Fergus Ewing could be celebrated as the man who gave devolution a long overdue kick up the A9

In SNP terms, Fergus’s offence was to be right about everything he stepped out of line on

Fergus Ewing, pictured in the Scottish Parliament | PA

Fergus Ewing’s intimation that he will stand as an independent in next year’s Holyrood elections is a political milestone but not a surprise. His alienation from the party with which his family name is synonymous has long been apparent.

Equally, his personal status among the good burghers of Inverness and Nairn is beyond doubt. He says the tipping point was a visit to Morrison’s when it took two hours to navigate the aisles due to good wishes from electors; an accolade to which few MSPs could aspire. He will be hard to beat.

The influence of his arguments should extend far beyond Inverness and Nairn since the matters which have separated Fergus Ewing from the SNP have resonance in every corner of Scotland. Basically, there is a desperate need for change if devolution is ever going to deliver its potential.

In SNP terms, Fergus’s offence was to be right about everything he stepped out of line on – coalition with the Greens; future of the North Sea; Deposit Return Scheme; Highly Protected Marine Areas, the Gender Reform imbroglio and so on. It is from these stances, rather than the constitution, that he has won respect. Incidentally, Fergus usefully reminded us yesterday that the Bute House Agreement with the Greens was “negotiated by the current First Minister” who cannot now run far enough from its outcomes. That’s what passes for “steadying the ship” without a word of apology to Scotland for a vastly expensive and socially divisive waste of time. Such arrogance!

The greatest of Fergus’s local causes has been the flagrant breach of manifesto pledges to upgrade the A9 and A96. These are examples of the SNP being hoist on a petard which served them well for so long – making grand promises without meeting them, then relying on short memories.

In 2007, the SNP squeaked into government with an unambiguous commitment to dual the A9 between Perth and Inverness by 2025, the year of grace in which we now live. In his previously marginal seat, Fergus romped home. The A9 pledge was highly influential in the Highlands and therefore in determining the overall outcome.

Once made, it had outlived its usefulness. To cut a very long story short, they now admit to being a decade away from the declared objective and probably a lot longer. Fergus last week accused his erstwhile colleagues of again rejecting expert advice by adopting a procurement strategy that makes 2085 a better bet!

Some politicians become apologists for such cynicism. Once out of office, Fergus chose not to and his constituents appreciate that, across political divides. If the SNP had listened to him as an elder statesman with an old-fashioned loyalty to the people he represents, they would not now find themselves in this mess. Liking and respecting does not necessarily mean voting for him, of course. As I’m sure he would expect if I lived in Inverness and Nairn, I would vote Labour as usual since the only way of getting rid of the government which he dissects so effectively is to replace them with someone else. But the “someone else” should also heed the arguments Fergus makes.

“Over time”, he says, “I have seen the Scottish Parliament at its best and its worst. I fear in recent years it has been at its worst. I believe the SNP has lost its way and that devolution itself is letting Scotland’s people down. It doesn’t need to be this way”.

Holyrood, he says, “is more fractious and tribal than ever before”. First Minister’s Questions is “a pointless slanging match” which participants regard “as the highlight of their working week”. The Scottish Parliament “came of age some years ago - surely now it’s time for it to grow up; to act with maturity. Instead, there is the same lack of delivery, the same blame game of ‘it wisnae me’ and the same lack of humility”.

Beyond the specific policy issues with which Fergus Ewing has been identified, this brutal - and patently accurate - critique should be even more damaging to the reputation of Holyrood’s current masters who have had 18 years to reduce it to this. Fergus argues for the main parties to work together and “replace brittle bickering with reasoned debate and the cross party co-designing of, for example, reform of public services and maximising economic growth”. He then recommends “a grand coalition” to head off the threat from “fringe parties”.

That might be stretching it but the basic point is right. If you take the constitution out the mix, there are no great ideological chasms at Holyrood, however much they are contrived. The failings are overwhelmingly of leadership, competence and vision, the essential foundations of good and productive government, which is really what Scotland wants.

Those who aspire to replacing Mr Swinney and his dismal band should rise to that challenge. They need to offer something better, not only in policies but also the whole approach to making devolution work for the people. Willingness to co- operate across party lines, and crucially, to work with the UK government rather than against it should certainly be parts of that approach.

I would also put the return of powers to local levels and a purge of the quango statelet as high priorities. Who would disagree? And revising Holyrood’s own stultifying procedures is long overdue. The list of options for “a new approach” are plentiful and should be brought together as a reforming agenda.

Whether Fergus Ewing continues as an MSP beyond next May is in the hands of the Morrison’s shoppers. Either way, he could be celebrated as the man who gave devolution a long overdue kick up the A9.