Farmers are continuing to protest the UK Government's decision to change inheritance tax rules, which they fear will impact their livelihoods.

Demonstrations are planned for the end of January, as many in the farming community say they could be forced to sell their farms if the new rules come into force.

One claim causing controversy suggests the UK Government is prioritising farmers overseas via foreign aid ahead of those in Britain.

Former Conservative minister Robert Jenrick made this claim in a post on X in November 2024.

Labour hand £536m to foreign farmers, paid for by hiking tax on our own farmers.

Robert Jenrick

Ferret Fact service looked at this claim and found it Mostly False.

Evidence

In October 2024, the UK Government revealed its 2025 budget, with changes made to inheritance tax on agricultural properties.

Previously, agricultural property relief meant that most farming property was exempt from inheritance tax, meaning farm assets could be passed down tax-free. The budget announced that from April 2026, this exemption would be restricted to £1m. This means that any asset value higher than £1m would only get a 50 per cent tax relief.

This led to significant anger in the farming community, and a series of demonstrations were held to oppose the move.

Are conspiracy groups trying to hijack farmers' protests?

In late November, Robert Jenrick posted the claim on X that the Labour government had given "£536m to foreign farmers, paid for by hiking tax on our own farmers".

This came from an article in the Daily Express newspaper, which cited research produced by the Taxpayers' Alliance, a pressure group that campaigns to lower taxes in the UK.

The research carried out by the Taxpayers' Alliance stated that "£536.4m is being spent on ten active funding programmes focused on supporting farmers and farming communities abroad".

This information was gleaned through analysis of the UK Government's development tracker, which shows the amount of money spent in foreign aid on different projects throughout the world.

The Taxpayers' Alliance did not respond to requests from The Ferret to provide the detailed methodology of its analysis, but did say that the "£536.4 million in ten foreign aid programmes for farmers identified cover varying time periods".

Nine specific projects are mentioned in its press release, covering various projects in countries including Brazil, Ghana, Somalia, Rwanda, and Tanzania.

The largest agriculture-related project included in the analysis is "Support to the Global Agriculture and Food Security Programme (GAFSP)". GAFSP is a worldwide project launched by the G20 nations in 2007 with the stated aim of improving food resilience in the world's poorest countries.

The UK Government has committed £206m to this project, and states its contribution is to "improve agricultural productivity" and "increase farmers' access to markets".

Robert Jenrick's post on X stated that the Labour government had given £536m to foreign farmers, and paid for it with the changes to inheritance tax, but this is not accurate.

The £206m given to the GAFSP was to be spent between October 2012 and June 2031.

By the time Labour got into power in July 2024, about £180m of this budget had already been spent, with the money being initially committed by the previous Conservative government.

This is also the case with a number of other projects mentioned in the analysis. Many spent a majority of their budgets before the current government took office.

More than two-thirds of the money allocated to the nine projects referenced in the Taxpayers' Alliance press release had been spent before the election in July 2024.

Ferret Fact Service verdict: Mostly False

Robert Jenrick's claim that Labour is spending £536m on overseas farmers while increasing tax for UK farmers is misleading. The figures do not relate to spending on overseas aid from the Labour government. Instead they are the total budgets of agriculture projects which are still active, m...

For the past year now, The Ferret has been investigating the health of Scotland's seas.

The Scotland's Seas in Danger project - funded by Journalismfund Europe - is a collaboration with Fada Collective and the Investigative Reporting Project Italy (IRPI).

Our aim has been to highlight problems and solutions to pressing issues impacting our oceans and seas, which produce more than half the world's oxygen and hold most of the planet's nature. They also support nearly half the global population's livelihoods, providing crucial food, jobs and energy.

But the marine environment is at risk, and our investigation has spotlighted threats to our waters from climate change, fish farming, oil spills, and plastic pollution, among other issues.

The final report of our series - a collaboration with IRPI - explains what's been happening with marine protected areas (MPAs) in both Scotland and Italy.

These environmental protection zones are intended to safeguard a wide range of marine features - including important habitats, aquatic life and geological features.

Both Scotland and Italy have made bold claims over their MPAs, but green campaigners in both countries fear their respective governments are failing to protect these threatened seas.

What protections does Scotland have in place for its waters?

In Scotland Marine protected areas (MPAs) span 247 sites, covering 37 per cent of Scottish seas. These areas were designated for protection in 2014.

Inside these MPAs, activities like fishing, aquaculture and energy infrastructure are allowed, if they are licensed and in line with legislation.

The Scottish Government can issue fines for breaking rules in MPAs, such as fishing within restricted areas.

Different types of protection zones exist, including nature conservation MPAs, special areas of conservation, special protection areas, sites of special scientific interest, and Ramsar sites, which cover wetlands of "international importance".

Scotland's marine protection measures explained

Why are green groups criticising the Scottish Government over MPAs?

Green groups claim that many MPAs are vulnerable to the impact of poorly-managed fishing such as scallop dredging and bottom trawling because ministers have failed to tighten laws on controversial fishing methods.

Scallop dredging and bottom-trawling - the most environmentally harmful forms of fishing - are restricted in less than five per cent of Scotland's seas. Scallop dredging involves heavy-duty metal framed nets being pulled over the seabed, while bottom-trawling involves nets towed to catch fish and other marine species close to the seabed.

In 2021 the Scottish Government said it was committed to establishing new fisheries management measures for MPAs by March 2024. But these commitments have been pushed back.

Attempts to strengthen protections for marine sea life ran into controversy, particularly the government's proposal to introduce highly protected marine areas (HPMAs). It was planned that these areas would cover about ten per cent of Scotland's seas, with a number of activities believed to put pressure on marine environments banned or severely restricted within their boundaries.

When the plan was announced, it was criticised by some in coastal communities as well as island and fishing industry organisations. The HPMA policy was shelved after this criticism and the response to a consultation, which showed strong opposition to the proposed plans.

Last year, the Our Seas coalition - which comprises more than 130 organisations including community groups, marine conservationists and fishers - claimed the biggest threat to the marine environment was the government's "ongoing failure to protect it due to broken promises and endless delays".

Scottish Government accused of "broken promises" over marine protection

In response, the Scottish Government told The Ferret that new measures to protect MPAs remain a "top government priority" and it is now consulting with a view to updating the Natio...

Top political donors, a Labour lord and Scottish football hero Ally McCoist have been among secret owners of a tax haven firm behind an elite Scottish golf club, The Ferret can reveal.

The 660-acre private Loch Lomond Golf Club hosted the Scottish Open and boasts a Georgian mansion, a spa within a historic walled garden, and dramatic lochside views to Ben Lomond.

But the club is open only to members who can join on a strict invite-only policy, and the entry fees - estimated at well over £100,000 today - mean the luxury is open only to a wealthy few.

As the club is ultimately owned and operated by a firm incorporated in the Cayman Islands, the names of its true owners are allowed to stay hidden due to secrecy provisions in the Caribbean tax haven.

But the once-secret shareholders of years past are named in leaked documents. They include Scottish Labour and the Scottish Liberal Democrats' biggest donor ahead of the last general election, Robin MacGeachy, top footballers and senior bankers.

The leaked Paradise Papers files were obtained by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists and the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung, and shared with The Ferret.

Financial transparency would guarantee that, at a time when the UK is struggling, the Treasury's coffers are as full as possible.

Tom Brake, Unlock Democracy

One 2014 document from an offshore law firm shows that the Cayman entity, Loch Lomond Members Golf Club Limited, received nearly £50m from shareholders, members, and applicant members over just a few years.

There is no suggestion of tax abuse from the company, its shareholders or club members.

But a tax expert said tax avoidance and secrecy were the "two distinctive advantages" allowed by the club's Cayman Islands ownership, with neither "in the public interest for UK taxpayers".

The revelations prompted renewed calls from campaigners for the UK Government to force British overseas territories like the Caymans to introduce a public register of the beneficial owners behind companies incorporated there.

Billionaires, bankers and businessmen

Among the club's more than 500 named shareholders as of 2014 were the millionaire Labour lord and party donor, Baron Willie Haughey, billionaire Perthshire landowner Moshin Mohammed Mahdi Al Tajir, and the late billionaire motor magnate Arnold Clark.

Businessman Robin MacGeachy is a current director of the club. Since 2014, companies owned by MacGeachy - Peak Scientific, Dusty TLP, and Treeman Rockafella - have given nearly £2.7m to the Conservatives, Labour, and the Lib Dems.

The firms were both Scottish Labour and the Scottish Liberal Democrats' biggest donors ahead of the last general election, handing over £700,000 and £710,000 respectively.

Billionaires, lobbyists and a 'dark money' trust': Who funds Scotland's parties?

The contributions represented more than a third of Labour's donations and more than a half of the Lib Dems' in the three years preceding the 2024 general election, according to analysis of donations records by The Ferret.

Among top sportsmen on the shareholder list were footballers Ally McCoist, Ian Wright and Alan Shearer, cricket coach Paul Collingwood, former Manchester United director Roy Gardner, and golfer Gordon Sherry.

Senior bankers were well represented among shareholders. Barclays executives included current president, Stephen Dainton, former director of the bank's investment arm, John Porter, and ex-advisory board member of its wealth management division, Stuart Counsell.

Counsell was also deputy chief executive of Deloitte. Other shareholders linked to the accounting giant were then-vice chair Cahal Dowds, and former partner Donald Campbell.

Martin Gilbert, the former chair of Scottish Golf, current chair of and Revolut, and co-founder and former head of Aberdeen Asset Management, which later merged with Standard Life, also featured.

So too did Fahad Al-Rajaan, who, in 2020, was accused of embezzling around £680m from Kuwait's state pensio...

A global, right-wing petition site, set up by an anti-LGBT Spanish lawyer, is campaigning in Scotland to "protect" statues in Glasgow's George Square and persuade Tesco to reverse its decision to open its Stornoway store "on the Sabbath".

CitizenGO, was set up in 2013 to defend "life, family and freedom across the world" by Ignacio Arsuaga, whose conservative Catholic organisation, HazteOir, has similar aims. It claims to be formed by more than 18 million "active citizens stopping radical lobbies from imposing their agenda on society".

It says it is funded by "small online donations" made by thousands of people. But a 2021 report by the European Parliamentary Forum for Sexual and Reproductive Rights found it also had funding from wealthy EU and Russian individuals including some of its own board members.

The campaigning organisation says it is working from "a Christian perspective" with an aim of offering "all citizens and organizations a tool to participate in the improvement of our society". But serious concerns have been raised about its "anti-rights" stance, particularly on LGBT and gender issues and reproductive rights.

As well as Arsuaga, its board members include Brian Brown, the American activist and co-founder of the National Organisation for Marriage and president of the World Congress of Families, which opposes abortion, same-sex marriage, birth control and divorce. Previous speakers at its annual gatherings include hard-right leaders Viktor Orbán from Hungary and Matteo Salvini, Italy's deputy premier and transport minister.

For Fact's Sake podcast: How is misinformation fuelling the anti-abortion movement?

Others include Luca Volontè, the founder of Novae Terrae, an Italian foundation that lobbies against abortion, assisted suicide, same-sex marriage and secularism. In 2021 the Italian Christian politician was convicted of accepting bribes from Azerbaijan. He has denied wrongdoing.

CitizenGO are also campaigning in Scotland, launching two petitions last month.

Petitions on local issues

The first petition, titled 'Stand for Stornoway's sacred Sabbath: keep Tesco closed on Sundays' calls on the supermarket chain to reverse its decision to open on a Sunday, when Christian tradition dictates shops on the island of Lewis remain closed. The decision has attracted some local opposition with an earlier petition set-up by local Alasdair MacLeod in October.

The CitizenGO petition, created by its staff, was posted on 13 December last year and has been signed by 8,955 so far. CitizenGO does not publish the names or locations of signatories.

The petition alleges that the decision to open "not only disregards the local culture but also reflects a broader trend of eroding Christian customs across Scotland" adding, "accepting cultural erasure inevitably leads to its decline". It calls on signatories to "stand with us to preserve Stornoway's Sabbath" claiming "these customs are at the heart of our community and culture".

Another CitizenGO petition opposes Glasgow City Council's decision to remove statues from George Square. The council claims this is part of a planned refurbishment of the public square and says it intends for all the statues to return.

However the petition repeats suspicions raised that this is "cover" for the local authority to permanently remove statues of military figures such as Colin Campbell, who led the British army against the so-called Indian mutiny of 1857 - a rebellion against the British East India Company which saw hundreds of thousands of casualties.

It would be useful if they could spell out who is initiating their campaigns - local people or CitizenGo staff - and publish detailed accounts.

Tom Brake, Unlock Democracy

A council working group looking at the city's slavery and colonial legacy also identified a statue of John Moore,who is linked to the slave trade, having suppressed the 1796 slave revolt on the Caribbean island of St Lucia.

The CitizenGO petition accuses Glasgow City Council of "can...

After major protests across the UK at the end of last year, anger from farmers at tax changes shows no sign of abating.

The National Farmers' Union (NFU) has planned a nationwide day of action for 25 January. In Scotland this is set to include "coordinated tractor rallies" across the country.

While the protests have focused on tax and other pressures faced by the farming industry, there are concerns that some groups are attempting to capitalise on the farmers' cause to peddle conspiracy theories and misinformation.

Ferret Fact Service explains.

Farmers are angry at changes to inheritance tax announced by the Labour government in October. Thousands marched on London in November 2024 to protest the policy, which some view as the "last straw" after a series of decisions by governments which have been unpopular with farmers.

From April 2026, farms will no longer be eligible for full relief from inheritance tax. Instead, full relief will only apply to the first £1m of assets passed down.

Anything over £1m will be charged inheritance tax at 20 per cent - half the usual inheritance tax - although some additional relief could be available, particularly for married couples.

Many farmers claim that their businesses do not generate enough money to pay inheritance tax bills due to a range of factors including rising costs and cuts to subsidies.

The NFU argues the only option for many farmers would be to sell their farms to afford tax bills which could, it claims, impact the amount of food the UK produces.

The government has countered that most farms won't pay inheritance tax - a claim the NFU rejects - and that money raised by the changes is needed to pay for public services.

The policy has also been described by some experts as an attempt to stop wealthy people from buying up farmland to avoid paying inheritance tax.

'No Farmers, No Food'

One group which has gained traction in farming debates in the last year is No Farmers, No Food.

It has garnered over 130,000 followers on social media, more than the NFU itself, and its yellow logo is increasingly spotted both online and at protests. Scottish politicians have shared No Farmers, No Food posts on social media and the Tories' agriculture spokesperson, Jamie Halcro Johnston, has appeared wearing one of its badges outside the Scottish Parliament.

No Farmers, No Food was founded by PR expert and GB News regular, James Melville.

Melville - who has over half a million followers on X - says he grew up on a family farm in Fife and started the group to provide a "unified and non-partisan campaign" for farmers.

Yet on his personal accounts he has posted and shared misinformation including around conspiracy topics like 15 minute cities, the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the 'Great Reset', as well as the extent of deaths from Covid-19.

What are 15 minute cities and why are they controversial?

Melville has called net zero policies to limit climate change a "con" aimed at making money for corporations.

While No Farmers, No Food has largely focused on the impacts of the inheritance tax in recent months, its mission statement published in February 2024 took aim at net zero.

"The government's obsession with net zero is having a devastating impact on British farming," the group claimed in a statement that said one of its objectives was to "push back against unrealistic net zero policies". The campaign has also argued that farming is being "sacrificed on the altar of net zero".

Posts by the group on social media also attract comments from conspiracy theorists. One farmer has described being added to a campaign WhatsApp chat after an invite by Melville. He claimed the group was "toxic" with members "fighting amongst each other" about Covid-19 vaccines and discussing "uprisings" against the WEF.

Despite outlining plans for one nearly a year ago, No Farmers, No Food has no website. A limited company which names Melville and two others as directors was set up in April last year but is yet to file any accoun...

There has been renewed controversy over the UK Government's handling of grooming gangs in recent weeks.

X owner Elon Musk made several posts about the issue, including a claim that UK politicians had shown reluctance to deal with foreign offenders.

In one related post, he shared an image that claimed to name MPs and Lords who had voted against deporting foreigners living in the UK convicted of rape. Musk told readers to "remember these names next election".

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1876435054622388257

Ferret Fact Service looked at this claim and found it False.

Evidence

The scandal around the UK state's response to grooming gangs has been ongoing for a decade, and there have been a series of inquiries into how gangs were able to exploit vulnerable children.

It has been claimed that authorities including the police were reluctant to look into exploitation allegations committed by British Asians to avoid inflaming community tensions.

Musk has made a number of interventions into UK politics since he took over the X platform, and has focussed recent criticism on Keir Starmer and other politicians for their handling of the grooming gangs scandal. His posts have sparked new interest in the issue.

Analysis from Sky News found Musk's interest was sparked by a handful of right-wing accounts on the X platform, and posts about the issue significantly increased after he began to post about it.

This has led to calls for a fresh inquiry into the issue, which the Conservative Party attempted to add as an amendment to Labour's child welfare bill in the House of Commons this week. The proposed amendment was voted down.

The image alleged MPs had voted down a bill aimed at deporting foreign-born people in the UK convicted of rape.

It included a number of Scottish MPs.

The UK Government already has the power to deport foreign nationals sentenced to a year or more in prison.

Section 32(5) of the UK Borders Act 2007 mandates that the home secretary must make a deportation order against a "foreign criminal". This is defined in act as a person who has been convicted and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment for an offence.

There are certain exceptions to this, where the deportation would breach international human rights legislation or the UK's obligations on rights for refugees.

British citizens cannot be deported, although citizenship can be revoked if it is considered to be conducive to the public good, or if the citizenship was obtained by fraud.

The list of MPs circulated by Musk actually showed more than 170 members who signed a letter in 2020 opposing plans to deport dozens of people convicted of crimes to Jamaica, after it emerged people on the flight had come to the UK as children as part of the Windrush generation.

The letter, organised by Labour MP Nadia Whittome, urged the flight to be delayed until a then-anticipated review of the scandal around the Windrush was completed. The review was published in March of that year.

The Windrush generation were invited to come to the UK from Caribbean countries between 1948 and 1971 as part of a bid to rebuild post-war Britain.

An estimated 500,000 people arrived during this time, and were later granted leave to remain in the UK.

In 2012, changes to immigration law meant many people who had arrived as children without their own documents were now unable to prove their status, and several were detained and removed from the country despite having lived as settled citizens for decades.

The flight in 2020 that prompted the letter eventually did fly containing 17 people and the UK Government said two had been convicted of rape. Those who signed the letter were not voting against deporting people convicted of rape, but expressing concerns over the flight and issues surrounding the Windrush in general.

Ferret Fact Service verdict: False

The claim that the listed MPs had all voted against deporting foreign rapists is inaccurate. In fact, the list contained signatories to a letter expressing conc...

Nuclear sites, King Charles' childhood school and a famous battlefield were among nearly 1,000 sites across Scotland which broke environmental rules in the past two years.

The Dounreay nuclear facility in Caithness was found to be in breach of rules on eleven occasions in recent years, making it one of the most frequent offenders in Scotland.

Dounreay - which houses radioactive waste - was a hub of nuclear research between the 1950s and 1990s but is now the site of the largest nuclear clean up in Scotland. There was also a breach at the Faslane naval base, although this did not involve radioactivity.

Gordonstoun School in Moray - which the King attended between 1962 and 1967 - the visitor centre at the Culloden battlefield, and a host of whisky distilleries have also been rapped.

The findings come from data released to The Ferret by the Scottish Government's green watchdog, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa).

The agency kept a further 25 sites which had broken rules secret. The Ferret understands this is because they house radioactive materials which governments fear could be targeted by terrorists aiming to build a dirty bomb.

That's twice a day that companies are disregarding the environment, at the expense of all of us.

Kim Pratt, Friends of the Earth Scotland

Campaigners described it as "alarming" that environmental rule breaking was being uncovered "every 12 hours in Scotland".

One opposition politician questioned why "repeat offenders are continuing to get away with non-compliance" and suggested Sepa may need to "pursue more cases through to prosecution".

Sepa said compliance with Scotland's environmental laws is "non-negotiable" and that it is taking "effective action against those who have failed to comply" with rules.

'New approach'

Sepa issues authorisations to businesses to carry out activities which could cause pollution to the environment.

Sepa determines whether companies are complying with the rules laid out in these authorisations by carrying out inspections and sampling at business and industry sites across the country. Companies also report breaches to Sepa themselves.

The agency used to publish annual reports on its website which ranked over 5,000 sites' environmental performance on a scale from 'very poor' to 'excellent'.

Previous sites to be damned for their performance included Gordonstoun, Donald Trump's golf courses, and the luxury five-star Gleneagles hotel.

But the last of these reports was for 2019 and information about environmental rule breaking has not been available in recent years, which Sepa blames on the Covid-19 pandemic and a criminal cyber attack in late 2020. The attack caused the body to lose a host of information on environmental checks and pollution breaches.

Cost of Sepa cyber attack doubles to £5.5m

In the aftermath of these issues, Sepa said it was developing a "new approach" to compliance. As The Ferret reported in 2023, campaigners and a former Sepa boss feared that this would impact transparency and mean the body stopped publicly naming and shaming businesses who flout rules.

Compliance information for 2023 and 2024 was only released following a freedom of information request by The Ferret. Detailed information about the reasons for breaches was not provided.

Sepa says the new compliance information is not comparable to the assessments prior to 2020 because it includes "different parameters". Sites are considered either 'compliant', 'non-compliant', or 'major non-compliant' at different times but are not given an overall rating.

In total, 966 sites were found to be breaking rules at least once in the last two years and there were 1,616 instances of non-compliance overall, although some of these might be minor administrative issues. Over 600 of the breaches were in the more serious 'major non-compliant' category.

Many facilities that Sepa regulates were not assessed in that period, meaning the extent of rule breaking could be even higher. "The number of authorisat...

With its coarse leaves, jaggy spikes and purple blooms - the thistle is known as Scotland's national flower. Now it is also the name of the UK's first safer drug consumption facility, opening in Glasgow's east-end on Monday, 13 January.

Like its jaggy botanical namesake this drug injection centre - almost a decade in the planning - has been a thorny issue. It's considered bold and beautiful by many though met with more ambivalence by others.

But now, managers claim, it's time to prove that this approach can work and save lives. They reject criticisms of £2.3m costs, pointing out that specialist services for other health conditions - from cancer to kidney failure - would not be held up to the same level of scrutiny. And they claim that its trauma informed approach will help marginalised people traditionally excluded from services access the support they need.

The service, which will open daily from 9am to 9pm, is designed to reduce overdoses by providing a safe and clean place for an estimated 400 people who inject drugs such as heroin and cocaine in Glasgow's city centre. It will not provide facilities for people to smoke drugs at this stage, although work is ongoing to develop this service.

Neither will drug testing be available when it opens on Monday, though this is also due to be made available at Glasgow's Hunter Street complex, where both the Thistle and the assisted heroin treatment service are also based.

While on the premises drug users will not be prosecuted for possession. Those attending can also ask for help to reduce their drug use or access treatment services including drug rehab as well as being able to access support with housing or health services.

Promoting safer drug use

Early this week The Ferret was given a pre-opening tour of the Thistle, with its muted colour palette, sleek reception area and "chat rooms" - a more informal name for consultation rooms suggested by an advisory panel with experience of drug use.

The same panel gave the Thistle its name, advised on its layout and helped recruit staff.

Inside the injecting space, eight brightly lit mirrored booths dominate behind a nursing station where injecting equipment will be provided to drug users, who bring their own drugs with them.

Initially they might pass for vanity tables. But the large floor space behind them - where staff can give revive someone if they collapse due to overdose, along with oxygen tanks and access to an ambulance bay, are a reminder of the serious purpose of this facility.

Through the doors from the recovery area is a lounge with comfy chairs, a bookcase and kitchenette where people can make tea and coffee. The aim is to offer some respite from complicated and often harrowing lives after using the injection space and support from harm reduction workers, some of whom have experience of drug addiction.

In this still empty room there is a feeling of calm that belies the political battle it took to get to this stage. First proposed officially in 2016, in response to Glasgow's HIV epidemic affecting injecting drug users, permission was initially blocked by the Home Office under the then Conservative government.

In August 2023 Westminster's Home Affairs Committee recommended pilots of safe consumption facilities in areas across the UK where local government and others deem there is a need. A month later Scotland's Lord Advocate Dorothy Bain confirmed that it would not be in the public interest to prosecute and the safe consumption room was given the green light by Glasgow City Council with the backing of the Scottish government.

'A foundation to build on': Can Scotland's first safer injection site tackle the drugs crisis?

"Politically, all eyes are now on Glasgow," explains councillor Allan Casey, city convenor for workforce, homelessness and addiction services. "Some people are watching with skepticism. Some people are watching with interest because they want to do the same thing as we're doing.

"So there will be a huge amount of ...

The so-called 'culture war' has impacted politics across the globe. Populist outsider candidates and traditional political parties are, more than ever, using ideological wedge issues to appeal to voters and criticise the values of their opponents.

In recent years, Scotland has been the focus of such debates, becoming something of a lightning rod for several right-wing and libertarian culture warriors who have criticised the Scottish Government for pursuing what they feel are radical 'woke' policies and curbing liberties.

But what are the issues that have made Scotland part of the global culture war? Ferret Fact Service explains.

Significant battles of the 'culture war' have been largely fought online, with the globalised nature of the internet allowing for debates and disinformation around issues such as reproductive rights, race and civil liberties to reach around the world.

Humza Yousaf's racism speech

Former first minister and SNP politician Humza Yousaf faced criticism in Scotland and across the UK during his time as first minister , but it was a relatively low-profile speech made three years before that catapulted Yousaf into the global online culture war.

While justice secretary in 2020, Yousaf made a speech in a Scottish Parliament debate entitled 'Showing solidarity with anti-racism'. It took place in June that year, just weeks after the murder of Black American George Floyd by a police officer in Minneapolis.

Floyd's death sparked a series of protests across the US and the rest of the world, and brought the Black Lives Matter protest movement to global attention.

In his speech, Yousaf described his anger that racism still persists across the world, and referred to experiences of racial abuse he had faced as a Scottish Asian, since becoming an MSP.

He argued then that Scotland was not "immune" to racism, and referenced the "unconscious, the subtle, the overt, the institutional and the structural racism".

To underline his point, he went on to list senior positions across Scottish public life that were then held by white people.

Claim Humza Yousaf made anti-white speech is False

He said: "Some people have been surprised or taken aback by my mention on my social media that at 99 per cent of the meetings that I go to, I am the only non-white person in the room.

"Why are we so surprised when the most senior positions in Scotland are filled almost exclusively by people who are white? Take my portfolio, for example. The lord president? White, the lord justice clerk? White, every high court judge? White, the lord advocate? White, the solicitor general? White, the chief constable? White, every deputy chief constable? White, every assistant chief constable? White, the head of the Law Society? White, the head of the Faculty of Advocates? White, every prison governor? White.

"And not just justice. The chief medical officer? White, the chief nursing officer? White, the chief veterinary officer? White, the chief social work adviser? White, almost every trade union in the country, headed by people who are white. In the Scottish Government every director general is white. Every chair of every public body is white. That is not good enough."

This section of his speech has been clipped up and posted numerous times on social media, often accompanied by the suggestion that Yousaf is being an anti-white racist. It formed part of a lengthy speech which ended with the Glasgow Pollok MSP repeating the final words said by George Floyd as he died, ending with "I can't breathe". This phrase became a rallying call for protests against police brutality following Floyd's murder.

The debate in its entirety was posted on the Scottish Parliament's YouTube channel on 10 June 2023, and Yousaf used a portion of the speech, including the list of senior positions, on his social media channels two days later.

This speech began to get traction in Scotland and the UK a few weeks after it was posted online. It was featured in a number of YouTube clips and on...

Are you interested in supporting independent, investigative journalism in Scotland and the UK?

Are you already a fan of The Ferret and want to help it grow?

Would you like to be part of deciding our future direction as an organisation, as we head into our tenth year?

The Ferret is an award-winning Scottish not-for-profit, non-partisan investigative journalism cooperative, owned by our journalists and our readers. We strive to reflect the diverse population we serve in both our journalism and on our board and are currently looking to expand the experience and expertise on our board.

You can find out more about our current directors on our website.

If you'd like to discuss or have any questions, please get in touch with our current chair Rachel Hamada or our board secretary Jamie Mann.

Overview

The board of directors is responsible for the oversight and governance of The Ferret. It is elected at a yearly Annual General Meeting (AGM) by Ferret members - the next one is on 21 March 2025. The Ferret is a registered society regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority, and our journalism is independently regulated by Impress. You can view our governing document here.

We have three types of directors. You can become an independent director, a reader director if you are a Ferret member, or a journalist director if you are a working journalist.

What to expect

The board of directors meets roughly eight times per year - including the AGM - and meetings are usually held online, although sometimes can take place in Edinburgh or Glasgow. The Ferret relies on a suite of digital tools to manage day-to-day coordination and decision-making without swamping everyone with emails. If you are thinking of becoming a director, some familiarity with Google Docs and Slack would be helpful. Don't worry if you don't know these tools, we can provide training.

As a cooperative, we use consensus decision-making and working groups to get things done. You may be invited to form or participate in additional groups that meet independently of the board, or to collaborate on project work. The time commitment for the role should not exceed 2-3 hours per month, though there may on occasion be a busy period.

None of our directors are paid for their role - The Ferret is a not-for-profit outlet that ploughs any profit back into the work of the organisation. However, if a director is asked to get involved in a more substantial administrative or operational task, they will be paid at The Ferret's day rate (currently £145). Reasonable expenses, such as travel costs or accessibility adaptations, incurred by directors in the course of carrying out their role, will be reimbursed.

What are the benefits of getting involved?

The Ferret punches above its weight in terms of political, social and environmental impact through its investigative journalism.

By joining us, you will:

Become part of a genuinely innovative and different media platform that is accountable solely to its workers and members.

Learn new skills.

Come along to Ferret events and socials for free.

Have access to extremely cool Ferret merch…

The Ferret's Chair

We also welcome any interest in applying as chair or co-chair - our current chair will soon be stepping back to director level. Being a chair involves additional responsibilities, such as planning and chairing board meetings and other key meetings, ensuring legal and financial oversight, and line managing senior staff.

The chair or co-chair will be paid a stipend (£145/month on the basis of one day's work per month) for the additional responsibilities involved. Our current chair can talk you through what is involved and a new chair or co-chairs would receive training as a matter of priority.

Creating an inclusive board

In order to promote gender balance on the board, the appointment process for journalist director posts will ensure at minimum three places for women and/or anyone identifying outside the gender binary. The same principle shall not be appli...