Senator Claire Chandler is a Liberal Party member of the Australian Parliament. Some recent experiences she’s had send a very serious warning about the likely outcomes of the Scottish Government’s wildly unpopular new Hate Crime Bill. She’s graciously allowed us to publish this column she wrote on the subject.
Early this month I received a letter from Tasmania’s Anti-Discrimination Commissioner directing me to attend a compulsory “conciliation” conference with somebody offended by my comments about the need to protect women’s sport and women’s toilets and changerooms. You can watch them here:
Ironically, the complaint against me was about an opinion article I wrote about free speech. You can read it here and make up your own mind whether bureaucrats at the Anti-Discrimination Commission should be able to censor any Australian citizens for this kind of public policy discussion.
Following up this morning’s article, we’ve been trawling through the Publications/FOI section of the Scottish Government website to see which other articles might be being hidden from its search function. We found quite a few, and you’re never going to guess what the common factor in all of them is.
We’ve given you a wee clue with that picture, though.
As a right-of-centre English conservative, there are Scottish National Party concepts I haven’t so far been able to comprehend. Perhaps it’s because I don’t follow Nicola Sturgeon and Ian Blackford. Should I keep an eye on what The Scotsman is saying?
SNP leaders talk in the same sentence of a “free” and “independent” Scotland having a future as a member of the EU. My grasp of those words is not theirs. Distinguished lawyers – be they Remainers, Leavers or Don’t-Care-Just-Pay-My-Billsers – all agree that a series of European Court of Justice decisions have established the unqualified supremacy of European Union laws – disguised as “Regulations and Directives” – over the national laws of EU states.
Last night on social media a few people raised a semi-interested eyebrow at Scotland On Sunday’s front page, and wondered if the suspiciously unattributed lead story might be something balanced and worthwhile, or if it’d be by Dani Garavelli again.
Whichever side you’re on, it’s simply observably true that the Scottish Government is doing everything in its power to obstruct, delay and derail the Parliamentary inquiry into its ruinously botched investigation of false allegations against Alex Salmond.
Any investigative journalist attempting to get to the bottom of the subject and find out what really happened is met with a wall of secrecy and misinformation while trying to navigate their way through the publicly-available information, and just to give you some idea of what it’s like, we’d like to offer you one tiny but typical example.
Readers may recall that this site is engaged in an ongoing attempt to clarify why the Scottish justice system is choosing to selectively only pursue those supportive of Alex Salmond for contempt of court with regard to his trial, while conspicuously turning a blind eye to those in the media who have committed exactly the same crime but are hostile to Mr Salmond and therefore apparently immune from prosecution.
During that investigation we received a reply from Police Scotland last month stating that contempt of court is in fact not a criminal offence in Scots law (although you can be tried and imprisoned for it), and so is nothing to do with them, and that they only act in relation to contempt when instructed by the courts or the Crown Office.
So naturally we asked them if they had been so instructed.
Forgive us for not joining in the pointless and unusually muted hoopla about the latest indyref anniversary (which for the first time we can recall, nobody has bothered to mark by commissioning an opinion poll).
We’re still thinking about the SNP’s treatment of the man who was chiefly responsible for securing the only independence referendum Scotland has ever had.
And of its utter abysmal failure for more than half a decade to come up with anything even remotely approaching a credible plan to get a second one.
Our previous offer remains open: we’ll take any bet of any size from anyone against the proposition “Boris Johnson will never grant Nicola Sturgeon a Section 30 order in the absence of some sort of court judgement legally compelling him to”.
We’ve had no takers yet from the Sturgeon faithful. We don’t expect any.
Every day that passes from now until the current SNP leadership is removed is another one wasted to add to the 2,191 that have been wasted from 19 September 2014 until today, achieving nothing. Until that tally ends we have nothing to celebrate.
Over the last year or so, this site’s commentary on matters surrounding the attempted imprisonment of Alex Salmond over false allegations of sexual abuse has attracted a considerable amount of ire from a section of the readership, demanding “proof” of the involvement of the current First Minister.
Such proof has been impossible to provide for legal reasons. But it’s always been the case that the truth could only be suppressed for so long, and events in recent days have brought the first chinks of light through the wall of smoke and mirrors the Scottish Government has been attempting to surround the matter with.
So in our very lightest and softest shoes, let’s tiptoe through what is both a labyrinth and a minefield and see if we can make some of it a little easier to understand.
“Settling up, not settling down” was the rhetoric, as Westminster reconvened and the new SNP group headed south. Fine words and said no doubt sincerely. But it’s been said by every SNP generation that’s gone there, though none possessed the authority or faced the threats to Scottish democracy as now.
But what has happened since? As ever fine speeches given and incisive questioning of Ministers made, but to what effect?
The first major debate was the Fisheries Bill. A sore point in Scotland where a Tory government sold out our fishing industry and entire communities along with it decades ago, when negotiating EEC entry terms. Now, two generations on, as another Tory administration seeks to implement Brexit, that industry and those communities face betrayal yet again.
The Woman Who Remembers Nothing, having asked for some time to think about it, concluded that there was simply no way to estimate the total cost to the public purse of the biased and unlawful fiasco she presided over regarding the investigation of false abuse claims against Alex Salmond, and which had cost taxpayers over half a million pounds in Mr Salmond’s legal fees alone.
