ALBA’s leading lights: Kenny MacAskill MP, Alex Salmond, leader, Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh
The Alba Party has launched its election manifesto, with pledges on independence, saving the Grangemouth refinery and gender self-identity. ALBA is standing 19 candidates in the election and has endorsed independent MP, (former SNP) Angus B. MacNeil in the Na h-Eileanan an Iar (Western Isles) constituency.
The former First Minister’s party said in its manifesto “ALBA are the only party putting independence on the ballot paper and the only party with a strategy to deliver independence”. That strategy would involve using the 2024 general election as “impetus” for pro-independence parties to use the 2026 Holyrood election as a vote on independence.
ALBA says if a simple majority on the list vote was returned for pro-independence parties it would represent a popular mandate for independence. If Westminster refused to implement that mandate, the manifesto says, “it will be for the Scottish Parliament to mobilise domestic and international pressure to bend Westminster to the will of the Scottsh people“.
Salmond said: “On July 4 Scotland goes to the polls in a UK General Election – the ALBA Party believe that every single national election should be used to seek a mandate to begin negotiations for Independence. “That means the election itself should provide the popular mandate for Independence.
“Scotland stands at a pivotal moment in its history. For too long Westminster governments have been allowed to veto the expressed democratic wishes of Scots. Household incomes are under unprecedented financial pressure as families face a cost of living crisis which is squeezing household budgets to breaking point. Eight separate national elections have come and gone since the referendum of 2014, including two mandates at Holyrood and three Westminster elections, all with an Independence majority. But little or no action has been taken to move the dial forward on Independence. We have the opportunity at this Election to make our votes count for independence.”
ALBA also made several pledges not related to the constitutional question. Here are a seletion:
1: Fight to save the Grangemouth refinery, which has been earmarked for closure by owner Petroineos.
2: ALBA supports new oil and gas licences as long as they are carbon neutral, which it says could be secured by investment in carbon capture technology.
3: The document outlines proposals to increase staffing in the NHS.
4: Provide annual £500 payment to households on council tax reduction, at a cost of £250 million.
5: Increasing the Scottish Child Payment – controlled by the Scottish Government – to £40 per week.
6: Standing up for women and children, by “clarity in law – a woman is an adult human female”.
7: Implementation of the Cass Review, and “high-quality, evidence-based care for children and youth”.
8: Opposition to gender self-ID and “any attempt to conflate gender identity with sex-based rights”.
9: Support singe-sex spaces and sex-based rights at all levels.
10: Call for the renewal of Trident to be scrapped, and implement a nuclear free Scotland.
Here is the link to the fill manifesto: https://albaparty.org/alba_party_manifesto_2024
********************************************************
Grouse Beater 
I have voted Alba this time round. However, I can’t guarantee that I will do so in the future – my real preference would be for the ISP. My reasoning on this is simple Alba are not aligned with Salvo, Sara Salyers, and the Claim of Right based on the principle that the people of Scotland are sovereign over politicians.
Alex Salmond was instrumental in crushing the move to have the Sovereignty of the People included in Alba’s policies. This means that Salmond (along with others) is no democrat at heart and sees a future independent Scotland political set up such that, as exists now between Scotland and Westminster, politicians in the Scottish parliament have sovereignty over the people of Scotland. In other words more of the same — meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
Avoiding the notion of Sovereignty of the People over politicians is at the root of why Salmond has been making noises of about a Republic of Scotland with a new post: a President of Scotland. A stitch-up to avoid enacting a truly representative Assembly of the People that would oversee and direct what the politicians do. Again, a demonstration that Salmond and Alba are no democrats at hearts. All they want to offer is a new post for some political grandee ‘chum’ to lord it over the peoples of Scotland and pretend this is a victory for democracy.
Alba really need to get in alignment with Salvo and Direct Democracy, as the ISP have already done. Without that we might gain an independence not worth having, and thus far that looks like what Alba have in store for us all.
For an eloquent summary of much of this see: Going Public And Why? Sara Salyers Resigns From Alba
I can’t see how anybody let alone Salmond can deny Scots are sovereign, considering it is written in stone, and he himself has quoted it in discussion and debate.
I am not fully aware of day-to-day ALBA detail, but understand he disputes SALVO’s way forward, though not the constituent elements, and if I am correct, his objection may have something to do with procedure, national and international.
I have written about the process in an edition of my Essays trilogy and have no qualms about quoting from SALVO’s work in any formal document.
That aside, the UN pays attention to protests from official leaders of elected groups, usually those in colonial administration trying to get out of their oppression. And we need another country to endorse our approach to the UN (Ireland?) suggesting SALVO may be an informed group to augment such a move, to offer input, but not to lead a delegation.
Speaking for myself, I’d never discount any individual or group who had taken time to study our colonial reality, (unlike the SNP in toto) and knew how to communicate the main elements to the electorate.
It is always disappointing when differing views clash over a single point, but I have never known a UK party not to have a flaw in their make-up – the original two parties that conjoined to create the SNP had the ever troublesome Hugh MacDiarmid in its midst ready to cause dissent at the drop of a pipe cleaner and did, and got ejected, as did Salmond in more recent times. My view is, if a party embodies most of what you feel good for the majority, vote for it, which you have done.
Spoiling ballot papers is a negative but a personal choice, claims for its efficacy highly debateable. You have done the right thing, held tight to the democratic process and not attacked it. As it is, the mood on the streets indicates a low turnout, with SNP about to be punished for their lethargy and craven actions.
Incidentally, Ireland has a president, the indomitable and eloquent Michael D. Higgins, his job to host mostly important ceremonial occasions. I believe ALBA’s idea is based on the Irish model. Had Salmond not been viciously besmirched by unionist sympathisers, he may well have been our president by now.
Grouse Beater said: “You have done the right thing, held tight to the democratic process and not attacked it.”
I think that gets to the nub of it. As things stand there really isn’t much by way of democracy in process beyond having an election at all. For Westminster and for Holyrood too the current process is that the people are sovereign for the one day that it takes to elect a government. Once that day is over a parliament and its members MPs, MSPs suddenly become sovereign over the people with no input from the people by way of oversight, influence and control of what parliament does. We end up with nothing remotely resembling Sovereignty of the People — just Parliamentary Sovereignty: the people are totally cut out of the equation, the politicians go back to doing as they please and the people be damned (as happens now both at Westminster and Holyrood).
All my current reading of Alba and Alex Salmond points to a situation in which Sovereignty of the People is paid lip-service for one day — and then it vanishes into the mist again to only be resurrected by the politicians (with much trumpeting) at the point of a new election. I would say that situation isn’t one that I would favour for an independent Scotland. It’s a con. The precise same con that we endure from Westminster.
For Sovereignty of the People to have any kind of a meaning at all it needs to be an active living breathing component of governance. Presidents come nowhere near cutting the ice in that regard.
This is brilliantly summarised by Sara Salyers in this video and it makes a huge amount of sense: Sara Salyers Speech at Alba Conference
See a recent guest post on my blog from Henry Ferguson about the state of popular sovereignty in Scotland: https://dearscotland.substack.com/p/direct-democracy-in-scotland-an-update
Political Parties cannot use the route that Salvo / Liberation Scotland are taking and we are already making our international connections. If they try it they will soon find out that only a ‘Liberation Movement’ can go down this road.
Pleased to see that many groups / parties originally opposed to Salvo are using the language at least. However, I have no faith ANY political party being able to rid us of an outdated and unwanted joint parliament. Any of them that plans their route going anywhere close to Westminster are just conning the people into believing that somehow, sometime, someone at that foreign body will grant them another opportunity to leave that joint parliament.
Alex Salmond, Nicola Sturgeon, Humza Yousaf, Stephen Flynn, Ian Blackford and many others have sworn to ‘assist and defend’ the so-called ‘king’ and his parliaments at both Westminster and at Holyrood. The height of hypocrisy to then lead parties supposedly in favour of independence.
Politicians have had more than enough opportunities, it is now long past the time for the people of Scotland to do the job themselves. If the parties want to cling on to our coat-tails sobeit.
Independence would be a personal and financial disaster for SNP MPs or any others elected to sit on the green benches. As Peter Cramond mentioned, why would we gain our independence only to create a clone of the Westminster parliament? ‘Parliamentary Democracy’ is an oxymoron if there ever was one!
Salmond, Swinney et al are scared stiff of the sovereignty of the people of Scotland, because true sovereignty provides the people with a wee bit more power than allowing them a vote every 5 years. I have spoken at length to people from most parts of Scotland about Direct Democracy over the past 18 months and I have only heard any real opposition 3 times (apart from politicians of course). 2 of those changed their mind when I asked them why they would not support it and both gave a similar reply – ‘well the politicians wouldn’t let the people do it would they?” When I burst out laughing they said – “Oh I see what you mean”.
