ACCORDING to reports in recent days, some letters of no confidence in Boris Johnson have started to dribble into the chairman of the 1922 committee.
Let’s not get our hopes up though. Any letters that have already been sent are most likely from a core group of ruddy-cheeked backbenchers.
You know the ones I mean. The lads that would send a letter of no confidence to the boss of Asda to complain about the expansion of their vegan range.
Boris Johnson isn’t in danger … yet. The game isn’t really on until those who have sent in letters start to go public. When letters are published on Twitter and the journalist Whatsapp groups are ablaze with gossip, that’s when things really start to get interesting.
Nicola Sturgeon is facing a different problem.
In an interview with Laura Kuenssberg, the First Minister attempted to shut down speculation that she is thinking about exiting politics in the not-too-distant future.
She said the constant questions about her future plans indicated nothing more than wishful thinking on the part of her opponents.
After the interview, some opposition representatives gave their reaction to the news that Nicola Sturgeon plans on sticking around.
Jackson Carlaw said it was "bad news for Scotland", Alex Cole-Hamilton said "it’s time Scotland had an alternative" and Labour’s Neil Bibby called it a "self-indulgent distraction".
READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon: Those seeking refuge are human beings not political footballs
I’m sure that all three would much prefer to see their own party in charge. They should put the graft in to try and beat the SNP at the next election. It would be a better use of their time than whispering incantations over a bubbling cauldron to try and bring about Nicola Sturgeon’s resignation as First Minister.
But after watching what went down at FMQs on Thursday, some of them might be secretly glad they’re not the ones in the hot seat.
It was another brutal session for the First Minister, as Anas Sarwar returned once again to the problems at Glasgow’s Queen Elizabeth University Hospital.
Last week, he raised the case of Andrew Slorance, after the health board was accused of a "cover-up" over his death.
This week, Sarwar said that he had been contacted by a senior clinician at the hospital, who had asked to remain anonymous.
Mr Sarwar said that the whistle-blower claims that two children have died after contracting infections.
One was said to be a cancer patient who was on the same ward as Slorance at about the same time.
According to Mr Sarwar’s source at the hospital, another child is said to have died after acquiring a waterborne infection in the last two months.
In a furious series of questions, Mr Sarwar described the Scottish Government’s handling of these issues as a "failure of leadership".
"The holding answers are no longer good enough. This is gross negligence. The First Minister needs to act to stop infections and save lives," he said.
In response, the First Minister said she didn’t have the details of the case but she would look into it as a matter of priority.
She went on to outline the steps that the Government has taken.
“I know the independent statutory public inquiry is important but it is simply not the case to say that nothing else is being done. While we await the findings, Glasgow health board is right now at the highest level of escalation … that means there is a significant amount of work underway to address infection in hospitals and to reduce the incidence of infection.”
Anas Sarwar's fury was palpable as he accused the Scottish Government of complacency.
READ MORE: UK and Scottish Tory and Labour leaders' approval ratings 'hit record lows'
“Infections are happening now. Patients are dying now. Last week, the cause of Andrew Slorance’s death was revealed. This week the death of two children. Another week of dithering and inaction simply won't cut it.
“Sack the leadership of the health board today. Sack the oversight board today and use your emergency powers to take control of this hospital. First Minister, how many more families will have to be devastated before you do the right thing?”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel