Sleazy SNP?

While SNP donor Crawford Beveridge was not appointed chief executive of Scottish Enterprise, contrary to media speculation, it's not clear whether accusations of cronyism may have played a part in instead selecting another Crawford - Mr Gillies - to the post, or perhaps the unusual first name led to some kind of mix up! On the other hand, if Crawford Beveridge was not involved in the process then it was surely incumbent on officials to quell the media speculation, since it may have been personally damaging to Mr Beveridge, and ruling him out would not have compromised the procedure in any way.

Of course, the SNP Government had already appointed one of the party's councillors to head the Scottish Qualifications Authority - an ostensibly politically neutral body - thus the party is clearly not averse to the kind of cronyism that it chided Labour for while in opposition, therefore underlining the 'do as I say, not as I do' attitude afflicting politics.

While finding evidence in relation to this kind of hypocrisy isn't, of course, difficult, it would be remiss of this blog not to include a few pertinent quotes from the SNP while in opposition:

• "These appointments show we are still living in a Labour Mafia-ridden society. What makes this even more disgraceful than the usual partisan appointments we have grown accustomed to under New Labour is that the purpose of this team is to scrutinise those very appointments - cronies to preside over cronyism." (Alex Neil MSP, on Labour's appointment of independent (sic!) assessors to oversee ministerial appointments to quangos);
• "This Bill is a golden opportunity for Parliament to begin to bring to an end the culture of cronyism. We must show in the clearest of terms that the appointments procedure to public bodies in Scotland is as transparent as it can be and is seen to be operating fairly." (Fiona McLeod MSP, on the Water Industry Bill);
• "We used to have Team McLeish. Now we have Faction Jack - it's a cabinet of cronies." (John Swinney MSP, on Jack McConnell appointing Labour MSPs (sic!) to his cabinet).

However, last weekend the focus shifted onto SNP MSP Nigel Don, who is an aide to Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill. A Sunday Herald story revealed that the taxpayer is funding mortgage payments to Mr Don after his house move from Dundee to Aberdeen meant that he then qualified for a controversial allowance to buy a flat in Edinburgh.

Both Dundee and Aberdeen lie in the constituency to which Mr Don was elected, but the MSP told the newspaper that the SNP wanted to raise its profile in marginal seats within the sprawling north east regional constituency, hence his move northwards and consequently further from Holyrood, thus qualifying him for allowances on accommodation in Edinburgh

Of course, it's not clear whether Mr Don's primary motivation was the allowances or was indeed political. However, the MSP had hedged his bets by standing for both Holyrood (on the regional list) and Dundee City Council in May 2007, and even a couple of months later he claimed to be able to fulfil both his MSP and councillor duties. By the end of the year Mr Don had resigned as a Dundee councillor, but at that time there was no mention of the Aberdeen rationale. However, Steve Bargeton, the Courier's political editor, had raised the issue of Mr Don, his 'flit' north and the allowances in his Political Diary column months before last weekend's story, and if I remember correctly there was no mention of any political motivation at that time.

But it's not only Mr Don who's an ex-SNP councillor in Dundee that has been accused of financial cynicism. However, MSP Joe Fitzpatrick differed from Mr Don in that he didn't stand for re-election to Dundee City Council, but was instead selected as the SNP candidate for the Dundee West seat, which he duly won. But Mr Fitzpatrick's retiral from the council made him eligible for one of the Scottish Executive's 'golden goodbyes' paid to those who pledged not to stand in local elections in the future (in effect a sop to Labour councillors who would lose their seats under the proportional representation system introduced as the price of the Liberal Democrats joining Labour in a Holyrood coalition).

Mr Fitzpatrick commendably pledged to give his £10,000 payoff to charities and good causes. Problem was that this was conditional on him being elected to Holyrood, thus in effect a small price to pay for the salary and allowances - totalling the thick end of quarter of a million pounds - he would receive if elevated to the Scottish Parliament. This resulted in 'electoral bribe' allegations, and indeed an unsuccessful complaint to the Electoral Commission by Mr Fitzpatrick's prospective Labour opponent in Dundee West, Jill Shimi. (Mrs Shimi was likewise a Dundee Councillor standing for Holyrood rather than the local elections, but who had also hedged her bets by waiving her potential £15,000 payoff and thus leaving the council option open for future elections.) Some time after Mr Fitzpatrick's election to Holyrood the MSP said he was "quietly" giving the money away and he "did not request publicity when giving money to good causes", which clearly contradicted how he went about his initial pledge, perhaps indicating that he had been badly stung by the controversy.

Of course, this was largely a local issue, and no doubt many other cases exist which never make it onto the national political radar screen, but there seems little point in wasting time compiling a definitive dossier of these local storms in tea cups.

But coming back to the national picture, some of the attempts to defend the SNP against the impropriety accusations verge on the excruciating. For example, with regard to the cronyism, from an SNP blogger: "It's about doing what's best for Scotland, no matter what the political affiliation." In relation to Mr Don's little imbroglio, blogger Will Patterson made a valiant, intelligent but ultimately contrived and fruitless attempt to rationalise the MSP's contortions on a political basis - this will impress SNP partisans, but the general public will make up their minds on a more superficial basis, rightly or wrongly.

So does all this add up to SNP standing for the Sleazy National Party? In all honesty, not really. Granted, there's the usual political machinations, hypocrisy and lack of candour - not to mention other questionable actions, such as the Brian Souter affair - but no worse than that exhibited by politicians of all hues, and certainly little evidence of the outright sleaze demonstrated by other major parties. Of course, the SNP's lack of experience in government is probably a factor in this, since according to Lord Acton's oft-quoted dictum:

Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Something, of course, that should always be borne in mind, particularly in view of new Labour's terms at Westminster, not to mention the experience of the Tories before them.