Peter Murrell’s arrest raises thorny questions for SNP
Humza Yousaf, Scotland’s new First Minister, hit out this afternoon at the “conspiracy theory” that police were “in cahoots” with the SNP over the timing of Nicola Sturgeon’s husband’s arrest, amid mounting speculation over yesterday’s shock raid.
Speaking outside Bute House, Yousaf dismissed the suggestion that police delayed arresting Peter Murrell, the party’s former chief executive, until after the SNP leadership election, insisting: “The timing of any investigation is absolutely for Police Scotland, it’s not determined by anybody else.”
A two-year police probe into the disputed whereabouts of £600,000 donated to the SNP’s campaign fund took a dramatic turn on Wednesday when Scottish police raided the SNP’s Edinburgh headquarters and cordoned off an area outside Sturgeon and Murrell’s Glasgow home, before taking him into police custody for questioning by detectives.
Murrell, 58, was released without charge last night “pending further investigation” but police continued to search his home today and Sturgeon pulled out of a climate change event this evening as the investigation – named Operation Branchform – continues.
Murrell’s arrest raises some thorny questions.
Firstly, it has heightened speculation about the “real” reason for Sturgeon’s surprise resignation in February. The former First Minister insists the police inquiry had nothing to do with her decision to quit but, as Alex Neil, a former Scottish government minister, put it today: “There were very strong rumours for the last couple of months that some kind of arrest was possibly imminent, so it’s hard to believe that it wasn’t a factor.”
Others have also pointed to the SNP’s decision to run a very short campaign of less than six weeks, suggesting that the party establishment may have been eager to see their preferred successor elected before Murrell’s arrest.
Given how close Yousaf was to the outgoing First Minister’s camp, an arrest prior to the ballot opening would almost certainly have worked in Kate Forbes’ favour. And given what a close run result it was – 52% to 48% – this could have easily affected the outcome, insist some of her supporters today. (Forbes herself is yet to comment.)
Some of Forbes’ supporters are even privately considering whether she should challenge the result of the leadership contest and demand a rerun because of the latest information. They say it could have skewed the result.
The extent of the damage this scandal will inflict on the SNP will depend on the final outcome of the probe – which could take several more months. But it certainly won’t help the party to restore credibility after a destabilising leadership contest and a series of blows to its authority.
Just two weeks ago, Murrell resigned as chief executive amid a row over membership figures which revealed that the number of SNP members has slumped from 104,000 only two years ago to just over 72,000.
To make matters worse for the party, a new opinion poll puts Scottish Labour just five points behind the SNP.
Anas Sarwar, the leader of Scottish Labour, who this morning branded the SNP “out of control”, has called for a new election to Holyrood. Yet even with support from the Tories and Liberal Democrats, Sarwar has nothing like enough seats to force such a vote.
The SNP has 64 seats in the 129-seat Holyrood parliament, and relies on the Greens’ six seats for its majority. Scottish Conservatives have 31 seats, Scottish Labour has 22, and the Scottish Lib Dems, four.
Another Holyrood election is not expected until 2026, unless Yousaf is forced to resign.
If Yousaf wishes to avoid this fate, he would be wise to listen to those critiquing the SNP’s secretive style of governance and calling for more transparency at its headquarters.
Write to us with your comments to be considered for publication at letters@reaction.life