STEPHEN Flynn has been accused of thinking “he is already first minister” after Humza Yousaf’s resignation.
Ian Murray has previously accused the SNP Westminster leader of orchestrating the events which led to the First Minister’s resignation.
Flynn has previously called the accusation “a lie” – but Labour's shadow Scottish secretary continued his theme at Scotland Questions in the Commons on Wednesday morning.
He said: “The truth is that Scotland is trapped between two chaotic and failing governments. We’ve had three prime ministers and we’ll have had three first ministers in as many years.
“All the while the member for Aberdeen South thinks he is already first minister, by calling the shots but shooting himself firmly in the foot.”
Flynn has made it clear previously he was happy to see Yousaf end the Bute House Agreement, the abrupt termination of which ended his premiership.
READ MORE: Labour's Anas Sarwar in car crash interview when challenged on Holyrood election call
But the top SNP MP previously said the claims were “not true”. Speaking to the media earlier this week he said: “Nobody goes into the First Minister’s house and tells them what to do, let alone me.
“Any individual pushing this argument is overstating my influence.”
Flynn is known to have spoken to Yousaf in Edinburgh last Wednesday, the day before the First Minister terminated his power-sharing deal with the Scottish Greens.
Continuing in the Commons, Murray (above) asked Scottish Secretary Alister Jack whether it was the Tories or the SNP who were “most scared of a General Election”.
This was met with jeers of “bring it on” from the SNP benches.
READ MORE: Rishi Sunak evades questions over role of UK troops in Gaza amid demand for 'clarity'
Jack replied: “We absolutely do not fear an election, whether it’s a Holyrood election or a General Election. I mean, as I watch the Nationalists imploding again, I say bring it on.
“I hear them say ‘bring it on’ from a sedentary position. Bring it on, yes, bring it on. And just start chaps over there and chapesses, start polishing up your CVs.”
Flynn was approached for comment.
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