Having originally dismissed the idea of John Swinney entering the SNP leadership contest I was more than a little surprised to learn that he was “actively considering” doing just that. In response, I wrote a short piece a couple of days ago in which I mused on his chances of winning that contest and the possibility that he could become First Minister. I should have realised that the lack of vitriolic railing against the SNP in the article would cause the mindless SNP haters to read it as a glowing tribute to John Swinney, an endorsement of his candidacy and/or a defence of the SNP Scottish Government.
Of course, it was none of these things. But that is where the Yes movement is at the moment – split between those who insist that we mustn’t criticise the SNP at all and those who demand that we do nothing other than attack the party. The space left for objectivity is maybe half the thickness of a cigarette-paper. Reflecting on the fact that John Swinney might be party leader and First Minister is not the same as opining that he should be. And even suggesting that he should be is relative to other potential candidates here in the real world. It is pointless arguing that a particular individual should get the job if there is absolutely no possibility of that happening.
The vast majority of us don’t have any say in who becomes leader of the SNP. Only party members get a vote. Given that the leader of the governing party is all but certain to become First Minister, it follows that the vast majority of us have no say in that either. You may not approve of this. But you cannot sensibly deny that it is the situation. You may wish we had more direct involvement in selecting the First Minister, just as you may wish a particular individual was chosen. But wishing doesn’t make it so. We can only sensibly analyse the situation as it is, not as we would wish it to be.
As a blogger, I can only comment on the situation as it is at the time of writing. Sometimes, events move so quickly that what was said yesterday looks quite silly in the light of overnight developments. Commenting on a John Swinney candidacy today I would have to take account of credible reports that Swinney has been selected for a Yousaf-style coronation by The Clique, as the Sturgeon-centred controlling group within the SNP leadership shall henceforth be known. I would also have to take due account of the fact that the leadership contest currently looks like being a two-horse race between John Swinney and Kate Forbes. And I’d have to factor-in stories about these two holding ‘secret talks’.
My reading of the situation as it stands is that John Swinney would probably win this race. My opinion would be that this is probably for the best, all things considered.
I say this in full awareness of how it will be read by the SNP haters. There is nothing I can do about that. An appeal to rationality and objectivity is pointless when dealing with people who are irrational and incapable of being objective. It will make not a jot of difference is I say that John Swinney is not my dream candidate for the job. If I chose him it is because I don’t get to choose the person I consider ideal out of all the people I can imagine. I am limited to choosing from the much smaller subset of people who actually exist. And then from the relatively miniscule subset of people who are actually applying for the position.
Between John Swinney and Kate Forbes, I reason that the former would be the choice of the party membership and the one favoured by most SNP voters and the one acceptable to the largest part of the electorate. There is good reason for this. For one thing, there’s a big question mark over whether Kate Forbes could even form a government far less hold it together for two years. It’s not that she is massively unpopular with party members or the general public. It’s just that she is not approved by The Clique. We know the lengths The Clique will go to when they want to take someone out of play. Which is not to suggest they’d try to have her thrown in prison on trumped-up charges. Only that they would wield their very considerable powers of patronage to isolate and undermine her. They could, if they chose, make it impossible for Forbes to function as First Minister.
Even if The Clique didn’t go so far as actively trying to bring down a Kate Forbes-led administration, she’d be in a very difficult situation. Any nominally pro-independence First Minister has more than enough enemies without the elite of her own party being added to a list that includes the British parties, the British government and the British media.
John Swinney might at least be able to function as party leader and First Minister. Even if that’s the best that can be said, it’s probably enough – given the options.
One further thought. This was prompted, as my thoughts very often are, by a contribution to the comment section. This said, referring to John Swinney –
How anyone can imagine the resurrection of this un-dead, clapped out, failed SNP leader from the “noughties” can bear fruit for the independence movement beats me.
I responded to this saying that nobody imagines a John Swinney leadership might “bear fruit for the independence movement”. I should have qualified this by excepting the devout SNP loyalists who would have us believe that their party is forever leading the fight to restore Scotland’s independence. But what occurred to me, prompted by this remark, is how ability to progress Scotland’s cause is now barely a consideration when a new SNP leader is being discussed. Vanishingly few people seem to expect that an SNP leader will actively pursue the restoration of Scotland’s independence. They’ve either pushed the constitutional issue way down their list of priorities to match where it is presumed to lie for the SNP, or they have totally given up on the ‘beautiful dream’ the way many perceive the SNP as having done.
If the principal criterion in choosing a new SNP leader and/or First Minister is the candidate’s ability to lead the struggle to free Scotland of the onerous burden of the Union, the vacancies must go unfilled. The harsh reality Scottish nationalists must face is that we are bereft of political leadership – and nobody is even applying for the job.
Peter A Bell 
Spot on Peter. Just a thought though – we all know that there is a ruling clique in the SNP, and we all have some idea about the people who are in it. Wouldn’t it be a good idea to make a list with names and roles ? Or has someone done this already ?
LikeLike
I’m not sure that would be a clever idea. My immediate thought is that it would spark an endless debate about who should and should not be on the list when what really matters is a small group acting in concert to manipulate the party in its own interests. Individuals within the group may come and go. But such groups tend to persist regardless of who is on the membership list.
LikeLiked by 1 person
We could always ask them to keep the list updated
LikeLike
No harm in asking, I suppose. No point, either. But hey-ho…
LikeLike
No, bad idea. Anyone who ever utters anything positive about any of them will by extension be included in ‘the bad guys’. It’ll just turn into further brain numbing extended rants and turn off swathes from any purposeful debates.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Personally I think there is little chance of much changing with respect to the SNP ‘loyalists’ and ‘haters’ until the real ‘elephant in the room’ is taken cognisance of, namely Sturgeon/Salmond schism.
Until that particular boil is lanced properly and the puss fully ejected there is little hope of an end to the back-biting, distrust and paranoia (real or imagined).
Meanwhile Scotland, and The Cause, suffers.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I see no realistic prospect of that schism being bridged. Once it sets in, tribalism becomes self-perpetuating and self-sustaining. It is eternal.
Which implies that if Scotland’s cause is to be progressed, a ‘third force’ is required. Something that stands outside the Sturgeon/Salmond arena. Just don’t ask me how this third force might come into being. I’m all out of ideas on that front.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The ‘third force’ Peter is truth. Until such time as some person/s is/are brave and bold enough in publicly exposing to the nation, Sturgeon and her co- conspirators, for their roles in attempting to incarcerate Salmond, then in our lifetime that schism will endure.
LikeLiked by 2 people
If the choice is between S and F then I still dont quite get why you would go for the ‘certainty’ option. It reads a bit like the ‘reluctant’ No voters going for the status quo for fear things might be worse otherwise. But then I’m the type of person that habitually gets off the motorway and takes the minor roads just to see what I’m missing. I’ve still not crashed the car.
LikeLike
I explained why I reckon Swinney is the least worst of the two. Bear in mind that I’m not looking for which one would best serve Scotland’s cause. As I say in the article, that criterion is made inapplicable by the fact that serving Scotland’s cause is no longer part of the role that is to be filled.
I prefer (too strong a word) John Swinney only because I reckon a Forbes-led government would be extremely unstable and I worry about all sorts of potential consequences of this. A Forbes-led party would also suffer internal upheaval, and this might not be a bad thing. However, it’s the instability of the government that must be the greatest concern.
A Swinney-led government is at least feasible. Anybody who is hoping for more than that really needs to wake up and smell the shite.
As for the implications for the party of having Swinney as leader, I’m not sure. The sense I get of the SNP derives almost entirely from the demented antics of party loyalists on social media. I know this cannot accurately reflect the attitudes of all members. Or even of most members. It’s hard to say how the party would respond to Swinney’s leadership because it’s hard to know what the SNP is really like outside the leadership and their loud loyalist guardians. The Clique is the only thing we see in action. The loyalists are the only thing we hear. Neither, I suppose, represents the ‘real’ SNP.
LikeLike
Thank you Peter, I get it now. Swinney has laid down enough poison in his speech to warn off Forbes. I hope she extracts real promises and gets the likes of Ivan McKee into cabinet.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The * situation * within the SNP is akin to being given a choice between hanging & lethal injection as ways to be executed . The end result is the same , ie an appointment with the dude with the scythe .
I reckon there is no shortage of willing candidates for the gig as Head Of Gravy ; they’re just waiting till ( they hope ) the present – and impending – concatenation of political exocets have passed : they may have a long wait for that scenario .
In the interim , human bullet-absorber John The Anabaptist is being pushed in take the flak , ( attempt to ) steady the ship – a Sisyphean task when the ship is taking in water at an alarming rate on all sides and is bound – on present trajectory – to be an unsalvageable wreck ere lang .
You said the other day , P , that Political Parties can always change , and this is true – as it is about anything – but they have to WANT to change , at least if the desire is to improve their situation . They can of course be changed by people with malign intent .
Or , they can have change forced upon them . I see no other way other than the latter the current SNP will change . The only question is whether or not even compelled change is possible , given the truly abysmal calibre of it’s * leaders * and the apparently terminal incapacity of the membership to , as it were …Choose Life .
LikeLiked by 3 people
Still with you on the subject of a new leader.
LikeLiked by 1 person
SNP-hater, as alleged, or someone who hates what the SNP has done to Scotland? I wonder…
I think I know the answer when it comes to Nicola Sturgeon, her deputy John Swinney, the henchman who attempted to cover her tracks, and all those who politicked during the pandemic. That includes Liz Lloyd, Jean Freeman, Humza Yousaf, Jason Leitch, Catherine Calderwood and others less memorable.
Similarly, there’s those who I believe conducted a criminal conspiracy in a failed attempt to jail Alex Salmond. I won’t risk contempt of court by naming any.
Beyond that there’s all the troughers, such as Pete Wishart, Mhairi Black, etc., who are contemptible but not adding much to my hate-addled state.
Is any of this unjustified on my part? No.
No, it’s not. It’s all perfectly understandable, logical and deserved.
LikeLike
On the other side of the balance sheet there are thousands of SNP members (give or take the odd 30,000) who I don’t hate.
I’ve started to feel a bit angry on their behalf.
Arguably the SNP has mostly been a party of devolution for as long as I can remember – since the 1970s – and certainly they’ve blatantly been a party of devolution for almost the past 10 years now. Yet they pretend to their own members, supporters and voters that they are nationalists. That’s lies.
If you want to call out lies, call that out.
On balance it’s the SNP Scottish Government, their henchmen and women, their cronies, the clique, and the conspirators vs. the decent, honest nationalists who continue to be fooled by these hateful liars and alleged criminals.
If I’m hateful, I’m hateful on the right side of history, the current debate, and for very good reasons. I’m calling them out for a purpose.
LikeLike
I’d say that the FM position right now with the SNP in mind is a bit of a poisoned chalice, very few want it. Swinney is considered a safe pair of hands for Sturgeon and he’s another continuity candidate, Forbes has confirmed that she WON’T run for the FM position, so Swinney might be coronated sooner than later.
We’ll have at least another two-years of no movement on independence, but they’ll be plenty of talk on it from the likes of Swinney.
LikeLike
Swinney is not just a safe pair of hands, he’s a disposable pair of hands. He has nothing to lose. Topping-off his career with a spell as FM will be more than he could have hoped for. And it doesn’t really matter what happens during or after that spell. He’ll take the flak for The Clique and walk away with a packed CV. Then The Clique can roll out whoever they’ve selected as their long-term prospect.
In all of this, there is not one moment’s thought given to the nation, the people or Scotland’s cause. It is British politics at its most base.
LikeLiked by 3 people
“In all of this, there is not one moment’s thought given to the nation, the people or Scotland’s cause.”
Truer words have never been spoken.
LikeLiked by 1 person
For those who are determined self abusers:
John Swinneys announcement this morning.
First there is about 15 minutes of his announcement, then about 20 mins of him responding to questions.
“John Swinney announces campaign to be Scotland’s first minister and SNP leader for a second time”
Sky News
LikeLike
Late breaking news:
The politicking may not be over yet.
It seems that Graeme McCormick is to mount a challenge.
https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2024/05/02/some-random-thoughts-about-any-leadership-race/#comment-53925
LikeLike
JS will have to carry the gov’s record, all the good bits but also the bad. And now, so will Kate. We have kicked the can of reform down the road again.
LikeLike
John Swinney has been the best man, the groomsman, or the bride’s father, or an usher in government, but never the groom wedded to the People of Scotland.
He may surprise us yet.
Now Forbes has stood down I hope nobody does stand against him and make a fool of themselves as well as wasting time on what is already a non-story.
Wake me up when we get near Independence.
RVW
LikeLike
“Wake me up when we get near Independence”
YesIndyref2.
With this lot running the show, you’ll sleep longer than Rip Van Winkle before indy gets near.
LikeLike
I’ll probably be very beautiful when I wake up then.
LikeLike
I can’t see anyone else running against him, and winning at this point.
While it might be so, that any SNP member can run for Leadership, that person really would have to be an elected Parliamentarian to have any wider credibility, otherwise precious few will vote for them.
For example how could there be a Leader of the Party who is not either at Westminster or the Edinburgh Parliament? And if not at Edinburgh, that person would not be First Minister!
I’m guessing None of the MPs will be standing. And any others who might have been a real challenge, have been forced out of it. They will now be in ALBA, or be Independent.
It remains to be seen how a Swinnery Leadership will go, and who he has in his new Administration will give us some idea of what we can expect.
We can only hope, if MSP Swinney does become First Minister, he can surprise us all, and shake things up, but it is simply too early to tell what will happen at this moment in time.
LikeLike
‘uniting’ for independence ! Dear Lord. Do they ever think these slogans through.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“….,they have totally given up on the ‘beautiful dream’ the way many perceive the SNP as having done.”
=========
First, thank you for the fuller response to my comment on the previous piece which you graciously highlight above.
I think you need to unpack “the SNP” a little. The blanket term can range from ordinary members, activists, candidates, councillors, parliamentarians, staffers, ministers and cheerleaders of various stripes. The apex of this pyramid is what you call The Clique.
You surely know why the Clique has rallied behind Swinney. He is New (!) Continuity. What The Clique is determined to avoid, at all costs, is the prospect of an outsider leading the SNP to anything resembling a recovery in its fortunes.
John Swinney is a temporary seat warmer to buy time for The Clique’ s new dream team of Neil Gray/ Màiri McAllan to acquire a public profile of more substance than The Invisible Man’s.
Finally, some of the finest people I know are ordinary SNP members. They have been betrayed -again- by another leadership coronation. Swinney may not be the utterly hopeless case that Yousaf was. He is at best, to borrow from Hugh MacDiarmid, the apotheosis of mediocrity.
LikeLiked by 2 people
You make a very good point about “ordinary SNP members”. The problem, of course, is that the people to whom you refer no longer have a significant voice in the party.
LikeLike