The latest edition of The Worst of Westminster is here and we hope you enjoy it. Remember you can get the newsletter in your inbox for free every week by clicking here.
THE theme of the week is the UK Government and the serious questions it has to answer on domestic and global matters after eye-opening revelations at the Covid inquiry and a potentially momentous ruling at the UN's highest court.
The lights are on but Jack's not home
ALISTER Jack may have pulled out of appearing at the UK Covid Inquiry this week for reasons unknown, but he did not avoid scrutiny completely. First Minister Humza Yousaf was questioned about the Scottish Secretary’s involvement in four-nations meetings during the pandemic.
Yousaf claimed Jack would join the meetings but would at times say nothing at all, adding his engagement was “very limited”.
“There would often be meetings when he wouldn’t say anything at all. Perhaps he was there to observe,” the First Minister said.
READ MORE: Hamilton Inquiry: David Davis says rule of law at risk over 'cover-up'
Yousaf said he was “curious” as to why Jack was on calls at times when he wasn’t making contributions “call after call”.
It left us wondering even more about a question posed by SNP MP Deidre Brock in the Commons on Wednesday when she asked “what on Earth” staff at the “pointless” Scotland Office do.
She asked if the UK Government could “justify” its spending on the department after it was revealed the Scotland Office’s budget had “jumped” by more than £3 million since 2018.
Jack will surely face questions for his apparent lack of contribution to four-nations meetings when he does eventually face the inquiry on February 1.
ICJ ruling puts UK under pressure
THE UK Government’s refusal to call for a ceasefire in Gaza is a position that looks worse by the week and, given a key decision on Friday, the SNP have insisted it “can no longer remain silent”.
The UN’s top court, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), ordered Israel to take all measures within its power to prevent genocide and enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance in the Gaza Strip.
The ICJ said it would not throw out the genocide case brought forward by South Africa as Israel requested. It said the “catastrophic humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip is at risk of deteriorating further before the court renders its final judgment” as it imposed six provisional measures.
It has led to calls for the UK to stop arms sales to Israel and make clear its support for international law by calling for a ceasefire.
READ MORE: Israel responds after ICJ issues ruling in genocide case
Given the court has now suggested there is a plausible case for genocide, former British ambassador and human rights campaigner Craig Murray has said the UK cannot continue supplying arms to Israel.
He told The National: “They plainly can’t now continue weapons shipments to Israel, which they’ve been doing regularly out of Akrotiri in Cyprus. They’ve got to stop military cooperation with Israel while this alleged genocide continues, otherwise they’re risking complicity in genocide.”
Prior to the ICJ ruling, Rishi Sunak failed to describe the killing of an “unarmed Palestinian man walking under a white flag” by Israeli forces as a war crime, after people were left shocked by ITV footage.
Though the ICJ has no power to enforce its ruling, it is binding. Given that Israel mounted a defence against South Africa, it makes it more difficult for it to dismiss the verdict. Surely, the UK will come under enormous pressure to change its stance.
AOB
THE latest episode of Tory infighting stars Foreign Secretary David Cameron and David Mundell as the latter accused the former of breaching “proper process” in appointing Michelle Mone to the House of Lords.
Mundell, who was secretary of state for Scotland from 2015 to 2019, said Cameron did not consult the Scotland Office, which is considered usual when awarding peerages to Scots.
He said Scottish businesses were “unhappy” with the appointment as they did not consider her “to be a substantial businesswoman”.
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 here