The man who stuck his head above the parapet by almost challenging John Swinney's SNP coronation has warned the "jury is still out" on his former rival's leadership.
Graeme McCormick dropped his leadership bid despite securing the 100 nominations, clearing the way for Mr Swinney in May.
He did so after "fruitful" discussions with the now First Minister.
But speaking to the Herald during SNP conference in Edinburgh, Mr McCormick said he had received written assurances on how the party would be taken forward, including prioritising a route to independence.
After what the SNP admitted has been a tumultuous election campaign, which saw the SNP drop to just nine MPs at Westminster, down from 48 in 2019, the party was forced to perform an internal audit of where it went wrong during its annual party conference, held in Edinburgh this weekend.
The party analysed its strategy, blaming "self-inflicted" wounds and the desire to change government in the UK as the reasons for the election defeat.
However, Mr McCormick said he was undecided on whether Mr Swinney's message to members. and his leadership so far, had been a success.
Asked by the Herald if he was reassured after the internal party discussion, he said: "The jury is still out on that to be honest. Given that we no longer have the support at Westminster that we had previously, it changed the dynamics a wee bit.
"It's even more important now that we focus on independence. We have to get that momentum back and people have got to be inspired. Friday was a reasonable attempt at starting to change the dial but it wasn't perfect.
"John has taken on this role when he had decided he initially was going to step back. I admire the man tremendously but there is going to become a time when he is not going to be (leader) so it is a question of how he and the party move forward and what the succession should look like."
Mr McCormick, who is now standing for the second time to become party president, said he would be challenging the First Minister on the promises he made prior to becoming leader.
READ MORE: John Swinney rejects claim SNP is in denial over election defeat
READ MORE: SNP conference: Flynn calls for patience on independence
"The conversation I had with John, he gave me a note - an undertaking - which I've not made public that he would take these issues (independence) on. But they have got to be moved on soon, let's put it like that," he said.
"I haven't met with him since our conversation but I would like to and if I was fortunate enough to become party president I would insist on that for the sake of the party."
During the sit-down interview, Mr McCormick considered whether he regretted not challenging Mr Swinney for the leadership job.
However, he acknowledged in "hindsight" much of that internal battle would have taken place during a general election campaign, which could have damaged his party.
However, asked if he would have been a better leader than Mr Swinney, he said: "I would like to think so."
"I put my name forward because I thought I could do it and do it well. I would like to think I could do at least as good as he has," he added.
The SNP presidential candidate is running against former SNP MSP and government minister Maureen Watt, and if successful said he would use the role to challenge the leadership where necessary.
Mr McCormick is a well known figure within the party and has been seen to challenge senior figures on numerous occasions when he did not agree with them.
During last year's annual conference he described former first minister Humza Yousaf's independence strategy as "flatulence in a trance".
And he took on then president Michael Russell for his role at that conference, losing by 79 votes to 599 in a ballot of delegates.
He described the party's election strategy as "crazy" urging Mr Swinney to be "transformative and dramatic", adding the actions of the party so far had been akin to a "pressure group" instead of a government in power.
The party, he said, also had to avoid "poisonous" issues including gender reform battles with the UK Government which risked distracting from independence.
The SNP were asked for comment.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel