PQs on Defence and Scotland dual role

Today's Scotsman included a report on Parliamentary Questions asked yesterday by Robert Wilson, Reading East MP, and James Gray, a Scots-born Wiltshire MP regarding the "part time" Defence/Scottish Secretary. Now it seems that Des Browne's "two jobs" won't be part time at all - he'll be giving over his Scottish Secretary duties to David Cairns.

Why bother with the title, if the role means nothing? Does Gordy not trust David to do the job without having someone to hold his hand?

The report also stated that:

"A source close to Mr Browne dismissed the concerns about the dual role as unjustified. They added that the Cabinet minister had already made clear he would work as hard as he had to to take on both roles "even if he has to get up an hour earlier".

A whole hour? Lucky us!

Is Gordon Brown trying to tell us something?

I was listening to the radio news while heading to a meeting in my ward, when I heard that Des Browne is to take on the role of both Defence Secretary and Scottish Secretary.

Maybe it's just the way things connect in my head, but I immediately wondered whether this new joint role makes it easier to roll the tanks up to the border in the event of the independence referendum going our way...

Joking (and yes, dear Labour readers, that wasn't a serious statement) aside, I do feel it's a bit unfortunate that the two roles are now combined, particularly in light of the raw deal the Scots regiments have had from previous Defence Secretaries. Others have quite rightly pointed out that the dualling could make Defence a "part time" role, and are concerned given the current situation in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, I'm not sure it's the Defence aspect that will suffer most.

Now that we have a very different Government in Scotland, the role of the Secretary of State for Scotland should become a very significant one from the Westminster perspective. They surely need someone to be their eyes and ears in Scotland, and to try and keep relations smooth. If it looks like the Scottish Government is being frustrated and undermined by Westminster, I believe it will damage the Westminster administration and the Union, rather than the SNP Government in Holyrood. If the relationship is fractious and uncooperative (and not from Holyrood), this could well sway doubters towards an independent Parliament with full powers.

When's a withdrawal not a withdrawal?

That'll be when it's a redeployment. It seems from news reports that while UK troops are being withdrawn from Iraq (as mentioned below) and Bosnia, there are some 1,400 troops being sent to Afghanistan.

Margaret Beckett has been quick to deny that the events aren't linked, but if you've only got a certain number of troops then surely the troops who are coming home will eventually find themselves in Afghanistan? One to watch, I think.