BLOG: Power grabs and headline grabbing

The Scottish parliament as an institution is under attack from a "powerful faction" at Westminster, which wants to "rein in" Holyrood.

That was the stark warning from Nicola Sturgeon last night in an intervention which Tory leader Ruth Davidson said was an attempt to stoke a "synthetic grievance".

The debate it has sparked has carried on into today, featuring heavily at Prime Minister's and Scotland Office questions in Westminster.

Now, the background is the expectation the First Minister will soon call a second independence referendum after declaring she has won no concessions from Theresa May over Brexit. More of that in the days and weeks...

But is worth examining what Ms Sturgeon actually said and did not say, and how the subsequent row has played out.

First, the First Minister's script for her David Hume Institute speech contained this line: "So what we have is in effect an attack on the very foundations of the devolved parliament we voted for 20 years ago."

But as my colleague Kathryn Samson pointed out Ms Sturgeon did not deliver that line, dropping it completely.

She was also scripted to say this: "But after 20 years of progress, devolution in Scotland is now under grave threat from the Conservatives at Westminster." Ms Sturgeon changed the word 'threat' to 'challenge'.

Both lines are, by the way, in the full text of the speech on the David Hume Institute website. It's here:

http://www.davidhumeinstitute.com/nicola-sturgeon-tory-brexit-actions-attack-foundations-devolution/

The First Minister did actually say this: "The Brexit process has emboldened a now powerful Westminster faction, which perhaps never fully embraced devolution, and which now sees an opportunity to rein in the Scottish Parliament."

Perhaps it does not matter if she actually uttered the words, though the omissions are puzzling, the impact of the speech text was what mattered.

Initially, at least, reaction among what one might call the commentariat (what others might disparagingly call the 'Mainstream Media' or MSM) was not great.

For example, there was a coruscating opinion column in the Daily Record, which Ms Strugeon now writes a weekly column for. You can read it here:

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/nicola-sturgeon-changes-tactics-brexit-9938961

The opposition parties attacked the speech. The UK government said that Ms Sturgeon was flat wrong, "completely misrepresenting' their position. And so it went on.

Her opponents pointed out that the fact of devolution has been that more and more power has come to Holyrood since its creation in 1999. And they are right. That is a fact. More power has come gradually over nearly two decades.

It was also pointed out that Ms Sturgeon, or her team, could not say who this "powerful Westminster faction" was, or where in Whitehall.

A bad night for the First Minister then? Well, it was looking that way until question time at Westminster today.

At Scotland Office and Prime Minister's questions, the SNP leader at Westminster, Angus Robertson, asked the Scottish Secretary, and after him the Prime Minister, the same question.

Will powers over agriculture and fishing, which are currently under EU control, come back to Holyrood, not Westminster as the 'Leave' campaigners said they would during the EU referendum?

Neither David Mundell nor Theresa May could give a definitive 'yes' in reply to that question, which prompted the SNP to argue that Ms Sturgeon's warning last night had been bang on the money.

All the UK government ministers could say was that they were in talks with the devolved administrations across the UK to get the best possible deal for them on Brexit.

Mr Mundell was able to add that he could give an "absolute guarantee" that when the UK leaves the EU the Scottish parliament and Scottish ministers will have more powers than they do now.

But this did not satisfy the SNP who claimed it proved that the fundamental point that the institution of Holyrood - founded on legislation which states that all powers not reserved to Westminster reside in Scotland - was being undermined. Just as the FM had warned.

Now, it should be pointed out that although she did mention fishing and agriculture Ms Sturgeon did not limit her claims of a what the SNP call a 'power grab' to powers coming back from Brussels.

Hers was a general claim about she believes is the undermining of Holyrood by those powerful - if unnamed - factions in Tory Whitehall. She meant current powers too. She said as much.

However, the fact that Mr Mundell and Mrs May were unable to promise all powers from Brussels in devolved areas would come to Scotland undoubtedly weakened the UK government's hand in their battle with the SNP.

There may well be a very good reason - in UK ministers' eyes - for all powers not going to Holyrood. Assuming Scotland does not become independent, the need for a single UK market in agriculture might be one.

But by feeling they had to avoid giving a straightforward answer, the UK government allowed the SNP go claw back some of the ground it appeared to have lost from the headlines this morning.