“Here we go everybody, good luck!”
They were words meant for those in the studio only, but thanks to the presenter’s microphone being left open, every viewer of Sky News’ Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips heard his shout of encouragement.
Never mind, Trevor. As “hot mic” incidents go I’m sure that one will struggle to make it on to the Christmas party blooper reel.
Whether or not Phillips’ guests left the studio feeling that the television fates had smiled on them depended on what they wanted to get out of their appearance.
Take Stephen Flynn, for example, leader of the SNP at Westminster and one of Phillips’ guests. This week MPs continue to debate the King’s Speech. The SNP plans to introduce a motion calling for a ceasefire in Gaza which the house would then have to vote on. Since Labour would not back a ceasefire, said Phillips, wasn’t this just a ruse to embarrass them?
READ MORE Pressure on Labour over vote
No, said Flynn, who said such accusations of playing politics made “my heart sink a wee bit”.
“This is a humanitarian catastrophe and the best way to deal with it is a ceasefire.”
Cynics might say the SNP was trying to “deflect” from the party’s own troubles at home, said Phillips, asking when Flynn expected police to conclude their investigation into former SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon.
“I have absolutely no idea what the police are or aren’t intending to do and they should be able to operate free from the influence of politicians,” Flynn replied.
He contrasted his position with that of the Home Secretary, Suella Braverman, who he claimed had tried to tell the police what to do about Saturday’s protest marches.
“It’s very important for us to have this discussion – it would be very easy for me to say the police are doing something wrong when the police are independent from politicians and should be allowed to get on with their work without fear or favour.”
READ MORE Yousaf says Braverman should be sacked
Phillips returned to the police investigation into SNP finances, describing it as a “shadow” lingering over the party. At what point could people expect answers, he asked.
Flynn replied: “I can assure you that I want to know the answers to these questions as much as you do, and indeed a lot of the viewers back home in Scotland want to know.”
As for trying to deflect attention, he said: “My role is to try and be the best voice I can possibly be for the people of Scotland in Westminster, and next week [with the debate on the King’s Speech] affords me the opportunity to be that voice, to stand up for international law, for civilian lives and for peace.”
On Phillips’ show, Yvette Cooper, shadow home secretary, would not be drawn on Labour’s response to the SNP motion. On BBC1’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, the corporation’s former political editor tried again.
If there was a vote, she asked, would Keir Starmer sack any Labour frontbencher who backed ceasefire? Again, no luck, with Cooper saying she did not want to preempt what might happen, or predict which motions the Speaker would select for debate, which Kuenssberg called “a very elegant way of avoiding the question”.
Subscribe here for more Scottish news
Grant Shapps, Defence Secretary and minister for the Sunday shows, engaged in a similar exercise when asked if his cabinet colleague, Suella Braverman, should resign. He did not call directly for the Home Secretary to go, but nor would he say she would still be in her job this time next week. “A week’s a long time in politics,” said Shapps. I never make predictions about these things.”
Pressed on calls for her removal, he said: “The make-up of the Cabinet is entirely a matter for the Prime Minister. “He will decide that in his own time.
There was no mistaking what Nadine Dorries wanted to get out of her appearance on Kuenssberg’s panel – book sales. The former culture secretary and staunch defender of Boris Johnson has been busy plugging The Plot wherever she can. Could she manage to do so on the BBC? Try stopping her, particularly after co-panellist, Labour peer Shami Chakrabarti, praised The Plot as “a very good read”.
“Thank you Shami,” said Dorries the satisfied customer.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel