The Summer of Scotland after Sarwar, Sturgeon and Swinney

The Andy Burnham administration has taken office. It faces huge challenges – economic, political, geopolitical – along with no direct popular mandate and the rising storm of radicalised right-wing opinion in the UK waiting to devour anything that gets in its way.

At the same time implicit in this is a challenge to Scottish politics: its assumptions, beliefs and dynamics of recent decades and the present. This is particularly true of those of an independence persuasion who are used to treating all things Labour with scorn, have some reason to, but in so doing can miss the nuance of developments in Labour and UK politics to the detriment of their views.

In the past few weeks many of the interim judgements passed on the Burnham government have an air of predictability and even caricature. Labour cannot govern; are torn apart by divisions; the UK is on the verge of ‘bankruptcy’ and ‘going bust’; and from the extreme right on the ‘brink of a civil war.’

The Scottish take on this is equally filled with pre-prepared positions, like a general fighting the current war with the tactics of the previous. Labour is incapable of addressing the huge issues facing Scotland; every Labour government ‘betrays Scotland’, ‘does not care about us’ and ‘treats us with contempt’ – all of which lacks just a little shade of grey or insight into the state of Labour, Scotland and the UK.

What this also does by design or default is give a free pass to the SNP and independence despite 20 years of SNP domestic rule which, to put even the best gloss on it, has a patchy record of good, bad and indifferent like any long-term incumbent. And that is without mentioning the specific internal SNP problems. Similarly, the voices repeating yet again the almost daily calls for an immediate indyref from John Swinney and his representatives, and repeated by a dwindling constituency, are now almost a comedic act of diversion – obvious to nearly everyone – and treated as such by opponents.

In this climate of the changing of the Labour government guard, new leadership coming again in Scottish Labour, and the aftermath of the SNP victory and beginning of positioning for the inevitable post-Swinney leadership, the predictable positioning above is not enough. Rather some hard truths and truisms need articulation and discussion across the political spectrum. Some will not agree with all of them; some will upset certain folk; but there is a need to break out of Groundhog Day politics. Doing so is cathartic and healthy, as will eventually be the terrain that Scottish politics needs to reach.

Where is the SNP after its election victory?

For starters, let’s take the state of the SNP after its recent election victory and 20 years in office. It is exhausted, hollowed out, and bereft of plausible policy ideas and strategy. Rather, it is in a holding pattern, knowing that by doing what it has previously done it can continue into the foreseeable future as the leading party of Scotland.

Where is the SNP agenda for governing? Where is the sense of direction, prioritisation and honesty about the difficult choices Scotland faces? Moreover, where is the SNP inquest into the culture of how the party ruled itself – and by extension wider Scotland?

Two decades of quasi-presidential leadership under Salmond and Sturgeon alongside two sets of inter-connected controversy and scandal have left a party bruised and confused which has forgotten how to do party democracy.  First, there was the slow attrition of intra-party culture due to the SNP’s ascension to power; the sheer force of the second Salmond leadership and self-discipline of focusing on retaining office and the indyref. Second, under Sturgeon this became explicit: a politics of managing and manipulating party democracy, concentrating power in leadership hands, and marginalising any dissenting or critical voices – all it now has become evident to mask the Sturgeon-Murrell misgovernance of party and country that people are still coming to terms with.

The SNP leadership position for now is to sweep the most obvious criminal part of this under the carpet, to state that all the previous inadequate management processes have now somehow been corrected and that to ask questions about this is somehow impertinent and unwanted. Indeed, even worse the SNP official position is to present itself as ‘the victim’ of Peter Murrell’s crimes while having no interest in the systematic culture which let his crimes go on in plain sight.

One insider opines that ‘the party dare not launch an independent inquiry into its inner workings because of the scale of wrongdoing and questionable acts it would bring to the surface.’ They conclude with the assessment: ‘Without such an inquiry the current party exists in a half-life, unable to fully move on from the Sturgeon era.’

Where now for Scottish Labour?

Alongside this is the predictably sad state of Scottish Labour: once a force which could impose its views on Scotland and widely seen with a mixture of awe and dislike. That now seems a long time ago – in part because it is. Twenty years of SNP rule in Holyrood has seen twenty years of Labour in opposition but despite this long period in the wilderness, the party has not managed to adapt to opposition or successfully critique the SNP.

Ten Scottish Labour leaders have been in post over devolution – Donald Dewar, Henry McLeish, Jack McConnell, Wendy Alexander, Iain Gray, Johann Lamont, Jim Murphy, Kezia Dugdale, Richard Leonard and Anas Sarwar. The first three held the office of First Minister. The next seven opposition leaders have all held the leader’s post to diminishing impact and relevance. Who can even remember some of them or any of their pronouncements?

There is still a generational capture of Scottish Labour with some media and public debate clinging to the views of Lord McConnell or Lord Foulkes as if they have some currency in 2026. Whereas any relevance they have is part of the problem, about Labour’s weakness in opposition, its inability to adapt and evolve to devolution and the lack of quality in the present party. Will Labour leader number eleven be the one to crack it? Likely front-runners Michael Marra or Monica Lennon have qualities, and at least they won’t have Anas Sarwar briefing against them now he has been fast-tracked to the House of Lords. 

