There's been a sex-based scandal in UK politics this week and it relates to wine. Honestly (if a tad tenuously…)
Foreign Secretary William Hague was stupid enough to appear to make a grossly sexist comment "under his breath", but in front of parliament's dozens of cameras. It was in response to a question from Labour MP Cathy Jamieson at Prime Minister’s Question Time.
She had been bold enough to ask about his ministerial conduct in relation to his work with party donors. Said donors were an oil company.
Hague’s response wasn't to assist Big Dave in the quest for “transparency” - no, no no... Instead he mouthed the words: "Stupid woman". You know, because obviously Jamieson's sex was an integral part of why she asked her question...
I need to be delicate in my wording here, but IF Hague did indeed mouth those words then I would mouth back that he’s an ignorant imbecile of the highest and/or lowest order.
"What's all this got to do with wine?" I hear you cry! Well, William and Cathy might find it useful to meet over a glass of wine. You see, these two MPs are linked by other events that suggest they prefer the grain, as opposed to the grape.
I don't really need to remind you of Hague's claim that he used to drink 14 pints of lager daily as a young man. I bet he regrets that statement 14 times daily, as it defined his brief and farcical Tory leadership. Brutal.
(Just a thought, but maybe the Commons should introduce the consumption of 14 pints as a mandatory punishment for sexist comments made in the House... Unless you're Eric Joyce, that is...)
But Cathy Jamieson has an alco-political history to match Hague. She loves grain, but hates grape - sort of. As MP for Kilmarnock and Loudoun, she has had to deal with the fallout of Diageo's decision to close their historic Johnnie Walker plant in her constituency, which cost over 700 jobs in the area. Cheers Diageo!
Plus, back in 2005, she was part of a woefully ill-advised campaign to ban Buckfast Tonic Wine (she 'hates the grape', see?). This was not so clever, as reports at the time suggested that sales of 'The Buckie' subsequently skyrocketed.
My suggestion is that these star-crossed grape-haters meet up over a glass of vino. And (I need to be careful with my wording again) because Hague is reportedly and apparently the maybe sexist one, perhaps they should drink some wine made by women! Here are some suggestions:
To start, they should enjoy a glass of FP Branco 2012 by Filipa Pato (Oddbins, £11.75). This beautifully summery Portuguese drop could calm the ire of even the most swivel-eyed wine-haters. Pato's wonderfully fresh wine has lime and mandarin on the palate, and despite it's glorious dryness, it can work beautifully as an aperitif.
Next, they could try Veronique Drouhin's Domaine Drouhin Pinot Noir 2009 (£27.50, Oddbins). Coming from a family of Legendary status in Burgundy, she makes truly exquisite wines in the US state of Oregon that aim towards the style - and easily match the quality - of her French heritage. A good compromise for William, as it matches to 'manly-but-trendy' dishes like carpaccio or pulled pork.
Once William has proved to Cathy that he sees her as his equal, they might consider cracking a crème brûlée together. They should match that to Julie Mortlock's ever-astounding De Bortoli Noble One 2008 (£16.99, Waitrose). Yes, I have recommended this delightful dessert wine before (it's amazing, vintage upon vintage) but I feel I must again: it has toffee, golden syrup, ginger, lemon and much, much more. Utterly delicious.
Maybe - just maybe - after lunch, Willy could bring himself to apologise to Cathy. No politician is 'perfect', but they might as well be decent human beings, eh?
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article