Peter Hitchens writes:
Here’s an interesting footnote on the modern Tory Party’s true attitude towards Scotland. It made little impact at the time, because a Scottish exit then seemed so far away, rather than imminent, as it does now.
The news story involved alleges that the words spoken by Michael Portillo would 'anger' David Cameron. I don't know if they did, and can find no record of any such anger.
But if so, was that because what Mr Portillo said was unrepresentative of true feeling in his party? Or because it was representative, and therefore best kept quiet?
It’s also perfectly true that Michael Portillo, at the time he said the words reported, was an ex-politician.
Well, what of it? Had he still been serving, he almost certainly wouldn’t have been so frank.
But we must remember that Mr Portillo was a heavyweight, a Cabinet Minister widely believed by many to be a possible leader.
Indeed, if things had fallen out slightly differently, he might have been the Blairite candidate to lead the Tory Party back into BBC and establishment favour.
So it’s not unreasonable to suggest that similar thoughts may have crossed the minds of others in that party.
What people think about most closely is what they also never ever say.
Here’s an interesting footnote on the modern Tory Party’s true attitude towards Scotland. It made little impact at the time, because a Scottish exit then seemed so far away, rather than imminent, as it does now.
The news story involved alleges that the words spoken by Michael Portillo would 'anger' David Cameron. I don't know if they did, and can find no record of any such anger.
But if so, was that because what Mr Portillo said was unrepresentative of true feeling in his party? Or because it was representative, and therefore best kept quiet?
It’s also perfectly true that Michael Portillo, at the time he said the words reported, was an ex-politician.
Well, what of it? Had he still been serving, he almost certainly wouldn’t have been so frank.
But we must remember that Mr Portillo was a heavyweight, a Cabinet Minister widely believed by many to be a possible leader.
Indeed, if things had fallen out slightly differently, he might have been the Blairite candidate to lead the Tory Party back into BBC and establishment favour.
So it’s not unreasonable to suggest that similar thoughts may have crossed the minds of others in that party.
What people think about most closely is what they also never ever say.
Anyway,
it’s a story from the Daily Mail, of 8th July 2006:
Former Tory minister Michael Portillo called last night for Britain to be broken up because England and Scotland would be better off without each other.
He said the United Kingdom is no longer 'sacrosanct' and the Conservatives should ditch their commitment to the 1707 Act of Union and push for English independence.
Mr Portillo's views come amid a growing backlash against the Union. Many in England believe Scotland gets too much of Britain's budget and is effectively subsidised.
They also claim it is not right that Scottish MPs can vote at Westminster, while English MPs have no influence on the Scottish Parliament.
Mr Portillo's comments will anger David Cameron, who fears the Tories are seen as an English, rather than a British, party. But Mr Portillo insists breaking up the Union would give the Tories the best chance of seizing power in England, where they have a majority.
On the BBC politics show This Week, he was challenged by host Andrew Neil, who asked: 'So for party advantage, you are prepared to break up our country?'
Mr Portillo replied: 'No, not just for party advantage. The Scots would be probably a great deal better off if they weren't subsidised by England.
'From the point of political advantage, the Conservatives have a better chance of being in government if Scotland is not part of the affair.
'You are continuing to assume the Union is sacrosanct. That is not an assumption I make any more.'
He also backed Tory frontbench MP Alan Duncan's claim that a Scottish MP could not be Prime Minister – a clear attack on Gordon Brown.
Former Tory minister Michael Portillo called last night for Britain to be broken up because England and Scotland would be better off without each other.
He said the United Kingdom is no longer 'sacrosanct' and the Conservatives should ditch their commitment to the 1707 Act of Union and push for English independence.
Mr Portillo's views come amid a growing backlash against the Union. Many in England believe Scotland gets too much of Britain's budget and is effectively subsidised.
They also claim it is not right that Scottish MPs can vote at Westminster, while English MPs have no influence on the Scottish Parliament.
Mr Portillo's comments will anger David Cameron, who fears the Tories are seen as an English, rather than a British, party. But Mr Portillo insists breaking up the Union would give the Tories the best chance of seizing power in England, where they have a majority.
On the BBC politics show This Week, he was challenged by host Andrew Neil, who asked: 'So for party advantage, you are prepared to break up our country?'
Mr Portillo replied: 'No, not just for party advantage. The Scots would be probably a great deal better off if they weren't subsidised by England.
'From the point of political advantage, the Conservatives have a better chance of being in government if Scotland is not part of the affair.
'You are continuing to assume the Union is sacrosanct. That is not an assumption I make any more.'
He also backed Tory frontbench MP Alan Duncan's claim that a Scottish MP could not be Prime Minister – a clear attack on Gordon Brown.
No comments:
Post a Comment