ELECTION watchdogs have rejected a bid to create a new Scottish independence party.
The Alliance for Independence, which wants to run candidates on the Holyrood list next year to “Max the Yes’ in parliament, had its registration turned down by the Electoral Commission.
After considering the AFI’s application for six weeks, the Commission refused to allow its name in case it over-stated its support and misled voters.
Interim leader Dave Thompson, a former SNP MSP, described the refusal as “a bit of a hiccup”, and said he would be having talks with the Commission to resolve it.
The development is another blow to the fledgling AFI, which has already been rebuffed in its attempts to monopolise the Yes vote on the list system in May.
The new group says it could win 24 MSPs on the list if it was the only pro-independence party standing, strengthening a mandate for a second independence referendum.
However the SNP and Greens have refused to withdraw from the list, meaning the AFI would be in competition with the more established parties for votes.
The AFI has said it wants to act as a new vehicle for various pro-independence groups to garner Yes votes, and has had talks with Tommy Sheridan’s Solidarity party.
Instead of standing under their usual banner, candidates would stand for the AFI instead.
However the Commission said the plan was flawed, as the name could be interpreted as encompassing the Greens, SNP and other parties not backing the AFI.
It said: “It was our view that a voter, if presented with this proposed name on ballot papers, would likely to be misled on the basis that they may consider it to be an alliance of some or all independence supporting parties.
“It was our view that a voter was likely to consider this party to represent parties that it did not who share similar aims surrounding independence.
“A proposed name cannot be registered if, in our opinion, a voter is likely to be misled as to the effect of their vote.”
The Commission also said it was concerned by the AFI’s intention to be led by co-convenors, saying: “Whilst this is not prohibited in itself, your constitution does not set out how a co-convenor can be designated leader … It also does not set out sufficient details about the roles of the co-convenor’s [sic] and if they differ, if at all.”
Mr Thompson insisted the “technical issues” could be easily resolved.
He said: “Most of this is easily sorted.
“The main positive to take from it is the fact that they have accepted our central proposition and unique selling point that other parties can come under our umbrella.”
He said he had taken up the Electoral Commission’s offer of an early meeting to discuss the registration, but admitted that rejecting the AFI’s proposed name was “a bit of a hiccup”.
He said: “We are disappointed that the Electoral Commission have rejected our application but this is not unusual for a first time application.
“Most of the points they have raised are technical and can easily be sorted by minor changes to our constitution.
“We do not agree with the Commission that our name would mislead voters into thinking that we represented all independence supporting parties and will raise this, among other issues, at our meeting, in cooperation with the Commission.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel