
Scotland needed Kate Forbes
That she is doing so in order to spend more time with her family, particularly her three-year-old daughter Naomi, is entirely in keeping with how she lives her life. Of all the politicians I have known, she is the most fiercely driven by service and faith. Her authenticity, her refusal to hear the cock crow, has cost her at times. But it also elevated her among her peers.
Forbes's explanation of the moment that led her to make the decision during this summer recess, having already been selected as a candidate for next May's election, rings all too true. Visiting an Indian orphanage, 'there was a moment… when it just suddenly dawned on me what a great privilege it is to be a mother but also to have a parent', she told the Times. 'It's not an inconvenience to be squeezed into the rest of my life but actually is quite a high calling.'
I've spoken to her often over the years, and it was always clear that the long distances and time-sacrifice involved in pursuing her career – regular five-hour drives to and from her Highland constituency and home – were a drain. The arrival of a child only added to the burden of juggling everything in a fulfilling way.
Holyrood is meant to be a family-friendly parliament, but there will always be a limit to just how family-friendly the political life can be. Not just an MSP, but a Cabinet minister holding demanding posts and, latterly, the cross-government role of deputy FM. It's not a life that can be lived half-in, half-out. In the end, something had to give, and she has made her choice.
It is, clearly, a loss: to the government, to the SNP, and to Scottish public life. Forbes was the ballast in the Swinney administration, the senior guarantor that the Sturgeon era of increasingly radical leftism was at an end. Her very presence underwrote Swinney's promise that his administration would be mainstream and moderate.
She was also, simply, very good at being a minister, a rarity in Edinburgh. Her civil servants rated her highly, as did their colleagues in Whitehall – she was energetic, constructive and bullshit-free. The business community saw her as their voice in government, not as a cheerleader come what may, but as an ally who understood the need for economic growth, wealth creation and innovation not just to boost national performance but also to provide the tax revenues that could fund public services and a war on poverty. She felt this naturally, in a way few of her party colleagues do.
Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe
The public liked her too. I remember sitting with her in a café in Inverness, where she was continually approached by passers-by displaying real warmth towards her. She connected with ordinary people in an unaffected, natural way. Not all of them agreed with her faith-based social conservatism, but they could detect the authenticity, and were less put off by her traditional views than the progressive campaigners who often screamed loudest. She was real, in an era of plastic politicians.
SNP high command, which Nicola Sturgeon controlled long after leaving office, did everything it could to stop her rising to the top. Humza Yousaf was, fatally, shoved forward to stop her replacing Sturgeon, and the party machine put up every block it could. Forbes was more popular with the public, and even those of us who don't support independence could see she was the better candidate by a distance. Sturgeon got her way, Yousaf won, and then very quickly he fell. Forbes would have been good at the job.
In an era of growing political division, we need politicians like Forbes. She pursued politics and policy in a way that rose above ideology, which made her a uniter, rather than a divider. She liked to work with politicians across the political spectrum to get things done. And as Reform rises, her particular mix of hard-headedness, compassion and common sense perhaps offered a compelling pathway to tackling that threat.
The government, without her, looks thin on talent. I'm more impressed by the junior ministers than most of the Cabinet, who have been in situ too long without making much of a difference to Scots' quality of life. In fact, they have overseen decline across the board. Forbes was one of the few motive forces towards improvement – a believer in radical public sector reform and challenging the vested interests that continue to hold the nation back.
Mark Logan, formerly Scotland's chief entrepreneur and a senior figure at Skyscanner, the tech giant sold for £1.3 billion, worked closely with her, and said he would have given her a senior job in any company he worked for. There aren't many at Holyrood you would say that about. It seems more likely that Forbes will do something with a social impact, though. 'I will continue to be motivated by public service of some kind,' she said. 'Public service is what gets me out of bed in the morning.' There is no reason to doubt that is true.
She hasn't ruled out returning to Holyrood at some point in the future. She is young enough to raise her family and then start a political career again. One hopes her voice will continue to be heard. For now, though, the progressive left and its online warriors won't have Kate Forbes to kick around any more. What's that phrase? Sometimes you don't know what you've got till it's gone.
[Further reading: Britain's decline is as much intellectual as political]
Related

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Glasgow Times
40 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
Recall sought on 'huge' battery storage plant near Clydebank
Scottish Ministers gave the go-ahead for a 560MW site covering 29 hectares on Whitehall Farm this week, causing uproar in the local community. A Facebook titled 'Save Our Countryside - Cochno Road' was set up shortly after the proposals were first announced, which has gained more than 1,000 members opposing the plans. Now, local MP, Douglas McAllister, has written to the Cabinet Secretary of Climate Action and Energy, Gillian Martin, and Ivan McKee, Minister of Public Finance, to recall their decision. In the letter, Mr McAllister wrote: "The level of objection by the community of West Dunbartonshire is based on the sheer size and scale of this potential development, described as one of the largest of its kind in Europe. The application site is the wrong location; it is too close in proximity to the heavily populated residential area of Faifley. The Scottish Government, in partnership with West Dunbartonshire local authority, has recently invested in excess of £35 million, completing a community education campus in Faifley due to be open in the autumn of this year. This proposed BESS application is in close proximity to that. In the letter, he said: "It is incredibly disappointing that at a time when the local community is celebrating the largest capital investment since the construction of Faifley, that at the same time, the Scottish Government's Energy Consents Unit has consented to such a significant unwelcome construction. "In all the circumstances, I respectfully submit that consenting to this application is inappropriate, and therefore I formally request, as the Member of Parliament for West Dunbartonshire, that Scottish Ministers give consideration to calling in the application outcome by the Energy Consents Unit to review matters." Examining the cup and ring markings at Whitehill 4, this, and three others in the small hazel woodland, are less than 20m from the perimeter of the development. (Image: Kat Jones) Meanwhile, Action to Protect Rural Scotland (APRS) is calling for the reconsideration of planning policy surrounding the battery site after seven, including the Whitehall Farm, were approved. Dr Kat Jones, Director of APRS, said: "It is shocking that a site with such important archaeological and natural heritage, and of such importance for local people and visitors, can get permission for a huge and damaging battery storage facility. If this site can get permission for battery storage, then nowhere is safe.

The National
an hour ago
- The National
Trans people face 'total ban from single-sex spaces under EHRC rules'
While services will not be compelled to provide single-sex spaces, The Times reported that trans people could be barred from accessing any that do exist – whether those spaces align with their birth sex or their acquired one. The difficulty stems from the fact that trans people will not be allowed to use facilities that align with their acquired gender – but can also be banned from using facilities that align with their birth sex if they look too much like their acquired gender. READ MORE: Trans toilet rules 'may force Scottish museums to close' Draft EHRC guidance states: 'For example, a trans man [who was born a female] might be excluded from the women-only service if the service provider decides that, because he presents as a man, other service users could reasonably object to his presence, and it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim to exclude him.' The Times reported that the finalised guidance would have the same effect as this draft guidance. It will apply to organisations that provide public services, including shops, museums, gyms, prisons, and NHS departments, among others. The statutory guidance, which will have to be approved by Labour's Equalities Minister Bridget Phillipson, is further expected to say that trans people can be excluded from single-sex sports, and that people could object to trans people's 'presence' if they feel it is a vulnerable situation, such as changing clothes. Services will be allowed to request to see people's birth certificates to decide whether they are allowed in a single-sex space – but will have to tread carefully as doing so insensitively could be considered discrimination, The Times reported. However, services will also have to provide suitable facilities for trans people to use, meaning a separate space may be the only option many places have. The EHRC is facing a legal challenge over its draft guidance, with a full hearing due in November. Good Law Project, who are bringing the challenge, claim the EHRC guidance goes 'far beyond' the Supreme Court's ruling, which said in April that sex must be considered biological under the 2010 Equality Act. 'It amounts to a bathroom ban for trans people, violating people's right to privacy in their everyday lives,' Good Law Project said. READ MORE: EHRC changes guidance on single-sex toilets after legal challenge People have privacy rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which campaigners argue may be breached by having to reveal biological details to use the toilet. 'We'll be arguing in November that the EHRC was wrong to say employers can only provide gendered toilets based on 'biological sex', and wrong to ignore ways that companies and the public sector can provide trans inclusive men's and women's facilities,' Good Law Project said. The EHRC has also faced criticism for the speed at which it has consulted on its draft guidance, using artificial intelligence to sift through 50,000 representations at a reported rate of 1850 per day. A legal challenge against the short consultation period was thrown out in June. A spokesperson for the EHRC said: 'The code of practice has not yet been finalised. We received an extremely high volume of responses to the consultation and are grateful to everyone who shared their feedback. 'To ensure we give these responses the consideration they merit, we are working at pace to analyse them and are amending the draft code of practice text where necessary to make it as clear and helpful as possible. The news comes after a Scottish Government report found that negative media and political attention around trans people is impacting on gender healthcare, making it harder to recruit and retain staff. 'But our code will remain consistent with the law as set out by the Supreme Court.'


Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
India approves $3.4 billion payout to state-run refiners for cooking gas losses
MUMBAI/NEW DELHI Aug 8 (Reuters) - India has approved 300 billion rupees ($3.4 billion) compensation to oil marketing companies for losses incurred in selling subsidised cooking gas, Information and Broadcasting Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw said on Friday. The compensation, approved by Prime Minister Narendra Modi's cabinet, would be paid to state-run Indian Oil Corp ( opens new tab, Bharat Petroleum Corp ( opens new tab and Hindustan Petroleum Corp ( opens new tab in 12 tranches, according to a government statement. It will allow state-run oil companies to continue crude procurement, debt servicing, and sustaining capital expenditure, the statement said. "As gas prices are impacted by geopolitics, the subsidy will insulate the country's middle-class families from any negative impact," Vaishnaw said at a briefing. The government also allocated 120.6 billion rupees towards a scheme to provide subsidised cooking gas connections to women from nearly 100 million poor households. ($1 = 87.6880 Indian rupees)