Duplicitousness and treachery
John Swinney is delusional. Or he is deceitful. In an essay for the Sunday National that meanders aimlessly between vapidity and mawkishness, he writes:
On Thursday, May 7, Scotland’s destiny will be in Scotland’s hands.
The people of Scotland have the opportunity to elect an SNP majority and secure a referendum on Scotland’s future.
That outcome is within touching distance, and it would make the world sit up and listen.
On a positive note, he gets the date right. There shall indeed be an election on Thursday, May 7 2026. Why he chooses the American month-day order is a bit of a mystery. But credit where it’s due, he correctly identifies the date of this year’s Scottish general election. Well done, First Minister!
He may even be right when he says that “Scotland’s destiny will be in Scotland’s hands“. However, this implies an element of choice that, as things stand, will be entirely missing from this democratic event. The election should be an opportunity for Scotland’s cause. But nobody has done more than John Swinney to ensure this opportunity is missed.
The people of Scotland can be said to have the opportunity to elect an SNP majority. But all available evidence suggests it is an opportunity we shall decline. Swinney offers no real inducement to voters. Nothing substantial. Nothing notable. As James Murphy says in his comment on Swinney’s column:
I’m reading this thinking: right, where’s the moment that grabs you?
Because it’s not here.
Anyone looking for the Big Idea here will be sorely disappointed. I felt no disappointment because I had kept my expectations low. Having paid attention to what John Swinney has been saying about the constitutional issue and his ‘strategy’, the challenge was to keep those expectations low enough.
What we get instead is the politician’s promise of a “referendum on Scotland’s future“. The problem is that this is not something John Swinney can deliver. It’s an empty promise. It is a deceitful promise. John Swinney cannot promise a referendum even if he gets that near-miraculous SNP majority because he has acceded to the British state’s asserted authority to veto that mandate. And Sir Keir Starmer has made it clear that he will not countenance the referendum Swinney is promising as if it were his to grant.
John Swinney cannot promise a referendum even if he gets that near-miraculous SNP majority because he has acceded to the British state’s asserted authority to veto that mandate.
Starmer has explicitly ruled out granting the Section 30 order that Swinney says is a prerequisite for a referendum.
For us to achieve that independence, the first step is to secure a legal referendum recognised by all. In 2011 we secured that reliable and dependable route when the SNP achieved a majority of seats at Holyrood.
That is the only mechanism that has been proven to deliver such a vote - so that is what we need to deliver again.
(Emphasis added.)
Swinney is asking people to vote en masse for the SNP on both the constituency and regional ballot based on his promise of something that cannot happen. Let’s set aside for a moment the fact that the referendum he is promising couldn’t actually lead to independence being restored. That hardly matters given that there is no chance of the referendum happening. It is challenging to avoid saying that John Swinney is lying when he claims that an SNP majority will “secure a referendum on Scotland’s future“. He must know that it won’t.
It is challenging to avoid saying that John Swinney is lying when he claims that an SNP majority will “secure a referendum on Scotland’s future“. He must know that it won’t.
There may be other reasons to vote for the SNP. You may take the view that the SNP’s record in government outweighs its abysmal failure to progress Scotland’s cause. For this to be the case, your commitment to that cause would have to be a whole lot less than mine. In some instances, it may be argued that voting SNP is necessary because they act as a barrier to the British parties squatting in our parliament gaining power. But if you are intending to vote SNP on the strength of John Swinney’s promise of a referendum, you are allowing yourself to be played for a fool.
This is not some trivial or benign deception. It is not something we can shrug off as just part of the game of politics. It is not simply a case of a politician making manifesto commitments they will not honour. We are well accustomed to that. We almost assume they will renege on those commitments. We know that Swinney’s proposed Section 30 order request is merely performative. That doesn’t mean it is harmless.
This is not some trivial or benign deception. It is not something we can shrug off as just part of the game of politics.
By the act of submitting that Section 30 order request, Swinney is accepting Starmer’s ‘right’ to say no. Swinney’s position is that the SNP majority he seeks would be a mandate from the people of Scotland for a referendum. But he allows that the British Prime Minister can overrule that mandate.
Swinney waxes eloquent when he asserts the sovereignty of Scotland’s people:
I firmly believe that the people who live in Scotland are best placed to make decisions about Scotland. That is the fundamental democratic and practical argument underpinning the case that we make.
He changes his tune sharply when it comes to confronting the British state. At that point, he drops the principle of popular sovereignty like a red-hot iron and obsequiously accedes to the alien doctrine of parliamentary (Westminster) sovereignty.
The implications for Scotland’s cause of this treachery run deep and long. The sovereignty of Scotland's people is the cardinal precept of Scotland’s democracy. It is both a constitutional fact and an inviolable principle. Swinney treats it as something to be traded for British promises that are as worthless as his own.
The sovereignty of Scotland’s people is the cardinal precept of Scotland’s democracy.
Appalled as I am at Swinney’s cavalier attitude to popular sovereignty, what shocks me more is the fact that the independence movement isn’t up in arms about this treachery. It is bad enough that the opportunity to progress Scotland’s cause offered by the 2026 election is to be squandered. Worse by far is the harm that will be done to our cause by the self-serving duplicitousness of the SNP leadership.
"this treachery"
Former SNP MSP Campbell Martin, in his 2-part 'Outspoken' books, was in little doubt there were and no doubt still are 'British Spies in The SNP'. He specifically mentions John Swinney.
It does appear to be the case that Swinney is 'tasked' with taking the national party and the movement as far up Fanon's 'blind alley' as possible. Fanon similarly asserted that the dominant national party will inevitably have its "confidential agents pensioned off at high reward"; which realisation "sickens the movement".
Swinneys actions in the 'Salmond Inquiry' at Holyrood were similarly questionable, redacting evidence etc. Much of that 'inquiry' itself looked to be 'managed' by the security services, certain witnesses permitted not to attend, and other issues. And, like previous SNP First Ministers, he is averse to appointing bona fide nationalists qualified to run the many quango's and state agencies funded by what is supposedly a 'nationalist' government.
Given the ongoing paralysis and "petrifaction of the dominant national party" vis-a-vis independence (which is another Fanon conclusion), it would seem naive not to conclude that there are those at the top of the party who are in the pay and/or control of our oppressors. There were also of course numerous examples of such covert activities and agents in Ireland and elsewhere.
What else is MI5's £billions of budget and thousands of 'staff' and guaranteed immunity by law for but to protect the interest of the British state, and where keeping Scotland held tight at all costs remains top of their agenda.
I hope the good folk of North Perthshire vote Swinney out in May.