Likeable, humble, popular - and still the most dangerous woman in Britain

THE only thing worse than being talked about, as Oscar Wilde observed, is not being talked about. That was my first reaction to Nicola Sturgeon’s speech to the SNP conference this weekend.

It was, after all, a speech that paid a measure of ironic tribute to this newspaper. Miss Sturgeon noted that the Daily Mail had referred to her as ‘the most dangerous woman in Britain’. It was a title she seemed to enjoy, even relish, as she addressed her adoring audience in Aberdeen.

Her speech was a reminder that this paper was right to consider the First Minister the clearest threat to the future integrity of the United Kingdom. It was the speech of a woman in her prime, a politician who in just a year has become the most impressive political force this country has seen since the Scottish parliament was established 16 years ago.

None of Miss Sturgeon’s predecessors dominated the political landscape like she does. Alex Salmond won a famous victory in 2011 but even he never enjoyed the kind of supremacy his successor has achieved. Although he was respected as a political operator and sometimes also feared, he was never liked in the way Miss Sturgeon is admired, even by her opponents.

Suspicion

Mr Salmond was too plainly opportunistic to be wholly trustworthy. His swagger revolted as many Scots as it attracted, and the suspicion that his approach was calculated on whatever was most politically expedient at the time diminished his long-term credibility. Throughout the independence referendum, it was clear Mr Salmond would say anything, spin any untruth to advance his cause, even if this line was palpably nonsensical.

By contrast, Miss Sturgeon realises that short-term expediency often comes at the expense of longer-term credibility. For this reason she welcomes a measure of criticism, accepts that the SNP should be judged on its record and concedes that it is entirely reasonable for other people to disagree with her prescriptions for the country. Neither she nor her party, she acknowledged, is perfect.

On that we may certainly agree, even as we note that this kind of humility would be utterly beyond Alex Salmond. Drawing a distinction between herself and her predecessor is an important part of Miss Sturgeon’s job. It was telling that her conference speech made only a brief, and ad-libbed, reference to her predecessor. Her supremacy now is so complete that Mr Salmond has been entirely eclipsed. It should be clear to everyone now that she is the better politician, better suited to this moment in Scottish political history. He i s yesterday’s man, while she is Scotland’s present.

Mr Salmond was a divisive figure who many Scots liked to hate. Miss Sturgeon is a person many Scots like to like. That is a significant difference. It helps ensure she is given a greater deal of latitude.

Looking back, it now seems significant that her early days as First Minister were marked by a tone of conciliation. She would, she said, welcome constructive criticism. Other parties had a role to play and, if they offered useful ideas, she would listen to them. That change in tone suited the mood as Scotland sought a moment of healing after the divisions caused by the referendum campaign.

But Miss Sturgeon’s apparent willingness to concede she had no monopoly on wisdom had a greater, canny, political purpose too. It allows her to seem reasonable, a quality all the more important in an era in which politics often seems dominated by a marked absence of reason. And in this fashion she can then be seen as a more dignified, even a more mature, kind of politician. She rises above the political fray and is vaccinated against the usual diseases that bedevil political leaders.

There is, of course, a degree of artifice in this. Her willingness to concede her own fallibility is doubtless as genuine as it is useful to her. It shields her from criticism, since it gives her licence to argue that he is only doing her best and it is time the opposition gave her the benefit of the doubt. Never mind the outcomes of SNP policy, consider her good intentions.

This, it should be clear, is not actually good enough, especially when it is a mechanism designed to deflect attention away from the Scottish Government’s actual record, which is nothing like as shiny or splendid as the SNP claims. There is a discrepancy, too, between Miss Sturgeon’s acceptance that scrutiny is warranted and her deputy Stewart Hosie saying, in his thuggish style, that criticising the SNP’s record i n office amounts to ‘ talking Scotland down’. Opposition, in other words, is unpatriotic and something of which to be ashamed. A bigger man than Hosie would be ashamed to talk in this fashion.

Another tactic at First Minister’s Questions is Miss Sturgeon’s habit of deflecting criticism of her government’s record by asking her opponents to consider the state of the national opinion polls. Fifty per cent of Scots intend to endorse SNP candidates in next year’s Holyrood elections – so this must be evidence that, despite opposition ‘carping’, the SNP must be getting it right. But the fact that Labour is a shambles and the Tories remain persona non grata is no kind of endorsement of the SNP government. A party can be popular and mistaken at the same time.

Unsinkable

The SNP’s record on education, health, policing and civil liberties is nothing like as shiny as its supporters insist. That the party appears unsinkable does not change the cold, hard facts. Students from deprived backgrounds in Scotland, for instance, are less likely to gain the qualifications necessary for admission to our leading universities than comparable students in England.

Moreover, Miss Sturgeon’s decision to call off the referendum dogs for the time being, making it clear there will be no commitment in next year’s SNP manifesto to an imminent re-run, gives voters licence to judge her party on its record.

By all the normal laws of politics, that verdict should be a withering one. And yet it seems unlikely to be so. The SNP continues to enjoy the most precious commodity in politics – trust. That owes much to the calibre of its leader. Many voters are quietly proud to have a First Minister capable of representing the country with such assurance. Even confirmed Unionists could appreciate and admire Miss Sturgeon’s performance on the UK stage during the most recent general election campaign.

The question next May is not whether or not the SNP will win the election, but how convincing its triumph will be. Nicola Sturgeon’s supremacy is total. No other politician in Britain enjoys the level of confidence that Scotland’s First Minister inspires. She is Queen in the North and there is no reason to expect her domination of Scotland’s political landscape will expire any time soon. No wonder the opposition is in such a state of peevish despair.