A new SNP leader is not enough to give Scottish politics a 'reset'

In truth, a lot of this kind of coverage is related to the intrigue associated with a self-referential political bubble. Moreover, it can obscure the root causes of dysfunction, breakdown and crisis.

The purpose of political analysis should instead be to zoom out – to dissect the underlying causes and address the overarching themes which define the era, and to situate events within that context.

Not only does this approach help us to understand the current impasse, but it signposts where things might be headed.

READ MORE: Wee Ginger Dug: Is uniting a Holyrood majority too tall an order for Kate Forbes?

This week’s column will seek to address the events of the last week in two ways. First, what it means for the SNP, and second, the consequences for the Scottish governing class as a whole.

First Minister Humza Yousaf’s calamitous management of the termination of the Bute House Agreement between the SNP and the Scottish Greens is the proximate cause for his resignation. But the roots of the crisis in the SNP grew from the hangover from the Nicola Sturgeon years and the manifold problems the once-untouchable first minister bequeathed to the new leader.

Here we can reference a litany of half-baked domestic initiatives and a failure to seize the opportunity to deliver tangible change despite the unrivalled power that the SNP enjoyed in the post-2014 period.

The centralisation of decision-making – mostly shaped through the lens of public relations and corporate outsourcing – prioritised grabbing headlines over policy development and implementation. This threadbare legacy then fused with the police investigation into party finances, and the escalating sense of scandal this precipitated.

Critically, and at the same time, the stagnation around progress to independence and the outcome of the Supreme Court misadventure meant that Yousaf was robbed of the luxury his predecessor enjoyed: the ability to dangle the promise of a second independence referendum before both the party faithful and the wider public.

Pitching himself as a “continuity candidate” in the SNP leadership election under these conditions was always a mistake. But even after taking office, a deep reticence to forge a distinctive leadership that could break with the failures of the Sturgeon period cemented the difficulties.

And this was despite the obvious “off-ramp” provided by Sturgeon’s arrest and questioning by police, and that of former SNP chief executive, Peter Murrell, now charged with embezzlement.

Ultimately, this was Yousaf’s responsibility. But he was not aided by his colleagues, who preferred to perpetuate a culture of misplaced deference to Sturgeon. This was personified by Keith Brown, who on behalf of SNP MSPs and in front of the assembled press, sent flowers to her office in the aftermath of her police questioning. This kind of whimsical approach undermined Yousaf, who in return could not exercise the necessary authority required to erect a cordon sanitaire around the previous leadership.

READ MORE: New polling predicts Holyrood and Westminster results as Humza Yousaf resigns

Thus, even if you are not a Yousaf supporter, it is superficial to pin the SNP’s meltdown onto the beleaguered First Minister as he exits the stage. The problems are more profound – especially when the party’s stated reason for existence is unattainable in the foreseeable future.

In my last column, we explored the dilemmas facing the independence cause and this generated an interesting discussion. The state of the SNP this week underlines that analysis. The party will most likely lurch from one crisis to the next under the weight of its own internal factionalism, which is now uncontainable due to the lack of coherence and near-term possibilities around the national question. Relying on the likes of John Swinney only serves to expose the intellectual decline of the party cadre, as it struggles to reproduce new leaders capable of both uniting the party and reconnecting it with a viable route towards an independent Scotland.

Even the most talented don’t have a quick fix, because, frankly, one doesn’t exist.

Meanwhile, the Scottish Greens, who waxed lyrical about the “independence majority” as a rationale for the Bute House Agreement, stated repeatedly their willingness to form a future government with Scottish Labour, and judge independence on its electoral salience and very little else.

Independence then is far from “frustratingly close”, and supporters of Scottish autonomy should not be patronised any longer.

As intimated in the introduction to this piece, there is another dimension to the Holyrood drama which goes beyond the SNP.

Scottish politics across the board is characterised by crude opportunism, a lack of professionalism and personalised outbursts. In other words: a dearth of any real politics and disconnected from the lives of the general public. The political class – detached from serious democratic pressure for too long – lack vision, leadership and meaningful connection with the mass of the population.

Of course, this is not unique to Scotland, though many thought it might elude the parallel developments across European liberal democracies and the United States. This is why an election alone does not offer a “reset”.

Without rebuilding Scottish civic life, citizens’ organisations, unions and other popular mechanisms which can shape the political environment and penetrate the Holyrood bubble, governance will have a tendency towards careerist in-fighting, the prioritisation of insider interests and the orthodoxies of the neoliberal age which have hollowed out public agency in the first place.

Compare the quality of debate in 2014 to that of today.

Then, society-engagement in public life elevated and sharpened all politics. Big questions around economics, industry and democracy were discussed in town halls across the country, in a spirit of inquiry and – yes – the clashing of fundamentally different ideas about the future.

Now, politics has once again been reduced to the political class alone. And no amount of churn in the official leadership in Parliament will change that.