Hostile or Consensual?: A Comparative Study of Personal Attacks and Positive Self-Reference in Exchanges between the Conservatives and SNP in PMQs and FMQs

While Prime Ministers Questions (PMQs) has received some scholarly attention, First Minister Questions (FMQs) in devolved administrations have yet to be systematically investigated. In this paper we focus on comparative levels of hostility between: a) the Scottish First Minister and the Conservative leader in the Scottish Parliament (Holyrood); and b) the Prime Minister and the leader of the SNP in Westminster to examine the extent to which divergent institutional and political contexts influence the level of hostility during those question times. Comparing ten question times pre-Covid with ten question times post-Covid, we analyse exchanges between the leaders in both parliaments. Our findings indicate that exchanges during FMQs are less hostile. However, the COVID outbreak impacted exchanges in Westminster and in Holyrood. While both have been significantly less aggressive post-COVID, the magnitude of the lack of hostility is still noticeably different in Holyrood. The results of this study are useful for 3 main reasons: 1) they address in part a gap in the literature on FMQs; 2) it contributes to the debate on whether politics at Holyrood is more consensual; and 3) the pre and post design permits a comparative assessment of the impact of crises upon legislative behaviour.