First of all let me say I am a huge fan of the Spectator. When I was a student and got a cheap subscription I would love it hitting the floor on Friday mornings. And I also think that Alex Salmond did a top-notch job at winning the Scottish elections this year. A brilliant campaign led by a charismatic figure which really changed the face of British, not just Scottish, politics.
Having said that I am at a loss as to why Alex Salmond won Parliamentarian of the Year. And my confusion comes with the comments of the editor of the Spectator. He said:
"Whatever your view on that great question, the judges felt it was right to salute the man whose brilliant tactics in the Scottish Parliament laid the foundations for an extraordinary victory."
Now the first half of the statement, right up until tactics I have no problem with. But I do wonder if Matthew d'Ancona, the editor of the premier political magazine in the country knows that until May Alex Salmond wasn't a member of the Scottish Parliament. His tactics were great, they did lay the foundations of victory, but they weren't laid in Parliament. So is this a snub to Nicola Sturgeon who was brilliant as leader of the opposition in the Scottish Parliament, another snub to Scotland by the English establishment who just don't care enough to know the basics, or (much more likely)shoe-horning recognition of Salmond into some category, no matter what one it was?
Anyway - well done. A richly deserved victory if a little bizarre.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment