Why Stephen Flynn should change his mind on being an MSP AND MP

If he wants to head to Holyrood, that’s fine – but if he wins, the Aberdeen South MP should quit his Westminster seat.

And if he wants to represent the north east in the Scottish Parliament, he should stand on the list and not try to oust Audrey Nicoll as constituency MSP for Aberdeen South and Kincardine.

Why? Cos it ain’t fair. And as the late great William McIlvanney said, fairness is the key to Scottish identity and the reason so many of us want shot of Westminster: "Our national motto isn’t 'why daur mess wi’ me’ – it’s ‘that’s no fair."

And holding two parliamentary jobs at the same time patently ain’t.

Indeed, the lack of a credible explanation makes the move even more weird. Stephen is probably the next SNP leader. So it matters how he behaves. And appearing to believe there’s one rule for him and another for everyone else smacks of opportunism – something the Scottish public has always heartily despised.

It’s the reason Boris "Chancer" Johnson was roundly shunned in Scotland and Douglas "four jobs" Ross got his jotters at July’s General Election whilst neighbouring Tory MPs held on.

It hardly needs saying that "daeing a Doogie" looks bad. But even worse is the presumption folk won’t even make that association because … it’s Stephen we’re talking about. And he’s a good guy. A likeable guy. And for Yessers, and maybe some swithering Aberdonian voters, a far more acceptable guy than the petulant Douglas Ross. Some may also think Audrey Nicoll’s Holyrood seat will be safer with a candidate of Flynn’s profile and status.

Now, I don’t know the innards of Aberdeenshire politics. But this kind of exceptionalism is wrong, counter-productive and should be corrected immediately.

The Holyrood seat Stephen Flynn has targeted is occupied by a capable female MSP. Last week, when SNP rules were still rules, vacated seats had to be filled by women-only shortlists, so keen was the party to boost female representation. Now, the Westminster leader and obvious leadership contender looks intent on chucking a good woman aside.

READ MORE: Michael Matheson 'urged not to stand as SNP candidate by party bosses'

Call Kaye on Radio Scotland had an interesting hour’s phone-in on this subject. Yes – that choice might arise from an automatic reflex to focus on SNP woes. Will there ever be an hour devoted to the Sue Gray envoy debacle, I wonder? Still, we are where we are.

For an hour callers were either critical or baffled by Flynn’s intention to hold two jobs, including self-proclaimed Yessers like Angela Haggerty. None could see why Flynn would stay on at Westminster if he won at Holyrood and Angela highlighted the unintended consequences of his move.

One caller suggested that all MPs should "dae a Flynn" and double up as MSPs to cut costs and streamline governance. Never mind that uneven numbers in Westminster (57 seats) and Holyrood (129) make this impossible, the slightly barking stance was made credible by Stephen Flynn’s claim that he can do both jobs. Some folk clearly dislike devolution – one described Holyrood as a job creation scheme. But if one MP can do two jobs, why don’t they all sit in two parliaments a half day’s travel apart?

The dual mandate seems to suggest that one (or both) jobs is a total doddle. And if it’s not that or about personal greed, then what is Flynn up to?

As Joanna Cherry noted in the Spectator: "Anyone with a dual mandate will have two lots of staff to help them do their job. This puts them in a powerful position."

And that could be very useful for a man readying himself for a sometime leadership pitch.

Traditional singer and indy campaigner Iona Fyfe suggested Flynn could usefully "kill two birds with one stone" by attending local civic events as both MP and MSP, but she still concluded the move smacked too much of double standards.

Iona Fyfe had a suggestion for Flynn I’m afraid there is no conclusion to draw from Flynn’s two jobs strategy than the fear he may lose at Holyrood in 2026 and then be left with nowt.

Maybe using Westminster as an insurance policy is deemed prudent for a young "rising star".

Doubtless it’s within the rules – especially since the SNP are now making them up as they go along and the once non-negotiable rule that MPs must resign at Westminster before winning at Holyrood, has apparently been jettisoned.

Again, it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that in stopping Joanna Cherry from shifting from London to Edinburgh, it has served its primary purpose. Neil Gray did bite the bullet, and stand down as an MP before being elected to Holyrood – which proves the political road less travelled can nonetheless be taken. But it wasn’t just Joanna Cherry who was frozen out.

It was sheer coincidence that the first election after the empowering indyref was a Westminster one. Imagine what would’ve happened if a Holyrood election had occurred, so MPs like Philippa Whitford, Joanna Cherry, Mhairi Black, Tommy Sheppard, Alison Thewliss and other skilled performers had entered Scottish politics not Westminster. My understanding is that many wanted to change parliaments but that option was shut down by the SNP – until now.

Of course, Flynn says he won’t draw two salaries and it’s true that Alex Salmond and current leader John Swinney also double-jobbed in Holyrood and Westminster.

But that was then. Context is all.

READ MORE: Third SNP MP applies for Holyrood 2026

Those "dual mandates" existed before the indyref established the primacy of the Scottish Parliament over Westminster and before Operation Branchform and the failed prosecution of Alex Salmond laid a pall of suspicion over the motives of SNP leaders.

Today, other precedents may lurk in the public consciousness. Like Michael Matheson who famously denied and later admitted that an exorbitant parliamentary iPad bill was run up by his sons watching football abroad. Hanging on as health minister damaged not just his own prospects but also the reputation of two first ministers. Now to be clear, Stephen Flynn has not broken any such rules. But his two jobs stance looks entitled and a wee bit smug. And that’s the appearance SNP ministers are fighting on a daily basis.

Current Health Secretary Neil Gray will appear before MSPs on Thursday to explain why ministerial limos took him to Aberdeen football matches.

Whether he acted within the rules or not, Neil Gray’s explanation will call Michael Matheson to mind and Flynn’s "two-jobs" stance will summon up both. After 17 years in power, the SNP are under scrutiny as never before for evidence of the entitlement and favouritism that dogs Westminster. The SNP cannot appear to be walking an inch down that path.

For Yessers it has to be the straight and narrow.

Especially since the SNP campaigned at Westminster to ban ALL second jobs, Flynn’s move carries a whiff of hypocrisy in a party that’s long prided itself on holding higher standards. The SNP have not nominated anyone to the corrupt House of Lords for decades. And I’m pretty sure most Scots are quietly impressed with that stance.

So, will he change tack?

Well, Stephen has already done that twice. He wasn’t going to challenge Ian Blackford as Westminster leader until he did. And wasn’t planning a move to Holyrood in July – now he is. Still, maybe those changes of course were already privately in train.

This would be different.

One motto dominates public life – never apologise, never explain.

So, the chances of a Flynn rethink are low.

A politician who listens to public opinion and changes tack will be called a "flip-flopping" fool by political opponents but might look pleasantly exceptional to the voting public.

It’s a tough call – but worth spelling out.

Stephen, you’re a likeable guy – so don’t take the low road to Holyrood.