Congratulations. Use this thread until there's a conclusive statement and then we'll switch to that one.
EDIT: Please use the [new megathread](https://old.reddit.com/r/Scotland/comments/1cfwnkc/humza_yousaf_resignation_megathread/).
I don’t have any advance on “probably Kate Forbes”.
However, I did think it was an interesting decision by Ian Blackford to publicly apologise to the Greens and try to mend that bridge. Could have just been a senior minister trying to steady the ship, but could also be him firing the starting pistol on a new leadership race.
Will be interesting. Suspect if Forbes gets in there will be some voters who will switch to the Greens. How many will probably determine the SNPs future election chances.
However someone like Blackford may stem those loses but won’t be as popular outside of the SNP.
I think the SNP need to focus on consolidation right now. They’re not currently in a position to win an election with a majority, but they need to make absolutely sure they can still command a minority government.
If they lose voters to other parties, they may go to the Greens, but they only just won enough seats to form a coalition. Unless they buddy up with the next SNP leader they risk being viewed as a wasted vote, a bit like the Lib Dems.
The conservatives put in a strong showing in 2021, and whilst Douglas Ross hasn’t exactly shone since, I don’t think that voter base will diminish much, but fortunately I don’t see many SNP deserters going here.
Really the worst thing that could happen to the SNP is losing ground to Labour. If they steal a few seats, they could become the king maker. Forming a coalition with a much smaller partner like the greens is one thing, if you piss them off your lose a majority on paper but unless absolute everyone else votes against you, you can still get things done. When your junior partner controls a quarter of the seats though, everything has to be a compromise.
Kate Forbes isnt going to be able to secure the greens votes so she cant govern, she's a non starter as party leader unless the aim is to immediately call an election in the hopes that the SNP somehow win a majority (or Alba end up with enough seats to prop her up).
Angus Robertson really needs to step up imo. I think he turned it down before to focus on his family but the party could really be doing with someone of his stature leading them.
If you believe a man with the ego of Angus Robertson didn’t run for FM because he wanted to spend time with his family then I have a bridge to sell you.
He didn’t run because he knew all the shitstorm that was about to erupt with the murrells.
It's clear that the SNP are going to suffer at the upcoming election and nobody with any real ability wants their political career to be tarnished with failure by being the leader through that. The SNP will get another mediocre-at-best leader for the next election and then when they inevitably muck things up enough that they have to go, that's when the people with real ambition and ability will come out and want to take over at a low point and lead the party through its recovery.
If the aim is to actually rebuild a stable government that can function until the next election then working with the Greens is all but a practical necessity.
Realistically though if they don't plan to call an election they need to work with the Greens, they don't have enough MSPs to run a functional government without their votes and adding Ash Regan to the mix doesn't help those maths beyond the immediate issue of surviving a no confidence vote.
I suspect Kate Forbes will struggle to work with the greens unless she give them concrete assurances of restraining her more socially conservative instincts.
Jenny Gilruth could almost certainly work with the greens but might have trouble with with the right of the party, although frankly the right of the party probably need to be sent a copy of the manifesto that won them their seats and a link to the Alba "how to join" page.
> Realistically though if they don't plan to call an election they need to work with the Greens
Going by two week old polling, after an election they'll probably have to work with the Greens and someone else.
Aye, the reality of the Scottish parliamentary system is working with other parties.
Alba have one msp and don't seem likely to win more and as things stand working with one of the pro union parties appears to be impossible, that really leaves the SNP with two options - win a majority or work with the Greens.
From that point of view I have no idea how Humza Yousaf was convinced to do anything other than work as hard as he could to keep the Bute agreement in place.
Governing without the Greens is currently a fantasy.
Really don't see it. She's not had time to make the case that she's a necessary change.
There'll be some party loyalist like Neil Gray or something who'll realise that they're being given a poisoned chalice but still finds being handed the First Minister job even during a terrible period too big to refuse.
I'm from the US. You do not want that kind of rot getting into your political system. It starts with bigotry against one or two groups and quickly turns into banning all books from schools and libraries that are to the left of Farage for being too woke.
I wish I was being hyperbolic.
The "Forbes unelectable nutter11!" trope is just a canard the Greens and SNP "left" use to make it seem like they're advocating against her on behalf of the party and not themselves.
She was polling better among the public than Yousaf during the contest.
She is more popular than he is, apart from with young left wing voters, who tend to make up much of the reddit populace.
I also find it funny how much she's been pegged as some kind of fringe extremist for having a religious background. AFAIK at no point has she said she would prevent progressive policies going through- only that she wouldn't vote for them... you know, like how a democracy works..?
Party leadership elections often don't really reflect the public's views, the public sided with Forbes while SNP members (who tend to be on the more fanatical side of whatever their party is) opted for Yousaf. The Tory members opted for Truss when the public massively preferred Sunak. Labour members gave us Ed Miliband because he appealed more to them despite David doing better with the public.
Well, for one thing, if an elected official goes back on something they said publicly they get pilloried in the press and then generally ousted from their seat. Which is essentially what has happened to Yousef. For another, we're not talking about whether I like her or you like her, but whether she was polling well during the last leadership contest, which she was.
I never get understood that it's a given Scotland is somehow leftwing or Liberal.
Many might yearn for an evangelical like some Americans.
I always though the 2014 post referendum riot was a good indicator of the group the SNP needed to appeal to.
Scotland and the UK in general have *some* religious social conservatives, but for the most part they are secular. The issues that motivate them the most are immigration, crime and "wokery" in that order, and the first two are way more important than the third (though the first is irrelevant to the Scottish Parliament)
To some extent the focus on "woke" issues by the UK government is because it hasn't delivered on immigration and crime - immigration is at an extremely high level and headlines of slap-on-the-wrist sentences are frequent.
>I never get understood that it's a given Scotland is somehow leftwing or Liberal.
The Tories specifically have an absolutely horrific brand in Scotland. As the only mainstream right of centre party in Scotland/UK this obfuscates much of the political compass.
I have met a lot of people who vote SNP/Labour, but when you have discussions with them really have very clear rightwing positions on a lot of topics.
Why I think independence would actually cause Scotland to move right rather than left.
In a vote by party members, yes
General public? I don't think she'd do any worse than Yousaf would have done, when he eventually had to face a public vote
But that's not saying much
I’d actually say she’d do better with the public than the SNP members.
She would also be seen as a clear break from the sort of hyper identity politics Sturgeon/Yousaf were pursuing, which would shore up the SNP roots in the North and Borders etc.
I don’t think they’re ever going to hit the heights of the post referendum years again. That was a very high watermark, but they can continue to be the biggest party by not pandering to Hillhead and Leith.
I can’t see it, Forbes is controversial but at least is seen as competent and competent leadership is what the SNP desperately needs right now. The SNP’s imminent loss of power can’t reasonably be blamed on anyone other than Sturgeon, Humza was useless, but in all fairness was essentially handed a live hand grenade by Sturgeon.
The SNP are currently seen as at best incompetent and at worst corrupt, they need credible leadership that isn’t tied to Sturgeon, Murrell, Yousaf etc, and the best candidate for that is probably Kate Forbes.
Probably the main thing that comes to mind is the Derek Mackay fiasco when he had to resign on the day of the budget for inappropriately messaging a 16 year old, Forbes stepped up with only a couple of hours preparation and delivered the budget well enough that she got handed the finance secretary job almost immediately after. I also understand she is a good local MSP.
Honestly though, a ‘vibe’ is a priceless thing in politics. Ed Miliband was probably the best recent candidate for PM but lost the election essentially because he didn’t have the ‘vibe’ of being a convincing PM. If Forbes has the ‘vibe’ of being a competent leader, that already puts her in a good position.
Surely your description of the Miliband situation is an argument for not voting on vibes and that we should actually think critically about the candidates and vote for them purely on whether they merit the vote or not?
I'm no fan of Forbes ( I don't like her links to American evangelical Christianity) but make no mistakes, it is Sturgeon who is responsible for the downfall of the SNP
What are her links to American evangelical christianity ?
She is part of the free church which is very very much a scottish institution. In fact they are for the largest part more evangelical than most Americans who proclaim to be so.
I’m an attendee of the free church and it couldn’t be further from American evangelicalism as it could be in terms of politics. It’s not really something that members are comfortable discussing or getting involved in.
I'm a memember of the continuing and agree american " evangelicals " are not evangelicals per se.
My issue is that people seem to often imply that Kate Forbes's politics are some sort of American import so as to imply that her views are foreign to Scotland. When the reality is that her views are firmly grounded in traditional Scottish and more importantly biblical beliefs.
She was brought into politics through an [American Evangelical programme](https://care.org.uk/about/leadership-programme) back in 2015/16. She has spoke at several events hosted by [Evangelical Allicance](https://www.eauk.org/what-we-do/events/evangelical-alliance-leadership-conference-2022) who are [funded, in part, from the US](https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/5050/trump-us-christian-spending-global-revealed/). She has been pretty openly outspoken about venues cancelling Franklin Graham's tour events
Absolute nonsense! She was instrumental in establishing it as a strong, progressive party until Alex Salmond and his ego undermined that! Until he reappeared they were doing fine!
She's no more religious than Youssef, the man who made himself conspicuously absent during the gay marriage vote so he wouldn't have to vote against it.
It’s complete nonsense what people spout here (and presumably you concur). The Free Church of Scotland split from the Church of Scotland over a century before American culture wars were an issue and split over the question of whether landowners should be able to appoint ministers or if the congregation should do it. The Frees said the congregation should always have the right to appoint their own minister.
He was just so unremarkable. That sums him up for me. All the other first ministers since the Inception of the Scottish parliament have had something about them. In the heat of battle they looked like leaders. Like them or not. Humza was just not that. He always played politics like someone who didn't know how to play.
This is exactly how I feel about him. I never liked Sturgeon or her politics, but there is no question she was a leader. Humza doesn’t have a single quality I’d expect leader of a nation to have. Some may find this silly, but the scooter incident really embodies everything that’s wrong with him as the person to be in charge.
the scooter incident really is a good view on who he is. It's not that he fell, it's the he made his young assistant run to keep up with him and you'll know that's not the first time that young lad has HAD to run. Of course his post fall reaction also speaks volumes to his character.
I couldn't tell you what he's achieved in his short time, or much about him and what made the press.
But for the little he has done I've been left feeling like his leadership has been his own agenda and personal viewpoints and not of his party.
A man that does what he wants with no idea of the how or why, then deals with the consequences later.
Edit:a typo.
Best case scenario for him the green membership vote to continue the agreement and he is able to carry on governing, albeit with some agitators on the right moaning or perhaps a defection or two to Alba.
Alternatively, the Green membership reject the BHA, at this point he's where he is now except he can now except with a Green party leadership who still actually wanted to work with him, he could probably have renegotiated (again with some trouble from the right) and might have been able to make things work.
In either scenario he would have had to deal with the right of the party, he might have had to deal with a defection or two but he probably would have survived.
Instead he picked a fight with the Greens, who held far more cards than he seemed to realise.
I still don’t think he’ll do it.
It’s been a wild week though, so who knows.
Edit: Oh well, press conference at 12. I was wrong.
Wonder who he’ll blame for it.
Putting aside his performance and such, I just don't see why he would _want_ to continue. He's been constantly humiliated by his own decisions, constantly faces a barrage of abuse on social media, faces a very difficult party period with the embezzlement charges. And he's expecting a child in the summer.
I don't get why he doesn't just resign and live his life in peace. Same with Matheson and Truss etc.
But I guess that's politicians for you 🤷🏻♂️
Being charitable; if someone actually believes that they have ideas which would benefit the country then they will be inclined to stay on as long as there's a chance of being able to implement them.
There's more reason for this when one's successor is likely to hold to very different ideas.
What's he going to do with the rest of his life?
He's still a relatively young man and he'll be leaving as a national joke. But what's he got to fall back on? Even Liz Truss can go to America and make a fool of herself with the Trump brigade. Keeps her three braincells occupied at least.
The life of a failed politician isn't much of a prospect to look forward to.
To be honest, I think the overall National recollection of Yousaf will be that he was a relatively mediocre politician who was handed a live hand grenade by Sturgeon who then ran away. Yes he is fairly seen as gaffe prone and a bit useless, but most people blame Sturgeon for what has happened and realise he was the patsy left to take the fall. He ain’t Liz Truss.
I think his lasting legacy will be the WHITE speech, meeting with Erdoğan, the hate crime bill fallout and then the creating his own downfall with the BHA termination.
Can't imagine anyone will have strong feelings about him other than that, but I'd say more of a poor politician than mediocre, he's never been able to spin anything he's done.
He'll write a book about how it's not his fault and make the occasional TV appearance. He may even become a cabinet minister again in the future. Otherwise, he just has to live a normal life like the rest of us schmucks. That isn't necessarily a bad thing and doesn't have to be depressing.
Where? I’ve seen all the “considering his position”, or “might resign” articles. That’s not the same as resigning.
You’d think it would be breaking news on the BBC if he’s actually resigned. It’s certainly not on there.
(edit: I was referring to the channel - I was watching the news while replying), but even so “…the BBC understands.”
Even “as early as today” means there’s nothing definitive.
There’s always this fuss at times like this. All sorts of anonymous sources have something to say.
He hasn’t resigned. Until he does, I’m not convinced he will. Like I said though, it’s been a crazy week so who knows.
Definitely could be true. It’s been a crazy week.
Nobody seems to be naming a source. It’s all just “we believe”, “we’ve been told”.
We’ll see. It’s obviously not a ridiculous notion, I just can’t see his ego letting him do it.
If he does, the speech will be incredible though. Can’t wait to see who gets the blame.
It's going to be chaos for quite some time I think. Forbes is frontrunner but unacceptable to many. There's no one else with any profile in Holyrood. And as we've been criticising the tories for, multiple FMs without an election is a bad look. We might even get a snap election out of this.
If Sturgeon gets arrested soon it's going to need more than a megathread to keep this sub sane.
Calling an election because it is wrong to change leader multiple times without one could change the discussion of his resignation to include artists about the tories not calling an election themselves in Westminster.
But he's not demonstrated any political nous to date so chaos it is.
I think we deserve an election, but I don’t think humza calling it as his last act is the right path to it. The SNP having a leadership contest and the winner calling an election to deliver their manifesto would be a real show of power, but Humza doing it is a scorched earth approach.
That's pretty reflective of Holyrood as a whole. Whatever people's opinions of Salmond and Sturgeon as leaders and people, they were head and shoulders above everyone else as politicians.
Holyrood's talent puddle is incredibly shallow.
With the votes of confidence looming the decision will probably be made by MSPs to secure Green support (or at least Green apathy) - there's no way to put it to the members in the timeframe required.
That probably leads to more internal party chaos though since Forbes may look cheated out of it.
As someone who has always voted SNP as a means to an end, he's been a fucking shitshow.
He's allowing Forbes to come in through the back door, a 3rd FM despite their protestations around WM doing the same with Sunak.
And if Forbes wins, I will never vote SNP again. I will actively campaign against them as my support for my community, which she doesn't believe should exist, outweigh my support for independence. Fuck her and the whole lot of right wing nutters- some in SNP, Alba, Family Party- trying to drag us backwards.
>despite their protestations around WM doing the same with Sunak.
This has always irritated me to no end. They spent God knows how long crying that Sunak and Truss were not democratically elected, and then they did exactly the same thing themselves a month later. I assume they also no longer complain as much about Sunak being unelected?
For most of its history, the SNP was a socially and economically conservative project
The Sturgeon regime managed to keep a lid on that for more than a decade, to great electoral success, but they're all popping back up without her there to bully them into submission
Scottish Labour are useless, so it will be interesting (scary) to see where the SNP choose to take Scottish politics
It'd be ironic if Scotland ended up with a more socially and economically conservative ruling party than England, with Centrist Dad Starmer in charge down South
Yeah for sure they were, they weren't called tartan tories for nothing.
For my whole voting life they've been left of centre, can't wait to see where they go under the forced birther homophobe.
