Want to help?

Click here to find out how you can help

Find Us On Facebook

facebook01

Contact Us

☎ 01334-656488
📧 info@fifeconservatives.uk

 

‘Job done’ as Ross withdraws no-confidence motion in Yousaf

Douglas Ross will no longer press ahead with his motion of no confidence in Humza Yousaf – because it’s achieved its goal of forcing the First Minister to quit.

The Scottish Conservative leader has today formally withdrawn his parliamentary motion – which led to the SNP leader’s resignation by winning the support of Labour, Liberal Democrat and Green MSPs – after declaring: “job done”.

Holyrood’s largest opposition party have requested that the 30-minute slot provisionally reserved for the debate tomorrow (Wednesday) instead be allocated to a statement from the Lord Advocate on the Post Office Horizon scandal, to clear up “blatant contradictions” in the SNP Government’s stance. 

 

Scottish Conservative leader Douglas Ross said: “I’m delighted that the Scottish Conservative motion of no confidence in Humza Yousaf achieved its purpose by forcing him to resign.

“While, on a personal level, I wish him well for the future, he was a disaster as First Minister and it’s in Scotland’s interests that he goes. 

“The next goal for my party is to see off this feuding, failing SNP government and switch the focus away from their independence obsession and on to the public’s real priorities – such as growing the economy and improving Scotland’s ailing public services.

“As it’s job done in terms of Humza Yousaf, there’s no longer any need for us to press ahead with a debate on our no-confidence motion.

“Consequently, we have formally withdrawn it and requested that the parliamentary bureau instead allocate that time for a statement from the Lord Advocate on the Post Office scandal.

“It’s essential, for Scottish victims of this appalling miscarriage of justice, that the SNP Government clear up the blatant contradictions in their position on Horizon.

“On the one hand, ministers are demanding that UK legislation be extended to Scotland, yet, on the other, the Lord Advocate is opposed to the blanket exonerations that lie at the heart of it.”