Scottish Tories have more urgent problems than links with UK party

Much of the debate revolving around the Scottish Tory leadership contest has so far focussed on the party's relationship with the UK Conservatives, whether they should stick together or have a looser relationship.

It is an issue that surfaces regularly in the party north of the Border, especially at moments of crisis, such as it is experiencing at the moment following the massive general election defeat.

Proponents of a split broadly argue that the move would allow it to become more distinct from its UK counterparts allowing it to more readily come up with policy ideas tailored to Scottish voters – for instance over immigration or relations with Europe – and better placed to make electoral progress.

They also argue that a more distant relationship would prevent the party's fortunes being so dependent on those of the UK Conservatives, tumbling when an unpopular leader takes charge in England or controversies hit the party south of the border.

Having a party more distinct from the UK Conservatives would have been less damaging to the Scottish Tories following Boris Johnson's partygate scandal or Liz Truss's mini budget, supporters argue.

On the other side of the debate, Scottish Tories opposed to a more semi detached set up say the united relationship between the Scottish and UK Conservatives is of benefit to both much like, they would argue, lies in the strength of the UK Union.

Read more:

Unspun | We are about to enter a new era of pylon politics

Former Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson, Baroness Davidson of Lundin Links, told the Daily Mail last week: “I've never believed in breaking up the party. And, in Scotland, a divided party is a short route to electoral suicide.

“Splitting apart will alienate many members, activists and supporters. You're either a Conservative and Unionist or you're not, and I know where I stand on that. A split party is still a split party, however you slice it.”

Davidson of course won the 2011 Tory leadership conference when she defeated Murdo Fraser who had argued for a relationship between the Scottish and UK Tories based on that which exists in Germany between the Christian Democrats and the Christian Social Union in Bavaria, that “of two distinct parties in a permanent coalition in the UK Parliament”, according to Mr Fraser.

Writing in The Telegraph today he said that on reflection he was “no longer convinced that the Bavarian model is the correct one” and instead thought “it is important that people in all parts of the United Kingdom have the opportunity to vote for the party that will form the UK Government. And there should be no barrier to Scottish Conservative MPs playing a full part in the UK government.”

He added that there are “alternative models that could be looked at” and pointed to the situation in Canada, with a distinction between the parties operating at a federal level, and those fighting provincial elections.

“This potentially gives a "best of both worlds" scenario, with two sister parties each focussing on their own strengths. It works well in Quebec, where we have seen the separation movement slide in support in recent years,” he said.

Read more:

Murdo Fraser calls for Scottish Tories to set up commission on party's future

What was most significant in Mr Fraser's article was his call for a commission to be set up to look at the future of the Scottish Conservatives and their relationship with the UK party and for any changes to be made after the Holyrood election in 2026.

In itself, it's an interesting development but it's also notable that he is making the call now – really before the leadership contest has formally got underway north of the Border. The party's management board meet this Wednesday to decide on the procedure and timetable.

Mr Fraser doesn't want the Scottish Tory leadership contest to be dominated by the question over its relationship to the UK Tories (as he said in today's Telegraph op-ed) – perhaps suspecting the candidate most associated with supporting looser links could be at a disadvantage among members reluctant to embrace any radical reforms.

Murdo Fraser said he was “no longer convinced that the Bavarian model is the correct one” in regards to the relationship between the Scottish Tories and the UK party (Image: Newsquest)
Besides, he noted, it would be "impractical" to go ahead with major changes to the Scottish Tories relationship with the UK party before May 2026.

Far more pressing a problem, Mr Fraser suggests, than the question of party structures is how the Scottish Tories will deal with challenges on two diverse fronts – how they can fight off  attacks from the left by Labour and from the right from Reform.

The latter presents a particular threat.

Reform's decision to stand in all 57 Westminster constituencies in the July 4 poll netted them 7% of the vote share and damaged the Tories with the party receiving its lowest share of the vote since 1997, at 13%.

It also probably cost them Aberdeenshire North and Moray East with the SNP winning the new seat taking 13,455 votes, defeating Scottish Tory leader Douglas Ross who got 12,513. Reform came third with 5,562 votes.

Get Scotland's top politics newsletter straight to your inbox.

The figures suggest that had Reform not stood in the seat Mr Ross would probably have been re-elected.

Polling expert Professor Sir John Curtice also noted the significance of the Reform threat to the Tories pointing out that if they replicate their 2024 vote share they’d be looking at a “small, but not insignificant presence” in Holyrood after 2026.

There is no doubt the Scottish Tories debate about its links to the UK party is being watched closely by Reform with party leader Nigel Farage ready to take electoral advantage and gain a foothold in Holyrood from any perception of the Scottish Tories looking inwards.