Detestable?

Why do astute politicians use language that causes uproar? Probably in order to cause uproar.

Don’t forget about my brand new podcast - the trailer is already online, and episode 1 will be published later today. It’s completely *free*. It’s called Whitehall Sources.

Click here to find it.

This article was first published in The Stornoway Gazette.

Credit: BBC/ Getty Images

To detest is “to hate; dislike extremely”, says the dictionary - a reliable source if ever there was one for such matters. I only went delving in order that I might frame my thoughts for this week appropriately. Because, when asked whether she would prefer a Conservative or Labour government, the First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, told the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg: “I detest the Tories and everything they stand for, so it’s not difficult to answer that question.”

First, some framework. It is widely observed that Nicola Sturgeon is a shrewd and intelligent political operator - make of her politics what you will, she knows how to conduct the orchestra, to play the game, to work the room, the press and her supporters. She is capable. 

Next, this was the SNP party conference weekend. This was when the spotlight burns on a political party in a way that, generally, is not replicated throughout the rest of the year.

Finally, there’s a new Prime Minister in situ - at least for now. A new Prime Minister whose comments about the First Minister and the devolved nations of the UK, remember, were the focus of this column in August when she was merely a contender for high office. Then, Liz Truss called the First Minister an “attention seeker” and said that UK government policies should apply across the country. She is a new Prime Minister who, it would seem, has not had a phone call with the First Ministers of Scotland and Wales since taking office. 

Photo by Joad Hughes on Unsplash

For me, these three aspects make up the context for why “detestgate” was, more than likely, a political calculation. Astute operative Nicola Sturgeon, who embraces a spotlight in a particularly effective manner, is looking to define her relationship with the new Prime Minister and get the SNP back onto their safe territory - that is, to be in a fight, a scrap, with, ideally, a Conservative government in Westminster. Behold - Nicola Sturgeon’s wish was granted.

Ciaran Jenkins, the Scotland Correspondent for Channel 4 News observed: “Divided Tory MPs today found something they could agree on, however: their disgust at Nicola Sturgeon’s strong language about them.”

Some have mused that Boris Johnson’s approach to the SNP was often jovial - like prodding a friend to make fun of them, to jostle and to enjoy japes and frivolity. That, as an “enemy” doesn’t suit the SNP. Rather, like the Jacobites of old, they would rather kilt-up, targe in hand, misty rain itching the moor, and Highland charge their politics and policies at those who stand in the way. Nicola Sturgeon is working to shape this relationship to meet her own ambitions.

One of the most viral takes after “detestgate” was texted to me by a friend who had been scrolling on Twitter: “Nicola Sturgeon is facing more pushback from the UK press for hating [sic] the Tories than the Tories are getting for crashing the pound and pushing children into poverty and starvation.” 

You know by now that I don’t easily subscribe to attacks on the press. For a start, attacking it as a lump is rarely particularly helpful. 

In any case, Alexander the viral Tweeter, fails to note the monumental U-turn that the Prime Minister and chancellor made after pressure grew from the public and Conservative MPs - reported by the press - over their most headline-grabbing policy from the “mini”-budget. As a result, they will now keep the 45p rate of tax. Who pressed politicians on the economic merit of the policy? Who reflected public opinion into the face of those who are to be held to account? Alexander fails to observe that journalists are relentlessly quizzing government ministers, even now, about what policies mean, when we will have adequate information about them, what “growth” means, who is in the “anti-growth coalition” and the impact of fiscal events (yuck) on people at large. 

Credit: The Daily Telegraph/ Eddie Mulholland

Some have questioned why Sturgeon needed to use such visceral language to describe the Conservatives, but surely the answer is obvious? It is exactly the sort of language that appeals to those who like her and what she stands for. To build on Ciaran Jenkins’ comment, Sturgeon’s approach only serves to entrench both sides. It doesn’t change the arguments or the substance or add any real meaning to the political debate. Those who were never going to be convinced by her, or by Liz Truss, are still never going to be convinced by them.

So then, why fuel this now? Aside from the party conference, this week, the UK’s highest court has been hearing arguments on whether Holyrood can set up a (second) Scottish independence referendum without the agreement of Westminster. Because she had to, Nicola Sturgeon declared the target date for her second attempt at separation during the SNP gathering in Aberdeen. It’s all part of the wider drive to stir up a scrap with the Conservatives because that is where the SNP can coalesce and perform for their base. The merit of their tactics is for you to determine.

Perhaps of greater concern to the Conservatives in the aftermath of this brouhaha is that much time and energy has now been expended on considering: “Is it right to detest the government of the moment?” Because in a democracy, and, perhaps, in a more pronounced way in Scotland, if the answer is yes, alternatives exist.