The key questions an inquiry into Peter Murrell scandal could ask

Almost all of its members back a probe into Nicola Sturgeon’s estranged husband stealing £400,000 from the party.

Dave Doogan, the sole SNP representative, has dismissed these calls as a “party political stunt” and said it would be “an unprecedented abuse of the House of Commons committee system”.

But pressure is building. This is partly because an inquiry in Holyrood seems very unlikely, with First Minister John Swinney refusing to consider it and the Greens also opposing it.

READ MORE: Why Scotland's Crown Office has questions to answer over Peter Murrell scandal – Brian Wilson

The Scottish Affairs Committee meets in private at 2pm on Tuesday.

But what are some of the key questions a parliamentary inquiry could consider?

Why did Nicola Sturgeon and other senior figures try to shut down questions about the SNP's finances?

Nicola Sturgeon and other senior figures dismissed concerns about the SNP’s finances at a time when Murrell was still embezzling money from the party.

In a now infamous leaked video, the former first minister told the SNP’s National Executive Committee (NEC) in March 2021: "There are no reasons for people to be concerned about the party's finances and all of us need to be careful about not suggesting that there is."

She has repeatedly insisted she knew nothing about Murrell’s embezzlement.

But clearly, some of the concerns about transparency and governance were legitimate. Did the leadership look into them - and if not, why not?

Why did NEC resignations not ring alarm bells?

Linked to the above, why did the resignation of several members of the NEC in 2021 not ring serious alarm bells?

Douglas Chapman quit as treasurer in May that year, saying he had not received the necessary “support or financial information” to carry out his duties. Former SNP MP Joanna Cherry also resigned from the NEC shortly afterwards.

Three SNP officials - Frank Ross, Allison Graham and Cynthia Guthrie - had quit the party's finance and audit committee in March 2021.

Were questions raised internally about this, or reassurances sought?

To what extent was Murrell protected by his relationship to Nicola Sturgeon?

Murrell was the chief executive of a party led by Ms Sturgeon, his now estranged wife. It was an extremely unusual situation, and one figures such as Alex Salmond had warned against.

Did this insular approach inhibit proper scrutiny?

Why were there no checks and balances around Murrell's spending?

The High Court in Edinburgh heard extraordinary evidence about the apparent lack of any proper checks and balances around Murrell’s spending.

He had direct access to the party’s accounting system and had ultimate approval of all expense claims, including his own. He could submit claims without providing a receipt.

How and when did this faulty system come about?

Why was the 'ring-fenced' £600k referendum fund not, in fact, ring-fenced?

The police investigation that uncovered Murrell’s crimes was sparked by complaints about the SNP’s handling of a “ring-fenced” £600,000 independence referendum campaign fund.

We now know that fund was simply spent on general party business and was not, in fact, ring-fenced at all. Was this always the intention, and who took the key decisions around it? What precisely was it spent on, and when?

Some concrete details and accountability would be welcome here.