An expert on the Scottish National Party has stated that the SNP "fears" an independent inquiry into the Peter Murrell scandal because multiple members were "complicit" in the fraud. Professor James Mitchell, a leading academic at the University of Edinburgh who has authored several books on the Nationalists, said it is now clear that whistleblowers who raised questions about the party's finances in 2020 and 2021 were "harassed, bullied and marginalised".
Whistleblowers allege cover-up
Professor Mitchell's comments follow allegations from Cynthia Guthrie, a former member of the SNP's finance and audit committee, who claimed that John Swinney and Nicola Sturgeon were "culpable" for Murrell's actions because they misled party members and the public. Another ex-committee member, Allison Graham, stated that she was "bullied" after raising concerns internally in 2021.
Peter Murrell, Nicola Sturgeon's estranged husband, was sentenced last week to five years and three months in prison after being convicted of embezzling more than £400,000 from the party over a 12-year period. A judge described the fraud as "not particularly sophisticated", prompting questions about why he was not stopped sooner.
Political blocking of inquiry
SNP and Green Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs) collaborated earlier this month to block a Holyrood inquiry into the scandal. However, a probe may still be launched by the Scottish Affairs Committee at Westminster.
Professor Mitchell told the Record: "These revelations show that very many people in the SNP were complicit in this massive fraud. They explain why the leadership fears an independent inquiry. They know it will reveal much they want to keep hidden - there can be no other explanation."
Culture of intimidation
Mitchell added: "We now know that the very few who dared to raise questions were harassed, bullied and marginalised not only by Nicola Sturgeon but by a large number of her acolytes. This was clearly not just senior officers and members of the SNP - all of whom most certainly were aware of concerns being expressed - who either turned a blind eye or were party to the efforts to block scrutiny."
He continued: "This helps explains the lack of a groundswell of demands from within the SNP to an inquiry - few in or near the leadership over the last decade and more will emerge unscathed."
Governance failures
Mitchell highlighted that "the staggering extent to which the governance arrangements were not just inadequate but facilitated embezzlement" has become clear. He predicted that more information will continue to emerge, whether from an independent inquiry, leaks, a revolt by the wider membership, or further legal proceedings.
He said: "John Swinney has, of course, much to lose and may hope this will all go away but that seems very unlikely. But he is only postponing the inevitable, dragging this out."
Call for leadership
Mitchell argued that Swinney faces a choice between "openness and accountability through an independent inquiry or the slow process of daily revelations keeping these issues in the news day in day out for some time." He suggested that Swinney "may yet show leadership, recognise that getting it all out in public at once and properly addressing the causes would be better than the slow drip, drip of information."
Mitchell concluded: "It is not simply that John Swinney has shown very poor judgment. It is his failure to acknowledge this, continues to contradict himself and seeks to cover up the greatest scandal in the SNP’s history that will damage him. He can get angry with journalists just as Sturgeon got angry with questions about the party’s financial management but that only contributes to the impression that he and the senior SNP still has a lot more to hide."
