John Swinney must be more than just likeable to reinvigorate SNP

There were doubtless myriad reasons why Kate Forbes didn’t want to run against John Swinney. There are also, however, myriad reasons why she perhaps shouldn’t have agreed to be running in tandem with him.

If the ship were to go down, everyone on the bridge will sink too. There are precious few life rafts for losers.

Kate Forbes, for all the previous controversies attending her personal beliefs, would have been a clean skin. John self-evidently is not. He has been at the heart of his party since well before Kate was born, and with that kind of hinterland comes all manner of ammunition for his political opponents.

Very few people in politics (or journalism) dislike John Swinney. And being generally likeable is an obvious asset. Yet it is not of itself enough without a healthy dollop of charisma, a gift for compelling oracy and an essential streak of ruthlessness.

READ MORE: Andrew Neil in furious outburst at The National over SNP cartoon

I watched his leadership pitch twice, once live, once on YouTube. And I read the text with care. Anyone who thinks this was a barnstorming performance has yet to witness a barn being stormed.

There were heartfelt passages about feeling compelled to hurl his hat ringwards, even after calculating the sacrifices both he and his family were now signed up to. And there were passages about the necessity for economic growth which could have have been uttered by Ms Forbes. I doubt that was an accident.

Neither accidental was his stated commitment to concentrate on the nation’s health, education and transport given that these were the issues which preoccupied most voters.

One of the most interesting segments, however, was given relatively little attention. He talked about his first national council meeting where the party leadership was questioned and challenged.

And he said: “That is how it should be. And that’s the culture I will encourage in the SNP I lead. It is by being open, willing to engage and happy to debate, that we bring people together.

"It is by giving people the space to speak their mind, and the respect their opinions deserve, that they are willing to come together and unify once a decision is made.”

As we all know, that is not the culture which has recently obtained in the SNP, where dissent was confused with disloyalty and there was precious little in the way of space for free speech lest the speaker in question was monstered by the self-declared ideologically pure.

Which brings us to the role of the Greens, a party with no constituency MSPs or visible vote in the constituency ballots, but 8% in the regional variety. Which speaks of many Scots being prepared to give them their second vote.

I used to be one such voter but got well and truly scunnered by their self-righteous pontification during the trans wars. Badges and jolly lanyards are really no substitute for careful research and a useful habit of not deploying the mouth before the brain is fully engaged.

Perhaps they might care to reflect the numbers voting green were tiny compared with those supporting the SNP, the Tories and Labour. The LibDems with more than 324,000 votes in 2021, found themselves with four seats. The Greens, with 253,000, garnered eight.

READ MORE: New poll finds support for monarchy in Scotland falling rapidly

Such are the vagaries of our imperfect semi-proportional system; vastly preferable to first past the post, but hardly the fairest game in town. The trick with our PR variant is to figure out where to concentrate your troops to gain the best return. The Greens notched up 8% in Glasgow, for instance, yet less than 4% in the West as a whole.

Given all of which, the level of influence they managed to exert as the junior partners in the Bute House Agreement was, well, somewhat disproportionate. And at no point did they seem likely to engage with the thought that a safe space for disagreement, as proposed last Thursday by Mr Swinney, was actually the sign of a healthy body politic.

When disgruntled Nationalists talked of the green tail wagging the yellow dog, you might suppose their irritation stemmed from the Government being hauled sideways up a number of blind alleyways so far as the Scottish public was concerned. The latter were keen to hear how their living conditions were likely to be improved, less likely to be pondering the possible effects of puberty blockers.

Yet even last Thursday, John body-swerved a question about trans women, perhaps forgetting that being disingenuous on that subject was what had derailed many political leaders. Or perhaps not!

So whither the SNP now? Mr Swinney insists he should not be regarded as a caretaker or interim leader. He says he intends to fight and win at both the next general and Holyrood elections.

There is not much time to beef up his offer for the first of these contests, given that it has to happen in a matter of months, maybe even weeks. He will need to fashion a credible Cabinet and give them the autonomy to play to their perceived strengths.

When the late John Smith led his party, the English press, with their customary ignorance of Scottish politics and politicians, characterised him as a douce bank manager. His closer friends said, in contrast, that he could and did start a party in an empty room.

Mr Swinney, in turn, gives the impression of being a douce Church of Scotland elder, and he is in fact a committed Christian, which will doubtless oil some of the wheels in his dealings with the Free Kirk’s Ms Forbes.

He will find it tricky to dismiss the impression of being a political retread, however, just as David Cameron’s past life has come back to haunt him in his unlikely new incarnation as Rishi Sunak’s Foreign Secretary. Though, in fairness, we can assume that Mr Swinney is unlikely ever to be accused of lobbying on behalf of dodgy financiers.

I doubt that he is in the market for advice from a stray commentator, however committed to independence. Certainly not one sceptical of the wisdom of his returning to frontline politics.

READ MORE: Palestinian rector of Glasgow University denied entry into France

For what it’s worth, I would train my fire on the fact that what seems certain to be an incoming Labour government has done more handbrake turns than Jeremy Clarkson in his petrolhead pomp.

Just this last week, it seems the promises made by Angela Rayner anent zero-hour contracts and employees’ rights have been the latest policy document heading for the shredder.

And when queried about the Rwanda project and the backlog of asylum claims, I’ve yet to hear one Labour politician speak to the immorality of it all. Instead, they talk of wasted money, and how they will make more efficient use of the same funds.

Just once, I want to hear a Labour leader remember that they are supposed to be the People’s Party, and that the people concerned aren’t those indulging in high-stakes gambling in hedge funds.

I want to hear them extolling the virtues of compassion rather than Conserative-lite pronouncements on social policy. If I were a prospective Labour voter I’d be frankly outraged that the party chose to abstain on the Waspi women compensation vote.

John Swinney at least put the twin scourges of childhood poverty and climate change at the top of his to-do list. It is said that the leader of “Scottish” Labour, Anas Sarwar, is not on the same page as the boss man on an assortment of policies, Gaza being the obvious example.

If he turns out to be little more than His Master’s Voice on Scottish issues, he might find Scottish voters will be less than receptive on that ubiquitous doorstep.