SNP group on D&G Council say they have officially called for a vote of no confidence
It comes after seven Conservative councillors left the party, making the SNP the biggest group.
Councillor Gail MacGregor has been the leader of the Conservative administration since 2023, when an SNP-led rainbow coalition collapsed.
SNP group business manager Councillor Katie Hagmann told ITV Border her party had submitted a no confidence motion that has received cross party support.
The vote is expected to take place at a special full council meeting in the coming days.
In February, councillors voted through the opposition SNP budget.
Councillor Katie Hagmann said the administration was in 'disarray.'
She added: 'We have submitted a motion of no confidence in the current administration. There is likely to be an announcement of a full council meeting and we are calling for the removal of the convener and the deputy convener, which is also the leader of Dumfries and Galloway council.
"It is not acceptable the way that the administration is acting and the SNP group are the biggest group within the whole of the council and this is an snp budget that's been passed.
"We've got business to do, we've got to deliver for the people of Dumfries and Galloway and we're determined to do that."
The Conservative rebels have formed two separate groups.
Councillors Andrew Giusti, Chrissie Hill, David Inglis and Richard Marsh have formed a new group called Novantae.
The three other councillors Ian Carruthers, Karen Carruthers and Andrew Wood, have formed a separate independent group.
A spokesperson for the Scottish Conservatives said: 'We wish them well.'
The rebellion means that the Conservative group shrinks from 16 to nine and raises questions over the viability of the current administration.
The political make-up of the council is now: 11 SNP members; nine Scottish Conservatives; eight Scottish Labour; one Scottish Liberal Democrat; 14 independent / other.
A spokesperson for Dumfries and Galloway Council said: 'Dumfries and Galloway Council can confirm that seven councillors have resigned from the Conservative group. The council's website has been updated.
'Four of the councillors have formed a new political group called Novantae – councillors Richard Marsh, Chrissie Hill, Andrew Giusti and David Inglis.
'Three of the councillors have informed council officers that they have set up a separate group and they intend to call it The Dumfries and Galloway Independent Group. These are councillors Ian Carruthers, Karen Carruthers and Andrew Wood.
'The council will not be commenting further at this time.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
25 minutes ago
- The National
Why didn't the SNP act when they had power in the UK?
As I have said many times in these pages and to SNP leadership, when we had a majority of SNP MPs at Westminster, and were the third-biggest party there, that if the FM spent less time strutting around like a world leader, distracting from the job at hand, and allowed the SNP group at Westminster to actually do their job, we could have had either independence or another referendum by now. As I said, in my simplistic view: 1. In 1707, it was Scottish parliamentarians who voted to unionise with England, not through a referendum or public opinion which was very much against it at the time. 2. The [[SNP]] in 2011 achieved what was meant to be improbable, due to the way the proportional representation system was set up at [[Holyrood]], and won a majority. Independence polling was in the low 30% at the time and [[Westminster]] thought they would lay to rest once and for all Scottish independence and reset the narrative. READ MORE: 'Not in our name': Hundreds gather in Scottish cities to protest Donald Trump Scots sensing freedom rallied around the cause as the polls rose, only for Westminster to panic and reach out to the vast Union media to spread doom and fear about Scotland's chances to surviving on its own (see point 5). Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon were not prepared for the referendum fight that ensued, failing to deliver on the big questions in debates. Which isn't surprising because the [[SNP]] were probably taken aback when David Cameron said yes to a referendum, the [[SNP]] hadn't done all the preparative homework (ie currency, pensions, trade, the border, etc) to allay the fears of Scots never mind that of Scottish businesses and institutions. Even now, they are not prepared 11 years on and the SNPs hierarchy of 'it's my way or the highway approach to independence' is a flaw in their DNA. Scots' democracy is a consensus-based system, that's how the convention brought about devolution, and it's about time the SNP woke up to this fact. The SNP hierarchy don't even listen to their own rank and file or their activists! Even Swinney's recent independence reset is so bland, it wasn't worth the airtime. The concern of independence voters is who will be their political voice, certainly not the SNP at this time, the reason more than half a million voters failed to vote for them last time not many of these voters jumped the divide to Labour if you look at the voter breakdown. Worrying times indeed for both the SNP and independence voters. The independence voter churn is likely to continue. (Image: PA) 3. [[Westminster]] and the House of Lords (monarchy) demand power and obedience to rule which make the privilege richer and give the middle and lower classes just enough to keep them in line. So, the [[SNP]] need to be strategic and be prepared to gamble all to deliver independence. They had a whole parliamentary term when they were in the ascendancy to do this and failed miserably, partly due to internal squabbling at [[Westminster]] and interference from the FM and the FM's inner circle who acted as though [[Holyrood]] had political precedence and would deliver independence. Oh how wrong this attitude was, and it's been a slippery downward slope ever since. The best they could do was ask 'please sir can I have one more referendum?' and their reply was 'more, you had your day and the people of Scotland voted to remain, now is not the time for another referendum'. 4. At this time, the SNP should have shaken this up by electing a 'majority Scottish leader' at Westminster. Reintroduce the Scottish Grand Committee to review all Westminster's reserved matters like the constitution, eg another independence referendum or to vote on the impact of Westminster land-grab legalisation the 'Internal Market Act'. To vote on these and relay to the speaker of the house and the government the Scottish MP majority outcomes are token and disruptive gestures maybe, but it does echo the Scottish electorate will to the Parliament. More importantly, at this time the UK was out of Europe, a fundamental material change from the referendum debate of 2014 where membership of the European Union was one of [[Westminster]]'s key fear strategies, and from a democratic perspective, the [[SNP]] were the third-largest party at [[Westminster]] (unheard of achievement), the biggest party at [[Holyrood]] and biggest party of elected councillors in Scotland. If I was in charge at that time, I would have given the Westminster government the simple either/or ultimatum; to grant a second referendum or Scotland will unitarily leave the Union based on the elected mandate. The latter throwing the UK into a constitutional crisis, spooking the Bank of England (not UK!) and the financial markets. I am sure this would have led to a lot of activity behind the scenes as when the city of London catches a cold, Westminster sits up and takes note and then there is the probable granting of a second referendum. As I said, gamble big, better than the limp approach to the English Supreme Court approach! 5. Many countries have successfully left British rule and never looked back. As stated at point 1), Scots parliamentarians decided to join England in an Union, so it is not unrealistic to do the same in reverse, irrespective of the language of the treaty. Labour rules the UK with only 33.7% of those voted, so having greater than 50% is not necessary. Also, when a small group of Tory MPs like the 1922 club can oust an elected leader that won them a general election, it just goes to show how democracy works for English privilege and not for the democratic masses, like for Scotland. Also, when a Westminster party comes to power, there is no penalty or forfeit for not following their manifesto, so just because the SNP manifesto didn't explicitly say Scotland would leave the UK, anyone that votes for the SNP knows their DNA is independence, so shock horror if they deliver on it. From an European perspective, precedent was set when the Slovakian party announced the dissolution of Czechoslovakia, resulting in the separation in 1992 and the resultant independent sovereign states of Slovakia and Czech Republic where future EU ascension wasn't an issue, so why would Scotland's independence be a roadblock to independence or EU ascension, certainly not now after Brexit? A Wilson Stirlingshire THE Government has recently announced changes to the Contracts for Difference scheme, with a view to speeding up the development of renewable energy projects across the country. One of the new changes to the scheme is to extend the length of contracts for onshore and offshore windfarm project development. This provides an incentive for developers bidding for new contracts, as it gives them more time to recoup their costs. The new cycle for applications to the scheme opens on August 7, 2025. This incentivising highlights the point that Pat Kane made in his article on July 12, titled 'Scotland is heading back into a cycle of 'extraction without consent'', that after oil comes wind power. He also made reference to Lesley Riddoch's equally excellent article of June 19, about the multiple windfarm applications which are currently being made across the Highlands and Islands of Scotland. Kane reflected back to a time when the play, The Cheviot, The Stag And The Black, Black Oil, by John McGrath dramatised the issues surrounding oil extraction in Scotland's waters, and went on to ask rhetorically, 'What kind of single dramatic 'representation' could take purchase?' in relation to the issues surrounding renewable energy generation in Scotland today. He lays down the gauntlet when he suggests that: 'Creatives worth their salt should rise to the challenge'. In the comments section at the end of his article, I did point out that in terms of dramatising the issues surrounding renewable energy being generated in Scotland, much of the problem creatives like myself face is getting our work heard. It's not that we are not offering a commentary, or perspective, on these issues, but without the following which the celebrity cult seems to generate in today's publishing world, it is hard to get your work noticed. Oblivious as to whether or not I am one of those who are 'worth their salt', I had just started the process of uploading, finalising and then releasing my latest humorous novel, An t-Eilean Dorcha (The Dark Island) at the time of his article. This was finally released in paperback on July 21 on Amazon. The novel focuses on a renewable energy project which is proposed for a small island, and the community has to evaluate its impact and consider how best to respond. My hope is that as well as providing the reader with some light entertainment and an escape from their day-to-day life, it will also, give voice to the very real concerns people have expressed about renewable energy resource generation in the Highlands and Islands. Gordon Ian MacLeod via email MUCH angst has been expressed recently about the high cost of electricity in Scotland. Hardly surprising in the UK's cradle of green, affordable generation. Disgruntled consumers may hold meetings, march, post banners and write letters – all protesting against high charges. The privatised electricity companies will ignore them, assuming that people will pay up for this essential necessity; and most probably will. In 1915, at the height of the First World War, greedy landlords in Glasgow increased rents beyond what was reasonable. Already poor people were incensed, but didn't know what to do about it. That is until local woman Mary Barbour stepped in and created an army which united in a rent strike. They surmised that if they hit the landlords in their pockets they would soon begin to squeal – and indeed it was not long before they did back down, realising that some rent was better than none. All the passive actions I mention above will not disturb the power companies one iota, so I suggest that folk in the Highlands and Islands emulate Mary Barbour's army, and refuse to pay their electricity bills en masse until they are charged the same per kilowatt that Londoners pay, backdated to 2020. Yes, the companies will hold out for as long as possible, they will take a few people to court, and as with any strike there will be folk who capitulate. But with solidarity, mutual support and determination, I believe the people will prevail. Richard Walthew Duns THE article in the digital edition reporting on the sale of an estate near Fort Augustus indicates that there will be a lot of interest from overseas. If this parcel of Scottish land is sold to an overseas buyer then there should be a hefty tax burden on the buyer and they should only be allowed to purchase it if everything is transparent so that the people of Scotland know who owns the land that should belong to the people of Scotland. Audrey Maceachen via email YOUR article on the electric super highway mentions a subsea cable from Fife into England. Meanwhile, Scotland is faced with giant pylons ruining the land? Our 'green' electricity, for which we are charged extortionate rates, being fed into another country. Has Mr Swinney and the [[SNP]] anything to say in this? Or is this robbery getting the silence that Grangemouth got. Jim Butchart via email
The National
3 hours ago
- The National
Flynn: Don't let Trump be reason Starmer finally visits Aberdeen
SNP WESTMINSTER leader Stephen Flynn has called on the Prime Minister to meet with energy workers during his visit to the North East to meet Donald Trump. Flynn wrote a letter to Keir Starmer inviting him to the meeting with workers and those in the wider industry, noting that it shouldn't have taken a visit from Trump to 'drag [him] up to Aberdeen'. Starmer has not visited Aberdeen since before the election, despite the UK Government's latest energy policies affecting roles within Scotland's energy sector. In the letter, Flynn warned that the Labour Government's fiscal regime has cost thousands of jobs with net zero and energy security now at risk. READ MORE: Trump International golf tournament to receive £180k from Scottish Government The [[Aberdeen]] South MP said "it seems jobs become more critical to Westminster depending on which side of the Tweed they lie". He added: 'It should not take the visit of Donald Trump to drag you up to Aberdeen – it should have been the billions our industry provided to your Treasury coffers and the thousands of jobs being lost." Starmer and Energy Secretary Ed Miliband have faced widespread backlash over the scrapping of zonal pricing, as well as the closure of the Grangemouth oil refinery. Flynn's letter continues: 'The just transition is being put in jeopardy by your government that chooses to sit silent as workers lose their jobs, energy security is put at risk, economic growth is lost, supply chains are offshored and net zero targets are missed. READ MORE: 'He belongs in The Hague': Keir Starmer fiercely criticised over Gaza speech 'The independent expert advice is clear - we will see a Grangemouth scale of job losses each and every fortnight if your government does not shift from its misguided position and protect the energy industry of today so that the workforce can use their skills and expertise to develop the net zero industries of tomorrow. 'The opportunities of net zero are enormous, but they will not be realised if the Labour Government continues with its current fiscal regime that deters stability, confidence and investment in existing industries and we therefore lose our best people, and world-class supply chain, to nations elsewhere. 'Whether it is the impact of the Energy Profits Levy or your misguided investment in nuclear energy south of the border, we run the real risk of being in a 'worst of all worlds' type scenario and that would be unforgivable.'
The Independent
11 hours ago
- The Independent
Who are the key players in Taiwan's ‘great recall' vote?
Unprecedented polls are underway in Taiwan as the island votes to decide whether to oust 24 of its parliament lawmakers, who were only elected into office eighteen months ago. Voters are queuing up in schools, temples, and community centres to cast their ballots on whether to oust about one-fifth of their lawmakers, all from the opposition Nationalist Party, in what is being called the 'Great Recall Movement' that could reshape the power balance in the island. If more than six lawmakers are recalled, it could shift the balance of power in the parliament in favour of Taiwanese president Lai Ching-te, who wants Taiwan to forge a future separate from China, against an opposition largely seen as favouring close ties with Beijing. The poll sees close competition between Taiwan's major political parties, the DPP, the KMT, and their allies. Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Taiwan's independence-leaning ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) won last year's presidential election for an unprecedented third term over a platform that strongly rejected China's territorial claims over Taiwan. The party came to power by winning 40 per cent of the votes, even though its share of the vote had decreased compared to the previous election. Soon after coming to power, Mr Lai, 64, a former doctor who had served as vice-president to Tsai Ing-wen since 2020, said Taiwan would 'continue to walk side by side with democracies around the world'. The DPP-led government has tried to highlight the 'Taiwan identity' as something unique and different from that of China. However, many Taiwanese citizens have expressed concern that this approach could continue to put the island under threat from Beijing, which has upped its military exercises around Taiwan in recent years. Although the DPP won the presidential elections, it was a coalition led by the China-friendly Nationalists, or Kuomintang (KMT), that got enough seats to form a majority bloc in the island's parliament. The KMT has been accused by the ruling party of blocking key legislation, especially the defence budget, and of passing legislative changes favouring China, which considers Taiwan a part of its own territory. It has succeeded in passing three controversial bills and budget cuts to the 2025 national budget, which together were seen as strengthening the powers of parliament at the cost of the executive. All the lawmakers currently facing recall belong to the KMT, the largest party in the legislature with 52 seats. With the election commission scheduling recall polls for seven more KMT legislators on 23 August, nearly one-third of all legislative constituencies face the vote, mostly concentrated in the north and urban regions. Taiwan People's Party (TPP) The TPP is a smaller party and a relative newcomer in the race, gathering strong support among young people disillusioned by the ruling and main opposition parties. It controls eight of the Taiwanese parliament's 113 seats and works in a coalition with the KMT to wield control over the legislature. The relations between Taiwan and mainland China have been central to the recall mandate. Many supporters of the recall movement point to close ties between some KMT officials and leaders in mainland China. In April, some KMT legislators travelled to the mainland and met with Beijing's chief theoretician Wang Huning, a member of the Politburo Standing Committee, raising concerns that KMT leaders could be taking orders from Beijing.
