Euan McColm: Almost a year on, the fall of the House of Humza Yousaf has started

Some SNP colleagues exasperated with First Minister’s performance as snubbed rival Kate Forbes waits in the wings

Euan McColm: Almost a year on, the fall of the House of Humza Yousaf has started

“I’m afraid,” a publicly loyal SNP politician tells me, “we might have to accept that Humza’s just not very good at being First Minister.”

While the official line remains that Humza Yousaf is the man to lead his party to new heights of success, privately there’s a growing sense of despair about his stewardship. “If there’s a wrong way to do something, then he’ll oblige,” says another colleague.

Next month will see Yousaf mark the first anniversary of his time as Nicola Sturgeon’s successor and the sense that he’s losing his grip on the SNP is strong. The stench of decay is in the air. The fall of the House of Humza has commenced.

When former health secretary Michael Matheson jumped ship last week, quitting before publication of a report into how he falsely claimed £11,000 in expenses for data charges, which he later admitted had been run up by his sons while they streamed football matches on his parliament-provided iPad, Yousaf was left to explain precisely why he had spent three months attempting to defend his colleague’s indefensible actions.

The First Minister’s effort was pitiful. Matheson, he insisted, had been entitled to “due process”. This was a reference to an investigation – its findings still to be published – into Matheson’s actions by the Scottish Parliament’s Corporate Body, the cross-party group that oversees Holyrood business.

If “due process” was at all important to Matheson, why had he jumped before the SPCB’s findings had been published? And, anyway, for anyone in the real world caught fiddling their expenses to the tune of 11 grand, “due process” would be instant dismissal.

Had Yousaf sacked Matheson last November when details of his bogus expenses claim were made public, this would be a long-forgotten issue. Instead, thanks to his decision to back Matheson right up until the point he quit, Yousaf’s judgement is – not for the first time – in question.

Once the truth about that expenses claim had been established, Yousaf should have cut Matheson adrift. The First Minister may have convinced himself that his former health secretary deserved “due process” but the impression that decision created was that he didn’t grasp – or, worse, didn’t care about – the seriousness of the matter.

Shortly after Matheson announced his resignation on Thursday morning, speculation about his replacement had many in the Scottish political bubble asking whether Yousaf might approach Kate Forbes, the former finance secretary, to fill the position. Forbes, who came a close second to Yousaf in last year’s SNP leadership contest, has been on the backbenches since she was offered a demoted position by her new boss. While the SNP’s fortunes have declined, Forbes’s star has risen with colleagues and party members. With each passing week, speculation that she is ready to succeed Yousaf grows. Had Yousaf offered her the key health brief at this time of crisis, she would have struggled to refuse – even her staunchest supporters would have struggled to explain her refusal to step up at a time of crisis for her party. Not only would bringing Forbes back have been a sensible use of her talents, it would have tied her to the fortunes of the SNP.

Instead, Yousaf ignored Forbes, leaving her on the backbenches where she is free to continue building support for a possible future leadership bid.

Polls tell all of us – including Humza Yousaf – that the SNP is on track to lose a significant number of its 43 MPs at this year’s general election. The nationalists’ leader will struggle to survive such a drubbing and we should not be at all surprised if colleagues decide he should be replaced before the next Holyrood election.

One SNP MSP tells me they’d put £11,000 on Yousaf being forced out after general election humiliation and Forbes stepping in as his replacement.

“The polls might show us losing MPs but they also tell is that, once Labour is in power at Westminster, we can expect the SNP to rally at the next Holyrood election. I think we’ll see Humza take a lot of pain at the general election and then Kate take over and win the next Holyrood election,” he says.

I’m inclined to think this scenario entirely plausible.

Forbes appeared to have exploded her leadership campaign last year when she admitted that – due to her firm Christian beliefs – she would have voted against gay marriage had she been a elected member when the issue was being debated at Holyrood. A number of her senior colleagues spoke out about the prospect of her becoming First Minister; Forbes was perfectly entitled to her views, they said, but they weren’t compatible with her becoming leader of the SNP.

That wave of outrage didn’t stop Forbes winning 48 per cent of the vote to Yousaf’s 52. And, since then, a number of those who publicly opposed her last year will now privately admit they’d be willing to overlook her more controversial positions.

“The thing is,” says one nationalist MSP, “That the gay marriage thing is over and done with. Kate might not have supported it but she’s also been clear she has no desire to overturn the legislation so the question is whether we put that to one side on the grounds that she’s smart and competent or we continue to reject her. Once we take our bumps at the general election, there are plenty of us who’d bet on a Forbes leadership to stop the slide.”

Yousaf’s leadership has been bedevilled by controversy. From an ongoing police investigation into allegations of fraud involving SNP finances to a stark fall in support for the party, the first year of his time in office has been punctuated by crisis after crisis.

This being so, his failure to bring his former rival back into government is foolish.

After Humza Yousaf leads his party to general election losses, Kate Forbes will be perfectly placed to ride to the SNP’s rescue.