Stephen Flynn drops ‘double jobbing’ plan after SNP backlash

The SNP’s Stephen Flynn has said he will no longer be seeking a “dual mandate” by standing for Holyrood while still an MP.

The SNP Westminster leader had previously confirmed his intention to stand for Holyrood in 2026. He said if elected he would continue to be the MP for Aberdeen South, a practice known as double jobbing.

But Flynn faced a significant backlash to the plan, including by some colleagues within his own party.

In a statement released tonight, he said he had “got it wrong”.

He said: “Hands up, I’ve got this one wrong and won’t be pursuing a dual mandate. My aim to save the public purse from unnecessary strain by potentially overlapping the role of an MP and an MSP for a short period until the next general election was genuine in its intent – but doing it for the right reasons doesn’t change the fact I got it wrong.

“My motivation and central belief remains that Holyrood, as the heart of Scottish democracy, is the democratic platform that will drive the route to an independent Scotland. All of us in the independence movement share that common cause and want to be part of that story.

“Alongside all SNP members, I now look forward to assessing the new candidate selection rules that my party will put in place.”

Earlier this month, Flynn announced plans to stand for election at Holyrood in 2026, challenging Audrey Nicoll for her seat.

Reacting to the news on X, SNP MSP Emma Roddick said: “I hope Stephen Flynn rethinks. Can’t imagine spending half my time in London & being a good MSP. Key that rules apply to everyone equally; men and women.”

During a meeting of the equalities committee this week, the SNP's Evelyn Tweed asked the SNP’s local government and campaigns officer Cailyn McMahon what “protections” are in place to stop a man from challenging an existing female MSP for selection in 2026.

McMahon said: “This isn’t something that I’m aware of conversations having taken place at a national executive level, or a candidate assessment committee level. But it’s definitely one that I’m happy to take away. I think it’s absolutely a valid point and this is something we should prioritise.”