Thomas Heald: The Mandelson affair and the lessons it holds for Scotland

Councillor Thomas Heald is a Scottish Conservative councillor for Dunblane and Bridge of Allan, Scottish Conservative and Unionist candidate for Dunfermline and political advisor in the Scottish Parliament.

The controversy surrounding Lord Mandelson matters not because of personality, however objectionable, but because it exposes a recurring flaw in modern politics: the belief that trust can be restored simply by changing the people in charge.

That assumption was central to Keir Starmer’s pitch for office. Labour did not win on ideology or ambition, but on a moral claim that standards, judgement and seriousness would improve because different people were in power. The Mandelson affair tests that claim and suggests that trust cannot be rebuilt by intent alone.

This is not about a single controversy. It reflects a deeper tendency to confuse ethical language with ethical behaviour. Voters are repeatedly told that professionalism and experience will guarantee better outcomes. In practice, systems behave much as they did before.

Conservatives should be honest about our own record. The past decade damaged public confidence. Too often we appeared distracted or insufficiently serious about the responsibilities of office. Any attempt to rebuild trust must begin with acknowledging that failure. An acknowledgement which has quite rightly been at the forefront of Kemi Badenoch’s attempts to rebuild and remodel our party at a UK level.

But Labour’s difficulties point to a wider truth: trust is not restored by tone, presentation or moral claims. It is restored by conduct, particularly when that conduct is inconvenient or politically costly.

This lesson is especially relevant in Scotland.

For nearly two decades, Scottish politics has been dominated by a party that has framed itself as a moral alternative to its opponents. The SNP has claimed higher purpose and greater legitimacy, but long tenure has not produced improved outcomes. Educational standards have declined, public services are under sustained pressure and local government increasingly struggles to maintain basic infrastructure.

Council tax rises while roads and pavements deteriorate. Moral certainty has not translated into competent administration.

This is not unique to Scotland, but Scotland illustrates the danger clearly: when political authority rests on moral posture rather than accountability, standards erode quietly over time.

The Mandelson affair is a reminder that no party is immune to this dynamic. Power breeds defensiveness. Longevity dulls judgement. Promises to “do things differently” collapse unless they are backed by discipline and restraint.

Scottish voters are not hostile to politics, but they have too often been encouraged to substitute moral assertion for evidence of delivery. Repeated appeals to virtue, grievance and intent have been allowed to stand in for measurable improvement in schools, public services and local government. Over time, that has weakened scrutiny and lowered expectations — not because voters are disengaged, but because the political culture has rewarded rhetoric over results.

For Conservatives in Scotland, the implication is straightforward.

Rebuilding trust does not mean competing in the language of virtue. That road has failed repeatedly. Trust is rebuilt locally and incrementally: through competent councils, improved schools, maintained infrastructure, and politicians who explain difficult decisions rather than evade them.

The lesson of the Mandelson affair is not that trust in politics is impossible. It is that trust cannot be asserted, outsourced, or inherited. It is earned through discipline, restraint and visible competence, especially when those in power are tempted to excuse themselves. Scotland has lived for years under a politics that mistakes moral claims for delivery.

Conservatives should resist that temptation entirely. If trust is to be rebuilt, it will not come from saying we are different, but from governing differently, consistently, locally and without pretending that good intentions are a substitute for results.