WHEN Keir Hardie arrived in the House of Commons in

1892, as the first independent representative of the working classes, he immediately drew criticism from the media and establishment of the day. His attire – a cloth cap and tweeds rather than a silk topper and morning coat – was denounced for being common and an affront to the dignity of the House.

I mention this bit of trivial history because nothing changes when it comes to the synthetic outrage of the London press when faced with a perceived threat to the established order, particularly from the Celtic fringes. The new group of 56 SNP MPs are now the subject of similar manufactured criticisms about their alleged lack of parliamentary decorum. Like Hardie and others before us, we will shrug our shoulders and get on with the job we came to Westminster to do.

But does another fate lie in store for the SNP awkward squad in the Commons? After a few weeks in the headlines, will we simply find ourselves politically impotent in the face of David Cameron’s Commons majority? After all, there is precedent. Back in 1987, Scotland sent 50 Labour

MPs to Parliament, led by the wily Donald Dewar, to take up cudgels against Margaret Thatcher. But

Mrs T resolutely ignored the Scottish invasion, while the SNP dubbed them the “Feeble Fifty”. Are we about to become the even more feeble 56?

This is what the London commentariat are already suggesting. Think again. For starters, Margaret Thatcher had a majority of more than 100 in 1987. Labour were shell-shocked after losing a third election in a row. But today a self-confident SNP group, elected with more than 50 per cent of Scottish votes, is now the third-largest party in the Commons.

It faces a Tory government with a majority of just 12 – well down on the 76 David Cameron had during the coalition with the LibDems. A sizeable group of Tory backbenchers got used to rebelling against that coalition. They’ll find it hard to break the habit. Do the maths: a defection of just six Tories in a significant vote and Cameron has problems.

In fact, history suggests that Cameron’s majority is too small for comfort. In 1950, Labour’s Clement Attlee survived barely a year with a majority of six before calling an election (which he lost). Harold Wilson’s single-digit majority vanished within a couple of years of his 1964 election victory, forcing fresh elections in 1966. Labour held on to government between 1974 and 1979 only by bringing sick MPs to Parliament in ambulances so they could vote in knife-edge divisions. John Major seemed to have a comfortable majority of 21 after the 1992 General Election but it disintegrated over Europe.

Expect the SNP 56 to exploit every opportunity to give the Government a hard time. They will have allies in unexpected places. For years, the main Unionist parties at Westminster have allowed the Downing Street and Whitehall executive to usurp the powers of Parliament itself. Until recently, various Speakers in the Commons acquiesced in this process – witness the hapless Michael Martin. But John Bercow, the current Speaker, has championed the right of Parliament to hold the executive to account – which is why David Cameron tried to get rid of him.

The SNP will be represented on every major committee, enabling us to question ministers, extract information and table reports. We will speak in all important debates and have the right to call our own. We will have an extensive parliamentary staff to back us up. Our job is to be the tribune of the people in a way that New Labour abandoned in pursuit of ministerial limos. The right-wing media is busy sneering and telling the world that the new SNP intake does not understand or respect the traditions of Parliament. On the contrary, we know that the parliamentary machinery – with its endless conventions, customs, rituals and ceremonies – is built to harry the executive to the point of exhaustion, if we choose to do so. It is a job the SNP will relish.

David Cameron is about to help us by pursuing a narrow set of policy priorities largely designed to shore up his own party position. He talks about being a “one nation” Tory but the proposed EU referendum and the bid to dismantle the Human Rights Act are aimed squarely at crushing the challenge on his right from Ukip.

Europe has proved a permanent dividing line between hard-line English nationalists in the Tory ranks and the wing of the party which represents the global finance capitalism of the City of London. It is not a dividing line that is likely to disappear – especially as Cameron makes no bones about his desire to keep the UK inside the EU. If the Prime Minister secures a Yes vote with the help of Labour, the English nationalist wing of the Tories is even more liable to move in Ukip’s direction, reducing or eliminating the Conservative Government’s modest majority. In such circumstances, the political leverage of the SNP parliamentary bloc can only increase.

Cameron hopes to appease his populist right wing and the Eurosceptic media by repealing the Human Rights Act. But there is a lot of smoke and mirrors involved in this idea. For starters, repealing the Act will in no way remove the ultimate jurisdiction of the Human Rights Convention over British law – it will merely alter the speed at which judgments are made. Even then, there are leading Tories who think Cameron is being too accommodating to the Eurosceptics. Dominic Grieve, who was Attorney General for four years, has signalled he will vote against moves to water down human rights legislation.

The SNP group in Parliament has already flagged up that it will make a stand against any moves to repeal the Human Rights Act. And while the LibDems are an endangered species in the House of Commons, there are still more than one hundred LibDem peers in the House of Lords ready to take revenge on the Tories by opposing any tinkering with the Act. Cameron has also opened a political Pandora’s Box by proposing to replace the HRA with a new “British” Bill of Rights. Getting agreement on what this Bill of Rights should contain in the 21st century will be complicated, to say the least. Rumour has it that civil service lawyers at the Ministry of Justice are now on their seventh draft. Prediction: trying to repeal the HRA could turn into a political nightmare for Cameron.

Just as important as our parliamentary work, the new SNP group will follow in the footsteps of Keir Hardie by taking our case outside the confines of the Palace of Westminster. Hardie toured the length and breadth of Britain, speaking at public meeting and demonstrations, in support of working-class demands. Likewise, SNP MPs will make common cause outside Parliament with people and groups in England opposed to Trident or further austerity. That way we give the lie to right-wing media attempts to brand us as anti-English or only being at Westminster to cause trouble. The new SNP intake feeble? More the Frisky 56, I’d say.