Her argument was that because government employees are paid fixed salaries and don’t record how much of their time they spent on specific tasks, there was no way to estimate how much had been spent on the attempt to fit up the former First Minister.
But that isn’t how anything works these days, is it?
Mark Beggan on The quality of mercy: “I served in Operation Lionheart. Auf vedersein pet! Was the golden age of British television. Never missed it. Yes Deutsch…” Apr 7, 02:52
Young Lochinvar on The quality of mercy: “Beggars Spend much time on the tools in West Germany or BAOR holding back Ivan?? No? Thought not. I did.…” Apr 7, 00:29
Young Lochinvar on The quality of mercy: “Beggars Quoting Hitler (one on from the derivative Main Kampf here).. You’ve graduated from Moseley it seems.. Not a good…” Apr 7, 00:21
Sven on The quality of mercy: “I’m just betting it wasn’t either of Ms Sturgeon’s “Clyde Built” Ferry boats with painted on windows, Mark. You’d be…” Apr 6, 20:57
George Ferguson on The quality of mercy: “@Fearghas Agreed people don’t understand the Constitutional implications of King Charles not fulfilling the Union treaty to the Church of…” Apr 6, 19:43
Mark Beggan on The quality of mercy: “Why Aye Man. ‘We had no way of staying afloat We had to leave on the ferry boat Economic refugees…” Apr 6, 19:40
Geri on The quality of mercy: “It’s more than ten years & I hate to break it to you but it’s GLOBAL. England has perpetual grudges.…” Apr 6, 19:38
Geri on The quality of mercy: “Agreed! I’m also so over the eejits who constantly think we need to fix this & that before Indy. England…” Apr 6, 19:24
Mark Beggan on The quality of mercy: ““It is thus necessary that the individual should finally realise that his own ego is of no importance in comparison…” Apr 6, 19:24
Alf Baird on The quality of mercy: ““Hate by its very nature is destructive. To hate an entire nation over a period of ten years rips the…” Apr 6, 18:55
Young Lochinvar on Clocks And Calendars: “What in tarnashun boyy! Aint not no none of yer good ol’ boyys talkin’ likee that in tham there Scahtland..…” Apr 6, 18:31
TURABDIN on The quality of mercy: “From WIKI: «The earliest use of the term appears in 1507, when King James IV of Scotland was granted the…” Apr 6, 16:56
Andy Ellis on Clocks And Calendars: “@YL Given that “gotten” is – as I stated – probably more common amongst Scots than English users of the…” Apr 6, 16:47
Young Lochinvar on Clocks And Calendars: “Yee Haw Pardner! You for forget to say FACT after your “construction” (?!?) statement.. Do you also call trousers “pants”,…” Apr 6, 16:27
Young Lochinvar on The quality of mercy: “Beggars Then stop dissing all things Scotland “old boy”! By your own acknowledgement ye’ll feel so much better for it…” Apr 6, 16:20
Andy Ellis on Clocks And Calendars: “The construction “might have gotten” is perfectly acceptable English usage: it’s probably more common in US, Canadian and indeed Scots…” Apr 6, 16:05
James on The quality of mercy: “Purpose here? Distract, divide, dereail. Rinse, Repeat. And he/she/it thinks everyone is his/her/it’s “mate”. When in reality I don’t expect…” Apr 6, 15:57
Mark Beggan on The quality of mercy: “To hate someone takes a lot of energy. Energy that could be better spent and used more constructively. Hate by…” Apr 6, 15:46
crisiscult on Clocks And Calendars: ““might have gotten”? Who writes the blog these days? 8-/” Apr 6, 15:17
Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on The quality of mercy: “CONSTITUTIONAL STATUS of CHURCH OF ENGLAND and CHURCH OF SCOTLAND. When Elizabeth was Queen the royal website carried the following:…” Apr 6, 14:35
James Barr Gardner on The quality of mercy: “I totally agree word for word, more and more people agree with it but the process needs speeding up for…” Apr 6, 14:06
James on The quality of mercy: “Wilma; “Hello, pot? Kettle here…..”” Apr 6, 12:51
Captain Caveman on The quality of mercy: “Heh. If there’s one thing I couldn’t been accused of, mate, it’s “poor self esteem”… much to the annoyance of…” Apr 6, 12:45
Jay on The quality of mercy: “Thank you for the ‘good luck’ comment, Young Lochinvar. Regrettably, I lack your knowledge of M. Beggan and what I…” Apr 6, 12:19
Confused on The quality of mercy: “an independent Scotland with the worst government imaginable is still preferrable to being in the UK with a government of…” Apr 6, 11:51
Confused on The quality of mercy: “I’m not here to talk / debate / discuss with the hotpot-eaters, but merely to piss on them, from a…” Apr 6, 11:47
Northcode on The quality of mercy: “I asked the internet this question: Do colonised elites appease their oppressor? And the internet said this: “In summary, while…” Apr 6, 11:22
Northcode on The quality of mercy: “A hae writ doun a new vers fir thon rideeculous, agin-the-Scots, hatesome Inglis naconal anthem pish tae pit in the…” Apr 6, 10:36
Alf Baird on The quality of mercy: ““Let us celebrate humiliation” Deid richt, Willie, the assimilated colonized aye celebrate their oppressor, e’en raise statues tae thaim, name…” Apr 6, 09:47