top of page
Search
denisenexus

Guest Post by Gordon Millar (Part 2) - Don't Shoot The Messenger

Updated: Sep 22



(Editorial note from Denise Findlay: I am publishing this guest post by ALBA member Gordon Millar.   Any objections Alba may have to the contents are a matter for Gordon not a matter for me and should not be addressed to me.  Many thanks.)


So, What Exactly Did I Do?


Over the last few weeks on X, I've been called a disreputable, vindictive, jerk, publishing negative crap as part of the endless trashing of pro-independence parties. I've also been told that I'm aggrieved that people don't realise how much I think I have to offer, that Scottish politics is none of my business, that I'm a disrupter, and that I need to step back into “reality”.

 

So, what have I done to generate this tirade? Poured a bucket of whitewash over Aberdeen's Robert The Bruce statue? Superglued a large Union flag to the side of the Holyrood parliament building.? Written a paean of praise to Nigel Farage and joined Reform?

 

Well, no. Nothing so dramatic. What I actually did was to analyse a set of accounts.

 

Unfortunately, they were the accounts of the Alba party and I wasn't too impressed. But, rather naively, I assumed that, if people didn't agree with my conclusions, they would challenge the figures and my interpretations. But the figures were completely ignored and what actually happened was a combination of Shoot-the-Messenger and Wheesht-for-Alba.

 

This strikes me as a very unhealthy reaction, particularly as we've been there before with the SNP. Going along with Wheesht-for-Indy and believing in Nicola's Secret Plan has had disastrous consequences for the independence movement, some of which are still playing out – the results for the SNP, and any other pro-independence party (the Greens are not a pro-independence party) in the 2026 Holyrood elections are effectively out of their hands and depend on the public's reaction to what the SNP must hope will become an increasingly unpopular Labour government.

 

But, Do I have The Right To Comment?


For background, I began my career in what was then the Inland Revenue and qualified as a District Inspector before moving to, firstly, Arthur Andersen and then Ernst & Young as a Senior Manager. From 1996 I have been self-employed as the proprietor of a typical suburban tax and accountancy practice. So while I won't claim that my interpretation is always going to be correct, I think that I can say that I do know my way round a set of accounts.

 

As regards independence, I was a member of the SNP's London Branch, until 2021, when I joined Alba. I am still a member of Alba, although that may change in the near future!

 

So, yes, I think that I have the knowledge and the right, as a member, to question the Alba party accounts, and I think that I also have a right to have my concerns properly addressed.

 

Especially as taken with recent events, the reaction to the original article has increased my concerns over Alba's future.

 

My Original Conclusions


Briefly, my main points of concern were as follows.

 

Income was not only down by £60k from the previous year but, in particular, donations had almost dried up (£134k down to £34k) and conference income halved from £16k to £8k. These changes seemed to suggest a  decline in enthusiasm both within and outwith the party.

 

Another cause for concern was that, at £124k, the policy development grant was about 30% of the total income, but this won't be available in the future as the party no longer has any MPs (and this grant may be subject to clawbacks).

 

Also, Alba's membership was static and the party was not breaking through in the polls. In these circumstances, there was no reason to assume that donations, membership fees, and conference/marketing income would recover to any significant extent.

 

Therefore, without positive action to build the brand, it was very difficult to see where the funds were going to come from to get through 2024 and 2025, let alone compete seriously in the 2026 Holyrood election.

 

Alba Apologists and Ideologues


But, as I said,  the figures and conclusions were completely ignored in favour of Shoot-the-Messenger and Wheesht-for-Alba.

 

Such as this example from one of the more zealous Alba members:

 

Tweet from an ALBA member

"A disreputable attempt to devalue an indie party. As for 'blind faith in the leader', are you claiming to read people's minds?"

@TheMcGreig (Me)

"I don't think that's particularly fair. Interpreting accounts is my day job & I explain my concerns in some detail. My comments re wishful thinking etc come from the atmosphere of the Glasgow & Lochgelly conferences, where I was a delegate. Others may have a different take-away."

Tweet from an ALBA member

"It's vindictive. Just two days after Prof Curtice gave the party a boost, thousands of members counting on ALBA to give the a voice, and you publish negative crap? What do you hope to achieve? Thousands of folk sending donations?"

 

What's concerning about this is the absolute refusal, even after a polite and explanatory reply, to engage with what I said but to stick to Wheesht-for-Alba. If someone thinks that I'm wrong then they should be able to explain why. And, if I'm right, then what is gained by pretending that everything's OK and that, if I had only kept quiet, everything would magically remain OK. This is the thinking of a religious cult, not a political party.

 

And I also get to join the Stuart Campbell club, where people who know nothing about you tell you that your address prohibits you from commenting or having an opinion:

 

Another tweet stated:

"You live in London It's got FA to do with you if you don't have a vote.

I tell you what I suspect In the week it was stated Alba could win 4 MSP seats you have Londoners trying to cast aspersions


Don't like how the party's run, then resign And why is the choice always to go along with the leadership or leave? What happened to being “member led”? Putting Nicola Sturgeon on an untouchable pedestal turned out to be a disaster – replacing her with Alex Salmond won't make things better."

 

Alba's Official Response (1) – Shoot the Messenger


But what about Alba itself? Well, the party seems to have restricted its comments to the members' weekly email which, in theory would be an ideal place to discuss the concerns raised in private. Sadly, however, they have gone for a mixture of shoot-the-messenger, wishful thinking and denial, none of which alleviates the concerns generated by the accounts and, if anything, increases my conviction that the party has potentially serious financial problems.

 

The sections in blue italics are direct quotes from Tasmina Ahmed Sheikh, the Party Chair.

 

“Inevitably, all signs of success from ALBA will be met by a handful of ex and disgruntled members who . . . .spend their lives on X tweeting offensive material about their former colleagues”.  “Their latest target has been the Party finances . . . .  The accusation is because we posted a deficit for 2023, that indicates that the Party is in financial difficulty”.


Ignoring the Shoot-The-Messenger element, this response completely misses the actual point that the issue is not the deficit in itself but the pattern shown by figures, which suggests a drop off in both backing and enthusiasm

 

“All political parties have some years in deficit . . . . .  ALBA was in surplus for each of the two previous years since our formation”.


This is true but irrelevant – again, the cause for concern is the situation now, not two years ago, and in particular the income and expenditure patterns shown in the accounts.

 

Alba's Official Response (2) – Diversion


Also, a substantial part of the Party Chair's statement was just a diversion to avoid dealing with the actual points at issue. For example:

 

The NEC . . . . believe that a breakthrough in 2026 can only come if we meet 3 political criteria. One, is that our list of candidates is comprised of people of calibre . . . .  ALBA has to offer the prospect of adults back in the room. Two, is that our strategy to achieve independence identifies us as the REAL independence Party . . . . . Three, is that our policy programme needs to have distinct, transformative policies on key issues to galvanise support.


Motherhood and apple pie. But just words – in three years Alba has done nothing to develop members into candidates of real calibre or (other than the Equalities Team who have all subsequently left ALBA) develop “transformative” policies. And repeating over and over that you have a proper plan for gaining independence doesn't make it true. There is nothing here that even hints at how these objectives might be achieved. This is simply magical thinking and Alba members deserve much better from their leadership.

 

“Right now, at the end of August this year, we have almost £50,000 in the Bank and we have no borrowings at all . . . . .  remember our most important and reliable income is from you, the membership, and we would be so grateful if you shift your contribution to direct debit and increase it a little, if you can”


Again, this is pretty much irrelevant. The issue is future cash flow and building the brand and two things not mentioned in my original analysis now make the picture seem even more gloomy.

 

Firstly, the day before the Westminster election, Alba's Election Crowd-Funder stood at £47,300. However, this was originally started in November 2023 and renamed when the election was announced. £47,300 over seven months, from approximately 7,000 members, is not a sign of vibrant party with a committed activist base.

 

Secondly, the party received £36,000 on 31 May 2024 from the Electoral Commission, presumably the second instalment of the policy development grant. However, if the current bank balance is only £50,000, this implies that, rather than building up a reserve, the £47,300 has pretty much been used to cover existing running costs and that £36k of the £50,000 is restricted in what it can be used for.

Again, this is not a picture of a financially healthy organisation.

 

Alba's Official Response (3) - Do You Really Expect Us To Believe This Nonsense?


And now we move on to the frankly unbelievable.

 

“Last year, ALBA took two deliberate decisions. Firstly, to build up our staff resources and secondly, not to approach our significant donors in a non election year because we will be asking these same people to help us from now on, as we prepare for our key election - the Scottish campaign of 2026”

 

Firstly, the increase in staff resources does not seem to have produced any tangible benefits.

 

But, more significantly, at the May Lochgelly conference, the 2024 Westminster election was portrayed as vital for Alba's progress and was also the subject of Alex Salmond's “vital push” email on the eve of the election. In the event the election was completely mishandled. The candidates were left with no plan, no leadership, no funding and no activists. After an effectively invisible campaign, the average result was 1.5% of the vote.

