Home from home

*** Currently blogging at http://www.betternation.org/ ***

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

I wanna be like EU EU EU

"If the new EU Treaty doesn't need a referendum then I'm a chimpanzee"

Ok, I'm quoting myself there as noone I know actually said that but let's think about this:


The new EU Treaty is 96% similar to the old Treaty, which we were promised a referendum on.

A human is, genetically, 98% similar to chimps.


Ok, so that last point doesn't actually mean anything other than to beef up this post and add a nice tidbit of info.


But basically, Brown should stop monkeying around, having a giraffe, treating us like dodo's and give us the referendum we were promised. Otherwise he's just a big cheatah.



See you later alligator, I'm off to watch the bears beat Red Star Belgrade.

Parting the Fringe

And so, it is all over.

The floats, the fanfares, the hoardes of tourists will now leave from whence they came. No longer will we share out city with Korean breakdancers, Chinese military bands, Polish musicians and wacky Irish comics.

Some shows have been spell-binding and others have fizzled* spectacularly. (* - died on their a%ses)

I myself have seen 2 German musicians destroy a Fiat Punto to the sounds of Chopin in Auto Auto, I had a sensory onslaught during the breathtaking Fuerzabruta, heard some deliciously seedy European music from Camille O'Sullivan, was inspired by some funky hip-hop in Into the Hoods, enjoyed some high camp innuendo in a spoof Eurovision show, was entertained by a crazy Irishman (Jason Byrne), a gay Indian (Paul Sinha) and a Jewish cockney (Ian Stone), I sat painfully through two shows with no redeeming features whatsoever and peppered all of this action by getting drunk 3 times, eating out 6 times, squeezing in a trip to London and taking 23 strangers back to my flat, though such seemingly wanton behaviour need not be sniffed at as all 23 were infact merely surfing my couch.


So all in all August has been an absolute ripper. Best Festival yet? I would have to say yes.



September's going to be tough.

Come and have a go if you think you're hard enough

Any suggestions as to who might be selling this? Or who may need it? Perhaps Bruce Willis is in town and is clearing out his wardrobe?


Bullet proof vest for sale. Very heavy. Never been shot at. Must pick up as is very heavy.



I just love the idea that this guy has been wearing this vest everyday for the past year and is chuffed that he's "never been shot at". Mind you, he does live in Slateford.....

PPP = Thorn in our sides

After a question from SNP MSP Jamie Hepburn, we now know the true cost of PPP thanks to Labour and Lib Dem's bright ideas.

£22bn it will cost us over the next 40 years. A completely indefensible figure, though it doesn't stop one Labour spokesperson from trying:

This figure does sound like a lot but actually PPP is only a fraction - 27% of the capital expenditure - of the overall spent on improving public buildings under the last executive.

When was 27% considered to be a "fraction". 1% yes, 3% maybe, but 27% of the total CapEx is not an insignificant amount. And neither is £22bn.


The most unfortunate thing now is, the SNP can't just cut ties with PPP and need to see a lot of these projects out. All the while watching money get handed over to the private sector needlessly. And then with all this wasted cash, Labour have a cheek to complain about the need for closing down schools due to a lack of funding!?


In a four year term that will see the Executive strapped for cash thanks to trams and a downturn in the economy, it will be interesting to see how Labour choose to attack the SNP over its budget given the Labour party's fingerprints are all over the sorry financial mess that Scotland finds itelf in.


P-P-Painful stuff indeed......

Monday, August 27, 2007

George Foulkes - Pointless Questions

S3W-15248 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Tuesday, July 29, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive whether the First Minister has travelled to an official engagement by train and, if so, when and where.

S3W-15249 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Tuesday, July 29, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive how many freedom of information requests it has received in the last year and, of these, in how many cases the information was provided and how many cases were referred to the Scottish Information Commissioner.

S3W-15282 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, July 31, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive which civil servants accompanied the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing to the Weaving the Tartan conference at Eastwood Park Theatre on 6 August 2007.

S3W-15400 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Friday, August 08, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S3W-15148 by John Swinney on 7 August 2008, whether the car parking fines listed in the answer were incurred during the course of ministerial business and, if so, which ministers were involved.

S3W-15247 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Tuesday, July 29, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive how much of its mail was despatched by (a) the Royal Mail and (b) other carriers in the last year.

S3W-15245 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Tuesday, July 29, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive whether the First Minister has made any referrals to the independent advisers on the ministerial code.

S3W-15244 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Tuesday, July 29, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive what action it is taking to ensure that goods used in the celebration of St Andrew’s Day 2008 are manufactured in an appropriate location.

S3W-15242 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Tuesday, July 29, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive how many dinners and receptions have been held in Bute House by the First Minister in 2008, showing in each case (a) who the guests were, (b) what the cost was and (c) who the caterers were.

S3W-15241 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Tuesday, July 29, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive what percentage of Scottish ministers have their principal residence in the area covered by the former Strathclyde Regional Council.

S3W-15239 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Tuesday, July 29, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it is satisfied that all local authorities take account of sections 15, 16 and 17 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 and what the reasons are for its position on the matter.

S3W-15237 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Tuesday, July 29, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive how many full-time staff in each of its departments and agencies are over the age of (a) 60, (b) 65 and (c) 70.

S3W-15236 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Tuesday, July 29, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive how many of its civil servants were seconded to commercial or industrial forums and how many people were seconded to it from commerce and industry in the last year.

S3W-15234 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Tuesday, July 29, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive what action it has taken in the last year to replace traditional light bulbs with low energy bulbs in each building for which it is responsible and what its current estimate is of the number of bulbs that are low energy in the total estate.

S3W-15232 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Tuesday, July 29, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive in which of its directorates or agencies there are differential rates of pay for women and men in the same job.

S3W-15224 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Tuesday, July 29, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive what official trips the First Minister took by ministerial car from 1 to 24 July 2008, showing the origin, destination and purpose of the journey in each case.


Of course, George's silly questions aren't just in the past month, if you stretch the net out further you get these absolute whoppers (note I only looked through a few of the 63 pages at my disposal):


S3W-9884 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, February 14, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive how many written parliamentary questions have been answered by each cabinet secretary and minister since May 2007.

S3W-1101 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, June 14, 2007): To ask the Scottish Executive whether making an emergency statement without first seeking clarification from the UK Government shows a lack of willingness to work together with Westminster and Whitehall in the best interests of Scotland.

S3W-1078 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, June 14, 2007): To ask the Scottish Executive whether any reference to a memorandum of understanding between the UK and Libyan governments was included in the official papers of the First Minister or Cabinet Secretary for Justice.
Answered by Kenny MacAskill (Monday, June 25, 2007): Yes. (Nice succinct answer there, I thought.)

S3W-3341 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Wednesday, August 15, 2007): To ask the Scottish Executive how many court cases involving bank charges there have been in each of the last four years.

S3W-3342 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Wednesday, August 15, 2007): To ask the Scottish Executive what the average length is of court cases involving bank charges.

S3W-2879 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, August 02, 2007): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S3W-2255 by Stewart Maxwell on 1 August 2007, to what extent the Lothians will benefit should Glasgow’s bid to host the Commonwealth Games be successful.

S3W-3843 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, August 30, 2007): To ask the Scottish Executive what the total cost to the NHS of coronary heart disease has been in each year since 1999, broken down by NHS board.

S3W-3842 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, August 30, 2007): To ask the Scottish Executive what the projected number is of people with coronary heart disease aged (a) 16 to 24, (b) 25 to 34 (c) 35 to 44, (d) 45 to 54, (e) 55 to 64, (f) 65 to 74 and (g) 75 and over in each year up to 2025, broken down by NHS board area.

S3W-3841 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, August 30, 2007): To ask the Scottish Executive what the projected trend is for coronary heart disease for (a) the total population and (b) people over 65 for each year up to 2025, broken down by NHS board area.

S3W-3840 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, August 30, 2007): To ask the Scottish Executive how many hospital admissions there were due to heart disease in each year since 2003, broken down into admissions due to (a) atherosclerosis, (b) angina, (c) myocardial infarction, (d) heart failure and (e) arrhythmia, in each NHS board.

S3W-15005 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Monday, July 14, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will list those organisations representing the Muslim community that have received Scottish Government grants since May 2007, also showing the value of grants received.

S3W-14622 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Wednesday, June 25, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it considers that victims of miscarriages of justice should receive an official apology following their release from prison.

S3W-14135 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, June 12, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive what revenue was generated by Edinburgh’s 2007-08 Winter Festival.

S3W-4324 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Friday, September 14, 2007): To ask the Scottish Executive how many of its officials are carrying out work in relation to the Trident missile system and what the estimated cost is of any such work, broken down by department.

S3W-5895 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, November 01, 2007): To ask the Scottish Executive what sporting events have been attended by the Minister for Communities and Sport since May 2007.

S3W-5880 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Wednesday, October 31, 2007): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has any plans to change the title of First Minister.

S3W-5906 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, November 01, 2007): To ask the Scottish Executive when it expects bridge tolls to be abolished.

S3W-5910 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, November 01, 2007): To ask the Scottish Executive whom the First Minister met on his recent visit to the United States of America and what devolved matters were discussed in each case.

S3W-5972 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, November 01, 2007): To ask the Scottish Executive whether official cars have been used to transport ministers, for purposes outwith their official capacities, to or from private addresses other than those registered as the relevant minister’s home address and, if so, whether it will provide details of such journeys, since May 2007.Answered by John Swinney (Monday, November 12, 2007): All use of official cars is for purposes within ministers’ official capacities.

S3W-6844 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, November 22, 2007): To ask the Scottish Executive how many official journeys have been made by each minister using public transport since May 2007.

S3W-7209 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, November 29, 2007): To ask the Scottish Executive what paintings and other works of art it owns and what its policy is regarding their display.

S3W-7208 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, November 29, 2007): To ask the Scottish Executive which newspapers and magazines are purchased regularly for ministers, both daily and weekly.

S3W-7206 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, November 29, 2007): To ask the Scottish Executive how many different computer systems it operates and what the purpose and function is of each system.

S3W-7694 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Monday, December 10, 2007): To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to celebrate Christmas.

S3W-9301 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, January 31, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive how much use ministers have made of (a) ministerial cars, (b) private hire cars and (c) taxis for official travel since May 2007.

When 3 become 1

The Times are reporting that Scary Spice, Ginger Spice and Old Spice are due to combine their Labour, Lib Dem and Tory forces in the Scottish Parliament and take on the Nationalists not only on the issue of independence (or lack of it from their point of view) but also on setting the agenda for the next three and a half years in Holyrood.

It's a brave move by these Wannabes, attempting to paint the SNP as being in office and out of power is a tricky balancing act and, probably, will result in them looking like they are not respecting democracy and not respecting the will of the Scottish people. The SNP won fair and square on May 3rd and have since then Spiced Up Our Lives. The sooner the Wannabes accept this and get on with effecive opposition the better.

By all means, they can push bills through parliament where they all happen to have agreement. The trams is one such example where it is perfectly valid for the SNP to be defeated. But for the three parties to form a coalition of sorts, compromising their principles with the primary purpose of pulling the rug from under Salmond's feet is not helpful. Minority administrations are difficult enough without such low brow party politics.


I daresay the Scottish electorate will tire of The Wannabes plans before they even get off the ground, and eventually ask them Who Do You Think You Are?

Friday, August 24, 2007

Bad education

Any council closing down schools is going to be a highly emptiove and controversial issue. But with regard to Edinburgh council's decision to close 22 nurseries, schools and community centres, it seems like a fairly easy call.

A few things fall out of the kefuffle:

(1) There are less people going to these schools now, down a fifth in most areas, and consequently the schools are now financially unsustainable. The argument that the closures should be phased out so it is easier for the families to adjust to the situation doesn't hold for me. Once the decision is made, you move on and get on with it.

(2) There were many people suggesting that the parents of the pupils going to these schools and using the community centres should have had a say in the debate. They were denied this opportunity. Again I say quite rightly. What could have been added to the debate that would have been constructive and influential on the councillors involved? The councillors were voted into their positions democratically, let them get on with making decisions without clouding the issue.

(3) There is a clear gap in the finances of Edinburgh Council, a gap which will be exacerbated by the funding of the Edinburgh trams which will fall at the council's door before too long. It would be remiss of the council not to take action now and it seems fair that a "flabby" schooling system in Edinburgh is among the first of the cuts.

(4) Strikes have now taken place. The main arguments against the closures seems to be nostalgia and the speed of the decision which, I'm sorry, doesn't cut any mustard with myself. Demographics change and our schooling system needs to evolve and change alongside the movement of people. With regard the speed of the decision, surely it is refreshing for a council to take swift, decisive action, saving money this way rather than wasting it?


The Labour ranks need to be very careful and really think about why they are supporting the Save the Cuts campaign.

The financial mess of the council was partly their doing in the first place and I am sure they will be amongst the first to stick the boot into John Swinney when he announces spending plans that will no doubt, allegedly, "not add up".

You can't oppose cuts on the one hand and then blame the SNP for overspending on the other, all the while forcing needless trams onto a financially overburdened council/Executive. And let's reiterate this is on the back of a financial mess caused by Labour in the first place!

Thursday, August 23, 2007

The Union Dividend



NOTE: A lot of effort went in to some comments from a certain R2D2 (who will soon have his or her own blog I am very sure), so I've decided to bump this posting up to the top again to give folk a chance to read it. Apologies to any regular readers (note the hesitancy there actually arer any) who are sick of this one already. I think it's kind of nice to actually debate the union rather than skirt around it like some...


I've decided to prepare (as much as one can in 40 minutes) a positive argument in favour of staying within the union, since Jack, Nicol and Annabel were only able to give us negative rebuttals such as:


"We will listen, but we fear this will be less of a conversation than a one-way megaphone."

"The SNP is squandering taxpayers' money in pursuit of their own narrow and failed agenda."

"Alex Salmond's pet project of independence"


My four main reasons for not yet being convinced of the merits of Independence are:


Economies of Scale – Britain (244,820 sq km) is bigger than Scotland (78,783 sq km). Not just in terms of land mass but also in terms of economic and global might.

Much in the same way as America would have more bargaining power than Arkansas on a global platform. Scotland has a stronger voice inside the UK as opposed to outside of it with regard to international conflict, trade agreements and climate change treaties to name but three areas.

Clipping our own wings would be detrimental to a very successful Foreign Office, Army and UK Cabinet as a whole. The cream of British talent at the Westminster table has a synergy that would always outscore the combined cocktail involving the whisky cream of Scottish talent and the sour cream of English talent (couldn't resist, *laugh*).


Also Scotland and England+Wales+NI would pay two separate lots of "overhead costs"; paying twice for administration of government systems, politicians and bureaucracy not to mention set up costs for new frameworks and processes after Scotland won her independence. Much like when a couple go their separate ways the two mortgages, the two sets of TV licenses, the separate dinners and the separate travel costs all make it harder to get along financially, regardless of how free the heart feels.

Grossing this up to the national scale for Mr and Mrs Britain would apply similarly. Britain makes great savings in pooling so many of her resources.



Mitigating Risks – Britain has a highly diverse group of regions offering its own contribution to the UK pot. Scotland, of course, has oil which is highly lucrative and has contributed to the British coffers for generations. We also have a strong financial sector in Edinburgh (5th biggest financial sector in Europe). We export well known brands around the world, the whisky trade recently went past the 1bn bottles exported mark with a £2.5bn trade, a quarter of all UK food and drink exported. Tourism, too, is on the up and up within Scotland.


All great reasons for Scotland to be independent one may argue but the overbearing risk is that Scotland's route to financial strength is too narrow. Relying primarily on oil, whisky and tourism is inherently risky and with the UK as a whole able to provide an altogether larger and more varied manufacturing and financial sector might and more diversification in other areas of the markets that Scotland doesn't contribute to, Scotland will be less liable to take hits from falling oil reserves/prices, less international travel and cuts on importing luxury items in foreign lands. All very real risks in the 21st century.



Dependency culture - Scotland still has a dangerously unhealthy reliance on public money to prop up failing areas of our society. The comparison to the Eastern bloc countries in this regard doesn't seem to be going away and with the value of Sterling sitting at such a high level, Scotland requires to be as lean and mean as possible to make independence work. Within the Union, there is less uncertainty and therefore less of a risk that the Scots relying on the state for handouts or jobs will financially pull us under. Not enough entrepreneurs and not enough people pulling their weight would, in my view, be too heavy a millstone at this stage to carry alone.


While Scotland languishes bottom of the league of small European nations, we surely are not healthy enough to be successful. We shouldn't be independent in order to be healthy, we should be healthy before we become independent. Our diet, our levels of exercise, our reading and writing rates and our aspirations need to be in good form at the best of times to be a successful nation, but they need to be firing on all cylinders before we can successfully be independent without the UK safety net.





Passports at the Borders - It is much more sensible to live on an island where one can travel freely from country to country. To have to be stopped at checkpoints on the A1 and M74 and fish around for your passport would be immensely frustrating and no doubt would dissuade our English brothers and sisters coming north to see us as often as they currently do. I have family in England and it would be horrible if something as silly as Scottish Independence was the reason we lost touch.






Conclusion



Scotland can be independent, absolutely, and in my heart of hearts I think we should be. We're just not prepared yet, physically or mentally, and as things stand it'd be a safer, savvy and more sensible option to stay within the UK and focus on playing our part to as full a level as possible. If we are then able to punch our way into a position where the undoubted benefits of independence exceed the benefits of the union as set out above, then we should grasp the thistle and go for it.





But an intriguing paradox is this:

The more Alex Salmond and the SNP succeed in improving Scotland and shaping it into the healthy, dynamic nation it needs to be for independence to work, the more comfortable people will be with their lot and the less they will want to say "Yes" to any referendum put before them.


So, as things stand, I'll be voting "no" if this white paper somehow makes it through to an actual referendum. Does anyone care to disagree with me? Or back me up?



(OK, I put the Passport/Border guff in for a joke and also so certain people could get that sweet puff of self-righteous annoyance for a second or two when they thought I was being a prat. But the other 3 arguments still apply for me as things stand. But only just.)

Tuesday, August 21, 2007

We're all a bunch of fatties

I've just read this BBC article that claims 1.2million Scots are abdominally obese. It says a lot that I wasn't overly surprised; after all, you get many people who are clinicallly obese who appear perfectly in shape.

However, then I read the detail. Abdominally obese equates to a waistline of more than 40 inches if you're a bloke and 35 inches if you're a woman. That's incredible! There's nothing wrong with being a bit tubby of course but these sizes are remarkable and to think 1.2million people boast them.


This posting of course comes with the caveat that losing weight must be a horrific battle for many but Scotland's diet and lack of exercise must be made a priority by the SNP administration. I'm no advocate of the nanny state but such an unhealthy nation cannot prosper for long.


(I feel I have to say though that I wrote this entry while tucking into a rather large Iced Ginger. So let me take the first of the ten steps, "My name is Jeff, and I eat like a pig")

Monday, August 20, 2007

Substance over form

There is a rule within the accounting profession which is titled "Substance over form". The way I chose to understand it when learning this subject was: "if something looks technically incorrect, but is in reality a reasonable approach, then the technical aspect can be deemed irrelevant".


It is with this sort of thinking that I turn the reader's mind to that of Stefan Tymkewycz, the SNP councillor who will soon be stepping down from his other job, that of an MSP.


Naturally, Labour supporters are trying to make a bit of hay out of this and score some political points. See Kezia Dugdale and Andrew Burns for example. Their main point is that the remaining 5 MSPs who are also councillors should choose one job and one job only.

On the other side of the fence, Davie Hutchison backs Stefan with some personal comments given they know each other from local campaigning.


Now, going back to substance over form, should a person who is both an MSP and a councillor be judged on the basis of their job titles alone? Surely the substance of a man or woman's performance is more important than how many job titles they have. After all, it isn't difficult to imagine an MSP and councillor doing a sterling job of both and another list MSP making a hash of that one job alone through laziness or ineptitude.

Of course, I can't speak for any of the MSPs' performances, particularly those who are also councillors but I used to live in Abbeyhill, an area that was lucky enough to receive monthly updates on what local campaigns and initiatives Stefan was involved in. The power of work this guy was putting in was very impressive and I'm sure such determination and diligence continued into his dual role as MSP and councillor.

Stefan has amassed a well-known fortune through various properties across Edinburgh so it is fair to say he is working for the love of the job rather than for the money. If his love of council work exceeds that of list MSP work then so be it.


So, with regard the other five SNP MSPs who are also councillors, George Foulkes who is also a Lord, Alex Salmond who is an MP and to a lesser extent Gordon "Crackerjack" Jackson, their performance as an MSP should be judged on the substance of the work that they achieve, not simply on the form of how they go about their days.

Unstoppable force due to hit an immovable object

So it seems the left-wing branch of Labour have given up the ghost of challenging Wendy Alexander for the Scottish Labour leadership hoping, perhaps, that a coronation for the Paisley MSP will see similar successes as it did for her former mentor Gordon Brown.

I don't see this as a huge problem for the party, Wendy would win any contest before her now that the main contenders have dropped out and the arguable 'lack of democracy' in her imminent position as Labour leader is worth it for the continued momentum she is building as she aims to match the SNP's popularity.

But it seems an intractable position has already surfaced for the Labour camp. Just a week ago Jack McConnell gave tacit support for extending powers for Holyrood, anything to the contrary championed by Wendy would be seen as some sort of U-turn. A second U-turn on the same subject no less and I can't imagine someone as forthright and savvy as Wendy Alexander would want to start her reign by tying the party into knots on a subject as important as the powers devolved to Scotland.

And yet, Des Browne says Holyrood needs no new powers? So how will Labour be able to square this circle when Wendy says "everything is up for review" while Des suggests nothing is.


Well, maybe it's not such a problem for the red party, (and this is where my cynical side steps in), as this could all have been orchestrated in advance. Scottish Labour were always going to take a hit to their reputation as they have changed tack on how devolved Scotland should be. So perhaps they have decided to add to the mix an engineered stand-off between Holyrood and Westminster with Browne apparently being 'Wendied' along the way, finally giving off the impression that Scottish Labour can stand up to its Westminster masters.


It's just a theory. My own view is that Labour are not that clever and have too many fish to fry to come up with elaborate scenarios such as this.


So, consequently, what will give way first, the unstoppable force of Wendy Alexander, or the immovable object of Des Browne?

Friday, August 17, 2007

MEP IN FRAUD SHOCKER

Yes, I live for those screaming headlines.

Sadly I didn't get such a one today as the news was more understated in its announcement that an MEP has been found guilty of fraud.

But an MEP from which party? Who would receive the embarrassment? (*cue thrilling music*)

My first thoughts were, please not the SNP. But given the guy represents the South East of the UK I found this to be unlikely.

Next thought turned to the Tories. Go on, more problems for David Cameron would be nice in a rather twisted way. Even a wee reality check for Team GB at the Labour Camps might not be so bad.

But it was neither, solid gold dear reader.... It's UKIP.

Thursday, August 16, 2007

London Tory Night Mayor

Now, you would expect such behaviour from the Lib Dems perhaps, but Labour supporters posing as Tories to vote against Boris Johnson is clearly unfair.

Four things fall out of this:


(1) Boris Johnson is clearly a strong opponent if Labour supporters have to resort to such underhand tactics to take him on. Personally I thought Ken would wipe the floor with him but I guess this just shows what I know.

(2) Ken Livingstone should surely come out strongly against such practises, otherwise silence would be tacit support for it.

(3) If this Labour sabotage turns out to be just a few students on Facebook then the BBC are going to have to up their game with regard to "Breaking News".

(4) Someone is surely having a laugh that the other three Tory candidates are genuinely called: Victoria Borwick, Warwick Lightfoot and Andrew Boff. Perhaps they are competing to see who has the silliest name and who will consequently attract all the Labour votes and win the contest. My money's on Warwick.


Anyway, in response to the quote from londontorynightmayor : It's a deeply sensible idea, and we'd encourage as many non-Tories as possible to get involved...

.... stop wetting your pants chortling at childish games and get back to studying for your resits.

No smoke without fire?

Could James Graham of the Quaequam blog have cracked the push for an independence referendum on the head with one simple quote:

Who is denying the Scots a vote on independence? Two thirds of them voted against independence in the last Scottish elections, where the issue was debated. Two thirds of them say they oppose it in opinion polls.

I wish I understood this pseudo-democratic argument that if people don't want something, it is undemocratic not to give it to them anyway.


Well said indeed. Not that the case will now be closed of course, not while Alex Salmond has that supposed one-way megaphone in the palm of his hand.


But is Alex once again just stoking a fire that didn't have any kindling to begin with?

Surveying a Wendy house

I thought I would repost this blog item as I probably released it a bit early a couple of weeks ago. Seems a bit more topical now somehow. I never was very good at











timing.




I've been trying to imagine what the Holyrood debating chamber will be like with Wendy Alexander as interrogator-in-chief for the Labour party.

There's no doubt there will be a change in tone as Jack and Wendy's personalities and approaches in general are chalk and cheese. And to be fair to the leader-in-waiting, Jack is more like common chalk with Wendy being the expensive cheese. (I could go on to slyly comment that one has to swallow chalk to stop one from making embarrassing, odorous noises in public, but that would just be mean).

Anyway, the question is: With cheese at the top rather than chalk, will Labour's performances in Holyrood mature any?

Well, my conclusion is a fence-warming yes and no.

Yes because Wendy Alexander can think on her feet better than previous Labour leaders. She will go into debates and FMQs with a width and depth of knowledge of the arguments and issues of the day that far outstrip those that have gone before. Wendy is an intellectual, often these complimentary tags are stretched slightly but I don't think many people can deny that the Paisley MSP can think around problems and come up with creative ideas better than most. Wendy is also female, with a young family. Not that these things should matter but given Alex Salmond's particular lack of appeal to females it is a definite boost for the Opposition.

But I still see the coronation of Wendy Alexander as a potential step in the wrong direction for Labour for a few specific reasons.

Remember that girl in your class who, in that annoying accent, would tell you that you were wrong and she was right and then go on to explain why? It didn't matter how much sense she made, you just plain didn't like her for being such a bossy boots and goody two shoes at the same time.

An analogy could also be used for the girl in your street who always told on her Dad whenever you took a risk or went on an adventure. With Daddy Broon not too far down the road, this is another possible downside to Labour's 'choice', a risk-averse leader who won’t take the radical decisions needed to pull Scotland up by its lengthening bootstraps.

Basically, I personally think there is something about Wendy Alexander's approach and tone that will just put people off.

The other downside to Wendy is as follows:

Jack was seriously harmed by his close ties with Tony and Gordon. The irony being neither side really got on all that well personally anyway. With Wendy, the same cannot be said. The Paisley lass is good buddies with Gordon and Alastair and no doubt her and her brother have long gotten past any teenage rammies they used to have.

Well, all this cosiness you would think would be a good thing but those that want Holyrood to work want it to stand on its own 129 feet without Westminster interference. After all, what's the point in paying for all these MSPs and their expenses if they can't think for themselves, right?

So, similar to how Gordon had to drive a wedge between himself and George, so too must Oor Wendy drive a wedge between herself and Daddy Broon.


But that "holier than thou" tone is just something Wendy will have to take a chance on and hope that we see her as great, as well as grating.

The missing link

I try to keep my blog links up to date, and if I happen across a new blog that is regularly updated I'll probably add it to my list.

I also try to include blogs from across the political spectrum to get a balanced set of analysis.

So I was left with a dilemma when I happened across a regularly updated, perfectly fair BNP blog.

I don't believe in gagging (except on those rare occasions when I've had too much to drink and feel decidedly awful) so I've added the Aberdeen-based "Scottish, British and Proud" blog to the set of links. I can't say I agree with much (or any) of it, but it makes for interesting reading as the BNP point of view is set out in as reasonable a way as one could hope.

Becks hits the spot

No, I'm not starting off this morning with a boozy breakfast but rather commenting on David Beckham scoring his first goal for MLS. I know most people probably won't really care about such boring, meaningless things but I do like the guy.

It was indeed a trademark freekick, and Posh's lukewarm reaction is worth viewing the Youtube video alone.


Anyway, with David also getting an assist in the 2-0 victory and England's team falling apart at the seams (get well soon Rooney), maybe he'll reach that 100 cap mark after all.



Incidentally, well played to Celtic and Rangers, 2 feet into the Champions League proper. Just a shame that's two feet out of four and there's a lot of hard work still to do!

Wednesday, August 15, 2007

Scottish Roulette

With all this hullabaloo over Scotland's future and the three options before us, can we not just make it simple to avoid all this conversation nonsense? I never was very good in group discussions anyway.

I was going to suggest a live game of Ker-Plunk with each of the four main leaders challenging for the right to decide Scotland's future but marbles (stones of destiny?) can be tricky to find these days.

So how about this. Someone gets a die out and we set out the following rules for one roll of said die:


Roll a 1 - We don't do anything, scrap the white paper and with the money saved all the MSPs go out for a pub crawl on us.

Roll a 2 - We still don't do anything but Gordon Brown must wear a kilt to work on Fridays. Other MPs and MSPs can dress casually, but no ripped jeans or bandanas.

Roll a 3 - Edinburgh Castle and other Scottish landmarks must fly Saltires as opposed to Union Flags. Christine Grahame is made a Dame.

Roll a 4 - We get to give all the nuclear weapons back to England and turn Rosyth into the World Centre for offshore wind farms. Shetland Islands get to toss a coin on whether they're independent as a (Robert the) Brucie Bonus.

Roll a 5 - Scotland gets to set her own interest rates and corporation tax bands. The Bank of England must relocate to Bannockburn.

Roll a 6 - Full independence. And noone's allowed to moan about it.


There. In the words of Gordon Ramsay. "National Conversation...... Done."

Out with the old

If the best thing you did in your five and a half years as First Minister was introduce a measly smoking ban, then you know you didn't do as good a job as you could have.

I suspect the former First Minister's efforts will reap greater rewards in assisting education for Malawian and Rwandan children, needless to say a very noble career choice for a man who could easily have cashed in with private sector positions and played a lot of golf in between.


So thanks Jack, I thought you were rubbish, but thanks anyway.

Tuesday, August 14, 2007

Chav Hunt

A very funny clip by some kids with a strong sense of satire.


Not everyone agrees, sadly.

Monday, August 13, 2007

Empty chairs at empty tables


Remember those halcyon days where you wanted to be at the table when those really tall people were having proper discussions about serious things? Even if you only got to sit there quietly when you should have been in bed you'd be delighted to just listen as the tones changed from that baby-talk you wished they'd stop doing to you months ago to the mature, reasoned and often passionate dialogue.

For many, that desire to be involved wears off fairly quickly as teenage years kick in but for those destined to be politicians I would imagine they would always want to be at the cutting edge of, or at least in the same room as, whatever debate was on the table.

Putting arguments forward, assessing arguments coming their way, conjecture, theory, big picture, detail, detail, detail. It's what should get the politician's juices flowing. And if they fail to win the argument of the day from those bothering to tune in to watch, they take it on the chin and accept that democracy is the overall winner.

The current debate of the day seems to involve the 3 basic options Scotland has ahead of her: independence, more powers for the devolved Holyrood or keeping the status quo. And to pick which is the best option you need a debate, though the current favoured option seems to clearly be more powers for Holyrood but falling significantly short of full independence.

I can't help but wonder therefore, with such a debate on the table, where the political instincts have gone for the Labour, Tory and Lib Dem politicians?

Why does the unionist majority choose to bury their head in the sand? Of particular bemusement is the Lib Dem and Tory refusal to speak up for the "more powers for Holyrood" option which they seemed to be desirous of before the election. What has changed? If I had voted for either of these parties then I would be very put out indeed. But then, had I voted for either of these parties I would also be a monkey's uncle and the months would have rather more Sundays than they had before.


The joint statement from the unionist parties today damning the SNP for having the audacity to publish a white paper on independence was presumably designed to be a showing of strength but, unfortunately, their poor choice of language lets them down.


Scaremongering with no detail and no reasoned argument has become the tired response from each of the SNP's rivals with regard to independence. Without a structured approach to this issue, an issue that's not going anywhere fast, the SNP can only gain ground from voters who will surely see the unionists as being lazy and childish. (As an example, opposing a white paper before it is published means you're either being immature or don't have the gumption to actually read the thing)

Labour, Lib Dem and Conservative members need to dig deep and set out the real benefits that the "union dividend" will bring. And they also have to decide if they do want more powers for Holyrood or not. They talk of the SNP bringing instability and confusuion and yet noone really knows any more what it is these 3 parties actually want for Scotland going forward 10, 20, 50 years into the future.


So to go back to the opening scene, Alex Salmond and his colleagues appear to be waiting at the empty dining table in the ever-dimming evening light, waiting for the debate to begin and wondering if their adversaries would really rather avoid this grown-up chat altogether.

Friday, August 10, 2007

Galloway vs Fitzpatrick

It seems Gorgeous George will not be taking on Jack Straw as had been rumoured but rather he'll be taking on Jim Fitzpatrick in an East London constituency.

Tricky one to call I suppose but given his ousting of Oona King last time around, I don't see why George won't overhaul Jim's 7,000 majority this time around.

I hope so, Westminster would be a duller place without him.

Stock Market Jitters


Crikey, you go out for a lunch and upon returning the financial world has gone into meltdown.


3% is generally a movement that is statistically insignificant. However, when applied to the FTSE 100 it equates to billions of pounds. Gone. Seemingly in a flash.


Days like these show how precariously our capitalist society is held together. A fairly innocuous lack of confidence in a very specific area of the market and suddenly the whole market starts unravelling. Banks rely on other banks, and all business rely on banks. The domino effect means everyone suddenly wants to sell their shares and there's no clear picture of when such selling will stop.


Of course, the business savvy will know that stock market prices will at some point make good this 3%, and then some, so the sold shares will always be purchased but peoples' pensions and investments still take a hammering in the short term.



The good news? If yoou really want to see it? After today, the likelihood of interest rate rises will decrease a bit as the market is correcting the generous credit terms of the past few years on its own without Bank of England or the Fed's involvement.


So some of us might have just saved £20-£50 a month. Whether our pensions and saving accounts will see such a silver lining is another question!

The UK Citizenship Test

As interested as I am in Politics, I always thought I'd make a lousy politician. For one thing, I don't really care enough about most issues of the day, seeing either side of the argument makes it difficult to fight tooth and nail for one or other side of the debate.

But one issue I'm happy to fight tooth and nail for is immigration. We have it easy in the UK, we really do, and if through an open immigration policy and involvement with the EU we can balance out the uneven trade and salary distribution around the world then I'm all for it.

The number of Polish people in Edinburgh specifically is incredible, but when they can earn 4 or 5 times in the UK what they can back home then it makes perfect sense that they come over here, put a power of work in for a few years and then go home with a solid base of money with which they can invest in their life. Or, of course, they may stay on and settle into the UK way of life. Either way, I'm all for it.

Polish is the most evident nationality making full use of the free movement of people policy within the EU. Unfortunately, those from more foreign lands do not have this luxury and yet are those with potentially the greatest need as wars and famines have pushed hundreds of thousands from their broken homes.

It is with some dismay that I read in the Scotsman today that the insulting and somewhat bizarre Citizenship Test is still being applied to new immigrants.

With a high pass mark of 75%, a £34 charge each time and such subjective/irrelevant questions as shown below, I am embarrassed that we are making people jump through such hoops just to find a stable country to call home.

A not-so-random sample of questions from the UK Citizenship Test:

How many people in the UK own their own home?

What are the ages of compulsory education? How does this differ in Northern Ireland?

What is the film classification system?

What is the State Pension age for men and for women?

What type of constitution does the UK have?



I'd honestly struggle with each of them, and I wouldn't really care if UK citizens, recently established or not, knew the correct answers either.


Of course the test has been set for political reasons, so that the Government can help those in need but also massage the misplaced worries of the Little Englanders. A group of people who sadly, collectively, seem to have the casting vote in UK elections and therefore bask in the position of having David Cameron and Gordon Brown falling over themselves to appease them. I also see them as a group of people with a mindset so far removed from the collective Scottish psyche that I can only imagine the average BNP person could be more at odds than the average Scot.


I don't have a burning desire to live in an independent Scotland, but if independence means we can distance ourselves from disagreeable policies such as this, set our own agenda and not insult foreigners with meaningless Citizenship Tests then I'm a little bit more in favour of it than I was yesterday.

Back to black


Following on from my last post about global warming (sort of) and taking the leads of Davie Hutchison and Kezia Dugdale (a rare Labour blogger, but don't hold it against her), I have decided to drop my white background for a more energy-saving, and slightly more gothic, black one.

As people like to say in business-land, if we're going to solve this problem we're going to have to "knife and fork"** it so this is my recent tiny contribution.





** "Knife and fork it" - to break a big problem up into small pieces to make it more solvable.

Basicallly it's crap office chat, somewhat similar to the the global warming question which Al Gore "ran up the flagpole to see who'd salute it"

Thursday, August 9, 2007

Portable Power

I was sitting on the bus this morning, reading my Times and scoffing at the people around me who had a mere Metro to keep them entertained. That was until I saw a story in one of the faraway Metros that seemed to have a pretty girl in the attached photo and all of a sudden reading Simon Jenkins, Matthew Paris and co no longer seemed so appealing.

Anyway, most people didn’t have papers and were staring out into space. Bored on the bus before, presumably, sitting bored at work. Life really is a rat race for most of us hey?

Up and down the country, infact across the planet, we have millions of people just standing or sitting, staring into space, between the hours of 7:30am – 9am and also 5pm to 6:30pm. Well, why not give these people something to do during this ‘down time’? And what more noble a displacement activity than saving the world?

So here’s where the wheels may fall off but stay with me, what if we gave all of these people mini-generators? A little contraption they could wind up when they had nothing else to do and, using the kinetic energy of their moving hands, could build portable power to use to contribute to the energy we use at work and home. Well, at home for me since I personally pay those bills. I’m kind of cheap like that.

As flippant as this may sound, I don’t see why it’s not a fairly logical idea. There could even be screens hooked up on buses and planes where the faster you can turn your generator, the faster your little stick figure runs onscreen. You know, make a game out of it. It won’t rival the Playstation 2 but it’s something at least.

Or think of the moving parts in vehicles, wheels spinning round, propellers doing the same and turbines doing, well, whatever it is that turbines do. Why can’t we harness that kinetic energy that is being wasted? We look to build wave farms out in the ocean and wind farms out in some remote hill range, but if we stop and consider it, I think we’ll find that the solution to global warming, actually, is all around.


(I also just think the image of a bus full of people all sitting/standing rotivating away like crazy is rather amusing)

Tuesday, August 7, 2007

Sports Scotland

I was playing football last night out at Inverleith Park and a bit like Hearts these days, I find myself having to make introductions to my team mates each week as it’s a different group of guys every time we play. My lazy small talk approach tends to involve the standard questions but a certain team mate’s response to the “Did you get up to much at the weekend?” was anything but standard. “Mountain boarding” was the answer and I have to admit I was verbally wrong-footed, which to be honest doesn’t usually take much as I have the eloquence of George W Bush at the best of times. I believe I spluttered a few times, said a rather weak “wow” and then asked in all seriousness if that was like snowboarding without the snow. Apparently yes, it is.

This got me thinking. If Edinburgh can be the Athens of the North, why can’t Scotland be the adventure playground of Europe? It’s all there, though we’d probably have to challenge those hardy Scandinavians for the title. We have mountain ranges that are rugged but not austere, challenging bike tracks, world-class surfing locations, countless freeflowing rivers and canals for watersports, sufficient snow in the winters, plenty of wind for anything from hang-gliding to sailing and of course scenery and wildlife that can only enhance any outdoor pursuit.

When I was at school, not so many years ago I like to think, Physical Education involved the girls handing in their forged sick notes and then settling down to watch the boys play football. Great fun at the time, but I had zero idea what else was out there so of course I was content with the footy. Then I moved on to university and I suddenly realised that guys who don’t play soccer don’t actually deserve ridicule, they’ll probably be ace at archery, rugby or table tennis. Three sports I did not a single second of in my 13 years at school. I believe we had one class of hockey, one class of cricket and a few games of rounders sprinkled in with the cross country running and, of course, the constant football.

And I can’t help but think a trick is being missed in Scotland. What an investment in the next generation to have them running, jumping, diving as much as they can if we can do it without threatening grades. Let’s stop testing kids so much and get them out exercising and trying new sports, and that basis of knowing the basics will no doubt have them well placed to join those crazy enough to surf in the North Sea and slide down mountains on a tea tray later on in life. Even if they fall short of that, a healthier Scotland will mean saving money in the long run anyway, and more Tom McKeans and Yvonne Murrays to cheer on when the Olympics come around.

I believe the SNP are backing more sport in schools though it was the Lib Dems who were pushing it quite hard during the election, so between the two I daresay they can come up with some new initiative. I have to admit I don’t really know where we are with regard passing white papers etc in this area but we grown-ups should be leading the charge anyway, trying new things and lifting the lid on what adventure companies there are out there who for £40 will happily nail us to a plank of wood and push us down a mountain.

As for the result of last night’s football for me and my new friends, let’s just say it’s not the winning but the taking part that counts.

Mr Benn

I have to ask, is everyone in the UK Cabinet on holiday except for Hilary Benn? It seems every time I switch on the TV at the moment it’s either Big Brother or Mr Benn (and sadly not the classic kids TV programme).

To be fair, the floods and the foot and mouth fiascos fall squarely on his desk but even still, you’d think a few other ministers would pop up from time to time to put their oar in (an unfortunate reference to the floods there I do apologise). Even David Cameron stayed in the country long enough to make an appearance at a recent cattle show. Or no-show as it turned out to be. DC made some good comments on the affair in his attempt to paint himself as a better manager of such issues than GB. His attempt to pin some of the blame on the Government was a bit lame though.

But the one thing I wanted to mention on here was the possibility that the company who started the recent foot and mouth problems may well end up profiting from it. Now hopefully this potential disaster for the UK won’t spread beyond the second affected farm reported this morning but it seems bizarre that the Government will have to pay a company for vaccines when it was that company that caused the outbreak in the first place.

I believe a report of some sort is out today which will further clarify if this is what is actually about to happen. And if it does, one can only hope that as if by magic, some common sense appears before the ever-present Mr Benn.

Friday, August 3, 2007

"I'm ready - come on then"


It seems Scotland doesn't have just one international hero in the intrepid John Smeaton (who met the Prime Minister today in what is the latest chapter of the feel-good story of the year).

While The Smeat was taking time out from banjoing terrorists, who was going to keep us safe up here in Scotland?

Step forward Mohammed Afzah.

An example of Mr Afzah's finely honed anti-crime skills were displayed on the 17th of July when a hapless armed robber chose to raid Mohammed's Edinburgh newsagent. Amidst scenes where lesser men would have meekly handed over the money and cried for their Mummy, Mr Afzah (an ex-bodyguard of the Pakistan President), stepped out from the desk, assumed an attacking karate position and uttered the menacing phrase "I'm ready - come on then".


A few more of these Scottish-based superheroes and we won't even need George Bush's Son of Star Wars to protect us.

YouGov Poll

As I learned through Tartan Hero's multi-award winning blog, there is a new You Gov poll out which is as detailed as it is interesting.

I couldn't possibly cover all of the information contained in it and the Scottish section of the results could be somewhat misleading given the poll is related to Westminster but people's thoughts on Holyrood may get added to the mix. However, their voting intentions may well be based on Holyrood actions too so who knows what is and isn't relevant these days.

The most glaring statistic of all is the 4% that the Lib Dems are polling at in Scotland. Difficult to say if this is slap in the face for Nicol Stephen or Menzies Campbell but given that Ming polls at around 17% in England and Wales, you've got to think Nicol will be pretty miffed. Mind you, a separate question resulted in only 12% saying Ming Campbell should stay on as leader with 39% preferring a younger person. Among Lib Dem voters, as many as 54% would prefer to see a young leader (with 24% wanting to keep Ming).

The SNP's issues regarding women voting for them doesn't seem to have improved much. Of the 29% of the Scottish sample who say they would vote SNP, only 20% are female. How long can the SNP be the most popular party in Scotland with such a low level of support from half of the population?


Good news for the SNP comes from the 29% figure itself. The SNP secured 17% of the overall vote in 2005 so clearly this is a massive jump and would surely translate into an increased number of seats. Currently sitting at 6 Westminster seats, the Nationalists may yet be the victims or the beneficiaries from some tactical voting when the election comes around, but I'd be surprised if they didn't increase their tally. When the time comes, I shall of course be pushing for as much SNP tactical voting as possible ;-)



There's a surprisingly high level (52%) of overall dissatisfaction with the Government's record with only 27% approving. Despite the recent council elections, there are still a large number of voters who seem quite happy to give Labour a bit of a kicking.


However, on personality, Brown is still wiping the floor with Cameron in almost every region on every question. The esteem for Brown is decidedly more pronounced in Scotland, as expected.


The issues that divide the genders most noticeably are:

"Replace the existing council tax with a local income tax levied at an average rate of 3p or 4p in the pound".
53% of men are in favour with only 38% of women agreeing. (May go some way to explain the problems the SNP have had in appealing to females.)

"Take the authority to ratify treaties away from the Government of the day and give it to Parliament as a whole"
62% of men are in favour with only 43% of women agreeing.



Issues that divide Scotland and the rest of the UK:

"Take cannabis more seriously by raising its classification from Class C to Class B"
Only 51% approval in Scotland with roughly 60% in the rest of the UK.

"Raise to 18 the age at which pupils can leave education or training"
Only 35% of people in Scotland are in favour with about 49% of England/Wales being for. Given the age at which Scots can leave school and still go on to university, as young as 16, a difference in opinion here is expected.

"Detain terrorist suspects without charge for as long as the police need to carry out their enquiries"
66% of Scots in favour compared to around 75-76% in favour for England and Wales. I was very surprised to see those figures so high, but not surprising to see that Scotland is more left-wing on this one.



And finally, one pair of statistics that were highly amusing. Among those intending to vote Conservative, 1% would prefer to see Gordon Brown win the next election. Though I wouldn't get so smug if you're a Labour supporter, apparently 2% of you lot would rather see David Cameron win!

Guantanamo Bay

There is a complacency that I think Britain as a whole is guilty of on an almost daily basis. I am as guilty as the next person myself.

That complacency is to be outraged by some news article or issue one day and then to clean forget about it the next.

Granted, we lead busy lives and there are long spaces of time for each of us when just getting through the days, weeks and months in a happy state, solvent and generally unscathed is a bit of a struggle.

But we have it very, very good here in the UK. With the main parties scrabbling for the coveted centre ground we should be grateful that political debate doesn't involve sentiments such as "if you don't agree with me we'll blow you to smithereens"

There are thousands of news items over the past five years that I could drag out of the archives and receive that guilty feeling over given I personally have done bugger all about it ever since. But the existence of Guantanamo Bay is the biggest millstone hanging around the West's heads and it makes a mockery of civil rights and international justice.


According to the US Department of Defense, approximately 360 men remain detained in Guantánamo held without charge. The prison itself has been in existence for over 5 years.


So I have linked to Amnesty International's "Close Gunatanmo Bay" page and suggest clicking on the "Get Involved" section.


With a possible general election coming up, now may be the ideal time to exert some pressure on our new PM to engage his moral compass and do what he can to end an injustice that has gone on for far too long.

Galloway vs Straw - The Battle of Blackburn

He is opportunistic, a rabble-rouser, has a huge ego and can often be very narrow-minded. He is also one of the finest orators Scotland has ever produced, a passionate man not afraid to stand out from the crowd and put his neck on the line. He is George Galloway and I quite simply love the guy.


And now, The Herald claims, Gorgeous George is considering standing against Jack Straw.


The man's sense of theatre is so astute that I am surprised he doesn't have his own sell-out show at the festival. His performance in the US Senate was incredible and the bemused faces of these old powerful Americans who didn't know what to do with this belligerent Scot was a sight to see.


Most people either love to hate him or hate to love him. Or both. Personally I think he's arguing a case that too many politicians are afraid to speak out about. Even the irascible Clare Short bottled her golden moment by resigning too late when she was well placed in the Cabinet to stand up for and make an example of what she believes in.


But I do wish more people would choose to love George Galloway. As much as I think Jack Straw does a fairly decent job as an MP, I hope he gets hammered by George if he chooses to stand.


So now, if this was a TV programme, I would insert his "best bits" to sign off, a plethora of footage including big cheesy smiles, handshakes, incandescent remonstrations and kissing of babies, all with a backing song of, I don't know, Rod Stewart's "Have I told you Lately" or something.

But instead, here's a bunch of George's best quotes for those who have stomached this post to this point:


"Senator, in everything I said about Iraq, I turned out to be right and you turned out to be wrong.”


"I would rather be eating cheese and reading Sartre on the banks of the river Seine than eating popcorn with a born again bible-belt fundamentalist Republican administration in Crawford, Texas, execution capital of the world.”


"I'm demanding that they charge me with contempt and with perjury, I'm demanding it.”


"Saddam Hussein greeted me with a handshake, which, again to my surprise, is surprisingly soft considering how many people that hand had dispatched, allegedly. I think he's quite a forbidding presence, too forbidding a presence to be charming. But he's interesting.”


"Now I know that standards have slipped in the last few years in Washington, but for a lawyer you are remarkably cavalier with any idea of justice. I am here today but last week you already found me guilty. You traduced my name around the world without ever having asked me a single question, without ever having contacted me, without having written to me or telephoned me, without any attempt to contact me whatsoever. And you call that justice."


"I told the world, contrary to your claims, that the Iraqi people would resist a British and American invasion of their country and that the fall of Baghdad would not be the beginning of the end, but merely the end of the beginning."


"Senator, in everything I said about Iraq, I turned out to be right and you turned out to be wrong and 100,000 people paid with their lives; 1600 of them American soldiers sent to their deaths on a pack of lies; 15,000 of them wounded, many of them disabled forever on a pack of lies."


"I have met Saddam Hussein exactly the same number of times as Donald Rumsfeld met him. The difference is that Donald Rumsfeld met him to sell him guns and to give him maps the better to target those guns. I met him to try and bring about an end to sanctions, suffering and war, and on the second of the two occasions, I met him to try and persuade him to let Dr Hans Blix and the United Nations weapons inspectors back into the country - a rather better use of two meetings with Saddam Hussein than your own Secretary of State for Defense made of his."


"Some believe that those aeroplanes on September 11 came out of a clear blue sky. I believe they came out of a swamp of hatred created by us."



"What you have witnessed since [Christopher Hitchen’s opposition to the 1991 invasion of Iraq] is something unique in natural history: the first ever metamorphosis of a butterfly back into a slug."


"People like Mr Hitchens are ready to fight to the last drop of other people's blood, and it's utterly and completely contemptible."

Sad news

I woke up to be told there was a fire on Princes St which, at the time, I commented "that's not very good". Possibly one of the bigger understatements I've made in my years.

I hopped off the 22 bus about a half hour later and walked along to see which store had been hit and it was very unfortunate to see that it is the independent kilt maker, and purveyor of all things Scottish, Romanes and Paterson that is the victim.

I don't know if it's wrong of me to have wished the blaze on GAP or M&S, a global company that could absorb such a hit more easily, but wish it I did.

Fire crews were still battling the flames at 9am from what I could see but hopefully the shop will live to see another day. With the invasion of loud, crude, tacky tourist shops hitting Princes St and the Royal Mile, we should be grateful for as many Romanes and Patersons as we can get.

Thursday, August 2, 2007

Nice move George!

George Foulkes has had a wee bit of bad press in 2007:


There was the xenophobia slur against Alex Salmond

After becoming an MSP he quit a committee as it was too "dull", seemingly preferring the House of Lords lifestyle

The Scotland on Sunday even gave him a wee warning in one of their editorials recently:

George Foulkes, for one, needs to take care that his instinctive hatred of nationalism does not blind him to the need for a mature debate on constitutional evolution. He should tone down his vitriol accordingly.


So given the above, it seems to be a smart move for the Lord to have a well-publicised reach out to the Lothian constituents via what is being claimed as the first series of "live online surgeries".

I think this is a fine idea. To be fair, it's not too dissimilar from simply dropping your local MSP an email but still a bit of credit should be given for this. Of course, it's not entirely clear who will be on the other end of the internet cable, George himself or an assistant but that's not really so important as the method of communication is merely a means to an end.

MSPs starting blogs, online surgeries and having podcasts can only help in decreaing the democratic deficit (Though, to be fair, these moves have had varying degrees of success. David Cameron at home, pausing in washing the dishes, to discuss Tory policy was about as staged and unnatural a broadcast as you can get!)


But hats off to George, it's not out of the question that if I have a Lothian-based problem that I won't turn to his e-surgery in the future. After all, it's all about choice these days....

Fair play

Despite the increased election gossip, I would say that it is becoming relatively clear that a snap election in October is less and less likely the more the talking heads chew it over. Aside from "election mastermind" Douglas Alexander being on holiday 2.5 months before the supposed day of reckoning and Labour being well and truly skint, Brian Taylor sets out a superb explanation for why Brown is probably going to wait till 2008 or later.

But to change the topic slightly, why should Brown have the right to have us all on tenterhooks like this anyway? Is it fair that he can wait until the Tories are at their weakest and Labour at their strongest before going to the electorate to seek a mandate?

What if such an approach was taken in another vitally important area of modern life, football. Let's imagine Italy, current World Champions, could announce when the next World Cup could be...

Del Piero, Inzaghi, Nesta, Cannavaro etc could all mosey into the Piazza Navona on their Vespas bedecked in designer sunglasses and Armani suits for a meeting every month. Over pizza and Peroni they could establish how everyone is feeling, make sure there are no niggling injuries and ensure the rival Brazilians, Argentinians and Scottish** superstars are wrong-footed or injured as much as possible before deciding to kick off the next festival of football a month hence.

It's just not cricket. Or football in this case. And it doesn't seem impartial enough for the Prime Minister to choose when the general election should take place given its importance.

No, I'd like to see someone irrelevant to modern-day Politics make the call, someone whose views on the way we should live has no direct impact on public policy.


Perhaps Menzies Campbell could be the man.......?








** It's the optimism that keeps you going.

Courtesy of the Calgary Herald

799 Words
08-01-2007
Calgary Herald

The antiwar crowd is right. It's all about oil -- although perhaps not in the way it means. Consider some of the current threats to global stability: Russia's contempt for international norms, Iran's nuclear ambitions, the massacres in Darfur, the descent of South America into leftist authoritarianism. All these crises are oil-fuelled. The six-fold rise in the price of a barrel, and the commensurate boost it has given to the petro-kleptocracies, is the central fact of our age.

Russia is ceasing to be a democracy in any meaningful sense: opposition politicians are harassed, independent media closed, journalists murdered. Almost every contiguous state has felt the force of President Vladimir Putin's oil diplomacy: Estonia, Moldova, Belarus, Ukraine and, above all, Georgia, which is being asphyxiated by a semi-official blockade. Nor does it stop there. Alexander Litvinenko, let us remember, was a British subject living under the Queen's peace. At best, his murder was an act of terrorism; at worst, an act of war. Yet Putin calculates that he can mock us because, as his defence minister cheerfully puts it: "The west keeps buying our energy."

Russian revanchism correlates remarkably closely to the price of a barrel. When oil last peaked, at the end of the 1970s, the Red Army poured into Afghanistan. When prices collapsed at the end of the 1980s, so did the USSR. Similarly, see how Teheran is throwing its weight about, sponsoring militias in the Balkans, the Caucasus and the old Silk Road khanates, supplying its Lebanese and Palestinian proxies with rockets, orchestrating attacks on U.S. soldiers in Basra, even seizing servicemen in the Gulf. Meanwhile, the ayatollahs have given up even pretending to collaborate with the international nuclear authorities. Oil again. At the same time, largely unnoticed, South America is retreating from the pluralism of the 1990s into a malignant neo-caudillismo.

The modern Latin dictator does not seize power with tanks. Rather, he gets himself more or less fairly elected, then promptly sets about dismantling every check on his power, closing down parliament, nationalizing the media, stuffing the judiciary, vitiating the electoral commission, rewriting the constitution. And where has this process gone furthest? In the region's three hydrocarbon exporters: Bolivia, Ecuador and, worst of all, Venezuela, whose foul-mouthed autocrat, Hugo Chavez, has now decreed that foreigners who criticize him will be immediately deported. And while we're about it, what do you suppose gives the Sudanese government the confidence to defy world opinion in Darfur? Chiefly the fact that its revenue is secure as long as China keeps buying its gasoline.

An oil strike could well be the worst thing that can happen to a country. By giving the regime an independent income stream, it breaks the link between taxation and representation. States that do not depend on a single natural resource can develop free economies in which property rights are adjudicated by independent courts. But states where there is one overwhelming source of wealth tend to become oligarchies, whose leaders squabble to get their hands on fabulous riches. There are exceptions. Norway has found a way to put its oil wealth beyond the reach of its politicians, placing its revenues in a special fund. But for every Norway there are a dozen Nigerias -- states whose rulers have lost the habit of consulting their citizens.

Israelis like to joke that they spent 40 years wandering the wilderness, and managed to wind up in the only part of the Middle East with no oil. Perhaps this is connected to another thing that Israelis are quick to tell you, namely that theirs is the only democracy in the neighbourhood. Even the most quiescent oil producers often turn out to have bought internal stability at the price of foreign instability. It is striking how many suicide bombers come from repressive Gulf monarchies. To borrow a metaphor from chaos theory, these states are drinking order from their environment. Or in Leninist terms, they are exporting their internal contradictions. All because they have been cursed with unearned wealth.

So, a piece of advice to Scottish Nationalist Party Leader Alex Salmond, who is about to publish his plans for an independence referendum. Stop droning on about the oil revenue that you think a separate Scottish state should have received. Scotland has suffered enough from subventions. Scots, like other Britons, are a restless, mercantile, inventive people. They rose by relying on themselves, not by trusting their leaders to sign backroom deals with multinationals. In any case, North Sea extraction is now definitively dwindling -- and not before time.

Wednesday, August 1, 2007

"SNP is a collection of frikkin idiots"

It was claimed, fairly in my view, that the SNP won the online battle for selling its policies via podcasts, emails and general web activity from grassroots members.

Well, I recently joined Facebook (which incidentally is a godsend for getting in touch with lost friends) and from a search of the groups, it is clear that there is one corner of the web that remains unchartered territory for the SNP online juggernaut.

Having typed in SNP into the search field, a couple of the groups that you can join on Facebook include:


If I see Alex Salmond in the street I will endevour to throw an egg at him (29 members).
The rallying cry seems to be an exclamation mark heavy: Long live the Union!!! Down with the SNP!!!!!!!!!!!


Destroy the Scottish National Party (SNP) (with a worryingly hefty 326 members, including an A MacAskill. No relation to Kenny I hope. There is also an Iain Gray but I'm sure it's just a coincidence.)

I'm not entirely sure if the title of this party could be in contravention of some sort of anti-terrorist legislation but there they are boasting such eloquent gems as "Scottish National Party is a collection of frikkin idiots" and "They have absolutely no idea how to run a country - they would sink Scotland faster than the Titanic" (clearly needs updating)

My favourite two when put together are: "Make sure you're not one of them, or you too will join the world's largest collection of retarded politicians outside of America" and "Supporters of the SNP are also welcome. Both sides of the argument are encouraged. Hopefully we can get some sort of intelligent debate going". Brilliant!

Wow, it gets worse. In the same group:

"It is my belief that we should start preparing now for Civil War that will undoubtedly ensue should the treacherous SNP scum try and dissolve The Union...Clearly they are little better than animals...if somebody starts storing bottled water... i'll start buying hand grenades, tanks, rocket launchers and the like on ebay.... "

To be fair, the members seem to be intelligent types, certainly the vast majority are at university though more than 50% appear to be non-Scots. Maybe that highlights the real stink that the SNP's recent victory has caused, people in England/Wales are more cheesed off than Scots perhaps?

And yes, saddo that I am, I did trawl through each of the names out of morbid interest. I did see a guy I used to work with gave me a wry smile and also, interestingly, a fine blogger that I link to on my page but it would be churlish to pass on who it is ;-)


Anyway, this is all just fun and games but I'll stop now as I'm sure I'm only a hair's breadth away from being some sort of stalker so instead I'll maybe just join one of these exclamation-mark-heavy groups and see if I can get some of that intelligent debate on the go that they so desperately crave. It's worth it, even if it does boost their numbers to 327!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

October Election - The gossip gathers pace

The Times have picked up on the increasingly plausible possibility of an October election. I guess a mixture of Brown's current popularity and the shifting uneasiness that sitting on Blair's election 2005 success has brought for the big man has pushed Brown into thinking that going to the electorate early is best.


But how the heck did Kate Garraway get wind of all of this before anyone else!


Don't tell me that lovable rogue Lembit Opik has hooked up with and is spilling secrets to another B-list celebrity....??

The best way to waste money

The white paper on a referendum for an Independent Scotland is due out in a fortnight. Of course it won't get much further on the path to legal status but it is still a tantalising development for those who want to see Scotland stand up for itself on a global stage. (Or, for the unionists amongst you, for those who want to see Scotland ripped out of the successful and economically strong United Kingdom)

There has been a lot of hoo-ha about this white paper being a wate of money and I really do wish they would stop all the fuss. For one thing it would prevent me using such embarrassing terms as "hoo-ha" but the SNP are perfectly justified in bringing this white paper to the table and the complaints from the other three parties has more to do with them wanting independence off the agenda entirely than worrying about costs involved.

Infact, the list of reasons why the white paper is either justifiable or a smart thing for the SNP to do is pretty much as follows:

(1) The SNP won the election fair and square. The central plank of their manifesto was the push for independence. It would be totally remiss of Alex Salmond not to construct a white paper to this end, regardless of its chances of success.

(2) It puts pressure on the Lib Dems specifically to say yes to this. They consistently talk about a debate on a constutitional convention and more powers for Holyrood which could easily be incorporated into the debate on an independence referendum. For them to say no just paints them as being in an even bigger huff than they currently appear to be in.

(3) It gets past the coalition sticking point with the Lib Dems and clears the way for a potential SNP-Lib Dem-Green administration in the future.

(4) Large swathes of the public will be annoyed at not being allowed to have their say on the matter. Granted, most of them will be SNP supporters already but I can envisage the Nationalists picking up a lot of sympathy and possibly further support through this issue alone.

(5) It reinforces the following questions whcih I've not yet heard or read decent answers to:

If there is no appetite for independence - why won't the unionists choose to have a referendum and ram the UK message down Salmond's throat, kicking the independence question into the long grass for a generation? The resulting quagmire could almost trigger another election where the SNP vote would surely drop.

And if there is an appetite for independence, surely the Scottish people deserve a referendum on it?


For me, personally, I'm not yet sure whether I would vote yes or no on a referendum, but I do think the time is right for us to have a say on it once and for all.