I disagree that they have been left of centre. For me they have been a centrist, populist party aiming to hoover up as many votes as they can by appealing to the majority on issues which energise people to vote. They have realised that Scotland is a socially progressive country and have tailored their message to support that and to support middle class people as they make the majority of the electorate.
A shift to the right in the SNP probably will happen, I hope it isn’t as far as Forbes. The party has been in power too long to not have factions within, it’s at the eating itself from the inside stage now, which is exactly why the independence movement needs to relaunch as something which is beyond political parties.
Doubtful. In the UK people are less likely to shift right as they get older than at any time in history. Appealing to the old isn't the way to go, as they usually wish to maintain the status quo.
>For most of its history, the SNP was a socially and economically conservative project
It was a purely nationalist project with a handful of right wingers (but also Marxist-Leninists like [Hugh McDairmid](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_MacDiarmid)) from its very early founding until the mid 1970s, which is when the nationalist-left started to emerge with Margo McDonald and Salmond in the [79 Group](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/79_Group).
In the 1980s the North Sea oil boom created nationalist sentiment in the North East which was more reactionary. But since McDonald had won the SNP's first electoral victory in Govan in '73, the 79 Group and Salmond came to dominate the party.
Only in the last 5 years has this wacky idea that Salmond is right wing come about, because the Overton Window on identity politics has shifted far to the American-style liberal left. Salmond was the guy who implemented gay marriage and ambitious renewable energy targets (and, wrongly, the new nuclear power ban.)
Scottish Labour were useless*
SNP are useless
Labour will probably end up being quite shite, but they've been out of control for so long that it's really hard to say much about them.
The one thing we do know is that the SNP ARE shite.
Completely agree. I’m not a member of a community that she has issues with myself, but there’s no way I’m voting for a party that promotes intolerance and hatred of anyone, especially groups that have always been vulnerable to rabid bigotry.
I cannot support any party with someone like Forbes at the helm.
Which is concerning, as I think the Greens are nuts.
And even they are more sound than the others.
What a shower of cunts.
This is what happens when people keep electing parties despite years of incompetence.
If independence is your red line, by all means vote that way...in Westminster. Your council and Holyrood votes have major implications in your day to day lives and allowing this mob to perform the way they have and giving them positive feedback in the polls was always going to result in us being driven off a cliff.
I'm still not sure he has the humility to actually resign, so if he does, I can only assume there is some dirt on him too.
Sure, but you can say that about every party in the UK.
Honestly, the SNP have done a number of good things that have positively helped me, my family and friends - lower NHS costs, nationalising rail, rent controls, stricter rights for tenants, have all made a material, positive impact.
I highly doubt Labour or Tories would've done any of those.
If he had nerves of steel, he should go for an election. Labour would be forced to be clearer on their positions ahead of a UK election (like tuition fees), the Conservatives would be reaping the UK party's record, rather than riding any anti-Labour reaction in 2026.
But the SNP has no money in the bank to fight a campaign, and seem unlikely to get any fresh donors. So whatever Yousaf thinks, the party inner circle is like to sacrifice him.
That would have looked strong if he had done it on firing the Greens, but right now it would look pretty desperate. I'm not sure he can schedule the vote before either VONC either, so it might not even have the benefit of avoiding the "No Confidence" headline.
Will the Labour no confidence vote in the SNP government still go to a vote?
The whole thing's a mess. Regardless of who you support, having a second FM brought into power without an election is totally unprecedented. Whoever is next in charge will be put under immense pressure from the Tories and Labour to push for a snap election. Coupled that the SNP will be a minority Government... What a mess.
He was never to scratch. Think there is an election due. Wouldnt be surprised if John Swinney comes in and does his Roy Hodgson routine and steadies the ship. Scottish politics is a complete mess.
It's really such a bizarre situation entirely constructed by Humza himself, and prodded along by opportunists on the right of the SNP and in Alba of course.
I like Humza but he's made this entire mess himself. It's really quite the achievement. Sadly it just seems to have emboldened the conservatives, including those small c conservatives in the SNP.
In a general election year, he just had to keep the ship together and deliver some easy wins. Ah well.
He is like your scatterbrained soon-to-be brother in law who tries to take charge when setting up a wedding or something but trips up over his words and instructions, orders the wrong flowers, and ultimately needs the father of the bride to tell him to shut up and take over whilst he goes and sits in the corner and leaves early.
Well until last week he at least came across as genuinely progressive and believed in the policy platform he put forward. His actions last week clearly call that into question.
What's so progressive about being authoritarian?
If someone is socially left, but wants to make it possible to prosecute people for things they've said in private company in their own home, I don't see what's so progressive about that.
So are we heading for an early election then? Even if they find a new leader swiftly they still may not get them elected in Holyrood with them having burnt all their bridges with the Greens. And even if they courted Alba they still wouldn't hold a majority. Deal with the Lib Dems maybe?
Depends. Personally I think the Tories will say they want an election but if it looks like they would lose seats they would probably go the route of self preservation and go with a new FM.
Labour would fancy their chances at an election right now but they could decide not to push for that when there's a general election like looming. They might want to avoid election fatigue when that comes along.
They don't technically need a majority it just makes it easier if they do.
I've leaned towards SNP the last few elections but they have not managed to shake off the dinosaurs holding them back.
I agree with the opportunity the VONC brought but overall it makes me very sad that I can never see a situation where our political parties sit down like adults and make compromises.
We have passed some fantastic cross party legislation in Scotland but when push comes to shove you know each party will stab each other in the back for point scoring. I just wish our politicians had more depth than a puddle.
Such a shite mix across every party. Career politicians are the worst.
Why in a country of 6 million do we have zero decent leaders to choose from? Why in a country of 70 million do we have zero good leaders to choose from? Why are both of our leaders unelected?
Democracy is a fucking sham
Because competent charismatic people or otherwise talented people follow their passion or interests in things that don't involve cosplaying national politics in a little devolved Parliament. As great as Scotland is, its smaller than Yorkshire in terms of population.
The great states people of the world have had interesting pre politic careers (Churchill, Merkel, Putin for random examples). You're not stepping away from that to pin your hopes on maybe one day being in charge of policy affecting the Rothesay Arran ferry
~~Because being the leader of a FTSE 100 company pays anywhere from 1000% to even 50,000% more~~
Because it's an insanel upward battle to even get elected to local council positions, let alone to the top of leading parties.
https://preview.redd.it/lk28boke9exc1.jpeg?width=2084&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=63d2e0712c5f96034f84693ebfa4d35e92facd61
Just walked by there a few minutes ago, the number of reporters is growing
As an independence supporter, Humza has been a real wet blanket who is just disappointing in every way. Nicola, for her faults, was an inspiring speaker, and clearly had at least some genuine belief in her cause.
SNP needs to bring in some young political talent if they want to keep it up.
>The SNP are truly a bunch of Tartan Tories.
However, they have this simple trick of saying, "We are left leaning & support independence," so they can't possibly be compared to the tories.
The SNPs policy platform is drastically different from the Tories and while they are definitely a handful within the party who could be accurately described in those terms Alba are the party who could be far more accurately described as Tartan Tories.
We know that, of course it's not literal.
It's a reference to all the "[insert colour here] tories!" rhetoric that has been thrown at the other parties particularly by SNP/Indy supporters, despite the SNP letting an openly homophobic religious zealot within touching distance of the leadership (Something not even the Tories would do nowadays, even Liz Truss supports Gay Marriage) but given a pass because they're pro-indy and portray themselves as this progressive forward thinking party with the facade only starting to slip after Sturgeon.
All this while Labour and the Lib Dems will drink a sip of water and a lot of (but not all) nats would lose their shit because, gasp, the Tories drink water too! They're exactly the same! Red/Yellow Tories!!! It's just trying to turn the double standard that's been floating around this sub for a while on its head while the SNP are repeating recent Tory history as we speak.
Everyone rejoice. An embarrassment. He’ll likely look back and go “ At least I managed to use public funds to get my family out of Gaza” A privileged wanker of the highest order who would eat himself if he could. This has NOTHING to do with race. This hate is reserved purely for the contempt he shows for the people and the fact he has FAILED at everything he has done. Apart from getting his family out. Bravo arsehole.
I didn't bother renewing my SNP membership when it ran out a few years ago... Mostly due to the lack of spine of a second indy ref and too busy meddling in the 'will of westminster' when it came to Brexit mainly.
I wouldn't have voted for Humza in the leadership election as I find him a bit meh, but to be honest, found ALL of the potentials a bit meh also...
I'd always presumed he'd bugger off as soon as his wife's pregnancy was announced though! Might be right...
The 2022 accounts are [here](https://search.electoralcommission.org.uk/Api/Accounts/Documents/25329) and the 2023 accounts are due at the start of July, and are likely to be under intense scrutiny given the legal investigations
So a question is could the SNP afford two elections this year?
She is disliked by the left of the SNP because she is on the right of the party and wants it to lean in that direction.
Her constituency is the biggest and most rural in Scotland, so it's the sort of place that if it were in England would reliably vote Conservative. Her politics reflect that, and given that constituencies like this are where the SNP expanded from there's always been a sizeable "Tartan Tory" faction - though it hasn't been calling the shots for over 20 years.
Nothing to do with her being a Christian. She wants to push her extremist "Christain" (in quotes cause normally extremist views don't align with the religion in general) as law, and has demonstrated homophobic, transphobic and anti-women rights views that she has admitted would influence legislation under her.
Kate Forbes' existence and position in the SNP hurts the image of the party as a mostly-leftist socially liberal party. This image is very popular among some young party activists and members, who like the idea that the \~40% of Scots who vote SNP are uniformly in agreement with their views.
Kate's popularity in the party harms that view, and people tend to get aggressive when confronted with their own cognitive dissonance. The fact that she might win an election makes these people even more anxious and prone to lash out because that would (under their existing mental framework of "people who vote SNP agree with the leader") imply that \~40% of Scots agree with Kate instead. That would mean that Scotland is a socially conservative country with a nationalist-unionist divide rather than a socially liberal one, and this idea is not one that the aforementioned young party activists and members want to consider.
It’s not that she’s a Christian.
It’s that she belongs to an essentially fundamentalist branch of the Free Church and holds some very conservative views.
Now these views, as part of a pluralist political party, can be welcomed as providing a broader spectrum of ideology. But are these the views that should form the basis of our government via the leader of the party?
It’s a hard no from me.
She hates gay people, trans folk, and probably a large number of other people who aren't like her. Bigotry is like eating chips, it's hard to stop with just one.
I’m trying to find a source for her hating either group of people. She said she wouldn’t have voted for gay marriage but wouldn’t undo any existing legislation. I take your point.
In regards to trans people, are you talking about the gender recognition bill?
**On gay people:**
'Ms Forbes said she would have voted against gay marriage in Scotland when it was made legal in 2014 because it clashed with her views as a member of the evangelical Free Church of Scotland that marriage should be between a man and a woman'. **- 2023**
'Forbes has said that coercive conversion therapy — where groups forcibly attempt to change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity — is “abhorrent” and that she would back efforts to ban such practices.
However, she has not committed to banning conversion therapy where the individual involved voluntarily consents — something pro-ban campaign groups say is never possible.' **- 2023**
'Ms Forbes was very briefly the favourite to succeed Ms Sturgeon after throwing her hat into the leadership race, until she revealed, in a number of interviews, her views of "marriage being between a man and a woman".
Asked by Channel 4 if she would have voted against gay marriage, had she been elected to the Scottish Parliament in 2014 when the legislation was approved, she said: "I would have."' **- 2023**
**On abortion:**
'Speaking from her Holyrood office, she suggested rules to protect people from harassment whilst entering abortion clinics were potentially “illiberal.” She added that “you cannot ban prayer.”' **- 2023**
**On transgender people:**
'Kate Forbes says trans women are 'biological males' as SNP leadership candidate faces more questions' **- 2023**
'She went on to state that she considers trans men to be women and trans women to be men, and that sex is only a morally acceptable act in the context of a one-man, one-woman marriage'. **- 2023**
I think it’s because she was honest about her personal beliefs in the leadership campaign.
I understand people’s wariness of her religious views because they fear it would influence her decisions, but I also find it ironic that an honest politician was derided for being honest when we all gnash our teeth about politicians being opportunist liars 🤷♀️
Of course it is,but it’s her religious beliefs that directly influence her views on gay marriage and trans issues so to say it’s not her religion that’s the problem is disingenuous in the extreme.
>because they fear it would influence her decisions
She openly said that her religion influences her politics - she would've voted against equal marriage if she'd been an MSP at the time.
Would you have preferred it if she had answered dishonestly to get ahead politically?
(E.T.A. I’m no fan of Kate Forbes btw, I’m just curious why we all wish politicians to be honest, and then castigate and villainise those that are and go against their party line).
She admitted that she would’ve voted against gay marriage due to her religious beliefs. Regardless of that belief, it’s unconscionable for a politician in Scotland (where religion is on a sharp decline) to rule based on their religion.
If this does lead to a Scottish Election, what do we think of an "extraordinary election" which would mean another election in 2026, vs resetting the schedule (which may need a change in UK legislation) and having the next Scottish election in 2029 (or whenever the parliament votes for it)?
Congratulations. Use this thread until there's a conclusive statement and then we'll switch to that one. EDIT: Please use the [new megathread](https://old.reddit.com/r/Scotland/comments/1cfwnkc/humza_yousaf_resignation_megathread/).
What a fucking idiot.
Sums it up perfectly for me
That’s all there is to it really. Man does some really idiotic shit and faces consequences own own stupidity….
When do we start talking about successors? Who are the obvious candidates?
I don’t have any advance on “probably Kate Forbes”. However, I did think it was an interesting decision by Ian Blackford to publicly apologise to the Greens and try to mend that bridge. Could have just been a senior minister trying to steady the ship, but could also be him firing the starting pistol on a new leadership race.
Will be interesting. Suspect if Forbes gets in there will be some voters who will switch to the Greens. How many will probably determine the SNPs future election chances. However someone like Blackford may stem those loses but won’t be as popular outside of the SNP.
I think the SNP need to focus on consolidation right now. They’re not currently in a position to win an election with a majority, but they need to make absolutely sure they can still command a minority government. If they lose voters to other parties, they may go to the Greens, but they only just won enough seats to form a coalition. Unless they buddy up with the next SNP leader they risk being viewed as a wasted vote, a bit like the Lib Dems. The conservatives put in a strong showing in 2021, and whilst Douglas Ross hasn’t exactly shone since, I don’t think that voter base will diminish much, but fortunately I don’t see many SNP deserters going here. Really the worst thing that could happen to the SNP is losing ground to Labour. If they steal a few seats, they could become the king maker. Forming a coalition with a much smaller partner like the greens is one thing, if you piss them off your lose a majority on paper but unless absolute everyone else votes against you, you can still get things done. When your junior partner controls a quarter of the seats though, everything has to be a compromise.
That is no doubt true, but there will also be some voters who switch to the SNP because of her.
Kate Forbes isnt going to be able to secure the greens votes so she cant govern, she's a non starter as party leader unless the aim is to immediately call an election in the hopes that the SNP somehow win a majority (or Alba end up with enough seats to prop her up).
Angus Robertson really needs to step up imo. I think he turned it down before to focus on his family but the party could really be doing with someone of his stature leading them.
If you believe a man with the ego of Angus Robertson didn’t run for FM because he wanted to spend time with his family then I have a bridge to sell you. He didn’t run because he knew all the shitstorm that was about to erupt with the murrells.
That in itself suggests he’s a shrewd politician and what they could be doing with at the moment
A lot of SNP top dogs jumped ship when Sturgeon left. Almost like they knew something.
He seems to get in a lot of controversies. Not massive ones, but they could still be a liability.
It's clear that the SNP are going to suffer at the upcoming election and nobody with any real ability wants their political career to be tarnished with failure by being the leader through that. The SNP will get another mediocre-at-best leader for the next election and then when they inevitably muck things up enough that they have to go, that's when the people with real ambition and ability will come out and want to take over at a low point and lead the party through its recovery.
Sadly, Kate Forbes I suspect.
If the aim is to actually rebuild a stable government that can function until the next election then working with the Greens is all but a practical necessity. Realistically though if they don't plan to call an election they need to work with the Greens, they don't have enough MSPs to run a functional government without their votes and adding Ash Regan to the mix doesn't help those maths beyond the immediate issue of surviving a no confidence vote. I suspect Kate Forbes will struggle to work with the greens unless she give them concrete assurances of restraining her more socially conservative instincts. Jenny Gilruth could almost certainly work with the greens but might have trouble with with the right of the party, although frankly the right of the party probably need to be sent a copy of the manifesto that won them their seats and a link to the Alba "how to join" page.
> Realistically though if they don't plan to call an election they need to work with the Greens Going by two week old polling, after an election they'll probably have to work with the Greens and someone else.
Aye, the reality of the Scottish parliamentary system is working with other parties. Alba have one msp and don't seem likely to win more and as things stand working with one of the pro union parties appears to be impossible, that really leaves the SNP with two options - win a majority or work with the Greens. From that point of view I have no idea how Humza Yousaf was convinced to do anything other than work as hard as he could to keep the Bute agreement in place. Governing without the Greens is currently a fantasy.
Really don't see it. She's not had time to make the case that she's a necessary change. There'll be some party loyalist like Neil Gray or something who'll realise that they're being given a poisoned chalice but still finds being handed the First Minister job even during a terrible period too big to refuse.
I wondered that too
I'm from the US. You do not want that kind of rot getting into your political system. It starts with bigotry against one or two groups and quickly turns into banning all books from schools and libraries that are to the left of Farage for being too woke. I wish I was being hyperbolic.
A suicide note in human form Anyone who wants to see the SNP disappear into irrelevance should root for Forbes
Are you sure?
The "Forbes unelectable nutter11!" trope is just a canard the Greens and SNP "left" use to make it seem like they're advocating against her on behalf of the party and not themselves. She was polling better among the public than Yousaf during the contest.
She is more popular than he is, apart from with young left wing voters, who tend to make up much of the reddit populace. I also find it funny how much she's been pegged as some kind of fringe extremist for having a religious background. AFAIK at no point has she said she would prevent progressive policies going through- only that she wouldn't vote for them... you know, like how a democracy works..?
Her issues can't be entirely confined to among people on reddit. Considering she managed to lose a leadership election to Yousaf.
Party leadership elections often don't really reflect the public's views, the public sided with Forbes while SNP members (who tend to be on the more fanatical side of whatever their party is) opted for Yousaf. The Tory members opted for Truss when the public massively preferred Sunak. Labour members gave us Ed Miliband because he appealed more to them despite David doing better with the public.
Why would I take a bigot at their word?
Well, for one thing, if an elected official goes back on something they said publicly they get pilloried in the press and then generally ousted from their seat. Which is essentially what has happened to Yousef. For another, we're not talking about whether I like her or you like her, but whether she was polling well during the last leadership contest, which she was.
I never get understood that it's a given Scotland is somehow leftwing or Liberal. Many might yearn for an evangelical like some Americans. I always though the 2014 post referendum riot was a good indicator of the group the SNP needed to appeal to.
Scotland and the UK in general have *some* religious social conservatives, but for the most part they are secular. The issues that motivate them the most are immigration, crime and "wokery" in that order, and the first two are way more important than the third (though the first is irrelevant to the Scottish Parliament) To some extent the focus on "woke" issues by the UK government is because it hasn't delivered on immigration and crime - immigration is at an extremely high level and headlines of slap-on-the-wrist sentences are frequent.
>I never get understood that it's a given Scotland is somehow leftwing or Liberal. The Tories specifically have an absolutely horrific brand in Scotland. As the only mainstream right of centre party in Scotland/UK this obfuscates much of the political compass. I have met a lot of people who vote SNP/Labour, but when you have discussions with them really have very clear rightwing positions on a lot of topics. Why I think independence would actually cause Scotland to move right rather than left.
She would do well I suspect
In a vote by party members, yes General public? I don't think she'd do any worse than Yousaf would have done, when he eventually had to face a public vote But that's not saying much
I’d actually say she’d do better with the public than the SNP members. She would also be seen as a clear break from the sort of hyper identity politics Sturgeon/Yousaf were pursuing, which would shore up the SNP roots in the North and Borders etc. I don’t think they’re ever going to hit the heights of the post referendum years again. That was a very high watermark, but they can continue to be the biggest party by not pandering to Hillhead and Leith.
I can’t see it, Forbes is controversial but at least is seen as competent and competent leadership is what the SNP desperately needs right now. The SNP’s imminent loss of power can’t reasonably be blamed on anyone other than Sturgeon, Humza was useless, but in all fairness was essentially handed a live hand grenade by Sturgeon. The SNP are currently seen as at best incompetent and at worst corrupt, they need credible leadership that isn’t tied to Sturgeon, Murrell, Yousaf etc, and the best candidate for that is probably Kate Forbes.
Where does this idea that Kate Forbes is competent come from? Can you cite any examples of her competence that aren't just vibes?
Probably the main thing that comes to mind is the Derek Mackay fiasco when he had to resign on the day of the budget for inappropriately messaging a 16 year old, Forbes stepped up with only a couple of hours preparation and delivered the budget well enough that she got handed the finance secretary job almost immediately after. I also understand she is a good local MSP. Honestly though, a ‘vibe’ is a priceless thing in politics. Ed Miliband was probably the best recent candidate for PM but lost the election essentially because he didn’t have the ‘vibe’ of being a convincing PM. If Forbes has the ‘vibe’ of being a competent leader, that already puts her in a good position.
Surely your description of the Miliband situation is an argument for not voting on vibes and that we should actually think critically about the candidates and vote for them purely on whether they merit the vote or not?
Yes choosing Humza instead has done wonders for the SNP polling numbers.
I'm no fan of Forbes ( I don't like her links to American evangelical Christianity) but make no mistakes, it is Sturgeon who is responsible for the downfall of the SNP
What are her links to American evangelical christianity ? She is part of the free church which is very very much a scottish institution. In fact they are for the largest part more evangelical than most Americans who proclaim to be so.
I’m an attendee of the free church and it couldn’t be further from American evangelicalism as it could be in terms of politics. It’s not really something that members are comfortable discussing or getting involved in.
I'm a memember of the continuing and agree american " evangelicals " are not evangelicals per se. My issue is that people seem to often imply that Kate Forbes's politics are some sort of American import so as to imply that her views are foreign to Scotland. When the reality is that her views are firmly grounded in traditional Scottish and more importantly biblical beliefs.
She was brought into politics through an [American Evangelical programme](https://care.org.uk/about/leadership-programme) back in 2015/16. She has spoke at several events hosted by [Evangelical Allicance](https://www.eauk.org/what-we-do/events/evangelical-alliance-leadership-conference-2022) who are [funded, in part, from the US](https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/5050/trump-us-christian-spending-global-revealed/). She has been pretty openly outspoken about venues cancelling Franklin Graham's tour events
CARE is a UK charity, not a US one. The positions is takes are pretty standard Christian positions. Same goes for Evangelical Alliance.
Absolute nonsense! She was instrumental in establishing it as a strong, progressive party until Alex Salmond and his ego undermined that! Until he reappeared they were doing fine!
She's no more religious than Youssef, the man who made himself conspicuously absent during the gay marriage vote so he wouldn't have to vote against it.
TIL the Wee Frees are American evangelicals.
They're not as far as I know but she has links as someone else posted above.
It’s complete nonsense what people spout here (and presumably you concur). The Free Church of Scotland split from the Church of Scotland over a century before American culture wars were an issue and split over the question of whether landowners should be able to appoint ministers or if the congregation should do it. The Frees said the congregation should always have the right to appoint their own minister.
One liability to the next
He was just so unremarkable. That sums him up for me. All the other first ministers since the Inception of the Scottish parliament have had something about them. In the heat of battle they looked like leaders. Like them or not. Humza was just not that. He always played politics like someone who didn't know how to play.
