ONE of Richard Leonard’s rebel MSPs has not ruled out the prospect of court action over a bid to force a leadership contest.
Daniel Johnson did not say who their side’s candidate for the post would be – insisting that it is important first to clarify how the internal election could be sparked.
He accused the embattled Scottish Labour boss of “hiding behind the rulebook” amid a row over the ability to challenge the party’s leadership.
Earlier this week Johnson and his Holyrood party colleague James Kelly wrote to party officials for clarity over how a leadership contest can be triggered.
Speaking on BBC Good Morning Scotland yesterday, Johnson indicated the fiasco could end up in court.
When asked about the potential for court action, Johnson said that “it’s certainly challengeable and I think we need to look at all our options”.
The rebels argue that, with a fifth of MSPs at Holyrood no longer supporting Leonard’s leadership, that should be enough to permit a contest.
Johnson argued this is the case because in this area the Scottish Labour Party “defers” to the UK party’s rule book – adding that this accepts “that a fifth of the parliamentary party constitutes a valid challenge”.
However, Scottish Labour general secretary Michael Sharpe said he is “not aware of any such precedent on this issue” for the Scottish Party.
Johnson branded that “absurd”.
Concerns about Scottish Labour’s leadership have been raised ahead of next May’s Holyrood elections, with the group of MSPs calling for Leonard to quit – who also include Jenny Marra and Mark Griffin – fearing the impact he will have on their party’s performance at the poll.
Leonard remains insistent that he will lead his party in next year’s Holyrood election campaign, arguing that it would be a “dereliction of duty” for the party to “turn in on itself at the very point when the country is facing an unprecedented crisis”.
Johnson, the MSP for Edinburgh Southern, told the BBC: “We seem to be in the slightly odd situation where a few days ago we had the leader of the Scottish Labour Party saying he would accept any challenge and now there seems to be a claim that no challenge is possible.
“That seems fairly absurd.
“But fundamentally there is a point of fairness here, in that even constituency Labour Party chairs have to submit themselves for re-election once a year.
“The UK leader of the Labour Party may be challenged if a fifth of MPs submit a challenge, but apparently the Scottish Labour leader uniquely holds office without qualification, caveat or limitation.
“And I don’t think that is fair, I don’t think that is reasonable and I think it is certainly highly questionable.”
He insisted: “The Scottish Labour Party rule book says the general provisions of the UK Labour Party rule book apply to the Scottish Labour Party.
“So given this provision for challenging a leader is in the UK rule book, I think it is at best arguable that the provision applies to the Scottish Labour Party.”
Pressed on who the challenger to Leonard’s position would be in the contest, Johnson responded: “I don’t think it would be sensible or reasonable to put forward a candidate until we have established what the rules are.”
He continued: “We need to establish that there is this possibility. I think Labour Party democracy and fairness within the party demands that we establish that there is a fair and consistent application of rules.At the moment that seems to have been cast into doubt – that is what we need to establish before we move forward.”
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