You wonder what went through Alex Salmond’s mind when a producer from Firecrest Films called to ask him to participate in a documentary called “Salmond and Sturgeon - a Troubled Union” for the BBC.

The Alba party leader now regrets taking part in the film which, he apparently believed, would focus on subject matter entirely different from that suggested by its title, and which he now characterises as part of an ongoing, nefarious plot by the unionist broadcaster to undermine his nationalist cause.

"Instead of a serious analysis about how a fringe party rose to challenge and almost break the British state, they present it as a psychodrama between myself and Nicola Sturgeon,” he fulminated.

If the name alone didn’t give the game away about the nature of the project, then a quick Google search of the Glasgow-based production company’s website might have provided some additional clues.

“Liar – the fake grooming scandal”; “Three mothers, two babies and a scandal”; and “Inside the cage: the rise of female fighters” are just some of the titles on the roster of Firecrest Films.

Read more by Carlos Alba

This is not a company renowned for its serious-minded treatments of political record. Chin-stroking analyses of ideological movements and historical trends are not its thing.

The most revealing thing to come out of this episode is the way in which politicians use such documentaries as opportunities to rewrite history in a light that is most favourable to themselves.

Even after filming had ended, and before the programme had been screened, participants were falling over themselves to grab the limelight, to assert that the part they played in Scotland’s recent political history was the most prescient and decisive.

John Swinney insists that, as Ms Sturgeon’s deputy following the 2016 Brexit vote, he privately cautioned her against pushing for a second Scottish independence referendum, despite having publicly supported one.

Mr Salmond also claims to have warned her against the strategy, despite not having said so publicly at the time. He also claims to have advised her against retaining her husband, Peter Murrell, as the party’s chief executive after she succeeded him as party leader and First Minister.

Both men present themselves as a latter-day Nostradamus, whose clear-eyed political vision and judgment ultimately proved them to be correct on the most important issues of the day.

Mr Swinney conveniently casts himself as having been on the side of public opinion on the issue of a second referendum notwithstanding that his position in supporting one now, as First Minister, is so egregiously out of step with voters.

Mr Salmond was also a secret Indyref2 denier back in the day, according to his version of events which, needless to say, are not those remembered by Ms Sturgeon.

She claimed that Mr Salmond initially encouraged her to push harder for a second referendum, but later changed his mind when voters in his constituency signalled they might chuck him out if he backed such a move.

He also appears to have foreseen the internal conflict of interest which preceded Mr Murrell’s arrest in connection with alleged irregularities in the SNP’s accounts, and the ongoing police investigation under Operation Branchform, according to the documentary.

This is despite having apparently been perfectly content to have Mr Murrell in post when he was party leader and Ms Sturgeon was his deputy.

What this episode demonstrates most effectively, is that voters have no clear idea about what politicians really think when they are making decisions on our behalf and how willing they appear to be to mislead us on matters of grave importance.

Of course, the principle of collective responsibility requires members of the cabinet to toe-the-line on items of a government’s programme, some of which they may not agree with.

But support for a second referendum was the defining policy of Ms Sturgeon’s administration and the most important political issue of the day.

Mr Swinney neatly sidesteps the question of why he didn’t feel the need to resign - or even consider resigning - when his private position appears to have been so significantly at odds with that of his leader and his party.

The only proper insight into what political leaders really think is now gleaned from classified government documents, released under the 30-year rule. By the time they are in the public domain however, the issues they cover are historic, many of the principal actors are dead and any damage has long since been done.

Political memoirs rarely contain anything truly revelatory and are, more often than not, used as handsomely rewarded platforms for political leaders to settle scores, reframe the past and attempt to define their own legacies.

In a rare moment of candour this week, Ms Sturgeon praised the leadership of the former Labour prime minister Tony Blair who, for much of her career, was cast as a detested political nemesis.

John Swinney: a latter-day Nostradamus?John Swinney: a latter-day Nostradamus? (Image: PA)

Reviewing his latest book for a newspaper, she said that history would “judge him much more kindly than contemporary opinion does”.

Tellingly, she went on to say that expressing such a view would have been “nigh on impossible” while she was in office because it would have prompted “outrage among my supporters”.

Why do we maintain a system that requires our political leaders to obfuscate, mislead and deny what they really think and believe to us, the voters?

Earlier this year the US-based Pew Research Centre’s annual survey revealed continuing widespread dissatisfaction with democracy globally, with many citizens desiring significant changes to their political systems.

The survey posed an open-ended question to more than 30,000 respondents in 24 countries: "What do you think would help improve the way democracy in your country is working?"

The results highlighted a consistent top priority in 20 of the countries, including the UK: the need for better or different politicians.

People want politicians who are more responsive, competent, and honest. Beyond that, they also recognise the role of citizens in strengthening democracy. Public participation and changes in citizen behaviour consistently rank among the top five priorities for improving democratic systems across the surveyed nations.

The next time Mr Salmond, or any other politician, is contacted by a TV production company asking them to participate in a documentary, perhaps he should suggest that it interviews some voters instead.

Carlos Alba is a journalist, author, and PR consultant at Carlos Alba Media. His latest novel, There’s a Problem with Dad, explores the issue of undiagnosed autism among older people.