JOHN Swinney’s decision to host an anti-far-right summit in a bid to stand up to the growing influence of Reform UK may have come “too late” and could “backfire badly”, according to political experts.
The First Minister gathered Scotland’s political, trade union, civic and faith leaders last week for a cross-party summit in Glasgow in which all who attended agreed to “taking action to safeguard Scotland’s democracy” against the rise of the far right, which Swinney says includes Nigel Farage’s party.
During the event – which attracted a small protest outside from activists reportedly from fringe Unionist group A Force For Good – there were discussions on key themes of combating inequality, tackling disinformation, enhancing trust in politics, strengthening vigilance to electoral interference, and encouraging more active democratic participation.
Reform UK were not invited to the event but took advantage of their exclusion to attack Scotland’s “political class”.
Swinney said the summit was “just the start of the process”, adding the discussions were “respectful and open”.
Experts have now told the Sunday National they fear Swinney’s tactics, while well-intentioned, may play into Reform’s hands unless there is more concrete action.
Dr James Foley, a lecturer in politics at Glasgow Caledonian University, said while the summit could be seen as a smart political manoeuvre from the SNP’s perspective, displaying “alarmism” about Reform is only likely to boost them electorally.
He said: “If he’s [Swinney] acting in good faith, and this is truly about uniting to combat Reform, the proposal will likely backfire badly. Alternatively, this is a more Machiavellian move in the SNP’s narrow party-political interest – in which case, it might prove a clever manoeuvre.
“A broad coalition of Scottish worthies and the political establishment is an entirely illogical approach to the threat of Reform.
“But from the narrow perspective of a government clinging to power, perhaps it makes sense. It helps unite a divided activist base against an easily vilified enemy, and by making everything about Reform, he’ll arguably help further fragment the Unionist voting base in Scotland.”
However, Dr Foley added: “Ultimately, alarmism about Reform helps embed small-c conservatism and ensures that the same grievances will fester.
“If recent history has taught us anything, it’s that this alarmism will benefit rather than harm Reform electorally.
“Ironically, the one thing that might hold Reform’s jerry-rigged coalition together is the perceived unity of the Scottish establishment.”
In 2010 for example, The Party of European Socialists (PES) in the European Parliament confirmed an agreement between all its members to distance themselves from working with far-right parties. The concept has also been informally applied in Germany against the far-right AfD at state levels and against the Swedish Democrats in the national parliament in Sweden.
But Dr Judith Sijstermans, a politics lecturer at the University of Aberdeen, said following these examples is a “misguided” way of trying to deal with Reform, adding that it is now “too late” for this approach.
“I wonder if he's [Swinney] thinking, is there something we can do to come together and make Reform less of a threat, less of a governing option in Scotland?” she said.
“If that is the reason though, I think it’s a bit misguided because it’s too late at this point to implement something like that for Reform, given the platform they have, the media attention they receive, and the influence they have had over issues like migration or Brexit.
“It doesn’t really make sense to implement this kind of exclusionary cordon at this point.”
He said if politicians want to rebuild trust, they should be looking at dismantling Reform’s “overly simplistic” solutions to problems with hard facts.
“I think decades of politicians not being trusted is how we end up with a party that is peddling more populist narratives and being overly simplistic in its solutions,” he said.
“Are we really testing what Reform’s solutions to the problems they highlight are? I don’t think we are. I think we’re more focused on the spectacle of it.”
He said politicians looking to dent Reform’s success need to put their energy into bringing down a “belief echo” that has formed among the public – where people believe claims and numbers even when they have been debunked.
Reilly explained this has happened because figures from across the political spectrum have leaned into Reform’s rhetoric.
“There’s a real political failure at the heart of this. Why do people believe false information about immigration? Because politicians of various hues have leant into that,” he said.
Reilly went on: “We should look across the Atlantic and see what’s happened there. There were parallels to Reform to an extent in terms of people’s fears and prejudices over immigration being stoked by a political movement which was promising solutions it could not deliver.
“I think the lesson from that for Scotland is that to change the discourse on topics like immigration, you have to have facts as paramount.
“It requires politicians to not lean into highly emotive narratives on issues like immigration. I think nationally, Labour under Keir Starmer to a certain extent are doing that. Some of the decisions they have made since last July do lean into this idea of immigration being a bigger issue than it perhaps is.”
Dr Sijstermans warned Scotland must also be wary of how Reform and more extreme far-right movements are gaining ground at a local level, adding she fears some groups in attendance at the summit may wrongly assume it’s all about Farage’s influence south of the Border.
“One of the dangers when thinking about Reform UK is to assume it’s only Nigel Farage or to assume it’s only at a UK level,” said Dr Sijstermans.
“My research has shown they are increasingly active at a local level, engaging with communities, trying to establish local branches.
“So I think it’s important to recognise there is a local Scottish approach to radical right politics and that’s not just coming from Nigel Farage and Westminster.
“I think some of these groups find it too easy to point their finger at that rather than thinking about the local level.”
