more to light which led to a criminal trial of Alex Salmond.

The Alphabet Women it appeared seemed to have something in common, as pointed out by many, a closeness to Team Sturgeon.

In a dramatic court case which could have seen Alex Salmond lose his freedom, his reputation, and his career on RT, he fought against his 10 accusers, and a jury of his peers in Edinburgh found him innocent. Having won his victory, it seemed his accusers were quick to continue the fight against him, using avenues like Rape Crisis Scotland to publish their post verdict letter. The first battle was won by Alex Salmond, the second battle was won by Alex Salmond, he and his allies defended, now as he appeared outside the Court in Edinburgh, he said in plain speak, it was time to go on the offensive, when we reached a post covid world. In the press and on social media, his media, his supporters would fire political salvos into the Sturgeon camp, highlighting policy failures or the need to secure a second indyref.

Although Salmond checked his fire, continuing on with his show on RT, what was clearly emerging was a split in the SNP ranks, over Salmond and over independence. Former SNP MSP Dave Thompson and the Alliance for Independence caught out many, SNP version 2.0 was condemned by Team Sturgeon as splitting the Nationalist vote. SNP version 2.0 is all about scooping up regional list seats and has been condemned as ‘gaming the system’. My view on this is simple, Holyrood was setup wrong, it was setup to ‘game the system’ by the then Labour Government in Westminster. I am a long time supporter of removal of the list system, in its place; I would replace it with 129 seats, all FPTP, no list. Instead of an MSP representing circa 3 wards, they would represent two in new drawn up boundaries.

As the split in the SNP goes on, the public is finding out how dirty SNP politics actually is, a member of Team Salmond, SNP MP Joanna Cherry has effectively been blocked by Team Sturgeon from standing for Holyrood. You might ask how this was done, simply by changing the rules. It is well known that Angus Robertson is a Sturgeon ally, Cherry is a Salmond ally, and a threat to the leadership of Nicola Sturgeon. I don’t think much of Cherry but she seems to be useful as a Salmond proxy. What the SNP NEC have done is to change the rules so that members could not run for Holyrood if they were a sitting MP. By doing so, Cherry must resign as an MP prior to entering the contest, so she would be unemployed and so would her staff.

Regardless of my thoughts on Cherry, the individual, this rule is unfair, undemocratic and plain nasty, but this is what you get in the SNP under the ‘cult of personality’. No one crosses the leader, and the leader is Sturgeon. Sturgeon as I pointed out is a wee vicious nasty poisonous individual who should have never risen to the top; she is no leader but holds the position. As bad as Sturgeon is, what makes up her Team Sturgeon surrounding her is equally on a par with her and also they have more time to operate in the shadows. As seen on twitter the news of the rule change in favour of Angus Robertson hasn't gone down well with SNP supporters who have taken to twitter to vent their anger, some to Sturgeon’s twitter account. What the SNP supporters haven’t worked out; and it took me long enough when I was a member, is that the SNP is a party within a party. Sturgeon doesn’t care what the ordinary rank and file think of her, she cares about their votes and their money, that’s it.

  

When Joanna Cherry announced she would be seeking the nomination for the Edinburgh Central seat, you knew there would be trouble, so to clear the way for Angus Robertson, the easiest thing to do was a rule change. Since barring Cherry as a candidate wasn’t viable or an option, she had to be allowed to stand, but making a financial barrier threw the decision back on Cherry. It had to be Cherry’s decision to stand down to dampen down the flames, but no one can have any doubt what has been done here.  

In a statement Cherry said:

“I have not had the courtesy of any official confirmation of this decision and would not normally comment on leaks of internal party matters, however private discussions by the current SNP NEC seem to regularly reach the press and I understand that the information which has been leaked is correct. I think that most fair-minded people will see the events of the last few days for what they are. Edinburgh Central SNP, the branch of which I have been a member since I joined the SNP 12 years ago, has the right to choose the candidate it wants to field in the 2021 Holyrood election. Branch democracy is an important part of our party. Members of Edinburgh Central had hoped that I would be part of a fair and open contest, but this decision makes that impossible.”

Cherry added:

“It is unprecedented in our party’s history of dual mandates to demand that a parliamentarian make themselves and their constituency staff unemployed in order to be eligible to be a candidate. It is particularly unreasonable to demand this in the middle of a pandemic. I am not prepared to do it and so unless circumstances change, I won’t be seeking nomination for Holyrood in this election. I have been overwhelmed by the messages of support from party members and members of the public. I believe I stood a very good chance to be selected to fight the seat where I have lived for most of my life and I want to thank everyone who has emailed, written or stopped me in the street to offer their support. I would like to reassure my constituents that I shall continue to represent their interests as their MP and to the grassroots members of our party, I promise that I will continue to advocate for independence, democratic reform of our party and open debate. As Westminster is in recess, I am about to take some time off to spend with my partner and my family and I won’t be making any further comment at this stage.”

Notice she said, “I will continue to advocate for independence, democratic reform of our party and open debate”. Does that sound like someone who is happy? So, Cherry stands down, but that doesn’t mean that Team Salmond can’t field another candidate unless Team Sturgeon has also shut off that route as well. One thing which should be mentioned is the call by Team Salmond for a ‘clear out’ at SNP HQ, and any clear out must include Peter Murrell, Sturgeon’s husband. Although Salmond is sitting on the fence, he must realise that what Cherry faced to block her, re rules changes would also be applied to him in his efforts to return as leader or even as a member.

Is there a Team Salmond MSP kicking about the place willing to call for a leadership contest against Nicola Sturgeon?

Will Salmond come to the conclusion that SNP version 2.0 is now his best vehicle and option for a return to Holyrood?

Salmond said he ‘loves’ the SNP, but he has to wake up to the fact that those who now control the SNP levers don’t love him and want him gone.

Finally, if the SNP was a house, it would be condemned as rotten, although there are seats up for grabs as some in the SNP ranks depart after this Holyrood term, Salmond is a name that is doubtful to appear anytime soon on an SNP ballot paper. If Salmond and his supporters want their revenge, it is increasingly likely that they will have to pull down the party brick by brick from both the inside and the outside. Leaders who lose elections have a tendency to step down, but with no future avenue emerging for Sturgeon to jump to regards employment, her options are leave politics or stay in place. I sincerely doubt Team Salmond have her welfare at heart or that of her husband, when she goes, he goes, and given no future leader has emerged in Team Sturgeon or as CEO in waiting, the Murrells will have to tough it out because rebellions from the inside only have to be lucky once.

Yours sincerely

George Laird

The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University 

Wakey wakey, why so slow; Scottish Conservatives and Scottish Labour finally wake up to the fact that the Sturgeon briefings on Covid are 'SNP party political broadcasts', ten months out from an election, and months off the pace of what is happening, the opposition should press the point that the SNP can also limit political activities in communities, how is Holyrood 2021 going to be seen as a free and fair election?

Dear All

If you’re a regular reader on this blog, you will have seen now and again that I used the phrase, ‘George Laird right again’. I did this to remind people that I had made predictions of what should be done, what needed to be done and much later, sometimes weeks, months or years, it happened. One example of this was several years ago, me talking about the need for an EU border force, an idea which others later arrived at. Back in Sept 2010, I floated both the idea of a single national police force and fire service while in the SNP. Later on the SNP politicians came to the same ideas, instead of following my theories of how these should operate, they put their spin on it. Their ideas led to problems such as the ‘vat’ problem with Police Scotland because of their unwillingness to work with the UK government.

The Scottish Conservatives have now sussed out something I have touched upon months back, that Nicola Surgeon and the SNP are using covid briefings as opportunities to run covert are 'SNP party political broadcasts'. A few days ago, I even tweeted again that the political parties should make a formal complaint to the BBC. I would also say that these briefings should now be taken completely off the SNP leader and presented by BBC personnel, with additional guests with expertise. It was always going to happen that Nicola Sturgeon once she had a platform would abuse it for political gain. As the Scottish Conservatives have pointed out, Sturgeon has veered off Covid and used the TV broadcasts to score political points. And if you don’t know who she is attacking or badmouthing, it is typically the UK Government. The Scottish Conservatives so far have pointed out that there are at least seven occasions when this has happened.

Next year is election year at Holyrood, 2021 is going to be an interesting election, for various reasons with new parties set to debut. At this point, it should be pointed out that the opposition to the SNP have been slow to react not just over covid briefings but also in a general sense. The SNP have used their position to effectively block them out as a force. Of the new players coming to the electoral scene, there are the pro UK, Alliance for Unity, headed up by George Galloway and what could be described as a rogue Nationalist outfit headed by former SNP MSP Dave Thompson with elements connected to Tommy Sheridan in it. The Nationalists are seeking to use the new indy party to scoop up regional lists which would not be available to the SNP due to their FPTP dominance in constituencies. Sometime ago, the idea was floated of tactical voting but due to hostility of the pro UK main parties, the idea never gained ground. The opposition to the SNP haven’t made inroads as expected or effectively challenged the Nats. They need to wake up, the voters need convinced and so far they aren’t producing narratives to convince. As I mentioned awhile ago, the opposition to the SNP really is the majority of pro UK Scots such as Allan Sutherland.

My view of the Scottish covid briefings is simple, they are a farce, Nicola Sturgeon controls the briefings, others are mere but players; and the press; they get one question. If Sturgeon doesn’t like the question, she doesn’t answer it, or if she calls it political then it is dismissed out of hand. Her stock answer seems to be, ‘this is a covid briefing’, but apparently she can talk about politics, she can attack rivals and she can have an 'SNP party political broadcast'. In briefings, Sturgeon referred to the UK Government’s approach to airbridges as “shambolic”, she went out of her way to criticise Boris Johnson for remarks on the Scotland-England border, and raised questions about immigration policy. What she is supposed to do is stick to facts, figures and Scottish government policy about covid response.

The Scottish Conservatives also highlighted that had also “blasted the UK Government’s rebranded ‘stay alert’ guidance, only to herself adopt an almost identical message weeks later”. In case you haven’t clicked to it, what Sturgeon is doing is following UK government policy, but in a delayed fashion. If something goes wrong like a ‘spike’, she then takes credit for being cautious. One thing which you need to know is that politicians give the impression of having all the answers, but the truth is, they don’t. As much as the SNP love the idea of how wonderful Sturgeon is doing, the truth is that she isn’t having a good pandemic, she is having solely a good PR show on the BBC. The scandal of covid in care homes is a disgrace, the fact the elderly weren’t sent to hospitals are a disgrace, the fact there wasn’t enough or the correct PPE is a disgrace, and it is all a Scottish failure.

Now, it seems the opposition are finally getting it about the "SNP party political broadcasts", so much so that both Labour and the Tories urge BBC Scotland to stop airing the briefings, which the opposition claim have become increasingly “partisan”. Yes, they are ‘partisan’ but this is the nature of the SNP, with them it is ‘party before country’, the common good plays second fiddle to power. Scottish Labour has also asked for an urgent meeting with BBC Scotland Director to argue the briefings are now a misuse of public money and in breach of the BBC charter. As I mentioned above, the BBC must take over the briefings, this appears the only solution because it is highly unlikely that the BBC will allocate the same amount of air time to the opposition.

Scottish Tory leader Jackson Carlaw said:

“It was quite right for the First Minister to embark on these daily briefings at the outset of this crisis, and for them to continue in the months that followed. But increasingly, as the statistics have improved and there’s inevitably less to say about them, the First Minister has turned to political point-scoring. This analysis shows how what starts with a daily data update soon descends into an SNP party political broadcast. She shouldn’t be doing that, and the BBC shouldn’t be indulging it. Either Nicola Sturgeon reverts to this being purely a factual event; or the corporation takes a stand and refuses to give her the airtime.”

Jackson Carlaw is right to complain, but his solutions are both unworkable, the only real solution is what I have outlined, these briefings are tainted, they are "SNP party political broadcasts". They are designed to place Nicola Sturgeon as the sole voice of the government, and when the election starts, Sturgeon will be the sole voice of the SNP campaign. If I can understand it, if I can get it, why can’t Jackson Carlaw? Carlaw needs to demand an investigation and the briefings turned over to the BBC. Covid is with us for the rest of the year, campaigning by parties needs to start back in communities, allowing Sturgeon and the SNP air time is an unfair advantage.  

BBC Scotland said:

“We are broadcasting Scottish Government briefings on the pandemic ad the easing of lockdown because these are matters of significant public interest. While cases of infection may be decreasing from their peak during the pandemic, there remains a valid editorial justification for reporting public health information and asking questions on new developments, such as the recent clusters in the Borders and Lanarkshire. The briefings in Scotland are covered by BBC one - which has also been the case when the UK and Welsh governments have held briefings. Viewing figures indicate there is a continuing audience need and appetite for information on the crisis, with an average daily combined audience of 275,000 for the briefings on both BBC One Scotland and the BBC Scotland channel.”

Is it time the point was forcibly made that these briefings can be done by the BBC? When a democracy becomes unbalanced, it is dangerous; the BBC in my opinion has like the rest of the press in Scotland been cowed. If the Scottish opposition parties get nowhere with BBC Scotland, they should raise a formal grievance with the BBC in London regards The Charter. As Scottish Labour points out, we are ten months out from an election, also given the SNP can control people and crowds movements, it tends to suggest that they can limit political activities in communities. Did the BBC take that into account when they just fobbed off opposition parties?

Yours sincerely

George Laird

The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

TIME FOR CHANGE IN ITALY; Italians demand a vote to leave the EU as soon as possible, Italy is in danger of becoming a failed state as their GDP rockets to 155.7%, grassroots campaign being launched as Italians fear they will end up like Greece, a country abused by an uncaring EU elite

Dear All

If Coronavirus has taught us one thing politically, it is that the EU has been ineffective as an entity and that member states have had to go it alone. Coronavirus has served one purpose, it exposed the EU project as fundamentally broken, too slow to react and too big to manage. Brexit has taught those who run the EU nothing in my opinion, they still cling to a furlong hope that even if they can’t get the UK back, they can put in measures to fleece us financially. The negotiations have been long, tedious, lacking in goodwill and so far unproductive. As a Brexiteer, I consider that campaign I fought in 2016 as rather special because in essence, it was a fight about sovereignty being restored. The idea of ‘Brexit’ isn’t just a British idea, likeminded people in other European countries have begun to recognise as we did; the EU doesn’t work on behalf of the people.

This begs the question, who does the EU ‘work’ for if not the people of member states?

The short answer is big business, huge corporations and their various offshoots, EU rights such as employment rights can simply be swept away from people, as seen in the ‘Viking Case’. Once you look passed the window dressing of ‘EU rights’, you see that in the UK, our UK rights in many cases surpass the EU. Check it out online and be made aware of what Remainers, the pro EU lobby in the UK are trying to do to deceive you. Their latest pitch is ‘freedom of movement’ and how wonderful it is, but ask yourself this, how many people in the UK travel to Europe to work and back?

Very few!

The fight about ‘freedom of movement’ is not about free movement, it is about residency, what ‘freedom of movement’ does is over saturation of the jobs market. Ask yourself this, if you were applying for a job which would you prefer, applying against five other people or applying against five hundred people? What about other areas such as housing, same thing, applying against five other people or applying against five hundred people? You see, what working class people know is that ‘freedom of movement’ doesn’t help them, it hinders their life chances right across the social sphere. If life chances are being hindered in the UK, it is logical to assume that this must apply in some degree to other working class people in countries in the EU block.

The UK has shown the way in leaving, which has prompted others such as the Italians to reassess what value EU membership has for them. The Italians are losing faith in the EU; they like the UK are travelling the same journey. When Covid-19 came to Europe it was Italy that was hit first and hit really hard, the virus spread rapidly and death toll in some parts seemed to be like a set of a horror movie. Italians weren’t slow to recognise as the virus ravished the nation that little help came from its European neighbours in those first weeks in February and March. Neighbours weren’t helping and the EU was ineffective and if we are being blunt negligent. Italians were left to fight the battle as hospitals in the north were overwhelmed.

Coronavirus just didn’t kill the people which were bad enough, it also killed the economy stone dead; everything had to close down bar essential services and food distribution. Italy is a beautiful country; you could list many places of interest, it is a country that is steep in history which has been part of many world events. But Italy has a problem, it isn’t Germany, its economy is different, so even before the virus hit, Italy like many countries in Southern Europe was struggling. The economies of southern Europe don’t fare well because of Euro; Greece is a model of how the EU has utterly failed to protect a member state. In trouble, the Greeks were given loans which failed to turn it around, and importantly destroyed democracy. Powers that the Greeks should have kept were handed over to the EU on important decisions like setting a budget.

Italy is important to the EU because, here is where the Treaty of Rome launched the then European Economic Community in 1957, with Italy a founding member. From the ECC over time, the organisation morphed into the EU, from a trading organisation to a political organisation. So, what does your ordinary Italian on the street think now about the EU; well Rome real estate agent Marco Tondo, 34 says:

"I have changed my mind a little on Europe. We are facing an absolute emergency, and seeing countries turning their backs on each other is really awkward."

Marco is currently receiving nine weeks' redundancy pay from the government at 80% of his normal salary. He needs to sell houses, and he can’t do that if people have no jobs and the economy is depressed. How long will he be unemployed? How many more thousands of Italians will join him?

