Kate Forbes quits: what it means for the SNP
Well, not any more.
READ MORE
The news that she will not stand at next year's election has properly stunned the SNP group at [[Holyrood]] and the wider party.
The timing of the announcement that she wants to spend more time with her young family is not coincidental. Today is her daughter Naomi's third birthday.
There is something a bit jarring about some of the tributes paid to Ms Forbes, especially those by people who had attacked and briefed against her during 2023's bitter SNP leadership campaign.
But that's politics, I suppose.
John Swinney recently claimed to have 'healed' his party, but the scars from that lengthy battle between Ms Forbes, Humza Yousaf and Ash Regan are still fresh.
And while his deputy's decision to stand down means the race to replace John Swinney is now likely to be between Stephen Flynn and Mairi McAllan, could it also signal a change in the party's politics?
'Kate was holding back some of the wilder current obsessions,' one MSP told me.
'As we approach the election, watch the party stance on so-called conversion therapy' they added.
Plans for a ban were shelved after [[John Swinney]] succeeded Mr Yousaf as First Minister, with the Scottish Government instead working with UK ministers on Westminster-led legislation.
There is, of course, an election looming, one where, thanks to Nigel Farage, the result is still widely unpredictable.
It may be that the SNP needs to look, once again, at the Greens for help in forming a government.
No Kate Forbes, and a move on conversion therapy could make those Bute House Mk2 conversations a little easier.
Another senior SNP source said they thought Ms Forbes' resignation was a damning indictment of the party's chances next year.
'We're losing parts left right and centre' they said. 'It doesn't bode well for John's plan to win a majority next year - if there was even a glimmer of that happening I doubt she'd have thrown in the towel.'
Another thing about the timing of the announcement is that it comes just days before the Deputy First Minister is due to sit down with The Herald at the Edinburgh Festival Fringe for a long form interview in front of a live audience.
The chat will take place in the Dissection Room at Summerhall, the capital's old vet school.
There is plenty to dissect.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
20 minutes ago
- The Sun
Of all the harebrained schemes to smash migrant smugglers, Labour's new One In One Out plan is worst of all – here's why
HOME SECRETARY Yvette Cooper has a new plan to stop the migrants flooding into this country but is not going to tell you about it. It isn't about the numbers. They're calling the plan One-in, One-out but that isn't about the numbers, either. 4 4 More than 25,400 illegal migrants have crossed the Channel this year alone — 50 per cent more than last year — but that's not about the numbers, apparently. Ms Cooper isn't inclined to even reveal how many of them will be sent back to France under the new scheme, because to do so would only aid the people smugglers, or so she claims. Yesterday we had the rather ludicrous launch of a new policy that doesn't even do what it says on the tin. The Government's hope that this gimmick — for that is plainly what it is — will convince anyone the vile people-smuggling gangs will simply give up trafficking their lucrative quarries is wildly deluded. Taxpayer's expense Any examination of the new system makes it immediately obvious that there is no chance of it working. The Home Secretary said yesterday that, as of this week, migrants arriving illegally on to our shores will be detained then returned to France. Ms Cooper said detained 'within days' and returned 'within weeks'. But how, exactly? It was what she didn't say that was of far more interest. For example, where will they be detained? As far as we know, there are no workable detention centres anywhere near Dover. Small boat migrant found dead riddled with bullets on French coast after being gunned down 'by people smugglers' And Manston, the current holding area 20 miles away, is already over capacity. Ms Cooper has not volunteered any information as to where the arrivals will go. Neither has she suggested how long they will be held in detention, whether they will go through a court process or, indeed, whether they will be able to access legal services at the taxpayer's expense. As if all that wasn't bad enough, there is simply no explanation at all of how the migrants will be 'returned'. Will they all be packed into the back of a lorry? Will Border Force take them back to France on their boats? Or will it be down to the RNLI? One-in, One-out, it may be called, but not one clue is being given as to its likely success Perhaps the migrants will be put on the Eurostar or flown out of the country on one of those chartered jets. You might as well throw a dice or toss a coin. One-in, One-out, it may be called, but not one clue is being given as to its likely success. The Home Secretary has conceded there 'might' be legal challenges in some cases. So it's then back to the old right to a family life, under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The public, of course, are under no illusions. 4 4 My listeners and readers gave me their verdict about all this yesterday. 'If it's 50,000 in and 50,000 out, they get replaced by another 50,000, so it's still 50,000 more,' said one wise caller. Despite Ms Cooper's claim that this is not about the numbers, the increasingly frustrated and fed-up citizens of this country are very clear that it is. She has conceded that only about 50 migrants will be exchanged per week in the initial pilot stage of the programme — which is due to run for only 11 months. That represents just one in 17 of the current small-boat arrivals on to our shores. And so, obviously, the numbers do matter. Ms Cooper says that the replacement migrants will be fully documented and legitimised. In effect, they will qualify to come and live here because they can prove who they are and that they have family here. Does she really think that system won't be abused? Asylum seekers in France can now apply online to come to Britain. So, you can only imagine the numbers that will flock to the French coast in the hopes of a successful application. In one fell swoop, the Government has taken away the risk of dying in the Channel — instead encouraging the migrants to fill out a form. Harebrained schemes And who will assess the suitability of the applicants? Will a family of four from Libya get precedence over two teenage brothers from Eritrea? And if their application is successful, where will they live? A migrant hotel? Social housing? An army camp? Of all the harebrained schemes to smash the gangs, stop the boats, fix the system and secure our borders — yes, Sir Keir Starmer has promised to do all four — this is perhaps the worst of all. It brings yet more people into the country with no perceived skills or reason to be here. It adds fuel to an already tense situation, up and down the country. And it will almost certainly fail to do what it is meant to do. Aside from that, it'll cost more billions of pounds of our money. I'm not in. I'm out.
The Guardian
20 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Labour thinktank offers sponsorship packages to meet and influence ‘key policymakers'
A Labour thinktank has been offering sponsorship packages where businesses can meet and influence MPs and ministers, according to a report. The Labour Infrastructure Forum (LIF) has been offering companies the chance to sponsor events at which they can meet 'key policymakers' in private and 'shape the discussion', the Times said. An LIF prospectus lists a set of sponsorship packages on offer for companies, including a £7,850 deal for a 'private breakfast/dinner roundtable with an influential Labour figure'. Other deals on offer include £11,750 for a 'parliamentary panel event with key policymakers', and between £21,500 and £30,000 for a 'Westminster drinks reception'. The prices are not inclusive of VAT. The Labour Infrastructure Forum describes itself on its website as 'a thinktank focused on getting Britain building and growing again'. It states that it wants to 'spark dialogue' between the party and 'those working across the infrastructure sector'. The thinktank was launched in September last year at an event with speeches from Darren Jones MP, the chief secretary to the Treasury, and Varun Chandra, a business adviser to Keir Starmer. It is not part of the Labour party and is not a lobbying company, which means it does not need to abide by the rules or guidance for lobbying firms or political parties. A spokesperson for the LIF told the Times that the group used sponsorship money to cover its costs and that 'any LIF activity that is supported by sponsors will be made publicly available at the time and in our annual report, as is common across the industry'. The group does not disclose its sponsors. The Labour party said it had no connection to LIF and does not endorse its activities. 'Commercial partnerships at events are a longstanding practice and have no bearing on party or government policy. The party fully complies with all rules relating to the reporting of donations,' a party spokesperson said. LIF states that its secretariat and work is supported by the lobbying company Bradshaw Advisory. The Times reported that a client of Bradshaw Advisory had been able to have a meeting last year with Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary, at the Labour party conference, which has not been declared on transparency records. A Labour party spokesperson said: 'This was a meeting at party conference that was held in a political capacity. All meetings held in a ministerial capacity are declared in the proper way in full accordance with the rules.' Labour came under fire last autumn for offering company bosses breakfast with Reynolds for up to £30,000. For £15,000 plus VAT, companies were told they would get an opportunity to give a keynote speech, photographs with the business secretary and others, and a dedicated member of Labour party staff to help make introductions. For £30,000 they would also get to help decide who would attend. In the pitch, Labour's commercial team called the offer a 'unique opportunity to become a commercial partner at our business policy roundtable over breakfast'. The event ultimately did not go ahead and the party said Reynolds had been unaware of it. The Guardian reported last month that Labour MPs were alarmed at the number of sponsored corporate receptions for backbenchers that have been arranged by the party, amid concerns about perceived conflicts of interest. MPs said they had received invitations for networking receptions that include explicit advertisements for property developers or public affairs firms, sent directly from the parliamentary Labour party (PLP) office.
The Sun
20 minutes ago
- The Sun
Keir Starmer faces new sleaze row over Labour caught offering access to influential figures for cash
SIR Keir Starmer faces a new sleaze row over Labour offering access to 'influential' figures for cash. Since last summer a group linked to the party has been flogging sponsorship packages costing £9,500 to private firms. In exchange business leaders are invited to private meetings with 'key policymakers' where they can 'shape the conversation'. Sponsorship packs offered to companies include a £7,850 deal, where buyers can enjoy a 'private breakfast/dinner roundtable with an influential Labour figure'. There's also an £11,750 option to sponsor a 'parliamentary panel event with key policymakers' or £30,000 choice to pay for a 'Westminster drinks reception'. The cash for access, revealed by The Times, is organised by a group called the Labour Infrastructure Forum (LIF). Because it's run by lobbyists and a council of Labour bigwigs, but isn't itself a lobbying company, it is exempt from usual anti-sleaze rules. The organisation so far refuses to reveal which firms have signed up to its lucrative deals and who the influential Labour figures are that have taken part in back-room meet ups. A spokesperson for LIF said the group uses sponsorship cash to cover costs and 'any LIF activity that is supported by sponsors will be made publicly available at the time and in our annual report, as is common across the industry'. A Labour Party spokesman said: 'Commercial partnerships at events are a longstanding practice and have no bearing on party or government policy. The party fully complies with all rules relating to the reporting of donations.' Sir Keir Starmer red-faced AGAIN after Commons opens sleaze probe into his earnings 1