ALBA advocates a republic.
As Salmond states in many an interview, in 2013-14, the SNP advocated keeping the monarchy when affection for Queen Elizabeth II was at its height. Why endanger your indie credentials by causing a sand storm with a policy of overthrowing the monarchy?
Things are different now.
‘Alba advocates a republic’ – while that is true, their Leader swore the Oath of a Privy Councillor, as did all of those mentioned previously. Part of the Oath taken states ‘You will to your uttermost bear Faith and Allegiance to the
Queen’s (King’s) Majesty; and will assist and defend all civil and temporal
Jurisdictions, Pre-eminences, and Authorities, granted to Her Majesty
and annexed to the Crown by Acts of Parliament, or otherwise, against
all Foreign Princes, Persons, Prelates, States, or Potentates. And
generally in all things you will do as a faithful and true Servant ought to
do to Her Majesty.
Is it not just a wee bit hypocritical to be Leader of a party claiming to support independence from the Queen’s (King’s) Parliament and then swearing to ‘assist and defend’ it? Claiming he wants a ‘republic’ but then swears to be ‘a faithful and true Servant (note the capital letter) to Her (His) Majesty!
As you mention, things are very different now as we have a changed political landscape as far as independence is concerned. SNP has, for the most part, left the battlefield and largely joined the enemy by acting as their colonial administrator. Alba is not quite sure where it wants to be. It wants independence but still wants to defer to Westminster and continue with Parliamentary Sovereignty post-independence.
The people are now beginning to realise that we do not need to be stuck with the same feudal system that Westminster is proud to tell us goes back to the Magna Carta.
Only just over a week to go and we will see what the electorate thinks about politicians and their parties. Yes, the SNP will probably lose quite heavily but there may still be those who hold on to hope that they will change direction. They may also benefit from a number who have been voting for independence but don’t really get involved and it’s the only party with which they are familiar. They are also benefiting from the fact that they are still the 3rd largest party at Westminster and therefore receiving invitations by the media that are not given to other parties.
I am told that SNP canvassers are in the main invisible and Alba still does not have the numbers to make a real difference. ISP has the policies and is gaining credence daily but they too will have to await the 2026 Holyrood election.
That state of SNP invisibility extended to the Bannockburn Rally last Saturday where I saw only one SNP symbol all day. That is almost unbelievable when compared to a decade ago. What happened to the electoral machine that other parties envied and feared?
As far as the monarchy is concerned, they don’t exist in Scotland but we will still have ‘Royal Week’ next week when Charles Windsor and his wife, deign to pay us a visit.
Speaking of which, I see that the SNP set up an ‘action group’ to consider changes to the way marches and processions are conducted. ‘“The Scottish government established the action group to ensure that processions are conducted safely and peacefully across the country.’ That all sounds very sensible and the 6 points they make appear quite reasonable at face value. However, experience has shown that it is the implementation that matters and the SNP doesn’t have a great record as far as free speech or peaceful demonstrations are concerned.
You should know by now not to post fatalist defeatism on this site. It is always rejected. No one who wants liberty thinks swearing fealty to a monarch is a good thing. Greenland felt the same to Demark, but they also felt Denmark was not an oppressor state “unlike the English”.
Almost all you’ve written is exactly that, plus an unfortunate tinge of defaming to remove authority of the personality and exchange it for doubt.
The party leader, Salmond, who secured a referendum to remove Scotland from the corrupt Union, was the same Salmond who earlier did as all politicians do, swear allegiance. Look at it as our form of infiltration.
I cannot speak for SNP, but any indie candidate is better than a Unionist hoping to shut down our Parliament.
How has a politician to get into government without paying the prescribed fee at the door? Once in, the landscape is theirs to alter for the better. Why add a ball and chain to their leg and shout ‘forward!’?
Grousebeater , if you were as fit as a flea I would insist you stand as a politician , most certainly a winner!
What have I said now to anger you that you so condemn me to a hell hole? 🙂 But thank you for the accolade.
Actually, Duncanio, an MSP role would do me fine, either with a free hand to move education into the modern age, and a budget to match, or Minister for the Arts. However, I will post my manifesto for the arts which covers some aspects of education.
Bravo!