A problem which most people don’t talk about is the myth of continual growth. Continual growth is an illusion sold to people by politicians. Just as history teaches us of the rise and fall of an empire, it also applies to companies. How many businesses have you heard that are doing out of business, and we aren’t talking maw and pa enterprises, we are talking brand name companies? Continual growth; and the myth of continual growth couldn’t save them as they were too big and not enough cash flow reserves to serve their debts.

According to a survey of 1,000 Italians conducted in April by Tecné, 42% of respondents said they would leave the EU, up from 26% in November 2018. People are starting to wake up regarding the EU, the country's economic output will fall by 8% this year, but right across Europe others will experience a downturn, but let’s face it that is no comfort to the Italians. That scale of downturn will bloat Italy's public debt this year to the tune of almost 155.7% of GDP. There isn’t enough money being generated to service debts, and the downward spiral leads to the nightmare of taking EU loans. Italy could end up in deep trouble; they want the creation of coronabonds, which would have been underwritten by all eurozone members to share the burden of economic recovery.

Germany and the Netherlands ruled out any kind of debt mutualisation, the Netherlands have been particularly vocal. So, the word no, isn’t going down well in Italy. Carlo Altomonte, associate Professor of Economics of European Integration at Bocconi University said of the Italian PM’s suggestion:

“Asking for coronabonds was the perfect way to have the door slammed in his face. Mutualisation of debt is forbidden by EU treaties and Germany's constitution. I think Conte used it as a weapon in negotiations."

Italian PM Giuseppe Conte told the BBC that the outbreak threatened the future of Europe. Now the bad bit for Italy, on 18 March, the European Central Bank launched a €750bn (£660bn; $800bn) bond purchase programme to help the eurozone's more indebted countries by pushing down borrowing costs. Two days later, the European Commission announced the suspension of rules on public deficits, thus allowing countries to inject as much money as they needed into their economies. Then, on 8 April, the Eurogroup of eurozone finance ministers agreed on a €540bn rescue plan. It was made up of:

€200bn as a new credit line for companies, provided by the European Investment Bank

€100bn in loans to support temporary unemployment schemes

€240bn as a credit line provided by the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) to fund eurozone health systems

This bailout package is to suck weak countries in which is why the political debate in Italy has focused mostly on that last part of the package. The unpopular ESM is an intergovernmental bailout fund. This bailout fund is the mechanism that provided loans to Greece and some other EU countries during the financial crisis and dates back to 2012. You can understand why the Italians are upset; everyone saw how badly the EU treated Greece under the guise of ‘help’. One thing which sticks in my mind about the Greek disaster was the reports of pensioners searching for food in bins, Greece, an EU country, a cradle of civilisation and some of its people reduced to this.

I remember commenting years ago that this isn’t the European dream.

Do you know what led to Brexit, it was ordinary people; millions of people who had enough of the EU, likewise, the movement to leave if it gets going in Italy will come from ordinary people. They will setup stalls, print their leaflets and hold rallies. They will be the driving force as it was in the UK. It will come from people like Italian Valentina Rosi has recently lost her job and her faith in the EU. She said:

"Europe is proving once more to be useless, so we should leave the EU."

When enough Italians see the light, then a political figure will emerge to spearhead it, and then the real push for a referendum will start. Already an Italexit campaign ‘No Europe - For Italy’ is being organised and launches on Thursday with advice from Nigel Farage who was a key player in Brexit. Gianluigi Paragone, a former senator for the anti-establishment 5Star Movement, said Italy would no longer be "blackmailed" by the Brussels bloc. He added:

“This is the way forward: we can no longer be blackmailed by tax havens that allow themselves to offend the great prestige of Italy. For this reason, on July 23, at 10 am, in the press room of the Chamber of Deputies, I will officially launch my party for Italexit, presenting the name and logo.”

Finally, the EU is an organisation which is unwilling to reform; I labelled it an organisation which is anti country and anti worker. While it remains unaccountable and divorced from the concerns of ordinary people dissent and distrust will grow. The loss of a founding member such as Italy is a huge blow, it could be what the countries in southern Europe need to kick start their own exit campaigns. I found campaigning against the EU to be rather easy, because their record is a matter of public record, their failures, their mindset and their attitude will be their undoing. I hope the Italians find the courage to have that referendum on EU membership.

Yours sincerely

George Laird

The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University