John Swinney’s spokesman has refused to say if the First Minister would co-operate should MPs choose to launch a probe into the circumstances that allowed former SNP chief executive Peter Murrell to embezzle more than £400,000 from the party.
With Mr Swinney refusing to sanction an inquiry into what happened at Holyrood, MPs on Westminster’s Scottish Affairs Committee are expected to consider staging their own inquiry when they meet on Tuesday.
SNP Westminster leader Dave Doogan, a member of the Scottish Affairs Committee, has already declared that such a move would be a “party political stunt” and an “unprecedented abuse” of the committee system at the House of Commons.
When asked if Mr Swinney would co-operate, and potentially appear before MPs if they launch an inquiry, a spokesperson for the First Minister would only say that he would “decide how to respond when we see what is agreed to”.
Both the First Minister and Mr Doogan found themselves on the same side as Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, who said he did not think MPs should be tasked with investigating the SNP’s finances.
But Mr Swinney’s spokesman added: “The First Minister’s clear view is if the committee decides to proceed it will destroy the credibility of the committee and its convener.”
He continued: “This is effectively political parties, members of political parties, conducting an inquiry and scrutinising the internal affairs of another party. That seems to set quite a dangerous precedent.
“The First Minister is simply questioning why on earth it is appropriate for parliamentary time to be used, and ultimately taxpayers’ money, for a process that has already been undertaken.”
Speaking to journalists after First Minister’s Questions on Tuesday, Mr Swinney said he did not think a Scottish Affairs Committee inquiry into the issue was “necessary”.
“I think it’s inappropriate for there to be an inquiry into these matters, because they affect the internal governance of the SNP, which I have sorted out,” he said.
Read More
“The idea of political rivals scrutinising the internal business of other political parties is, well, let me just say an interesting precedent to set, that people should think twice about.”
Calls for an inquiry have continued ever since Murrell, the ex-husband of Nicola Sturgeon, admitted embezzling more than £400,000 from the SNP over a 12-year period.
Speaking to the Press Association on Tuesday during a visit to Scotland, Mr Farage said: “I don’t think, having allowed devolution to happen and Holyrood to flourish, it’s for Westminster to come in and start banging the drum.
“I’d be very surprised if MSPs didn’t want to have an inquiry but I would say the Electoral Commission have got big questions to answer.
“All of us, as parties, have to submit accounts to (the Electoral Commission) and I just wonder how this got missed for 12 years, unless it was very, very deviously and very cleverly hidden.”
Mr Swinney has steadfastly rejected demands for an inquiry, arguing that after a lengthy police investigation there is no need for further action.
Speaking last week, the SNP leader said: “We’ve had a police investigation, there can be no higher investigation and more forensic investigation than a police investigation.
“I therefore do not support the establishment of a parliamentary inquiry because we have had an investigation and it convicted somebody for embezzling from my party’s funds.”
Mr Swinney’s spokesman said: “The First Minister’s view is we have already had an inquiry, we have already had a police inquiry. There is no need for a further inquiry.
“There is going to be nothing more forensic than a police investigation that lasted several years and actually led to a guilty plea.”