Defections to Reform smack of political opportunism
The party has also bled support in the Scottish Parliament when MSP Jamie Green joined the Liberal Democrats in April.
Of course, this phenomenon is not limited to the Tories. In March 2021, SNP MPs Kenny MacAskill and Neale Hanvey followed former FM Alex Salmond to the newly-formed Alba Party.
Ash Regan followed suit in 2023 after coming a distant third in the race to become Nicola Sturgeon's successor.
Ash Regan is a high-profile defectee. (Image: PA) In some cases, the mental gymnastics required to swap one party for another are quite impressive.
Former MP Lisa Cameron famously deserted the SNP for the Tories in October 2023, as the East Kilbride parliamentarian faced a staunch selection contest.
Reform councillor Jamie McGuire serves as a recent example of this drastic ideological seesaw.
Read more:
The former Labour apparatchik worked as a Parliamentary Researcher for Paisley & Renfrewshire North MP Alison Taylor and was a past chair of Glasgow University's Labour club.
He dramatically swapped sides in early June, announcing his defection as Nigel Farage visited Scotland ahead of the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election.
McGuire's former colleagues have shared their shock at the defection.
A fellow Glasgow University graduate who was on the committee of the Labour society alongside Jamie told The Herald that the defection came as a 'slap in the face'.
'I am quite shocked,' the source said. 'He was so deep within the Labour circles and organised some decent events too for the society.
'He got elected as a councillor and trained by the party to be a candidate so it does feel like a slap in the face. It is shocking.'
Jamie McGuire is a former Labour councillor. (Image: Newsquest) The decision came as a surprise to another Glasgow University politics alumnus, who took classes alongside McGuire.
The source said they thought the announcement was a joke at first.
They told The Herald: 'I was bored scrolling on Reddit, then saw his picture in a Glasgow-related page with Reform background logos. I assumed some SNP cybernat made it up as a joke but when I found out it was real I was beyond floored.
'The guy was the biggest Labour party advocate I knew at university, I even spoke to him last year and he was talking to me about his excitement about what the Labour party was going to do in government and his excitement for the Scottish elections. It feels like a fever dream.
'He's one of the most lovely guys I've met and I'm really curious to hear more about his decision and hopes for the party's future.'
Another person who knew McGuire at university said: 'I'll tell you this, it was coming. He was setting himself up to be a Labour MP.
'Clearly he sensed the way of the wind and jumped ship.'
In a tweet that now appears to be deleted, McGuire shared a photo of himself alongside Jeremy Corbyn at an event he organised during COP26.
The post reads: 'It was a surreal experience tonight to share a stage with Jeremy Corbyn for my GU Labour Club COP26 event. Thank you to the Corbyn Project for showing us that another future is possible.'
Jeremy Corbyn was hosted at an event set up by McGuire. (Image: Other) McGuire also served as Secretary of Scottish Young Labour and Scottish Labour Students in recent years.
The Renfrewshire councillor cancelled a scheduled interview with The Herald last week, and did not respond to subsequent requests for comment.
However, speaking to the Local Democracy Service last week, McGuire pushed back against claims made by his former group leader on the council.
Councillor Ian McMillian of Labour said: 'His politics have, shall we say, always been a bit fluid and, since being elected three years ago as a Labour councillor, he has at times struggled to be a team player.'
McGuire retorted: 'I've always been a team player, I've always been in politics to try and make a difference.
'I wish everyone well. I've always thought it was about the community, that was the reason I got involved in politics.
'I've always tried my best and I don't think anyone could disagree with the fact I put 100 per cent in all the time.'
He said he joined Reform because it was a 'genuine opportunity' to tackle 'deep structural issues' affecting the UK.
Read more:
McGuire's story is far from unique. Indeed, it feels as if defections are occurring with increasing regularity.
Some of that is to be expected as new political parties come to the forefront. Yet, far too often, ideological consistency is abandoned for political opportunity.
Where does the average voter stand amidst all of this?
Is it fair that the people of Renfrew North, who elected a Labour councillor four years ago, are now represented by a member of Reform UK? Or what about the constituents of West Scotland, who elected Jamie Greene as a Tory, and now have a Lib Dem MSP?
After each high-profile defection calls for by-elections abound; in our nation's newspapers, radio stations, and social media sites.
And while the noble thing would be to defend one's seat, or at least to stand down, politics is ultimately about power. Fairness is not top of mind for most politicians.
Yet, sooner or later; in 2026, 2027, or 2029, our happy band of defectors will face the voting public.
And like Julius Caesar, now they have crossed the Rubicon, there is no going back.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
36 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Keir Starmer urged to do just one thing every day to fix the Nuked Blood scandal
As millions see a viral video of Labour's broken promises to nuclear veterans, the PM is being asked every day to do the one thing that would fix it Keir Starmer was already gacing a £5bn lawsuit and police investigation over a cover-up of human experiments on British troops. Now a video of Labour's broken promises to survivors has gone viral, with 2 million people seeing proof of Cabinet ministers demanding compensation schemes they've failed to come up with in office. And after 327 days of Downing Street ignoring requests to resolve what has become known as the Nuked Blood scandal, campaigners have vowed to repost the clips every day until they get a sit-down with the PM. Starmer risks further humiliation in the months to come, with publication of an estimated 750,000 classified documents packed with juicy details of what really happened to 40,000 troops ordered to take part in nuclear weapons trials over more than a decade. Alan Owen, founder of campaign group LABRATS, said: "Keir was the first party leader to sit down with members of the nuclear community and we believed him when he said 'your campaign is our campaign'. But after almost a year in government we are no nearer the truth or justice. Veterans are dying every week, and families are suffering chronic illness and psychological harm. "We can start to fix that if we can show him our evidence of an official cover-up of biological experiments with radiation. It is fairer to the taxpayer to resolve it now, rather than wait for a judge's order. All we want is for him to look us in the eye and hear what we have to tell him." The Ministry of Defence has denied for seven decades that troops were deliberately put in harm's way during the Cold War race to create nuclear weapons. But in 2022 the Mirror uncovered a memo detailing the blood tests of Group Captain Terry Gledhill, conducted before, during and after he led a squadron of planes through the mushroom clouds to gather samples. It led to more than 30 separate orders for blood tests, covering thousands of men in all three armed forces, plus Commonwealth troops and indigenous people, between 1952 and 1967. Most were locked on a top secret database, codenamed Merlin, at the Atomic Weapons Establishment, which is about to be declassified and published following cross-party pressure from parliament and the Mirror. A partial release has already revealed hundreds of named servicemen called up for testing, confirmation that thousands were involved, and analysis of the results by weapons scientists. Yet veterans who remember giving blood and urine specimens have found their medical records are missing, denying them accurate diagnosis for the high rates of cancers and blood disorders they report, as well as blocking war pensions and compensation. In Opposition, Labour bigwigs who now hold influential government roles said "it shames us as a country" that nuclear veterans did not have justice, and demanded financial compensation from the Tories. Deputy Leader Angela Rayner sent campaigners a video she had scripted herself, calling for the Tories to "set up an appropriate financial compensation programme for veterans and their descendants". Defence Secretary John Healey told the Labour Party Conference that the lack of a scheme "shames us, it shames us as a country". And Armed Forces Minister Luke Pollard told the Mirror's News Agenda podcast that it was "really dumb" for the Tories not to have paid out already. Peter Stefanovic, lawyer and CEO of the Campaign for Social Justice, edited the clips together and has been sharing them on social media, gathering more than 2m views in just a few weeks. He said: "They all backed compensation for our nuclear test veterans while in Opposition, and Keir Starmer himself told them 'the country owes you a huge debt of honour. Your campaign is our campaign'. I will repost my film every single day until the PM agrees to meet with them to discuss how his government will honour the commitment his party made to these national heroes." LABRATS asked the PM for a meeting within days of his taking office, but has had no response for 327 days. The Mirror has also asked Mr Healey for a meeting, but none has been arranged. The Met Police are assessing a 500-page dossier of evidence about allegations of criminal misconduct in public office, while lawyers are preparing to issue a legal claim for the missing medical records that is predicted to lead to a 10-figure payout. Last month, the MoD admitted the monitoring "may have been" conducted without proper medical supervision.
The Herald Scotland
2 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
SNP's nuclear stance costing Scotland jobs, says UK minister
While energy is largely reserved to the UK Government, the Scottish Government effectively has a veto on new nuclear power developments through planning regulations. Last week, in her Spending Review, Rachel Reeves unveiled a multi-billion-pound investment programme in new nuclear energy. The Chancellor said £2.5 billion of the £8.3bn set aside for Great British Energy would be redirected to support new nuclear technologies, including small modular reactors, and a new plant in the south of England. READ MORE: In an interview with BBC Scotland's Sunday Show, Mr Shanks was asked about why the money had been redirected, particularly given the party's manifesto made no mention of nuclear, but instead focussed on onshore wind, solar, and hydro power. 'Well, it's not an exclusive list, because there's a lot of other clean energy technologies,' Mr Shanks said. 'Nuclear is part of our energy mix. 'I'm not going to make any apologies for the government investing in nuclear where thousands of highly skilled jobs can be delivered, including in Scotland if it wasn't for the ideological position of the SNP to block new nuclear, could be delivering those well paid skilled jobs here in Scotland. 'They turned their face against that, and they will have to answer for that.' He added: 'The broader point here is Great British Energy is all about harnessing the power of the public purse to invest not just in clean power projects directly but supply chains that drive them. 'Because unlike the previous government, we want to see those well paid, industrialised jobs coming alongside us, not towing in offshore wind and switching it on, but building it in this country and getting the manufacturing jobs that go with it. "That's how we deliver the jobs of the future.' The Herald revealed at the weekend that unions are calling on the Scottish Government to end its longstanding resistance to new nuclear power. Louise Gilmour, from GMB Scotland, has written to Energy Minister Gillian Martin calling for an urgent rethink. She said: 'Amidst broken promises on a green jobs revolution, the Scottish Government cannot afford to scoff at the offering of nuclear energy on the table. An offer that would in large part be funded by the UK Government. The ban against new nuclear – especially SMRs – must be lifted.' Responding to Ms Gilmour's comments, a Scottish Government spokesperson told The Herald: 'The Scottish Government is focused on supporting growth and creating jobs by capitalising on Scotland's immense renewable energy capacity rather than expensive new nuclear energy which takes decades to build, creates toxic waste which is difficult and costly to dispose of and does not generate power at a cost that will bring down energy bills.' READ MORE: Meanwhile, during the interview with the BBC, Mr Shanks was pressed on the impact of oil and gas job losses in Aberdeen. Companies in the north east have blamed the UK Government's Energy Profits Levy, which means the effective rate of tax on oil and gas companies is 78%. Mr Shanks said: 'Every single job loss is hugely distressing for the individuals and for their families and communities. 'I do not for a second discount the impact that job losses have, but I do not think that is an entirely fair assessment, because yes, there have been job losses recently announced, but there have also been thousands of jobs created.' He argued that transition involved movement from one part of the energy sector to another, and that support for workers was crucial. 'That is why we announced incredibly quickly that passporting support—where if you are an offshore oil and gas worker doing a particular job and you could do the same job in offshore wind, you should not have to requalify or have your skills reassessed. 'You should be able to move straight into that job. That is something the previous government talked about for a long time. We delivered it.' READ MORE: The Labour Energy Minister also said he was 'hopeful' that an announcement on investment in Grangemouth will be made soon. Mr Shanks said more than 80 potential investors had come forward since the UK Government pledged £200 million for the site. The Government is seeking a further £600m in private investment in the area, following the closure of Scotland's last oil refinery. Mr Shanks said the investment would help provide a 'long-term, sustainable future' for the site. Petroineos, the joint venture between INEOS and PetroChina, which owns the 100-year-old refinery, first announced plans to close in November 2023. They said the plant's future as an import terminal would 'require significantly fewer people to operate' and that there would need to be a 'net reduction of approximately 400 roles over the next two years.' Mr Shanks said the Government was engaging with businesses on new projects for the area. 'We have had some really positive meetings around potential investors,' he said. 'In fact, more than 80 potential investors have come forward. Scottish Enterprise is driving forward due diligence on that. There are a number of really credible projects that we are developing at the moment. 'We hope we will have some really positive announcements to make soon.' Mr Shanks said the 'unprecedented' £200m investment from the National Wealth Fund would help 'create the jobs of the future' while ensuring long-term investment security. He added: 'I am not involved in the due diligence, as you would not expect, but there are some really exciting, viable projects coming forward that will deliver jobs in Grangemouth long into the future.' Last week, Jan Robertson, Grangemouth director for Scottish Enterprise, said she had received a 'mixture of inquiries' from businesses—some interested in the site itself and others with 'a good opportunity to become projects in the relatively near term.' 'What I mean by that is the next three to four years,' she told Holyrood's Economy and Fair Work Committee. 'Our approach at the moment is very much working with those and working as closely and quickly as we can to make the progress that we want to see in Grangemouth.' Ms Martin told the committee the 'door is not closed' to companies looking to work at the site, and said Petroineos had also received approaches. 'We could look back five years and start pointing fingers, but the most important thing is that in the last year—actually the last six months—Project Willow and the taskforce have moved things along in a way that has been swift, agile and focused,' she said. 'I am feeling so much more confident than I did this time last year in the prospects for that site.'
