IF you thought that with Ruth Davidson abandoning democratic politics she might stop being the media’s poster girl for Unionism, we have bad news for you.
Davidson may have left Holyrood for her ermine cloak, but she has certainly not left our TV screens.
Indeed, the BBC’s Politics Live actually covered a rare Scottish story today – it is just unfortunate that the story was Davidson’s upcoming move to the Lords.
Baroness Davidson of Lundin Links is set to make her appearance in the Lords for the first time tomorrow after officially receiving her title last week.
Despite the Scottish Conservatives consistently falling into line with their London bosses, Davidson has been running around the media acting shocked that Boris Johnson signed off on her peerage.
On the BBC’s political programme this lunchtime, presenter Jo Coburn asked the guests about the story and for their thoughts on Baroness Davidson’s new job.
Tory MP Stephen Crabb said he would “love to see her in government”, adding that his only regret about her entering the Lords is that she’s not coming to join him in the Commons. “She’d have the ideal platform for her range of talents. She’s bright. She’s funny. She doesn’t give a damn about offending people when she wants to speak her mind and make her point. She’s exactly the kind of person we need at Westminster to liven the place up and get some hard truths spoken at times.”
So, is that Mr Crabb suggesting that her successor Douglas Ross hasn’t been achieving those feats in his role in the Commons? We couldn’t possibly comment.
SNP MP Alyn Smith offered a much-needed break from the Davidson love-fest. “The SNP boycotts the House of Lords,” he told the panel. “We don’t think it’s a credible organisation. I’ve got friends in the House of Lords who are doing their best to reform it, doing their best to put in a shift. That’s all fine. But the fact is Ruth Davidson has run away from the voters in Scotland. She ran away from Edinburgh Central, she could have stood again, but she didn’t. And she now doesn’t need to worry about democracy for the rest of her days.
"And that’s a poor show, that’s a poor way to run any country much less mine, and that will be judged by the people of Scotland on its merits.”
In response Crabb accused Smith’s party of being “jealous” of Davidson, who has “lit up” Scottish politics apparently. Not like Smith’s party just set a record-high number of votes at the Holyrood election or anything … “Her coming to Westminster would be a very good thing for the Union as well,” he declared.
Over footage of the former Scottish Tory boss in a tank, former UK Government adviser Salma Shah added her voice to the Davidson-fest. “I just want to echo what Stephen said, that actually for the UK I think it’s brilliant to have such a big Scottish figure coming into the House of Lords. And I think it’s important in both Chambers to have a good Union presence. So I think her coming down here is strengthening our engagement with Scotland and I think we’ve needed that for a very long time.”
READ MORE: 'Time to escape the 19th century': Scots react to Ruth Davidson's Lords title
Shah added that Davidson brings “relatability” to politics, which “so few” politicians do. “I’m very excited to see what she’s going to do and I’m very excited to see what might happen if she is brought forward into a government role, I think it would make things very interesting.”
Then Clare Gerada of the NHS Assembly had her say: “I’m a doctor, not a politician. But I do think that Ruth Davidson seems like a really very decent and a really lovely person.”
Er, alright …
Thankfully Smith was there to bring some realism to suggestions that all this is fantastic for the Union.
“Bring it on,” he told the panel.
“I don’t take anything away from Ruth personally, but the House of Lords has no democratic legitimacy and the idea that the people of Scotland can be told by a Baroness from a Palace on the Thames what’s good for us just won't fly. And if you think that’s going to save the Union keep that coming.”
Exactly.
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