THE BBC's Scotland editor Sarah Smith may occasionally be a bit forgetful.
Back in May she forgot not to report her own opinion as fact and said the First Minister had "enjoyed the opportunity to make her own different lockdown rules” during the coronavirus pandemic.
That was apparently a slip of the tongue. She meant to say embraced, but enjoyed came out.
Her forgetfulness reached new heights this morning however, when she seemed to forget about her own mother.
READ MORE: Sarah Smith report on FM is BBC's most complained about item this year
In the wake of the list of new peers being announced, a list which was called "the worst kind of cronyism" by the SNP's Pete Wishart after it included such political heavyweights as Brexiteer Ian Botham and Boris Johnson's brother, Smith tweeted: "Theresa May’s husband Philip is to get a knighthood. Just like Dennis Thatcher before him.
"I’m sure they were both supportive of their partners in No 10. But how many political wives have ever been given a Damehood? Why do men have to be rewarded for supporting their spouses?"
Though Smith's point was admirable in its intent, following up on her public criticism of the BBC's gender pay gap, it has one glaring flaw.
That flaw should have been obvious to Sarah Smith, daughter of former Labour leader John Smith and Baroness Smith of Gilmorehill.
READ MORE: From Ruth Davidson to Ian Botham: Every new peer on the latest honours list
Within a year of her father John's tragic death in 1994, his wife Elizabeth had been made a peer.
And she is not the only political wife to have been raised to the Lords, as many Twitter users pointed out.
Baron Andrew Adonis wrote: "Florence Bevin was given a damehood after the death of Ernie Bevin in 1951.
"There is a long list of wives of top politicians being honoured - wives of Disraeli, Churchill, Gaitskell & Major all got damehoods or peerages."
To Smith's credit she did later remember her mother, adding to her previous tweet: "The glaring flaw in this argument is obviously my Mother’s peerage.
"I will shut up now - if no one tells her I forgot about my own Mum!"
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel