The Mess of SNP Finances

Police Scotland entering the Edinburgh headquarters of the SNP

In the chaotic aftermath of Nicola Sturgeon’s sudden resignation and the ignominous raids by Police Scotland on her and husband’s home, simultaneously removing documents from the Scottish National Party’s headquarters, the future looks empty for a national organisation continuing as anything more that a rump party.

To exist beyond the outcome of the present disasters and remain a governing party, the SNP will have to renew its pledge to rid Scotland of colonial power and secure self-governance, this time adding it will move to making this nation a republic as soon as we have reinstated self-governance. To attain those things requires people of high ability and even higher ethical standing. The Murrells are not in that company, and never were.

Main villain of the SNP’s humiliation is decidely the former chief executive of the national committee, a man who disappeared as soon as he was unable to control events. At this stage of daily developments we can say he is guilty of gross hubris, and together with his wife, bringing down to its knees the very nationalist party he and she exploitied as a personal platform for Nicola Sturgeon campaiging as if a president. Expect greater charges laid at Murrell’s feet.

The heads of the SNP must take responsibility for their own misdemeanours and wounds. The rest of us will get on with the task of implementing a free Scotland.

SNP MP and lawyer, Joanna Cherry has similar concerns and here looks at what has happened from her own personal experience.

THOSE WITH QUESTIONS WERE SHOUTED DOWN

By Joanna Cherry MP KC

It goes without saying that anybody under suspicion of criminality is entitled to the presumption of innocence. It’s a cornerstone of the rule of law in a democratic society and it also makes good sense. In recent times we have seen commentators end up with egg on their faces when they assumed a leading political figure was guilty, only for a jury to acquit him of all charges after actually hearing the evidence.

For that reason – and because of the very strict Scots law rules on contempt of court when commenting on ongoing criminal proceedings I won’t be saying anything about Peter Murrell’s arrest and later release in this article other than to note that he is very lucky that his SNP membership has not been suspended pending the outcome of the police investigation.

Others have not enjoyed the same leniency. One thinks of Michelle Thomson, never arrested, ultimately exonerated but thrown under the bus at the first hint of trouble. Tim Rideout was suspended for six months for an ill-judged tweet. Gender-critical women have been suspended indefinitely for tweets exercising their right to freedom of belief and freedom of speech. This difference in approach is neither fair nor in accordance with the principles of natural justice. In some cases, it might even amount to unlawful discrimination.

The anomalies in how the SNP’s complaints and disciplinary process has been applied are part of a much wider problem with the party’s management which is now in the public domain because of recent events. I am conscious from my conversations with party members and from my mailbox that what has occurred has been deeply shocking for many. For others, including myself, while some of the visuals have been shocking the fact that there is a significant problem has come as no surprise.

At the SNP conference in November 2020, I was one of a group of members elected to the NEC by thousands of fellow conference delegates on a promise to improve transparency and accountability. From the moment we set out our manifesto for change we were attacked and traduced by a small but determined cabal of fellow party members including councillors, parliamentarians, and other NEC members whose actions were condoned by the silence of the leadership. When some of those attacking us lost their places on the NEC at the elections, they were simply co-opted back onto the body despite the fact they had no democratic mandate to be there. 

Those of us elected by the membership were concerned about the party’s finances and governance. No-one can seriously now doubt that those concerns were well founded. Yet from the moment we were elected our efforts to get answers were frustrated. Worse, we were shouted down and hounded out of office. I have sat on several other management boards, and I have never witnessed business conducted in such a menacing atmosphere. With the benefit of hindsight, it looks to have been a deliberate attempt to hide the truth of what was going on.

At the first meeting of the new NEC in December 2020, we raised the issue of the liability of NEC members should anything ever go wrong and whether we were insured against that eventuality. We were promised an answer but as with our questions about the party’s finances, it was never forthcoming.

I should imagine the current members of the NEC will be more than anxious now to know the answer to this question. The party’s constitution is quite clear that the NEC is responsible for ownership of the party’s assets and management of the party’s financial affairs and says that it has full control over all monies, funds, property, investments and securities of any kind belonging to the party. That was certainly not my practical experience.

Readers may recall that shortly after I started asking awkward questions about the party’s internal management, I lost my frontbench role as the SNP spokesperson on justice and home affairs in February 2021. Yes, reshuffles happen and yes, nobody should assume an entitlement to a position but the way it was done was unusually brutal. Usually, in these circumstances, there would be some word of thanks at the following group meeting. Breaking with convention, there was absolutely no acknowledgement of the work I had done over the previous six years, including winning the case against the prorogation of the UK Parliament.

There was only a terse comment from Ian Blackford that I was guilty of “unacceptable behaviour” and “Joanna is leaving us”, as though I had somehow been kicked out of the group rather than simply not taking up a role as spokesperson. He has yet to specify what he meant by that. Others, including Kirsty Blackman, made it clear from their social media attacks on me that I was being sacked for “transphobia”. I am still waiting to hear the evidence in support of these attacks which were, of course, in breach of the party’s code of conduct. My complaints about this – like those of so many women – in the party have been ignored.

I have been open about my gender-critical views since May 2019. They seemed only to become an acute problem when I sought and won election to the NEC on a manifesto for change and started asking searching questions. I am in no doubt that wrongful allegations of transphobia were weaponised against me and others who were rocking the boat to marginalise and discredit us. There was a strong correlation between those of us with the guts to question the party’s internal management and those with the courage to raise questions about the policy of self-identification of sex now embodied in the Gender Recognition Reform Bill. We have been proved right in our concerns about both.

The weaponisation of our legally protected views against us was dirty politics at its worst and it put some of us in real danger.

I expect those still in denial about the extent of the mess that has emerged in the SNP’s management will be unhappy about me setting all this out. But it needs to be said. If we are to rebuild our party and achieve meaningful unity, there must be an acknowledgement of what has gone wrong, a proper investigation, major reform, and an end to the practice of bullying and smearing those who dare to ask questions or sound warnings.

There are still many people in the SNP and wider movement that seem to see the current mess as a wrinkle to get over and who are keen to point out that our scandals aren’t as bad as those of other parties. Many people have been wheeshting for indy for so long that it is hard to break from that mindset. As an SNP member and long-standing supporter, I care about the SNP and still see it as the main political vehicle to lead us to independence. So, in protecting the cause of independence, I also want to save the SNP, but this can only be done if we look at what has gone wrong, how it was able to go wrong and make sure it can never happen again.

I was impressed – as I so often am, given her integrity – by Kate Forbes’s dignified plea to members to stay. I would echo that but I would not expect members to stay unless they see a firm commitment to address what has gone wrong. This means action now before this disaster engulfs both our new leader and our party. I support the calls by Alex Neil and Bill Ramsay for forensic accountants to be brought in to look at the SNP’s finances and report back to the party. This needs to be done immediately given the looming deadline with the Electoral Commission on July 7.

As a member of the Westminster group, I had no idea until it came out in the press that auditors had withdrawn their services as overseers of our group accounts. Now, I understand from press reports that the group only has until the end of May to submit properly signed-off accounts. I also agree with Alex Neil (above) that those who previously opposed reforms to the party’s structures to improve transparency and governance should consider their position and resign. What has gone wrong cannot simply be laid at the door of one individual. The problem is much wider than that and the party’s office bearers cannot delegate their constitutional responsibilities to an employee.

Moreover, party HQ is not just the chief executive. There are staff specifically employed to deal with legal and operational matters and compliance. Again, looking at the party’s mismanagement rather than any suggestion of criminality, we need a proper review of what they have been doing. A new broom is needed at SNP HQ. The selection panel for the new chief executive officer should reflect the widest possible membership base and consist of people who have relevant skills and experience. If the prize of independence is to be won, employees, like parliamentarians, should be appointed on merit.

NOTES

Before entering Parliament, Joanna Cherry had been in practice as an Advocate for 20 years. She became a QC in 2009 (now KC) and is ranked by the Legal 500 as one of the leading QCs in Scotland. She previously held the offices of Standing Junior Counsel to the Scottish Government and Advocate Depute and was one of the first specialist sex crimes prosecutors in the Crown Office’s pioneering National Sex Crimes Unit. She has appeared at the UK Supreme Court on a number of occasions, including twice on behalf of the Lord Advocate. She co-authored the textbook ‘Mental Health & Scots Law in Practice’. Cherry has been a member of the SNP since 2008 and supported independence and home rule. During the Referendum she co-founded and led “Lawyers for Yes”, a group of around 200 lawyers who had a high profile during the campaign and promoted the desirability of continuing EU membership for an independent Scotland. Cherry was the leading litigant in the Scottish court case successfully challenging the five-week prorogation of Parliament by Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

************************************************