THESE are anxious days in the Douglas Ross household and I feel for the Scottish Tory leader. Having been mistakenly referred to as "Murray" by his Westminster leader it’s now imperative that Ross re-locates his Christian name quickly and restores it to its rightful place at the front of his surname.
And so, his decision to write to Scottish Labour leader, Anas Sarwar and Scottish Liberal Democrats chief, Willie Rennie is understandable and shows that he’s not taking the loss of his first name lying down. Ross has ostensibly reached out to his two Unionist counterparts in a bid to form a pro-UK coalition following the Holyrood elections.
I suspect though, that the real reason for the letters is that he hopes to secure early affirmation of his real birth-name before it disappears from public consciousness entirely.
This is not the first time that Ross, through no fault of his own, has encountered a degree of turbulence in matters appellative. For several years his first name had endured a bumpy ride when Ross Thomson was the Tory MP for Aberdeen South, a constituency maddeningly close to the Moray stronghold of Mr Ross.
But what better way to re-connect his first and second names than by finding a pretext for writing to two fellow party leaders whose first names, while hardly in the household category, remain reassuringly intact at the head of their family designations.
WATCH: Boris Johnson appears to call Douglas Ross by wrong name in Commons
The tension when Ross opens his mail over the next few days will be palpable. He’ll have dreamt of that golden moment when he opens the first envelope and eyes the greeting that will signal full possession of his unruly moniker. If both Sarwar and Rennie begin their replies with the legend, “Dear Douglas” he’s home and hosed.
But what if, like Boris Johnson, they call him something else like Jonathan or Diana, these being the most famous bearers of a surname which though steadfast and stout is easily misplaced in a crowd of more dramatic cognomens.
If the Scottish Tory leader with the loose surname had really wanted us to think he was actually writing to Sarwar and Rennie about something believable he might have chosen a more convincing pretext that the formation of a Unionist coalition.
No disrespect here to Willie Rennie but thus far the highlights of his plodding political leadership have come when he canvasses farmyard animals, which admittedly have given us some priceless selfie moments. His presence on a bi-lateral ticket to the Union is of no earthly interest to anyone. I suspect Jonathan was just being polite.
And is there anyone left in the UK that doesn’t think the Labour Party north and south of the border are already thicker with the Tories than the PPE brokerage sector?
Sarwar and his UK boss, Sir Keir Starmer have taken the Labour Party so far to the right that lawyers at Conservative Central Office will soon be considering suing them for unlawful appropriation. Sir Keir, like Sarwar, a millionaire, seems to have formed an unlikely and unwritten alliance with Boris Johnson at Westminster.
READ MORE: Douglas Ross urges Unionist parties to commit to 'pro-UK coalition' after election
So rarely has Sir Keir opposed the Johnson administration that he has effectively become the 22nd member of the Tory cabinet. Perhaps this is a sort of Trojan Horse grift: once safely inside the Tory ramparts he’ll emerge with a big red rose, belting out the Internationale and forcing the Tories to nationalise stuff and take in more immigrants.
Sarwar, meanwhile wrapped himself so tightly in the Union Jack during the 2014 independence referendum that they had to put him under full anaesthetic afterwards to remove it. Since becoming leader earlier this month he’s done nothing of any note other than sack a candidate for daring to support a second referendum and insist that the Scottish Parliament should be “a Covid recovery parliament” – a statement of the bleedin’ obvious right up there with “the SNP wants to take Scotland out of the United Kingdom”.
I’ll be thinking of Murray Ross over the next few days as he ventures to this front door to open the mail. I mean what if they called him something Django or Paddy?
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel