Snp

Scotland is a small place. This has many advantages. There is an intimacy to Scottish public life that can, on occasion, be charming. It is a place where everyone knows everyone else and this helps foster a climate of relaxed informality. Politicians, even more than elsewhere, are known by their first names. So it’s Nicola vs Ruth vs Kezia and this isn’t just because they are all women and all, in their different ways and to different degrees, quietly impressive figures. But a small place, like a family, can be suffocating too. Intimacy is the other side of cosy. If that reflects itself in tight connections between politicians and those

There is no party in Britain quite as fake as the Scottish National Party. The SNP, now entrenched in its dominance of Scottish politics, imagines itself a revolutionary force for change. Its mission to break up Britain bolsters that impression. But if the SNP campaigns with zeal, it governs with caution. These are the most conservative revolutionaries on the planet. On health, education and taxes, the SNP stresses continuity. The party saves its radicalism for issues the public considers trivial. One is Trident. Another is land reform. According to an opinion poll earlier this year, just 3 per cent of voters consider nuclear weapons one of the three most important

There may be confusion about the role of EU immigrants in Westminster, but there’s none in Scotland. Our message is clear: this is your home, you are welcome here, your contribution is valued. Scotland needs immigration, and we’ve been delighted to welcome EU citizens here over the last few years and decades. They are the new Scots. They are our nurses, teachers, small-business owners and are an important and cherished part of our society. It’s quite understandable that people are aghast at Theresa May using EU immigrants as bargaining chips. But it is a chilling reminder of just how ‘nasty’ the Tory party still is. As Nicola Sturgeon was able

Nicola Sturgeon still believes in Scottish independence. I know, who knew? That’s the point of the SNP, a party Ms Sturgeon joined as a teenager back when she felt, or so she has said, that Neil Kinnock was busy leading Labour into the wilderness. That, remember, is when she says it all started going wrong for Labour. This is something worth recalling the next time you see or hear some SNP elected representative concern-trolling the Labour party. The weaker, the more unelectable, Labour is the better that suits the SNP. Anyway, the First Minister gave a speech yesterday in which she spoke about Scotland’s five ‘key’ EU interests that ‘must be

MPs have voted to renew Trident by an overwhelming margin: 472 voted for, compared to 172 against. It’s no great surprise that the decision to approve the replacement of Britain’s four nuclear submarines passed. Perhaps what was more interesting was the split on the Labour benches opposite the Government, with 140 of the party’s MPs going against Jeremy Corbyn and backing Trident. So, how did your local MP vote in the Trident debate? Here’s the Spectator’s full run-through of every MP and which way they sided: For: Conservatives: Adam Afriyie (Windsor), Peter Aldous (Waveney), Lucy Allan (Telford), Heidi Allen (Cambridgeshire South), Sir David Amess (Southend West), Stuart Andrew (Pudsey), Caroline Ansell

The Trident debate might be about national security, but all the parties have political points they want to make. Indeed, the reason the debate is happening now is that the Tories wanted something to bring them together, and divide, Labour post-referendum. Angus Robertson, the SNP’s Westminster leader, began with a few kind words for the new Prime Minister. But then, he was straight on to repeatedly—and theatrically—asking the government front bench to set out what the full life time cost of the Trident replacement would be. There is an argument to be had about the cost of Trident—and whether it is the most effective form of defence spending—but Robertson’s argument

We are ‘in uncharted territory with, effectively, a blank sheet of paper’ in front of us – and that means ‘there might be’ a way that Scotland could stay in both the UK and the EU after Brexit, Nicola Sturgeon said on the Andrew Marr Show this morning. So England and Wales would get what they want and Scots what they want – except for the two-in-five Scots who voted to Leave. But Ms Sturgeon had no suggestion as to how such a plan might work in practice, because it wouldn’t work in practice. Scotland voted in 2014 to stay in the UK, and the UK voted in June to leave

It ought not to be a surprise that Alex Salmond, Scotland’s former First Minister, has declared that the vote to leave the European Union is the trigger for a second referendum on Scottish independence. Salmond thinks everything is an excuse for another go. If a new Bay City Rollers album suffered poor reviews south of the border, or an English football pundit failed to declare Archie Gemmill’s wonder goal for Scotland against Holland in the 1978 world cup the best ever, Salmond would be right there on the UK’s television screens, chortling at the brilliance of his own wit, before intoning gravely that this insult is surely the final straw

So where are we now? Pretty much in the same position as the traveller who asks for directions to Limerick and is told, ‘Well, I wouldn’t start from here.’ But we are where we are, for better or, more probably, for worse. Not before time it is slowly dawning on people in England that while this was very much their referendum it has consequences for the whole of the United Kingdom. They were warned this would be the case and, if it was not something that was ever uppermost in their thoughts, they cannot claim they were not told. Because they were. I don’t dispute English voters’ right to privilege their disgruntlement

Over the last few years, Scots have had to get used to Nicola Sturgeon telling them what they think. When the SNP had its majority (one the voters stripped away in the recent Holyrood election) she was keen to present herself as the voice of the country: l’Ecosse, c’est moi. If the SNP wants X, then Scotland wants X. She’s at it again, saying that the UK has voted out of the European Union and Scotland has voted in – so the UK was voting ‘against the interests of the Scottish people’ and finally provided the provocation needed to launch a new referendum. In fact, two-in-five Scots – and even a

The speeches in the Commons which follow the Queen’s Speech blend together humour with some serious points. They are the Commons as its most clubbable, with lots of in jokes and the like. So, there was a fair amount of chatter about how Jeremy Corbyn – who is not the clubbable sort – would deal with the occasion. At first, the answer was surprisingly well. He was funny, and generous, about the proposer, Caroline Spelman, and the second, Philip Lee. The House was laughing with him, and even Cameron couldn’t help but chuckle at some rather good jokes including those at his own party’s expense. But then Corbyn turned serious,

When the SNP 56 were elected to Parliament, they were heralded as a breath of fresh air in an otherwise archaic institution. The nationalists made clear that they were unhappy to be moved to Westminster, let alone indulge in its pleasures. Despite this, they appear to have grown accustomed to their surroundings over time, with reports surfacing of their taste for Parliament’s many taxpayer-subsidised bars. Now it appears that other Westminster indulgences are also proving too hard to resist. The Daily Mail reports that Angus MacNeil and Stewart Hosie have both separated from their wives after enjoying the company of the same woman. The paper reports that both men enjoyed relationships — at different times — with Serena Cowdy, a

By now, Labour should be rather good at post-defeat inquests. Plenty have been conducted over the years and the drill has become familiar. The party goes into an election promising a certain vision of the future only to find out that it leaves the voters cold. A senior figure is then commissioned to state the obvious, and the report is sent back to the leader’s office, where it is filed and ignored. Then the party embarks upon a fresh misadventure — and the cycle of defeat begins again. This week Labour is digesting its worst result in Scotland since 1918, having lost not only to the nationalists but to the

As the dust settles on Thursday’s election, it becomes ever clearer that—with the exception of London—these were awful results for Labour. They were bad enough to suggest that the party is on course for a third successive general election defeat. But, as I say in The Sun, not disastrous enough to persuade the Labour membership that they need to dump Corbyn. One Tory Minister remarked to me yesterday, ‘Labour have done well enough to keep Corbyn. I can live with that.’ Before adding, ‘Corbyn’s survival is the single most important thing for 2020’. The result that should worry Labour most, though, is the Scottish one. As the third party of

The election results that we’ve had through so far are a pretty potent combination for the Labour party. Diane Abbott said this morning that they show that Labour is on course to win the 2020 general election, while Jeremy Corbyn skirted around what they actually meant for the party in the long-term when he gave his reaction. The potency lies in the party’s devastation in Scotland that points to a long-term structural inability to win a majority coupled with English council results that, by being less bad than expected, deceive about the challenge the party faces in winning in those areas in 2020. The party’s moderates are concerned this morning