 

But now we're being asked to pretend that this never happened, that 2024 was, somehow, a “non-election” year and that it had always been the plan to conserve resources and funding for 2026. Because, of course, a car crash election result, confirming the party's lack of political visibility, would make no difference to “significant donors”, whereas being asked for a donation in 2024 would have really upset them! This is simply not credible. It also makes no sense that Alba decided “not to approach significant donors” while simultaneously pushing their election crowd-funder on the eve of the election.

 

Expecting members to believe this is simply insulting.

 

Subsequent Events (1) – Lessons Will Not Be Learned


In the immediate aftermath of the publication of the accounts and my original analysis, the most worrying thing was that no lessons appeared to have been learned. The report from a special National Assembly on 21 July claimed that the Scottish elections of 2026 were to be ALBA’s breakthrough election and that Alba would aim to get 15% of the list vote, but there was absolutely nothing on how this might be achieved, given the party’s current position.

 

Similarly, on 6 September, the Alba members' weekly email, after sniping at the SNP (not, to be fair, undeserved, but nothing to do with presenting a positive case for Alba) was claiming that


The polls now show us gaining seats in the Scottish elections of 2026 and the balance of power for independence should not be beyond us with a team of people who have already achieved something for the country”


Except that this was, in fact one poll from a firm known to produce Alba-friendly results and, once again, there was no indication of how this might be achieved.

 

The members' weekly email is where difficult issues, such as funding and resources, ought to be discussed but this has never been the case. At the moment Alba seems to be propelled by bluster and wishful thinking but, at some point, reality will have to be addressed.

 

Subsequent Events (2) – Infamy, Infamy, They've All Got It In For Me!


However, the most significant feature of the last couple of months, and the one that convinces me that Alba really does have problems, is what appears to be an orchestrated effort by leading Alba figures to weave a "stab in the back" narrative that blames Alba's lack of progress on malignant ex members. (For more on this, see James Kelly's “Scot Goes Pop” blog for 9 September https://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2024/09/a-personal-statement-on-alba.html) or, to use their preferred phrase, a “wee gang of malcontents”.

 

This has involved several Alba members close to the leadership. One such member used the phrase "wee gang of malcontents", word for word, three times a couple of weeks ago and then others repeated that identical language.

 

Here are a few more examples from X which give a flavour of the overall approach:

 

ALBA member 1: “Stab in the back” is no mythology and although the “wee gang of malcontents” have had a lot to do with attacking Alba, there has been a concerted effort behind the scenes started long before the NEC elections by those who seek to undermine the party, some of whom remain members.

 

ALBA Member 2: For months, they disrupted conferences and created trouble. They attacked everyone around Alex, but not him. Then after Ash joined, they really showed their true colours and it became 'the Alba leadership' with Alex very much the focus.

 

ALBA member 3 : . . . . . . .  Many innocents were whipped up in a tissue of lies created by four women, one no longer here. They've caused (problems) between friends, within the SNP & Alba, and are now fighting like ferrets in a sack among themselves. Even their own families have no time for them.

 

ALBA member 1: This is the point I have been making. After the very public leaving Alba by the group of women, there were a number of “agitators” working behind the scenes pulling their strings who did not leave the party.

 

All very co-ordinated. All pushing the same story. At the moment, Alba's membership is static, the party is not breaking through in the polls, potential SNP defectors are staying put and the most committed activists are leaving. But it's not the leadership's fault!

 

Their basic approach is that Alba has been somehow sabotaged by members who've left, but who continue to exercise a malevolent influence on the party. Most of these leavers are women but they've apparently been aided by anonymous men in the background. But what none of these people can do is explain just how these ex-members, with no resources, have had such an impressive impact on a rigidly controlled top-down party like Alba?

 

Conclusion


But why is this happening?

 

Well, to repeat the conclusion from my previous article, there is no reason to assume that donations, membership fees and conference/marketing income will recover to any significant extent, in which case expenditure on employees, conferences and building the brand generally will have to be seriously cut back.

 

There is simply no possibility, on the figures and trends shown by the 2023 accounts, that Alba will be able to survive in any meaningful form for a further two years, let alone mount a significant challenge in the Holyrood 2026 elections.

 

So my theory is that this “stabbed-in-back” narrative is a classic diversion tactic. I suspect that no-one has addressed my original concerns regarding the accounts because they can't, and that the Alba leadership has been aware of the position for some time. I think that Alba may be coming to an end, at least in its current form, and that the leadership knows it. Hence the development of the "wee gang of malcontents" narrative as an excuse for why it all went wrong.

 

It would be nice to be wrong and for someone to show that Alba really is what it claims to be but, so far, no-one has even tried.



Read Gordon's previous blog that caused all the furore here https://www.denisefindlay.org/post/guest-blog-by-gordon-millar-alba-in-the-balance



837 views0 comments

Comments


Post: Blog2_Post
bottom of page