Scotland

Patriotic peers have demanded that David Cameron raise the US haggis import ban with President Obama at the White House today. As Steerpike noted yesterday, the 1971 ban on the product is under renewed scrutiny in the run up to Burn’s Night, with Lord McColl demanding answers to great cheers in the House of Lords this morning. Apparently ‘this wholesome food is much better than the junk many Americans eat’. Tory peer Michael Forsyth even went as far as to demand that a special envoy on the matter be appointed immediately, and suggested the former First Minister Alex Salmond might be free to take the fight directly to the Yanks. Only

Tomorrow, parliament will debate a topic of immense significance. Steerpike hears that Tory peer Lord McColl is planning on championing a great repressed minority, in a land that claims to be free. Not so much a political hot potato, rather a hot sheep stomach stuffed with the animal’s heart, liver and lungs. Since 1971 haggis has been banned in the States, denying the 24 million Americans who claim to be of Scottish descent (with varying degrees of credibility), from celebrating Burns Night properly. Behind the scenes there has been a long lobbying campaign to have the ban overturned, aimed at Defra and the US Embassy, and spearheaded by Ranald Macdonald, owner of

We’ve just had two years of intensive constitutional politics. Time enough, you’d think, for even London-based politicians and commentators to work out how British politics actually works. But if you think that you’d be wrong. Very wrong. Consider our old friend the Barnett Formula. Antiquated and not entirely fit for purpose – it being a 1970s convenience that was itself an updated version of the 1880s Goschen Formula – but hardly a mystery or a terribly complicated piece of financial wizardry. And yet it seems that almost no-one in the Westminster village actually understands how Barnett works. Yesterday, you see, Jim Murphy promised that he would use Scotland’s share of

The proverbial visitor from Mars would assume that the Scottish Nationalists had won—not lost—September’s referendum. Alex Salmond has given another crowing interview today, you can read mine with him from The Spectator’s Christmas issue here, in which he offers advice to England on how to rediscover itself. While the crisis in Scottish Labour continues. In an interview with The Guardian, Labour’s new Scottish leader Jim Murphy drives home how big a challenge the party faces there, ‘We’re 20% behind. Just to get even we have to close the gap by 1% a week.’ Murphy is also remarkably frank about the quality of the leaders that preceded him. When Libby Brooks

Today’s Guardian long-read on the Scottish referendum is a great piece of journalism. Both Alistair Darling and Danny Alexander argue in it that when David Cameron stepped out of Downing Street and announced his support for English votes for English laws he allowed the SNP to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat, to argue that Scottish voters had been hoodwinked.   Now, to be sure, Alex Salmond make much of Cameron’s announcement. In his Spectator interview he says that it showed that Cameron thinks Scots ‘heads zipped up the back’ and that he didn’t get the enormity of what had just happened. But the idea that Cameron’s announcement alone,

The Most Rev Philip Tartaglia, Catholic Archbishop of Glasgow, is at it again: There is a feeling around that we are in a special moment when we can shape a new Scotland. Our new First Minister, who is happily with us here this afternoon, has proposed a more consensual form of government, less partisan, less party-political, and less adversarial. I think everyone would welcome that … We are all equal in Scotland … all free to express our views and follow our consciences. The Archbishop was speaking earlier this month at an ecumenical service attended by Nicola Sturgeon. By all accounts she was pink with pleasure at his lavish tribute. But

Is it acceptable for writers to sport their political allegiances publicly? In more sensible times you’d hardly need to consider the question since its answer would ordinarily be so bleedin’ obvious. These, of course, are neither sensible nor ordinary times. So it is with the fauxtroversy over whether or not it is acceptable – or, worse, appropriate – for Liz Lochhead to have joined the SNP.  This is a real thing, it seems and yet another example of how politics corrupts most things it touches. Lochhead, you see, is not just a poet she is Scotland’s Makar (or poet laureate) and therefore, god help us, it’s all very different. For some reason. People are

Nearly 20 years ago, during one of the many impasses on the road to ‘peace’ in Northern Ireland, Gerry Adams reminded his opponents that the republican movement would set the terms of any agreement. The IRA reserved a power of veto. ‘They haven’t gone away, you know,’ he said. Scotland is not Ulster, of course, but the Scottish nationalists haven’t gone away either. Anyone who thinks the referendum settled this country’s constitutional future hasn’t been paying attention. The long war continues, albeit — and mercifully — in figurative terms. If anything, defeat has encouraged the nationalists to redouble their efforts. The SNP is the only political party in Scotland that can

What’s the most significant political story of the week, Ukip winning Rochester or Emily Thornberry’s resignation? Well, I suspect, it might be neither of them and that the really big event this week happened north of the border, Nicola Sturgeon being sworn in as First Minister. For the new SNP leader is riding a quite remarkable wave of popularity. Right now, she’s addressing a rally at the Glasgow Hydro, a 12,000 seat venue that she sold out faster than Kylie Minogue—what other politician in Britain could hope to do that?   As I say in the column this week, what makes Sturgeon’s popularity all the more remarkable is that she

And so the Age of Nicola dawns. Elected First Minister by the Scottish Parliament yesterday; sworn in this morning. Taking First Minister’s Questions this afternoon. Alex Salmond’s departure was a long drawn-out affair but it will not take Nicola Sturgeon anything like as long to leave her own distinct impression on Scottish politics. I am not sure why folk at Westminster thought the referendum defeat would plunge the SNP into crisis. That might have been the case if the result had been 65-35 but that, despite what some thought, was never, ever, a likely outcome. Senior SNP strategists knew winning might be difficult but they also reckoned that anything above

Alex Salmond is on his way out. The First Minister gives every impression of enjoying – or at least making the most of – his farewell tour. And why not? Far from weakening the SNP, defeat in September’s referendum has – at least for now – strengthened the party. Its supremacy is unchallenged and while recent polls putting the Nationalists on 50 percent of the vote are unlikely – surely! – to last forever this is the kind of problem worth having. Nevertheless, the First Minister’s final days in office have also reminded us that policy and, indeed, philosophy are not necessarily Salmond’s strengths. Unusually, First Minister’s Questions proved a

Imagine if, in one of her first acts as First Minister of Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon announced that, in spite of the result of September’s independence vote, Scotland was to declare independence anyway, on the basis that opinion polls now showed a majority of people in favour of independence and therefore there was no need for the decision to be approved in a referendum. David Cameron and his government would surely treat it as an outrage. Why, then, has the Chancellor this week seen fit to announce that the people of Greater Manchester are to have a directly elected mayor? Two years ago the very same question was put to the

A while back I was speaking at one of those How did it all go so wrong? post-referendum discussions and, as expected, the air was thick with recrimination. The good people of Glasgow – rebranded as Yes City – were unhappy and indignant. Eventually, however, talk turned to what might be done next. I made the suggestion that, just perhaps, Scotland’s political and blethering classes might pay some attention to the powers the Scottish parliament currently enjoys. I mean, I said, it is not as though there are no big arguments to be had within the confines of Holyrood’s truncated responsibilities. Not as though there are no large problems that

Even the po-faced Associated Press (video above) couldn’t but describe as ‘toe-curling’ Ed Miliband’s encounter with a homeless hijabi. Pundits agree that Ed appeared ‘terrified’ of the beggar in Manchester. Mr S was there, however – on unrelated business, of course – and can confirm that the opposition leader really did only have 2p in his pocket at the time. (Why on earth would he carry more?) Your correspondent was otherwise engaged, however (in discussion with my equine consultant) in the moment this photo was snapped: What could have been on his mind? Or that of shadow transport secretery Mary Creagh, for that matter, as they headed into the Manchester town hall? The new Scottish