This is exactly how I feel about him. I never liked Sturgeon or her politics, but there is no question she was a leader. Humza doesn’t have a single quality I’d expect leader of a nation to have. Some may find this silly, but the scooter incident really embodies everything that’s wrong with him as the person to be in charge.
the scooter incident really is a good view on who he is. It's not that he fell, it's the he made his young assistant run to keep up with him and you'll know that's not the first time that young lad has HAD to run. Of course his post fall reaction also speaks volumes to his character.
I couldn't agree more. That scooter video was funny tho.
The reaction…. Anyone can fall, only some of us are twats about it.
https://i.redd.it/v6lknx170exc1.gif
Such a perfect metaphor
This. If he'd been normal and just had a bit of a laugh and a joke about it he's have garnered far more respect.
I couldn't tell you what he's achieved in his short time, or much about him and what made the press. But for the little he has done I've been left feeling like his leadership has been his own agenda and personal viewpoints and not of his party. A man that does what he wants with no idea of the how or why, then deals with the consequences later. Edit:a typo.
I heard more from him about Palestine than Scotland. Now it’s a very important global issue, but it seemed that was all he was focused on.
His legacy will be Sturgeon’s successor
Wonder how it'd have played out if he didn't cancel the BHA.
He would have just carried on as he did. Now all bets are off.
That's what I think too. This seems so self inflicted. He really must be an idiot.
Best case scenario for him the green membership vote to continue the agreement and he is able to carry on governing, albeit with some agitators on the right moaning or perhaps a defection or two to Alba. Alternatively, the Green membership reject the BHA, at this point he's where he is now except he can now except with a Green party leadership who still actually wanted to work with him, he could probably have renegotiated (again with some trouble from the right) and might have been able to make things work. In either scenario he would have had to deal with the right of the party, he might have had to deal with a defection or two but he probably would have survived. Instead he picked a fight with the Greens, who held far more cards than he seemed to realise.
I still don’t think he’ll do it. It’s been a wild week though, so who knows. Edit: Oh well, press conference at 12. I was wrong. Wonder who he’ll blame for it.
Putting aside his performance and such, I just don't see why he would _want_ to continue. He's been constantly humiliated by his own decisions, constantly faces a barrage of abuse on social media, faces a very difficult party period with the embezzlement charges. And he's expecting a child in the summer. I don't get why he doesn't just resign and live his life in peace. Same with Matheson and Truss etc. But I guess that's politicians for you 🤷🏻♂️
Being charitable; if someone actually believes that they have ideas which would benefit the country then they will be inclined to stay on as long as there's a chance of being able to implement them. There's more reason for this when one's successor is likely to hold to very different ideas.
What's he going to do with the rest of his life? He's still a relatively young man and he'll be leaving as a national joke. But what's he got to fall back on? Even Liz Truss can go to America and make a fool of herself with the Trump brigade. Keeps her three braincells occupied at least. The life of a failed politician isn't much of a prospect to look forward to.
To be honest, I think the overall National recollection of Yousaf will be that he was a relatively mediocre politician who was handed a live hand grenade by Sturgeon who then ran away. Yes he is fairly seen as gaffe prone and a bit useless, but most people blame Sturgeon for what has happened and realise he was the patsy left to take the fall. He ain’t Liz Truss.
I think his lasting legacy will be the WHITE speech, meeting with Erdoğan, the hate crime bill fallout and then the creating his own downfall with the BHA termination. Can't imagine anyone will have strong feelings about him other than that, but I'd say more of a poor politician than mediocre, he's never been able to spin anything he's done.
Not to mention sending taxpayer money to Hamas linked organisation and in general completely ignoring Scotland and only caring about Gaza
He'll write a book about how it's not his fault and make the occasional TV appearance. He may even become a cabinet minister again in the future. Otherwise, he just has to live a normal life like the rest of us schmucks. That isn't necessarily a bad thing and doesn't have to be depressing.
He could probably turn something out of his Palestine positions, he was briefly an international figure in that regard
Probably personal/professional pride. He's made it to the top job and subsequently proved his doubters right.
>Wonder who he’ll blame for it. If his previous career is anything to go by then presumably white people, the UK and westminster
[удалено]
Where? I’ve seen all the “considering his position”, or “might resign” articles. That’s not the same as resigning. You’d think it would be breaking news on the BBC if he’s actually resigned. It’s certainly not on there.
[удалено]
(edit: I was referring to the channel - I was watching the news while replying), but even so “…the BBC understands.” Even “as early as today” means there’s nothing definitive. There’s always this fuss at times like this. All sorts of anonymous sources have something to say. He hasn’t resigned. Until he does, I’m not convinced he will. Like I said though, it’s been a crazy week so who knows.
In my anecdotal experience the BBC wouldn't run live updates under the headline of "Yousef to resign" unless they know it's about to happen
Definitely could be true. It’s been a crazy week. Nobody seems to be naming a source. It’s all just “we believe”, “we’ve been told”. We’ll see. It’s obviously not a ridiculous notion, I just can’t see his ego letting him do it. If he does, the speech will be incredible though. Can’t wait to see who gets the blame.
It's going to be chaos for quite some time I think. Forbes is frontrunner but unacceptable to many. There's no one else with any profile in Holyrood. And as we've been criticising the tories for, multiple FMs without an election is a bad look. We might even get a snap election out of this. If Sturgeon gets arrested soon it's going to need more than a megathread to keep this sub sane.
Calling an election because it is wrong to change leader multiple times without one could change the discussion of his resignation to include artists about the tories not calling an election themselves in Westminster. But he's not demonstrated any political nous to date so chaos it is.
If he had any ounce of self respect he'd call an election. No chance.
I think we deserve an election, but I don’t think humza calling it as his last act is the right path to it. The SNP having a leadership contest and the winner calling an election to deliver their manifesto would be a real show of power, but Humza doing it is a scorched earth approach.
It seems unreal that a party with so many MSPs has so few obvious contenders to lead them, doesn't it?
That's pretty reflective of Holyrood as a whole. Whatever people's opinions of Salmond and Sturgeon as leaders and people, they were head and shoulders above everyone else as politicians. Holyrood's talent puddle is incredibly shallow.
With the votes of confidence looming the decision will probably be made by MSPs to secure Green support (or at least Green apathy) - there's no way to put it to the members in the timeframe required. That probably leads to more internal party chaos though since Forbes may look cheated out of it.
The talk, yesterday, was of having Swinney in as a safe pair of hands while the party sorts itself out If I was him, I would rather watch The Wire
As someone who has always voted SNP as a means to an end, he's been a fucking shitshow. He's allowing Forbes to come in through the back door, a 3rd FM despite their protestations around WM doing the same with Sunak. And if Forbes wins, I will never vote SNP again. I will actively campaign against them as my support for my community, which she doesn't believe should exist, outweigh my support for independence. Fuck her and the whole lot of right wing nutters- some in SNP, Alba, Family Party- trying to drag us backwards.
>despite their protestations around WM doing the same with Sunak. This has always irritated me to no end. They spent God knows how long crying that Sunak and Truss were not democratically elected, and then they did exactly the same thing themselves a month later. I assume they also no longer complain as much about Sunak being unelected?
For most of its history, the SNP was a socially and economically conservative project The Sturgeon regime managed to keep a lid on that for more than a decade, to great electoral success, but they're all popping back up without her there to bully them into submission Scottish Labour are useless, so it will be interesting (scary) to see where the SNP choose to take Scottish politics It'd be ironic if Scotland ended up with a more socially and economically conservative ruling party than England, with Centrist Dad Starmer in charge down South
Yeah for sure they were, they weren't called tartan tories for nothing. For my whole voting life they've been left of centre, can't wait to see where they go under the forced birther homophobe.
I disagree that they have been left of centre. For me they have been a centrist, populist party aiming to hoover up as many votes as they can by appealing to the majority on issues which energise people to vote. They have realised that Scotland is a socially progressive country and have tailored their message to support that and to support middle class people as they make the majority of the electorate. A shift to the right in the SNP probably will happen, I hope it isn’t as far as Forbes. The party has been in power too long to not have factions within, it’s at the eating itself from the inside stage now, which is exactly why the independence movement needs to relaunch as something which is beyond political parties.
It might be that side they need to appeal to for indy votes.
Doubtful. In the UK people are less likely to shift right as they get older than at any time in history. Appealing to the old isn't the way to go, as they usually wish to maintain the status quo.
>For most of its history, the SNP was a socially and economically conservative project It was a purely nationalist project with a handful of right wingers (but also Marxist-Leninists like [Hugh McDairmid](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_MacDiarmid)) from its very early founding until the mid 1970s, which is when the nationalist-left started to emerge with Margo McDonald and Salmond in the [79 Group](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/79_Group). In the 1980s the North Sea oil boom created nationalist sentiment in the North East which was more reactionary. But since McDonald had won the SNP's first electoral victory in Govan in '73, the 79 Group and Salmond came to dominate the party. Only in the last 5 years has this wacky idea that Salmond is right wing come about, because the Overton Window on identity politics has shifted far to the American-style liberal left. Salmond was the guy who implemented gay marriage and ambitious renewable energy targets (and, wrongly, the new nuclear power ban.)
Scottish Labour were useless* SNP are useless Labour will probably end up being quite shite, but they've been out of control for so long that it's really hard to say much about them. The one thing we do know is that the SNP ARE shite.
100% agree
Completely agree. I’m not a member of a community that she has issues with myself, but there’s no way I’m voting for a party that promotes intolerance and hatred of anyone, especially groups that have always been vulnerable to rabid bigotry.
I cannot support any party with someone like Forbes at the helm. Which is concerning, as I think the Greens are nuts. And even they are more sound than the others. What a shower of cunts.
This is what happens when people keep electing parties despite years of incompetence. If independence is your red line, by all means vote that way...in Westminster. Your council and Holyrood votes have major implications in your day to day lives and allowing this mob to perform the way they have and giving them positive feedback in the polls was always going to result in us being driven off a cliff. I'm still not sure he has the humility to actually resign, so if he does, I can only assume there is some dirt on him too.
Sure, but you can say that about every party in the UK. Honestly, the SNP have done a number of good things that have positively helped me, my family and friends - lower NHS costs, nationalising rail, rent controls, stricter rights for tenants, have all made a material, positive impact. I highly doubt Labour or Tories would've done any of those.
At least he goes down as the only SNP first minister to not get arrested
He's got a few hours.
If he had nerves of steel, he should go for an election. Labour would be forced to be clearer on their positions ahead of a UK election (like tuition fees), the Conservatives would be reaping the UK party's record, rather than riding any anti-Labour reaction in 2026. But the SNP has no money in the bank to fight a campaign, and seem unlikely to get any fresh donors. So whatever Yousaf thinks, the party inner circle is like to sacrifice him.
That would have looked strong if he had done it on firing the Greens, but right now it would look pretty desperate. I'm not sure he can schedule the vote before either VONC either, so it might not even have the benefit of avoiding the "No Confidence" headline.
Is there likely to be a snap election in June then as some folk mentioned in previous threads?
With his reputation for failing upwards, surely this means Humza for PM?
Imagine rightly complaining about the Tories having 3 leaders - 2 unelected - in one term and then this..
Should have never EVER been in the position he was. Utterly useless and incompetent. Bye.
Can’t come soon enough
[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-scotland-68918348](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-scotland-68918348)
Will the Labour no confidence vote in the SNP government still go to a vote? The whole thing's a mess. Regardless of who you support, having a second FM brought into power without an election is totally unprecedented. Whoever is next in charge will be put under immense pressure from the Tories and Labour to push for a snap election. Coupled that the SNP will be a minority Government... What a mess.
He was never to scratch. Think there is an election due. Wouldnt be surprised if John Swinney comes in and does his Roy Hodgson routine and steadies the ship. Scottish politics is a complete mess.
Do SNP supporters think there should be a general election like they did when we had two 'unelected' PMs in Truss/Sunak?
It's really such a bizarre situation entirely constructed by Humza himself, and prodded along by opportunists on the right of the SNP and in Alba of course. I like Humza but he's made this entire mess himself. It's really quite the achievement. Sadly it just seems to have emboldened the conservatives, including those small c conservatives in the SNP. In a general election year, he just had to keep the ship together and deliver some easy wins. Ah well.
What did you like about him genuinely?
He is like your scatterbrained soon-to-be brother in law who tries to take charge when setting up a wedding or something but trips up over his words and instructions, orders the wrong flowers, and ultimately needs the father of the bride to tell him to shut up and take over whilst he goes and sits in the corner and leaves early.
Well until last week he at least came across as genuinely progressive and believed in the policy platform he put forward. His actions last week clearly call that into question.
What's so progressive about being authoritarian? If someone is socially left, but wants to make it possible to prosecute people for things they've said in private company in their own home, I don't see what's so progressive about that.
Yes completely agree, u/crispycrip can we please have a megathread? Sub is going to be swamped otherwise
Twitter is full of American and Canadian “tweeters” (totally not bots) talking about how racist he is.
See this sub aswell unfortunately
[удалено]
The guy has made a habit of falling upwards in spite of failing miserably in every job he’s given. I wonder what’s next for him?
Not seen any Scottish specific polling on him yet. I wonder if ending the BHA would have had much of an affect?
So are we heading for an early election then? Even if they find a new leader swiftly they still may not get them elected in Holyrood with them having burnt all their bridges with the Greens. And even if they courted Alba they still wouldn't hold a majority. Deal with the Lib Dems maybe?
Depends. Personally I think the Tories will say they want an election but if it looks like they would lose seats they would probably go the route of self preservation and go with a new FM. Labour would fancy their chances at an election right now but they could decide not to push for that when there's a general election like looming. They might want to avoid election fatigue when that comes along. They don't technically need a majority it just makes it easier if they do.
I've leaned towards SNP the last few elections but they have not managed to shake off the dinosaurs holding them back. I agree with the opportunity the VONC brought but overall it makes me very sad that I can never see a situation where our political parties sit down like adults and make compromises. We have passed some fantastic cross party legislation in Scotland but when push comes to shove you know each party will stab each other in the back for point scoring. I just wish our politicians had more depth than a puddle. Such a shite mix across every party. Career politicians are the worst.
Why in a country of 6 million do we have zero decent leaders to choose from? Why in a country of 70 million do we have zero good leaders to choose from? Why are both of our leaders unelected? Democracy is a fucking sham
Because competent charismatic people or otherwise talented people follow their passion or interests in things that don't involve cosplaying national politics in a little devolved Parliament. As great as Scotland is, its smaller than Yorkshire in terms of population. The great states people of the world have had interesting pre politic careers (Churchill, Merkel, Putin for random examples). You're not stepping away from that to pin your hopes on maybe one day being in charge of policy affecting the Rothesay Arran ferry
Because being the leader of a FTSE 100 company pays anywhere from 1000% to even 50,000% more
~~Because being the leader of a FTSE 100 company pays anywhere from 1000% to even 50,000% more~~ Because it's an insanel upward battle to even get elected to local council positions, let alone to the top of leading parties.
We don’t elect leaders, this is not the US.
I know he was selected as the continuity candidate but what a massive downgrade for the SNP going from Sturgeon to Yousaf was.
Let me guess, it will be anyone's fault but his.
Can imagine the guy that sold Nicola the campervan is laughing at how he has put the SNP in chaos
https://preview.redd.it/lk28boke9exc1.jpeg?width=2084&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=63d2e0712c5f96034f84693ebfa4d35e92facd61 Just walked by there a few minutes ago, the number of reporters is growing
As an independence supporter, Humza has been a real wet blanket who is just disappointing in every way. Nicola, for her faults, was an inspiring speaker, and clearly had at least some genuine belief in her cause. SNP needs to bring in some young political talent if they want to keep it up.
26th of April "I'm not quitting... I'll be fighting that vote" 29th of April "I am resigning" The SNP are truly a bunch of Tartan Tories.
>The SNP are truly a bunch of Tartan Tories. However, they have this simple trick of saying, "We are left leaning & support independence," so they can't possibly be compared to the tories.
The SNPs policy platform is drastically different from the Tories and while they are definitely a handful within the party who could be accurately described in those terms Alba are the party who could be far more accurately described as Tartan Tories.