But can anyone explain what Scottish Labour is for? One commentator suggested that ‘all Scottish Labour’s problems of recent past came from London, and this will be true in 2029 and 2031’ which begs the question what is the point of Scottish Labour? After a quarter century of devolution it has failed to decide if it should be unapologetically Scottish Labour – ‘made in Scotland for Scotland’ – or ‘British Labour in Scotland’. It has tried to blur the lines, ride both horses, ended up satisfying no one, and in the process been unambiguously neither of the above. The reason is both involve taking risks, alienating people, and charting a new course. That is scary for a party which in its DNA believed it had a divine right to govern, has still not adapted to opposition, and cannot comprehend the continued dominance of the SNP.

It is possible that any Burnham bounce and honeymoon could offer Scottish Labour a reprieve. Burnham could bring a new agenda not just to England and the UK but north of the border. SNP politicians forget there is more to politics than Holyrood. There is local government which in 20 years in office the SNP have shown no interest in nurturing; instead seeing it as a sycophantic support act to the main national act. A Burnham Scottish approach which bypasses Holyrood but does so in a collaborative manner building buy-in with other public and civic bodies could have traction and the SNP would be wise not to be too cynical and dismissive in their response. But Scottish Labour would have to positively contribute to this and seize any window of opportunity – something Sarwar and company failed to do in the run-up to 2024 and Labour victory.

The Future Direction of Scottish Politics

The independence question and its evolution hangs over all this. Some honesty and inconvenient truths would be welcome, rather than the same old stale rhetoric and positions. SNP politicians cite their mandate and pro-independence majority. The pro-independence Believe in Scotland stated that the 2026 election witnessed ‘the biggest ever indy majority’ in parliamentary seats and that ‘the Scottish people have voted for a second independence referendum’ and that is a conclusive mandate: the reality being independence won 41% FPTP and 42% of the regional list vote.

The stances of Swinney and Burnham are part of a predictable stand-off where everyone knows the script. None of this really matters and more importantly, no one is making a substantive move of genuine consequence. The big question for independence is how to advance the principle of Scotland’s right to decide its future; all sides at some point have an interest in agreeing a constitutional process which allows this to be decided in a future indyref.

But that is not for now. Independence has the road post-2014 unexplored by Sturgeon to navigate. In what way is an independence offer different from 2014? What lessons have been learnt from why Yes lost beyond the usual litany of culprits (Brown, ‘the Vow’, BBC)? Whatever you think of that predictable list Yes fell short and failed to win a majority then or a sustained majority since. Then alongside the economic and social questions and the rupture issue there is the geo-political context: the world of 2026 is not the world of 2014 and the threats of Putin, a resurgent China and an increasingly unpredictable Trump needs acknowledging. 

The future direction of Scottish politics has to see the SNP attempt a reset and renewal: a tough ask after two decades in office and one which will require a post-Swinney leadership to explicitly break with the Sturgeon era. Related to this, where will the main forces of challenge and opposition to the SNP emerge from? Could Scottish Labour finally get their act together and speak for a centre-left constituency more convincingly than the catch-all SNP? It has not happened over the past 20 years, but that does not mean it is impossible.

Similarly, the Scottish Greens represent a constituency beyond the SNP, Labour and the centrist politics of Holyrood. Could that politics get more serious, radical and develop a wider constituency or are they at the boundary of their maximum support? Then there is the sudden influx of Reform into the Scottish Parliament who have so far shown their propensity for performative politics and anti-virtue signalling but have yet to work out the kind of politics they want to promote beyond this. Reform have a host of negatives in Scotland – Farage, English nationalism, the overt racism and bigotry – all of which puts a ceiling on their support.

Politics and power detests a vacuum and will not continue as it is at present in a world of disruption and flux. In this the Swinney leadership is clearly an interregnum and the party will have to adjust to loosening its grip on its own party members and country – always a tough balancing act after years of control politics. Related to this the unconvincing offers from all the opposition parties will at some point see a political critique emerge which challenges the SNP’s centrism and speaks for the Scotland not won over by the Nationalists.

Finally, Scottish politics must take cognisance of the gathering storm of radicalised right-wing sentiment and agitation across the West. Scotland is not immune to this. Nor is our current complacent slightly centre-leftish politics an adequate answer. First Minister-inspired ‘civic Scotland’ summits may have once carried weight and been appropriate a quarter century ago but that is no longer the case.

And who, if anyone, will politically dare to speak for the Scotland which is discontented and dissatisfied with the present political offering? Who aspires to speak for the constituency of opinion beyond Holyrood and Westminster who feel they are not being represented and seen? 

For all the hyperbole and over-the-top rhetoric of Scottish politics much of it flies over the heads of a vast part of Scotland. A Scotland for whom much of our mainstream politics is mere background noise is there to be championed and addressed and the insider politics of Holyrood and devolved Scotland challenged.

Speak to that Scotland and address the forgotten Scotland and missing million detached from our politics. Whoever does that has the prospect of seizing the terrain and defining our collective future – irrespective of our constitutional status. Indeed, independent or self-governing in a looser union they could give meaning to a different kind of politics, power and political settlement – one beyond abstract visions and centred on an economy, society and democracy which works for the vast majority and treats them as adults and citizens in their own land.