Motion S4M-02317: Mark McDonald, North East Scotland, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 13/03/2012
Timing of Scottish Cup Semi-final
That the Parliament notes that the Scottish Cup semi-final between Aberdeen and Hibernian will take place at Hampden Park on 14 April 2012, kicking off at 12.15pm; congratulates both teams on their achievement in the competition thus far; notes that the match is being broadcast live on Sky Sports and the BBC; considers that the timing of the kick-off will greatly inconvenience supporters travelling from the north east, and calls on the Scottish Football Association to consider changing the time so that it suits supporters rather than television schedules.

I’m not sure Mark needed to submit the motion. I mean, surely the mass protests, the newspaper outrage and the constant Sky Sports coverage is sufficient on what is, of course, a huge injustice to Aberdonians.

Alternatively, one could remember that football is part of business so subject to money-spinning decisions, and is only a game.

Mhairi McAlpine is a feminist, socialist and internationalist based in Glasgow.  She blogs at Second Council House of Virgo

I watched the Kony2012 viral video and response with mounting horror.  A slick, professional propaganda film, heavy on emotional pull demanding US intervention in Central Africa gained a visibility that most activist campaigns can only dream of.  The campaign has been critiqued in a variety of places from a variety of angles, yet one must consider why this video has achieved such purchase within Western populations.  I suggested on Twitter that “ Invisible children gets away with the neo-colonial #kony2012 propaganda project because the left doesn’t take internationalism seriously”, which was robustly challenged by a number of “lefties”, particularly from the point of view of invoking that abstract concept of “the left”.

“The left” exists.  Its boundaries are fuzzy, but it includes self-identified socialists, marxists, anarchists, greens, primitives,  feminists, anti-colonialists, vegans, community campaigners, trade unionists, student activists, human rights activists, and probably the biggest group of all on the left – the telly shouters. Yet within the left, there are a number of differing and competing priorities both in terms of practical time and attention, but also in terms of theory.  Sometimes these theoretical differences reflect differing ideological perspectives; more often they reflect ideological laziness.

As a white Westerner, we live pretty insulated from the horrors of colonialism, its consequences and its modern instigations.  We don’t fear that our country will be invaded by a foreign power, that our assets will be stolen through dodgy quasi-legal means, that our homes will be bombed and our families killed.  The closest we may get is hearing the screams of a neighbour as they are shipped off to Dungavel for deportation.   We benefit from colonialism and are shielded from seeing its effects.

The Scottish Socialist Party was founded on the principle that socialists spent too much time arguing over small points of difference, and that what we should be doing was concentrating on the 80% that we did agree with, while agreeing to differ on the 20% of our differences.  That project blew apart when it became apparent that feminism and the role of women within the movement could not simply be shunted into the 20% of  “other stuff we don’t want to talk about because it might cause a big row“.   Women must be central to any revolution, and it is a failure of “the left” that they are frequently marginalised.    While it is not necessary to have a full understanding of feminist theory to be an asset to “the left” there is a minimum understanding of the fundamentals of patriarchy, below which you stop becoming an asset and start becoming a liability.

So too with internationalism.  “The left” has a terrible tendency to identify the most horrible aspects of neo-colonialism, based generally on a particular Western intervention and campaign with a narrow focus and emotional pull. #Kony2012 mimics the intervention of the left, only it does it better: more money, cuter kids, more shock value, greater production quality.  “The left” needs to get a grip on colonialism as a discourse – not in terms of any particular intervention, but as an overarching system of structural global control and develop it within the movement.  Just as the  male-dominated left frequently able to utilise their privilage to hold onto power, both within the movement, but more critically to stop radical examinations of the gendered power structures in wider society, so too the white left uses its faux-internationalism as a sop to fundamental examinations of the structures which support neo-colonialism abroad and racism domestically.

We cannot simply disavow the sexist, racist left, they are part of us and they are our responsibility.  We need to challenge within our movement on the basis of oppositional consciousness,  taking leadership from those closest to the struggle and making the links between pockets of resistance under a sound educative framework of anti-colonialism.  Racism and sexism are not external things to the left – to be fought against as “the other” – they are within our movement and they are part of each one of us.  Only by developing “the left” drawing it cohesively together on the basis of oppositional consciousness can we hope to ever effect a revolution, rather than just yet another change of management.

It is with a horrid hypocrisy that young Richard O’Dwyer had his unnecessary extradition to the US rubber-stamped on the same day that Cameron and Obama cemented their love-in with a joint article declaring “a partnership of the heart, bound by the history, traditions and values we share”.

Richard O’Dwyer, for those that don’t know, is the student who created a website called TV Shack that would link to sites showing free TV. He didn’t host free TV, he just directed you to it; not unlike the way a search engine could direct you to child porn. We don’t see Google or Yahoo extradited to the US for their links pages but Richard is a little guy, with no Corporation Tax to offer, so off you go son. Don’t think Cameron or Obama will spare a thought for you.

For me, cases like this are the big disappointment of not just the coalition, but the Labour Government before it. Gary McKinnon has been neglected by Governments who were too afraid to tell the US to get some perspective and drop their pursuit of harmless British citizen. Richard O’Dwyer is suffering from the same insipid toadying from the Tories today and, well, there has long been a strong case for the UK getting more involved in the shocking treatment of Wales-raised Wikileaks whistleblower Bradley Manning.

I don’t know the detail of this extradition treaty but how a crime can be committed against the US when you haven’t committed a crime in the UK is beyond me. There should be a sense-check built into this agreement whereby the Home Secretary can assess whether there is a serious case to answer and authorise or reject the request accordingly. Searching for UFOs on a US network and mucking around on the internet for TV links would, needless to say one would hope, fall into the ‘reject’ category.

This young man faces a 10 year prison sentence, the same sentence has those who have committed rape, child abuse or tax fraud. Everyone knows it’s wrong for this guy to be flown out to America for this but no one will do anything about it, myself, hand on heart, included, except for writing to my MP and signing any petitions out there. Big deal.

Why aren’t we taking to the streets on such occasions? What would we hope would happen if it was us with our feet held to an unfair fire? Are our lives really so busy and/or so tedious that we no can no longer motivate ourselves into righting these wrongs through the power of numbers?

Sadly, it seems that way.

It won’t just be Richard O’Dwyer who is being extradited away from the UK if that sad, shameful event is to take place, it is a little bit of ourselves too.

UPDATE

Campaign blog

Petition

I have a constructive suggestion to make before we delve into the murky world of Holyrood motions this week and it is a suggestion regarding the winner of our Worst Motion of the Week prize.

How about, instead of whatever interjection SNP MSP Kenneth Gibson deigns to make at the Scottish Parliament each week, be it spoken, a Parliamentary Question or a motion, we replace it instead with a (short) burst of bagpipe strains. On recent evidence, it would be of similar value.

Take this week’s winning WMOTW:

Short Title: Forward to Independence
S4M-02210 Kenneth Gibson () (Scottish National Party): That the Parliament notes the increasing collaboration between the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties in Scotland; regrets that their only shared vision appears to be in uniting to stifle and hold back any ambition for Scotland to take what is considered its rightful place among the independent nations of the world, and believes that this “can’t do” attitude will be resoundingly defeated when Scotland votes Yes in the independence referendum.

Or, put another way, harummmmmm, (*hang on, I’ll just get this shanter up and running*), harrummmm, rummm, dee dum, dum dee dum….

Dare I suggest that he is simply peddling the line that those other parties are being anti-Scottish? The motion is not seeking to make Scotland a better place and has a hollowness and emptiness to it that I wager even the author would not deny. It’s a lazy kick at rival parties draped in a Scottish flag and it should have no place at the Parliament. It is worth noting that “motions are used by MSPs as a device to initiate debate or propose a course of action”, of which this seeks to achieve neither.

Now, I don’t often get to watch First Minister Questions so I’ll confess to being a little bit disappointed that upon hearing this question put forward by Kenny G, a question that resulted in embarrassed guffaws from the First Minister, the MSP for Cunninghame was not dressed in a kilt with a face painted purple when he delivered his pro-independence diatribe in the question after Willie Rennie’s (transcript not yet available).

Indeed, Kenny’s been on something of a roll recently, following on from early promise in his halcyon Crap Holyrood Chat days, and this week is no different. Here are a couple more still waters that he has clubbed a clumsy oar into:

S4M-02266 Kenneth Gibson () (Scottish National Party): That the Parliament notes the twelfth anniversary of the presentation of a declaration with 50,000 signatories in favour of the establishment of a Cornish assembly, equating to more than 10% of the adult population of Cornwall, launched by Mebyon Kernow on St Piran’s Day, 5 March 2000; understands that this declaration received support from Cornish people of various political backgrounds and persuasions, and calls on the UK Government to establish a Cornish assembly to allow for direct democratic control of Cornish affairs.

which attracted this amendment:

S4M-02266.1 Liam McArthur () (Scottish Liberal Democrats): As an amendment to motion S4W-02266 in the name of Kenneth Gibson (50,000 Call for a Cornish Assembly), leave out from “launched” to end and insert “and believes that, in the spirit of respect, decisions about the future of Cornwall should be left to the government and to the people of Cornwall rather than the Scottish Parliament, and considers that motion S4M-01381 in the name of Kenneth Gibson also seeks to interfere in the governance arrangements of Italy and Greece.”

And another….:

Motion S4M-02203: Kenneth Gibson, Cunninghame North, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 02/03/2012
Labour’s Free University Education Confusion
That the Parliament notes with concern the comments made by the former MSP, Des McNulty, in his online Scotsman article on 29 February 2012 regarding the Scottish Government’s commitment to providing free university education; understands that, as Labour’s education spokesperson, Mr McNulty campaigned on the promise “with Scottish Labour, there will be no up-front or back-end tuition fees for Scottish university students” but now pursues the reintroduction of fees; finds it deeply troubling that, less than 10 months after campaigning to uphold the proud Scottish tradition of free higher education, Mr McNulty appears to have so reversed his position; believes that, had Labour won the 2011 Scottish Parliament election, fee paying policies would now be being pursued, and therefore considers that the Scottish Labour Party is not trustworthy on the issue of university fees and that, following what is considered its inability to form a coherent policy on the matter, only the Scottish National Party can be trusted by students, parents and the university sector to deliver world-class higher education based not on the ability to pay, but the ability to learn.

And indeed another….:

Motion S4M-02263: Kenneth Gibson, Cunninghame North, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 08/03/2012
No Spanish Veto
That the Parliament recognises the statement made by the Spanish Minister for Foreign Affairs and Cooperation, José García-Margallo, regarding how Spain would vote on an independent Scotland’s membership of the EU; acknowledges Mr García-Margallo’s denial of any suggestion of a Spanish veto of an independent Scotland’s EU membership, with the newspaper Diario Vasco reporting on 24 February 2012 his comment that “if in the UK both parties agree that this is consistent with their constitutional order, written or unwritten, Spain would have nothing to say, just that this does not affect us. No one would object to a consented independence of Scotland”; welcomes the Spanish foreign minister’s statement on this point, especially after rumours suggesting that Spain would veto Scottish EU membership in order to discourage Catalan and Basque independence; appreciates the clarification from Mr García-Margallo that Spain would not veto an independent Scotland’s membership of the EU, but would instead support the sovereign decision of Scottish voters to remain members.
Supported by: Humza Yousaf, David Torrance, Dennis Robertson, Willie Coffey, Margaret Burgess, Rob Gibson, Richard Lyle, Adam Ingram, Roderick Campbell, Bill Walker, Mike MacKenzie, Sandra White, Bob Doris, Kevin Stewart, Bill Kidd, Colin Beattie

Kenny Gibson is close to achieving a lifetime achievement award for poor Holyrood motions at the tender age of 50 and with four long years of this Holyrood term to go.

I maintain therefore that we’d save ourselves a lot of money and a good bit of hot air by having 128 MSPs and simply a set of bagpipes as the representative for Cunninghame North.

Not to be too negative this week, there were two Best Motions of the Week that bubbled to the surface and are well worth sharing:

Motion S4M-02225: John Finnie, Highlands and Islands, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 06/03/2012
Blacklist of Construction Workers
That the Parliament notes with concern reports suggesting the existence of a so-called blacklist of construction workers who have, as a consequence of participating in trade union activities, been identified as troublesome; understands that an investigation by the Information Commissioner’s Office has concluded that the list contains information that could only have been provided by the police or security services; believes that, should it have taken place, such collusion is completely unacceptable, and condemns any companies or organisations that participate in the creation or use of such blacklists.
Supported by: David Torrance, Mike MacKenzie, Stuart McMillan, Rob Gibson, Christina McKelvie, Kevin Stewart, Dave Thompson, Bill Kidd, Bill Walker, Richard Lyle, John Wilson, Hugh Henry, Gordon MacDonald, Dennis Robertson, Chic Brodie, Patrick Harvie, John Park, Colin Beattie, Joan McAlpine, Humza Yousaf, Jean Urquhart, Adam Ingram, Jamie Hepburn, Fiona McLeod, Annabelle Ewing, Sandra White, Margaret Burgess, Linda Fabiani, Maureen Watt

Motion S4M-02225.1: Drew Smith, Glasgow, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 08/03/2012
Blacklist of Construction Workers
As an amendment to motion S4M-02225 in the name of John Finnie (Blacklist of Construction Workers), insert at end “, and calls on the Scottish Government to report to the Parliament on the question of whether territorial police forces or other agencies in Scotland have been involved in collating or passing on information that has been used to inform blacklists.”
Supported by: Helen Eadie, Iain Gray, Patrick Harvie, Anne McTaggart, Neil Bibby, David Stewart, Neil Findlay, Hanzala Malik, Patricia Ferguson, John Park, Hugh Henry

An investigation by the Sunday Herald’s unofficial Standards Commissioner, Paul Hutcheon, has led to the suspension of Bill Walker MSP from the SNP group. Not one, not two, but three of his ex-wives have reported domestic abuse, either while divorcing him or now, and he also admits hitting his stepdaughter with a saucepan. He’s like Sean Connery without the glittering career, and the SNP have done the right thing by suspending him “pending a full investigation of the facts and circumstances”. There can be no way back, even given just the bits of these depressing tales he doesn’t contest.

When the paper’s front page went round Twitter last night, without an indication of who’d been suspended, I can’t have been the only person hoping it wouldn’t be one of the Nats I liked. And Walker certainly isn’t that. Quite the opposite.

Walker’s part of the under-vetted 2011 intake, and is known in political circles for one thing only – being so homophobic that he made John Mason look almost reasonable. In August last year, when Mason was stirring the pot with his weasel-worded motion (brought to public attention by Jeff here), Bill Walker went a lot further: “There are things called civil partnerships, which I accept, but I’m really concerned about the use of the term ‘gay marriage’ because to me it’s a contradiction in terms and anything that puts homosexual relationships as any way equal to male-female marriages is just not right.” Although I can’t find the link for it, he also used the classic “the dictionary defines marriage as a man and a woman” line of argument. First, it doesn’t, and second, the dictionary defines “United Kingdom” in a way you’re seeking to change.

And the politics? Landslides in a partly proportional system are relative, although 53% of seats on 44-45% of the vote was a pretty generous deal for the Nats. Using their numbers to put one of their more partisan members into the Presiding Officer’s chair took them down to 68 MSPs, three more than a bare majority. Bruce Crawford must be having wee palpitations this weekend, although even falling below 65 would hardly be the end of the world. They got more done more competently last session with just 47 MSPs, after all, and there are still at least three more votes for independence beyond their ranks.

Also, crucially, Walker is the constituency member for Dunfermline. If he’d been a regional MSP, it would have been possible for the leadership to try to persuade him to stand down on behalf of whoever was next on the list, despite the evidence from 2003-2007 when the likes of Campbell Martin and Dorothy-Grace Elder stuck two fingers up at them and stayed on as independents. But no, and Walker’s majority was just 590. A by-election in these circumstances in Labour’s former heartlands is not on Alex Salmond’s to-do list. An independent ex-SNP MSP without any credibility who keeps his trap shut and probably votes with them on everything is probably the least worst outcome for Ministers. But pressure will build to have him out, both from the opposition and from those who believe someone responsible for an apparent career domestic violence is unfit to serve at Holyrood.

The election of someone this unsuitable was part of the price of the SNP’s success. They’d never have expected Dunfermline to fall into their hands: Dunfermline West, which preceded it until the last lot of boundary changes, had been narrowly won by the Lib Dems over Labour in 2007. And so the Nats selected someone with a personal history one assumes no-one in the local party knew about, which suggests no-one really knew him at all. The story about Salmond meeting a new MSP the day after the election and not knowing who he or she was must not seem so cute now at SNP head office.