JOANNA Cherry has said she wants to be able to stand for a seat in Holyrood.
During an appearance at the Fringe – which was previously subject to controversy after organisers attempted to cancel Cherry’s appearance due to staff refusing to work the event – the SNP MP said she did not want to spend the rest of her political career in opposition.
Her previous attempt to stand in a Holyrood election was thwarted by party rules which only allow MPs to run if they resign from their seat at Westminster.
“I don’t want to be in opposition for the rest of my life,” she said.
“I would really like to be in government and that’s why I would like to be able to stand for Holyrood.
READ MORE: 'Every SNP MP would prefer Holyrood to Westminster', says Stephen Flynn
“I also think I would be of benefit to the SNP and other parties at Holyrood.
“The party’s under different management now and clearly we’re having a huge review of transparency and governance and I hope the sense of encouraging some of us who have got Westminster experience to think about coming to Holyrood will come to the fore during that period.”
It comes after the SNP’s leader at Westminster, Stephen Flynn, said “almost all SNP MPs would prefer to be elected to Holyrood and not to Westminster.”
When asked by journalist Graham Spiers, who conducted the 70-minute interview, whether she supported a renegotiation of the Bute House Agreement with the Scottish Greens, Cherry said there “is a feeling the tail is wagging the dog in Holyrood” and said members should be consulted on whether to end the agreement or make it better.
READ MORE: Joanna Cherry dismisses claim she said Greens deal should be 'ripped up'
However, following the event she balked at a headline from the Daily Record which suggested she wanted the deal to be “ripped up”.
“This is a very misleading headline I did not say the deal should be ripped up,” she tweeted.
“My comments were far more measured and nuanced than this as the body of the article reflects.
“I hope the Daily Record will correct the sub editors misleading headline.”
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