ONLY Nicola Sturgeon and Kezia Dugdale know what was really said during the phone conversation between the two leaders that is now at the forefront of the Scottish election campaign. The First Minister says she categorically stands by her claim, made during the final TV debate, that the Scottish Labour leader told her that she was open to a second referendum on Scottish independence because of Brexit; Ms Dugdale on the other hand says Ms Sturgeon’s claim is a lie. Both of them cannot be right.

What is also unclear is precisely what Ms Sturgeon’s motives could be in making the claim, although it is understood that the decision to say what she did was a calculated move rather than an ad-lib – in other words, there appears to have been a strategy behind the move. The question is whether it is playing quite as Ms Sturgeon and her advisors might have hoped it would.

For a start, the timing of the revelation, right at the end of the election campaign, looks rather desperate, which is not a good look for a politician like Ms Sturgeon, who has a reputation for sureness and confidence. The incident also puts the question of the First Minister’s character and judgment at the heart of the campaign, with the Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson saying that she strongly believes private conversations should stay private.

Ms Davidson has a point. Private conversations go on all the time between rival politicians, and journalists and politicians, and, mostly, the nature of those conversations is respected. However, if there is now a risk that what is said in private could be made public, then Ms Davidson is right to ask whether officials will have to be present at any future meetings between the FM and the PM to ensure an independent record of the meeting is kept.

In seeming to flout the usual conventions of political relationships as she has done, the risk for Ms Sturgeon is that some voters will see her in a different light as someone not be trusted and a leader who will breach a confidence for political gain. To be fair to Ms Sturgeon, she was undoubtedly turning a spotlight on some inconsistences in Ms Dugdale’s and Labour’s stance on a second independence referendum, but the First Minister’s tactics in making the point do not reflect well on her.

As to what Ms Sturgeon might have been hoping to achieve, there are two conflicting theories, one more likely than the other. The first, suggested by Kezia Dugdale, is that the First Minister actually wants to help the Tories because a Tory PM could increase support for independence. But how likely is that really when any Tory surge could cost the SNP seats in Scotland, including that of the deputy leader Angus Robertson?

What is much more likely is that Ms Sturgeon is hoping to restrict any prospect of a Labour recovery in Scotland, which has looked much more likely in recent days. However, even if she achieves that, the potential downsides for the First Minister are considerable. It may be that the gamble pays off and that Labour does not advance at all at the election, but the price Nicola Sturgeon may pay for the tactic is a considerable change in the way many people see her.