IF you wanted a clearer example of the sense of entitlement of the Labour party in Scotland, you won't find one better than Anas Sarwar, who yesterday complained about the absolute temerity of the SNP in opposing the Labour party in Scotland.
Sarwar actually had the unmitigated gall to describe another party pointing out the shortcomings and hypocrisy of Keir Starmer's centre right Labour party as "dirty tricks".
It appears that in Sarwar's eyes, the aim of the SNP and other independence supporting parties in Scotland ought to be to campaign to get his boss Starmer into Downing Street.
Does Sarwar understand how democracy actually works?
Given this latest statement and his persistent refusal to accept that in 2021 the people of Scotland elected a Scottish Parliament with its largest ever pro-independence majority because they wanted another independence referendum, the answer to that question would appear to be no.
For Sarwar, voting and campaigning in elections are only legitimate when they result in a victory for the Labour party.
Sarwar repeated his nonsensical and self-serving claim that in opposing the Labour party, the SNP wants a Conservative victory.
Let's set this straight. I would say once and for all, but Sarwar will continue to repeat his lie, amplified by the Scottish media.
The SNP, other pro-independence parties, and those on the left politically do not oppose Starmer's Labour party because we are on the side of the Tories. We do so because Starmer's Labour party is on the side of the Tories.
There is abundant evidence for that political truth:
- Starmer's repeated adoption of right-wing policies from Brexit to the 'offshoring' of asylum claims
- The mutual support that Labour and the Tories give one another in order to deny the people of Scotland another independence referendum, irrespective of what the Scottish electorate chooses through the ballot box
- The cosy relationship between Labour and the Conservatives in local authorities across Scotland
- Labour's refusal to undo many of the most pernicious policies of this Conservative government
The House of Commons has only just returned following the Christmas and New Year holidays and already there's yet another example of Labour aping the Conservatives in its disdain for the struggles of ordinary households.
Yesterday, David Linden, the SNP MP for Glasgow East, secured a Commons debate on the impact of the cost of living crisis in Scotland.
The debate took place in Westminster Hall after 4pm yesterday, and not a single Labour MP could be bothered to attend. Not one.
READ MORE: MP David Linden reacts after Labour snub cost of living debate
And Labour wants the people of Scotland to believe that it cares about them.
This is not the first time Labour have dodged a debate on the cost of living. This newspaper reported in May last year how not a single backbench Labour MP put themselves forward to speak in a debate on the cost of living.
So much for the promises of Michael Shanks (above) that he'd stand up for the people of Rutherglen and Hamilton West.
In his short time in the Commons, all that Shanks has stood up for so far is the advancement of his own career. During the by-election campaign which saw him elected, Shanks had insisted that Anas Sarwar would be his boss and he would oppose Starmer on key issues.
However, since being elected he has meekly fallen into line behind Starmer and was quickly elevated to Labour's frontbench, taking on a role as a shadow Scotland Office minister.
Shanks can't be bothered to appear at a debate on the cost of living, he won't oppose Starmer on policies like the heinous two child benefit cap, but he has made his priorities clear by accepting an invitation to speak at an even organised by the frothing British nationalist campaign group Scotland in Union.
An opinion poll published earlier this week has shown that for the first time support for the monarchy in the UK has fallen below 50%.
The poll, carried out by polling company Savanta, found that support for the monarchy is rapidly falling under King Charles. Support for the monarchy is particularly low amongst people under the age of 55., fewer than half in all age groups under the age of 55 prefer the royals to an elected head of state.
When asked if they would prefer the monarchy or an elected head of state – just 48% said they would prefer the royals. Meanwhile a third (32%) said they would like an elected head of state, with a large swathe of "don't knows."
READ MORE: Humza Yousaf: Keir Starmer does not need Scotland to win election
For many years Scots have displayed far less enthusiasm for the antics of the Windsors and their flummery than people in other parts of the UK.
Large royal events like the jubilee and the coronation were met in Scotland with a resounding "Meh".
Digging into the subsamples of this new poll we find that just 41% of people in Scotland want a monarch as head of state, with the same percentage preferring an elected head of state.
A new law is to be introduced to exonerate sub post masters wrongly convicted as a result of the Horizon Post Office scandal, which has been described as the greatest miscarriage of justice in British history.
Hundreds were prosecuted for fraud and false accounting as a result of a faulty computer system. Even after issues with the Horizon software system came to light, the management of the Post Office covered up the problems and continued to prosecute sub postmasters.
READ MORE: SNP urge Ed Davey to hand back knighthood over Post Office scandal
The Post Office prosecuted more than 900 branch owner-operators who were wrongly accused of taking money from their businesses between 1999 and 2015, based on incorrect information from the faulty Horizon accounting software, installed by Fujitsu.
Although the Post Office has finally conceded that it is at fault, so far only 142 appeal case reviews have been completed, with 93 of these resulting in convictions being overturned.
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has said the government will introduce primary legislation to ensure those convicted are swiftly exonerated. He also announced an extra £75,000 compensation payment for victims.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel