SNP leadership election

[ParisInAKilt]

33 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

For me, it is clear, Yousaf has an impossible task. The unionist media are onto him like a pack of wolves throwing all the slurs they can in his direction and with division within the SNP and several SNP members disenchanted or leaving the party then what chance does he have? None.

 

[TDYER63]

25 minutes ago, aaid said:

At least Adam Boulton’s got his name right this time.

 

 

Ridiculous mistake for a journalist. Almost looks deliberate. 

Still, it doesn’t make what he says in the article any less true. 

[aaid]

18 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

Ridiculous mistake for a journalist. Almost looks deliberate. 

Still, it doesn’t make what he says in the article any less true. 

He has form for that as well.

It is not a great situation tbf, but it is difficult for Yousaf.   This all goes to disparity between the number of MSP endorsements that Yousaf got compared to Forbes.

I was highlighting that to show how difficult it might be for Forbes to get the parliamentary party behind her - and I was derided for pointing that out - but it also highlights the other side of the coin and shows how difficult it is for Yousaf to reach out and bring Forbes supporters into the field.

Only Forbes and McKee had Cabinet Secretary or Ministerial positions.   Both were offered new positions in the the government - Forbes apparently was first person he spoke to.  Both turned them down.  You could make the argument that being asked to serve is an honour or that the offers were an insult.    Kate Forbes seems to be very classy in her response, Ivan McKee by contrast small-minded - and I wouldn't be surprised if he wasn't the source of the "stick it" stories.  

https://www.thenational.scot/news/23419622.ivan-mckee-leaves-scottish-government-offered-smaller-job/

That then leads you onto the rest of her supporters.

Colin Beattie, Siobhian Brown, Anabelle Ewing, Fergus Ewing, Christine Grahame, Fulton McGregor, Ruth McGuire, Michelle Thomson and David Torrance.

Siobhian Brown was made minister for Victims and Community Safety.

Out of the rest Jim Failrlie can probably count himself unlucky although there may well be a reason for that.  He, and several others listed above, voted against the GRR bill.  With Humza Yousaf committed to challenging that - giving himself a wee get out on the legal advice - perhaps it was felt that by promoting any of them to the government they might not be able to accept that and collective responsibility would come into play.  Perhaps they were asked and refused for the same reason.   Who knows, but it is certainly a very big question mark over them while GRR is still live.

If anyone wants to make a case for any of the others being in government, I'd be very interested in seeing people's arguments - particularly those who are think that it should be the best people for the job who get it and not some political appointee.

Worth pointing out that Tom Arthur was re-appointed to his role in Public Finance and Gillian Martin was promoted to Energy.  Both of these initially endorsed Forbes but withdrew those endorsements after her equal marriage statements.

Unfortunately none of Ash Regan's MSP endorsements could be considered largely because there were none.

It's a question of numbers and of quality.

 

[hampden_loon2878]

37 minutes ago, aaid said:

He has form for that as well.

It is not a great situation tbf, but it is difficult for Yousaf.   This all goes to disparity between the number of MSP endorsements that Yousaf got compared to Forbes.

I was highlighting that to show how difficult it might be for Forbes to get the parliamentary party behind her - and I was derided for pointing that out - but it also highlights the other side of the coin and shows how difficult it is for Yousaf to reach out and bring Forbes supporters into the field.

Only Forbes and McKee had Cabinet Secretary or Ministerial positions.   Both were offered new positions in the the government - Forbes apparently was first person he spoke to.  Both turned them down.  You could make the argument that being asked to serve is an honour or that the offers were an insult.    Kate Forbes seems to be very classy in her response, Ivan McKee by contrast small-minded - and I wouldn't be surprised if he wasn't the source of the "stick it" stories.  

https://www.thenational.scot/news/23419622.ivan-mckee-leaves-scottish-government-offered-smaller-job/

That then leads you onto the rest of her supporters.

Colin Beattie, Siobhian Brown, Anabelle Ewing, Fergus Ewing, Christine Grahame, Fulton McGregor, Ruth McGuire, Michelle Thomson and David Torrance.

Siobhian Brown was made minister for Victims and Community Safety.

Out of the rest Jim Failrlie can probably count himself unlucky although there may well be a reason for that.  He, and several others listed above, voted against the GRR bill.  With Humza Yousaf committed to challenging that - giving himself a wee get out on the legal advice - perhaps it was felt that by promoting any of them to the government they might not be able to accept that and collective responsibility would come into play.  Perhaps they were asked and refused for the same reason.   Who knows, but it is certainly a very big question mark over them while GRR is still live.

If anyone wants to make a case for any of the others being in government, I'd be very interested in seeing people's arguments - particularly those who are think that it should be the best people for the job who get it and not some political appointee.

Worth pointing out that Tom Arthur was re-appointed to his role in Public Finance and Gillian Martin was promoted to Energy.  Both of these initially endorsed Forbes but withdrew those endorsements after her equal marriage statements.

Unfortunately none of Ash Regan's MSP endorsements could be considered largely because there were none.

It's a question of numbers and of quality.

 

The dust has settled, why did you go for humza? what is he going to do better than what his opposition would have

[aaid]

4 minutes ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

The dust has settled, why did you go for humza? what is he going to do better than what his opposition would have

First of all, I don't think his record is as bad as some people make out. 

Interesting that on here, I asked several times for people to tell me what exactly was so bad about him and no-one could or would come up with anything.   

I don't think he's of the quality of Sturgeon or Salmond but then who is, I think he's been a reasonably decent cabinet secretary.  It was pretty obvious for years that he was one of possibly three people who were being groomed for higher office - the other two being Derek Mackay and Aileen Campbell.  Of those, I would've preferred Aileen Campbell and was disappointed when she stood down in 2021.

So there's the fact that he's got good experience of running three major delivery portfolios.  Delivery portfolios is important, because I don't think that without that experience you'll struggle to be FM, a different story if you become leader while in opposition.   Running a delivery department is also where you can get into a lot of problems when things go wrong, no-one really looks at finance problems until long after the fact.

In summary, I felt that he was known quantity - good and bad - and was the person best capable of doing the job.

Why not Forbes?   I started the campaign thinking about both of them, I have always been impressed by her and she obviously has talent.

My concerns around Forbes centred largely on her relative lack of experience - my gut feeling was that this might have been a bit early for her.  She's only been a Cabinet Secretary for two and a bit years - excluding her period of maternity leave - and her first act was to deliver a budget speech that had already been written.  Prior to that she'd also been a junior minister in Finance - so no government experience outwith Finance.  Had she not stood as a candidate, then she *should* have been looking at a move to one of the big delivery department.   It is probably worth pointing out that because of the devolution, CabSec for Finance does not have the same level of importance as CoE at WM.  Health, Education, Transport, Justice, Rural Affairs are all wholly or largely devolved and are equivalent positions.   Finance is important, or course it is, but it is not the same as the setup at WM.

Then came her various socially policy statements, which I could not agree less with.   Despite her claims she would "govern for everyone", I couldn't trust that would be the case.   A lot of that isn't her fault, she hasn't had an opportunity to prove that would be the case and she fudged the GRR bill but she didn't have that track record - that's in comparison to Humza Yousaf, who despite similarly being a person of faith, has pretty consistently demonstrated that he's not swayed when it comes to making legislation or enacting policy.

To be honest, I don't see much difference between her approach to independence and Humza Yousaf's, both seem to be saying that we need to grow support to the point it can't be ignored.

[vanderark14]

2 hours ago, TDYER63 said:

Ridiculous mistake for a journalist. Almost looks deliberate. 

Still, it doesn’t make what he says in the article any less true. 

I hope Boulton has apologised to Chripper for the error

[TDYER63]

6 hours ago, aaid said:

He has form for that as well.

It is not a great situation tbf, but it is difficult for Yousaf.   This all goes to disparity between the number of MSP endorsements that Yousaf got compared to Forbes.

I was highlighting that to show how difficult it might be for Forbes to get the parliamentary party behind her - and I was derided for pointing that out - but it also highlights the other side of the coin and shows how difficult it is for Yousaf to reach out and bring Forbes supporters into the field.

Only Forbes and McKee had Cabinet Secretary or Ministerial positions.   Both were offered new positions in the the government - Forbes apparently was first person he spoke to.  Both turned them down.  You could make the argument that being asked to serve is an honour or that the offers were an insult.    Kate Forbes seems to be very classy in her response, Ivan McKee by contrast small-minded - and I wouldn't be surprised if he wasn't the source of the "stick it" stories.  

https://www.thenational.scot/news/23419622.ivan-mckee-leaves-scottish-government-offered-smaller-job/

That then leads you onto the rest of her supporters.

Colin Beattie, Siobhian Brown, Anabelle Ewing, Fergus Ewing, Christine Grahame, Fulton McGregor, Ruth McGuire, Michelle Thomson and David Torrance.

Siobhian Brown was made minister for Victims and Community Safety.

Out of the rest Jim Failrlie can probably count himself unlucky although there may well be a reason for that.  He, and several others listed above, voted against the GRR bill.  With Humza Yousaf committed to challenging that - giving himself a wee get out on the legal advice - perhaps it was felt that by promoting any of them to the government they might not be able to accept that and collective responsibility would come into play.  Perhaps they were asked and refused for the same reason.   Who knows, but it is certainly a very big question mark over them while GRR is still live.

If anyone wants to make a case for any of the others being in government, I'd be very interested in seeing people's arguments - particularly those who are think that it should be the best people for the job who get it and not some political appointee.

Worth pointing out that Tom Arthur was re-appointed to his role in Public Finance and Gillian Martin was promoted to Energy.  Both of these initially endorsed Forbes but withdrew those endorsements after her equal marriage statements.

Unfortunately none of Ash Regan's MSP endorsements could be considered largely because there were none.

It's a question of numbers and of quality.

 

I do ‘get’ that it’s difficult for Humza but I honestly think it would have better if he had offered Kate a decent role, one that reflected her abilities. Despite the fact I think this will all turn to shit and wouldn’t have wanted her involved I do think that on the other hand she may have helped hold it together more. Despite my poor opinion of Humza I do not want him to fail. 

As a leader you have to get as much cross party support as you can, picking all your pals is not the best strategy. Of course you want people you can rely on and who will support you but you need cover as much ground as you can with the electorate if you want to succeed. 
I will be honest and say I have very little knowledge of some of these MSP’s that have been appointed, but I dont rate those in the top positions. 
With regards to Jim Fairlie, he seems to command a lot of respect . So what if he is on the opposite side regarding GRR, honest tae fuck , surely to god we are not putting the GRR  above what few decent MSP’s we have. I know you are only putting that suggestion out there, but I really think it would be an extremely poor judgment call if that was the case. 
Only time will tell right enough..

[TDYER63]

5 hours ago, vanderark14 said:

I hope Boulton has apologised to Chripper for the error

😂

[aaid]

5 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

With regards to Jim Fairlie, he seems to command a lot of respect . So what if he is on the opposite side regarding GRR, honest tae fuck , surely to god we are not putting the GRR  above what few decent MSP’s we have. I know you are only putting that suggestion out there, but I really think it would be an extremely poor judgment call if that was the case. 
Only time will tell right enough..

It’s not about GRR though, it’s about cabinet government and collective responsibility.

If someone cannot accept the full program of government then they cannot be in the government.  The alternative is a free for all.

GRR is still live, if the UK government had not blocked it there would be no issue, especially with a change of leader.

I’m speculating here that that’s the reason here but someone who objected to the government challenging the UKG on this issue could not join the government.

 

[hampden_loon2878]

I see it actually being worse than this, some  MP’s going to be shitting themselves 

[Malcolm]

7 hours ago, aaid said:

First of all, I don't think his record is as bad as some people make out. 

Interesting that on here, I asked several times for people to tell me what exactly was so bad about him and no-one could or would come up with anything.   

I don't think he's of the quality of Sturgeon or Salmond but then who is, I think he's been a reasonably decent cabinet secretary.  It was pretty obvious for years that he was one of possibly three people who were being groomed for higher office - the other two being Derek Mackay and Aileen Campbell.  Of those, I would've preferred Aileen Campbell and was disappointed when she stood down in 2021.

So there's the fact that he's got good experience of running three major delivery portfolios.  Delivery portfolios is important, because I don't think that without that experience you'll struggle to be FM, a different story if you become leader while in opposition.   Running a delivery department is also where you can get into a lot of problems when things go wrong, no-one really looks at finance problems until long after the fact.

In summary, I felt that he was known quantity - good and bad - and was the person best capable of doing the job.

Why not Forbes?   I started the campaign thinking about both of them, I have always been impressed by her and she obviously has talent.

My concerns around Forbes centred largely on her relative lack of experience - my gut feeling was that this might have been a bit early for her.  She's only been a Cabinet Secretary for two and a bit years - excluding her period of maternity leave - and her first act was to deliver a budget speech that had already been written.  Prior to that she'd also been a junior minister in Finance - so no government experience outwith Finance.  Had she not stood as a candidate, then she *should* have been looking at a move to one of the big delivery department.   It is probably worth pointing out that because of the devolution, CabSec for Finance does not have the same level of importance as CoE at WM.  Health, Education, Transport, Justice, Rural Affairs are all wholly or largely devolved and are equivalent positions.   Finance is important, or course it is, but it is not the same as the setup at WM.

Then came her various socially policy statements, which I could not agree less with.   Despite her claims she would "govern for everyone", I couldn't trust that would be the case.   A lot of that isn't her fault, she hasn't had an opportunity to prove that would be the case and she fudged the GRR bill but she didn't have that track record - that's in comparison to Humza Yousaf, who despite similarly being a person of faith, has pretty consistently demonstrated that he's not swayed when it comes to making legislation or enacting policy.

To be honest, I don't see much difference between her approach to independence and Humza Yousaf's, both seem to be saying that we need to grow support to the point it can't be ignored.

respect your right to vote for whoever you like but I think the snp has shot itself in the foot.  I’m a  floating voter that the snp need to keep onside and the lurch to the left means I won’t even consider it.

as I say, you are a member so good on you, but a more centerist option would have been far more popular with the electorate.

[aaid]

1 hour ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

I see it actually being worse than this, some  MP’s going to be shitting themselves 

The weird thing about that poll is that it has support for Indy at 48%.  I’m not sure how people think voting Labour is going to get them independence but hey-ho. 

[hampden_loon2878]

5 minutes ago, aaid said:

The weird thing about that poll is that it has support for Indy at 48%.  I’m not sure how people think voting Labour is going to get them independence but hey-ho. 

I haven’t looked at the details but is possibility snp voters may not vote? I see extreme apathy with a lot of snp voters, especially those who didn’t back humza, me being one of them. I just don’t think I would vote in an election in the near future the way I am feeling, a lot of soul searching going on and maybe you are right , I may not be suited to the party, they need to stabilise polling sharp or they are in serious trouble 

Edited March 31, 2023 by hampden_loon2878

[Ally Bongo]

14 minutes ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

I haven’t looked at the details but is possibility snp voters may not vote? I see extreme apathy with a lot of snp voters, especially those who didn’t back humza, me being one of them. I just don’t think I would vote in an election in the near future the way I am feeling, a lot of soul searching going on and maybe you are right , I may not be suited to the party, they need to stabilise polling sharp or they are in serious trouble 

https://talkingupscotlandtwo.com/2023/03/31/first-poll-since-humza-win-has-increased-support-for-snp/

[aaid]

43 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

https://talkingupscotlandtwo.com/2023/03/31/first-poll-since-humza-win-has-increased-support-for-snp/

That’s a sub sample from a UK-wide poll so not worth paying attention to.

[Ally Bongo]

It's obvious that there will be a by election in Rutherglen and Hamilton West

I wonder what would happen if the SNP candidate finishes 3rd

Will also be interesting if Margaret Ferrier stands as an Independent

[hampden_loon2878]

11 hours ago, Ally Bongo said:

It's obvious that there will be a by election in Rutherglen and Hamilton West

I wonder what would happen if the SNP candidate finishes 3rd

Will also be interesting if Margaret Ferrier stands as an Independent

another rookie mistake from humza, the last thing the snp need just now is a byelection. they will get hammered and once the momentum starts in another party it is hard to stop.. for what its worth, i would have ferrier back in the party, show some loyalty even if she fucked up

[aaid]

14 minutes ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

another rookie mistake from humza, the last thing the snp need just now is a byelection. they will get hammered and once the momentum starts in another party it is hard to stop.. for what its worth, i would have ferrier back in the party, show some loyalty even if she fucked up

A rookie mistake, Nicola Sturgeon was clear at the time that she should resign.  
 

Did you actually see what she did.

This was in the days when the only tests available were PCR tests which took 48 hours to process.

She took a test on Saturday morning because she had symptoms.  I’m not sure on the exact legality of not isolating at that point, but you would think that anyone sensible who thought they might have covid would have isolated until they got the test result.   She didn’t, she went about her business as usual, went to church, went to a bar, then got on a train to London on the Monday morning.  Then the illegal stuff happened once she got the positive test result and jumped on a train back to Glasgow.

If she’d started to have symptoms while in London and then tested positive, I’d maybe have some sympathy for her heading home but it’s the fact that she set off for London in the first place knowing she might have covid that’s so bad.

Had she resigned straightaway and shown she understood the seriousness of her actions then maybe she could have been readmitted but not now, the press would have a field day.

Edited April 1, 2023 by aaid

[Malcolm]

44 minutes ago, aaid said:

A rookie mistake, Nicola Sturgeon was clear at the time that she should resign.  
 

Did you actually see what she did.

This was in the days when the only tests available were PCR tests which took 48 hours to process.

She took a test on Saturday morning because she had symptoms.  I’m not sure on the exact legality of not isolating at that point, but you would think that anyone sensible who thought they might have covid would have isolated until they got the test result.   She didn’t, she went about her business as usual, went to church, went to a bar, then got on a train to London on the Monday morning.  Then the illegal stuff happened once she got the positive test result and jumped on a train back to Glasgow.

If she’d started to have symptoms while in London and then tested positive, I’d maybe have some sympathy for her heading home but it’s the fact that she set off for London in the first place knowing she might have covid that’s so bad.

Had she resigned straightaway and shown she understood the seriousness of her actions then maybe she could have been readmitted but not now, the press would have a field day.

rules are rules I guess, but looking back we can see the restrictions were ludicrous.  We are all paying for that now.

[aaid]

4 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

rules are rules I guess, but looking back we can see the restrictions were ludicrous.  We are all paying for that now.

This was in 2020, before any vaccines were available.  Do you think it was acceptable then for someone to travel 400 miles on a train knowing they were infected?

[TDYER63]

15 hours ago, aaid said:

It’s not about GRR though, it’s about cabinet government and collective responsibility.

If someone cannot accept the full program of government then they cannot be in the government.  The alternative is a free for all.

GRR is still live, if the UK government had not blocked it there would be no issue, especially with a change of leader.

I’m speculating here that that’s the reason here but someone who objected to the government challenging the UKG on this issue could not join the government.

 

Kate Forbes was offered a position and I am pretty sure she doesnt accept everything in government. And what happens when new bills come in during the duration of parliament, there are going to be things cabinet ministers will disagree with. 

Fighting the GRR block may be noble but it  isn’t something that is going to get a lot of public backing. I would prefer there to be more people in the cabinet that could see that and talk Humza out of it. I know I am only thinking this as its my personal view but I think a lot of the public feel the same about the intention to fight the block. 

[phart]

4 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

rules are rules I guess, but looking back we can see the restrictions were ludicrous.  We are all paying for that now.

That's like saying the guy last week is an idiot for betting on something cause you now know the outcome.

You're an idiot for betting on A to win cause we now know B won.

Exponential growth of cases started late in August 2020 for covid. That's why more restrictions were announced in September 2020.

[TDYER63]

14 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

rules are rules I guess, but looking back we can see the restrictions were ludicrous.  We are all paying for that now.

I doubt the people who lost loved ones found the restrictions ludicrous. 

I find you quite funny Malcolm but if you are not on the wind up here you are being incredibly selfish . 

[hampden_loon2878]

1 hour ago, TDYER63 said:

Kate Forbes was offered a position and I am pretty sure she doesnt accept everything in government. And what happens when new bills come in during the duration of parliament, there are going to be things cabinet ministers will disagree with. 

Fighting the GRR block may be noble but it  isn’t something that is going to get a lot of public backing. I would prefer there to be more people in the cabinet that could see that and talk Humza out of it. I know I am only thinking this as its my personal view but I think a lot of the public feel the same about the intention to fight the block. 

As I said to @aaid this is why she turned it down, honestly this peace of ligislation is going to be a shit show. If anyone could spare a minute please fill in the consultation as it will create a mass exodus from the highlands and island, just madness

[aaid]

34 minutes ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

As I said to @aaid this is why she turned it down, honestly this peace of ligislation is going to be a shit show. If anyone could spare a minute please fill in the consultation as it will create a mass exodus from the highlands and island, just madness

That at least is something policy related.  I’d point out though that Kate Forbes as a member of the Scottish Government was quite happy to sign up to the Bute House Agreement, including the parts about enhancing marine protection and also that the agreement was passed by 95% of SNP voters.