Opinion

Mary Kelly: Arlene Foster is wrong - again

Former Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson is reportedly less than enthused at the prospect of a Thelma and Louise-style tour with Arlene Foster to promote the Union.
Former Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson is reportedly less than enthused at the prospect of a Thelma and Louise-style tour with Arlene Foster to promote the Union. Former Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson is reportedly less than enthused at the prospect of a Thelma and Louise-style tour with Arlene Foster to promote the Union.

IT was so disappointing to hear Ruth Davidson, erstwhile Tory leader in Scotland, has quashed reports that she and Arlene Foster were planning a whistle-stop UK tour to sell the benefits of the Union.

The Thelma and Louise-style trip had been aimed at taking the publicity off Nicola Sturgeon, and selling the benefits of UK unity, according to The Sun. But sadly, Ms Davidson apparently described the claim as "utter b*****ks". Probably not a first for that newspaper.

I'd been looking forward to hearing how their cosy chats on the road could've included Arlene explaining why she didn't think gay couples in Northern Ireland could marry as Ruth and her partner had done.

Ms Sturgeon is also probably gutted too, as she was counting on the tour boosting the independence cause by several percentage points.

The polls have already shown that Scotland is more likely to become independent if Truss becomes Prime Minister.

English indifference to the prospect should also be a worry to the unionist cause. When four in 10 people would either welcome or aren't bothered by their Caledonian cousins going their own way and a majority of English people are also untroubled by the possibility of a united Ireland, you can see why Baroness Davidson doesn't want to get involved.

Dame Arlene announced the launch of the pro-Union movement in the Sunday Telegraph at the weekend, saying it would be aimed at making "the positive, rational case" for keeping the UK together.

The foundation will tour the country bringing what it calls "mainstream pro-Union voices from across the entire country to highlight the benefits that the Union brings to us all - mostly without us realising it".

Yes, in fairness, a lot of us aren't aware of what these benefits might be. But our former First Minister, showing all the vision that has typified unionism here, is backing Liz Truss, believing she is best placed to counter threats to the union. Wrong again, Arlene.

****

PINNED to her collar by Any Questions presenter Alex Forsyth, to plump for one of the two Tory leadership candidates, the Labour Mayor of West Yorkshire, Tracy Brabin finally replied: "Well, since I like to see women in power, then Liz Truss."

Nooo Tracey. If you'd been asked which candidate would be best for a possible Labour victory, then Truss was certainly the right answer. But you should have learned from the legacy of Thatcher, that simply being a woman is not enough of a recommendation.

I'm hoping it will be Liz because she is so clearly unfit for the job that with luck, her tenure will force the British electorate to come to its senses. I also hope Keir Starmer is given some sort of electrical jolt to waken him up to the realities of what 12 years of Tory rule has brought the country to, when even m'learned friends are pushed to go on strike for a decent wage.

Young barristers are now saying they could earn more as baristas, largely because of cuts to the system of legal aid by the Tory-Lib Dem government in 2012.

Meanwhile the average wage for workers in the independent care sector was £9.01 a year in 2020/21. So naturally there's a shortage of staff to fill the many vacancies. And the government's response? They're planning a mass recruitment drive overseas.

This is the same government that insisted Brexit would mean an end to foreign workers depressing the wages of the British workforce.

****

THE post-civil war divisions between the pro- and anti-treaty sides were always clear enough. But as the years passed, it became harder for the casual observer to decide what were the essential differences between Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, if any.

Little wonder that former Taoiseach, Sean Lemass, when asked this question in the early 1960s, replied: "When we're in... they're out."

It was even harder to find any differences when the two finally entered a shotgun marriage coalition, with the Greens acting as chaperone, to avoid their nightmare of a Sinn Féin government.

Now it's considered a big deal that the Taoiseach, Micheál Martin, attended the Michael Collins centenary event at Béal na Bláth in Co Cork, last weekend.

There's been much talk of the end of civil war politics, as indeed there was when the two parties formed their coalition. The thing they have in common is their detestation of Sinn Féin and their desire for power, so why don't they just go the whole hog and form one party. Who would notice?