ALISTER Jack has revealed the so-called “transgressions” that resulted in the UK Government taking a tougher stance to visits involving Scottish ministers and overseas governments.
Speaking at the Scottish Affairs Committee meeting on Monday, the Secretary of State for Scotland listed six supposed breaches – including by former first minister Nicola Sturgeon and External Affairs Secretary Angus Robertson.
Committee chair and SNP MP Pete Wishart dismissed them as “meagre fare” and asked, incredulously: “We had a fall out because of this?”
READ MORE: Alister Jack insists UK international representation benefits Scotland
James Cleverly last month wrote to UK officials, instructing them to take a “strengthened approach” to visits involving Scottish ministers and overseas governments, urging them to ensure Westminster representatives were also present for any talks.
But the move angered Robertson, who accused the Foreign Secretary of making “misleading” statements as he called for the guidance to be withdrawn.
Robertson also wrote to Cleverly, raising concerns that it could damage “Scottish trade, cultural exchanges and education and Scottish interests in general”.
During the meeting, Jack insisted that Scotland “benefits hugely” from the UK Government’s international work, claiming that Scottish ministers talking about independence or “breaking up” the UK didn’t encourage investment and made foreign consuls “uncomfortable”.
The Tory MP for Dumfries and Galloway then went on to list the so-called breaches.
He said: “The first one is in Washington. Nicola Sturgeon, who may be a person of interest to this committee, was clear that she discussed the constitution with the US Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman during a visit to Washington DC in 2022, when she tweeted that she had ‘discussed the situation in Ukraine and the resulting refugee crisis, the Northern Ireland Protocol and the constitutional future of the United Kingdom.’
“During a meeting with the French EU minister, Angus Robertson discussed the EU Erasmus Scheme and the UK Turing Scheme and commented that there was ‘no alternative other than Scotland to be part of the EU again’."
Jack said: “Such criticism of UK policies clearly undermines our relationship with international partners.”
He went on: “Ivan McKee (SNP MSP) said at a trade event in Poland that was attended by a European secretary of state in a ministry of economic development and technology that Brexit was a mistake, that he looked forward to Scotland joining the EU as a full member in due course and showing the rest of the UK the benefits of membership.”
“Robertson described Brexit as a calamity and said it posed additional challenges for Scotland, not least because Scotland was pro-EU.
“At a St. Andrew's day reception, Robertson said that Scotland would rejoin the EU as an independent nation and criticised the impact of the EU exit on student exchange programs to Scotland.”
“Finally, an FOI release at the end of November showed that Scottish Government offices overseas have been used to correspond with the EU on constitutional matters which are reserved.”
Jack said that there were more supposed breaches, but added that he was unable to reveal them due to their “sensitive” nature. He added that they “were wrong” and “undermined” Scotland’s place in the UK.
Wishart the dismissed the claims as “meagre fare”.
He said: “You described them as ‘blatant breaches’, they sounded pretty much like meagre fare. A tweet from Nicola Sturgeon, Ivan McKee saying Brexit was a mistake. Everybody in Scotland, or most people, think that it was a mistake.”
“Come on Secretary of State, anybody asked a question about Brexit who is Scottish is likely to say it was a mistake.”
He added, incredulously: “We’ve had a fall out because of this?”
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