ON the BBC’s Politics Live on Tuesday, SNP MP Stewart Hosie quoted a report that appeared in The Guardian about six months ago in which it was reported that the Labour Party had lost 91,000 members and was “in the red” to the tune of £4.8 million, before asking Labour MP Liz Kendall what went so wrong with its membership and why Sir Keir Starmer was so poor at managing the party’s finances and keeping members.
Ms Kendall declined to answer the questions and Jo Coburn, the sometimes highly interrogative host, did not pose a single follow-up question.
Mr Hosie then asked Tory MP Siobhan Baillie what the £3.5m noted by Open Democracy in the last year as “unaccounted for” in the 2019 election campaign by the Conservative Party had been spent on, but Ms Baillie also declined to answer and again Jo Coburn (who, when she was not interrupting him, was always prepared with a follow-up question for Mr Hosie) did not pose a single follow-up question.
READ MORE: Lord Frost blasted for saying it's time to reverse Scotland's devolution
A spokesperson for the Electoral Commission said of the funds which were not accounted for: “The Commission reviewed the spending return delivered by the Conservative Party following the 2019 UK general parliamentary election, and is aware that not all required invoices were provided. Having reviewed the compliance of the return in the whole, we decided that it was not proportionate to take enforcement action in relation to those missing invoices.”
It seems evident from Mr Hosie’s unanswered questions that there are blatant double standards in the investigative reporting of UK political party memberships and finances, with the BBC seemingly playing a leading role in the huge disparity of media attention apparently driven by the SNP’s political opponents. This does not excuse any incorrect use of party donations but it raises significant questions as to why the same standards of supposedly impartial journalism, and public accountability, are not being applied to all political parties in the UK, and why the spending of several hundred thousand pounds of member donations not identified as assets is of seemingly more interest to authorities and reporters than tens of billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money lost to gross incompetence, corrupt processes and fraud.
READ MORE: Scottish Tories slam David Frost for attack on devolution
Was it simply coincidence that the arrest of the SNP CEO and the alarming police-intensive search of his house took place just after Humza Yousaf had been elected as First Minister? Was it simply coincidence that the arrest of the SNP treasurer took place on the morning when the new First Minister was scheduled to make a statement to the Scottish Parliament on his vision and the future policy agenda of his Scottish Government? While politics is not short of speculative conspiracy theories, the police actions around the spending of funds raised by the SNP for a new independence campaign could seemingly not have been better orchestrated to negatively impact on the SNP and its new leader Humza Yousaf, whom has had the focus on his new leadership and now the introduction of his policy agenda severely diverted with more than a little help from those in the mainstream media eager to assist the anti-SNP strategies of both the blue and the red Tories.
Stan Grodynski
Longniddry, East Lothian
I WAS disappointed to see the bottle return scheme has been delayed. As a volunteer litter collector on a half-mile rural road I was hoping to find less litter when the scheme went ahead. The vast majority of discarded litter is bottles and cans. Maybe the people who throw these items out of their cars are never going to recycle, but I live in hope.
Ann McGinnis
Girvan
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