Short and to the point... and Mrs May is no gentler
OH, to have been a fly on the wall when Theresa met Nicola. On her first proper day in her new job, the Prime Minister flew up to Scotland last week to meet the First Minister and thrash out the thorny issue of Scotland and Brexit.
At least David Cameron was good at small talk. Brought up to be well-mannered and charming, the former Prime Minister had the patter to ease through any situation, however awkward.
But those two? Theresa May and Nicola Sturgeon? It is difficult to imagine any two people with less in common yet who are more alike.
As those who know her well can attest, the First Minister doesn’t tend to do small talk and she has never made a habit of being unnecessarily charming – to anyone.
Mrs May, for her part, seems to carry the whiff of one of Bertie Wooster’s formidable aunts about her person: serious, focused and completely unable to suffer fools at all, let alone gladly.
So that meeting would have been a delight to witness. Formal – certainly: terse – probably; short and to the point – definitely, with each leader courteous yet resolutely committed to their point of view and unwilling to be seen to yield an inch to the other.
This is a relationship which is going to be hugely important for all of us who live in the UK, not just in Scotland, because our future will depend upon it.
And what is intriguing about both women – and neither will want to admit this – is how similar they are.
Both are driven career women with supportive husbands willing to stand behind them. Also, neither has children.
Both are passionate about what they believe and both have shown a remarkable and ruthless willingness to dispense with the legacy left to them by their male predecessors and forge their own path.
Neither is fiery nor intemperate, preferring to take decisions coolly and after deep consideration and both have amassed formidable reputations for mastering the details of ministerial briefs other, more flighty politicians don’t bother with.
They also both inspire that strange combination of loyalty and fear among the men who work for them that seems to be the rare preserve of women who reach the top in politics.
But it is not their similarities on which the future of our country will rest, but their differences.
Mrs May made it absolutely clear the moment she became Prime Minister that she was a unionist to the tips of her kittenheeled shoes.
Miss Sturgeon, as we know, is the opposite. Indeed, the drive for independence is so allconsuming within the First Minister that it is a wonder there is room for anything else in her life. So how do they find common ground?
Mrs May made the first concession by travelling to Scotland to see the First Minister, rather than inviting her to Number Ten.
She showed she was willing to meet on Miss Sturgeon’s home turf and that would have been appreciated by the First Minister. However, that is as far as the concessions went.
Having lost Europe, Mrs May does not want to lose Scotland. And while she made it clear to Miss Sturgeon that she would do all she can to accommodate Scotland’s desires to keep some sort of relationship with Europe, she was also adamant that the UK is leaving the EU.
The Prime Minister would also have been absolutely firm – in tone if not in word – that she will fight any second independence referendum with every ounce of political muscle she can summon.
Miss Sturgeon, for her part, warned of her readiness to go to the people once again on independence. She has argued that she is simply reacting to events and that she is at the mercy of circumstances outwith her control but she would have left Mrs May in no doubt that this option is real and not an empty threat.
Both leaders described the meeting as ‘constructive’ but that word can cover the flavour of almost every sort of meeting ever held.
So it is likely that this one, while cordial, was not much more than that.
This is understandable. Because there is more ice than fire running through the veins of both women, their relationship is unlikely ever to explode into angry recrimination.
BUT it is also unlikely that the two women are ever going to be close. Perhaps they are too similar in character for that, perhaps they are too far apart politically, or perhaps it is a combination of the two. Either way, while there is likely to be respect on both sides, there is never likely to be much real warmth.
There is also unlikely to be much room for misunderstandings. Both women say it like it is, neither plays political games and neither is likely to make empty threats they cannot – or will not – keep.
As a result, it looks as though we are about to enter an era of serious politics, an era which will be defined by how these two formidable women cope with events and with each other.
It is going to be fascinating to see what happens. Nothing less than the future of our country depends upon it.