Scotsman
2 hours ago
- Scotsman
John Swinney's critics should bite their tongues and get behind him
Sign up to our Politics newsletter 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... With his bank-managerly demeanour, he was the opposite of his predecessor, under whom the nationalists had grown increasingly divided. It did not take long, however, for the Swinney project to begin falling apart and, after a poor election result, calls for his resignation grew so loud that he could not credibly ignore them. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad I write, of course, not about current events but about the end of Swinney's first spell in charge of the SNP which ended, after four years, in 2004, paving the way for the return to the leadership of Alex Salmond. First Minister John Swinney joins candidate for the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election Katy Loudon during the last weekend of the campaign. Picture: JeffHistory has a habit of repeating itself. Today, little more than a year after succeeding Humza Yousaf as leader of the SNP, Swinney finds himself in what must be uncomfortably familiar territory. Defeat for the SNP in the recent Hamilton, Larkhall, and Stonehouse by-election has triggered a crisis in his leadership. There have been calls – both anonymous and public – for his resignation. The sense that he is losing his grip on the SNP grows stronger by the day. Just as he did in 2004, Swinney has decided to fight on. Responding to reports that a group of colleagues had met to discuss a leadership challenge during the SNP's annual conference in October, the First Minister said he did not think that would be a good idea. Swinney told BBC Radio Scotland that he had returned to the SNP leadership in order to help his party 'recover' from what he described as 'a very, very difficult situation in the spring of 2024' and that he remained focused on the job in hand. He was not, he added, worried 'in the slightest' about the briefing against him. If you say so, First Minister. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Swinney's characterisation of the state of his party when he took over last year is correct. Former FM Humza Yousaf's decision to end the power-sharing agreement between the SNP and the Greens had blown up in his face, leaving him without the parliamentary support needed to get things done, and the nationalists had descended into the sort of in-fighting that had, for many decades, kept them on the fringes of our politics. Given the circumstances, Swinney's flaws became his advantages. The SNP – and, indeed, the country – very much required a period of calm after years of stormy political weather. Steady old John was just the captain his party needed. However, Scottish nationalists are not, by nature, patient. Swinney may have been elected to be a safe pair of hands but, already, he's under pressure to be more radical, with a number of critics inside the SNP demanding he push harder for a second independence referendum. In response to these briefings, Swinney declared that, after returning stability to his party, he planned to 'open up a conversation about independence'. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad For some of Swinney's critics – one thinks, for example, of former health secretary Alex Neil, whose contempt for the First Minister dates back decades – this will never be good enough. Scotland will never gain its 'freedom' through conversations. Rather, the break-up of the Union will require something more radical than a cosy chat. It is perfectly understandable that those SNP members now agitating for Swinney to either change course or quit, want to see a new strategy for independence. Having been told, for years, that defeat in the 2014 vote was a bump in the road on the way to nationhood, they believe they have been badly let down in recent years. I'm not at all sure, however, what Swinney could be doing differently to advance the cause of independence. Former FM Nicola Sturgeon spent nine years telling SNP members that 'Indyref2' was on the horizon. A rush and a push, lads and lassies, and the land that they stood on would be theirs. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad But reality – in the shape of continuing minority support for independence and the Scottish Government's lack of power to call a referendum – got in the way of Sturgeon's plans. The authority to stage another vote remains with the UK Government. Recent polls suggest support for independence is rising and that, if there were another referendum tomorrow, the Union would come to an end. This, says one senior Swinney ally, is something for which the First Minister deserves some credit. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad I have some sympathy for that view. Do those now agitating for Swinney to go really think that their party – and their cause – would be in ruder health had Humza Yousaf remained in post? With the next Holyrood election just 11 months away, the last thing the SNP needs is another destabilising leadership contest. Polls may show increased support for independence but Swinney knows – because the focus group data he reads tells him so – that the constitution does not top the list of voters' priorities. Swinney is every bit as fanatical about independence as those now whispering about a leadership challenge – many years ago, one of the SNP leader's aides told me he 'would live in a cave to be free' – but the First Minister's zealotry is tempered by a degree of common sense. He knows and accepts that the time is not right for another referendum. Swinney also knows that the slight recovery his party has made under his leadership is still fragile. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The SNP is – as was perpetually the case for decades before the party unified under Alex Salmond in 2004 – divided and fractious. Any Scottish nationalist who thinks it's now time exacerbate that division is a fool.
