WHEN some of the richest people in the country are pouring money into political parties it should concern us all.
They aren’t doing it because they have suddenly developed a new sense of civic duty. It is because they are doing very well from a system that is broken beyond repair and they want to continue doing so.
The last few years have been really tough for people and families all over our country, but the super-rich have seen their incomes soaring. The richest 10% of people hold 43% of all wealth in this country, and that chasm is growing.
The Tory Party have long been a vehicle for the vested interests and those that benefit from a deeply unequal status quo, but they are far from the only ones winning millionaire approval.
READ MORE: I interviewed Alba, Greens and the SNP – here's what I learned
This week we saw billionaire John Caudwell telling the BBC that he had switched his allegiance from the Tories to Labour in part because Keir Starmer had removed the radicalism and, in his words, “taken all the left out of the Labour Party”.
Likewise, we have seen really concerning revelations from researchers at DeSmog of the extent to which the anti-net-zero Reform Party is dependent on donations and funding from those with links to the fossil fuel industry.
Is this really the kind of politics we want? I would much rather we had a system where our parties worked to reflect the views of their members, supporters and communities rather than a small number of extremely wealthy people.
I want our democracy to be protected from the self-interest and influence of the super-rich rather than being dependent on it.
It is these kinds of issues that have been on my mind over the last few weeks and particularly in the lead-up to yesterday’s launch of the Scottish Greens election manifesto.
It’s been a really big undertaking for our party, and one I’m very proud of. It is our members who have led on policy development, selecting candidates and funding our campaign.
We know that we can’t rely on the same levels of media coverage or advertising as some of the bigger parties, so we have to make every donation and every penny count.
There’s no denying that it can be really difficult. But we don’t, and would never want to, rely on the generosity or self-interest of big business or billionaire backers.
Elections are meant to be about debating big ideas, but, if anything, this one has emphasised how narrow and limited the Westminster consensus really is.
It’s not like there is any shortage of big issues for us to be concerned about. Yet, when Rishi Sunak (below) and Starmer are debating with one another it feels like they are happy to tweak at the edges and keep things the same in order to avoid looking at the big picture.
From upholding a Brexit that they once opposed and that they know has had a catastrophic impact on jobs and wellbeing to promising to maintain the 300-million barrel Rosebank oil field and the abhorrent two-child benefit cap, Labour are barely even pretending to offer any serious change.
If the polls are to be believed, we could soon see Starmer entering Downing Street with a massive majority and no plans to do anything of substance.
Is that really what he got into politics to do? Scotland deserves better than that.
We also deserve a far better and more honest debate and the consequences of business as usual.
We all know that our climate is in peril and we are on the verge of an environmental breakdown, but the other parties all seem to be arguing about which oil fields they might get away with greenlighting rather than how we can build a green economy.
Earlier this month the UN secretary-general warned that “the battle to limit temperature rise to 1.5 degrees will be won or lost in the 2020s.”
READ MORE: The key points from the launch of Scottish Greens' manifesto
That means it will be won and lost here in the UK by the next government, yet you would never know that from the way they talk about it.
Even with the alarm bells ringing louder than ever, neither party is being remotely honest about the scale of change that we need or the costs of delivering it.
They have tied themselves in knots arguing for increased spending in a whole range of areas, but are refusing to say how it would be funded. Not even the SNP have been prepared to back modest calls for extra wealth taxes on polluters and the super-rich.
That’s why, yesterday, I was so proud to launch the Scottish Green manifesto. With 54 pages of bold and ambitious policies, it is a strong and credible plan for a different and better way of doing politics.
From our radical and vital £28 billion green investment plan to our call to halt handouts to fossil fuel companies and take our national grid into public ownership, this is a vision for people and planet and, crucially, there isn’t a single fingerprint from vested interests or big business donors anywhere near it.
We are at a historic crossroads for our economy and our planet. This is not a time for political cowardice. It is a time for transformation and a time to send shockwaves through our politics.
That’s what Scotland needs and is what I hope we will vote for in record numbers on July 4.
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