There are two ubiquitous pieces of political rhetoric that I utterly detest. (Come to think of it, I'm sure there are hundreds - but, as of this evening, two in particular spring to mind.) The first is the endless appeal to the hearts and minds of "decent, hard-working families". It's a particular fixation of Labour's, of course, but it has to be conceded that the idiotic phrase has occasionally been known to pass Nationalist lips. The obvious implication of it is that the words "decent" and "hard-working" are synonymous - but they're not. I gather Hitler had quite a punishing schedule most days. Actually, if anyone ever starts a political party specifically for the decent-but-a-bit-lazy people in this country, I'd fancy it to do rather well.
The other one is "let's get on with more important issues, no-one talks about this down at the Dog and Duck". Anyone who says that might just as well wear a T-shirt that reads "I haven't really got a valid argument against this reform, but could we please, please, please not do it anyway?". The latest depressing example is Neil O'Brien's article in the Telegraph suggesting - rather unconvincingly - that the Scottish Parliament has all the powers it could ever possibly need to address the country's problems (you'd think we were practically a sovereign nation the way he talks) and that we should get on with doing so instead of "blethering" about the constitution. The trouble is, it's not too hard to imagine O'Brien in the pre-devolution days arguing that Scotland already had all the powers it could ever need back then - after all, who needed the pointless upheaval the Scottish Constitutional Convention were proposing when we had our great champion Michael Forsyth fighting our corner every step of the way at the Scottish Office? (Don't snigger, the Tories actually used to say that sort of thing.) But, there again, if O'Brien had been around circa 1885, he'd probably have been telling us that the establishment of the post of Scottish Secretary was an unnecessary distraction from the real business of governing, with the Home Office and the Lord Advocate doing such a cracking job on our behalf.
I suppose what I'm saying is that, if you want to argue the case against Scottish self-government, that's fine - but do so honestly, give your real reasons, and let people make up their minds on that basis. If you're so scared your case wouldn't stand up to that kind of scrutiny, it's more than possible you were on the wrong side of the argument in the first place.
Well said James. It maks me wonder how some politicians hae the nerve tae talk about poverty in this country, when they show such poverty o' language an' poverty o' ambition thersels.
ReplyDeleteI’m afraid I have rather strong views on Lord Forsyth which don’t seem to go down very well in the Tory blogosphere. Needless Tory bashing apparently for pointing out the good Baron’s short comings (of which there are so many to choose from). I don’t quite see it myself. After all he was a useless toady that got nowhere under Thatcher or latterly under Major until there was just no one left in the Scottish Office to pin the Sec’s job on. So he got it for a little over a year, claimed to have returned the stone of destiny and then lost his seat as one of many Tory Cabinet members to do so. So for that year and a half, and despite being rejected by the electorate, off he goes to the unelected chamber to stay on the parliamentary gravy train where he can campaign against devolution and pontificate at length about anything and everything with that vast year and a bit at cabinet under his belt. The point is my surprise at Tory bloggers seeming amazement that hitherto anti-Labour bloggers have switched to anti-Tory blogging. What a revelation? Hardly I would have though, surely a pro-Scottish blogger would have an anti-Union stance and in case I am not much mistaken the Tories are just as pro-Union as Labour, oh and they form the Government now too.
ReplyDeleteTalk about being able to prove anything you like with statistics. I’m amazed Mr O’Brien has not gone on to prove that black is white and that God is a woman who really does exist. If Scotland is so awful and the people are so backward and such a drain on England why haven’t the Tories done anything about it? Let’s face it (and this is something I ask English Tory bloggers who moan about the Scots all the time) if it were not for Scotland and its Labour MPs, England would be a land of never ending Tory Government. Only one Labour government in History has not needed Scottish seats to form a Government, that of Tony Blair in 1997, and only one Tory government since the war has needed Scottish seats to rule, that of Winston Churchill in 1951. The number of Scottish Tory MPs has fallen since their high in 1955 when they had 37 MPs, meteorically since Mrs Thatcher, until now they only have one. So what else is there in this equation that is not being talked about? A huge elephant in the room that the English anti-Scots Tories never mention but that is keeping their economy afloat, and has since the 1970s?
ReplyDeleteMunguin, on the subject of Forsyth - it's amusing to recall that he and the Stone of Destiny were the Tories' idea of a "respect agenda" in the mid-90s! The more things change, the more they stay the same...
ReplyDeleteRespect an' Michael Forsyth dinnae sit weel th'gither in ma mind. The man gies aff a funny smell. Why does he get a padded seat in the Hoose o' Turds, oops sorry Lords? Ah wonder if he sits comfortably next tae wee Lordie Georgie Robertson? Mibbe we'll understand the man better if we wait the 87 year it'll tak tae release a certain sheaf o' papers, tho ah'm no sure ah can haud ma breath that long...
ReplyDeleteMy mind's boggling with what you might be suggesting there, Sophia...
ReplyDelete