THE battle to become the SNP’s candidate in Edinburgh Central has become increasingly bitter, with the party’s former Westminster leader accused of making an 'inaccurate claim' about one of his rivals.
It follows a row on campaign finance, with former minister, Marco Biagi raising concerns over how much money Angus Robertson was spending on his bid to win support from local members.
The two men and local activist Lee-Anne Meznies are all vying for the prize of representing the party in a marginal seat currently held by outgoing Holyrood Tory leader Ruth Davidson.
The coronavirus pandemic has forced hopefuls to ditch the normal face-to-face approach to canvassing, relying almost solely on reaching members digitally.
On Monday, Biagi said a lack of spending cap in internal races had allowed his rival to spend “unlimited” sums on Facebook adverts.
Robertson has spent between £1,000 and £,1500 on Facebook adverts since July.
Biagi, who was the MSP for Edinburgh Central from 2011 to 2016 before stepping down, has suggested £100 should be the maximum allowed to be spent on an internal race.
Yesterday, a spokesperson for Robertson defended his online advertising spend, saying it was a “legitimate, permissible and effective way” of getting the message out.
The told Holyrood magazine: “SNP selection candidates are pretty much limited to online campaigning, which is why digital marketing is so important.
“Marco and Angus, as well as a range of SNP representatives, use online advertising as a legitimate, permissible and effective way to get their message out.
“Whether we like it or not, fundraising is an important part of modern campaigning.”
The spokesperson added: “Marco’s call for a £100 spending limit is completely unrealistic, which is why he himself has already commissioned four times that amount in Facebook advertising. “
That, Biaggi said, was a lie. Taking to Twitter, he pointed out that he’s only spent around £115 on social media adverts.
He called for an apology: “It's come to my attention that there is an inaccurate claim about me from a ‘spokesperson for Robertson’ in @HolyroodDaily. This is a direct attack on me that is false and misleading. I hope it is withdrawn by @AngusRobertson and I would appreciate an apology for the insinuation.
“In spending as he has Angus is only doing what rules permit. My criticism has been very deliberately focused solely on those rules. I'd expect any candidate with the financial resources to do the same as him unless rules are changed. It is the rules that are in the wrong.
“If NEC doesn't then I will have to consider whether, to ensure a fair contest, I seek to raise funds to compete in this way. That would be my absolute last choice because SNP money should be spent unseating unionists, not fighting amongst ourselves. I hope NEC acts.
“I should also add there's a totally legitimate contribution to debate here. I want to see new rules to end unlimited spending, Angus's views are on record now too. It's healthy for internal party democracy to let members see our perspectives.
Lee-Anne Mezie, who is also seeking selection for Edinburgh Central, warned against turning politics into “a race between those with funds” saying she simply could not afford to “spend a single penny on this campaign”.
She said: “Equality of access is at the heart of the Scot gov policies. It’s what sets Scotland apart. So, as the third wheel in this two horse race, let me say why we need equality of access on this;I work two jobs. Have little disposable income. Normal woman.
“For the Parliament to reflect us all, we should all have a chance to enter the campaign for election. When you are set back from the start, what chance do you actually have?”
“Whoever is the candidate for @EdinCentralSNP they will be an excellent addition to the Scottish Parliament. The quality of candidate is such that they shouldn’t need to spend huge amounts on an internal campaign. That money would be better spent in our campaign in 2021,” she added.
Robertson has been approached for a comment.
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