SNP Leadership contest 2004

'Labour has fought an unpopular war and its perceived failure to deliver on public services has resulted in a party of government at Westminster coming third in the English and Welsh council elections.' Robbie Dinwoodie, 15 th June 2004.

Swinney's future under the spotlight

By Robbie Dinwoodie, Chief Scottish Political Correspondent in the Herald, 15 th June 2004

THE SNP in general, and John Swinney's leadership in particular, emerged as the biggest losers in Scotland yesterday after the dust settled on the European election campaign. His aides worked commendably hard in going into full spin mode, interpreting the figures backwards and forwards through recent and future electoral history to create some putative triumph.

"So, you were stuffed, then?" came the press response.

One bottom line was the simple fact that, five years ago, the SNP came within two percentage points of Labour. This time, the Tories, even under pressure from UKIP, came within two points of the SNP.

The other was the goal Mr Swinney set himself: to beat Labour in the popular vote as a way of demonstrating the people's hatred for an illegal and immoral war in Iraq. However, the SNP ended up more than six percentage points and 100,000 votes behind Labour. None of the anti-war parties gained much of a Scottish dividend.

Another war has now started, the battle for the Swinney succession. The SNP has, in the main, been loyal to him since he took over, anointed by Alex Salmond. That support is now haemorrhaging as electoral failure follows electoral failure.

Mr Swinney is seen even by opponents as among the most decent people to have led a Scottish party in generations, but voters will make their own judgment and many party insiders Ð not just the usual suspects, but many firmly inside Camp Swinney Ð are saying the same thing: that he should quit for the greater good.

One supposedly friendly associate said yesterday: "We'd better face reality. We're just not cutting it with the people, which is why there was a frantic phone-round to shore up his leadership today."

Another said: "Anyone else in this situation would agree, change your leader. You should fall on your sword for the sake of your party. That's the message, but he's got his head in the sand and has surrounded himself with incredible spin." Campbell Martin, the MSP suspended from the SNP for criticising the leadership, clearly felt vindicated yesterday.

"A line has been crossed here whereby John clearly is not the man to lead us into the next election. It was a very poor result against a deeply unpopular government and we should have been hammering Labour at this time," he said.

"If this was a one-off we could overlook it, but there is the cumulative effect of repeated electoral failure. He has to go and I was right to say so."

The general line from the Swinney camp yesterday was that he had to be given time until after the next Westminster election to deliver. This would allow a period for the reforms he has initiated to work their way through the party's organisation and decision-making process. But will the public consider Mr Swinney more electable a year from now?

Labour has fought an unpopular war and its perceived failure to deliver on public services has resulted in a party of government at Westminster coming third in the English and Welsh council elections.

Here, Jack McConnell has become a joke figure in recent months since his sartorial gaffe involving the pinstripe kilt at Tartan Day. His justice minister faces regular resignation calls as prisoners are let loose by private escorts, and his culture minister's handling of Scottish Opera has the arts lobby up in arms.

Against this backdrop, the SNP was still unable to make headway. Perhaps it is structural, and devolution really has, in the words of George Robertson, killed nationalism stone dead. Or perhaps, decent man though he is, John Swinney is not the right leader of the SNP at a time when opposition politics is a pick 'n' mix market.