SNP embezzlement scandal can’t be dismissed as case of one bad apple

Political parties are the black boxes of our politics. We see their outputs, but their internal workings are a mystery to most people, even to senior SNP politicians in the case of that party, if we are to believe recent claims.

The vast majority of party members are passive, contributing financially and little else to the party, and have a right to know how their contributions are spent. So too does the public in a liberal democracy. There is no good reason why any party should fail to be transparent about its internal workings or how it handles its finances. It has long been established in law that internal financial management must be publicly transparent. No party can complain about Nigel Farage receiving millions from a wealthy donor and claiming it is a private matter while refusing to be fully transparent about its own finances.

There is a need to learn lessons in light of the embezzlement of SNP funds. This cannot be dismissed as a case of one bad apple. A system of governance by rules was overshadowed by governance by a handful of people. It is not that there were no procedures, but they were ignored or overruled. How that was possible and why this failed to attract wider attention demands attention. There is at least prima facie evidence of secrecy and bullying in the governing party as contributory factors that have also seeped out into governance beyond the SNP, creating poor decision-making. We cannot afford to lose talented, experienced figures from public life who dared to raise questions that have proved entirely justified. A political class of nodding heads is of little use in tackling public policy challenges.

Public disquiet, to put it mildly, is obvious. And this goes well beyond the internal workings of a single political party. There have been criticisms of the police and the Crown Office from various quarters. There have been reports of tensions and disagreements, leaks of information that have done little for public confidence. At the very least, this is an opportunity to inform and educate the public, and indeed many members of the political class, on the workings of the justice system. Failure to acknowledge the damage to public trust in our politics, politicians and institutions can only undermine political legitimacy and play into the hands of populists.

That this must be done should not be in doubt, but how it is done requires careful thought. It may be that what is required is not a single inquiry, and certainly not a lengthy, expensive inquiry that becomes an end in itself. Different types of inquiry may be needed. There is a case for an examination of the operation of the Crown Office by a parliamentary committee.

• The cosy SNP culture behind Peter Murrell’s ‘30 years of theft’

Demands have been made for a parliamentary committee inquiry specifically into the Peter Murrell case. An internal SNP inquiry would invite scorn and mockery. But there is little point in a repeat of the Holyrood committee inquiry into the Nicola Sturgeon government’s handling of harassment complaints in 2020-21. A genuinely independent inquiry is needed that offers reforms that should apply to all parties, otherwise it will all end up in the stasis of party politics.

Nobody should be in any doubt that recent revelations have damaged Scottish politics and the Scottish parliament. Demands that something should be done are valid, but we need to make sure that what is done results in improved outcomes, enhances transparency and improves internal party governance and not an opportunity for grandstanding, obfuscation and hyper-partisanship.

James Mitchell is a professor of politics and international relations at the University of Edinburgh