Opposition parties use trickery over assisted suicide bill to thwart referendum
February 3, 2010 by Hamish Macdonell · 68 Comments
Margo MacDonald
If anyone ever wondered what was more important to our politicians, life and death or party politics, they got their answer in the Scottish Parliament today.
On the surface, the decision by the main opposition parties to set up a special committee to look into assisted suicide seems a thoughtful and considerate move. But it was nothing of the sort.
In doing so, they have actually used parliamentary trickery to deal a major blow to the SNP’s independence referendum plans.
Confused? You should be. This is what happened.
The Scottish Parliament sets up “ad hoc” committees on a fairly regular basis to look at issues which can’t be handled by the main subject committees.
The convenership of these “ad hoc” committees rotates, so the Conservatives get one, then the Lib Dems get the next and so on. Each party gets a go, in turn.
The parliamentary business managers had all worked out that the Scottish Government’s high-profile and hugely important independence referendum bill is due to be published soon, and when it is, it was due to be convened by an SNP MSP. It was the SNP’s turn.
But then along came Margo MacDonald’s End of Life Assistance Bill. This was due to go to the Health Committee.
Today, though, the three main opposition parties came together in the business bureau to force the creation of a new “ad hoc” committee to consider Ms MacDonald’s bill.
The effect of this move is to push Ms MacDonald’s bill out into a new committee, where it may or not get the right sort of scrutiny but that’s not really the point, the point is the damaging effect it will have on the SNP’s referendum bill .
Because a new “ad hoc” committee has been established, it means that it will no longer be an SNP MSP who convenes the next “ad hoc” committee, which was due to be on the referendum bill. The SNP will have had its turn before the referendum bill arrives.
Instead, it will now be Labour’s turn to chair the next “ad hoc” committee. The job of convening the referendum bill “ad hoc” committee will go to a Labour MSP. That MSP is expected to use every tactic at his or her disposal to delay, impede and obstruct the SNP’s referendum bill.
What this amounts to is a typical piece of parliamentary politics. The opposition parties have contrived to strip the SNP of a key committee convenership.
All fair in love, war and politics, you might think except that it starts to look very, very petty when the substance of Ms MacDonald’s bill is considered.
Ms MacDonald wants to open up the whole, contentious and sensitive issue of assisted suicide for proper parliamentary debate – and proper national debate too – yet here we have the three main opposition parties playing politics with it and shunting it off to a new “ad hoc” committee just to score a few points over the Nats.
It is usual, it is typical, but it is so unedifying. Labour, the Tories and the Lib Dems are no doubt rubbing their hands in delight at the small success they have secured today over the Scottish Government and the Nats are complaining and cursing in equal measure.
By all accounts Alex Salmond is really quite angry about this.
But they should all stop and consider how this appears out there in the real world where people want a proper debate about assisted suicide and, more than that, they want their democratic representatives to discuss it properly, seriously and in the absence of party politics too.
The ramifications of the decision to establish the new “ad hoc”committee will rumble on for some time.
Already, Christine Grahame the SNP convener of the Health Committee has complained about the decision of the parliamentary business bureau. That is both unsurprising and unlikely to change matters.
As for Ms MacDonald, she described the move as “a piece of nonsense”. And she added: “When I asked why was it not going to the health committee, I was told it’s got morality in it.
“Every time we cast a vote in here there should be morality in it – so that’s a spurious reason.”
Related posts:
- Lib Dems accused of undermining committee convener as End-of-Life bill row escalates.
- SNP publishes Scottish independence referendum bill
- Independence referendum bill delayed until summer … at the earliest
- Opposition parties unite to expose capital budget secrets
- The way is not Bard for independence bill
What a parcel o rogues. I agree totally with Hamish that, considering the substance of Margo’s bill, it should be treated with more respect but the same surely applies to our constitution. The issue of independence will not go away just because the opposition parties decide to play silly b***ers with the referendum bill, they have to face up to the discussion eventually and this makes you wonder what they are so afraid of.
Whether people are in favour of independence or not, they want the debate, they want to explore the issues.
Report This Comment
1/ Dare any Labour MSP to openly defy Scottish democracy.
2/ There are three perhaps Wendy is four Labour MSPs who support the referendum now!
3/ Is the Independence referendum bill really the next ad-hoc committee? Perhaps your reportage is another fantasy from the Hootsmon?
4/ Surely Calman’s recommendations are been promised to be placed before Holyrood far sooner and Labour will want to see that getting safe passage?
5/ What guarantee is there that there will be an Ad-hoc committee on the Saint Andrew’s day bill?
6/ I was just assured by reporters that the weak minority government had no chance of getting their budget through and Salmond would be resigning over it!
7/ Labour shameful faux excuse of the “midst of a recession’ has passed!
Report This Comment
Its rare that Parliament actually gets to discuss, debate and decide upon subjects with any meat to them these days – there is so little of substance that is actually that contentious. I suppose the independence issue might count as a real subject worthy of debate on both sides – and with clearly opposing views; but actually nobody believes there is the public will for total independence so all that is being disputed is how important an MSP is in the grand scheme of things! Then along comes a real issue. A matter that might one day affect every single one of us. An issue of huge significance where understandably there are very significant differences of opinion. Surely a subject that would allow the most talented of our MSPs to demonstrate their oratory skills, wrestle with the difficult subject matter and come to a conclusion which the people of Scotland would accept and understand (for or against). A chance for some rising stars to gain recognition and respect for what they stand up for rather than who they’ve smarmed up to.
But no they are too busy worrying about trivial issues of their own importance. Is it any wonder that the public thinks politicians are out of touch.
Report This Comment
Unfortunately the claims of “eal subject worthy of debate on both sides – and with clearly opposing views” will no longer do as whilst Labour MPs, Greens, Liberals and some independents support independence, no SNP members support a backward step to the Union. There are no direct division on both sides!
Your claim “but actually nobody believes there is the public will for total independence” is as wrong as the claims that nobody supports devolution in1979 or in 1997! No Unionists dictator wants to allow the question on independence to be asked because they suspect a different answer from you.
When you are looking for a rising star you are clearly not gazing on those parties who are wishing they were in Westminster unable to orate their own political desires for fear that they end up on the back benches like Wendy?
Your final line is by far the lost offensive for whilst Westminster hold expensive inquiries into past Irakistan atrocities and court cases on fraudulently claimed mortgages they are unable to inform you of which services they are going to cut this year. They can tell you how much they will save. Will Scotland lose the (completely useless) Aircraft Carrier contracts in the MoD review?
Report This Comment
Is is just me, I am completely fed up with people telling me that there is no public will towards independence but funnily enough there is no will in the Unionist Camp towards asking the self same public.
Nothing surprises me about the Labour/Liberal/Conservative Parties. They all want to continue with the Westminster Parliament where money is easily obtained, it is amazing how many MPs will leave that house in a much better financial state than they went in.
Report This Comment
It is certainly not only you who sees the Labour party do not want to fight the next election on the issues of the day;
MPs expenses,
Cuts in services,
broken economy,
Scottish independence,
Iraq atrocity,
Afghan atrocity,
Education,
Privatisation and
Unemployment.
If Labour and conservative wish to address the issues of the day then they must raise the level of their pathetic questions such as Footpaths in Balmoral, Police Taser trials and Labour attacking Labour run COSLA for cooperating with the British traitor SNP!
Report This Comment
The way the opposition parties routinely club together to thwart any SNP progress on Independence is embarrassing. These tactics come across as childish. It was the same with the minimum pricing for alcohol. The opposition parties opposed it not because it wasn’t a good policy, but because it was a good SNP policy.
These parasites do not have the public interest at heart, it’s all self preservation.
Report This Comment
Thanks for this explanation – the BBC’s take on what actually happened and the reasons for it was as clear as mud.
What worries me most is not the referendum bill (I suspect the timing of such a bill going to committee stage would have been a case of the SNP playing party politics in the first place), nor the assisted suicide bill, which I don’t think has been dealt any material damage in its role as political football.
I’m more concerned about how regular an occurrence this type of trickery is, and the level of control that a single bloody-minded convener might have over the democratic process. It’s taken a clash involving two very important bills to get the topic into the headlines, but how many more minor incidents have gone before?
