Nothing is certain in life – and certainly not in Scotland – except death, taxes and an SNP defeat in Rutherglen and Hamilton West.
Let us consider the position objectively.
The seat itself has a small majority – just over 5,000 – and is held by the incumbent party of government for the last 16 years. That alone should make the SNP nervous.
Then think of the history. This is hardly dyed in the wool nationalist territory.
In fact, the seat was briefly won back by the Labour Party at the 2017 General Election and, until 2015, overwhelmingly backed the party since its inception.
In 2010, for instance, the Labour Party received more than 60 percent of the vote there.
So, not only is the seat a theoretical target, but the main opposition also has a recent history of success there.
That should make the SNP more nervous still. Then consider the wider circumstances.
‘SNP panic’
The by-election is taking place because the previous SNP candidate elected to represent the constituency (Margaret Ferrier) conducted a breach of Covid-19 regulations so flagrant it would make Boris Johnson blush.
The SNP’s decision to suspend her following the rule breach – meaning she technically sat as an independent – is a technicality that will matter little to voters on the doorstep.
Meanwhile, the nationalists themselves are in turmoil, with a new leader struggling to get a grip on the job and a predecessor under a prominent police investigation.
When all those factors combine, it should make the SNP panic.
That is why it has been particularly surprising to see Humza Yousaf take such ownership of the SNP’s campaign in Rutherglen and Hamilton West, even to the extent of answering questions on behalf of the SNP’s female candidate at her own launch event.
Indeed, whereas the Labour Party has been more judicious in the appearances of Sir Keir Starmer, Yousaf has already made several prominent visits to the constituency and will make more.
Most political leaders like to create a fall guy – the person to blame when things go wrong – but Yousaf seems determined to carve out this role for himself.
This is bad politics for several reasons.
Firstly, it will associate Yousaf with defeat in the eyes of the public. People across Scotland are already not particularly enamoured with the first minister, and if there is one absolute truth it is that no one likes a loser.
Secondly, becoming the face of the SNP’s defeat risks shattering Yousaf’s already fragile grip on his party.
‘Yousaf could become easy target’
An overwhelming Labour victory – as seems certain – will prompt another bout of internecine nationalist conflict, but one that is all the more bitter because it is now all the more real.
SNP MPs will be looking at the Rutherglen and Hamilton West result and thinking, ‘there but for the grace of a few months go I’.
That prospect of a career ending defeat will sharpen daggers as well as minds.
With Yousaf front and centre of the campaign, they will have an easy target for their attentions.
The Rutherglen and Hamilton West by-election will therefore be a key milestone on the downward trajectory of Yousaf’s reign.
He may will buy himself time with a reset or a reshuffle after the result, particularly given the by-election’s likely proximity to the SNP’s annual conference, which will provide a natural platform for such a pronouncement.
But he will only be delaying the inevitable.
Given his determination to own a result that is clearly going to be bad for the SNP, the Rutherglen and Hamilton West by-election may will herald the beginning of the end for Yousaf, if not also the nationalists themselves.
Lessons to be learned from Coutts saga
One story that has dominated the news in recent weeks is that of Nigel Farage and the closure of his Coutts bank account.
There seems little doubt that NatWest – the owner of Coutts as well as the Royal Bank of Scotland – has behaved badly here.
Cancelling someone’s bank accounts, particularly with no notice, would create enormous difficulty and potentially ruin their life. Equally, there is something rather sinister and Orwellian about institutions screening people for their political views.
Yet the most extraordinary thing about the whole saga is, perhaps inevitably, Farage himself.
Only a man with his populist abilities could somehow come out of a spat about his private account at Coutts – where you need a minimum of £3million in savings to open an account – as an anti-establishment figure. Yet that is exactly what has happened.
For those of us who strongly oppose Farage’s politics, this is a timely reminder of the power and influence he can still wield.
But it is also a timely reminder that trying to cancel people because of their political views is rarely an effective way of dealing with them, and can actually often give oxygen to the very perspectives you were trying to conceal in the first place.
