NO interrupting! Glenn Campbell was very firm in laying down the law at the beginning of this, the final leader’s debate of the election campaign. Would the leaders obey? Would they manage to bite their tongues? Would they … go rogue and interrupt proceedings to tell him he was asking the wrong questions? Oooooh.
You don’t get to be First Minister by doing what you’re telt by the BBC, and Nicola Sturgeon wasn’t happy to be cast in the role of obedient schoolgirl putting her hand up to answer the teacher’s question. “Come on – hands up? Can we not have a proper debate?” she boldy interjected, and anyone who had zoned out during Mr Campbell’s badgering (some might call it interrupting) about the IFS and manifesto costings will have perked right up again.
In further unexpected twists, the leaders then started talking over each other to agree with each other. The First Minister interjected to agree with Willie Rennie! What was going on? Had we entered a Scottish politics Twilight Zone? No, the crucial difference between this and earlier debates was that the first few questions were about policy issues, not the constitution. There was discussion on important topics such as Covid travel restrictions, a National Care Service, income tax, a new royal yacht ... wait, what?
“I don’t know why we’re debating this,” responded Rennie to a question on the last of these, his usual cheery grin replaced by the stoniest of expressions. Cripes, Mr Campbell was getting nearly as many pelters here as Douglas Ross. Had someone stuck a “kick me” sign on his back?
Of course, this was all building up to talk of indyref2, and the Scottish Tory leader took full advantage of the “no interruption” rule to repeatedly claim Sturgeon was planning an illegal wildcat referendum. Sly. Sarwar tried to join the rebels in saying he wasn’t interested in talking about currency and was lucky to avoid being sent out to the corridor.
“I get to choose the questions!” asserted Mr Campbell, who will need a lie down in the staff room after that.
READ MORE DEBATE ANALYSIS
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