Report This Comment
Even though there is room for chicanery whilst in opposition as suggested here, there is even greater room for gerrymandering/manoeuvring in government.
The previous administrations demonstrated how the selection, timing and program can all be contrived to assist a pet project through parliament. Admittedly, Labour did have the Liberals working with them in government giving them two shots at chairing steering committees but that it is no reason to suppose the government would allow an aggressive chair sit on their main Scottish policy.
Report This Comment
Let’s make it simple. Why not ask us, the people, about Margo’s bill? And independence? Are we not capable of making any decisions?
Mind you. Having seen what we elect, maybe not…
Report This Comment
If the Unionists are so certain that an Independence Referendum would fail why are they so scared of it?
Report This Comment
I do believe that a number of e/mails to our own MSP’s regarding the position that we as individuals will take at the election in two years time might cause a change in the thinking of these said MSP’s.
As there will be a GE on the 6th of May, do we really think that the result in Scotland could happen to influence the ad-hoc committee before they produce their deliberations?
Report This Comment
According to the P&J it will have a LibDem convenor(http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1588994) (are you allowed links?). I’m just confused …
Report This Comment
@Lyndyj: Absolutely, you’re allowed to link. We’re not one of those papers that tries to pretend the rest of the internet doesn’t exist.
Stewart Kirkpatrick
Editor, The Caledonian Mercury
Report This Comment
A highly commendable act sir! You may have guessed I am still clearly on the fence on this publication’s bias!
Report This Comment
Kudos to The Cally for explaining this mischief – why do we pay the BBC so much to continually fail to inform?
On links:
I tried to add a link last week but was thwarted.
Report This Comment
Thank you for allowing links (now I need to remember how to do them). But I remain confused. Either the P&J is wrong, or Hamish is, unless I’ve completely misunderstood. When do we find out officially who the convenor will be?
Report This Comment
Scratch that, the Telegraph just explained it to me (I read widely!). I wonder if they got the story from you guys …
Report This Comment
This is disgraceful behaviour by the opposition parties. I wonder if they actually appreciate how the country feels about them?
It is indeed strange that for a belief by the 3 opposition parties to expound that there is no suppot in Scotland for an Independence referendem let alone Independence, they are certainly not showing confidence in their own spin and hype!
A word to them – If you dont show democracy in action, then dont be surprised if it comes back to haunt , the people will accept so much, but not the killing of democracy
Report This Comment
Good article. Type of journalism that we have been missing in Scotland.
Report This Comment
“By all accounts Alex Salmond is really quite angry about this.”
And with good reason too. It is bad enough, although not entirely unexpected, to find Labour, Tory and Lib-dem MSPs jumping into bed together to block a key SNP proposal which was included in the manifesto on which they were elected.
But for them to reduce Margo`s bill to this level has to be a new low.
How Mike Rumbles has the gall to cite “Morality” as the reason why the Health Commitee couldn`t be trusted to scrutinise the Assisted Suicides Bill beggars belief.
He has no real interest in this legislation other than it`s ability to allow the opposition to mess around with the chairmanship of the Ad Hoc commitees. Am I alone in finding these manoevres debased and bereft of conscience or morality ?
Desperate people do desperate things and anyone looking for an indication of how desperate the London parties are to prevent Scotland gaining it`s independence need look no further than this.
Report This Comment
This a disgrace,to treat literally a life and death issue and to kick it into the long grass stinks. Margo has valid reasons for bring the bill forward and indeed there are many folk who genuinely want to see this issue debated especially with todays news on dementia/cancer funding hitting the headlines.
As for an independence vote, Im with Wendy – bring it on, lets get this out of the way and move on to what ever conclusion the people reach, my view is there will be a modified form of devolution.
For parties to act in this way makes our parliament an even greater laughing stock than it is, with its “family friendly” hours, high salaries, final salary pension schemes etc
Report This Comment
Is it not about time these politians realised that they are not there to play their silly little games but to represent the people who elected them. I feel so angry that these pompous arrogant people have not considered what may be best for the Scottish nation, only what is best for themselves.
I hope that the electorate realise what is happening and the majority of our opposition MSP’s are looking for other jobs after the 2011 Scottish election.
I may be a bit premature, I say good riddance to them, I hope they can find a job somewhere else, but quite frankly I couldn’t care less.
Report This Comment
I have just e-mailed my Lib MSP to complain about what the 3 main Parties have done,to use such a sensitive issue to get one over the SNP is a disgrace,I would suggest everyone should do the same regardless of what Party they support.If this is the way that politics is going God help us,my father suffered with Alzheimer then Dementia and it has nothing to do with Politics,all MSP who have put their name to this should hang their heads in shame.
Report This Comment
I ment Parkinson’s and then Dementia my father suffered with and it was not very nice to see.
Report This Comment
The poeople of Scotland deserve a referendum on independence and they should be allowed to choose to have a dignified death too if they are terminally ill! Of course, proper safeguards must be put in place.
The opposition parties have scored an own goal here i think. Silly them. How childish!
Report This Comment
Is there any evidence whatsoever that Margo’s Bill will be treated worse or less seriously as a result of this? No? So what are you on your high horse about? There is no ‘life and death/politics’ tradeoff involved. A bit of unworthy political posturing on your part, I am afraid.
Report This Comment
Peter I do not know if Margo’s bill will suffer because of this nonsense, I have made up my mind already, but I am happy to listen to the debate and who knows maybe someone will come up with something that makes me change my thinking on this issue.
This just isn’t about Margo’s bill this is about democracy in our country and we all know the opposition parties don’t want the people to be able to vote in a referendum on the way we improve the governance of this land. Well I want that vote, as do the majority, so what is the problem.
I am sick of politians treating the electorate like idiots. Sorry lads and lassies these days have gone.
Report This Comment
It looks like Hamish will need to get a bit more rad to engender those web-hits. Go’wan Hamish, it’s a matter of life, and death…. Should people be allowed to commit suicide, and should incapacitated people be allowed a proxy??
C’mon Hamish…
Get a journalist gear under the comfy seat, or perish.
Report This Comment
Putting your hands on your ears, and playing the ‘politics’ game is a complete disgrace to Margo’s bill.. Really terrible, crap journalism from Hamish, completely avoiding the very, very major issue therein.
Life and death?
Oh, CM talks about The Politics of Commissions.
Here’s is a subject the CM can apply some in-depth analysis to.
Will it?
Report This Comment
Where is the stance? Do these journalists believe in anything?
Report This Comment
Tee heee. 13 years of Nae labour reportage and you are unable to grasp the difference between opinion and reporting! This site will really hurt your tin brain.
Report This Comment
Does Hamish believe in assisted suicide, or does he believe in parliamentary committees?
As far as I can see, the latter are of far more interest than the subject. Debate?
Nah… trop difficice
Report This Comment
It is a journalist’s job to REPORT the news not “take a stance”. People are capable of making up their own minds without some journo telling them what to think. Give people the facts–that’s what “news” papers are supposed to do. I will admit, it has become a rarity.
Great job, Hamish!
Report This Comment
You are failing to take into account the Unionist mind set here J.R.
Unionists are not used to any national publication NOT showing a bias, especially NOT a Unionist bias. They have forgotten what real reporting is supposed to be all about. So, when confronted with a report that doesn’t just regurgitate Labour Party press releases, they get confused and a little frightened. The thought of the Scottish people being told the facts, being allowed to make up their own mind and not being led by the nose gets them all of a fluster
Report This Comment
Whilst it’s true that there’s no evidence to suggest that the passage of Margo’s bill will be adversely affected by this political manuevering, the fact that the Unionist parties are using such an apolitical bill as a stick with which to beat the SNP is damnable, and indicative of the lengths that they will go to subvert democracy. The unionist parties can’t be allowed to have their cake and eat it, scheming to block every Nationalist manifesto pledge and then crying foul about broken promises when they succeed. It’s so transparent, but with the majority of the media, and particularly the dead tree press along for the ride I worry it’s not as obvious to the general public as it should be.
I’m all for a referendum on both bills. I don’t buy the Unionist line that there is no appetite for independence. If this was truly the case, then there should be no fear about the passage of the bill…
As far as assisted suicide is concerned, and after watching the Dimbleby Lecture with Sir Terry Pratchett, I agree that this is a debate well worth having in the parliament and in the wider public, and yet another area where we in Scotland can show the rest of the UK the way ahead.
Report This Comment
Scottish ‘n Conservative is for you to explain
Report This Comment
Hurraha to technoligy
Report This Comment
I have had a beer or two today, in my timezone that is ok, and have a (half baked)theory on what would make this interesting.
I think Salmond should pull the plug and run to a Scottish election forthwith.
He can say he appreciates the budget getting through but after all the fun and games of 1979 and devolution he wants the Scottish people to be able to make a decion as per the SNP manifesto in next 12 months or so not delayed for another 20 yearsis, and if people want that opportunity, whether they agree or not for devo max, independence or the status quo then they should vote SNP this one time so that all Scots can make a decision and not let the pollies decide IF let alone WHEN Scots are allowed to vote in a referendum.
After the EU debacle we know that being promised a referendum by either labour or tory parties is a facade.
Time for a decision, whether you are for it or against it you need to vote for the right, the opportunity of having it. If Scots decide they do not want to determine their own future and let London rule all aspects of their lives then they can vote for labour again.
That would cause carnage to the British general election of course. The SNP vote would surge in the Scottish election where a mandate for the right to be offered change was requested, and the momentum on May 6th would be unstoppable.
Fighting am election on the basis the people should not have the right to decide their destiny would be hard for even aljabeeba to push, although they would try to do so.
A brave move, but I think it would work, and I would see the Liberals and Tories capitulate behind closed doors at the first whiff of this to avoid a wipeout in a Scotland election just prior to a British GE.
Report This Comment
The SNP should call a Scottish Election on the same day as the British Election for the English Parliament. That would cause panic by raising Scottish issues that would also affect Westminster seats here.
Report This Comment
Donald I like the idea but I dont think they can, I might be wrong but the Scottish parliament is a fixed term, and if Salmond hands his cards in, then the presiding officer then offers the keys to Bute house to the next party willing and ABLE to form a government, only if they are unable to form a government is a general election called. Given that labour will get humped nationally, I have a feeling that Mr Gray and Mr Scott would be able to cobble togeather some coalition for 12 months till the parliament term finishes.
Report This Comment
morning , yes Paul I believe your understanding to be correct. should the governing party “chuck it” the other party’s in the Parliament have a set time to rustle up a government to govern to the end of the set term. can’t remember whether it is 4 years or 5 for the set term & can’t remember whether it is a month or so many weeks to rustle up an alternative.
Sid
Report This Comment
Seconded ,and besides I am sure Alex Salmond and the SNP have a plan cometh the next Scottish GE.
The Tories safely in the headboys seat at Westminster , The Labour party in massive civil war,and the carnage that will cause .
I am sure the SNP will be relishing the next Scottish election,with no Westminster issues to deflect from Scotland’s destiny
Report This Comment
Paul, I know. I know, but wouldn’t it be nice if the SNP called the wean’s bluff and said, “Bring It On!” Let the numpties vote down the Scottish Government and see how the electorate appreciate being forced into another election. The mood of the country would sweep the cobwebs off the Labour benches. The atmosphere of such an election would surely give the SNP the working majority it needs to implement its progressive programme. Come the Municipal elections the reactionaries there would surely vanish into the great big dustbin of history, allowing for greater cooperation and commitment to the Scottish people.
Report This Comment
Good article.
Just so we get to understand this better, maybe Hamish might think about a follow-up piece outlining the ways in which a hostile convener can gum up the process of legislation?
Report This Comment
once again our Oppostion parties in Hollyrood playing political games with the Scottish nation.
It is a threat to our democracy and we have to stop these politicos putting party before electorate.
Whichever side of the argument you are on in terms of assisted suicide , independence ,Lisbon Treaty, how dare they stop us having our say.
They hide behind well you have your chance every 5 years to vote that gives us the mandate.
Does anyone here honestly believe if the SNP got 51% of the Westminster Seats that the same place would agree to Independence without a referendum?
Likewise if the SNP took half of Hollyrood seats would they agree?
Typical having the cake and eating it for the Unionists.
playing politics with this Bill is disgusting, but what can you expect from these careerists?
Report This Comment
disillusioned:
Just wondering – would you want to add the death penalty to that list?
Report This Comment
What has the death penalty got to do with any of these topical subjects Phil?
Report This Comment
Further to that Phil, in labour manifesto we were promised a referendum ,the SNP had an independence Referendum in their manifesto , and they are the government ,albeit a minority one.
Nobody has offered a referendum on the death penalty in any manifesto as far as I know
Report This Comment
Disillusioned:
Fair point on manifesto commitments. The SNP just didn’t win enough seats to implement it.
Assisted suicide’s a non-party issue, so it wouldn’t have been in anyone’s manifesto, I suppose.
Report This Comment
Phil this is not about a referendum on Margos Bill as you well know .
It is about the antics of a bitter Unionist cabal that does anything to opposse everything of the same minority government.
They continually put thier parties and their own self interests before that of the Scottish electorate.
We deserve better!!
Report This Comment
disillusioned:
I see what you’re getting at, but isn’t there a case for saying that one man’s procedural piece of nonsense is another’s constitutional safeguard?
In terms of independence I’m an agnostic. If the people of Scotland want it they must have it. But I rather think the SNP would win more friends if it sometimes allowed itself to admit that it is possible to be a proud patriotic Scot, with the nation’s best interests at heart, and still be a Unionist. Constant condemnation of Unionists as some species of lickspittle quislings does the SNP (and Scotland) few favours.
Report This Comment
Phil you are taking this way off thread ,it seems you want to have a go at Nationalists rather than address the core issue.
If that is your bag fair enough,just be open about it.
My gripe is ALL the parties playing politics with us when the people should be foremost.
Margo’s Bill is far too important (irrespective of anyones views)to allow unionist v nationalist to become the issue.
This cabal of Unionists were more concerned with their own party’s fortunes,and thwarting a referendum bill, than that of some of our most vulnerable people in society.
As to your “procedurial nonsense” argument this is about principle not procedure,the very sick and less able should not be used as political footballs!!
Labour it seems just opposse everything for opposition sake ,childish petty and not helpful.
Report This Comment
It never ceases to amaze me when I see the lengths the opposition parties will go to to avoid having a vote on a referendum bill they keep telling us is bound to fail. Why do they do this? The answer is they are terrified of having to face the electorate after voting to refuse us a referendum. They will move Heaven and Earth to wriggle out of having to have the vote and then face the electorate.
Report This Comment
disillusioned:
Sorry for taking this off-thread.
“This cabal of Unionists were more concerned with their own party’s fortunes,and thwarting a referendum bill, than that of some of our most vulnerable people in society.”
Assisted suicide is a non-party issue. It’s too big an issue to be dealt with by the health committee alone – it involves so much more than just health.
And if the opposition parties oppose a referendum, would it not be unprincipled not to oppose it?
Report This Comment
Where better to discuss Margo’s Bill than the health committee with two doctors and a lawyer in situ?
Margo has expressed her own anger at the unionists playing politics with her bill, and even Ross Finnie the man that will be convenor of the ad hoc committee has signed a motion condeming the situation.
I can only assume Phil you are a disciple of one of those parties that partook of this disgusting act.
Report This Comment
disillusioned:
I’d prefer it if the parliament sat as a committee ie all the members heard all the evidence. Time-consuming, but the issue’s that big.
I don’t see why this issue is one for doctors and lawyers. We are all of us going to die at some point, after all.
You’re perfectly free to assume whatever you want about which party I might support, as far as I’m concerned.
Report This Comment
Phil the committee it is now gonig to has nobody with medical experience and no legal eagle either.
How is that better?
Why will you not accept and condemn such blatant politicing with this very sensitive Bill?
Report This Comment
I do not agree with asisted suicide fro many a reason but the bill deserves to be treated with respect and not used as a political football. It is utterly disgraceful that the 3 parties have obviously colluded to sink the referendum bill by messing around with Margo’s bill.
Nothing more than a bunch of cowards.
Report This Comment
From what I have read in other news stories, Graham did not write in her own capacity, but on behalf of the Health Committee as a whole, which includes Ross Finnie who was mooted as being the Chair of the proposed Ad Hoc Committee… so that should carry some weight that he and the other members of the committee agreed to the letter… This is the kind of sloppy reporting that has led to the demise of the Scotsman and I sincerely hope will not be a characteristic of this new online media source.
Report This Comment
Perhaps the chicanery has a course to run, if Margo can be persuaded by Alex Salmond to withdraw her bill and have it reinstated after the referendum?
The hypocrisy in the Unionist position is blatant and breathtaking. Considering that the PM is punting for constitutional changes in the UK Parliament with the promise of a referendum. Trying so desperately to keep Labour in power.
The coalition deal between Labour and Plaid Cymru included a pledge to hold a referendum, if there was sufficient support, on primary law-making powers before elections in May 2011.
Yet we see the petulance and self-interest of the Unionist cabal in Hoyrood, denying Scotland just such a referendum, to let Scots have a say on their constitutional future. As Iain Gray said in Holyrood, “we know the result.”
The Unionist parties are just adding to the flames of independence by treating the Scottish electorate in such a shabby hypocritical manner. There is fear driving their decision making, as they see the ground falling beneath their feet. Independence is now inevitable because of them.
Report This Comment
You know… that’s a pretty shrewd idea about persuading Margo to postpone her bill in order to stymie the Unionist plot. I’m sure someone in Alec’s office reads this!
Report This Comment
Margot McDonald has fought long and hard to bring this important matter to the floor of the debating chamber. She is sincere in her beliefs and, given her own unfrtunate circumstances, has a personal interest in this. It is the ultimate HEALTH matter and should be debated as such. For the anti-independence politicians (and they are as entitled to that opinion as I am to mine), most of whom are not fit to lace this lady’s shoes, to use such a vital issue as this ‘fillibuster’ device to try to disrupt the passage of the proposed Referendum Bill, says more about them than their own weasley words.
If we were living in Switzerland we would be able to have our democratic say about both matters, following reasoned (maybe not!) debate; but here in the feartie dependency of North Britain, we are not deemed smart enough to do that. Shame on Gray, Goldie and Scott. May the electorate have their say on that trios future in an ‘end of political life’ referendum!
Report This Comment
if this is true, its a disgrace, no wonder margo is angry,so what do we do about it?..lets get our thinking caps on!! i for one cant allow a bunch of punch-drunk
half-wits to control our right to decide, this could be adevisory tactic to take our mind off whats happening in that other place, you know the place with all the
gready “pigs” are snouts feasting,remember the most important thing at the moment is to win a ge. and carry on as is their usual self interest,we can try to do them out of their joy at manipulating our right to a referendum, this is very important…
Report This Comment
This is another example of the Machiavellian tactics which have been employed by the opposition parties to deprive the Scottish people of their democratic right to discuss the issue of their own self determination. This of course is not a new thing, I’m sure most voters of 40 and over in Scotland, will remember Labour’s notorious ‘40% of the electorate’ amendment to the original devolution question back in the late seventies, which was rounded regarded by impartial politicians around the world as fundamentally undemocratic. Again here we see Labour colluding with their, allegedly sworn idiological enemies in a pact to manipulate the parliamentary committee process.
And my heart goes out to Ms MacDonald who has been forced to stomarch this nauseating display, which sees her extremely important bill used as a political football by Labour, the Conservatives and the Liberals in an effort to thwart the referendum bill. Insult was added to injury when Ms MacDonald was told that her bill contained an element of ‘morality’ as an excuse for the ‘musical chairs fiasco’ over the convening of the committees, when clearly the opposition parties have acted in a cunning, ‘amoral’ and opportunist fashion instead of tackling the real issues in a fair and ‘above board’ way. These issues should be addressed in a muture and sensitive manner and if the ‘political creatures’ of Labour and the other opposition parties had a grain of integrity they would hang their heads in shame over their reprehensible and Machiavellian behaviour. It is important that this type of behaviour is exposed for what it is, in order that the Scottish people can see exactly what Scottish Labour and the other shape-shifters composing the ‘new parcel’ are really all about.
Report This Comment