Ben Brogan accepts Labour’s challenge to judge Gordon on substance not style and, unsurprisingly, finds him wanting. But in his critique he also includes this:
What on earth is he talking about? What are these bodies, how have they been gerrymandered and how have they undermined the Union? I really have no idea.On the substance of the constitution, he gerrymandered new bodies that turned on Labour and undermined the union.
I assume Brogan is talking about the Scotttish parliament but, as an ex-Glasgow Herald man, he must know a) that Brown did not drive devolution, b) that “gerrymandered” is a very strange word to use about an electoral system that, whatever its flaws, required Labour to give-up its built-in advantage and c) that the case for devolution “undermining” the Union remains not proven at worst.
Worse still, Brogan seems to accept the nonsense that devolution was some kind of New Labour plot designed to cripple Britain.
Get Britain's best politics newsletters
Register to get The Spectator's insight and opinion straight to your inbox. You can then read two free articles each week.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate for just £1 a month
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for £3.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just £1 a monthAlready a subscriber? Log in