A "box office" Westminster inquiry into the Peter Murrell scandal could meet in Edinburgh to put maximum pressure on John Swinney, supporters of the investigation believe.
House of Commons sources suggest bringing any probe to Scotland would make it almost impossible for the SNP not to cooperate. Murrell, the former SNP chief executive and Nicola Sturgeon's estranged husband, faces jail after pleading guilty to embezzling over £400,000 of party funds.
Political rivals and some pro-independence figures argue for a separate parliamentary inquiry into the roles of Police Scotland and the Crown in the case. Labour has pushed for a Holyrood inquiry, but SNP and Green opposition have likely killed that option. A more probable outcome is a probe by Westminster's Scottish Affairs Committee.
As reported by the Record last week, the SNP are considering boycotting a Westminster investigation. However, Labour figures have told the Record that any Westminster hearings should be held north of the border, preferably in Edinburgh. This move, they argue, would undermine claims of a London-based committee investigating the SNP.
Supporters believe holding hearings on Swinney's doorstep would make a snub look ridiculous. Labour peer Lord Foulkes said: "There are strong arguments for evidence sessions in Edinburgh, as there would be less of an excuse for John Swinney to appear. It would also remind people that we have two Governments in Scotland. It would be curtains for Swinney's reputation if he did not cooperate. He would look evasive." He added that the inquiry "will be box office."
Douglas McAllister, the Labour MP for West Dunbartonshire who sits on the committee, said: "It's not unusual for the Scottish Affairs Committee to hold hearings in Scotland. Let's make it as easy as possible for the key witnesses to attend. This is also about restoring public confidence in politics, and rather than hearing evidence down in Westminster which some may regard as remote, let's bring the Scottish Affairs Committee directly to the people of Scotland."
If a witness refuses to provide evidence, a committee can issue a summons. Defying a summons can lead to being found in contempt of Parliament, with sanctions including admonishments, fines, or imprisonment.
However, SNP Westminster leader Dave Doogan has rejected calls for a Westminster probe, calling it a "party political stunt" and an "unprecedented abuse" of the committee system. He said: "If this inquiry goes ahead as suggested, it would be an unprecedented abuse of the House of Commons committee system - and a complete waste of taxpayers' money." He added: "The SNP will call this party political stunt out for exactly what it is - a desperate attempt by Labour Party and Tory MPs to weaponise a taxpayer-funded Westminster committee to take pot shots at their political opponents."
Doogan argued that such a "blatantly partisan inquiry" would create a dangerous precedent for investigating rival political parties. He insisted: "The police have already spent five years and more than £2 million investigating Peter Murrell's embezzlement crimes against the SNP. When John Swinney became SNP leader, he fundamentally reformed the way the party works and ensured a full governance review and stringent financial accountability measures within the party."
Scottish Labour deputy leader Jackie Baillie said: "The SNP have a brass neck to lecture anyone about taxpayers' money when senior figures within their party have wasted it with criminal recklessness for decades. It is for the SNP to answer why they are so scared of scrutiny and so desperate to stop the public from knowing the truth about the murky culture of cover-up and secrecy that is deep at the heart of their party. The more the SNP protest, the more people will think they have something to hide. Dave Doogan should show some backbone and stand up to John Swinney on this important issue rather than falling into line and allowing the cover-up culture to continue."
The issue is expected to come up when the committee meets on Tuesday.
