So a few thoughts about John Swinney's announcement that he intends to stay on until 2031, assuming the SNP win the Holyrood election next year -
* This shouldn't necessarily be taken ultra-literally. In many ways it feels similar to when Tony Blair announced that he was going to see out a full third term, but of course in the end Blair stepped down midway through the third term. The feeling is that a leader has to say they intend to serve a full term otherwise they're already fighting the election as a lame duck. But the logic still points to Swinney stepping down before 2031, otherwise the question would be - will he stand down one month before the 2031 election or one month after? Neither of those options makes any sense. You'd always want to give your successor time to bed in, and then face the electorate, so some time between 2027 and 2030 would be much more sensible.
* Swinney has done better in the polls than I expected him to. That may be partly due to his good sense in semi-dispensing with Yousaf's factionalism and appointing Kate Forbes as his deputy, but nevertheless it's fair to say a few more years of Swinney doesn't fill me with quite the dismay it once would have done - except of course for the elephant in the room. It's great that the SNP are recovering in the polls, it's great that they now have a chance of rescuing the pro-indy majority in 2026, but the SNP were not set up to seek power for its own sake. Their purpose in seeking power is supposed to be to use it to deliver independence. Swinney did not say, as far as I'm aware, that he wanted to stay on for six more years to deliver independence. He seems to be imagining himself handing on the baton of devolved government to someone else in 2031.
* Swinney of course has long since surrendered to the Westminster argument that a simple majority is not enough for Scotland to become an independent country - he says that will only happen if there is "overwhelming" support. But even if we give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he imagines himself to be genuinely working towards that "overwhelming" support, what will he actually do with it once he's got it? Suppose, for example, he gets lucky, Farage becomes Prime Minister and tries to abolish the Scottish Parliament and drives support for independence up to hitherto undreamed of levels. I've never bought into the argument that the way to win independence is to go over the heads of Westminster and seek international recognition, for the simple reason that other countries would shrug and turn away - but the abolition of devolution might just be an exception to that general rule. Although theoretically devolution is an internal matter for the UK, there are precedents (for example Kosovo) of countries taking a dim view of long-standing autonomy being stripped away from a stateless people. But would Swinney be assertive enough to try to nurture that and exploit it? Given what we know of his character, it's hard to imagine.
* The one good thing that might come out of this announcement would be if it gives Stephen Flynn pause for thought about whether it's worth his while to switch to Holyrood and trigger a totally unnecessary by-election in Aberdeen South. I don't believe that Flynn would be a sensible choice to replace Swinney anyway - he's a bit too belligerent for some segments of the electorate.
