The SNP have historically been swift to suspend any party members when there’s any hint of inappropriate conduct, never mind even a whiff of illegality. It’s been that way since 2015, with the axe falling on elected members as well as candidates in target seats and critical elections, and ordinary activists.
Not even a by-your-leave, let alone an explanation, is afforded – just suspension with immediate effect. And that’s all well and good, some might say. No hint of impropriety should attach to the party and making a virtue of acting swiftly can be both necessary and appropriate.
So why then no action against the Chief Executive?
The Electoral Commission appears to have missed yet another deadline for publishing the SNP’s 2019 accounts (we’re waiting on them to return our phone call), so we’ve got a moment to talk about something else relating to the party’s finances.
[EDIT 12.56pm: the Commission now “hopes” to have the accounts published “in the next three weeks” along with those of the other main Westminster parties.]
The Scottish press covered itself in as much disgrace over the publication of the will of lottery winner Colin Weir after his tragic death last year as it had done during his life. Pretty much every paper in the country ran lurid headlines about how he’d “blown” or “burned” (translation: spent) half of his £80m share of the 2011 jackpot in nine years.
Weirdly, the Scottish Sun and the Daily Mail stood out for (mainly) respectful coverage focused on the fact that Colin Weir had in fact used most of the money on good causes and generous support for friends, family and strangers.
(Also, both of the Weirs were fairly old and already in quite poor health when they won the money, so why wouldn’t they spend it? You famously can’t take it with you.)
But the Mail was almost unique in the fact that its headline mentioned something that seemed to stand out as the most obviously newsworthy aspect of the will.
Senator Claire Chandler is a Liberal Party member of the Australian Parliament. Some recent experiences she’s had send a very serious warning about the likely outcomes of the Scottish Government’s wildly unpopular new Hate Crime Bill. She’s graciously allowed us to publish this column she wrote on the subject.
Early this month I received a letter from Tasmania’s Anti-Discrimination Commissioner directing me to attend a compulsory “conciliation” conference with somebody offended by my comments about the need to protect women’s sport and women’s toilets and changerooms. You can watch them here:
Ironically, the complaint against me was about an opinion article I wrote about free speech. You can read it here and make up your own mind whether bureaucrats at the Anti-Discrimination Commission should be able to censor any Australian citizens for this kind of public policy discussion.
Following up this morning’s article, we’ve been trawling through the Publications/FOI section of the Scottish Government website to see which other articles might be being hidden from its search function. We found quite a few, and you’re never going to guess what the common factor in all of them is.
We’ve given you a wee clue with that picture, though.
As a right-of-centre English conservative, there are Scottish National Party concepts I haven’t so far been able to comprehend. Perhaps it’s because I don’t follow Nicola Sturgeon and Ian Blackford. Should I keep an eye on what The Scotsman is saying?
SNP leaders talk in the same sentence of a “free” and “independent” Scotland having a future as a member of the EU. My grasp of those words is not theirs. Distinguished lawyers – be they Remainers, Leavers or Don’t-Care-Just-Pay-My-Billsers – all agree that a series of European Court of Justice decisions have established the unqualified supremacy of European Union laws – disguised as “Regulations and Directives” – over the national laws of EU states.
Last night on social media a few people raised a semi-interested eyebrow at Scotland On Sunday’s front page, and wondered if the suspiciously unattributed lead story might be something balanced and worthwhile, or if it’d be by Dani Garavelli again.
Whichever side you’re on, it’s simply observably true that the Scottish Government is doing everything in its power to obstruct, delay and derail the Parliamentary inquiry into its ruinously botched investigation of false allegations against Alex Salmond.
Any investigative journalist attempting to get to the bottom of the subject and find out what really happened is met with a wall of secrecy and misinformation while trying to navigate their way through the publicly-available information, and just to give you some idea of what it’s like, we’d like to offer you one tiny but typical example.
Readers may recall that this site is engaged in an ongoing attempt to clarify why the Scottish justice system is choosing to selectively only pursue those supportive of Alex Salmond for contempt of court with regard to his trial, while conspicuously turning a blind eye to those in the media who have committed exactly the same crime but are hostile to Mr Salmond and therefore apparently immune from prosecution.
During that investigation we received a reply from Police Scotland last month stating that contempt of court is in fact not a criminal offence in Scots law (although you can be tried and imprisoned for it), and so is nothing to do with them, and that they only act in relation to contempt when instructed by the courts or the Crown Office.
So naturally we asked them if they had been so instructed.
Forgive us for not joining in the pointless and unusually muted hoopla about the latest indyref anniversary (which for the first time we can recall, nobody has bothered to mark by commissioning an opinion poll).
We’re still thinking about the SNP’s treatment of the man who was chiefly responsible for securing the only independence referendum Scotland has ever had.
And of its utter abysmal failure for more than half a decade to come up with anything even remotely approaching a credible plan to get a second one.
Our previous offer remains open: we’ll take any bet of any size from anyone against the proposition “Boris Johnson will never grant Nicola Sturgeon a Section 30 order in the absence of some sort of court judgement legally compelling him to”.
We’ve had no takers yet from the Sturgeon faithful. We don’t expect any.
Every day that passes from now until the current SNP leadership is removed is another one wasted to add to the 2,191 that have been wasted from 19 September 2014 until today, achieving nothing. Until that tally ends we have nothing to celebrate.
Over the last year or so, this site’s commentary on matters surrounding the attempted imprisonment of Alex Salmond over false allegations of sexual abuse has attracted a considerable amount of ire from a section of the readership, demanding “proof” of the involvement of the current First Minister.
Such proof has been impossible to provide for legal reasons. But it’s always been the case that the truth could only be suppressed for so long, and events in recent days have brought the first chinks of light through the wall of smoke and mirrors the Scottish Government has been attempting to surround the matter with.
So in our very lightest and softest shoes, let’s tiptoe through what is both a labyrinth and a minefield and see if we can make some of it a little easier to understand.
“Settling up, not settling down” was the rhetoric, as Westminster reconvened and the new SNP group headed south. Fine words and said no doubt sincerely. But it’s been said by every SNP generation that’s gone there, though none possessed the authority or faced the threats to Scottish democracy as now.
But what has happened since? As ever fine speeches given and incisive questioning of Ministers made, but to what effect?
The first major debate was the Fisheries Bill. A sore point in Scotland where a Tory government sold out our fishing industry and entire communities along with it decades ago, when negotiating EEC entry terms. Now, two generations on, as another Tory administration seeks to implement Brexit, that industry and those communities face betrayal yet again.
Cynicus on Yelling at the tide: “Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh says: ‘Josephine Bartosch commented that the cyber-attack has “stripped away the chintzy veil of victimhood that has long…” Jan 23, 02:38
Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on Yelling at the tide: “« Marx’s secularisation of the messianic seems to me to be accurate and precise, up to this point. But can…” Jan 23, 01:07
Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on Yelling at the tide: “Thanks TURABDIN. Good SPECTATOR article by MARY WAKEFIELD. “And look at Professor Gordon: they’re right to be scared. It’s not…” Jan 23, 00:09
Dave G on Yelling at the tide: “@Alf Baird 5:05pm Have you considered seeking professional help?” Jan 22, 22:55
Alasdair Roy on Yelling at the tide: “These positions as President of the Employment Tribunal (Scotland) are dangerous, especially given the backgrounds of these women. They carry…” Jan 22, 21:52
Alf Baird on Yelling at the tide: ““Which is precisely why there is no few dozen Scots prepared to organise themselves for Indy.” Och aye thar is:…” Jan 22, 20:34
Hatey McHateface on Yelling at the tide: “He also said a few pertinent things about the prognosis for small countries now that it’s finally becoming clear to…” Jan 22, 19:42
Hatey McHateface on Yelling at the tide: “What I know, Alf, is that our inalienable right to self determination needs but a few dozen of us to…” Jan 22, 19:32
Hatey McHateface on Yelling at the tide: “Aye, ah bet it’s an English cheese tae. Cheddar or Stilton. Haud oan though. Fit nationality were they Fanny and…” Jan 22, 19:23
sam on Yelling at the tide: “Link https://murrayblackburnmackenzie.org/2025/12/12/statement-on-the-closure-of-our-petition-pe1876-on-recording-sex-accurately-in-cases-of-rape/ “We would like to thank Tess White MSP, Carol Mochan MSP, Michelle Thomson MSP, Ruth Maguire MSP, Rachael…” Jan 22, 17:32
sam on Yelling at the tide: “From MBM Policy on 12/12 /2025 “Statement On Wednesday 10 December the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee closed our…” Jan 22, 17:29
Alf Baird on Yelling at the tide: “What we do know is that current “Diversity” policy totally ignores and is definitely not about prioritising the rights or…” Jan 22, 17:05
Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on Yelling at the tide: “TRANS ACTIVISTS HACK FREE SPEECH GROUP IN IDEOLOGICALLY DRIVEN ATTACK A free speech organisation has been hacked by a trans…” Jan 22, 16:07
David Rodgers on Yelling at the tide: “Fair points but I will take independence first – woke or no woke.” Jan 22, 16:03
Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on Yelling at the tide: “HEALTH SEC CHALLENGED OVER ‘IDEOLOGICALLY DRIVEN’ PUBERTY BLOCKER TRIAL ******* QUOTE: “… It is important to reiterate that gender incongruence…” Jan 22, 15:50
Michael McCoy on Yelling at the tide: “Brilliant! Unbelievable that this is necessary but thank god, someone is prepared to hold these chancers to account. Well done…” Jan 22, 14:38
Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on Yelling at the tide: ““Cha ro-innleachd cianalas.”” Jan 22, 14:10
sam on Yelling at the tide: “From the For women Scotland website. “Ahead of the judicial review of the Scottish Prison Service Policy for the Management…” Jan 22, 14:01
sam on Yelling at the tide: “Copy of letter sent on 6/1/2026 by For Women Scotland to John Swinney. Dear Mr Swinney, Thank you for your…” Jan 22, 13:52
James Cheyne on Yelling at the tide: “Sam, The Scottish government is under the legislation of the Great Britain parliament. Scotland Act, Scotland does not have a…” Jan 22, 13:15
James Cheyne on Yelling at the tide: “The parliament of Great Britain and the UK parliament having made no such international treaty with Scotlands 1707 parliament, Having…” Jan 22, 13:01
James Cheyne on Yelling at the tide: “North Code, A mythical and magical fantasy world of the parliament of England to be precise.” Jan 22, 12:36
sam on Yelling at the tide: “This is from the blog at Legal Feminist, Naomi Cunningham writing under the title “Three Questions”. “The second question arises…” Jan 22, 12:33
James Cheyne on Yelling at the tide: “Alf Baird . Scotland made a treaty of union with England 1707. Scotland did ( not ) make a treaty…” Jan 22, 12:28
James Cheyne on Yelling at the tide: “Alf Baird. Scotland does not hold nor ever has done a 1707 Treaty of Union with the parliament of Great…” Jan 22, 12:01
James Cheyne on Yelling at the tide: “Scots law. The laws that were to “remain the same as before the union” in the treaty of union. NOT…” Jan 22, 11:41
Alf Baird on Yelling at the tide: ““A magical tale set in a fantasy world” Indeed so, Northcode. Which follows on from the fantasy of a mythical…” Jan 22, 11:09
Northcode on Yelling at the tide: “Whit an erse am !… I only went and postit my laist comment up oan the wrang threed. Here it…” Jan 22, 09:40
Hatey McHateface on The Secondhand Amendment: “£20 says it can be trusted to inspire millions of Scots to vote for it in May.” Jan 22, 09:37
