Politics

Where do Tories stand in post-Sturgeon

Published

2 years ago

April 29, 2023

The Scottish Conservatives are holding their conference in Glasgow at a moment of flux and uncertainty in the nation’s politics.

What does Nicola Sturgeon’s departure mean for the balance of Scottish politics, which the Tories have been happy to keep on a constitutional theme? And how is Rishi Sunak’s UK government shaping up to deal with Humza Yosuaf as first minister?

On the surface, the Scottish Tories appear to be having a marvellous time with the SNP’s ongoing woes.

Leader Douglas Ross opened his conference speech with a lengthy string of gags at the expense of his rivals, as part of his one-man mission to exhaust every possible pun on the subject of motorhomes.

But for all this glee, there is a question over how ready his party is for the sands of Scottish politics to shift.

The Conservatives were quite comfortable with the post-indyref setup, contesting a never-ending constitutional squabble with the SNP – the parties of Yes and No, yin and yang – which left little room for Labour.

Ms Sturgeon was a useful bogeyman both for the Scottish party to scare up unionist voters, but also for the UK-wide operation to portray as a potential puppet master pulling the strings of a Sir Keir Starmer government.

Now she is gone, and uncertainty abounds.

They may talk a cheerful game, but the Tories’ own fortunes are not exactly looking rosy, with polls suggesting they are well adrift of Labour in Westminster voting intention.

That, in part, explains why Mr Ross waded into a row over tactical voting.

It started with a newspaper column suggesting that Scottish voters would know which party was best placed to take on the SNP in their local area. He didn’t actually say “vote Labour”, but the inference was clear.

Mr Ross knew the SNP would pounce on any suggestion that the “Better Together” alliance of the 2014 independence referendum could be resurrected.

Douglas Ross backtracks on tactical voting call

He also knows that Labour are desperate for the next election to hinge on anything other than the constitution – the topic which has seen them squeezed out into third place.

So anything that turns Scottish politics back into a binary bunfight over borders will implicitly damage Labour and benefit the Tories.

Hence why Mr Ross spent a good chunk of his speech wiring in about the SNP, and only a few lines writing off Labour as an insufficient challenge to them.

The attempt at 3D chess strategy was not publicly embraced by the prime minister, though.

Rishi Sunak has a very different struggle with Labour on his hands, and is very clear that Conservatives should vote Conservative.

The UK government perspective may not be hugely different to the Scottish Tory one overall though.

They too are pretty comfortable with how things stand between themselves and the Scottish government, particularly when it comes to the constitution.

In his rather brief speech to conference – it lasted just over seven minutes, before he took part in a Q&A session with the less than fearsome inquisitor, Douglas Ross – Mr Sunak stuck with the tried-and-tested approach of insisting he would say no to any request for an independence referendum.

Sunak and sturgeon — Rishi Sunak was the fourth successive PM to reject Nicola Sturgeon’s calls for a referendum

“Now is not the time” was first dreamed up by Theresa May six years ago, and is perhaps her most lasting contribution as prime minister.

Nicola Sturgeon used to insist that position would crumble; instead it endured through the reigns of Boris Johnson and Liz Truss, and indeed has outlasted her own time in office.

The latest variation on the theme was beamed across the back of the stage during Mr Sunak’s speech: that he is “focused on Scotland’s real priorities”, not independence.

Humza Yousaf formally asked for a referendum on his first day as first minister, and nobody was surprised when Mr Sunak shot the idea down immediately.

Somehow, over the years of polarisation and court cases and start-stop demands for a constitutional showdown, the idea that the UK government can simply ignore the demands of the majority of MSPs – at least when it comes to independence – has become an everyday feature of political life.

Perhaps that is why Mr Yousaf is now looking at playing a longer game, focusing on grassroots support rather than forcing the issue with Downing Street.

Another constant during the revolving-door era at Downing Street has been Alister Jack, the Scottish Secretary who has now served three prime ministers.

On his watch, UK government’s approach to dealing with devolution has developed through something known as “muscular unionism” into Arnold Schwarzenegger level body-building.

That is partly about being seen to do things for people on the ground in Scotland – directly funding local projects and infrastructure. But it has also involved more than a few clashes.

The previously iron lines of the Sewel Convention – that the UK government would “not normally” legislate across devolved areas – were breached during rows over Brexit. It may not be entirely normal, but it is hardly rare nowadays.

Precedent was similarly busted when the UK government used a dusty section of the Scotland Act for the first time ever to block Holyrood’s gender reform legislation.

And UK ministers had few qualms about holding up the Deposit Return Scheme via the Internal Market Act – another piece of post-Brexit legislation detested by Scottish ministers.

The government in Edinburgh has loudly decried each of these moves, and indeed is challenging the blocking of the gender reforms in the courts.

Mr Yousaf might hope to shift relations onto a different footing in time, but on his first visit to London earlier this week he was received in Mr Sunak’s House of Commons office rather than being afforded the diplomatic pomp of Downing Street, and the pair didn’t even pose for a picture together.

Lord (David) Frost and Boris Johnson — Lord Frost was the man behind Boris Johnson’s Brexit negotiations – but Scottish Tories reject his influence now

Constitutional conflict between the two governments has become normalised, and it seems the UK government side are ever-less shy about throwing their weight around.

There are limits, though.

Scottish Tories are running a mile from the position of Lord David Frost – the former Brexit negotiator who penned a column suggesting that devolution could be rolled back.

That successfully baited more than a few clicks, but was roundly rejected by Conservative MSPs as the haverings of a man whose period of influence ended a couple of prime ministers ago.

They know that kind of talk can only be damaging to their prospects in Scotland, where devolution has become pretty well entrenched.

Lord Frost’s intervention raises questions about whether that message resonates as strongly among Tory politicians south of the border.

Mr Sunak read the room at conference and lauded Holyrood’s range of powers from the stage. His line is that the SNP isn’t making great enough use of them, not that they should be stripped away.

But the prime minister did not display pitch-perfect understanding of Scottish politics during his trip to Glasgow – which it turns out was so brief because he was also addressing the Welsh Conservative conference later the same day.

Mr Sunak walked into a needless and self-inflicted row with the Holyrood press pack after his team attempted to restrict access to a post-speech media huddle.

One staffer – presumably jokingly – suggested to the hacks that they could delete their tweets about the bust-up after the attempted restrictions were roundly ignored.

Journalists famously take well to such suggestions from central government, so the predictable end result was even more tweets.

In the end the press were allowed access to a session which lasted about as long as Mr Sunak’s mini-speech.

It all added up to a gathering which was set up to revel in the struggles of a rival party – but which underlined that political difficulties are by no means unique to the SNP.

Reports /TrainViral/

Politics

Gething downfall delivers Starmer 1st headache

Published

5 months ago

July 16, 2024

Just when you’d have been forgiven for thinking politics might quieten down a bit…

The Welsh Labour government was for so long a case study in how the party could operate in power during its long years of opposition at Westminster.

And yet here we are less than a fortnight into a UK Labour government, and the Welsh Labour government is imploding.

So much for all that talk about bringing stability back to politics.

Last week Vaughan Gething was sharing smiles here not just with the new prime minister but the King too.

Now, he’s a goner, delivering Sir Keir Starmer a headache rather than a handshake.

When I was here in March covering Mr Gething’s victory, the seeds of his political demise were germinating before our eyes.

The donations row had already sprouted and his defeated opponent, Jeremy Miles, legged it from the venue without so much as any warm words about the victor on camera.

It was another sign of the cultivating anger, the political knotweed that would soon flourish and ensnare Vaughan Gething.

Along came the row about alleged leaking, a sacking, a confidence vote — and a first minister whose tenure up until today at least amounts to 2.4 times that of Liz Truss. Ouch.

Westminster has generated its fair share of turbulence in the last decade.

But it is far from unique as a source of turbulence in UK politics.

In February, Michelle O’Neill became first minister of Northern Ireland with Emma Little-Pengelly her deputy, after a long period without devolved government at Stormont.

In March, we had a new first minister of Wales, when Mark Drakeford stood down and Vaughan Gething took the job.

In April we had the resignation of the first minister of Scotland Humza Yousaf.

He was replaced the following month by John Swinney. June was the quiet month then. Just the small matter of a general election campaign.

And here we are in July, and Mr Gething is resigning.

So will begin another leadership race, a new government in Wales, a new first minister and a new team of senior Welsh ministers.

There will also be more arguments about Welsh Labour – its direction, its priorities, its capacity to govern effectively and its relationship with the UK party.

If you’re watching this in Downing Street, it’s the last thing you need.

Wales

Vaughan Gething

Reports /Trainviral/

Politics

Shoplifting crackdown expected to be unveiled

Published

5 months ago

July 16, 2024

A crackdown on shoplifting is expected to be announced in the King’s Speech on Wednesday.

The government is due to unveil a new crime bill to target people who steal goods worth less than £200.

The policy would be a reversal of 2014 legislation that meant “low-value” thefts worth under £200 were subject to less serious punishment.

The government is also expected to introduce a specific offence of assaulting a shop worker to its legislative agenda.

It will not be clear until legislation passes through Parliament what the punishments for any new or strengthened offences would be.

Data from the Office for National Statistics shows that last year was the worst on record for shoplifting in England and Wales.

Police recorded over 430,000 offences in those nations in 2023 – though retailers say underreporting means these figures are likely to represent only a fraction of the true number of incidents.

Michelle Whitehead, who works at a convenience store in Wolverhampton, said her shop had been “hit every day” by thieves.

People were stealing “absolutely anything” including “tins of spam, tins of corned beef, all the fresh meat”, Ms Whitehead told BBC Radio 4’s World at One programme.

“They’re just coming in, getting their whole arm and sweeping the lot off the shelves,” she said. “The shelves were always empty.”

She said she believed “organised” criminal gangs, rather than individuals struggling with the cost of living, were behind the thefts in her shop.

The crackdown on “low-value” shoplifting “will help a lot of little shops,” Ms Whitehead said.

While retailers and shop workers have welcomed the anticipated proposals, a civil liberties group has raised concerns about criminalising people struggling to make ends meet and overburdening the prison system.

The new legal measures are expected to be announced as part of the King’s Speech on Wednesday, a key piece of the State Opening of Parliament that allows the government to outline its priorities over the coming months.

Before the general election, the Labour Party pledged to reverse what it described as the “shoplifter’s charter” – a piece of 2014 legislation that reduced the criminal punishment for “low-value shoplifting”.

Tom Holder, spokesperson for the British Retail Consortium (BRC), told BBC News the impact of the 2014 legislation has been to “deprioritise it in the eyes of police”.

“I think police would be less likely to turn up to what they see as low-level theft,” he said.

Shoplifting cost retailers £1.8 billion in the last year, which could impact prices, according to the BRC.

“Shoplifting harms everyone in that sense – those costs eventually get made up somewhere, whether it’s prices going up or other prices that can’t come down,” Mr Holder said.

Co-op campaigns and public affairs director Paul Gerrard said the supermarket chain had also recorded rising theft and violence against shop workers.

“There’s always been people who will steal to make ends meet. That’s not what is behind the rise we’ve seen,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Tuesday. “What’s behind that rise is individuals and gangs targeting large volumes of stock in stores for resale in illicit venues like pubs, clubs, markets, and out the back of cars.”

But Jodie Beck, policy and campaigns officer at civil liberties organisation Liberty, had concerns about the expected proposals, saying there is “already a wide range of powers” the police can use to tackle shoplifting and anti-social behaviour levelled at retail staff.

Ms Beck said the “£200 threshold” would not just target criminal gangs but also “people who are pushed into the desperate situation of not paying for things” because they cannot afford to make ends meet.

She urged the government to avoid focusing on “criminal justice and policing solutions instead of doing the thoughtful work of looking at the root causes of crime, which we believe are related to poverty and inequality”.

Ms Beck also argued the additional legislation could serve to worsen the UK’s “enormous court backlog” and its “bursting prison system”.

Last week, Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced plans to release thousands of prisoners early to ease overcrowding in the country’s prisons.

A spokesperson for Downing Street said the government would not comment on the King’s Speech until it has been delivered by the monarch.

The National Police Chiefs’ Council has been approached for comment.

Reports /Trainviral/

Politics

Government launches ‘root and branch’ review

Published

5 months ago

July 16, 2024

Defence Secretary John Healey hailed the government’s defence review as the “first of its kind” and said it will “take a fresh look at the challenges we face”.

Mr Healey noted the “increasing instability and uncertainty” around the world, including the conflict in the Middle East and war in Ukraine, and said “threats are growing”.

The strategic defence review will consider the current state of the armed forces, the threats the UK faces and the capabilities needed to address them.

Sir Keir Starmer has previously said the review will set out a “roadmap” to the goal of spending 2.5% of national income on defence – a target he has made a “cast iron” commitment to but is yet to put a timeline on.

On Monday, the prime minister said the “root and branch review” of the armed forces would help prepare the UK for “a more dangerous and volatile world”.

The review will invite submissions from the military, veterans, MPs, the defence industry, the public, academics and the UK’s allies until the end of September and aims to deliver its findings in the first half of 2025.

“I promised the British people I would deliver the change needed to take our country forward, and I promised action not words,” Sir Keir said.

“That’s why one of my first acts since taking office is to launch our strategic defence review.

“We will make sure our hollowed out armed forces are bolstered and respected, that defence spending is responsibly increased, and that our country has the capabilities needed to ensure the UK’s resilience for the long term.”

The review will be overseen by Defence Secretary John Healey and headed by former Nato Secretary General Lord Robertson along with former US presidential advisor Fiona Hill and former Joint Force Commander Gen Sir Richard Barrons.

The group will have their work cut out.

The global security threats facing the UK and its Western allies are more serious and more complex than at any time since the end of the Cold War in 1990.

They also coincide with what many commentators have said is a catastrophic running down of the UK’s armed forces to the point where the country is arguably no longer considered to be a Tier One military force.

In terms of the number of troops in its regular forces, the British Army is now at its smallest size since the time of the Napoleonic Wars two centuries ago.

Recruitment is failing to match retention, with many soldiers and officers complaining about neglected and substandard accommodation.

The Royal Navy, which has spent vast sums on its two centrepiece aircraft carriers, is in need of many more surface ships to fulfil its tasks around the globe.

Its ageing fleet of nuclear-armed Vanguard submarines, the cornerstone of the UK’s strategic defence and known as the Continuous At Sea Deterrent (CASD), is overdue for replacement by four Dreadnought class submarines and costs are mounting.

Commenting on the review, Mr Healey said: “Hollowed-out armed forces, procurement waste and neglected morale cannot continue.”

Too many UK commitments?

The defence and security threats facing the UK, Nato and its allies further afield are multiple.

They include a war raging on Europe’s eastern flank in Ukraine against Russia’s full-scale invasion. The UK, along with the EU and Nato, has opted to help defend Ukraine with multi-billion pound packages of weapons and aid, stopping short of committing combat troops.

The policy behind this is not entirely altruistic. European governments, especially those closest to Russia like Poland and the Baltic states, fear that if President Putin wins the war in Ukraine it will not be long before he rebuilds his army and invades them next.

Some of those countries are already busy beefing up their own defence spending closer to 3% or even 4% of GDP.

The challenge for Nato has been how to provide Ukraine with as much weaponry as it can, without provoking Russia into retaliating against a Nato state and risk triggering a third world war.

The Royal Navy has been in action recently in the Red Sea, where it has been operating alongside the US Navy in fending off attacks on shipping by the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen.

But the UK has also made naval commitments further afield in the South China Sea with the Aukus pact, comprising of Australia, UK and the US, aimed at containing Chinese expansion in the region.

Critics have questioned whether a financially-constrained UK can afford to make commitments like this on the other side of the world.

Closer to home in Europe, there is a growing threat from so-called “hybrid warfare” attacks, suspected of coming from Russia.

These are anonymous, unattributable attacks on undersea pipelines and telecoms cables on which Western nations depend.

As tensions increase with Moscow there are fears such actions will only increase and the UK cannot possibly hope to guard all of its coastline all of the time.

But while those nervous Nato partners living close to Russia’s borders are busy beefing up their defence spending closer to 3 or even 4% of GDP, the UK has so far declined to put a timetable on when it will raise its own defence spending to just 2.5%.

Opposition figures have criticised the government for refusing to say when defence spending will be increased.

Before his election defeat, former prime minister Rishi Sunak committed to reaching 2.5% by 2030.

Shadow defence secretary James Cartlidge previously said: “In a world that is more volatile and dangerous than at any time since the Cold War, Keir Starmer’s Labour government had a clear choice to match the Conservatives’ fully funded pledge to spend 2.5% of GDP on defence by 2030.

“By failing to do so, they’ve created huge uncertainty for our armed forces, at the worst possible time.”

Reports /Trainviral/