Why did iPad row minister Michael Matheson choose to quit now?
- Published
Michael Matheson resigned on Thursday
The dust is beginning to settle on a frantic 24 hours in Scottish politics.
Michael Matheson had spent almost three months with an investigation into his £11,000 iPad bill looming over him.
On Thursday, he fell on his sword, ending a ministerial career that spanned more than a decade.
But the circumstances of his resignation still aren't entirely clear.
In his letter to the first minister he wrote that he did not want to be a distraction to the government.
But even the former health secretary's closest allies would have to admit that ship had sailed.
When the iPad bill emerged last September, there were days and days of coverage.
The story dominated the front pages. New elements dripped out regularly.
Mr Matheson revealed his sons had used the parliamentary iPad as a data hotspot on holiday to stream football, and he referred himself for an investigation.
There is no denying that it was a big distraction from the business of government at that time.
But that's not the only factor that made the timing of Thursday's resignation a bit unusual.
Humza Yousaf faced questions at FMQs an hour after the resignation was announced
Michael Matheson made his resignation public just after 11am.
He has been an MSP for 25 years and will be well aware of the significance of this time.
This is 60 minutes before the first minister faces the most stressful session of the parliamentary week - First Minister's Questions.
Humza Yousaf was about to enter a political bearpit where opposition leaders get to lob repeated questions at him.
If the first minister is politically on the back foot, it's a more difficult experience.
It doesn't get much worse than a ministerial resignation moments before FMQs.
Michael Matheson was also, as health secretary, due to give a statement to MSPs about the Scottish government's policy on minimum alcohol unit pricing.
Shona Robison had to step in and deliver the statement on minimum pricing
Deputy First Minister Shona Robison had to step in to deliver this at the last minute.
And lastly, it's worth bearing in mind what else was happening when Michael Matheson chose to step down.
It was known that Sir Keir Starmer was about to announce a major Labour U-turn on plans to invest £28bn a year in green industries.
That's a policy that could have big ramifications for Scotland.
It probably would have been a far more awkward day for Anas Sarwar and his Scottish Labour colleagues had Mr Matheson kept quiet.
That resignation announcement pulled the focus of every political journalist in Scotland from Labour and towards the government.
One Scottish Labour figure I spoke to couldn't believe how fortunate the party had been with the timing of Mr Matheson's departure.
On the other side, there are those within the SNP who think the party was denied a productive day bashing Labour U-turns.
Draft report completed
So with all this taken into account, the question remains: why did Michael Matheson choose to go when he did?
The answer may well lie in a report that's been compiled by the Scottish Parliament's Corporate Body (SPCB).
It is the cross-party group of five MSPs (including Holyrood's presiding officer) who rule on issues such as budgets and staffing in parliament.
It is also the group that was tasked with investigating Mr Matheson's iPad bill.
On Wednesday it was announced that they had finished their draft report. It went to Mr Matheson on Thursday afternoon and the former health secretary now has two weeks to respond.
The report should be made public at some point, but the whole issue could ultimately be passed over to another Holyrood body - the standards, procedures and public appointments committee.
They could ultimately recommend sanctions for all MSPs to vote on.
But, crucially, in his resignation statement Michael Matheson said he did not have "the findings of [the SPCB] review".
Perhaps the former health secretary had realised that the publication of this report would mean another spell in the limelight for the wrong reasons.
Perhaps it became clear to him somehow that the report would make uneasy reading.
Perhaps he was simply fed up of this whole saga.
But - as far as we know - he resigned before getting the findings.
Stepping down after seeing the report feels like it would make more sense.
But sometimes events in politics - upon first glance - don't make sense.
It could be a while off, but when we see the parliamentary report into the iPad saga, it may shine a bit more light on Thursday's events.