"Nicola Sturgeon isn't someone for whom oversharing comes naturally," said The Spectator's political correspondent Lucy Dunn.

Scotland's former first minister has "regularly been labelled 'dour' or 'frosty'" by both opponents and supporters. Her leadership during the Covid-19 pandemic, her stance on Scottish independence, her calamitous Gender Recognition Reform Bill – which "prompted her resignation" in 2023 – and Operation Branchform, the police probe into the finances of the SNP (which led to the arrest of her then husband Peter Murrell), have been "dissected, judged and criticised relentlessly".

But "there don't seem to be many people who really know her". Her memoir "Frankly" seems like "an attempt to shrug off that reservedness" and give people the chance to "see things from her point of view". But "her critics say she is less offering insight, more rewriting history".

'Nigh-on useless'

It's more the latter than the former, said Shona Craven in The National. Two and a half years after she was "grilled" about the implications for Scottish prison policy of saying "trans women are women", she still "stumbles" when asked if rapist Isla Bryson, who was sent to a woman's prison, is a man. "What I would say now is that anyone who commits the most heinous male crime against women probably forfeits the right to be – you know – the gender of their choice," she told ITV's Julie Etchingham.

That position on self-ID differs from what she set out in the book, as well as what she struggled with in 2023. But if she had admitted then that some people could "forfeit" their right to choose their gender, "then self-ID could not have become law and the promises she had made to activists would be broken".

The truth is, Sturgeon "began and continues to fight" the gender row, said Alan Cochrane in The Telegraph. This issue and others, like "the stupid coalition deal" she struck with the Scottish Greens and the "record drug deaths" in Scotland, brought the SNP "to its knees in last year's election". But her book is "getting pretty fair and positive licks in the media" because she "long ago completely conned a large part of the Fleet Street commentariat" into admiring her.

Personally, she has "many good qualities", including a "wicked sense of humour", and she's a "more than decent public speaker". But it's her "gallus nature – Scots for chutzpah – much more than political judgment that's got her to where she is today".

The reality is that Sturgeon was "an extremely poor politician" who "seldom did the right thing". When it comes to her judgement on policies, she was "nigh-on useless".

'Nicola Was Right All Along'

You might ask why "a fierce advocate for Scottish independence" chose London-based Pan Macmillan to publish her memoir, said Kevin McKenna in The Herald.

Indeed, the "gulf" between those who saw her every day and those for whom she was "a more peripheral, and hence more idealised, figure" is obvious from the book's promotional blurbs, said The Times' Alex Massie. None are written by people who live in Scotland.

The "indulgences" granted her by "certain parts of the impeccably right-on London left" included "oodles" of emotional intelligence. This is not just news to those of us north of the wall, "it strikes us as utter poppycock".

Ultimately, her autobiography is "designed to demonstrate, once and for all, that Nicola Was Right All Along". But she "sidles away from the only obvious and inescapable verdict on her record": poor educational and health outcomes, despite Scotland's 25% higher spending per capita than England.

"Still, it is a weakness of contemporary politics that good intentions are expected to substitute for good outcomes. In that respect, Sturgeon was an archetype of a particular type of political success."

The favourite to become the next leader of the SNP and first minister of Scotland may be crowned "with no contest", the Scottish Conservatives have warned.

John Swinney is widely tipped to take over from Humza Yousaf, whose resignation leaves a "leadership void needing to be filled in a time of crisis for the SNP", said The Courier. Douglas Ross, leader of the Scottish Tories, predicted that Swinney will quickly be voted in without a leadership election.

Swinney led the party from 2000-04, in the wake of Alex Salmond's sudden resignation, and served as Nicola Sturgeon's deputy from 2014–23. With such experience, he is considered the ultimate "safe pair of hands" within the party, said The Guardian, and is "known for his quiet charm as well as his steeliness".

Electorally 'ineffectual'

Born and raised in Edinburgh, Swinney joined the SNP in 1979, when he was 15 years old. He was elected to Westminster for North Tayside in Labour's landslide election of 1997, before entering Holyrood two years later, following the establishment of Scotland's devolved parliament.

Now 60, he led the SNP after succeeding Salmond in 2000. His tenure was short-lived and ultimately ended in failure, however, as the party failed to make progress in the 2001 general election and lost MSPs at the 2003 Holyrood election.

His time in office is "considered to be ineffectual because of poor election performances", said the Scottish Daily Express, and he stood down as leader in 2004 after disappointing results in European Parliament polls.

Swinney went on to serve as finance secretary from 2007 to 2016, initially under the returning Salmond, and then as education secretary from 2016 to 2021. He was also appointed deputy first minister by Salmond's successor, Sturgeon, in 2014, remaining in post until her political demise in 2023. 

An active member of the Church of Scotland, he won respect for his protracted negotiations with Westminster after the Smith commission, which gave further powers to Holyrood after the 2014 independence referendum. 

Swinney stepped back from frontline politics last year to spend more time with his children and wife, the TV reporter Elizabeth Quigley. He has remained loyal to Sturgeon, even as she has been engulfed in a crisis around financial mismanagement that has eroded the party's support.

A 'serious person for serious times'

Swinney has yet to confirm whether he is running for the top job again, but senior SNP figures have already given him their backing. The SNP's Westminster leader Stephen Flynn told Sky News that "serious times demand serious politics and serious people", and said Swinney was "the best person to take that forward now" for the party.

Swinney is "a vastly experienced politician", said The Guardian, and "understands the mechanics of government and the dynamic between Holyrood and the UK government better than anyone else in the Scottish parliament". He also understands the "internal dynamics and historic loyalties of SNP politicians and membership" and "would probably be the most favoured by the party's mainstream members because of his long experience and track record as a bipartisan, shrewd and centrist figure".

The current deputy leader, Keith Brown, denied claims made by opposition parties and even some within the SNP that the contest would be a "stitch-up" by "the boys club" at the top of the party.

Swinney "will bring unity hopefully to the parliament but also to the party", Brown said.

Peter Murrell, husband of former Scottish first minister Nicola Sturgeon, has been charged "in connection with the embezzlement of funds" from the SNP, the police have confirmed.

The party's former chief executive was arrested on Thursday morning and charged in the evening after questioning. He has since been released.

Murrell was first arrested in April last year, as part of a far-ranging investigation into the SNP's funding and finances. Detectives searched the couple's home and "confiscated a luxury motorhome parked in the driveway of Murrell's 92-year-old mother's home", said The Guardian. Murrell, Sturgeon and the party's then-treasurer Colin Beattie were arrested and interviewed. All three were released without charge, and Sturgeon has strenuously denied any wrongdoing.

The inquiry "focused on the status of £667,000 in donations for a pro-independence fighting fund", specifically on "allegations it had been used for the SNP's day-to-day spending".

An SNP spokesperson said the re-arrest and charge came as a "shock", while Scottish Labour's deputy leader Jackie Baillie called it "another incredibly concerning development in this long-running investigation".

Police Scotland has been "criticised for the duration of the inquiry" into the SNP's funding and finances, said The Times. First Minister Humza Yousaf said earlier this month he would welcome an end to the investigation. 

For more than two decades, Murrell "played a vital role in the SNP", turning the party into the "dominant force in Scottish politics", said The Scotsman. Given his centrality to the party, the police inquiry "is likely to have a far-reaching effect on UK politics and possibly the next general election", said The Guardian after his arrest last year.

A YouGov poll published this month showed Labour ahead of the SNP in Scotland for the first time since the 2014 independence referendum in a "sign of the governing party's decline", said The Scotsman.

Following the political turmoil of 2022, which saw three different prime ministers pass through Downing Street, it was hoped this year would provide a period of relative calm ahead of the rough and tumble of a general election expected in 2024.

But Nicola Sturgeon's resignation as Scotland's first minister set the tone for the year. Rishi Sunak struggled to maintain control of the Conservative Party in the face of Covid revelations and manoeuvrings among his top ministers, while Nigel Farage brought down the head of one of Britain's biggest banks.

Abroad, the continuing war in Ukraine was overshadowed by Hamas's deadly 7 October attacks and the subsequent Israeli bombardment of Gaza, which brought hundreds of thousands on to the streets around the world to protest. Across the pond, Donald Trump racked up nearly 100 criminal indictments over the course of the year yet still leads the opinion polls ahead of the 2024 presidential election.

Here is how the newspapers covered some of the biggest stories of the year.

Sturgeon resigns

When the Daily Record reported the sudden resignation of the all-powerful Scottish first minister Nicola Sturgeon in February with the headline "I want my Independence" few could have predicted what would happen next. 

The resignation and subsequent arrest of Peter Murrell, Sturgeon's husband and, for 24 years, the SNP's chief executive, sent the party into a tailspin from which it has never recovered. For years, the SNP was "admired, feared and envied" for its iron discipline, said Severin Carrell in The Guardian, but in just a few short weeks its once "impregnable political edifice" collapsed, and with it perhaps any remaining chance of Scottish independence.

The lockdown files

In a major scoop, The Telegraph obtained more than 100,000 WhatsApp messages sent between the then health secretary Matt Hancock and other ministers and officials at the height of the Covid-19 pandemic.

The conversations were detailed in what the paper called "The Lockdown Files" and they raised "vital new questions about the handling of the pandemic ahead of a public inquiry into the response to Covid-19", said the paper. Among the multiple revelations was Hancock's rejection of expert medical advice on care home testing.

Trump in the dock

In April, Donald Trump became the first sitting or former US president to face criminal charges when he pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business records linked to hush money payments allegedly made to adult film star Stormy Daniels during his first presidential election campaign.

Many papers led with variations on The Times's "Trump in the dock" headline in what The Independent described as "a day that shook America". But while an extraordinary moment, it was soon eclipsed by further charges brought against Trump related to the unauthorised possession of classified documents, the financial reporting in his organisations and attempts to overturn the 2020 election. 

Despite all these, the former president remains odds-on favourite to win the Republican nomination and is leading Joe Biden in head-to-head polling for next year's presidential election.

A 'happy and glorious' coronation

The organisers of King Charles' coronation in May said it would be an "unforgettable spectacle" and this pledge was "gloriously fulfilled on a day that mixed splendour and sacrament", reported the Sunday Express. 

Thousands lined the streets and millions tuned in around the world to watch the royal procession and ceremony at Westminster Abbey, although the day did not pass without incident after anti-monarchy protesters were detained, causing a significant backlash and pre-empting more recent debates around how police deal with protests.

Nigel Farage vs. NatWest

The Independent reported how NatWest lost £850 million in a single day's trading as Nigel Farage called for the entire board to quit after chief executive Dame Alison Rose stepped down in the wake of his "debanking scandal".

The row, which rumbled on for months, led not only to the departure of Rose but also Peter Flavel, chief executive of Coutts, as well as an intervention from the UK's data privacy regulator. 

In July the Treasury summoned the heads of Britain's biggest banks to explain how they intend to ensure that customers are not cancelled for their political views. The scandal cost Rose millions in pay-outs with Farage announcing in November he would sue NatWest, seeking millions of pounds in damages.

'Britain's worst baby killer'

The conviction of neonatal nurse Lucy Letby – found guilty in August of murdering seven newborns and attempting to kill another six after a 10-month trial – earned her the label of "Britain's worst baby killer".

But it was the Daily Mail that highlighted what was to become the focus of public anger over the coming weeks and ultimately lead to the setting up of a government inquiry, reporting on how hospital bosses had failed to "act on a string of warnings". Letby was sentenced to a whole-life jail term without the prospect of parole.

Hamas attacks

The world was stunned when Hamas launched a murderous attack on Israel in the early hours of 7 October. Some of the most harrowing images from that day came from a video of a student who was abducted from a music festival and heard screaming "don't kill me". Her words made the front page of the Mail on Sunday as people around the world showed their solidarity with Israel.

Yet support quickly turned to anger at what many saw as the indiscriminate targeting of Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip. The fate of the woman in the video is unknown, with Hamas claiming that 50 hostages taken on 7 October have since died in Israeli air strikes.

Useless *******s morons & ****s

The Daily Record splashed on Dominic Cummings' foul-mouth tirades on WhatsApp that were revealed at the Covid Inquiry. Boris Johnson's former senior adviser said that the government's initial plan for dealing with Covid was a "joke". 

He described the Cabinet Office, at the heart of No.10, as a "dumpster fire" and called Johnson's absence on holiday in February 2020, as Covid loomed, "insane". Cummings thought Johnson returning early from his holiday would have been "counterproductive", said The Times, while The Telegraph said that when Cummings resigned he left the country to be run by a man he described as "unfit for office".

Suella Sacked (but look who's back)

The Evening Standard was the first paper to lead on the dramatic return to frontline politics for former PM David Cameron. While the sacking of home secretary Suella Braverman had been widely anticipated following her inflammatory comments around Pro-Palestinian protests in the lead up to Remembrance Sunday, coverage of the biggest cabinet reshuffle of Rishi Sunak's premiership was dominated by the return of his predecessor-but-three.

Cameron is "well-connected on the international stage, which comes in handy when you're an incoming foreign secretary", said the BBC's political editor Chris Mason, and "he'll have useful words of advice about winning general elections too". But he also comes with significant "baggage".

Rishi Sunak is set to provoke a “constitutional row” by blocking a new Scottish bill that makes it easier for people to change their gender, according to reports.

In December, the Scottish parliament at Holyrood passed the Gender Recognition Reform Act, which cuts the waiting time for legally changing gender, lowers the minimum age for applying to 16 and eliminates the need for a medical diagnosis of gender dysphoria.

But The Times reported that the prime minister has now received legal advice that the legislation, also known as the “self-ID” bill, “will have an adverse impact on UK-wide equality legislation, enabling ministers to block it”.

The paper said a final decision was expected within days on whether to prohibit Holyrood’s presiding officer from submitting the bill for royal assent – a move that would “be an unprecedented intervention in 25 years of devolution”, said Sky News.

What did the papers say?

Gender recognition is a devolved matter and the SNP-Green government in Scotland has insisted that the changes do not affect England and Wales. But UK ministers “fear it may lead to gender tourism”, The Times reported, and “allow biologically male Scottish inmates in English jails to demand to be put in women’s prisons”.

Concerns are also said to have been raised about people who change gender in Scotland having a different legal sex in England and Wales. Some opponents point out that “IT infrastructure used to administer benefits would have to be overhauled”, said the paper, and that “organisations offering single-sex spaces for women could be forced to adopt differing policies depending where they are in the UK”.

A senior government figure told the Financial Times that “there isn’t much disagreement that legally we have to act”.

In a foreword to a new report by the Policy Exchange think tank, the former advocate general for Scotland, Richard Keen, said: “It would not only be impractical but constitutionally improper for the UK government to permit a devolved legislature to enact a provision that had a material impact upon the operation of the law throughout the United Kingdom.”

Citing such concerns, Sunak last month insisted it would be “completely reasonable” for the UK government to consider blocking the gender reforms.

What next?

Section 35 of the Scotland Act allows ministers an effective veto on Scottish law, by preventing the presiding officer of the Scottish Parliament sending the bill to the King for royal assent. This has to happen within 28 days of the bill passing into law, which would give Sunak until Wednesday to act.

While technically legal, blocking the gender bill would be the “nuclear option”, said The Spectator’s new political editor Katy Balls. Invoking a Section 35 order for the first time ever “would lead to a clash both on devolution and the trans debate – with women’s rights campaigners warning that the proposed legislation could put women and girls’ safety at risk”.

With the SNP already accusing Westminster of “denying democracy” by vetoing a second referendum on Scottish independence, said HuffPost UK, “this would be the political equivalent of throwing a match into a box of fireworks”.

The Scottish government said any attempt to undermine the democratic will of the Scottish Parliament will be “vigorously contested”. A constitutional expert predicted that the row would end up in the Supreme Court.

“Using such a radical mechanism as a veto power does rather play into the SNP narrative that Westminster is denying democracy, which seems to me to be politically risky,” the unnamed expert told the news site. “As we approach the 25th anniversary of devolution, it is a big moment.”

The Financial Times reported that in a bid to “appease equalities campaigners”, Sunak intends to bring forward “long-delayed UK legislation to ban conversion therapy, including for transgender people”.

But in a further headache for the prime minister, LGBTQ+ campaigners have accused his government of instigating a “trans travel ban”, after Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch last week announced plans to review the list of countries and territories whose process for changing gender on legal documents is recognised by the UK.

Campaign group Stonewall warned that the government was sending “a message” that trans people are viewed “as a threat to be contained, not citizens to be respected”.

Nicola Sturgeon has vowed to “find another democratic, lawful and constitutional means by which the Scottish people can express their will” on independence, after plans to hold a second referendum were blocked.

The UK Supreme Court ruled that the Scottish parliament cannot stage an indyRef2 without Westminster’s consent, dashing the Scottish Nationalist Party (SNP) leader’s hopes of holding a vote next October on whether Scotland should break away from the UK.

Speaking hours after the court’s ruling was delivered, Sturgeon said that her party would instead approach the next general election as a “de facto referendum”.

But which way Scottish voters will swing remains unclear. Polling shows that public opinion has remained fairly evenly split since the 2014 referendum, as arguments about the pros and cons of independence rage on.

To find out how closely you’ve been paying attention to the latest developments in the news and other global events, put your knowledge to the test with our Quiz of The Week.

Need a reminder of some of the other headlines over the past seven days?

• Supermarkets across the UK are rationing eggs as the country is hit by its worst ever outbreak of avian flu
• Germany’s national football team took part in a silent protest ahead of their first match at the 2022 Fifa World Cup in Qatar
• The only known letter to Marilyn Monroe from her estranged father is going up for auction
• A legal appeal against the removal of Shamima Begum’s UK citizenship began
• And a British angler made headlines by hooking a monster goldfish weighing almost 30kg (4st 10lb).

Traditionally, it is in August that Edinburgh “casts off its staid reputation” and shows itself off to the world as a “vibrant, cosmopolitan, cultural centre”, said The Daily Telegraph. But this year, the hundreds of thousands of people who flocked to the city for the Edinburgh Festival and Fringe met a sight described by some as nothing short of apocalyptic. Owing to a strike by refuse workers, mounds of rubbish bags lay piled up on the streets; noxious slime oozed onto pavements from overflowing public bins; and a foul stench hung heavy in the air.

Initially, the SNP Government tried to pin the blame on Edinburgh’s Labour-run council, said The Times, but that strategy unravelled when workers in a string of other local authorities walked out too. Nor is there yet an end in sight. This week, unions rejected an offer of a 5% pay rise, plus a one-off payment for lower earners, saying it would do too little to help the half of Scottish council workers who are paid less than £25,000pa.

Scotland is in the midst of a summer of discontent, said Tom Harris in the Daily Mail: next week, schools and nurseries will close for three days as a result of strikes by cleaners and other support staff. And though Nicola Sturgeon’s SNP administration has now offered extra funding to help settle the disputes, critics blame it for slashing local authority budgets in the first place, leaving them ill-prepared for the cost-of-living crisis.

This is yet another setback, to add to the long list the SNP has presided over. It suits Sturgeon to blame Westminster; but the country’s real problem is that it is governed by people who’ve no real interest in the day-to-day grind of government. They haven’t joined the SNP to raise school standards, or cut NHS waiting lists. They have only one real goal: the creation of an independent Scotland.

You might expect the escalating strikes to pose a threat to Sturgeon’s grip on power, said Lukanyo Mnyanda in the FT. But the divisive issue of independence remains very potent in Scotland, and while that debate rages, other matters “tend to take a backseat”. Her Government has survived a barrage of questions about its record, after 15 years in power, so it’s unlikely that the rubbish on the streets will prove a tipping point.

Politicians in Scotland have said “heart-breaking” new drug death statistics are a “badge of shame” for Nicola Sturgeon.

Although the number of people who died of drug misuse last year dropped by nine to 1,330, Scotland continues to have “by far the highest drug death rate recorded by any country in Europe,” said the BBC.

Deaths up among women

The new data, from National Records for Scotland, showed that of those who died, 65% were aged between 35 and 54 and 70% were men. Drug-related deaths among women increased by 8.5% to 397 – a record high.

Over the five years to 2021, Dundee city had the highest death rate (45.2 per 100,000 population), followed by Glasgow city (44.4) and Inverclyde (35.7).

‘Utterly shameful’

Opposition parties blame cuts to drug rehab and addiction programmes by the Scottish government.

Scottish Conservatives leader Douglas Ross said the SNP government must “accept their current approach isn’t working”. Scottish Labour's drug policy spokesperson, Claire Baker, said the “utterly shameful” new figures showed the government was not making sufficient progress.

In June, a report found that Scotland’s addiction services have failed to achieve key targets that were set to reduce drug deaths. Nearly 60% of services did not give addicts the option to start treatment the same day they turned up. Writing for The National in 2020, Martin Powell, head of partnerships at the Transform Drug Policy Foundation, said that “just 40% those who need treatment are in it”.

Areport by Audit Scotland has urged ministers to provide more transparency about initiatives aimed at tackling the scourge of addiction in the country.

Root causes

Poverty has also been blamed. The new data showed that people in the most deprived areas were 15 times more likely to have died from drug use than those in the least deprived areas.

It is a familiar story: in 2019, Scottish Drugs Forum’s chief executive, David Liddell, declared that “poverty is the root of Scotland’s fatal drug overdose crisis”.

In a guest post for the Poverty Alliance, Liddell wrote that Scotland’s drug problem “has its roots in the harsh climate of 1980s deindustrialisation and the economic and social impact in the subsequent decades”. Addiction took hold because Scotland did not “chose a more interventionist approach by which the state created alternative employment and opportunity during these changes”, he argued.

First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has previously admitted that the number of deaths was “a national disgrace”. She acknowledged that her government had not done enough to tackle the problem.

Scotland’s drugs policy minister, Angela Constance, said the problem could be alleviated if the UK government stopped “criminalising some of the most marginalised and vulnerable individuals”.

Speaking to The Herald, Constance said the stats do not mean her “national mission” to tackle drugs deaths is having no meaningful impact. She called for the 1971 Misuse of Drugs Act to be overhauled so that Scotland could legally open safe consumption rooms.

Nicola Sturgeon is limbering up for battle, said Fraser Nelson in The Daily Telegraph. The SNP leader launched her new bid for Scottish independence last week “with speeches, a 72-page economic dossier and the promise of a referendum next year”.

It will be an uphill struggle. Under devolution rules, the UK Government needs to agree to the vote, and “it won’t”: it argues that the Scots roundly rejected independence in 2014. The SNP could, in theory, appeal to the Supreme Court. That’s “a long shot”, but say it works, and she gets her referendum, “what then?”

Polls show a slim majority for staying in the UK even now, after Brexit, an inflation crisis, and with a law-breaking old Etonian in No. 10. Barely a third want a poll next year. It would be different if the SNP had a decent record, after 15 years in power: in fact, it’s genuinely atrocious. Schools are in “decay”, drug deaths are the highest in Europe and public spending has reached 61% of GDP.

Sturgeon’s independence plan now involves rejoining the EU, which would create a hard border with England and “massive and permanent economic disruption”. Project Fear is back, said Joyce McMillan in The Scotsman. Note the “profoundly unattractive” mixture of threat, negativity and insult in unionist arguments.

By contrast, the SNP dossier puts a very positive case, examining ten “comparator countries” – including Denmark, Norway and Ireland – which all have higher GDP per capita and lower inequality than the UK. And really, the unionist Tories who “gave us Brexit” have a cheek lecturing Scotland about the dangers of creating “a fierce EU border between Berwick and Carlisle”. Besides, it all depends how such borders are handled: trade is “largely frictionless” across the EU frontier between Norway and Sweden, for example.

The anti-independence parties are “running scared” of Scottish democracy, said Paul Kavanagh in The National. The SNP has been the biggest party in Holyrood since 2007. The current SNP-Green coalition has a “legitimate” mandate to seek a vote. Westminster cannot veto that and still hold to the “traditional unionist understanding” of the UK as a “voluntary coalition of nations”.

Whatever the ultimate outcome, Sturgeon knows what she’s doing, said Brian Taylor in The Herald. She wants to refresh the case for an independent Scotland. A series of papers on issues such as currency, the EU, pensions and the welfare state will follow. The idea is to “show progress” to her more plaintive, querulous party members; and “pick a fight with the UK Government”.

The big question that the SNP and the Greens are posing is this: if other smaller nations can thrive, then “Why Not Scotland?” Those words are likely to become the campaign slogan. And while the path to “Indyref2” could well be a rocky one, the “studied disdain” of the Tories along the way could bolster the SNP politically. What we’ve seen so far is “just the prologue. Act One and more to follow.”

Eoin McLaughlin and Seán Kenny of University College Cork on the economic lessons to be drawn from Ireland’s 1922 split from the UK

The UK local elections in May saw gains for nationalists in Scotland and Northern Ireland, raising the prospect of increased debates over the future make-up of the country. In Scotland, First Minister Nicola Sturgeon is hoping to hold a second independence referendum in 2023.

The economic context may have deteriorated since 2014 due to Brexit and Covid, but two key issues remain pertinent: Scotland’s choice of currency and whether its public finances would be sustainable. On both subjects, there are some useful lessons that can be drawn from the last secession from the UK, namely that of Ireland in 1922.

Sturgeon has indicated that an independent Scotland would be open to “sharing” the UK pound for a while to help bring stability. Ireland took the same approach until 1928, when it launched its own currency, the punt, pegged one-for-one to the pound sterling, which made sense because Ireland was heavily integrated into the UK economy.

The peg was managed by a currency board and was comparatively stable for over 50 years. The price for Ireland was the loss of monetary policy, choosing to follow UK interest rates, set by the Bank of England, instead. This is in line with the so-called “policy trilemma” in economics that says that a country cannot maintain a fixed exchange rate, control over interest rates and free capital flows at the same time, but must choose two out of the three alternatives.

Had interest rates not been harmonised, foreign investors might have pulled their money out of Ireland for fear that the currency peg wouldn’t hold and they would lose out as a result. Such a withdrawal would only increase the chances of a currency collapse, potentially making necessary imports unaffordable (this is known as a balance of payments crisis). Indeed, this happened in 1955 when Ireland did not raise interest rates in line with the Bank of England, resulting in a sharp recession and increases in emigration.

Over the years, UK monetary policy was also a constraint on the Irish government’s budget. Although in theory it was free to decide how to tax and spend, the need to maintain the sterling peg prevented various Irish governments from deviating too far from the UK’s approach to borrowing.

An independent Scotland is likely to face similar constraints. In 2018, the Sustainable Growth Commission (SGC), an economic body set up by the Scottish government to come up with credible financial plans for independence, stipulated that a pegged Scottish currency would require significant fiscal discipline. It noted that the “6% to 7% fiscal deficit is not sustainable”. In 2022-23, Scotland’s deficit is projected to exceed 10%.

The punt abandoned its sterling peg in 1979. By that time, the Irish volume of trade with continental Europe had grown significantly, following its accession to the pre-EU European Economic Community in 1973. Sterling was in the midst of a major appreciation in value on the back of the discovery of North Sea oil, rising 55% between 1977 and 1981.

However, Irish fiscal policy now lacked its traditional disciplinary anchor. Ireland’s debt grew significantly after 1979 and began to look precarious until the government reined in its budget and introduced pro-growth policies, including devaluing the punt, in the second half of the 1980s.

Fiscal liabilities

Among the most challenging issues for any dissolving nation state is apportioning government debts. In 2014, in language remarkably similar to the Anglo-Irish Treaty a century before, the UK Treasury issued a communiqué stating that, “[an] independent Scotland would become responsible for a fair and proportionate share of the UK’s current liabilities”.

With Ireland, that wasn’t what transpired. It ended up being granted the largest debt relief in modern history, in return for accepting the status quo border with Northern Ireland. Scotland doesn’t have a comparable bargaining chip, though the British nuclear submarine base at Faslane near Glasgow is very contentious. Perhaps the Scottish government would be allowed to write off debts in exchange for abandoning its anti-nuclear stance and allowing the UK unfettered access to Faslane.

Having said that, the Irish civil war (1922-23) and the Northern Ireland troubles (1969-97) demonstrate that the people may still decide that sacrificing something of great political importance in exchange for a debt write-off may ultimately be a step too far.

Fiscal constraints

Scotland currently runs a slightly different income tax policy to the rest of the UK. It charges an extra percentage point of tax to those in its two higher income bands: 41% on earnings between £43,663 and £150,000 and 46% on earnings above £150,000. It also has slightly wider bands than the rest of the UK so that people pay these rates on more of their income.

Instead of extracting greater revenue from wealthier citizens, Ireland was compelled after independence to lower the income taxes of these people who had supported the British union to discourage them from taking their money out of the country. The government then had to raise revenues in other ways, such as via budget cuts and increased duties on alcohol and tobacco. This increased inequality by inflicting most of the pain on the (predominantly nationalist) working classes.

This was quite a shift for Ireland. In contrast to 19th century nationalist rhetoric, Ireland had received comparatively generous social spending in the final decades of the union. A significant share of the Irish economy had also benefited from free trade with Britain. Again, the same could be said of Scotland.

A final contentious issue is pension contributions. While the SGC said back in 2018 that they would be affordable, the nation has an elderly population. Would the state pension be compatible with a balanced Scottish budget? Ireland learned that tackling the pension issue can produce a disproportionately negative political response, when the electorate voted against the ruling Cumann na nGaedheal party in 1932 for “tampering with the old age pensioners”.

There is no doubt that Scotland, like Ireland in the early 20th century, could succeed as an independent state. Indeed, key strengths such as oil and gas, renewables, financial services and higher education suggest it would start off in a wealthier position.

But managing the transition won’t be straightforward. Ireland’s experience shows that the need for fiscal discipline may be politically costly and adjustment may not be shared equally. Those who are promised the most through independence may be the ones that find themselves having to do the bulk of the heavy lifting.

Eoin McLaughlin, senior lecturer in economics, University College Cork, and Seán Kenny, post-doctoral researcher in economics, University College Cork.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

1. Studying health inequalities has been my life’s work. What’s about to happen in the UK is unprecedented

Michael Marmot in The Guardian

On impending calamity

“Studying the relationship between social conditions and inequalities in health” has been “my life’s work”, says Michael Marmot in The Guardian. A decade of austerity “damaged public health and made health equity worse”, writes the director of the UCL Institute of Health Equity, but “the cost of living crisis – and the chancellor’s failure to deal with it – is unprecedented” in terms of “its threats to the health and wellbeing of the nation”. Taking away even £10 a week from someone struggling to get by “can mean not just the choice between heating and eating but doing without both”, he warns, “and that will be bad both physically and psychologically”. Poverty is “literally a matter of life and death for those on the margins”. In the 2010s, “improvement in health in the UK slowed dramatically, inequalities increased, and health for the poorest people got worse”, he says. This was “all amplified by the pandemic”. Unless we deal with the “inability of people to meet their basic needs, by adequate income and services”, we are “in danger of inflicting a humanitarian calamity in one of the richest countries in the world”.

Read more

2. As Ukraine braces for a second round, the West has a duty to step up

David Ignatius in the Washington Post

On a moral obligation

With the “second bloody round” of the war in Ukraine about to start, the West must “move quickly” to provide Kyiv with heavier weapons to resist a “savage” new Russian assault, says David Ignatius in The Washington Post. After the first round of the war produced a “decisive defeat for Russian invaders”, Moscow is now regrouping for a campaign to control a slice of Ukraine stretching from the Donbas in the east all the way to Odessa at the western edge of Ukraine’s Black Sea coast, he adds. If this is successful it could lead Moscow to “partition the country”. Moving heavier weapons into Ukraine is “urgent” while Russian forces are still regrouping, he says, and “transport from Nato countries that ring Ukraine should be easier now, with most Russian forces gone from the north and west of the country”. It should be up to Ukrainians to decide what they are willing to concede, and how much risk and punishment they are willing to endure, he says. But if the Ukrainians are “determined to repel the invaders”, the US has a “moral duty” to do what it can to help them succeed.

Read more

3. Nicola Sturgeon never has to pay a price for failure

Alex Massie in The Times

On unaccountability

When the “final reckoning” of Covid-19 is made, says Alex Massie in The Times, few of our political leaders are likely to emerge from the pandemic in credit. “All shall be blamed save one,” he predicts, “for the ordinary rules of accountability do not apply to Nicola Sturgeon.” He accepts that “it is true that, for much of the pandemic, she has proven a more assured communicator” than Boris Johnson. But the Scottish first minister’s “supposedly” assured handling of the pandemic “made no difference whatsoever” because “outcomes in Scotland have been broadly the same as outcomes in England”. He cites a study published in The Lancet that found England has endured a slightly greater rate of Covid deaths than Scotland, but notes that when measured in terms of excess mortality, England has “marginally outperformed Scotland”. Therefore, “Sturgeon’s decisions, her insistence on organising matters differently from England, had no measurable effect”. Not that Massie believes this will damage her brand. “Just as the Conservative Party has dominated English politics for decades, so there is no reason to suppose the SNP’s hegemony will end at any point in the foreseeable future.”

Read more

4. The return of Jeremy Kyle to TV is a scary prospect in times of economic struggle

Kuba Shand-Baptiste on the i news site

On nasty narratives

It’s just under three years since The Jeremy Kyle Show was last on air, writes Kuba Shand-Baptiste on the i news site. But following an inquiry that exposed “dark practices” and the details of the tragic death of guest Steve Dymond, she finds it “absurd” that “in a few short weeks”, Kyle will be back on our screens hosting a show on Rupert Murdoch’s TalkTV. How long, she wonders, before the “same dog-whistle rhetoric about the poor rears its head again – especially as the cost of living crisis worsens”. The Jeremy Kyle Show launched in 2005, “a time when the poor were increasingly being demonised for their reliance on the welfare state”. She remembers the “performative” rants of “privately-educated Kyle”, including when he told a guest struggling with cocaine addiction: “Go ahead mate. Get lost. Do one. Kill yourself.” It is “significant” that he will make his “big return as poverty increases and resources continue to dwindle”. “It’s time we all stopped accepting false narratives about working-class people.”

Read more

5. A ‘no-fault’ divorce? Playing the blame game can fuel a marriage

Rowan Pelling in The Telegraph

On the joy of fault-finding

“I suppose I should be gladdened by the advent of no-fault divorces, which came into effect on Wednesday,” says Rowan Pelling in The Telegraph. But “the concept of being blameless in marriage feels disingenuous”. For Pelling, who has been married for 27 years, finding fault is “the one enthralling marital game that anyone with a wedding ring on their finger can play”. According to Pelling: “Everyone, absolutely everyone, is keeping score from day one – even if they don’t know it yet.” Many – if not most – marriages “break down into saints and transgressors, headteachers and juvenile delinquents, judges and criminals”, she says. “Passion should still have its due, in the shape of a meticulous hand-written litany of faults, spanning the entire marriage – a sign both parties cared enough to note them.”

Read more

1. Sally Rooney has discovered that novelists are cursed

James Marriott in The Times

on literary criticism

“There’s a weird media alchemy that transforms a novelist into a ‘public intellectual’,” writes James Marriott in The Times. While some novelists “yearningly pursue cultural relevance” others “stumble into the role” and find their works “are doomed to be interpreted not as works of the imagination but as public statements, their every action scrutinised for its socio-political significance and evidence of moral rectitude”. Novelist Sally Rooney “embarked on this melancholy trajectory this week” after criticism of her decision to boycott an Israeli publishing house. It seems that “controversy is now unavoidable for a publicly celebrated novelist”, writes Marriott. “The danger now is that our novelists get no freedom at all and we cage them in with our bad-faith readings, hatred of context, excessive literalism and obsession with politics over art. After all, I want to read another Rooney novel,” he concludes.

Read more

2. Anti-British, anti-Brexit Macron has turned France into a hostile state

Allister Heath in The Telegraph

on fraught relations

“Tragic doesn’t even begin to describe it,” writes Allister Heath in The Telegraph. “Relations between France and Britain, Europe’s two greatest nations, the country of my birth and the country of my home, are at a multi-generational low.” And the “real stumbling block to renewed post-EU friendship” is Emmanuel Macron himself, says Heath. He is “an arrogant, uninspiring president desperate not to end up a one termer like Nicolas Sarkozy and Francois Hollande”. With an election looming Macron hopes to “shore up his nationalistic credentials in a country that is shifting Right-wards culturally.” Our two nations are “desperately” in need of “reconciliation”, says Heath. “But only a fool would be optimistic.”

Read more

3. The Guardian view on austerity: get ready for its return

The Guardian editorial

on the Budget

“In British politics, unquestionably the best salesman of his generation is Boris Johnson, who has made the electorate some unbelievable promises: get Brexit done, ‘level up’ the country, race to net zero,” writes The Guardian. “The result won him a landslide at the last general election and still-healthy poll ratings today.” But in two weeks, “his government will have to disclose its cash position”, continues the paper. “When Rishi Sunak reads out those figures in the budget and the three-year spending review” the “strange jubilation” that has hung over the party this autumn will “dissipate”. “Reality will bite and, the early forecasts indicate, it has sharp teeth.”

Read more

4. Prince William is wrong: let Bezos go to space!

Tom Chivers on UnHerd

on indulgences

Jeff Bezos’ $7 billion space mission certainly feels “indulgent”, says Tom Chivers on UnHerd, “especially when you’re taking William Shatner to space for four minutes”. But Prince William’s assertion that we should concentrate on saving this planet first, is “wrong and silly”, according to Chivers. It is not an “either-or” situation. “You could say to Jeff Bezos that all the money he’s spent on Blue Origin could have been spent on developing green energy,” he writes. But “if he’d done that, the $7 billion he’s spent might have covered … a bit more than 20% of the cost of the Hinckley Point C nuclear power plant”. He continues: “Seven billion is a rounding error – less than a rounding error – in the effort to prevent climate change. Complaining that we’re wasting money on it is like worrying you’ll empty the sea with a teaspoon.”

Read more

5. Nicola Sturgeon is right – democracy must prevail

Robert Shrimsley in the Financial Times

on the union stalemate

“[Nicola] Sturgeon made two forceful points on tactics” in her recent interview with the Financial Times, writes Robert Shrimsley in the same paper. The first – and most important – was that “democracy must ultimately prevail: a nation consistently voting for parties demanding a new referendum cannot indefinitely be ignored”, he writes. While it “cannot be a given that her patience will be rewarded” we should be mindful that “the Union exists by consent and it cannot be maintained indefinitely by denying expression”. If the government insists on denying Scotland another referendum it would “undermine both democracy and the nature of the Union”. “While Sturgeon admitted she did not know how the stalemate would play out, she maintains ‘it will resolve itself on the side of democracy, because actually, the alternative is pretty unthinkable’.” Shrimsley concludes: “Ultimately she has to be right. If the nationalist tide does not soon ebb it will have to be confronted. Democracy can be delayed. It must not be denied.”

Read more

1. The SNP’s plans for rejoining the EU don’t add up

Oliver Kamm in The Times

on Scottish rejoiners

“The Scottish National Party is a latecomer to the pro-European cause,” writes Oliver Kamm in The Times, having “recommended leaving the Community in the 1975 referendum now it has the zeal of a convert”. However, “the SNP’s plans, like the Brexit campaign itself, promise speculative benefits while ignoring real trade-offs”. Were Scotland to rejoin, “it would enjoy some gains from being part of its internal market but at the price of erecting trade barriers to the rest of the UK”, Kamm says, while “the concessions previously enjoyed by the UK within the EU, such as the budget rebate and opting out of the euro, would probably not be on offer.” If Scotland plans to pursue a strategy of getting their feet back under the table in Brussels, they will have to recognise that “EU governments want Britain back but not at any price”.

Read more

2. The landmark report on racism should clear the way for a realistic debate on inequality in Britain

Fraser Myers in The Telegraph

on modern Britain

“Since the Black Lives Matter protests last year, an unflattering picture of Britain has been painted”, writes Fraser Myers in The Telegraph. “Britain, we are told, is institutionally, systemically and irredeemably racist”, with discrimination running rife in “our education system, in our workplaces, in our culture and even in our unconscious thoughts”. So will the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities report, released today, “challenge this doom-laden view”? It does not paint the UK as an “apocalyptic wasteland of racism”, instead suggesting that it is a “beacon” and a “model” for “other white-majority countries”. “The saturation of the ‘Britain is racist’ message has consequences, including for ethnic-minority Brits”, Myers adds. “Let’s hope this report opens up a more balanced – and realistic – debate about inequality in Britain.”

Read more

3. It’s right to get rid of ‘Bame’ – but this report minimises racism in the process

Amanda Parker in The Independent

on absolving complicity

“Along with others who’ve been lobbying for change, I’m definitely raising a glass in celebration of the decision to stop using” the term BAME, writes Amanda Parker in The Independent. But “my joy falls flat with the rest of the race disparities unit’s conclusions”. The report “concludes that because students of African and Indian heritage have higher than average education outcomes at GCSE level, this is proof that we’re no longer a racist society”. But what it fails to account for is that “despite performing least well in education”, white Britons “outperform their ethnically diverse peers in employment and social mobility”. The unit “overlooks what’s happening in GP surgeries and hospitals”, while ignoring “data on redundancies during the pandemic”, she adds. Despite the unit’s findings, racism in Britain remains “nuanced and complex”.

Read more

4. If the Queen has nothing to hide, she should tell us what artefacts she owns

Dan Hicks in The Guardian

on looted heirlooms

“As with ethical consumption in fashion retail, today people want to know where the culture they consume comes from – how it got here, and whether anybody is asking for it back”, says Dan Hicks in The Guardian. “This question of transparency comes into focus” after it was revealed that “Her Majesty’s private estates were exempted from the 2017 Cultural Property (Armed Conflicts) Act”. “In the colonial era, British royal power commemorated dispossession as a source of its legitimacy”, Hicks says. But “in today’s very different world cultural legitimacy requires that stealing is neither triumphantly displayed nor hidden away or covered up”. From “our nation’s museums to whatever it is that hangs from the picture-hooks of Sandringham House, the British public and the world deserve openness when it comes to questions of theft”.

Read more

5. Your Tinder match will soon be able to run a background check on you

Dr Karen Levy in The New York Times

on dating data

“There’s something to be said for the idea that intimacy is based on having discretion to share information with others”, writes Karen Levy in The New York Times. But Match Group – which owns Tinder, OKCupid and Match.com – is taking steps to make getting to know your partner easier by helping “run background checks on potential dates”. “It’s easy to understand why Match Group is making this move”, she says, as “potential partners sometimes deceive each other”, while “gender-based violence is a serious and prevalent problem”. But “it’s not hard to imagine how background checks might open the door to other kinds of data”. “Should I know whether someone has filed for bankruptcy or been married before or owns property? Should I be able to sort partners by their credit score?”, she asks. Introducing this level of checking “seems at odds with how we typically learn about one another – gradually, and with the benefit of context”.

Read more

1. Now, more than ever, the PM must hold firm on refusing a Scottish independence referendum

Henry Hill in The Telegraph

on the Salmond inquiry

The scandal unfolding in Holyrood over the Scottish government’s botched attempts to deal with sexual harassment accusations against Alex Salmond has revealed “a political culture in a dire state”, says Henry Hill in The Telegraph. A skilful performance from First Minister Nicola Sturgeon at Wednesday’s inquiry means “it seems unlikely… that the chaos will lead to the immediate downfall of the first minister”. But to ensure the health of the union, Boris Johnson must refuse a referendum, forcing the question of independence “beyond Sturgeon’s time in office” and thus negating her “unique connection to Scottish voters”.

Read more

2. Boris Johnson has double standards on the IRA

David Aaronovitch in The Times

on historic admissions

Roy Greenslade, the former editor of the Daily Mirror and a journalism ethics professor, revealed he was a silent supporter of the Provisional IRA in an “unrepentant admission” featured in the British Journalism Review this week, writes David Aaronovitch in The Times. “Yet,” says Aaronovitch, “such is the character of the prime minister that I couldn’t help wondering whether, had Greenslade become an enthusiastic Brexiteer late in his career, he might have avoided the condemnation and won instead a seat in the House of Lords.” That’s what happened last summer when Claire Fox, formerly of the Irish Freedom Movement, became Baroness Fox. “So IRA-supporting Greenslade is to be condemned but the even more IRA-supporting Fox is to be ennobled. And why?” asks Aaronovitch. “It’s simple: Johnson doesn’t care and he and his coterie don’t think you care either.”

Read more

3. The pandemic has laid bare the social care crisis as never before

Cathy Newman in The Independent

on a creaking system

“It’s getting on for two years since Boris Johnson stood outside Number Ten and promised, in his first speech as prime minister, to ‘fix the crisis in social care once and for all’,” writes Cathy Newman in The Independent. But so far “an ominous silence” has descended over those plans. The coronavirus crisis has revealed the scale of the social care crisis. “A lack of staff, years of underfunding and a fragmented system have all contributed to what they [those working within the sector] believe was a preventable tragedy,” Newman adds.

Read more

4. Rishi’s nightmare: will inflation crush the recovery?

Kate Andrews in The Spectator

on the spring budget

“At first” increasing corporation tax “seems to make no sense”, says Kate Andrew in The Spectator. “Britain is in the middle of the worst economic crash in recorded history, with a Chancellor who is famously keen on low taxes, spending control and sound money.” So why is Rishi Sunak increasing taxes on business? “The explanation most Tories comfort themselves with is that Sunak wants to explain to a high-spending Prime Minister that today’s cash splurge is tomorrow’s tax rise,” she says. But Sunak is “motivated by something else… not dreams of fiscal sanity… but nightmares… [about] an inflation resurgence that could crush Britain’s economic recovery”.

Read more

5. Irish outrage at Pontins obscures the truth about anti-Traveller racism

Seamas O’Reilly in The Guardian

on blatant discrimination

“I was well into my adult years when I realised a word that I… had been using as an insult was actually a name,” Seamss O’Reilly writes in The Guardian. “You could be called this word if you had scuffed trainers, or if your school uniform had gone a little threadbare.” It meant you were a “cheapskate, ingrate, reprobate and wretch”. He continues that he was reminded of the “power of that word” when news broke that holiday chain Pontins had a list of surnames that it banned from staying at its resorts. “We know that no one in Ireland is more Othered than members of the travelling community,” he adds.

Read more

1. Alex Salmond inquiry’s credibility has been undermined and Crown Office’s independence trashed

John McLellan in The Edinburgh Evening News

on a fishy inquiry

“It doesn’t matter whether you think conspiracy or cock-up was at the heart of the botched inquiry into complaints of sexual harassment” against Alex Salmond, writes John McLellan in the Edinburgh Evening News. “All you need to know is the Scottish government was warned it would fail but pressed on.” McLellan says “you don’t need to be a Salmond fan to accept this needs examining, or that having been subjected to a biased government investigation... he’s entitled to put forward his side of the story”. Whether the end result is a finding of corruption or incompetence, “the inquiry’s credibility [has been] undermined” and “the Crown Office’s independence trashed”.

Read more

2. Rishi Sunak must deliver a workers’ budget to ensure a post-Covid recovery

Frances O’Grady in The Guardian

on a green revival

“We all hope the pandemic is receding”, writes Frances O’Grady in The Guardian, “but what it leaves behind is the prospect of mass unemployment and whole industries fighting for survival”. The general secretary of the Trades Union Congress says that at next week’s budget, “working people across the UK need the chancellor to set out a new vision of good jobs for everyone”. Calling for job creation, she adds that “a powerful green stimulus package would revitalise communities that have lost traditional industries, transform firms and provide better opportunities”.

Read more

3. A £100 dog licence would make buyers think first

Janice Turner in The Times

on licensing pets

Janice Turner is upset by a “new delicacy” that contains salmon, peanut butter and sweet potato and is “100% natural, with no added salts, sugars or preservatives”. What’s got her so hot under the collar about this snack? That it is for dogs. With the “doggy pound” soaring as more people buy dogs and splash cash in pet stores, she calls for a return of the dog licence, abolished in 1987. “Make registration £100, with a compulsory microchip, add a £50 annual fee easily paid online”, she says in The Times. “It’s a modest fee given that some salmon-snacking dogs eat better than families who use food banks.”

Read more

4. It’s time to stop tampering with literary classics

Ben Lawrence in The Daily Telegraph

on unedifying rewrites

“Publishing houses love delving into classic novels for ‘re-imagined’ follow-ups”, writes Ben Lawrence in The Telegraph, but he is no fan of the results. “Literary classics are classics for a reason”, he argues, and “tampering with them in prequels, sequels or alternative versions does little to edify the original”. He wonders whether Ken Loach will soon produce a cinematic version of The Great Gatsby, “relocated to the sugar beet fields of Norfolk with a migrant worker in thrall to his enigmatic boss”.

Read more

5. It’s not a ‘home smear test’ trial – it’s a ‘home HPV test’. Here’s why the distinction matters

Lydia Brain in The Independent

on clear messaging

“News of the first NHS trial for HPV self-testing... is a positive step forward for anyone at risk of cervical cancer”, says Lydia Brain in The Independent. But its announcement “has also shone a light on the confusion that exists around the current cervical screening programme”. Even Health Secretary Matt Hancock got “the difference between a swab for HPV (the virus that causes the vast majority of cervical cancers)” and a home HPV test mixed up. And his mistake “really goes to show is that the language around cervical screening has become quite confusing”. But the differences between the HPV and a “smear test” are key. “It’s too important to leave this set of health messages to chance”.

Read more

Scotland is moving to tighten up its coronavirus restrictions after passing 7,000 deaths from confirmed or suspected Covid-19 since the pandemic began.

The ramped-up restrictions will see click-and-collect services limited to essential shopping, new rules on collecting takeaways from inside restaurants and will see Scots only allowed to leave home for essential purposes.

First Minister Nicola Sturgeon chose to increase restrictions following a meeting with her cabinet this morning, taking the opposite approach to Boris Johnson who is focusing on compliance with existing Covid restrictions after gathering his cabinet on Sunday.

Deaths north of the border

Scotland is currently battling an increase in deaths, with official data showing that 384 deaths were registered which mentioned Covid-19 on the death certificate between 4 and 10 January, up 197 on the previous week.

The country went into lockdown on 5 January with people only allowed to leave their homes for essential purposes and all schools moved to remote learning for the whole of January.

Addressing the Scottish parliament, Sturgeon today said that Scots should not “think in terms of the maximum interactions you can have without breaking the rules”.

The warning echoes Health Secretary Matt Hancock’s comments on Sky News’ Sophy Ridge on Sunday last weekend in which he said England’s rules were “not there as boundaries to be pushed”, and come after a bumpy series of months in Scotland’s pandemic response.

In November, the Financial Times (FT) reported that “weeks of official statistics suggest that proportionately more people have actually been dying of coronavirus in Scotland than in England”.

While Hancock and Sturgeon are this week singing from the same hymn sheet, Scotland has diverged from England in its approach to containing the pandemic. And the death rate in Scotland “challenges a popular image of Sturgeon and her government as being more effective in the fight against coronavirus”, the paper adds.

Disunited kingdom

The UK’s response to the pandemic has given the Scottish National Party (SNP) a new argument for independence, according to some of its most prominent MPs, including Joanna Cherry, a front runner to succeed Sturgeon as SNP leader.

In May, she told The Times that the “incompetent handling of Brexit and the Covid crisis by Westminster builds the case for independence”, adding that “many more people” would now question the UK as a “stable and competent entity” after the pandemic.

As the BBC has noted, many of Sturgeon’s decisions have “matched those by the UK government for England and the devolved administrations for Wales and Northern Ireland”. However, advisor to the Scottish government Professor Devi Sridhar told The Telegraph in October that unlike England, Scotland was pursuing a “zero Covid” strategy like the one implemented in New Zealand.

After lockdown restrictions were eased last summer, Scotland consistently maintained tougher lockdown restrictions than England, according to Oxford University researchers tracking the government responses to coronavirus. Scotland’s lockdown stringency score - a measure derived by the researchers from the entirety of a country’s restrictions - was higher than England’s throughout May to October.

Death rates began slowing in November, according to monthly data published by the National Records of Scotland. But that month, after weeks of stronger restrictions than those seen in England, deaths “recently outpaced” those seen south of the border.

Perception split

A marked difference between the two nations can be found in public perception of the pandemic handling.

An Ipsos Mori poll of voters in Scotland published in November, when Scots were dying at a higher rate than England, found that 72% thought the Scottish government was handling the coronavirus well. This compared with just 25% who said the same of the UK government.

Meanwhile, across the entire UK, just 31% of voters believe that the government is currently handling coronavirus “well” or “somewhat well”, according to polling by YouGov.

The Scottish government has advised people to cover their faces while in some enclosed public spaces, such as shops and public transport.

First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said that though it was “not a substitute” for lockdown restrictions, there could be “some benefit” in wearing face covering in sites where coronavirus social distancing was tricky.

She said she was referring to cloth garments such as scarves rather than the “medical grade facemasks” like those used by health and care workers.

Sturgeon said: “To be clear, the benefit comes mainly in cases where someone might have the virus but is not aware of that because they are not experiencing symptoms and thus not isolating completely.

“Wearing a face covering in those circumstances may reduce the risk of that person transmitting the virus to others.”

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––For a round-up of the most important stories from around the world - and a concise, refreshing and balanced takeon the week’s news agenda - try The Week magazine. Start your trial subscription today –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

The Scottish government’s advice states: “When applying or removing the covering, it is important that you wash your hands first and avoid touching your face.

“After each use, you must wash the face covering at 60 degrees centigrade, or dispose of it safely.”

The guidance also states that masks are “not being made mandatory and will not be enforced at this stage”.

The BBC’s science editor, David Shukman, says “dozens of governments are now urging - or ordering - their citizens to cover their faces in an effort to reduce this route of infection”.

Face masks are set to be compulsory on public transport in Germany, and in stores in Austria. Residents of Lombardy in Italy must cover their nose and mouth when outside.

But the Daily Express says the recommendation sees Sturgeon “defy” official coronavirus advice from Downing Street.

Number 10 said the government is still considering the scientific evidence for introducing similar advice. “Once a decision has been reached then we'll announce it publicly,” it said.

However, Michael Gove has revealed Britain is producing more cloth face coverings, which The Sun says suggests the advice “will go UK-wide in the near future”.

Scotland’s first minister has laid out a blueprint for how the country plans to lift its coronavirus lockdown measures, ramping up pressure on Westminster to do the same.

In a document published on the Scottish government’s website, Nicola Sturgeon set out how the country’s parliament will go about easing restrictions, but warned that the measures may be reimposed multiple times with “little notice”.

And while it did not explicitly lay out a timetable for measures to be lifted, the document also states that “now is not the right time” to end the lockdown, as the country’s death toll hit 1,120 on Thursday after another 58 deaths were reported, says ITV News.

But what is Scotland’s plan, and could Westminster follow suit?

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––For a round-up of the most important stories from around the world - and a concise, refreshing and balanced take on the week’s news agenda - try The Week magazine. Start your trial subscription today –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

What did Nicola Sturgeon announce today?

The Telegraph reports that earlier today, Sturgeon became the “first leader in the Union to announce plans to begin lifting lockdown” by publishing a 26-page document.

In it, the Scottish government says that it will first attempt to suppress the virus through compliance with physical distancing and hygiene measures, ensuring that the virus’s R value remains below one.

It also states that it will provide care to those who need it, whether infected by the virus or not, as well as supporting people, businesses and organisations affected by the crisis.

The government will also aim to recover to a new normal, carefully easing restrictions when safe to do so while maintaining necessary measures, and using lessons learned during this pandemic to protect against future events, including through effective testing, contact tracing and isolation.

It then plans to “Renew” the country through green initiatives and social programmes, concluding: “We can work together to design the Scotland we want to emerge from this crisis.”

The document warns that attending pubs or public events will be “banned or restricted for some time to come” – without giving a detailed timetable.

The Guardian reports that the document “warns the public to expect a cycle of lifting and re-imposing restrictions, with the possibility of restrictions being re-imposed quickly if transmission suddenly escalates”.

What does this mean for the rest of the UK?

Sturgeon said she isn’t currently focused on “whether we have a Scottish approach or a UK wide approach”, but was instead aiming for one that was “the best approach to tackling this virus”.

However, the blueprint says it was “unlikely” the virus could be contained domestically “without some form of surveillance of those coming into the country from elsewhere” – an addition the Telegraph calls a “direct warning to Boris Johnson”.

It also says Scotland supports “early and rapid testing to confirm cases” and “tracing of everyone a confirmed case has been in contact with”.

“Increasing our testing capacity is a critical part of this challenge,” the paper adds, another potential jab at the response so far from Downing Street.

The Independent says Scotland’s plans are now “at odds with the approach in Westminster”, where “ministers have refused to set out their plans for easing the lockdown amid fears it could confuse the message to the public to stay at home”.

The paper adds that the cabinet is currently “divided” over the best approach for lifting measures, with “more hawkish ministers such as the chancellor Rishi Sunak deeply concerned about the economic devastation caused by a lengthy lockdown”.

The Week’s daily round-up highlights the five best opinion pieces from across the British and international media, with excerpts from each.

1. Clare Foges in The Times

on surveillance

We need Big Brother to beat this virus

“The Keystone Coppery of recent weeks has had some people muttering darkly that we are heading the way of a police state. Those who style themselves as defenders of ancient British liberties will soon have bigger fish to fry: the digital surveillance tools that government hopes to use to trace the infected. Prepare for dire warnings of state intrusion and an avalanche of Nineteen Eighty-Four quotes on social media warning that Big Brother is upon us. Yet if we are to beat a path out of this pandemic without destroying our economy, overblown concerns about threats to our liberties must be countered by pragmatism. To recover some semblance of normality before a vaccine is found, we must accept the need for the state to access more information about ourselves, our health and our whereabouts — and not waste precious weeks arguing about it.”

2. Tim Stanley in The Telegraph

on the new normal

No country, not just Britain, has a plan for what next – all we can do is wait

“Pandemics are survived, not beaten, and with the timeless methods of isolation and patience. If Britain did cap its death rate and then lifted the lockdown, we would all fear the damn thing would come back, so any ‘lifting’ that we do enjoy in the next few months is going to be highly cautious and concentrated. Kids might return to school. Perhaps you can get a drive-thru McDonald’s. But don’t be surprised if we’re living in a stop-go state of suspended animation for a long time. My gut says over a year. It leaves us trapped in the most loopy logic imaginable. If the death rate falls, we shall say it’s proof that the lockdown works. If it rises, we shall say that we need more lockdown. In the absence of a vaccine, the establishment seems to have concluded that the lockdown is the only tool we have, or at least that the alternative might be thousands of times worse.”

3. Chris Deerin in the New Statesman

on Nicola Sturgeon’s dilemma

Why coronavirus will force the SNP to entirely remake the case for Scottish independence

Independence is itself a big idea, of course, if a somewhat blunt one. Before the pandemic struck it seemed entirely achievable, as a posh, right-wing, pro-Brexit Conservative government at Westminster moved the UK further and further away from what we might term the Scottish ideal. The trials, tribulations and revenge lust of Alex Salmond aside, there was no real threat to the SNP’s eminence, or to Nicola Sturgeon’s status as First Minister. The party would walk the 2021 devolved election – the only questions were whether it would secure a majority of seats to enable that second independence referendum, and whether it could tempt the Scottish electorate’s floating middle over to its side of the argument. How quaint those times seem. Like a village suddenly overwhelmed by a burst dam, the independence debate sits submerged in the Covid-19 flood, overwhelmed by this massive natural force – out of sight, out of mind, its foundations subject to sudden and intense new stresses, the possibility of rescue as yet unclear.”

4. Ian Hamilton in The Independent

on turning to drink

Using alcohol to cope with coronavirus lockdown is exposing our class divides

“Covid-19 hasn’t removed inequalities in our society; it has exaggerated them. As with so many aspects of health, there is a class divide in the impact that alcohol has. While access to alcohol is classless, as it is relatively affordable to most, the results of drinking depend on where you are in social hierarchy. Those with the least tend to fair worse than those who are more affluent, even when they drinking the same amount. It is not just the amount of alcohol that matters but the impact it has. If you have a limited income then spending on alcohol can compromise how much you are able to spend on food or other basics, areas unlikely to be adversely impacted for those with more money.”

5. Charles M. Blow in the New York Times

on playing the media

Stop Airing Trump’s Briefings!

“Trump has completely politicized this pandemic and the briefings have become a tool of that politicization. He is standing on top of nearly 40,000 dead bodies and using the media to distract attention away from them and instead brag about what a great job he’s done. In 2016, Trump stormed the castle by outwitting the media gatekeepers, exploiting their need for content and access, their intense hunger for ratings and clicks, their economic hardships and overconfidence. It’s all happening again. The media has learned nothing.”

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––For a round-up of the most important stories from around the world - and a concise, refreshing and balanced take on the week’s news agenda - try The Week magazine. Start your trial subscription today –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Scotland’s finance secretary has quit just hours before he was to deliver the nation’s budget, amid reports that he bombarded a 16-year-old boy with hundreds of messages on social media.

The Scottish Sun claims that Derek Mackay “pestered” the teenager on Instagram and Facebook after contacting him “out of the blue”.

Announcing his resignation, the Scottish National Party (SNP) minister said he took “full responsibility” for his “foolish actions”.

What happened?

According to The Scottish Sun, 42-year-old Mackay contacted the teenager on Facebook in August and had been messaging him up until earlier this week.

The openly gay father-of-two - who came out after leaving his wife in 2013 - reportedly sent the boy around 270 messages on the social media network and Instagram.

The BBC says Mackay allegedly “invited him to dinner and to attend a rugby event” and also “contacted the boy several times on Christmas Day”. On another occasion, the MSP reportedly said the teen was “looking good with that new haircut”.

In one message, the politician is said to have asked: “Our chats are between us?”

When the boy replied that they were, Mackay reportedly responded: “Cool, then to be honest I think you are really cute.”

The messages continued even after the boy confirmed that he was 16 and warned Mackay not to “try anything”, The Scottish Sun claims.

In the wake of the allegations, Mackay announced on Thursday that he was handing in his resignation “with immediate effect”.

The MSP - who Sky News says “had been tipped as a possible successor to First Minister Nicola Sturgeon” - had served as finance secretary since 2016.

“I take full responsibility for my actions,” he said. “I apologise unreservedly to the individual involved and his family.

“I spoke last night with the first minister and tendered my resignation with immediate effect. Serving in government has been a huge privilege and I am sorry to have let colleagues and supporters down.”

In a statement, Sturgeon said that Mackay had made “a significant contribution to government” but “recognises that his behaviour has failed to meet the standards required”.

What about the timing?

Mackay had been due at Holyrood today to deliver his government’s £43bn draft budget for the coming year, which is now being presented by his deputy, Kate Forbes, The Guardian reports.

His resignation “on the eve of the budget will be blow to Sturgeon”, according to the newspaper, which says that as well as setting out detailed spending plans on the climate crisis, infrastructure and public services, Mackay had been expected to “criticise the UK government’s decision to delay its budget until early March”.

The Treasury’s spending decisions influence about £20bn of spending by the Scottish government, so the delay had hindered Mackay’s ability to plan his budget.

Interim Scottish Conservative leader Jackson Carlaw says that as well as resigning from his role as finance secretary, Mackay should also consider standing down as an MSP, triggering a by-election in his Renfrewshire North and West seat.

Speaking to Sky News, Carlaw said: “I think there will be huge question to be asked, parents who will be concerned, and I think many colleagues in Parliament who will wonder if Mr Mackay can continue to enjoy the confidence of his constituents or Parliament.

“It’s a huge blow to politics in Scotland.”

The Week’s daily round-up highlights the five best opinion pieces from across the British and international media, with excerpts from each.

1. Peter Franklin in UnHerd

on boom and bust

Are we due another recession?

“There are all sorts of things that could still go badly wrong: war with Iran; a chaotic Brexit; a renewed Eurozone crisis; an unforeseen build-up of instability in the global financial system; or a delayed reaction to all those doses of quantitative easing. Nevertheless, it’s clear that the economy isn’t behaving the way it used to. But then why should it? Western economies have gone through big and permanent shifts in the past. There’s no reason why they shouldn’t do so again. We speak of economic ‘growth’ without thinking through the implications of the organic metaphor. In growing, living things don’t just get bigger over time they undergo qualitative changes too. A tree, for instance, isn’t just a larger version of sapling, let alone the seed the sapling grew from. Or take human development: an adult behaves differently from a teenager (or ought to), who in turn behaves differently from a primary school age child, who behaves differently from a toddler. Perhaps economies are like people in this respect. They grow, and also grow-up. It would be nice to think that we’re moving on from the exhausting tantrums and meltdowns of the toddler economy into something a little more self-controlled.”

2. James Kirkup in The Times

on the dangers of values-based politics

Boris Johnson has learnt the lessons of Brexit vote

“There are a thousand problems with a politics split between left and right. But politics institutionally divided between Leave and Remain would be far worse, because we wouldn’t be fighting about economic and social policies. We’d be fighting about the sort of people we are and believe our opponents to be. It’s one thing to think that the other side have plans that won’t work: you try to win power by persuading voters that your plans will work better for them. But if politics is a battle of values, there is no such victory to be won, no centre ground in which to compromise: just an endless angry stalemate between leaders using grievance to energise their base. So well done, prime minister, for accepting the need for politics to help the people it forgot. But remember, the only way to win a culture war is not to fight one.”

3. Louis Staples in The Independent

on a good week for the Scottish first minister

Nicola Sturgeon will be rubbing her hands as Boris tilts the scales towards Scottish independence

“The ascent of Johnson, an Etonian Brexiteer who embodies a brand of Englishness that practically drips with colonial nostalgia, personifies this growing divide. Johnson’s premiership makes him the face of the rift. His rise allows the SNP to paint these differences as not only political, but cultural too.”

4. Nick Dearden in The Guardian

on the new government’s free-market zeal

A Trump trade deal with Britain will unleash a bonfire of regulations

“Many Brexiteers have looked longingly across the Atlantic for decades, to an economy where business is free from the shackles of tax and regulation, which they see as a product of the European Union – an entity that competes with the Soviet Union for their disdain. Brexit gives them the opportunity to emulate that US model. And because modern trade deals are concerned less with tariffs, and more with how a country is allowed to regulate food standards, run public services and treat overseas investors, a trade deal with the US would be a powerful mechanism for transforming our economy.”

5. Pilita Clark in The Financial Times

on the pros and cons of ‘agile working’

The hidden hell of hot-desking is much worse than you think

“In a place with stratospheric real estate costs, such as London or Hong Kong, research has shown a single workstation can cost as much as $20,000 a year. Since workstations are often empty, because workers take leave and get sick, the temptation to bring in shared desks is obvious — even though data suggests this can sap productivity. People doomed to hot-desking waste an average of two weeks a year just looking for a place to sit, one British study claimed last month. That did not count the time it takes to set up a computer, adjust a chair and figure out where the people you need to talk to might be perched that day. Nor the efforts made by one hot-desker I know who gets up two hours early so she can get to work in time to nab a desk.”

Scotland’s former first minister Alex Salmond has resigned from the Scottish National Party (SNP) amid allegations of sexual misconduct, which he has denied.

He said he wanted to avoid his suspension causing “substantial internal division”.

“Salmond has described the allegations as ‘patently ridiculous’ – and has also criticised the complaints procedure which he claims is ‘unjust’,” the BBC says.

He recently launched a legal attack on Leslie Evans, the permanent secretary of the Scottish government, over her handling of two complaints that were received in January 2018.

The incidents “allegedly took place while he was first minister of Scotland and have since been passed to the police”, reports The Guardian.

Describing him as a “friend and mentor”, First Minister Nicola Sturgeon expressed a “huge sadness” over Salmond’s decision to resign from the party in order to clear his name.

“The hard fact remains that two complaints were received by the Scottish government that could not be ignored or swept under the carpet,” Sturgeon said.

Salmond had been a member of the SNP for 45 years and its leader for 20, notes the Herald Scotland, “taking it to its greatest electoral heights and closer than it has ever been to realising its goal of independence”.

Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon will unveil a bold new vision for the Scottish economy tomorrow in the wake of her pledge to “restart the debate” on independence.

The announcement has stoked speculation that Scottish National Party (SNP) leader will call for the use of pound sterling to be discontinued in favour of a national Scottish currency.

Would an independent Scotland ditch the pound?

Tthe 354-page blueprint, due to be published by the SNP’s Sustainable Growth Commission, “will recommend that the pound be used on an unofficial basis immediately after independence before moving to a new currency pegged to sterling”, reports The Daily Telegraph.

Economics professor Ronald MacDonald, of Glasgow University’s Adam Smith Business School, told the newspaper that tens of billions of pounds in foreign exchange reserves would need to be raised to protect the currency from economic shocks.

MacDonald warned that pegging the currency to sterling was a particularly “bad idea”, since it would require a far higher level of reserves - potentially hundreds of billions of pounds - to “defend it from market attack or if Scotland’s economy performed poorly relative to the remainder of the UK’s”.

However, Scottish independence campaigners told Scottish newspaper The National that they want Sturgeon to go further than the commission’s proposals. The Yes Edinburgh North and Leith group said they have long argued that “in order to truly function and flourish as an independent state, [Scotland] needs at its disposal, the full range of monetary and fiscal levers”.

A statement from the group added: “We are very concerned... that the Growth Commission’s preferred position involves a period of sterlingisation before moving to a Scottish currency only after a series of economic tests have been satisfied.

“While perhaps designed to make its economic plans look prudent, it serves to increase the complexity surrounding the currency question and will increase uncertainty in the minds of the voters.”

What are the other options for an independent Scotland?

The SNP proposed a currency union ahead of the 2014 referendum that would have seen the country continue to use the pound.

But “a formal arrangement was ruled out by then-chancellor George Osborne in a move that was widely seen as being a key factor for Yes losing the vote”, says the BBC.

Bank of England governor Mark Carney, however, has said it would be economically possible for an independent Scotland to have a currency union with the rest of the UK.

Earlier this week, Carney was asked by MPs on the Commons Treasury Committee whether he believed a currency union also required a political union.

He replied: “No, from the strict economics, it doesn’t.”

Carney added that it was for “others to judge” whether a political union was essential for Scotland to continue using the pound, “in comments that some pro-independence campaigners will claim as a softening of the Bank of England’s stance on a currency union”, says The Scotsman.

New figures on Scotland's massive budget deficit have been seized on by unionists as proof the country cannot afford to go it alone.

The deficit now stands at £13.3bn, or 8.3 per cent of GDP, more than three times the overall UK figure of 2.4 per cent. Although down slightly from last year, it is still higher than in any EU member state and double the deficit of Spain, the next highest.

The crash in the price of oil is largely to blame for the size of the shortfall. Last year, Scotland's projected oil revenues amounted to just £208m - a far cry from the £7.9bn predicted by the Yes campaign before the 2014 independence referendum, when oil prices were at their peak.

Pro-Union parties said the statistics showed an independent Scotland would have faced "unprecedented" levels of austerity and accused the SNP of "deception" ahead of the vote three years ago.

The figures will also reignite the question of why Scotland receives more per head in government spending than anywhere else in the UK.

Last year, the country contributed eight per cent of UK tax but received 9.3 per cent of spending. Total public sector revenue raised in Scotland was £312 per person below the UK average, while expenditure was £1,437 higher.

The University of Strathclyde says this is because Scotland spends more on devolved services, like health, education and economic development, and has higher spending on some key welfare programmes.

Either this shows that an independent Scotland would be running a huge deficit, "forcing the government at first to borrow heavily, and then to cut spending and/or raise taxes", says the��BBC's Douglas Fraser. Or it "shows what you get from being inside the UK, with relatively low tax take".

"From that pro-independence perspective," he adds, "it is not a measure of how Scotland would fare, but how it has fared without power at Holyrood."

In the pro-independence newspaper The National, George Kerevan argues that "without independence, Scotland lacks the ability to break the control over investment flows exerted by big firms and international banks" and reshape the economy in its favour.

Scotland's First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has made a similar case. The Guardian reports her argument that "since her devolved government did not have full control over taxation and UK economic policy, the UK government and supporters of the UK needed to explain why Scotland's economy was comparatively weaker".

But yesterday she acknowledged that "Scotland's economy has challenges" and the deficit should be "reduced to sustainable levels".

What does this mean for independence?

The Financial Times says Sturgeon has "sought to play down the significance of the data for her independence cause" by saying it reflects Scotland's finances "under current constitutional arrangements" and adding that "Scotland's economy remains strong".

Despite repeated warnings from nationalists about of the threat posed by Brexit to the Scottish economy, the "black hole means the risks of independence remain immense", says George Eaton in the New Statesman.

While many Scots remain pro-EU and aware of the dangers of a hard Brexit, for a large number, "this is merely cause to avoid the added turmoil of independence", says Eaton. Although eventual EU membership would benefit Scotland, he says, its UK trade is worth four times as much as that with Europe.

Nicola Sturgeon has dropped plans for "IndyRef2" after the SNP lost seats at the general election, but she said it was still "likely" a referendum will be held by 2021.

Addressing MSPs in Holyrood, the First Minister said she was strongly committed to "the principle of giving Scotland a choice" at the end of the Brexit process.

She added: "We will not seek to introduce the legislation for an independence referendum immediately. Instead, we will, in good faith, redouble our efforts and put our shoulders to the wheel in seeking to influence the Brexit talks in a way that protects Scotland's interests."

Recent polls suggest 43 per cent of Scots would like a second referendum to take place now and with the Nationalists' vote share down to 37 per cent from 50 per cent in 2015, Sturgeon admitted the push for IndyRef2 had cost her party at the ballot box.

Unionist opposition in the Scottish Parliament claimed the SNP leader had not gone far enough in ruling out a second ballot, but the pro-independence Scottish Greens urged her to "continue fighting" for another referendum.

While the detail and timing of a second independence referendum may have changed, the headline hasn't, says the BBC's Philip Sim. The timetable mooted in March "has gone up in smoke", says Sim, "but otherwise this is not particularly earthshaking stuff".

He adds: "The plans haven't been deleted, they've been saved to drafts."

"The general election result suggests discontent over local or devolved issues is currently overriding constitutional matters," says the New Statesman's Julie Rampen. While she may have "booted the prospect of another referendum into the heather", the First Minister is betting her political future, and another independence vote, "on Brexit becoming real before autumn 2018".

While Sturgeon may have "booted the prospect of another referendum into the heather", she is betting her political future - and another independence vote - "on Brexit becoming real before autumn 2018".

Scotland's highest earners will not receive the tax cut laid out in last week's budget if the SNP is returned to power, the party confirmed as it unveiled its tax plans ahead of May's Scottish parliament elections.

Leader Nicola Sturgeon said plans to increase the threshold at which workers start paying the 40p rate from £43,000 to £45,000 would not be implemented by an SNP government, raising an extra £1.2bn for Scottish public services.

She also pledged that the basic rate of tax, which affects more than 85 per cent of the population, would not increase until 2022.

"We do not believe it is right that those on low incomes are asked to pay for austerity," Sturgeon said.

As part of a raft of new powers promised during the independence referendum in 2014, Holyrood will gain control over rates and bands of income tax from April 2017. It will not have any power to change the personal allowance, which will rise to £11,500 next year under plans unveiled by George Osborne last week.

From this April, the Scottish government has the right to vary income taxes by 10p relative to the UK rate, but it must apply the changes equally across every tax band and it cannot take measures to amend the income levels at which the bands apply.

Under the new laws, it will gain fuller control from next year and the SNP has effectively pledged to keep taxes broadly as they are now.

However, while a freeze at current levels will "reassure well-off payers, some of whom had been concerned about the SNP rhetoric on social justice and the need for progressive taxation", it will fuel feeling among some left-wing members that the party is being "too cautious", says the Financial Times.

Sensing a possible opportunity to occupy SNP territory, Scottish Labour has tacked left in order to present itself as the truly radical party on taxation. It has already called for an increase across all income tax bands of 1p to fund higher spending, saying a £200-a-year payment could be made to the lowest paid to prevent them losing out.

Party leader Kezia Dugdale said: "Instead of ending austerity in Scotland, this means billions of pounds of Tory cuts passed on to Scotland's public services. Nicola Sturgeon must now tell people where these cuts will fall."

Scottish Labour has also pledged to scrap the current council tax system, which it labels "unfair", and replace it with a new form of local government tax based on property value. Under its system, it says, 80 per cent of households would be better off.

The SNP recently decided to retain council tax based on 25-year-old property valuations despite previous manifesto promises to reform the system, a move which has been condemned by its opponents.

Middle class Scots facing higher tax bill than rest of UK

17 March

Middle class workers in Scotland could soon be paying a higher rate of income tax than their fellow Brits.

In his Budget yesterday, Chancellor George Osborne made further moves to fulfil the Conservatives' tax-cutting manifesto pledges with the announcement of an increase in the higher-rate threshold at which 40 per cent tax becomes due to £45,000, which will see about 585,000 fewer people paying the higher rate from April 2017.

The argument is that the tax now catches swaths of people it was never intended for, including senior teachers and nurses, because the threshold has not kept pace with wage rises. When Nigel Lawson introduced the rate 30 years ago, it applied to one in 20 people, the Daily Telegraph notes. This has since risen to one in six.

But critics say Osborne's plans amount to a tax break for the rich at a time of a squeeze on benefits, including this week's move to cut payments for disabled people deemed fit to undertake some work.

Among the voices of dissent is Scottish first minister Nicola Sturgeon - and from next year, she'll have the power to do something about it.

From April, the Holyrood government can move income taxes by anything up to 10p higher or lower. However, under the final draft of the new Scotland bill, it will be able to vary tax rates and bands freely from next year, although MSPs will have no power over the personal allowance.

This means Sturgeon, should she win May's election, could decide to reverse Osborne's decision north of the border, meaning 372,000 Scottish people earning more than £43,000 would pay collectively £190m more in tax. The Scottish National Party will set out its plans next week, before the election break.

"Let me be absolutely clear today - a large tax cut for ten per cent of the population, those on the highest incomes, at a time when support for the disabled is being cut, at a time when our public services are under pressure, is in my view the wrong choice," Sturgeon told the BBC.

Scottish Labour and Liberal Democrats both also oppose the changes and have called for a 1p tax rise for all but the lowest paid and the reinstatement of the 50p tax for the highest paid. This, says The Guardian, allows the Scottish first minister to "portray herself as the moderate, centrist party leader" by opposing both Osborne's cut and more radical tax rises under her rivals.

The Scottish government has been dealt a blow over one its flagship policies by the European Court of Justice, which has ruled minimum alcohol pricing could be anti-competitive and illegal.

What does the ruling mean - and can the government still go ahead with the plans?

What has happened?

Put simply, the European court has thrown a spanner in the works of plans to introduce a minimum price for each unit of alcohol north of the border, which has been the subject of a protected legal battle since it was approved by Holyrood three years ago.

The judges said that denying firms the right to set their own prices could be "restrictive" to free trade, the Financial Times notes, and that it would be "illegal if tax rises could be used instead".

What was the government planning?

A minimum unit price of 50 pence, which academic studies reckon is the best way to target the cheap, high-alcohol drinks that are frequently abused by problem drinkers.

The plans were approved by an overwhelming majority of 86 to one in 2012, but since then have been the subject of a protected legal challenge led by the Scottish Whiskey Association that is backed by among others, nine EU member states, including France and Spain.

Has the ruling killed the policy?

No. The court has said that a minimum price would ordinarily be illegal in the European free market, but that it can be justified on health grounds if it is proportionate.

However, the government would need to prove it cannot achieve the same result by tax rises, which "would still allow retailers to set their own prices, and compete against each other". The ruling has been passed back to Edinburgh's Court of Session for a final decision.

What are the sides saying?

On the pro-policy side of the debate, there is caution from ministers but some tempered celebration from campaign groups. Eric Carlin, director of Scottish Health Action on Alcohol Problems, said the ruling "confirmed that minimum unit pricing… did not in itself contravene EU law".

Of course, on the other side of the debate there is similar positivity. David Frost, chief executive of the SWA, said the court "has confirmed that minimum unit pricing is a restriction on trade, and that it is illegal to choose [it] where there are less restrictive ways of achieving the same end."

For a more balanced opinion, the FT spoke to Graeme Young of the law firm CMS. He said the ECJ had set a “high hurdle” for Scottish judges and that the parameters on which they must base the decision are "heavily weighted against minimum pricing being an acceptable measure."

How does this affect the UK?

That's unclear, but there is certainly a context here. The Guardian notes the Scottish government does not have control over alcohol taxation, which is a matter for the UK government.

Whether this simply means the government has a stronger argument for minimum pricing – that tax rises aren't a viable option – or whether this simply becomes another bone of contention for independence-seeking nationalists, is yet to be seen.

Will the Scottish court ruling be the end of the matter?

Doubtful. The decision could still be appealed to the UK Supreme Court - and given the strong feelings on either side it is unlikely the loser will be willing to give up without trying every avenue.

A leak from within Buckingham Palace has prompted a slew of headlines pitting the apparently arch republican First Minister of Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon, against the monarchy, amid claims that Scotland has decided keep the profits from Crown Estate assets for itself.

It has been claimed that Holyrood's plan to keep money generated north of the border could knock a £2m hole in the Royals' income.

Three papers, the Daily Telegraph, The Times and The Guardian, all cite a source within the palace who claims that the Scottish government has decided profits on Crown Estate properties in Scotland, which will be devolved to Holyrood from next April, will no longer be paid to the Treasury. The portfolio of Scottish properties, valued at £216m, generated profits of £14.5m last year, but from now on that money will be retained for use in Scotland and could be transferred to local authorities.

The Crown Estate is a portfolio of properties owned on behalf of the monarchy, the income from which has traditionally been paid to the Treasury "for the benefit of the nation". The Royals are paid in return through a sovereign grant, which is worked out as a percentage of Crown Estate profits and other revenues.

Figures published today reveal the Crown Estate portfolio surged in value by 17 per cent last year to £11.5bn, generating an income of £285m. Under the current formula that would equate to a grant of £42.8m, or 15 per cent, in the 2016/2017 financial year. If the Scottish changes are taken at face value, then this figure would fall by around £2.2m.

However, profits from the Crown Estate are only indirectly linked to amount of money the Royal family receives. A spokesman for the Palace told the Guardian, "there is a formulaic connection between the two, but there is no financial connection between the two".

The exact percentage used to calculate the grant is due to be assessed from April 2016. The Palace source told the Telegraph: "Our intention is to reflect the consequences of the Scottish Crown Estate situation."

Police in Scotland have named the six people killed when a bin lorry crashed into crowds of Christmas shoppers in central Glasgow yesterday afternoon.

The lorry ran a red light at around 2.30pm on Queen Street before mounting a kerb, striking pedestrians and finally crashing into a hotel, according to witnesses.

Jack and Lorraine Sweeney, a couple in their 60s, and their 18-year-old granddaughter Erin McQuade, all from Dumbarton, were killed.

Gillian Ewing, 52, from Edinburgh, Stephenie Tait, 29, and Jacqueline Morton, 51, both from Glasgow, also died.

Eight others were seriously injured in what The Times describes as the "worst traffic accident for decades in a British city".

Unconfirmed reports suggest the driver, who survived the collision, had suffered a heart attack.

"The bin lorry just lost control," said one witness, Melanie Greg. "It went along the pavement, knocking everyone like pinballs. A mother with her baby in the pram fainted. Apparently the lorry had just missed her and her child.

"The only way it stopped was hitting the building... It was such a horrific thing. There was noise, bangs, screams and everything."

Others said pedestrians were "scattered like skittles", with Christmas shopping left strewn all over the streets.

A photographer who was shooting a video in George Square likened the scene to a warzone. "I saw someone thrown into the air and others lying on the ground," he said. "I witnessed a woman being told that her sister had died. It was horrific."

Supt Stewart Carle of Police Scotland said he wanted to reassure people it was a road traffic accident and "nothing more sinister".

It comes just a year after ten people died when a police helicopter plummeted into the roof of the Clutha Vaults in Stockwell Street on the banks of the River Clyde.

Scotland's First Minister and Glasgow MSP Nicola Sturgeon paid tribute to the "absolutely remarkable" response of the people of Glasgow.

"Everybody knows it is a city with a big, big heart," she told BBC Radio Scotland. "This morning it is a city with a broken heart but it will get through this as it got through the Clutha tragedy."

Nicola Sturgeon is to become the leader of the Scottish National Party and the first minister of Scotland after being the only person nominated to succeed former leader Alex Salmond.

Sturgeon is currently the SNP's deputy leader and was widely seen as having been a powerful advocate for the Yes campaign in the lead up to last month's independence referendum.

Sturgeon will become the country's first female first minister after being the only person to have put her name forward as a candidate ahead of Wednesday's 9am deadline.

The leadership change will be announced officially at the SNP's conference in mid-November.

SNP business convener Derek Mackay said he was "delighted" at the news of Sturgeon's role: "She will be a fantastic new leader of both the party and our country. She will build on the substantial legacy and extraordinary achievements of Alex Salmond as the longest serving first minister, and make her own mark as she leads Scotland forward."

Three candidates put their names forward to replace Sturgeon as deputy leader. Scottish transport minister Keith Brown "is seen as a front runner in that contest", the BBC says. Brown will compete for the position with youth employment secretary Angela Constance and SNP Treasury spokesman Stewart Hosie.

John Swinney, Scotland's finance minister, who was also SNP leader between 2000 and 2004, also welcomed Nicola Sturgeon's unopposed election.

According to a profile in The Guardian, Sturgeon is known to be to the left of Alex Salmond. She is also regarded as "the only person in cabinet who can disagree with him and get away with it", the paper says.

Political advisor Adam Tomkins said that the incoming first minister could come to change the face of Scottish politics: "There are two divisions in Scottish politics: unionist/nationalist and left/right, which don't run in parallel at the moment," Tomkins says. "She will pull the political centre of gravity of the SNP to the centre left, and the geographical centre away from Aberdeen and Perth, to Glasgow."

According to the Guardian, if she stays in power, Sturgeon may attempt to mount another independence referendum a decade from now; one that she could conceivably win.