I’ve always found the phrase “grasping the thistle” in a political context amusing. It’s a twist on grasping the nettle, derived from the idea that nettles sting if you brush against them but not if you firmly grasp them. As English parliamentarian John Lyly put it in his 1578 romance Euphues, “he which toucheth ye nettle tenderly, is soonest stung”. Face that danger boldly, however, and it will not hurt you.
Unlike nettles, grasping a thistle will likely end much more painfully than if you merely brush against it. Nevertheless, the phrase persists in the Scottish political lexicon. It was the title of a 2006 book co-authored by SNP grandee Mike Russell and the late mining magnate and SNP donor Dennis MacLeod, which set out a vision of Scotland in the 21st century.
And last week, it became the title of the Scottish Conservatives’ latest policy paper, in which Douglas Ross’s party sought to outline a plan to boost economic growth in Scotland.
Reviewing Russell and MacLeod’s book, then BBC Scotland political editor Brian Taylor described it as “impressive, intriguing and well-argued” but “seldom all three at once”.
It probably won’t surprise you to learn that I found the Scottish Conservative’s paper seldom any of those at any point. Perhaps because, unlike Mr Russell, who, as Mr Taylor put it, “ventured from partisan politics into the realm of sentient thought,” the Tories’ Grasping the Thistle is very much a document born of partisan politics.
It is a detail-light retread of classic Tory positions, with a dollop of unionism for good measure. A case in point is the proposed creation of an intergovernmental board comprising both Scottish and UK ministers responsible for agreeing and delivering a joint economic strategy.
Intergovernmental cooperation between Holyrood and Westminster can be thorny even when the same party is in power in both parliaments. Economic strategy dependent on Scottish and UK ministers being able to agree on means and ends, despite coming potentially from vehemently opposed party-political and ideological positions with competing mandates, is an awful idea.
It is a document that acknowledges the need for Scotland to encourage immigration to grow our working-age population but ignores the arguments for limited devolution of immigration powers that would allow the creation of a more open immigration system north of the border.
It is a document that mentions tax 79 times in 21 pages but ignores calls to devolve an element of corporation tax that might allow the Scottish Government to, for example, implement Sir Tom Hunter’s proposals for corporation tax cuts in key growth sectors.
And it is a document that takes the SNP to task over the state of the Scottish economy but with nary a mention of the most significant long-term economic shock to have impacted Scotland in recent years: Brexit.
Now, I’m not exactly the target audience here. I’ve cast votes and preferences for every party in the Scottish Parliament except the Conservatives, and I can’t imagine myself doing so in any foreseeable future. But even if I could, I’d struggle to find anything impressive here from a policymaking point of view.
But I suspect that isn’t the point. Party conference season is almost upon us, and Scotland’s campaigning machines are grinding, lethargically but inevitably into action. The long campaign for the next general election is about to begin in earnest and will be followed by a crucial couple of years before the Holyrood elections.
Unlike the past decade of elections in Scotland, the constitutional question is unlikely to dominate this cycle. It will remain important, particularly to committed supporters of independence and the union – the most recent Redfield & Wilton poll found the constitution was the third most important issue influencing how Scots would vote in a general election.
But with a referendum a distant prospect, Scots with softer views on the constitution are prioritising other issues – in that same poll, the economy and the NHS were by far the most critical issues.
Every party will need convincing economic arguments to succeed in this election cycle.
The débacle of Liz Truss’s premiership has not helped the Scottish Tories in this regard. The Conservative government at Westminster has annihilated their lead on economic competence, and they are haemorrhaging votes to Scottish Labour.
But they have been lucky in one regard: the proposed new boundaries for Scottish Westminster constituencies mean that their current polling could be enough for them to hold on to all six of their current seats – they could even gain seats while losing vote share if the SNP do not recover significantly.
The Tories are in for a hammering across the UK, and standing still will provide enough of a foundation for the Scottish party to build upon once the corruption and ineptitude of the Westminster Conservative government is no longer in focus.
So, a core vote strategy focusing on traditional economic conservatism messaging while retaining a devolution-sceptical edge seems appropriate for them.
While perhaps not as impressive as Russell and MacLeod’s Grasping the Thistle, the Conservative version isn’t dissimilar in some respects – both advocate for a free-marketeering, low tax, low government spending economy and a significantly leaner public sector.
And neither has a realistic chance of becoming government policy, which means that the Tories’ economic paper didn’t need to be that impressive, insightful, or well-argued. It will appeal to those the Tories need to keep on board and perhaps some of those they have lost to Labour, and that will be enough.
But for the SNP, facing a similar political decline to the Scottish Tories, politically compelling economic arguments will not suffice. They have three years in government before the next Holyrood elections and a mountain to climb to address Scotland’s economic ills.
The shape of the SNP’s approach should become apparent this week when Humza Yousaf sets out his Programme for Government for the coming year. He will be ultimately judged by the degree to which his government boosts economic growth and revitalises Scotland’s public sector by the next Holyrood election.
That demands much more impressive thinking than the Tories displayed last week. An SNP version of Grasping the Thistle will not be good enough – time for Mr Yousaf to “venture from partisan politics into the realm of sentient thought” and propose serious policy solutions to the dire challenges we face.
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