Holyrood protests – and the Westminster conspiracy of silence

I understand – but no further. Parliamentary democracy proceeds by open, unimpeded discussion of issues in an elected forum.

That discussion is mandated by a popular vote – and results in parliamentary choices. Which project advances. Which is sidelined.

Groups holding particularly strong views on individual issues may feel frustrated that their concerns are not advancing to the top of the political schedule.

Again, I understand. It remains open to them to ventilate such topics on public platforms or through lobbying Parliament.

It is, however, a different matter when such protests seek to interrupt discussion in the elected forum itself. That is, if you think about it, the antithesis of elective democracy.

The people have chosen their representatives. Thus mandated, our representatives have chosen how to proceed, what to discuss. Disruptive protest says: ignore that, pay heed to me instead.

Now, there may be a case to be made for greater use of participatory democracy, for citizens to be more closely involved in day-to-day decisions.

I have questions as to how – and whether – that would work in practice. But set that aside.

Right now, we have a system of parliamentary democracy. The Scottish Parliament is openly chosen by proportional voting, with a range of views represented.

The make-up of that parliament can and does change, according to the collective decisions of the electorate. We must afford our elected politicians the chance to discuss and choose, in our names, without disruption.

It is all, I believe, a factor of these troubled, anxious times. These manifestations of protest reflect wider, deeper concerns among the populace. Folk are disquieted, upset.

Look at the Rochdale by-election. Not just at the winner, George Galloway. Undoubtedly, his victory indicates discontent with contemporary politics. With Gaza, of course. Among our Muslim citizens and others.

But look also at the candidate who came second, vehicle repair shop owner David Tully.

His four-week campaign rested solely upon issues in Rochdale itself. Maternity provision, traffic, the local economy. He said the people of this proud community felt ignored.

That comment translates to other communities, to other constituencies. Folk feel neglected. But there is a second, concomitant factor. People have little faith that the political system will afford remedies.

Read more: Brian Taylor: Stand by for UK political change – from Wales

Read more: Brian Taylor: Gaza vote illustrates the great divide between SNP and Labour

That dual response explains two elements with regard to this week’s Budget. The Chancellor’s caution. And Labour’s response, declining to reject the government measures outright. Both fear upsetting the voters still further.

Commonly, Budgets unravel after a day or so. This one scarcely knitted together in the first place.

Even as Jeremy Hunt unveiled a further two per cent cut in national insurance, the caveats emerged. Economists cited stats to the effect that, overall, this Westminster Parliament looks like ending with families worse off than at the outset.

Citizens consulted their instincts. Do we feel more prosperous, more contented? Not yet, not yet.

In the Commons, Mr Hunt smiled – rather too frequently for my taste – and loyal backbenchers brandished their order papers.

But their hearts were not truly there. They hope but they dare not predict. On the Right, in particular, the preparations are being laid for a contest of leadership and ideology, post election.

As to the Budget, there was a startling absence of our lop-eared chums. Not a rabbit in sight. I commend the Chancellor for leaking every announcement to the media in advance. A good habit which others should follow.

But, generally, there is a bunny to be hauled from the Treasury hat. A surprise, a favour. Not this time. Folk are not in the mood for conjuring tricks.

Sir Keir Starmer gets that. And so, although he grinned along with the Chancellor’s jibes, his own speech was sombre.

Labour is determined to build upon that popular mood of disquiet, of protest. And so party leaders endlessly offer “change”. Simplistic – but effective. Does your life stink right now? Let us sort that.

But Labour is also well aware of that second element of popular mood. Distrust of established politics – and of promises.

And so Sir Keir offers change – without specifying, over much, what such alterations might involve. Even the big promise, iterative capital investment in green energy, has been toned down and scaled back.

Caution on both sides. From a Chancellor who remembers what Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng did to Tory support. And from Labour who measure how long they have been out of power.

UK politics is the dog that declines to bark, the curious incident in the night-time. Along with that absence of rabbits. Nothing to disturb.

It is, as the IFS noted, a “conspiracy of silence”, with both main parties studiously sidelining the choices to come, even as a limited degree of economic growth returns. Tax rises or spending cuts.

A comparable silence also envelops the issue of Brexit. This week, the OBR repeated its analysis. That leaving the EU trade bloc potentially removes four per cent from the UK economy. Independence, said the SNP, is the only response.

Not so, say UK politicians. Harriet Baldwin, the Tory who chairs the Treasury Select Committee, contrasted the cut in NI, reserved to Westminster, with the devolved income tax decisions taken at Holyrood.

Finally, to another protest. Douglas Ross, he who leads the Scottish Conservatives, pressed and cajoled the Chancellor to relieve the oil and gas sector from an extended windfall levy.

For a passing moment, I thought this might be choreographed. That he would get his way – or get something – and emerge a qualified hero.

Not so. Jeremy Hunt dismissed the case with minimal explanation, imposed the extended levy, and blithely conceded on the wireless that the North Sea was one of the losers in his budget.

Seldom has humiliation been so palpable. It allowed the FM to tease and torment Mr Ross. Amid the voluble gallery protests. It allows the SNP to challenge UK Minister Andrew Bowie, who backed Mr Ross but remains in office.

Troubled times, indeed.