Iain Macwhirter has a good column on the farcical Fabiani inquiry in the Herald today. But one piece of it really jumped out at us.
Wait, what?
Posted without comment.
4 FEBRUARY 2021
4 FEBRUARY 2021
9 FEBRUARY 2021
Sorry, folks, we had a minor medical emergency today (veteran readers can probably guess in which category) and haven’t been quite as on top of events as we’d like.
We did, however, watch the astonishing fiasco of Peter Murrell’s second “evidence” session before the Fabiani inquiry, at which he basically refused to answer any serious questions from the four Unionist members, convener Linda Fabiani ran interference, the SNP members lobbed him a few timewasting softballs in the inexplicably-rushed one-hour session, and independent member Andy Wightman didn’t say a single word.
So terrible was it that the SNP had a backup plan to distract from it – a nonsense of a press release from SNP chief operating officer Sue Ruddick in which she made an allegation about a supposed “act of physical aggression” by Alex Salmond.
The following statement has been issued in response. It’s an eye-opener.
Committee on the Scottish Govt Handling of Harassment Complaints
Dear Ms Fabiani and Committee Members,
We have now had the opportunity to consult on Friday evening and over the weekend with our client on your clerk’s latest emails of Friday afternoon. Those followed the convener’s letter informing us that you do not intend to publish our client’s submission on the Ministerial Code, a submission which was sent to you on December 31st and which was carefully considered by this firm, and by Counsel, prior to submission.
Your latest communications and the decision not to publish exemplify the confusion and legal difficulties created by the Committee and which now plainly undermine the capacity of the Committee to fulfil the remit set by Parliament.
The Scottish Government seems determined to pile insult upon injury to the Scottish people in relation to the inquiry into its botched stitch-up of Alex Salmond.
A shocking story in today’s Sunday Mail reveals that in addition to wasting in excess of £1 million on the initial unlawful investigation, untold millions on a criminal prosecution and trial, and £55,000 on coaching its inquiry witnesses (so badly that almost all of them were forced to return to the inquiry to subsequently “correct” their evidence), it’s also spent thousands of pounds of your money on lawyers to successfully prevent one of the key witnesses appearing at all.
Possibly because the witness in question doesn’t exist.
It’s hard to believe that it’s barely six months since grassroots SNP members rushed to the defence of Glasgow Cathcart MSP James Dornan when it looked like the party’s woke wing had pushed him out of his seat for electoral vampire Rhiannon Spear.
The loud uproar over a crooked NEC meeting that effectively deselected Dornan – the same one that stitched up Joanna Cherry – saw him reinstated as candidate, although the decision over Cherry wasn’t reversed. But the warning shot across Dornan’s bows clearly worked, because look at the state of him now.
Ever since the summer fiasco Dornan has been the most obsequiously loyal follower of the leadership in the entire party, but today’s tweet is a new low.
There’s currently a rather large and somewhat embarrassing vacancy at the top of the Yes movement. You may wish to be part of an organisation which includes some very good people seeking to do something about it.
In which case you should click on the image above.
The tl;dr is that Martin Keatings has lost his case over the Scottish Parliament’s right or otherwise to hold an independence referendum. Lady Carmichael in essence declined to make a decision over Holyrood’s authority to order any future vote, agreeing with the defenders in deeming the matter to be “hypothetical, academic and premature”.
We obviously haven’t yet had time to digest the full 72-page judgement, issued about an hour ago, and in any event aren’t really equipped to understand its dense legalese.
But there’s one thing we do understand.
Keatings was opposed by an alliance of the Advocate General for Scotland (despite his title, a representative of the UK government) and the Lord Advocate OF Scotland, who is a minister in Nicola Sturgeon’s government.
It was therefore the Scottish Government, alongside the one in Westminster, who were opposing the court even attempting to establish whether Scotland has the right to determine its own constitutional future.
In a surprise development, we made Pete Wishart happy today.
And not just him.
Wings Over Scotland is a thing that exists.