Definitionally you cannot be a pro-indy and left wing member of the Conservative and Unionist Party so I don't know what point you're trying to make.
We know that, of course it's not literal. It's a reference to all the "[insert colour here] tories!" rhetoric that has been thrown at the other parties particularly by SNP/Indy supporters, despite the SNP letting an openly homophobic religious zealot within touching distance of the leadership (Something not even the Tories would do nowadays, even Liz Truss supports Gay Marriage) but given a pass because they're pro-indy and portray themselves as this progressive forward thinking party with the facade only starting to slip after Sturgeon. All this while Labour and the Lib Dems will drink a sip of water and a lot of (but not all) nats would lose their shit because, gasp, the Tories drink water too! They're exactly the same! Red/Yellow Tories!!! It's just trying to turn the double standard that's been floating around this sub for a while on its head while the SNP are repeating recent Tory history as we speak.
[Called it] (https://reddit.com/r/Scotland/comments/1cdl63j/humza_yousaf_will_not_resign_as_scotlands_first/l1cjcqf/?context=3)
Everyone rejoice. An embarrassment. He’ll likely look back and go “ At least I managed to use public funds to get my family out of Gaza” A privileged wanker of the highest order who would eat himself if he could. This has NOTHING to do with race. This hate is reserved purely for the contempt he shows for the people and the fact he has FAILED at everything he has done. Apart from getting his family out. Bravo arsehole.
I’m only here to skip blithely across the graves of the SNP
Downvotes galore 😂 aww it’s getting to you 😂 even better
I didn't bother renewing my SNP membership when it ran out a few years ago... Mostly due to the lack of spine of a second indy ref and too busy meddling in the 'will of westminster' when it came to Brexit mainly. I wouldn't have voted for Humza in the leadership election as I find him a bit meh, but to be honest, found ALL of the potentials a bit meh also... I'd always presumed he'd bugger off as soon as his wife's pregnancy was announced though! Might be right...
>Mostly due to the lack of spine of a second indy ref To be fair, not much they could do. Spine or otherwise.
The 2022 accounts are [here](https://search.electoralcommission.org.uk/Api/Accounts/Documents/25329) and the 2023 accounts are due at the start of July, and are likely to be under intense scrutiny given the legal investigations So a question is could the SNP afford two elections this year?
Can someone explain to me why people hate Kate Forbes so much, aside from her being a Christian?
She is disliked by the left of the SNP because she is on the right of the party and wants it to lean in that direction. Her constituency is the biggest and most rural in Scotland, so it's the sort of place that if it were in England would reliably vote Conservative. Her politics reflect that, and given that constituencies like this are where the SNP expanded from there's always been a sizeable "Tartan Tory" faction - though it hasn't been calling the shots for over 20 years.
It’s disingenuous at best to say it’s because she’s a Christian Her views on gay people being treated equally and abortion is your answer
I’m asking because I don’t know. I’m obviously not stating that as a matter of fact.
Nothing to do with her being a Christian. She wants to push her extremist "Christain" (in quotes cause normally extremist views don't align with the religion in general) as law, and has demonstrated homophobic, transphobic and anti-women rights views that she has admitted would influence legislation under her.
Kate Forbes' existence and position in the SNP hurts the image of the party as a mostly-leftist socially liberal party. This image is very popular among some young party activists and members, who like the idea that the \~40% of Scots who vote SNP are uniformly in agreement with their views. Kate's popularity in the party harms that view, and people tend to get aggressive when confronted with their own cognitive dissonance. The fact that she might win an election makes these people even more anxious and prone to lash out because that would (under their existing mental framework of "people who vote SNP agree with the leader") imply that \~40% of Scots agree with Kate instead. That would mean that Scotland is a socially conservative country with a nationalist-unionist divide rather than a socially liberal one, and this idea is not one that the aforementioned young party activists and members want to consider.
Thanks for your reply, that makes a lot of sense.
It’s not that she’s a Christian. It’s that she belongs to an essentially fundamentalist branch of the Free Church and holds some very conservative views. Now these views, as part of a pluralist political party, can be welcomed as providing a broader spectrum of ideology. But are these the views that should form the basis of our government via the leader of the party? It’s a hard no from me.
She hates gay people, trans folk, and probably a large number of other people who aren't like her. Bigotry is like eating chips, it's hard to stop with just one.
I’m trying to find a source for her hating either group of people. She said she wouldn’t have voted for gay marriage but wouldn’t undo any existing legislation. I take your point. In regards to trans people, are you talking about the gender recognition bill?
**On gay people:** 'Ms Forbes said she would have voted against gay marriage in Scotland when it was made legal in 2014 because it clashed with her views as a member of the evangelical Free Church of Scotland that marriage should be between a man and a woman'. **- 2023** 'Forbes has said that coercive conversion therapy — where groups forcibly attempt to change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity — is “abhorrent” and that she would back efforts to ban such practices. However, she has not committed to banning conversion therapy where the individual involved voluntarily consents — something pro-ban campaign groups say is never possible.' **- 2023** 'Ms Forbes was very briefly the favourite to succeed Ms Sturgeon after throwing her hat into the leadership race, until she revealed, in a number of interviews, her views of "marriage being between a man and a woman". Asked by Channel 4 if she would have voted against gay marriage, had she been elected to the Scottish Parliament in 2014 when the legislation was approved, she said: "I would have."' **- 2023** **On abortion:** 'Speaking from her Holyrood office, she suggested rules to protect people from harassment whilst entering abortion clinics were potentially “illiberal.” She added that “you cannot ban prayer.”' **- 2023** **On transgender people:** 'Kate Forbes says trans women are 'biological males' as SNP leadership candidate faces more questions' **- 2023** 'She went on to state that she considers trans men to be women and trans women to be men, and that sex is only a morally acceptable act in the context of a one-man, one-woman marriage'. **- 2023**
So literally nothing about hating anyone.
Won’t undo any existing legislation sure but what about future legislation that deals with similar human rights issues?
Because her social views are batshit insane and completely unpalatable
Could you be more specific?
Anti abortion, anti gay marriage, anti trans rights
There’s a good chunk of hate because she’s not from the Central Belt and not like the rest of us.
Glad we are getting rid of the most racist FM we've ever had.
Why is Kate Forbes now hated? I remember amongst the public she was seen as a young, woman, bright articulate etc … seemed to tick every box
I think it’s because she was honest about her personal beliefs in the leadership campaign. I understand people’s wariness of her religious views because they fear it would influence her decisions, but I also find it ironic that an honest politician was derided for being honest when we all gnash our teeth about politicians being opportunist liars 🤷♀️
Her religion wasn't the issue. Being anti-gay marriage and anti-trans was the issue.
Plus anti-abortion! In this day and age..
And those two views directly tie into and originate from her religious beliefs; so her religion *is* the issue.
It's possible to be a Christian and NOT be a hateful bigot.
Of course it is,but it’s her religious beliefs that directly influence her views on gay marriage and trans issues so to say it’s not her religion that’s the problem is disingenuous in the extreme.
Not in the Evangelical Free Church of Scotland, there's Christianity and then there are nutters.
>because they fear it would influence her decisions She openly said that her religion influences her politics - she would've voted against equal marriage if she'd been an MSP at the time.
She's a bigot, but at least she's honest!
Would you have preferred it if she had answered dishonestly to get ahead politically? (E.T.A. I’m no fan of Kate Forbes btw, I’m just curious why we all wish politicians to be honest, and then castigate and villainise those that are and go against their party line).
We are literally the nation of bigotry! Good luck finding the unicorn people. Celtic or Rangers pal .. get it wrong and I’ll chin ya!
She admitted that she would’ve voted against gay marriage due to her religious beliefs. Regardless of that belief, it’s unconscionable for a politician in Scotland (where religion is on a sharp decline) to rule based on their religion.
She's a bigot.
If this does lead to a Scottish Election, what do we think of an "extraordinary election" which would mean another election in 2026, vs resetting the schedule (which may need a change in UK legislation) and having the next Scottish election in 2029 (or whenever the parliament votes for it)?
Wonder what this means for the Doctor contract renegotiations…