STEPHEN Flynn has said that no SNP MPs will be entering the House of Lords during his tenure as leader of the party at Westminster.
Speaking to ITV programme Representing Border, Flynn was asked whether he believed the SNP should begin taking up seats in the House of Lords.
It comes after an article in The Times reported that former SNP Westminster leader Ian Blackford suggested “the party should drop its opposition to membership of the House of Lords to increase nationalist influence in London” during a meeting with student journalists.
Following the story, an SNP spokesperson said Blackford would never take a seat in the unelected chamber and that the House of Lords should be abolished.
Journalist Peter MacMahon asked Flynn if he agreed with Blackford’s comments.
READ MORE: UK Government 'unlikely' to scrap biofuel cap to save Grangemouth
“Ian Blackford’s also said that he thinks your party should take seats in the House of Lords. He’s your predecessor, he led the group here.
“His argument is it’s a revising chamber, you should be in there to help revise policies. A current example would be Rwanda, for example.
“Do you agree?”
Flynn replied: “No”.
Pressed to expand upon his answer, he continued: “The House of Lords is a corrupt institution, one which is anarchic, one which rewards people based upon, in some instances, simply who they were born to.
'There'll be no SNP MPs entering the House of Lords under my watch'@StephenFlynnSNP says he doesn't agree with @Ianblackford_MP that the SNP should take seats in the Lords to increase their influence on legislation. pic.twitter.com/qDWlWjSCsy
— Representing Border (@ITVBorderRB) January 24, 2024
“There will be no SNP MPs entering the House of Lords or indeed any SNP members entering the House of Lords on my watch”.
On Tuesday evening, SNP MP Joanna Cherry criticised Blackford’s comment and suggested he was gunning for a peerage.
She said in a post on X/Twitter: “Hhmmmm let me guess? [thinking emoji] Could it be because you want a peerage? [facepalm emoji]”.
Responding to Flynn’s comments, she said: “Thank you Stephen.
“While there are respectable arguments to be made for accountable second houses or revising chambers this hare of SNP peerages in the House of Lords needed knocking on the head as it is categorically not SNP policy.”
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