Under Nicola Sturgeon’s leadership, the SNP was renowned for its discipline, unity and its impressive electoral success. Since the former first minister resigned, a series of revelations have chipped away at the party’s reputation leaving Scotland’s dominant party standing on shaky ground. If people had cared to look they would be forgiven for thinking that decay has always been present in the SNP – and the leaked video of the former first minister lecturing her politicians about SNP finances back in March 2021 doesn’t help matters – but it is the extent of the rot that is hard to stomach.
And no one feels this more than First Minister Humza Yousaf: barely in the post for three weeks after being elected as the establishment’s ‘continuity’ candidate, Yousaf is now desperately trying to distance himself from the ancien regime. Even before the party corruption had been exposed, Yousaf was not in the strongest of positions. Elected on a weak mandate, the new SNP leader only narrowly defeated Kate Forbes by 52 to 48 per cent. He has little authority, direction or strategy. And it is not too harsh to say that Yousaf is now less a ‘continuity’ candidate and more a transitional leader – an interregnum from one era to another.
Is the SNP finished, then? For all its problems, the Scottish National party still has some advantages about which its opponents should not become complacent. It is important to remember that the party has got into the habit of winning elections; it likes being in government in a way the UK Labour party after a period does not; and its opponents are divided and will split the pro-union vote in 2024 (where it counts with first past the post) and to a lesser extent in 2026 in the next Scottish Parliament elections (under proportional representation). And for all the challenges that independence faces, the appetite for separation is not going to go away.
But Yousaf faces a series of challenges which would tax any leader, let alone a weak one. Firstly, the SNP face a significant electoral challenge from Labour in the run-in to 2024. Labour now have the realistic chance of winning a cache of seats from the SNP which will aid Keir Starmer’s chances of entering Downing Street – meaning Labour has to win ‘less big’ in England.
16 years into office the SNP has to avoid doing what all incumbents end up doing: defending the status quo. It needs to relate to the dissatisfaction there is about the state of modern Scotland.
Secondly, the current generation of SNP politicians, such as Yousaf and his deputy Shona Robison, as well as defeated rival Kate Forbes, now have new problems because of the above. All of them have experienced elected office during the good years of the SNP’s electoral and political dominance and they will have to adapt quickly to a more competitive environment that is already becoming more hostile to the SNP.
Thirdly, this changing landscape will require a new language from SNP politicians rather than the one they have grown familiar with in their years of power, one which has typically bordered on open contempt for many opposition politicians. Tories are beyond the pale, but the most visceral anger has continually been directed at Labour and in particular Scottish Labour politicians – ‘red Tories’ and ‘yoons’. Or as Stephen Flynn, SNP Westminster leader, said of Keir Starmer: ‘David Cameron with a red tie.’ If a Labour government is elected next year it will change the dynamics of Scottish and UK politics. Equally, it will require a new outlook from SNP figures who cannot continue to be openly contemptuous and dismissive of the Labour party.
Fourthly, the SNP – for all its troubles – is in office at least until 2026. Up to the point of Sturgeon’s resignation, SNP members and independence supporters could take succour from the belief that whatever the imperfections of the Scottish government it was nothing compared to Westminster. It was a complacent judgement which has not paid off. Never mind calls for independence, Scotland faces big challenges in the here and now: the state of public services, falling educational standards, rising health inequalities and outcomes, strapped-for-cash local government and a collapsing infrastructure in cities and rural areas – without mentioning ongoing scandals like drug deaths and non-running ferries. Turning around a government record going in the wrong direction after 16 years in office is hard. Ask any incumbent, let alone one with the problems the SNP has.
A final dimension underpins all of this: how you do politics. It is all fine and well for Yousaf and the party hierarchy putting their faith in overhauling party processes and stressing the need for greater transparency. That will not cut it with many voters. The SNP need a new way of doing politics, government and independence, one which requires their politics to be more human. The party’s elected representatives need to speak and act with less ‘officialesse’ and managerialism, and more in a way that recognises and connects to the concerns of voters. Government needs to be informed and more focused on substance; independence has to have an honesty about risks – as well as opportunities – which treats voters as grown-ups.
Now 16 years into office, the SNP has to avoid doing what all incumbents end up doing: defending the status quo. The party have to be less an insider party and expression of the political classes. Instead it needs to be human, to talk like other human beings and relate to the dissatisfaction there is about the state of modern Scotland.
Paradoxically, one of Nicola Sturgeon’s strengths as a leader was that she could communicate simply and effectively, making people feel like she was one of them. Tragically, her record as First Minister points in the other direction: of being a technocratic, micro-manager with little sense of how to effectively run government. There appears no sign that Humza Yousaf will be an improvement, rather a regression.
The SNP are in for a bumpy ride. The main tenets of Sturgeonite nationalism have been rent asunder. The illusion that independence was just around the corner has been shattered – which is a kind of liberation. The mirage that the SNP embodied a different politics and idea of the state has been shown to be mostly rhetoric. All of this might be difficult for SNP members and supporters and a cause for celebration for pro-union supporters. But it is more than this: it is a release from a politics of command and control at home, not treating voters as adults, and viewing institutions from the SNP to government and sections of civil society as bodies to be manipulated.
Scotland deserves a better SNP, better politics and a better version of independence. But to get to that it will have to go through painful times. For Humza Yousaf, it will not be easy to shape the politics of the future.
Gerry Hassan is the author of Scotland Rising: The Case for Independence.
Comments