We couldn’t see any other outcome than this as soon as the decision was passed to the SPCB, because the Unionist parties have the majority of votes on it.
So it looks as though the Scottish Government’s desperate stalling is finally at an end, and two months after it was supposed to have happened we’re all about to have a very interesting day indeed. We can’t wait.
I first joined this union in roughly 1992. On the very few occasions that I’ve sought its assistance it’s been worse than useless, but I’ve retained membership for most of the period because I believe in the principle of trade unions.
However, there are limits, and they’ve just been breached.
The following article by Conor Matchett appears in today’s Scotsman:
It’s a pretty standard anti-Wings smear piece, except for this bit:
which is simply a flat-out lie. We can’t speak for Kenny MacAskill, but we do know for sure that Wings has NOT been contacted for comment by Mr Matchett.
We’d happily have provided a quote if we HAD been asked, to give the lazy hatchet job (perhaps “Matchett job”) at least a minimal veneer of balance and fairness as a boost to the badly-ailing paper’s “trusted, fact-checked journalism”. Since we’re banned from Twitter, perhaps someone could pass that on to Mr Matchett.
In the meantime, Wings readers should look forward to some more posts from SNP politicians, which we’ll be publishing later today.
It would be improper not to note that in addition to this:
…Darren McGarvey has contacted me directly by email this evening with what I take to be a sincere apology, which I’ve accepted as such.
(It was a private communication and won’t be reproduced here.)
I have no problem at all with people disliking me and saying so – I’m hardly a shrinking violet – but I can’t abide hypocrisy, which is what the massive pile-on from friends of Neil Mackay yesterday amounted to, and while I couldn’t give the slightest toss about the opinions of the people involved, even one person doing the decent thing over what was said deserves to be acknowledged. While I’m sure that we’ll continue to disagree profoundly and strongly on many or most things, what’s right is right.
It contains nothing that those who listened in on the case by telephone last week didn’t hear for themselves – it’s simply an 11-page summary of what was debated in court and casts no new light on what Lady Dorrian said at the time.
We’ll be very interested to see whether or not The Spectator – or perhaps more to the point its lawyers, who we must presume had vetted and cleared the initial publication just as Alex Salmond’s lawyers had – now feels able to restore the redacted paragraph that it removed after what it can now be publicly revealed was a threat from the Crown Office (a threat also received by this website).
The magazine’s response today is non-committal on the subject.
While it is this site’s belief that the paragraph in question DOES NOT identify anyone as a complainer – the Crown Office has not communicated which “other evidence” it feels could be combined with the paragraph, which makes no reference whatsoever to the criminal case, to provide identification – the restoration of the missing paragraph would certainly appear to provide circumstantial evidence to that effect, something which would be entirely due to the intervention of the Crown Office.
But overall, the needless delay in publishing this document has merely run down the clock on the inquiry by another week – time that it can ill afford – without providing any real additional clarity.
(We’re a bit puzzled as to why The Spectator’s counsel appears to have given up so easily on the second element of their application, which sought to specifically permit the publication of both Salmond and Geoff Aberdein’s written evidence.)
The fact that the judgement wasn’t released yesterday probably means, at a minimum, no more evidence sessions until next week, as the committee generally only meets on Tuesdays. We hope that doesn’t become a crucial issue, but we fear that the written judgement is sufficiently tepid that the crooked SNP members of the committee, and the spineless Andy Wightman, will use it to justify rejecting Salmond’s evidence and therefore hearing from him in person, rendering the entire undertaking moot anyway.
The SNP have plumbed some real depths recently, but this is a new low.
Although we suppose on one level you could spin it as a positive, namely that disabled people really are just like everyone else – they can be despicable scumbags too.
Dave Llewellyn on The Wheels Of Industry: “Turnover in 2024 was £300000. Not bad for a dormant company. ( see Companies House ). And if they want…” Jul 27, 02:36
Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “Northern Visions NVTV interview in Irish with English subtitles. Fionntan de Brun speaks to Seimi Mac Aindreasa in the studio…” Jul 27, 01:12
Young Lochinvar on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “MB You clearly are unfamiliar with the concept of asymmetric warfare. Perhaps you’ve been reading Hateys pieces too much and…” Jul 27, 00:43
Young Lochinvar on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “MB You clearly were never there. I assure you the streets in West Belfast had names that remain imprinted in…” Jul 27, 00:23
Mark Beggan on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “This is a public platform. We don’t want to know what you have done to your genitals.” Jul 26, 21:45
Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “THE CRISIS IN HUMANIST POLITICAL THEORY by Herman Dooyeweerd PDF: https://vcho.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/The-Crisis-in-Humanist-Political-Theory-B-Vol-7.pdf” Jul 26, 19:49
Lorncal on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “Minceheid: it’s fire-raising in Scotland. No such crime as arson up here. Not trying to be smart or putting you…” Jul 26, 19:46
Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “THE CRISIS IN HUMANIST POLITICAL THEORY by Herman Dooyeweerd (1931, republished 2010) Currently (re-)reading above book. Just reached the following…” Jul 26, 19:30
Hatey McHateface on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “It goes further than that, Mark. Once you are a woman they send in the crone with the rusty razor…” Jul 26, 19:27
Mark Beggan on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “During the Northern Ireland ‘Troubles’ the streets had no names. In today’s Middle east ‘Troubles’ the names have no streets.” Jul 26, 19:14
Hatey McHateface on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “I think we can all agree there’s a need to dampen things down. Send for Rayner.” Jul 26, 19:11
Bilbo on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “Labour is ideologically tied to immigration whether they like it or not. We are in a time where the UK…” Jul 26, 18:42
Southernbystander on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “I would have said yes to this genius spot, but no, unless the Cairngorms are full of ham.” Jul 26, 18:12
Southernbystander on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “I was on the border not very long ago and I can assure you there was a broken old fence…” Jul 26, 18:01
Mark Beggan on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “Being a Trans in a Muslim country is a waste of time and money. Once you are a woman they…” Jul 26, 17:13
Mark Beggan on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “I’ve came to the conclusion that if you are a gay Scot then voting for the Green party is Turkeys…” Jul 26, 17:04
Mark Beggan on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “They are going to blame Elon Musk. They won’t admit that progressive leftist ideology has failed.” Jul 26, 16:29
Mark Beggan on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “I used to have a T-shirt that said in German ” I’m a jelly doughnut”.” Jul 26, 16:06
Young Lochinvar on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “Two of JFKs most memorable speech quotes; “Ask not what your country can do for you..” And “Ich bin ein…” Jul 26, 15:49
Mark Beggan on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “So that’s were the saying ‘cut your cloth according to your pocket comes from. The Jocks had big deep pockets…” Jul 26, 15:49
Northcode on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “The length of time a constitutional arrangement has existed doesn’t determine whether it operates on long-term or short-term incentives. A…” Jul 26, 14:37
Northcode on Ain’t it funny how things change?: ““…even though we now live in a revised world.” Your comment seems to rest on the assumption that constitutional questions…” Jul 26, 14:29
John Cleary on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “Hello Stu, Want to know what happened to John Smith? Have a look here https://drive.proton.me/urls/0J0FYKBG24#F9ZfxS0qYcr6” Jul 26, 14:07
Hatey McHateface on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “Burnham setting the heather alight? His very name suggests guilt.” Jul 26, 13:53