Ross Greer bid to be Greens co-leader will deepen rift with rebels
Greer, 31, has emerged as a central figure in an increasingly bitter factional rift within the party, in which he has been criticised for his part in passing SNP budgets that cut council funding.
'This is probably the worst-kept secret at Holyrood,' his spokesman said. 'Over the past few weeks he has been approached by many colleagues encouraging him to run.'
His campaign is likely to lead to a bitter battle within the Greens. He faces a potential challenge from rebel members who want a more radical shift in direction and fear Greer will adopt more of the same approach, in which he would seek compromise with the more centrist SNP.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
A young woman could be deported from Australia after half a decade due to a change in immigration rules
A woman faces deportation due to sudden changes in immigration policy after six years of building a life in Australia. Caitlin Fraser moved from Scotland to Australia in 2019 on a working holiday visa but quickly fell in love with the country and wanted to stay long term. The now-31-year-old secured a Temporary Skills Shortage (TSS) visa in 2023, which would last two years, after a small Sydney restaurant agreed to sponsor her as a manager. While in the role, Ms Fraser worked full-time, paid her taxes and adopted a rescue dog, Billie, who has become her closest companion. She planned to reapply for another TSS visa which would bridge the time between her first visa and her application for a Temporary Residence Transition (TRT) Visa to become a permanent resident. But a change to Australia's skilled migration list meant the occupation 'restaurant manager' was not included, which means she cannot renew the crucial TSS visa. 'I'm not sleeping at the moment out of fear, I don't know what's going to happen,' she told Nine News. Due to the change, Ms Fraser must leave Australia when her current visa expires, just two weeks short of meeting the two-year full-time work requirement for a Temporary Residence Transition visa. She said she only has nine weeks remaining to apply for something that will cost $4900. The visa agent handling her case, Edupi, has an additional professional fee of $5500. It is not the first time Ms Fraser has been forced to source thousands of dollars to secure her visa status in Australia. She initially paid roughly $14,000 to secure her current TSS visa with the help of an immigration lawyer. Ms Fraser said she is frustrated by changes to the visa rules which have left her ineligible for permanent residency. 'The injustice is insane,' she said. 'This should be for new people applying, not for someone who's at the end of the visa. This isn't what I paid for.' The change was introduced in December last year when the Skills in Demand (SID) visa replaced Ms Fraser's current one. Those already living in Australia with a TSS have been permitted to stay until the visa expires but it cannot be renewed. Some are able to apply for the SID but Ms Fraser's role as restaurant manager is not included on the required jobs list. 'Whilst the occupation... was previously available for nomination for a Temporary Skills Shortage visa, the occupation has not been included on the Core Skills Occupation List,' a Department of Home Affairs spokesperson said. 'It is therefore ineligible for nomination for a SID visa.' Ms Fraser's cousin Megan Brokenshow has also launched a GoFundMe page to raise funds to help Caitlin remain in the country. 'She's worked so hard to stay here and build a life,' she said. 'It's heartbreaking to think she could be forced to leave because of a technicality.' On Saturday afternoon, the fundraiser had successfully received $2132 of the $7000 target. If Ms Fraser is unable to secure or pay for a new visa before her TSS visa expires, she'll be forced to leave Australia on September 14.
Scotsman
4 hours ago
- Scotsman
Why betting it all on offshore wind is a high-risk strategy for Scotland
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Zonal pricing, on which a remarkable number of instant experts have emerged over the past 48 hours, was always illusory as a route to cheaper electricity for Scotland or anywhere else. Harken, however, to Dave Doogan MP who is apparently the SNP's spokesman on the economy at Westminster, who tweeted: '[Energy Secretary] Ed Miliband has ruled out zonal pricing in the UK… Labour will never stand up for the people of Scotland. We need independence.' To emphasise his point, Mr Doogan accompanied his tweet with a crude montage of Mr Miliband wearing a Union Jack pith helmet. At least nobody can accuse Dave of subtlety – only of abysmal ignorance, not least about his own party's position on the subject. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Like many others, myself included, SNP ministers went through a learning curve on zonal pricing. It took them a bit longer due to the obvious attraction of any claim that Scotland is being done down. The fact opposition has been led by Scottish interests was a problem for that approach, though nobody seems to have told Dave. The lesson from the debate over zonal electricity pricing may be that building more wind turbines far away from population centres is not a good idea (Picture: William Edwards) | AFP via Getty Images SNP confusion about zonal pricing The case made by SSE, Scottish Power, Scottish Renewables, trade unions and many others was not all that complicated. If generators of power in Scotland were obliged to sell for a lower wholesale price because of location, they were less likely to attract the large-scale investment required to build offshore windfarms in the first place. Or, as Kate Forbes MSP – she's your deputy leader, Dave – put it: 'Zonal pricing is going to be hugely challenging as we could end up in the position where we don't get industrial opportunities and consumers don't get lower bills.' Asked directly if he still supported zonal pricing, John Swinney – being a bit more sleekit – refused to say yea or nay. But the Scottish Government's silence yesterday was deafening. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad While zonal pricing made headlines, there might have been greater significance elsewhere in Mr Miliband's statement on energy. The commitment to an overall review of wholesale pricing takes us to a starting point which should have been reached years ago. A coherent approach would have involved co-operation between Scottish and UK Governments, as well as the regulator Ofgem. None of that happened. The result is that we now have, particularly in Scotland, a catalogue of uncertainties, on which vast sums of money and dubious political assumptions depend. Zonal pricing would have added an additional uncertainty but taking it off the table does not mean the others have gone away. The need for reappraisal is urgent even if conclusions might be unpalatable. Importance of UK market I am a long-term supporter of renewable energy and when in government did my fair share to promote it. The Renewables Obligation was probably the most successful mechanism of its kind anywhere. Scotland was able to contribute disproportionately because of our onshore wind resource. But I also always argued for a balanced energy policy which is the crucial ingredient missing from current debate. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The blithe assumption that Scottish interests are best served by unlimited reliance on offshore wind needs to be challenged and scrutinised before further commitments are made. Mr Doogan and his ilk would do well to remember that Scottish renewables generation is based on the premise that there is an eager and willing market in the rest of Britain. That market has to be competed for, rather than taken for granted as one crucial sentence about the forthcoming review made clear: 'Reformed national pricing will send a clearer upfront signal ahead of the point of investment decision about the relative system value of investing in different locations, which can be accurately priced into those investment decisions.' Roughly translated, this points towards generating power closer to areas of highest demand. Or, as Professor Dieter Helm – a genuine expert – put it: 'Perhaps the real lesson from the zonal pricing debate is that some of the wind generation should not have been built in the north of Scotland in the first place, and perhaps not more should be built there now.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad That possibility cannot be dismissed lightly. Until there is a far clearer picture about the future pattern of generation, to serve the interests of net zero and lower bills, how much sense does it make to behave as if no such uncertainty exists? Turning Scottish backs on nuclear? Offshore wind developments on the scale envisaged only make sense if there is access to markets. Otherwise, we end up with billions in 'constraint payments' to generators who can't generate. Pump-storage hydro can mitigate that problem (and please let's get on with it) but only in part. Rationally, how much does the market actually need? Large-scale offshore wind is just as feasible around other parts of the UK which are far closer to population centres. As I write (albeit on a sunny day), solar is providing a third of Britain's electricity, which would not have been foreseen even a few years ago. A quarter of our power is coming in via interconnectors while wind accounts for just 2.3 per cent. My instincts tell me that much of the ScotWind programme may never be built because lower cost alternatives will emerge. We need to speed up these projects and also ensure recognition of their particular importance to peripheral areas where this is a one-off economic opportunity. Ofgem won't do that so politicians must. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad We must think again about whether it makes sense to run down gas or turn our Scottish backs on nuclear (in each case, the answer is 'no'). We still need a balanced energy policy in which Scottish renewables play a significant part.
The Herald Scotland
5 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Scottish Greens at the crossroads – principle or pragmatism?
Fergus Ewing, the former SNP Minister, previously dismissed them as 'wine-bar revolutionaries'. To each and every taunt, Green politicians tend to respond with a gentle, faintly supercilious smile. Read More: In truth, the most fervent advocates of Greenery can occasionally seem a mite smug. Like religious adherents, they can sometimes give the impression that their path is the way to truth, while others are self-deluded. Only very occasionally, mind. And they mean well. They genuinely believe, as they set out in their 2024 election manifesto, that 'we are hurtling towards climate hell.' Such a conclusion tends to lessen the scope for nuanced politics. But, alongside that, there is also an intriguing conundrum confronting the Scottish Greens right now as they elect their next leaders and contemplate the pending Holyrood elections. Are they content to be, principally, a party of voluble protest? Or is there pragmatism too – an opportunity to cut deals with other parties, such as the SNP or Labour, in pursuit of interim Green objectives? As The Herald has ably chronicled, there are those in the party who argue that the Greens must present a fully radical agenda, who distrust Holyrood compromise, including the Bute House pact previously struck by the retiring leadership. Equally, though, there are prominent Greens who lampoon such talk as 'heroic Bolshevik insurgency' – which achieves precisely nothing for the people of Scotland. Politics is frequently a question of balancing principle, pragmatism and power. Just ask those Labour MPs who found it impossible to back their leader's demands for welfare cuts. Again, commonly, that balance becomes trickier as a party gains more salience. It is relatively easy to be pure of thought when what you say and do is immaterial. That tends to change when there is the prospect that your contribution could alter Parliamentary arithmetic, could advance or thwart legislation, could sustain or oust a government. Then you have to choose. To compromise. You have to acknowledge that you cannot implement every line of your manifesto. Not least because the people did not vote for you in sufficient numbers. Be clear. The Greens will not abandon principle. They will still, on occasion, sport that knowing smile. But perhaps they may once more seek a mandate to enter negotiations with others. Is that feasible? Are the Greens not burned by Humza Yousaf's abrupt decision as First Minister to end the Bute House pact and kick them out of government? Seems not. One senior source dismissed the notion that they were 'nursing some raw fury at the SNP.' I was told that there is a good 'transactional' relationship with Team Swinney, as evidenced by the negotiations over the Scottish Government budget. The Greens know that John Swinney does not share their overall outlook. For example, he believes firmly in pursuing GDP economic growth while they do not, insisting that was excluded from the Bute House deal. First Minister John Swinney (Image: PA) And, yes, perhaps the relationship with Nicola Sturgeon was deeper. She is arguably closer to the Green perspective. After all, in a lecture, she previously set out the concept of assessing 'well-being', rather than simply economic wealth. But it seems the Greens could still work with John Swinney, where necessary. There is, I was told, 'sufficient mutual trust and respect.' There could also be a deal with Labour, arithmetically. But core Labour policies might be problematic – not least their eager advocacy of nuclear power. For now, the SNP seem more likely partners. After all, both parties support Scottish independence. Albeit with differing degrees of vigour. Frankly, I do not believe that Green politicians get up in the morning with the first thought that they must end the Union. Their waking focus is on the environment and climate change. Still, the Greens insist that they back independence, placing it in the context of those environmental aims. They say that an independent Scotland would be better placed to alter energy policy and tackle the climate crisis. And there is another thought lurking at the back of Green minds. They note that John Swinney has faced a degree of internal SNP criticism from those who believe he is not sufficiently fervent in pursuing independence. One source suggested to me that this might present an opportunity for the Greens to highlight their independence credentials. Frankly, to prise votes from the SNP. However, as with Mr Swinney, it seems the Greens want to get away from discourse over the independence process. To build support instead for the proclaimed advantages of the notion. Again, though, the Greens will not shed their iconoclastic image. They will continue to position themselves as challenging the wealthy establishment. An opportunity to do that presents itself with President Trump's possible Scottish visit. Many leading politicians will be torn between mounting protests and arguing Scotland's interests, if given a chance. No such dilemma confronts the Greens – who will be firmly behind the barricades. But, still, there is the lure of pragmatism. I expect the Greens to enter the next Holyrood elections with a litany of claimed achievements and a taste of what more could be feasible, if they are granted influence. Always a degree of grandiloquence on the climate. But a focus on cutting costs for working families. Rent controls, free bus travel for young people, secured by the Greens in partnership with the SNP. This leadership election will determine who is primarily making that case. Patrick Harvie is standing down as co-convener. Lorna Slater is seeking re-election. As I write, MSPs Ross Greer and Gillian Mackay are also in the frame. Others may emerge. En passant, I should note that the winners will not necessarily be one woman, one man, as in the past. That reflects revised equality guidance. But political balance will still be at the core of this contest. What direction will the Scottish Greens pursue? And could it lead them back to shared power at Holyrood? Brian Taylor is a former political editor for BBC Scotland and a columnist for The Herald. He cherishes his family, the theatre – and Dundee United FC
