Why Scottish Tories are wrong (and patronising) to say vote for Reform is vote for SNP

It would be hard to argue he is poorer than his predecessor Douglas Ross, whose abrasive tone might have appealed to diehard anti-nationalists but was delivering a waning Tory vote. Irrespective of Ross’s misjudgements, including not whipping his Holyrood group to vote against the final stage of the SNP’s Gender Recognition Reform Bill and seeking to stand for Westminster in preference to the sitting Tory MP David Duguid campaigning from his hospital bed, it was becoming clear he lacked the skill to deliver policies that provided positive reasons to vote for his party rather than simply be a bulwark against the nationalists.

Findlay has been putting in some good performances against John Swinney, but given his inheritance of Scotland’s Tories being policy light, it is right he begins to make speeches that seek to define what he wants his party to stand for. After all, following the record tax increases of Rishi Sunak and Jeremy Hunt at Westminster and their introduction of many regulatory interventions that could be more easily classed as anti-business or even of socialist origin, it has been difficult to know what the Conservative party, across the UK and in Scotland, stands for.

The best that can be said is that at least Badenoch and Findlay admit policy development is a work in progress – but principles should be eternal and stating what they are should not be difficult.

It was therefore regrettable that, when being questioned about the impact Reform UK might have in Scotland, Findlay resorted to a response more typical of Ross – saying if people vote Reform they will get SNP. This simplistic and utterly patronising put-down needs to be exposed for the falsehood it is.

The claim that voting for one party will cause another opponent to win by denying the leading competitor enough votes is a tired and rather insulting deflection. Every party has used this claim; in the past, the Liberal Democrats used it to appeal for Labour supporters to help unseat James Douglas-Hamilton In Edinburgh West, and for Tories to help unseat the SNP’s Stephen Gethins in North-East Fife, while Tories used it to appeal to Liberal Democrats to help them unseat Alex Salmond in Gordon – and Labour have used it to appeal to most parties to try and unseat SNP MPs.

Yes, of course, in a first-past-the-post election, where the Tories are the incumbents or are a close second and a Reform candidate stands it could risk a Labour, SNP or Liberal Democrat candidate winning, based on the presumption Reform might split the right-of-centre vote. This is, however, highly simplistic and disingenuous.

Findlay has a problem and it is called Tory entitlement, and it is an entitlement that is certainly not justified by his party’s recent record. Firstly, the evidence from surveys and council by-elections shows Reform is taking votes from the SNP and Labour – and appealing to people who often are so scunnered by the Holyrood circus they previously chose not to vote.

Secondly, there are now many areas of Scotland where Reform UK is ahead of the Conservatives. In such an instance the quip “vote Tory, get SNP” would be just as valid.

Take Glasgow for instance, where in the general election Reform polled more than the Scottish Tories in each of the six constituencies, losing only two deposits, while the Conservatives lost their deposit in every seat.

If the idea is that Reform is a right-of-centre party and should defer to the Tories as the traditional party of right-leaning voters, then where Reform UK is in the ascendant or already the foremost option, why should the Tories not recognise they are the problem and withdraw?

We should recognise that when an election such as for Holyrood uses a proportional voting system, electors have more reason for voting for the party they prefer. In the list vote, they can easily change from who they voted for in their constituency vote, where possibly their motive might have been to stop a particular candidate by supporting someone best placed to overcome an opponent.

In council elections, where single transferable vote is used, the first preference can go to a voter’s favoured choice with their second favourite selected next. In that situation, nobody is causing another opposition candidate to win.

The defection last week of former Conservative group leader on Glasgow city council, Councillor Thomas Kerr is just the latest switch of politicians wakening up to the fact that Reform is more likely to beat SNP, Labour or Liberal Democrat opponents than if they stand as Conservatives. That’s hardly a vote Reform, get someone else, type of vibe. Their fear is stay Conservative and get emptied.

Now Reform UK has momentum not just in the UK but in Scotland too. Nigel Farage was found to be the most popular choice in Scotland for Prime Minister, on 19 per cent, ahead of Starmer’s 17 per cent after a UK survey from last week was broken down into its respective jurisdictions and regions.

Russell Findlay needs to resist the temptation – even under close questioning from the media – to try and lay blows on Reform. In the end, the voters will decide who is entitled to win. His best way to ensure the Conservatives do not fall behind Reform is to offer positive reasons for voters to back them – being against the SNP is no longer enough (it never really was). Now with a Labour UK Government, being better than Starmer and Sarwar must be given priority, but it may already be too late.

Brian Monteith is a former member of the Scottish and European parliaments and editor of ThinkScotland.org