SNP leadership row: What are the complaints about?

The SNP leadership contest has run into fresh controversy, with calls for independent adjudication and accusations of "Trumpian" rhetoric.

The party's HQ has agreed to publish membership information in a bid to calm the storm - but what exactly are the concerns raised, and will this settle them?

For some time, Humza Yousaf has been emerging as the leadership candidate endorsed by the top of the SNP hierarchy, with John Swinney joining a string of cabinet members in backing the health secretary.

Against that backdrop, concerns from the other candidates - Kate Forbes and Ash Regan - have been bubbling away.

One MSP was banned from using her SNP email account after firing out a mass bulletin to the entire South Scotland membership backing Mr Yousaf.

The other two contenders had also called out "serial hustings attendees" appearing at multiple party events.

But the row exploded on Wednesday after they issued a joint letter to Peter Murrell - the SNP's chief executive and the First Husband of Nicola Sturgeon - asking for more information on who was eligible to vote.

The Mail on Sunday had suggested that only 78,000 names had been sent to the company running the vote, Mi-Voice. This was sharply down on the previously reported membership, which was in six figures.

The candidates were also annoyed by the fact they had asked for clarification from party HQ several times, and had not received a response.

A statement from Ms Forbes campaign manager Michelle Thomson then ratcheted things up further, by suggesting the party appoint an independent auditor of the vote.

She did not go into detail - either in her statement, or when door stepped at Holyrood today. The idea was perhaps to hint at impropriety, without actually coming out and alleging anything too specific.

However many party members and commentators reacted as if a serious charge had already been made.

MP Gavin Newlands said the idea of needing independent observers was "Trumpian nonsense" and "fake news".

Party president Mike Russell said staff had been abused by individuals who "damage our cause and aid our enemies" - the final word of the tweet in particular raising eyebrows.

It's not clear that he was talking about Ms Forbes or Ms Regan, but the party's more traditional opponents were not slow to jump in.

Labour leader Anas Sarwar joked about a "saltire-waving Stop the Steal rally" outside Holyrood at FMQs, while leader of the House of Commons Penny Mordaunt weighed in to call the row an "extraordinary occurrence".

The SNP's immediate position has been one of bafflement.

Ms Sturgeon told reporters she wasn't sure what the row was all about, saying she was "not clear what the specific allegations about the process are".

She also noted that the same electoral system had been used for a series of deputy leader elections - something echoed by national secretary Lorna Finn when she wrote to the candidates. Ms Finn added that "I can assure you that I am satisfied as to the integrity of the ballot".

However this was the latest in a string of unforced errors by SNP HQ during the contest - starting with the attempt to hold hustings events entirely in private.

As with the attempt to withhold membership figures, a U-turn was inevitable.

For a party which has done a pretty professional job of running Scottish politics for the better part of two decades, these have been glaring and avoidable mishaps.

After a period of enormous growth which the SNP was all too happy to signpost - up to a peak of 125,000 in 2019 - membership figures had been opaque for some time, only dripping out via the Electoral Commission.

After a newspaper reported that the membership had fallen by 30,000 in February, the party said that this figure was "not just wrong, it's wrong by about 30,000".

It turns out to have been pretty much bang on.

The last number formally published was just under 104,000. As of February 15, the cut-off date for those eligible to vote, it was just over 72,000. That's a fall of 32,000.

Context is important; the SNP is still by far the largest political party in Scotland.

And these figures were always going to come out eventually - the party had pledged to publish the results of this election in full.

But it is inescapable that membership numbers have slid. Further figures confirmed today show it was 85,000 at the turn of the year - so there has been a drop of 12,000 inside a matter of months.

The party has suggested cost of living pressures as a potential explanation, but others have pointed to rows over gender reforms and independence strategy.

It also throws fresh light on Nicola Sturgeon's decision to walk away from the job - and, perhaps, why Mr Murrell had to loan the party more than £100,000 last year.

Kate Forbes and Ash Regan have essentially accepted the release of the figures as a win, and seem content to move on without doubling down or demanding further concessions.

They both say they will accept the result. So given they don't believe the race is truly rigged, what was the tactical plan behind raising complaints?

Humza Yousaf has happily accepted the mantle of continuity candidate, with the idea that SNP members will be broadly in favour of Nicola Sturgeon.

But there is a danger for him in being painted as the establishment figure, in a movement with a distinctly anti-establishment flavour.

While they will of course listen to the views of influential figures like John Swinney, SNP members may not appreciate being told what to do, or the idea that their votes are being taken for granted.

And complaints about party management issues might resonate with the sort of people who attend conferences and debate constitutional amendments.

Of course the bad news for Ms Forbes and Ms Regan may be in the membership numbers they have unearthed.

Quite a lot of people have left the SNP. It may be that those who were impatient about independence and those with complaints about gender reform were the first out the door - meaning those who stayed might be less likely to be champing at the bit for change.

For a couple of days, it felt like the temperature of the contest might have been coming down a bit.

Tuesday's debate on BBC Scotland saw the candidates move away from the rather personal attacks of previous encounters, looking to play up their own policy platforms rather than trash those of their colleagues.

Party chiefs will be keen to get back on to that kind of course.

Ms Sturgeon has repeated a warning to the candidates that "the task is to retain the trust of the Scottish people".

Her point is that they should not campaign in a manner which risks making it difficult to bring the SNP back together, or indeed to govern after the dust has settled.

So the question is how damaging all of this proves to be going forward.

It was clear that nobody in the SNP machine was particularly ready for Ms Sturgeon's rather sudden departure.

The current panic is in part because a firm hand has been abruptly removed from the steering wheel, and the loss of thousands of members does nothing to dispel that impression.

It won't be Ms Sturgeon's problem if the next administration gets off to a rocky start - but it will undoubtedly be part of her legacy.