Purvis returns as Lord Jezza despite ballot box defeat

The SNP has spent the last few days issuing war cries for independence at their party conference but in Westminster thoughts are increasingly turning to what comes after next year’s Scottish referendum.

Politicians of all stripes are at pains to point out they are not taking the result for granted. But the talk from David Cameron and Ed Miliband at their party conferences last month was strikingly similar.

Both talked of winning the emotional argument in the months ahead. The Prime Minister went as far as to say that he felt the practical arguments “stacked up” in favour of the union, essentially that voters’ heads would tell them to stick with the UK but that their hearts had to be in it, too.

A number of fringe meetings at the Conservative conference in particular kicked around ideas on the future of devolution and the entire constitutional settlement if though generally the implication is when Scotland votes no. Typical of Westminster thinking is the appointment of Jeremy Purvis as a new Lib Dem peer this week.

Purvis, an MSP until the SNP landslide of 2011, is a man steeped in constitutional concerns. Nick Clegg has made him Lord Purvis of Tweed to act as a bridge man between the Westminster and Holyrood parties. Even his title straddles the border.

Said Purvis: “I’ll bring the perspective of someone who’s been a member of the Scottish Parliament and is a fan of the procedures in Holyrood. It’ll provide a platform to work on the growing middle ground as an alternative to independence.”

After losing his Scottish seat Purvis set up the Devo Plus group to campaign for the Scottish parliament to have more financial accountability to give Holyrood the ability to raise taxes as well as spend them. He’s convinced that’s the way to win the referendum.

He explained: “This is a critical few months when we need to come up with what is effectively an alternative to the Scottish Government’s White Paper, a vision for Scotland in the event of a no vote that people are able to respond to. It would be an optimistic alternative, a strong Scottish Parliament with more accountability.”

Purvis wants that alternative drawn up on a cross-party basis. But, given Purvis is now a Westminster politician, he can see the UK angle.

He added: “The bigger prize here is not simply to beat the Yes side in the referendum but to create a long-term positive relationship between the nations of the UK. If Scotland is to have enhanced powers we must take colleagues in England, Wales and Northern Ireland with us.

“There’s been an open border between Scotland and England for centuries to go back and say there’s a distinct line is strange. People are now talking about the consequences of the vote what happens if the people I speak to are in another country?”

The problem for Purvis, with his talk of accountability, democracy and constitution, is that on Tuesday he’ll don an outrageous ermine cloak and take his place in the least accountable or democratic place in British politics. This is, after all, a man rejected by the voters returning to front line politics without the need for an election.

He said: “I remain passionately in favour of Lords reform. I was asked to come back and there are challenges still to be taken forward. I still think I have something to contribute. I’ll be treating it as a job and I’m taking it extremely seriously. I’m the second youngest of around 800 peers, this is not a job for my retirement.”

His youth has already earned 39-year-old Purvis the nickname Lord Jezza. Purvis is particularly unusual in that he once worked in the Lords for David Steel. He’ll be formally introduced to the House by his old boss and his new one Lord Wallace of Tankerness, plain Jim Wallace when he was deputy first minister in the Scottish Parliament a decade ago.

It’s another irony that, though the Lib Dems want an elected upper chamber, Wallace took over as their leader in the Lords last week following an election in which he was the only candidate.

Lord Purvis added: “Nick Clegg tried to have the institution reformed. We won’t stop considering reform of Westminster institutions as part of the debate going forward.”