What does the Royal Navy’s new drone warship plan mean for Scotland?

When large amounts of publish cash are being distributed to weapons firms – and with different parties in power at Holyrood and Westminster – it’s almost inevitable political rammies will follow.

The biggest single pillar of spending in the DIP is for nuclear weaponry – something both the SNP and the Scottish Greens argue is immoral, outdated and overly expensive.

Meanwhile, supporters of what they term the UK’s “independent nuclear deterrent” argue that events in Ukraine and the Gulf show that it’s more important than ever, especially when the reliability of the US as an ally is being questioned.

Until recently, the Scottish government would refuse to hand over public money to support munitions manufacture, prompting a warning that plans for a specialist submarine welding centre on the Clyde might be scuppered.

Labour’s former Defence Secretary John Healey accused the SNP of “student politics” while, on BBC Scotland’s Sunday Show, a Scottish government cabinet minister defended its longstanding and “principled” position.

A few weeks later, John Swinney quietly ditched the policy (as part of a statement on Gaza), external on grounds that the world has changed.

The Scottish Greens, who the minority SNP government often depends on for support, remain sceptical.

And then there’s the question of how is it all being paid for?

Sir Keir Starmer concedes that other non-military budgets will have to be further squeezed.

What does that mean for money coming from Westminster to Holyrood as a result of “Barnett Consequentials”, external?

Plenty of rammy potential there.