Why Kate Forbes was an SNP misfit – Daily Business Magazine

The Deputy First Minister and the party have grown too far apart for her to have led it , writes TERRY MURDEN

As Scotland braced itself for the impact of Storm Floris the political wind of change was about to inflict more damage on the Scottish National Party. The surprise decision by Deputy First Minister Kate Forbes not to seek re-election next summer will leave an already battered governing party without one of its star players as it attempts to win back power.

In truth, the signs of a likely departure were there all along. She is not the only young mother in parliament, but she is struggling to juggle her long commute from the Highlands with the demands of high office and regular visits to factories, health centres and university laboratories.

However, those personal and family pressures aside, there have also been indications that she was not the perfect fit with the party she was supposedly lined up to lead. Indeed, if she had led the party there is evidence to suggest she would have sought a radically different mission that may have proved impossible to fulfill.

Her religious beliefs, particularly her opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage, sat awkwardly with a party that became obsessed with diversity and gender identity. On the economy and public services there was never a sense that she wanted more state-control and a never-ending supply of free services.

Forbes was on the diminishing right wing of the party, a believer in free enterprise and the need to encourage wealth creation. She had warned recently against higher taxation, though she was unable to find an alternative to funding her party’s desire to spend more while failing to do enough to grow the economy. 

She has been such a key figure in the party and in the government it is easy to overlook her short tenure in parliament. First elected only nine years ago, she prospered on the ill-fortune of former Finance Secretary Derek Mackay who was forced to resign over matters in his private life just before he was due to deliver the 2020 Scottish budget. Ms Forbes was ushered into office and presented the budget as if she had spent months preparing it. She gave such an assured performance that she won instant admirers and her ascendancy to the top of the party looked like a certain bet.

It all went wrong during the leadership race in 2023 which she was expected to win, until those religious beliefs got in the way. Her defeat to Humza Yousaf also saw her banished to the backbenches after she turned down a minor government role.

It was Yousaf’s cack-handed performance in the top job that once again opened the doors to Ms Forbes when John Swinney was brought out of intended Cabinet retirement to lead the party and promptly installed Ms Forbes as his deputy.

Over the years she has been one of the few MSPs on the government benches, along with Ivan McKee, Richard Lochhead and Michelle Thomson, who has come near to ‘getting it’ with business. It may have come from actually listening to the business community who continually reminded ministers of the folly of taxing them to the point of collapse and introducing poorly-devised policies, such as the ill-judged deposit return scheme and the alcohol promotion ban. Wisely, Ms Forbes stood aside from these issues, perhaps keeping her counsel while her fellow ministers fell on their swords.

She made the bold and innovative move to appoint former Skyscanner executive Mark Logan as the government’s first chief entrepreneur and adopted his recommendations for digitising the economy. Sadly, many have yet to be fully implemented or yield results, particularly on improving computing in education.

To those who see business as merely a cash-cow, ploughing taxpayers’ money into the pockets of higher earners did not fit with the drive on easing poverty and the disadvantaged. After declaring her support for business, Forbes would have found it difficult to defend cuts to enterprise budgets.

Then there have been situations where Ms Forbes has directly contradicted her own government. As Rolls-Royce was being denied support for a welding centre because of some obtuse link with munitions, Forbes was hailing investment at Govan by warship builder BAE Systems. Was that a deliberate kickback at her own party, or just poor judgement? One way or another, it left the government exposed to more policy muddle.

So was Kate Forbes the best leader the SNP never had, or was she actually a Westminster supporter in disguise? While not shying from contributing to the “grievance agenda”, there is enough evidence to suggest she sees how Scotland benefits from the union and that with a little more Westminster support she could happily work alongside Westminster.

At the SNP conference last year she spoke at length about Scotland’s economic achievements, supposedly to portray SNP success, but in a speech that could have been written by the Tories who were in power at the time, or Labour when it took office.

“…It turns out that people want to invest in our incredible industries and workers and opportunities,” she opined, adding that “GDP and productivity growth has outpaced the rest of the UK” and “Scotland is the standout economic performer in the UK”.

Like it or not, these are largely a result of monetary and economic policy emanating from London, not Edinburgh. Interest rates, employment policy, corporation tax, export guarantees… all driven by forces outwith Scotland and if the country was doing well, it was not because of Holyrood’s limited powers.

Forbes would have, and may still, push for a cut in business rates, or least reform, and for more investment in housing. As such she would be encouraging the SNP government to follow Labour policy. She has been less vocal on renewables and oil & gas but avoided giving a direct answer when I asked her recently whether the SNP should abandon its policy on banning new oil & gas licences.

Leader of the SNP? Did you ever see her on any of the independence marches let alone grabbing a megaphone to demand another referendum? On the evidence presented, if Kate Forbes had become leader she would most likely have pushed for more borrowing and employment powers and thereby settled for governing in a devolved state.

Of course, that scenario would not have suited the hardliners for whom independence is the number one goal. For that reason alone it is difficult to see how Kate Forbes could have brought the party together under her leadership.

Related