The Scottish Tory leadership race is in chaos after four of the six MSPs demanded party bosses give reassurances over the "transparency and fairness" of the contest.
The bombshell joint statement from Murdo Fraser, Jamie Greene, Liam Kerr and Brian Whittle came after reports that Douglas Ross attempted to quit as Scottish Tory leader more than a year ago.
The Telegraph said that in July 2023, the MSP told the party’s general election candidate for Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey that he wanted to replace her.
However, Kathleen Robertson, who is the leader of Moray council, rebuffed his request.
Insiders told the paper that at the meeting in Mr Ross’s house, he told the councillor “his heart was in Westminster, not Holyrood” and promised her she would be selected as the Tory candidate for the equivalent Holyrood seat at the 2026 election.
When Ms Robertson asked Mr Ross who would replace him as leader he said he wanted Russell Findlay.
Ms Robertson made the party chair, Craig Hoy, aware of the conversation at the start of the year.
READ MORE:
- Douglas Ross tried to quit as Scottish Tory leader last year
- Shadowy figures control Scottish Conservative leadership, says ex aide
- The next Scottish leader must expel the Tory party mafia
Mr Ross stunned colleagues when he unexpectedly announced his intention to stand down on the eve of the publication of the party’s general election manifesto.
His resignation came after a furious backlash sparked by his bid to stand for Westminster in the new Aberdeenshire North and Moray East constituency, replacing David Duguid, who, at the last minute, was declared too ill to campaign by the Party’s Management Board.
There was unease among Tory MSPs and activists over the decision, particularly as Mr Duguid insisted he was well enough to stand.
The four candidates said they were "deeply concerned by the disturbing claims" about "the conduct of Douglas Ross in relation to his seeking candidacy for a number of seats in the recent General Election."
They added: “The reports also reference his plans and preferences for a replacement leader to take over the party upon his departure which are relevant to the transparency and fairness of the current leadership contest we are participating in.
“These allegations raise serious questions for the party which, in our opinion, require to be answered before the current leadership contest proceeds further.”
The MSPs have asked the party’s candidates’ board if they knew Mr Ross had asked “a female candidate selected for a winnable target constituency” to stand aside for him and if they thought this was “an appropriate way in which to treat any candidate, not least a female?”
They also asked what action was taken after Ms Robertson reported the conversation to Mr Hoy and the party director.
They also want to know the party’s ruling Management Board knew when they took the decision not to permit David Duguid to stand as a candidate in the Aberdeenshire North and Moray East that Mr Ross “was seeking a way to remain as a Westminster MP, contrary to all the assurances he had given publicly and to colleagues.”
The four men also ask if the management board was aware of Mr Ross’s intention to have Russell Findlay replace him and “in light of it does it believe the current leadership replacement process has been affected by it in terms of fairness, scrutiny and transparency.”
They also ask what action will now be taken by the party on this matter, “including measures to ensure that this situation can never be repeated?”
Nominations for the contest close next week. As well as Mr Findlay, Mr Whittle, Mr Fraser, Mr Greene, and Mr Kerr, the party's deputy leader Meghan Gallacher has also thrown her hat into the ring.
A Scottish Conservative spokesperson said: “This relates to a personal and private conversation between Douglas Ross and Kathleen Robertson and is not a matter for the Party.
“Some months later Kathleen Robertson separately informed the chairman and the party director about this meeting and said she wished this matter to remain confidential and required them to do nothing further.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel