Carlaw gets the claws out and into the First Minister

LINGUISTS have debated for years whether the plural of referendum is ‘referenda’ or ‘referendums’. In Scotland, we just pronounce it with a long, guttural cry for mercy.

Those who have wished for Nicola Sturgeon to stop banging on about a second referendum on independence should have worded their request more specifically — she’s now banging on about two.

The First Minister’s preference for referendum re-runs on both Brexit and Scexit was troubling Jackson Carlaw. ‘Given she has ignored the result of the previous two, why would anyone believe she would behave differently this time round?’ he queried.

‘Well, I am rumbled,’ Sturgeon quipped, and happily admitted to wanting to stop Brexit and quit the UK at the same time.

‘When is all that supposed to happen?’ came back Carlaw’s sceptical mutter.

‘Would both referendums be on one day or on different days? Which vote would come first: indyref or Euroref?’

Brushing aside matters of detail, Sturgeon said: ‘My priority is to give the people of Scotland the opportunity to choose independence next year.’

‘Her priority used to be education, but now it is independence,’ he zinged, looking immensely pleased with himself.

His own priority was showing up Sturgeon’s shtick for what it was. She has professed her keenness on a ‘progressive alliance’ with a number of UK parties, despite telling voters in Scotland that progressive politics was impossible within the Westminster system.

‘I am intrigued,’ ventured Carlaw. ‘Can the First Minister explain how she can hope to form an alliance with the same people that she is planning to walk out on?‘

It would be unfair to say the First Minister didn’t answer. She did answer, just not the question Carlaw had asked. Instead, she explained that Tories were beastly, then she explained they were beastly in an even louder voice.

‘I see that we are back to our shouty, megaphone-inclusive, speech-making First Minister,’ Carlaw snapped back, at his high-camp best. He really is a few leopard-print frocks away from Bet Lynch.

Richard Leonard asked about stress levels among public sector staff. It’s hardly an upbeat subject to begin with but his tone of gloomy righteousness is wearying. It’s as if Disney hired Arthur Scargill to do the voice of Eeyore.

Leonard speaks about hope in a tenor of abject despair.

Naturally, he and Sturgeon were soon bickering over the election. The First Minister had ‘threatened to bring down a Labour government’, Leonard said. Most unsporting. After all, that is Labour’s job.

Patrick Harvie’s question began the way they always do: ‘I hope that the whole chamber shares my horror...’ This time, his moral totalitarianism was directed at the Court of Session for finding in favour of Home Office contractor Serco.

SERCO seeks to evict 150 failed asylum seekers from temporary accommodation provided while their refugee claims were being assessed. Not the happiest business but not, contrary to the bald assertions of campaigners, against the law.

Sturgeon clambered up on the high horse and nudged Harvie aside, proclaiming herself ‘horrified at the implications of the judgment’. For those keeping score at home, it’s okay to criticise judges again.

‘If lock-change evictions are legal... they are certainly not moral, which is the key issue,’ added the trained solicitor, putting both the Court of Session and Oliver Wendell Holmes in their place.

Every time Sturgeon opines on legal matters, it feels like a Glasgow University law degree loses a little more prestige.