BORIS Johnson has a plan to save the Union, and it may come as a huge relief to all the Scots who are sick and tired of having policy dictated to them from London.
Instead, Johnson is planning to dictate policy from Edinburgh.
In a move that may see the UK Cabinet meet in the recently completed Queen Elizabeth House by Waverley station, Johnson has created a "special meeting room ... due open this autumn", The Times reported.
READ MORE: Some Scottish locations that might suit PM's taste for adventure
However, the unveiling of the "seven-storey, 190,000 square feet, ultra-modern office space" yesterday didn't quite go as planned.
Michael Russell wrote: "I can’t remember where I read that as empires crumble, symbol and show always replace substance.
"Anyway it was proved today by this grandiose posed display in Edinburgh by a somewhat gender unbalanced 'UK’s men in Scotland' team outside their very expensive new premises."
I can’t remember where I read that as empires crumble , symbol and show always replace substance. Anyway it was proved today by this grandiose posed display in Edinburgh by a somewhat gender unbalanced “UK’s men in Scotland” team outside their very expensive new premises. pic.twitter.com/POAKT3KCvZ
— Michael Russell (@Feorlean) August 10, 2020
Other Scots took to Twitter to ask some pressing questions, like who on earth are those two guys behind Scottish Secretary Alister Jack?
That question, fortunately, is easy enough to answer. On the right is David Duguid, the MP for Banff and Buchan, and the other is Iain Stewart, the MP for ... Milton Keynes South.
What an MP for a constituency almost 400 miles from the Scottish capital is doing there won't be a mystery to anyone who remembers Douglas Ross's resignation after the Dominic Cummings scandal, though that does seem a long time ago now.
READ MORE: Boris Johnson appoints Milton Keynes MP as new Scotland Office Minister
But there were other pressing questions which Scots wanted to see answered. A key one was: What's going to happen to the building after independence?
As one Twitter user noted: "The furniture in the board room [below] looks cheap. They don't seem to be investing in a long stay."
Indylive's Fiona McGregor asked: "Will make a nice embassy, maybe?"
"Let’s just call it the English embassy? That’s what it is after all right," one user wrote.
"I guess they are going to need an Embassy or a Consulate..." another added.
Thinking more of the here-and-now, some Scots were happy to have a new place for independence marches to congregate.
"England's Colonial HQ in Scotland? Anyway, good meeting point for any future protests," one Ron Dickinson wrote.
"Think that venue may become an interesting focal point for a wee public gathering or two in the very near future," a Graham Laurie added.
Common Weal's Craig Dalzell was less optimistic, writing: "Worth saying that, as @FerretScot reported last month, UKGov has handed £millions to a tax haven firm as part of the lease on this building."
Worth saying that, as @FerretScot reported last month, UKGov has handed £millions to a tax haven firm as part of the lease on this building.https://t.co/maqKpjy6yy https://t.co/vTl849Y87D
— Dr Craig Dalȝell (@thecommongreen) August 11, 2020
The Ferret reported that the government had procured a 25-year pre-let agreement of the building with the subsidiary of a company registered offshore.
The comparisons to colonialism were also rife, with one Scot writing: "They’re doing what the British Empire did in the 19th C. Erecting edifices to show colonial power. To show the natives just who held real power. No change there!
"Maybe when Scotland rejects colonial power we can repurpose the building as a cultural centre?"
Another added: "Indeed. The last days of colonial rule."
With any luck Westminster won't be needing even 10% of that 25-year lease...
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