A LABOUR MSP has been accused of looking to “scuttle off” to Westminster as friction in the Scottish Labour party grows over a proposed ban on MSPs standing for the UK Parliament.
Paul Sweeney has urged his party leaders to reconsider a blanket ban on MSPs being allowed to stand for seats in Westminster.
Supporters of the proposed restriction say it looks bad for recently elected MSPs to leave for Westminster after such little time.
SNP MSP Rona Mackay said: "Shameless Paul Sweeney demonstrates his utter contempt for the Scottish Parliament with his ambition to scuttle off back to Westminster and abandon the people he was elected to represent just last year.
"Standing for Holyrood clearly was no more than a convenient stop-gap to pay his bills after he was kicked out of Westminster in 2019. So much for Scottish Labour being the so-called ‘party of devolution’?”
READ MORE: Scottish independence referendum showdown in Supreme Court sees first loss for UK
Sweeney became an MSP in the regional list in May last year after losing his Glasgow North East Westminster seat in 2019.
If the proposed ban was to be implemented, Sweeney would have to give up his Holyrood seat before standing as an MP.
In a leaked email seen by the Daily Record, Sweeney said regional MSPs played a “key role” in “driving forward the party’s electoral progress in Scotland”.
He also argued that regional MSPs should play a vital role in contesting constituency seats, regardless if it was for Holyrood or Westminster.
He said: “Ultimately the expectation is for regional members to shadow and then contest constituencies as the basis for the party to make progress at elections, and I would argue that this principle should be applied to both Holyrood and Westminster constituencies alike.”
He continued: “I have only ever contested the Glasgow North East constituency as a candidate and would advise my local CLP [constituency party] that I would only be interested in seeking selection in that seat, due to the established relationship I have with it.”
Sweeney said “discretion” should be applied where a regional MSP has a “significant relationship” to a Westminster constituency, such as “having served as the previous MP”.
Sweeney added that it should be mandatory for regional MSPs who are elected to the UK Parliament to resign from their previous role.
He added: “I also understand the risk that selecting candidates who already hold elected positions potentially invites an argument from our opponents that they are not fully committed to their current position.”
A Daily Record source close to Sweeney said: “Local party members have approached Paul about standing again as a candidate for his former constituency at the next General Election as they believe he is the best prospect for Labour to re-gain the seat, so it has been something he has been giving consideration to.
“For the past year, Paul has been a dedicated MSP, relentlessly standing up for and improving the lives of his constituents in Glasgow. That remains his focus, and he will support whoever is selected to stand at a future General Election.”
A Scottish Labour spokesperson said: “The final selection procedures are a matter for the Scottish Executive Committee. Scottish Labour are committed to having excellent Parliamentarians in Holyrood focused on standing up for their constituents, and a range of talented and diverse candidates for the next General Election.”
Scottish Conservative party chair Craig Hoy said: “This proposal from Scottish Labour already appears to be unravelling within their own party.
“It was designed to show they were belatedly trying to show they were a serious party at Holyrood, but that memo doesn’t seem to have met with the approval of one of their own MSPs.
“Given one of his MSPs also sits in the House of Lords, Anas Sarwar needs to get his own house in order before he begins to talk up this plan.”
Sweeney declined to comment when contacted by the Daily Record.
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