David Davis may have buried Scottish independence once and for all

Politics, often as not, is a game of massaging expectations, otherwise known as spin. The disclosure of damaging information by MP David Davis about the Alex Salmond affair in Westminster was certainly unexpected. It is a clever ploy.

Due to some oversight or maybe excessive caution in the original Scotland Act 1998, which set up the parliament in Edinburgh, Scottish MPs were not protected by privilege, and thus could be sued for slander or libel. Maybe Tony Blair didn’t trust them not to abuse their powers.

It now means they can’t pursue the Salmond affair properly, and so it falls to an English MP in an English seat to do it for them. That’s good and bad news for first minister Nicola Sturgeon.

Davis’ allegations do move the story on. During the debate, he highlighted that leaked messages from a whistleblower suggest, among other things, that Salmond was, arguably, right to think there were people in the SNP seeking to pressurise witnesses to testify against him.

According to Davis, these SNP officials were in contact with one another, talking about the women’s complainants against Salmond in tactical terms. One referred to a woman “feeling pressured by the whole thing rather than supported”. The SNP officials mentioned by Davis are: CEO Sue Ruddick, compliance officer Iain McCann, and chief executive Paul Murrell.

Murrell stated in another leaked message that: “The more fronts [Salmond] is having to firefight on the better for all concerned”. It is suggestive of the “malicious and concerted” attempt to destroy and even imprison him that Salmond claims. 

Leaked messages also suggest Sturgeon’s special adviser and chief of staff, Liz Lloyd, knew about the complaints in February 2018, which raises the question as to whether Sturgeon knew that they were about Salmond then. In Scottish parliament, she maintains she did not know until April, which would be more in line with procedures. A newly leaked contemporary message (6 February 2018) between two civil servants, Judith Mackinnon and Barbara Allison, refers to “Liz interference v bad”.  

So what? The information has arrived too late to make a big difference to the inquiries, with investigations being concluded soon, and it seems unlikely that, say, Sturgeon and Salmond will be recalled to give further public evidence. The Davis claims tend to add colour and detail to an existing picture rather than transform it. They do not quite add up to a “smoking gun”. 

Read more:

So far, indeed, Sturgeon and what might be termed the SNP “establishment” have been skilful in dialling down the Salmond affair, which has, understandably, never eclipsed Brexit and coronavirus for very long. 

In her prolix, bureaucratic, legalistic insistent way, Sturgeon has done a fine job in admitting only those errors that she could not possibly avoid having to admit, apologising profusely and trying to persuade the public that there’s “nothing to see, please move along”. 

It has been largely a success. Most Scots who were not anyway bemused, confused or plain bored by the whole business long since made their minds up about who they believed and whether the points raised – all relating to the past – actually mattered in political terms, even though they will have had natural sympathy for the female complainants.

There is not, it is fair to say, any great groundswell calling for Sturgeon to quit: no marches of protest, no strike actions to push her out of Bute House. The SNP will probably still do very well in the elections in May. Sturgeon will probably be wounded but not conquered after the three separate inquiries report (one has already done so, in underwhelming terms). If she did break the ministerial code, it is not necessarily a resigning matter. She and the SNP will move on. 

But the damage does not have to be terminal to make some difference, and the polling evidence is beginning to show a small shift in opinion away from the SNP and the independence cause. The tilt in the political balance, if it sustains until May, will weaken the SNP’s grip on the parliament in Edinburgh and Sturgeon’s claim that she will have won a mandate for a second referendum on independence.

Even after Brexit, independence was never overwhelmingly popular. The SNP, even with 60 per cent plus support for independence could not be completely confident of success. They are closer to 50 per cent or less now. Without confidence in a lawful referendum win, the risks of going for a second vote inside a decade – even if London granted it – are far too high. A second loss within a decade really would put the national question to bed for a generation, and with it the SNP’s relevance. 

Soon enough, it will become apparent that the only way Scotland can be sure, practically speaking, of not being ruled by a Tory government it doesn’t want is to vote for a Labour government that it probably does want, or at least wouldn’t mind.

Broadly speaking, Labour can’t win without winning in Scotland, as was traditionally the case. It is true today. Perhaps the youthful and energetic new leader of Scottish Labour, Anas Sarwar, will be able to make a better job of persuading his fellow countrymen of the merit of this Realpolitik, and whether they want five more years of Johnson or rather have Starmer.

There are tentative signs of a slight swing to Labour, though 20 per cent in the polls and third behind the Tories is nothing to brag about. After some 14 years in power, the shine might just come off the SNP. A bit, that is, but enough to make the difference between nationhood or not, in our time.

It is ironic indeed that the two personalities who did more than anyone to secure Scotland’s destiny as an independent nation state should now have managed to kill it, and indeed the party that they built into an election-winning machine and natural party of government.

It is not enough to be dominant and stay dominant even if slipping back a little – the SNP and independence need huge momentum to carry its project through. But it seems that Salmond and Sturgeon have instead exhausted themselves and their party, and Davis has given their indomitable reputation for unity and competence a final shove into the political grave. A sorry business indeed.