A way back for the Scottish Tories? Mibbes aye, mibbes…

Firstly, Rishi Sunak borrowed the Blairite concept of the pledge card as he set out five key promises.

Then Sir Keir Starmer mirrored his Labour predecessor by promising a form of devolution all round and by stressing fiscal responsibility.

Finally, Douglas Ross, the Scottish Tory leader, relied upon Blair-style triangulation as he invited voters to contemplate the SNP and Labour, casting a plague upon both their houses.

READ MORE: Mr Swinney - what happened to helping economy grow

More on that later. But first to the PM. He made five promises: to cut NHS waiting lists in England; to halve inflation this year; to grow the economy; to cut national debt; and to prevent migrant boats from crossing the channel.

These are mostly imprecise plans, relying largely upon trends already in play.

For example, inflation is thought to have peaked and it is scarcely credible to imagine that NHS waiting lists in spring and summer will outpace the current crisis levels.

Of the others, if he does not rescue the economy, then he is finished and so is his government. He could emboss his pledges on a gold-plated card, delivered personally to every voter. It would make no difference.

As a Sherlock Holmes adherent, I was more intrigued by the dog which declined to bark. The absence of a reference to one of the most divisive issues in UK governance.

Doubtless it was lack of space which meant that the list did not include legislative action to mitigate the impact of striking trades unions.

Anas Sarwar (Image: free)

Or was it perhaps that the plans themselves are inchoate, semi-formed? Or that setting a target for curbing strikes would simply encourage further unrest, particularly if the consequence were to be, effectively, a no confidence vote in Rishi Sunak?

Turning to Labour, there is a comparable degree of imprecision in Sir Keir’s plans. However, this is perhaps more pardonable.

The next UK General Election could be as late as January 2025. He has time to formulate a manifesto. For now, he simply needs to establish that Labour, under his leadership, has changed. More Blair than Corbyn.

On the plans to devolve power from Westminster, I was struck once more by echoes of Tony Blair and, indeed, of Gordon Brown who has generated the latest thinking.

Scottish self-government was a Scottish initiative. It did not spring fully formed from Tony Blair’s brain. Indeed, he was decidedly apprehensive but chose, with caveats, to back the judgement of Donald Dewar.

Pretty much since then, Labour has been looking for ways to spread devolution to England. Partly from principle but mostly as a way to reform and thus bolster the Union, to avoid Scotland becoming so different that independence is fostered.

READ MORE: Who has a mandate? Rishi Sunak or Nicola Sturgeon?

Now, we have the latest manifestation, linked (as in the Blairite past) with a transformation in the House of Lords. For now, we must simply acknowledge receipt and await developments.

To Douglas Ross, then. You have to admire his courage. He leads a party in Scotland which many still cordially loathe.

But not only that. He chooses, without duress, to act as an assistant referee at senior Scottish football matches. Indeed, he ran the line with judicious discretion when the mighty United were forced to settle for a late draw against Hearts on Christmas Eve.

A Tory and a referee? Is there no limit to his capacity for arousing Scottish bile?

Seriously, he has a rough furrow to plough. Indeed, in his latest speech, he conceded that he would be glad to see the back of 2022, given “turbulent events” at Westminster.

Therein lies the fundamental problem facing every Scottish leader of a UK party, particularly when confronting the SNP. They have little control over Westminster actions yet have to suffer the electoral consequences.

So what to do? Douglas Ross needs a USP. Something to make his squad stand out in Scotland against the Holyrood governing party and other rivals.

Hence the suggestion from Mr Ross that Labour and the SNP were “indistinguishable” on key policies such as gender recognition reform and income tax policy.

The two parties, he said, were part of a “cosy Holyrood consensus”. By contrast, he said that the Tories were “non-conformists”.

All this followed by his core argument: that supporters of the Union needed to rally around the Conservatives.

He argued that Unionists in many communities across Scotland voted tactically for Labour to thwart the SNP. Now, he argued, those Unionist supporters had been let down.

It is, if you like, a form of Blairite triangulation. Now, I know, I know, triangulation did not begin or end with Tony Blair. It was borrowed from Team Clinton and it means different things in different contexts.

In this instance, Labour and the SNP are placed on a uniform base line with the Unionist Tories floating above them, supposedly clear and distinctive.

Might it work? It might make a difference. But, consider the problems. I think, for example, that it will be difficult to mount a sustained and widespread electoral campaign on individual issues, even those which stir political heat, such as gender reform.

Tax is different. The Tories in Scotland could set themselves apart by arguing vigorously against John Swinney’s budget.

Except the UK Chancellor is also increasing the fiscal burden. OK, with a different focus. But it still makes matters challenging for Mr Ross.

Plus Labour’s Anas Sarwar will not sit meekly by and allow his party to be depicted as little helpers for the SNP. He will fight back, arguing that the solution is to replace the Tories at Westminster and the SNP at Holyrood.

Nor will the SNP be silent. They will argue that the people of Scotland should determine their own priorities.

Still, Douglas Ross now has a cogent argument to pursue, seeking to corral Unionist sympathisers into his corner.

After months when the political focus has been predominantly upon Westminster, that argument will add to a revitalised contest at Holyrood.