TORY leadership hopeful Liz Truss has won the support of three MSPs in the last 24 hours.
Oliver Mundell, Sharon Dowey and Douglas Lumsden have all thrown their weight behind the Foreign Secretary.
Ms Truss is still behind her rival in the contest. By the end of last week, Rishi Sunak had been endorsed by seven MSPs, including former Scottish Tory leader Jackson Carlaw and constitution spokesman Donald Cameron.
Mr Lumsden, who represents the North East in Holyrood, said he was backing Ms Truss as she “cares passionately about the Union” and “understands the value of the energy industry.”
Ms Dowey, who is the MSP for South Scotland and Shadow Minister for Culture, Europe and ID, simply said she was backing Ms Truss “after careful consideration.”
There’s speculation more of the Holyrood group could soon back Ms Truss. It is understood she will be in Scotland next week to meet with party members and prospective backers.
There was also some criticism of the Chancellor from MSPs after Monday night’s BBC debate on the BBC, where he interrupted his opponent on numerous occasions.
Rachael Hamilton, who last week told The Herald she was undecided, took to Twitter to describe Mr Sunak as “infuriating.”
However, Ms Truss was criticised by influential former Tory MSP Adam Tomkins.
Writing in The Herald, the constitutional law professor said she was without substance. He said: "Despite being a former Remainer (indeed, she is a former Lib Dem!), she is preferred by the right wing of the Tory party because they think they will be able to run and control her.
"She will be a puppet prime minister, on strings pulled by the most wild-eyed of the lunatic fringe. I hope to God I’m wrong."
While the former Chancellor may currently be the favourite among the Holyrood group, it is Ms Truss who is the most popular among the rank and file.
A snap YouGov poll of 507 following the debate on Monday found that party members believed Truss was the better performer, with 50 per cent saying so to Rishi Sunak’s 39%.
Meanwhile, in his latest pledge, Mr Sunak has committed to remove VAT from domestic energy bills for a year if the price cap – currently just under £2,000 a year for the average home – exceeds £3,000 as is forecast by experts.
However, the policy was criticised by supporters of Ms Truss, who described it as a u-turn.
Mr Sunak rejected calls in February for a VAT cut to energy bills, telling the Commons “there would be no guarantee that suppliers would pass on the discounts to all customers”.
Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng told Times Radio: “I think he’s under a lot of pressure.
“That’s why we see all these statements: he was the person who said the VAT cut would disproportionately benefit rich families and now he’s saying that a VAT cut on energy bills is the right thing.
“He was saying that tax cuts were a fairytale, now he is proposing an unfunded tax cut.
“There comes a time in campaigns when people are under a lot of pressure, he clearly felt under a lot of pressure in the debate and he wanted to get out on the front foot and interrupt Liz.
“I think that was the wrong look for him, I think that was the wrong action, but I can understand why he did that.”
Asked whether Mr Sunak could win a general election, Mr Kwarteng told LBC radio: “He has flip-flopped and U-turned on this tax issue, which I find somewhat concerning, but he is a capable politician and a very likeable chap.”
Transport Secretary Grant Shapps, a supporter of Mr Sunak, defended the Mr Sunak’s £4.3 billion policy as sensible.
"In the short term it would be deflationary because people’s costs would reduce, in the medium term it would not have an impact on the consumer prices index,” he told ITV’s Good Morning Britain.
Mr Shapps denied it was “flip-flop”. He said: “If he hadn’t produced £37 billion of support, about £1,200 to the hardest-up households already – if he hadn’t done any of that and then suddenly did it, then you would have a point.
“But he has, he has been providing all this support, now he is saying: ‘Here’s something that won’t add to inflation that would save every person watching your programme £160 off their energy bills’ – I think that’s worthwhile.”
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