ACROSS all the world’s democracies, and perhaps even dictatorships, it would be difficult to find a more dysfunctional event than Scottish Secretary’s questions at the House of Commons.
Overwhelmingly dominated by Conservative MPs in English constituencies, and with the shadow Scottish secretary being Labour’s one MP in Scotland, it might as well be renamed the “absolutely correct” or “completely agree” sessions, because that’s what Alister “Union” Jack, the Scottish Secretary, answers to most of the docile questions.
When Tim Loughton (Con) spoke on the suspension of Scotch whisky tariffs being a benefit for Scotland that “would not have happened if the UK was still in the EU,” Mr J replied: “My honourable friend is absolutely right”.
READ MORE RAB: Sketch - PM’s obsession with independence for Scotland undermines his Vax Britannica
When former Scottish Secretary David Mundell congratulated his right honourable friend on his efforts, his right honourable friend replied: “I absolutely agree with my right honourable friend.”
When Alun Cairns (Con) eulogised “the benefits of the union of the four nations”, the Scottish Secretary replied: “My right honourable friend is absolutely correct.”
When Rob Roberts (Con) spoke of transport infrastructure improvements allowing folk from his constituency to “enjoy the delights of Scotland” and “our Scottish cousins to visit … our fantastic North Wales area”, Mr Jack said: “Mr Speaker, why don’t I just completely agree?”
He even began an answer to Ian Murray, Labour’s shadow Scottish secretary, with the words: “Can I begin by agreeing with the honourable gentleman?” This was in relation to congratulating Anas Sarwar on becoming Scottish Labour leader and with Mr Murray’s call for transparency on Scottish Government Covid spending.
He was less in agreement with the Labour man’s surprisingly nationalistic complaint about offshore renewable projects benefitting the south-east of England at the expense of Scotland. All together now, Scottish Labour: “Freedom!”
Oddly enough, if the chiels normally expected to shout “Freedom!” didn’t get much time yesterday, at both Scottish Secretary’s and Prime Minister’s questions, neither did they take much advantage of the time given them.
Like many Scots when orating, Gavin Newlands (SNP) spoke too quickly as he called for Scottish representatives to be given “a key place” at the forthcoming COP26 UN climate change conference in Glasgow because Scotland was – all together now – “world leading” in such matters.
When his SNP colleague Pete Wishart also called for more Scottish Government involvement in trade talks, Mr Jack castigated the former Runrig kazoo player for failing to express gratitude for the whisky tariff suspension but praised him for not mentioning “separation” for once as he usually does like a “broken record” (loud laughter at old joke).
As for taking part in important discussions, Mr Jack became almost animated with regard to the “Union connectivity review” into transport infrastructure, hollering: “I think it’s pathetic of the Scottish nationalist government not to have engaged just because it’s a ‘Union’ connectivity review.”
Maybe not deliberately calling it that to annoy the Nats in the first place might have helped.
Talking of annoying the SNP, their tormentor in chief, Boris Johnson, blundered into PMQs yesterday with a hairdo that has taken on an increasingly Trumpian aspect. Clearly, it’s to disguise a receding hairline but, undaunted, he shook it defiantly and declared: “I oppose vaccine nationalism in all its forms.” The pop was at the EU rather then the SNP.
Labour leader Keir Starmer gave Boris the needle with repeated criticisms of the 1 per cent pay rise proposed for nurses. Mr Johnson replied: “We owe a massive debt as a society, and I personally, to the nurses of the NHS.”
When Sir Keir claimed nurses’s pay had fallen in real terms by more than £800 since 2010, the PM replied: “I believe that we all owe” – all together now – “a massive debt to our NHS nurses.” But not a decent pay rise, obviously.
When the Speaker announced “technical issues with the leader of the SNP,” loud laughter ensued. With Ian Blackford powerless (and not just politically for once) due to cuts in his Skye energy supply, deputy Westminster leader Kirsten Oswald stepped in to the breach. She did not use the time wisely nor, indeed, very much at all.
Her brief question about the Erasmus student exchange scheme eschewed Mr Blackford’s usual preamble of flamboyant grandiloquence about “the people of Scotland”. Mr Johnson thanked her for “a delightfully concise question” and, shortly afterwards, roused the House to laughter with another boring reference to the “nationalist” name of the SNP. Every titter another vote for independence.
READ MORE RAB: Robert McNeil: Keeping fit is just a box-ticking exercise until the gym reopens
When the SNP’s David Linden asked about the added £20 in Universal Benefit not applying to “legacy” claimants such as disabled people, once again he spoke too quickly. Maybe, such Scots feel time passes too quickly at Westminster. Or that it’s all a waste of time. Maybe they don’t feel comfortable speaking English-English in yonder England and just try to get it over with.
Boris Johnson would probably do the same in Lallans. But I’m sure we can all completely agree that is something we’re unlikely ever to hear.
Our columns are a platform for writers to express their opinions. They do not necessarily represent the views of The Herald.
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel