STEPHEN Flynn has addressed “anger” within the SNP at his decision to bid for a Holyrood seat while retaining his place at Westminster.
The SNP MP appeared on the BBC Sunday Show after facing internal criticism earlier in the week by publicly announcing his intention to stand in Aberdeen South and North Kincardine in the 2026 Scottish parliament elections – which is currently held by SNP MSP Audrey Nicoll.
Speaking on the BBC, Flynn dismissed reports he had pressured Nicoll to stand aside as “lies”, said he would not step down from Westminster in order to save the taxpayer money, and declined to rule out a bid for the SNP leadership.
Asked about reports that the SNP group at Holyrood was “united in anger” at his decision, Flynn said: “Look, there's always going to be a strong reaction to someone seeking to do things slightly differently. I've experienced this before in politics.
READ MORE: Has Stephen Flynn bitten off more than he can chew?
“It's not something which is particularly pleasant. It's not something which is particularly comfortable, particularly when you're dealing with people who you know really well you're dealing with, in my case, a colleague who overlaps almost entirely with the constituency that I currently represent at Westminster.”
Asked about reports which suggested he had pushed Nicoll to stand aside, Flynn said: “That's a lie.”
He went on: “I did call Audrey the night before. We had a fairly cordial conversation, albeit brief. Myself and Audrey speak relatively frequently, as I'm sure you can imagine.
“I made clear to her my intentions. Audrey, of course, suggested that some had been thinking that I may seek to seek candidacy in Dundee, which I assume would be a much bigger story. I don't want to do that. I live in Aberdeen. This is where my life is, I’m very fortunate to represent the people here.
“She told me that she wasn't overly surprised at the decision that I was taking, that I was obviously seeking to progress my activities in politics and that was ultimately the end of the conversation.”
Flynn was asked about SNP rules brought in for the 2021 election which forced a sitting MP to resign their Westminster seat before running for Holyrood. He said they were “election specific” and whether the same rule applied in 2026 was up to the SNP National Executive Committee.
Flynn was also asked why he would not step down from Westminster, given his previous claims that being an MP is a full-time job and criticism of former Scottish Tory leader Douglas Ross for holding seats in two parliaments at once.
He said: “I'm looking to save the public a significant amount of money, the public in Aberdeen, by not having a by-election. I think that would be welcomed by them in these tough financial times.
“I'm looking to save the party a significant amount of money as well.”
READ MORE: SNP politicians call for Stephen Flynn to 'rethink' bid to be both MP and MSP
And asked if he is “on manoeuvres” with an eye on the SNP leadership, Flynn suggested he was – but that it was a question for the future.
“I'm ambitious,” he said. “I'm seriously ambitious for Aberdeen and for Scotland.”
After BBC host Martin Geissler suggested he was also ambitious “for Stephen Flynn”, the MP responded: “I don't think that's called for.”
He went on: “I don't believe that there's going to be a leadership contest in the Scottish National Party for a long, long time because John Swinney is going to win the Scottish Parliament elections in 2026.
“He's going to continue as First Minister, and should there be a future leadership election that will be in the dim and distant future, because John Swinney is leader of our party and he's going to be the leader of our party for a long time to come.”
Flynn was asked about whether he had told Swinney of his intention to run for Holyrood before making it public, but he declined to either confirm or deny if he had done so.
“I had conversations with people right across the party,” he said.
“Locally, local activists, key local activists, everyone who needed to be aware of what my intentions were were aware of what my intentions are.”
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