FOLLOWING John Cleese’s impetuous outburst about half-educated Scottish tenement dwellers, I can’t have been the only person who recalled the “German” episode of Fawlty Towers. This was the one where John Cleese as Basil, the sclerotic English hotelier, reduces a family of German diners to tearful outrage with a series of references about the war.

In the following exchange between Fawlty and his German guests I have imagined that they are not Germans at all but that they are Scots.

Basil Fawlty: Is there something wrong?

Scottish guest: Will you stop talking about the referendum?

Basil Fawlty: Me? You started it.

Scottish guest: We did not!

Basil Fawlty: Yes, you did. You attacked the Union.

I reckon that, following the referendum on Scottish independence, the Fawlty Towers scriptwriters could have written an entire episode on the fragility of our sensibilities about national identity. There is great comic potential in all of this, yet I also acknowledge that for some who have invested a great deal of physical and emotional commitment in Scottish independence it may be harder to take a step back and have a laugh about it.

This week Cleese appears to have reduced half the Scottish nation to a similar state of apoplexy for the way that he criticised an article in The Daily Telegraph written by the Scottish journalist Fraser Nelson. In it Nelson, who also edits The Spectator, praised The Telegraph’s sting operation against the stricken England football manager Sam Allardyce. He also articulately defended the freedom of the press and cited several instances of its crucial role in exposing the hypocrisy, greed and corruption of rich and powerful people.

Cleese was irked by Nelson’s article and availed himself of Twitter to fire off a clumsy salvo at Nelson. “Why do we let half-educated tenement Scots run our English press? Because their craving for social status makes them obedient retainers?”

My first reaction on being alerted to Cleese’s daft intervention was to laugh out loud. I’ve never met Mr Nelson, though I admire what he has achieved in his journalistic career. And though we each occupy diametrically opposed positions on politics and social issues, this does not prevent me acknowledging that he is a fine writer with a first-class intellect. I’m not sure, though, what part of Cleese’s abjuration is most inaccurate; that he considers Nelson to be “half-educated” or that he is a “tenement Scot”.

Tenement dwellings are available these days in all sorts of sizes and for a wide range of prices. Even so, I’m not sure that Mr Nelson may have seen the inside of many (though I may be doing him a disservice here). I’m also fairly sure that Mr Nelson has not enjoyed any significant social or material advantage on his way to becoming one of the UK’s finest political journalists. He is a well-educated, lowland, middle-class Scot who has made the most of what God has given him. There are thousands more like him to be found in positions of power and influence in the cultural, social and political life of England.

I am always delighted to see my compatriots, no matter their political proclivities, gaining recognition and success in England or on foreign fields. That there may be a number of English people like Mr Cleese who resent this makes me even more delighted. Indeed, if I’m being honest, I am inclined to respond by uttering a “Get it right up youze” (silently, of course) when I encounter fits of English pique at perceived Scottish influence in the affairs of that country. Happily, my experience of England and English people is a much more positive one: they like Scotland and Scots and value our contribution to their nation.

I tried as hard as I could to work up a sense of outrage at Cleese’s inelegant insult. I didn’t consider it to be racist, xenophobic, offensive or, in any way, unpleasant. It was just silly and may very possibly have been the result of the consumption of a not insignificant quantity of the old Don Revie. There are many things in life that justify an angry response; this wasn’t one of them.

One of the most tired and most inaccurate tropes of the independence referendum was that it had divided the country in a way that was beastly and tribal. Tories and their referendum allies in the Labour Party in Scotland continue to espouse this nonsense. It is tailored to fit a narrative designed to shoo us away from a second referendum. It conveniently ignores the fact that many Unionist politicians and activists had an absolute ball during the referendum as, for the first time in their careers, they discovered that people were paying them some attention.

Few other falsehoods irk Scottish nationalists as much as this one. Where there was exuberance and passion, some Unionists chose only to see division and aggression. Those Scottish nationalists who derided the manufactured outrage of some Unionists during the independence referendum need to get a sense of perspective here. Cleese’s comments were the intemperate musings of a fading English comedy figure who is a bit upset at the pervasive influence of smart-arse Scots. We should have a wry smile at this, not be outraged by it.

As we prepare to choose the time of the second independence referendum we should also be preparing to deal with much uglier sentiments than those uttered by John Cleese. You might have thought that the first referendum was tasty enough but believe this: the second one will be saltier still.

On the same day that a man who amused us all by playing upper-class English twits decided to make a bit of a tit of himself, senior Tories were espousing sentiments far more insulting and patronising to Scots. Theresa May said she would “never allow divisive nationalists to undermine the precious Union” while David Mundell, her Scottish representative, said: “Ultimately, it is for the UK government to determine the arrangements for the UK leaving the EU.” Ruth Davidson, who has said nothing of any import since becoming leader of the opposition at Holyrood, wagged her finger at Nicola Sturgeon and said that she could “not wish away” the decision to quit the EU.

Earlier in the week Ms Davidson had talked about her ambition eventually to replace Ms Sturgeon as First Minister. Now, that really was a joke of which Basil Fawlty himself would have been proud.


Tasmina Ahmed-Sheik: It’s clear that May isn’t in the driving on the road to Brexit