Don't rush sectarian bill - Lib Dem Alison McInnes

Liberal Democrat justice spokesperson Alison McInnes has warned of the dangers of rushing to pass Alex Salmond's anti-sectarianism bill without giving proper time for scrutiny. The SNP Government wants it to become law by the time the football season starts at the end of July. The parliamentary recess takes place from the beginning of July until the beginning of September. You do the maths.

I have been concerned about this legislation, because it has knee jerk reaction written all over it. We need to be sure that the measures contained within the legislation are liberal, fair and necessary. It's very important that the laws are properly scrutinised for unintended consequence. Religion should not be immune from robust criticism and rational debate and it would be wrong for Parliament to pass a law which, for example, forbade me from saying that I felt any Church leader's stance on or treatment of gay people was wrong.

Two weeks is simply not enough time to properly scrutinise a measure and I think that it would be best left until after the Summer.

Alison addressed this in her speech this afternoon, saying:

....we want to see action on sectarianism. Let us be very clear.  Sectarianism has no place in our society.  Every single one of us in this chamber agrees that any discrimination based on religion is unacceptable; any threatening behaviour based on religion is wrong; and any acts inciting violence because of religion must not be tolerated. However, I think that the Government are naïve if they believe they can solve a centuries old problem by rushing through new legislation in the next fortnight. Just this weekend, the Cabinet Secretary for Parliamentary Business wrote of how he would like to see more pre-legislative scrutiny in Parliament.  Can I say now, that, for once, I agree wholeheartedly with Mr Crawford.  The Government are talking about introducing two entirely new offences onto the statute books.  Surely it is right that Parliament – that the people of Scotland – are allowed the time to study the proposals, take evidence, and try to ensure that there are no unintended consequences, no collateral infringements on law-abiding citizens’ liberties?  Oh, and to ensure that the new law actually does what it is intended to. There are many questions that any Government should have to answer before they can introduce a new law.  And any responsible Parliament cannot – or at least, should not – pass a law until all such questions are answered. This proposed new law is no different.  And the first – and most fundamental – question asks whether a new law is actually needed? The Cabinet Secretary tried to answer this very question on Newsnight a couple of weeks ago.  He said there are gaps in current Breach of the Peace definitions, meaning that “in some instances” there could be difficulties in prosecutions.  He might be right, but I say to him – we need to see the evidence.
 Are there gaps?  Well, just under a month ago, the then Solicitor General Frank Mulholland issued a press release welcoming “the high prosecution rate for crimes of religious prejudice.”
 If there are gaps would the new law close them?  Well, I await sight of the Bill with interest, but I can guarantee we won’t be able to adequately answer that question in two weeks with no chance to take expert evidence. I would also say this.  In England and Wales in the three years to 2010 since the Racial and Religious Hatred Act was enacted, there were 36,763 completed prosecutions of offences that were racially or religiously aggravated.  In that time, exactly one person was charged with an offence that had been introduced by the new Act.  He was acquitted.
 The Racial and Religious Hatred Act is a solid law.  It was debated in depth.  Expert evidence was taken over many days and weeks.  And it has made zero difference to convictions for religiously or racially motivated crimes. I am not saying that a new law will not work.  I am asking the Government to take the necessary time to consider all possibilities.
 Is it that offensive chanting is already covered by Breach of the Peace, but is simply hard to police because of the number of people involved? Is it that sending bullets through the post is actually already covered through anti-terrorism legislation?
 Is it that sending death threats via the internet is already covered by the UK Communications Act? And is it that the sectarian aspect of all these crimes is already dealt with by section 74 of the 2003 Criminal Justice Act, and it just needs to be enforced better? These are the questions the Government should be asking before it introduces legislation.  And it should be giving Parliament time to find the answers. 

I think that the most important thing in dealing with sectarianism is education. I remember a boy from my primary school nearly getting expelled for thumping a boy from the Catholic school down the road "because he was a Catholic." The entire school was summoned to the hall and I swear the head teacher didn't draw breath for 10 minutes as she rightly told us how awful it was to hit someone because of their religion, and how important religious freedom was.The boy concerned was eventually allowed to stay, but he was made to suffer first. The fear of Mrs Mackintosh which was much, much worse than any deity could ever offer. I'm fairly certain he's never done anything like that since.

I think actually modern education is much better at teaching messages of tolerance.

Two weeks is no time to properly scrutinise a piece of legislation. Let's hope that the Parliament realises this and asks the Government to wait until August. As my Granny used to say, if a job's worth doing, it's worth doing well.

Rennie calls Salmond out for blistering attack on senior Judge

For those of you who don't know, bourach is a lovely Scots word meaning a right old mess or confusion. I do like it as a word, but at the moment it seems particularly appropriate to use it to describe the muddled priorities at the top of the Scottish Government where justice is concerned.

I have already written a furious post today about the failures of the Scottish Government to even provide decent access to toilets, for goodness sake, amongst many other basics, to prisoners at our only women's prison, Cornton Vale. You would think being found wanting so severely for the second time in two years would concentrate their minds on what really is important.

But no. Alex Salmond, leader of the Government which has been responsible for such a shocking failure, seems to think it's more important to get really nasty about a senior judge, Lord Hope, who has been part of the UK Supreme Court which has ruled on recent high profile human rights cases. Now, the thing is, it's not a nasty English court telling we Scots what to do, it's operating under European  Court of Human Rights jurisprudence. It's ruling on whether what's happened in certain cases complies with European human rights laws which the SNP say they support.

Salmond's got really personal, about Lord Hope, calling his judgements extreme. And it looks like when he was in Downing Street recently, that he might have nicked David Cameron's dog whistle. He's really letting his illiberal, socially conservative side show with remarks like:

"All I would say to Lord Hope is that I probably know a wee bit about the legal system and he probably knows a wee bit about politics, but politics and the law intertwine and the political consequences of Lord Hope's judgments are extreme, and when the citizens of Scotland understandably vent their fury about the prospect of some of the vilest people on the planet getting lots of money off the public purse, they don't go chapping at Lord Hope's door, they ask their parliament what they are doing about it."

The words in bold put me in mind of David Cameron's comments last year, that people forfeit their human rights if they burgle your home.

When our justice system, either the UK, or Scottish, receives a judgement which shows it's flouted human rights, I find that shaming and a sign that things need to change. The rule of law can only work if the people have confidence that they will be treated fairly and their human rights respected within the judicial and penal systems.And it's the right thing to treat people fairly.

Peter Cadder, whose case sparked the SNP's casual quadrupling of pre-charge detention time in an afternoon last year, won his human rights case because, then a teenager, he had not had access to a lawyer before a police interrogation that led to his conviction for assault.  Now, to me, it seems eminently reasonable that people should have access to lawyers. A system that does not allow that is flawed. Rather than slag off judges and court judgements, surely the Scottish Justice Department would be better off comparing Scots law with European human rights law and sorting out where there could be problems. You could argue this should have been done years ago.

Alex Salmond is pandering to a Daily Fail type agenda with is comments and he needs to catch himself on.

Willie Rennie told Reporting Scotland today that he reckoned Salmond was just a wee bit too partial to driving the bulldozer. He also said: 

“Alex Salmond is making himself look a fool with these deeply personal and blistering attacks on one of Scotland’s most senior judges.
 “Scotland does not want a First Minister who uses such tawdry and childish language, leaving Scotland looking blinkered and insular.
 “As the crisis between the Scottish Judiciary and the Scottish Government deepens, it leaves serious questions for the future. The First Minister needs to do some serious damage control before the decay in this relationship becomes irreversible.”  

I've been really impressed with Willie's down to earth, practical comments on all sorts of issues since he became leader. Whether it's showing a real understanding of the way misuse of alcohol blights communities, or telling the First Minister to stop making Scotland look foolish, he's made a real impact in just 4 weeks.

Just as an aside, Willie seems very fond of the word tawdry - which is absolutely the right word to describe both Salmond's and MacAskill's comments about judges. It simply is not appropriate for senior politicians to call senior judges ambulance chasers. It's a cheap show which is more about headlines than sense. Anyway, it puts me in mind of one of the few Church sermons I can remember from my childhood. We went to the Scottish Episcopal Church in Wick, which was presided over by John Hadfield, Archdeacon of Caithness, who was quite a character.  I mostly drifted off into a daydream during the sermon, but I remember being fascinated by the story of St Etheldreda and I have never forgotten the origin of the word tawdry.

Kenny, Cornton Vale failure is your responsibility - sort it or go

Almost exactly two years ago, the Scottish Liberal Democrats highlighted the increase in the number of women self harming in prison. This came at around the same time as a damning inspection report on Scotland's only women's prison.

You would think, then, that, the SNP Government would have sorted things in time for the follow-up inspection which took place in February this year.

Sadly, and to my absolute fury, the inspection report released yesterday shows that things have not improved and have in some areas got worse over the last two years.  Conventional wisdom dictates that where problems have been identified in a service, that things will improve because of the spotlight, the attention, given to it. Not in this case. Look at the summary of progress since 2009:

Progress

2.1 Progress since the last inspection has been as follows.
Good Practice
Areas of Good Practice still in place       6
Areas which can no longer be described as Good Practice    4
Recommendations
Satisfactory progress made     3
Reasonable progress made     2
Progress not satisfactory     17
Points of Note
Satisfactory progress made   24
Reasonable progress made   15
Progress not satisfactory    36 

So, 4 areas which were described as showing Good Practice in 2009 no longer warrant that description and only 5 out of 17 recommendations have shown acceptable progress. We're going backwards, here.

It breaks my heart to think that women are being kept in conditions which are known to be overcrowded and their basic health needs, particularly in mental health, go unmet. It's not right.

Let's give you some examples. Yesterday's report is full of the righteous indignation of an inspector, Hugh Munro, who has seen for himself that his recommendations have been ignored.

It seems that the prison is failing at the most basic of levels. Paragraph 2.8 says:

The treatment of prisoners and the conditions in which they live are just not sufficiently good. This was a theme in the 2009 Inspection and except for minor progress in repainting some house blocks, conditions have either remained much the same or failed to improve. Indeed in some areas, such as the Mother and Baby Unit, they have worsened. The very poor access to toilets for women in Bruce and Younger Houses has continued and the dignity, safety, infection control and health issues associated with this
unacceptable situation are even more stark than in 2009.  

 Hugh Munro concludes that care of women with mental health problems must improve, noting that the most vulnerable don't even have proper care plans. And read what he has to say about the treatment of women removed from association:

Nowhere is the mental health issue more stark than in the euphemistically-named ‘Management Suite’ in Ross House. This segregation area is more colloquially known as the ‘back cells’. These cells are utterly depressing and are an unsuitable environment in which to hold very vulnerable girls and women. It is my view that these cells are used primarily as a control measure. Staff are insufficiently trained to deal with the women held there.  

He concludes that the lack of activity for women is also harmful to their well being.

I conclude that the way the regime is run at Cornton Vale must be reviewed with a determination to involve a far higher proportion of women in activities and offending behaviour interventions. This must include short-term prisoners as well as those on remand. For these two prisoner groups in particular, life at Cornton Vale is just far too restrictive, unproductive and lacking in challenge. This is no way to manage female prisoners in Scotland if there is to be any hope of reducing the level and frequency of their offending. 

As a liberal, I believe that prison should be there primarily to rehabilitate those who have broken the law, to give them the help and support they need to enable them to contribute positively to society when they come out. It's not just about money, although it is much cheaper if people don't keep going in and out of prison, it's about the human cost of persistent failure to give the appropriate support. Not just for the person concerned, but for their children.

So, given the second damning report in two years, what has justice secretary Kenny MacAskill done? Taken immediate, practical action to sort the problems out in the prison? Well, that wouldn't really be the SNP way. Their mantality seems to be "Why do today what you can talk about tomorrow and the next day?"You see the same thing with their moratorium on rural school closures. Anything but make a decision and do something.

MacAskill has set up a Commission to improve justice for female offenders, chaired by former Lord Advocate Dame Eilish Angiolini. This Commission will report by the end of this year. That report will no doubt sit on MacAskill's desk for a couple of months, and then, slowly, if we're lucky, some of its recommendations might be implemented. So we're looking at a good year before much improves inside Cornton Vale.

The thing is, Kenny doesn't need to set up another talking shop. If he just looked, the Equal Opportunities Committee of the Parliament actually looked at these issues 2 years ago in their report entitled "Female Offenders in the Justice System." I would be very surprised if this new Commission tells him anything different. What is it about SNP ministers that they disrespect the committees of the Parliament so much and set up their own bodies to duplicate their work?

If you look at that report, there's loads of stuff on how a more joined up approach between social services, housing, benefits and the prison service is needed,  how better care was needed to prevent reoffending, how mental health therapies needed to be available. It's not really rocket science. The report also asked for more clarity from MacAskill on sentencing (paragraph 114 and 115):

 Given the contrasting evidence on whether women are more harshly sentenced than men, the Committee notes with great interest quotes attributed to the Cabinet Secretary in the Herald on 12 August 2009:“There is analysis that (when) a man and woman facing punishment for the same offence, the woman will get a higher tariff. That is a product of Scottish society and perhaps male chauvinism that affects politicians as much as the judiciary. I don't think it is done deliberately, it is a cultural thing.”⁶⁶115. The issue of gender inequalities in sentencing was raised with the Cabinet Secretary when he and his officials provided oral evidence to the Committee on 23 June 2009. A Scottish Government official said “I am not sure that we have any statistics that show that women are punished more harshly than men.”⁶⁷ Given the Cabinet Secretary’s subsequent reported comments, the Committee considers that he should have raised these concerns first when providing oral evidence.The Committee would like to receive a more detailed summary of the analysis that the Cabinet Secretary is quoted as referring to, and, more importantly, an explanation of the action that he will take to address this apparent inequity in sentencing.

I think what annoys me the most about this, what really sticks in my craw, is MacAskill's blatant attempt to pretend that this catastrophic failure in the prison system is nothing to do with him.

"It highlights the serious issues facing female offenders, and, while the Scottish Prison Service (SPS) has made good progress in areas such as suicide risk management and education programmes, it is clear that much remains to be done to improve conditions. Things as they stand are unacceptable.

"This is a matter in operational terms for SPS and I know that they are looking carefully at the issues that have been raised and how they should be dealt with.

Sorry, Kenny. "It wisnae me, it was them at the Scottish Prison Service" just won't wash. You know why? Let's have a wee look at your ministerial responsibilities:

Kenny MacAskill MSP Responsibilities include: Criminal law and procedure, youth justice, criminal justice social work, police, prisons and sentencing policy, legal aid, legal profession, courts and law reform, anti-social behaviour, sectarianism, human rights, fire and rescue services, community safety, civil contingencies, drugs policy and related matters, liquor licensing, vulnerable witnesses, victim support and civil law, charity law, religious and faith organisations.

I'm pleased to see that Liberal Democrat Justice Spokesperson Alison McInnes has seen through MacAskill's excuses. She said:

 “This is a damming report from the Chief Inspector of Prisons. Nothing has been done to improve conditions at Cornton Vale Prison following last year’s poor report. In fact this report says that conditions are now much more ‘stark’.  “While I welcome the setting up of the Commission to look at a longer term strategy to reduce offending, that does not address the fact that the Government is utterly failing the women in the system now.
 “This is a shocking situation and the Justice Secretary cannot be allowed to shrug it off as an “operational matter for SPS”, he must take responsibility and direct that immediate improvements are made.” 

 Alison's right, but I don't have quite as much patience as she does. This Minister was told in 2009 both by HM Inspectorate of Prisons and by a committee of the Parliament that there were major failings at Cornton Vale and in the way women were treated in the justice system. Two years later, things, if anything, have got worse. If he's not prepared to take immediate, practical action to sort out the disgraceful conditions at Cornton Vale, then, frankly, he should hand over to someone who will.

Maplins store staff could learn from prompt Facebook service

My husband and daughter are just a teensy weensy bit obsessed with pretty lights. Our garden is full of solar powered fairy lights, mood lights and the like.

Well, it seems that their batteries of some of those we've had for a while are starting to fail. Husband went to local Maplins to ask for a replacement to be told that they didn't do replacement batteries. When husband said that it wasn't great that they sold products that you couldn't get replacement batteries for, he was basically told that you might buy a car from a garage, but you wouldn't expect them to stock your petrol. He was also advised to try fitting 2 batteries into the product to see if that would make it work.

Husband, who is, bless him, becoming more like Victor Meldrew every day, was less than impressed by this and  resorted to Maplins Facebook wall to enquire further.  Within 48 hours he had a response asking for more information, and within 72 had been told that their buyer had placed an order for the said batteries at my husband's suggestion.

A good example of using new media to provide excellent customer service. Although, to be honest, as ever, it's the attitude of the person doing the serving that counts.

Liberal Youth Scotland President Sophie Bridger is Lib Dems' Inverclyde candidate

One of the people who has impressed me most over the past year, even when I don't agree with her, is the new Liberal Youth Scotland President Sophie Bridger. Persuasive, intelligent and articulate, 20 year old Sophie has shown really strong leadership skills within LYS and has made an excellent and constructive contribution to the Scottish party executive in just a few meetings. She's very likeable and  has very cool head. I'd say that these are pretty much the exact qualities you need to fight a by-election for the Scottish Liberal Democrats in the current climate.

It's handy, then, that she's been selected as our candidate in the Inverclyde by-election. I think this is a job she'll do very well.

Welcoming her selection, Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie said:

“I am delighted that Sophie has been chosen as our candidate for this important by-election and I congratulate her on this achievement.
 “Sophie is the right choice for Inverclyde. She is a rising star within the Party and I know that she will be a fresh new voice for Inverclyde at Westminster.
 “Sophie has a brilliant track record, having given her time over to volunteering and working in a care home. It is time for a real change in Inverclyde and Sophie and the Scottish Liberal Democrats will make that change.
 "Liberal Democrats have real solutions and voters here can put their faith in the younger generation to fight for Inverclyde.”

To help Sophie's campaign, please contact Jean Stewart on 01475 704735 or Simon Hutton on 07886 626380.

Shirley Williams happy with Lib Dem wins on NHS reforms

Shirley Williams used an article in the Independent yesterday to express her satisfaction with the changes the Liberal Democrats have brought to bear on Coalition's NHS reforms.

She is satisfied that the changes will reflect the spirit of the motion passed at Spring Conference.

Liberal Democrats, from our party's grassroots to its leadership, can be proud of the influence we have exerted to change the Government's NHS plans. It is clear now that the proposals that will be taken forward are dramatically different to those originally proposed.

This is proof that this party and its members is in a position to exert a strong influence within the coalition. It's clear that these reforms would have gone through unopposed if the Conservatives were governing on their own. No amount of shouting and screaming by the Labour party would have made the first bit of difference. Calm, rational opposition from the Liberal Democrats did.

This is a tangible and welcome example of how we can take the sting out of the Tories.

Of course none of this applies in Scotland, but what we can show is that on welfare reform we've changed some, but not enough yet, of the welfare reforms. The idea that Housing Benefit would be cut by 10% after a year is not happening any more and you can bet your life that's not because of any Tory getting upset about it.

This is not the time, however, for us to pat ourselves on the back and sit down and have a nice up of tea. There are still some elements of welfare reform, particularly as they affect the quality of life of disabled people, that need to be stopped. The medical assessments for disability and sickness related benefits are flawed and unrealistic. There are elements of welfare to work which I think are just plain wrong. We need to calmly collect evidence of bad decisions and use that to make changes.

Calling all female #f1 fans today..........

If you're a female F1 fan, can you spare 5 minutes of your time to explain why you like the sport?

Rachel Clarke is doing some research for a blog post on Badger GP.

If you want to help, fill in the survey here. She's closing it down at the end of today (14th June).

Blogging will be light.....

I'm feeling a bit out of sorts right now. I will be fine, but I'm probably going to have the rest of this week off from blogging.

When I say things like that, most often something happens that I can't keep my trap shut about so it may not quite work out as expected.

I have a few things on at the school and Bob's impending Diamond Jubilee to prepare for. That'll keep me out of mischief. If I get really desperate, I could always try tidying my house.

I just want to curl up with some good books and tea.

Anyway, see you in a few days.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Laughter and tears as friends near and far say goodbye to Andrew Reeves

Yesterday was a pretty harrowing day.  No getting round that.

A day when I was laughing my head off one minute and bawling my eyes out the next.

Saying goodbye to someone who's been such a big part of your life is never easy. I'm grateful, though, that I was able to share the day in the company of wonderful friends old and new. Lots of hugs were exchanged by people on the same emotional big dipper.

When I arrived at Waverley, Stephen Glenn was already there and Helen Duffett arrived a few minutes later. We then caught up with Sophie Bridger on the concourse before heading off to Jenners on a secret cosmetics buying mission for Jo White. We then headed for tea and cake and were joined by Jo, Sarah Harding and Mark Pack.

I'm also glad that many of us were able to congregate in one "online" place, no matter how far apart we were in real life, to share memories of Andrew on Twitter. Thanks to Mark Pack, who told me how to do it, I've collated all the tweets posted under the hashtag #andrewreeves into one place, so hopefully they will keep for posterity. I'm particularly pleased that people actually joined Twitter to take part.

Some of them were absolutely hilarious. Wandering round Glasgow at 2am with a 12 foot pole, Lady Mark? Swearing in front of Claire Rayner? Reeves for Mayor? In amongst the funny stories, were people posting how much Andrew had supported them and cared for them, young candidates talking of his encouragement and support. Have a look for yourself.




Stephen has already posted about the music at yesterday's funeral. Hardly traditional funeral music - Lady Gaga has not featured in many farewells, I imagine, but she was utterly and absolutely spot on for Andrew. Take That and the Pet Shop Boys also featured. Highly appropriate.

Michael Moore MP gave the tribute. And I have to say he was perfect. Seconds before he started speaking, I had been having a little bubble to myself, overcome by a moment of intense sadness. And I wasn't alone. Very quickly he had us all engulfed in spirited laughter.

He really captured how we were all feeling, and summed up Andrew perfectly and with great affection for his friend. He'd also asked me to collate a selection of tweets from the Twitter stream for him to include which I did with the help of the tea and cake crowd, It was good that people who couldn't make the funeral could be included in the day's farewells in that way.

After the ceremony, it got a bit comedy of errors like. It seemed that everybody was heading off to a particular pub. We made a break for it and discovered that we were the only ones there. Apparently plans changed after we left, but we were quickly reunited. In some ways it worked out quite well, because I ended up spending a while in the sunshine drinking gin and completely changing plans for next Saturday. Of which more later.

After a while in the "proper" rather than the breakaway venue, Sophie Bridger, LYS's fabulous president and I headed up to town where we found some of the Campaigns Team who were nicely pickled by that point. We went for a pizza and a laugh and a muse before heading home. I made it back at around 11.30.

It was always going to be a hell of a day - but being surrounded by lovely friends made it easier to bear.

And, I have to show you, are these not the best shoes ever to grace a funeral? That'll be why Jo's Twitter name is @jolovesshoes then.  Andrew would have loved them.

Open thread: share your memories of Andrew Reeves

This photo, which I think captures Andrew perfectly, was taken at Andrew and Roger's wedding in January by Charles Dundas.

Andrew, we will never forget the fun and laughter you brought to our lives.

Share your memories of our friend in the comments. And don't forget to pop over to Twitter and share a story using #andrewreeves.

Tweet your memories of Andrew Reeves tomorrow 10 am - 12 noon

Tomorrow we have to say goodbye to our friend Andrew Reeves.

It's going to be a really difficult day after a hideous week.

I had a little idea this morning as I was lying in bed.  Andrew, as we all know, loved Twitter. He'd been a very early adopter of it and in fact, when he first came up to Scotland, it was still done via text message as well as the web. That is how I came to be lying by the pool in Mallorca finding him the answer to a question he asked.

We'll all have little treasured memories like that, things about our time with Andrew that makes us smile.

So, I thought that tomorrow morning it might be a good idea to share some of these memories on Twitter, using the hashtag #andrewreeves. I'd thought between 10 am and 12 noon, but don't feel unduly constrained by these times.

The reason I'm telling you now is so you can, if you want, schedule some in advance if you're not going to be around. There are several Twitter applications, like Tweetdeck and Hootsuite which allow you to do that.

Maybe it'll be a campaign, a particularly garish tie, a bit of old fashioned smut, a blog post, a Twitter exchange, a photograph or something cat related that springs to mind - or maybe all of the above. Tell us about it.

And for those memories which don't fit easily into 140 characters, I shall have an open thread on here from early tomorrow morning, and on Facebook too. Andrew's been a bit part of our lives for a long time now and there will be many stories to tell and more to learn about him. Whether we're able to be at his funeral in person tomorrow or not, this gives us another way of saying our farewells and expressing our appreciation for an extraordinary guy.

If you think this is a good idea, please spread the word as far and wide as you can.

I'm trying to keep tabs on all the online stuff that's written about Andrew so I can give all the links to his family. I know his husband Roger has really appreciated all the messages he's had.  One particularly special one was his obituary in the Scotsman today. It was written by his friend and colleague Graeme Littlejohn. Preparing an obituary about a friend is a hard thing to do but Graeme totally captured his personality, describing him perfectly.

I also missed Anders Hanson's tribute earlier in the week and Edinburgh Councillor Paul Edie's.

Rennie, Hughes and Carmichael pay tribute to Andrew Reeves

On Monday night, a whole crowd of people met in Edinburgh to just have a few drinks together in memory of Andrew Reeves. We went to this really homely, comfortable, friendly bar, Joseph Pearce's on Elm Row. That place is rapidly overtaking my previous favourite pub, the Station Bar in Cowcaddens in Glasgow. Joseph Pearce's is the sort of place you can relax in. You can feel at home. You can celebrate there, or it's a safe retreat in times of trouble. And they always have plenty Hendricks Gin.

Going in on the train, somebody said over Twitter to smile at the memories and at that time I really felt that it was too early to smile, and all I really wanted to do was cling to my friends for comfort. But, you know, there are very few memories of Andrew which don't have a smile in them somewhere. We sat outside in blazing sunshine for a little while, too. It was an evening which was exactly what I needed anyway.

Over in Belfast, other friends were similarly sharing memories of Andrew.

My guess is that we're probably all still a long way from all this hitting us, though.

They say that you don't know what you've got till it's gone. I don't think that's true - we did appreciate him while he was here, and it has been very comforting to see the tributes paid to him from friends and senior party figures alike.

Willie Rennie's, on Andrew's Facebook wall, was very personal.

He is there, part of your life, the he's not. Except I think Andrew will always be as he made such an impression on the way we were and are. I will miss you Andrew.

Alistair Carmichael's is contained in Callum Leslie's article on the Liberal Youth Scotland website.

 “I am not looking forward to my next visit to 4 Clifton Terrace where there will be a large Andrew Reeves – shaped hole. There are many people in the party who work hard, many who are fun to be around and many who have an instinctive feel for the liberal response to any given issue. He was one of the rare few who was all three and more.”

Simon Hughes, who worked closely with Andrew in London, said on his website:

Andrew's untimely and sudden death has sent shock waves and great sadness across the party.

To Liberal Democrats in Southwark and to me as the local MP he was a workhorse, a hugely talented campaigner and a source of perpetual wisdom and good advice.To the London region when he was our campaign officer Andrew was an effective advocate, loyal friend and very valued campaigner. In his final job in Scotland he was not blown off course during the very difficult campaign of recent weeks from his liberal principles, enormous commitment and dedicated hard work.

Thousands of Liberal Democrats will remain in Andrew's debt for many years ahead.

Now, I have had to correct the misplaced apostrophe in the first sentence from the original, because I'm a bit freakish about these things. I'm fairly certain Andrew would have laughed at the thought of me frothing at the mouth at that apostrophe. How do I know?  Because during the election we had a very similar conversation where he used exactly those words.

I should also mention that Nicola Sturgeon took time out of her day to send sympathy via Twitter. She didn't know Andrew, but she read the post I wrote on Friday. She didn't have to do that and her kindness is appreciated.

Scot Goes Pop also wrote warmly about him showing that there was affection for Andrew across the political spectrum.

And back to the Liberal Democrats, two lovely personal tributes that sum Andrew up perfectly.  Mark Cole talks about how Andrew always made time to encourage him with his blogging.

And, one of the biggest mysteries of all time - a front of house with Billi and Andrew on it - how on earth would anyone want to leave them and go out? She sums up exactly how his encouragement could give you confidence and help you decide the course of your life.

And damn you, Falchikov, for making me cry again. Beautiful choice.

Tomorrow we start to gather ahead of saying goodbye to him on Friday. Edinburgh is welcoming people from across the country. I just hope the city Andrew loved shows itself off at its best - and that doesn't mean the torrential rain that's falling at the moment, please.

Facebook are now using automatic facial recognition - but it's easy to turn off

Yet again, Facebook have introduced a measure which really interferes with our privacy without telling us.

They've introduced a feature which allows facial recognition software to suggest to you which of your friends they could tag in their photos. And to them, of course, what pictures of you they tag.

That does not excite me. If my friends want to tag me in their photos, that's for them to decide for themselves. I don't like the idea that Facebook could suggest it to them - and potentially to people that I don't know. And there's obviously the potential for errors to be made.

I have therefore turned the feature off. It took me a while to figure it out, but it's actually quite simple. This article tells you exactly how.

While I was at it, I also disabled the feature that enables people to check me into places. I think if the world is going to know where I am to the nearest millimetre, then I should be the one who chooses whether to tell them.

So, now you know - and the choice is yours.

Facebook can often be quite arbitrary in its decisions. It considers photos of nursing mothers posted on users' pages to be obscene and it has now, according to Life Begins, taken against links to a website called One World Birth. I haven't gone through One World Birth in too much detail, but something associated with people like Michel Odent and Sheila Kitzinger can't be bad.

I wish Facebook would give us plenty warning and instructions for opt out when they do these things, though, and not just sneak them out. Its usefulness as a medium of communication means that it's indispensable to us, and they know it. I guess we just have to stay aware of what they are up to - and publicise it when they do things like this. And explain that it does matter when a commercial organisation abuses your privacy.

PMQs - the best question ever. For Alice.

PMQs has a reputation as an aggresssive, unpleasant, macho pantomime which does nothing to hold the government to account seriously, or tackle real issues.

Occasionally, though, it can be poignant and relevant. There was a flash of that today.

It's self explanatory. From Hansard:

John Woodcock (Barrow and Furness) (Lab/Co-op):

After four years, 15-year-old Alice Pyne, who lives in my constituency, is losing her battle against cancer. She has posted online her “bucket list”, a simple wish list of things that she wants to do before it is too late. She wants to meet Take That, to own a purple iPod and to enter her dog in a labrador show, but at the top of the list is a call for everyone to sign up to be a bone marrow donor. Will the Prime Minister work with the Leader of the Opposition and me to find out why too few people are currently on that life-saving register?

The Prime Minister: I will certainly do that. I am very sorry to hear about the situation facing Alice and what she is going through. Our thoughts go out to her and to her parents. She sounds like a very brave and very admirable person.

We want to get as many people as possible on to the bone marrow register. This year we are investing some £4 million of new money to improve donation processing and services for NHS patients. However, this is partly to do with a cultural and population change that we must help to drive, and I am sure that the Leader of the Opposition and I can discuss that.

I'm sure everyone sends their best wishes to Alice.  And let's hope she manages to experience all that she wants to. Whoever manages Take That - you know what you have to do. The rest of us have to do our bit for Anthony Nolan 

Guest Post by Jacq Kelly: the violent disappearance of a gay girl in Damascus - how you can help

On 28 April the writer Rachel Shabi (she’s awesome by the way so check out her work) tweeted the following:

Incredible story from A Gay Girl in Damascus http://bit.ly/flICZ7

Read it – it made me cry, for a number of reasons. If you don’t have time right now then basically, in a nutshell, it’s this: the account of a Damascus-based lesbian (her name is Amina) who lives with her family. They are woken by the security services in the middle of the night. They come for Amina citing some of the things she has written in Arabic and in English “conspiring against the state,” and quickly get around to the subject of her sexuality, eventually threatening to rape her in front of her “pansy father” while they show her “how real men are”.

The blog post is entitled “My Father the Hero,” and is an account of how her “pansy father,” is actually a thoughtful, compassionate and brave man. He sends these men from his door armed with nothing more than words and the fact that he is in the right. By the time I got to the end I was in tears – not only at the power of his arguments, but with relief, that he walked back into his house with his arm around his daughter and they were both unharmed.

Unfortunately Amina’s blog has been updated in the past few days with news that has brought tears to my eyes for a whole other reason. Amina has been taken and her family think that the three men who hustled her into a van were members of the security services or the Baath Party militia. Her whereabouts are, as yet, unknown and it is thought that she will be forcibly deported from the country.

Given the way that she was previously threatened, I have other fears too.

There have been some people commenting on her blog that she somehow brought this on herself by being so open with her sexual orientation or her political views. I couldn’t disagree more and think those making these observations couldn’t be missing the point harder if they tried. But I’m not getting into that here – it hardly matters right now. What matters is that she’s found and is returned safely to her family and friends.

I’ll be writing to everyone I can think of to urge them to stop this – please do the same if you can. If you live somewhere with a Syrian Embassy, please get in touch and ask for Amina’s safe release and her return to her family.

I’ll also be writing to British.EmbassyDamascus-ConsularEnquiries@fco.gov.uk asking them to use whatever influence they have. And please tell as many people what you can that this is happening so that they can do the same.

There are lots of people’s lifestyles or political views that I don’t particularly like. But human rights are human rights – it isn’t ok to cherry-pick who gets them. I know that Syria has many more (some might feel bigger) problems than this. I’m not trying to tell you which battle you should choose to fight, but if you do choose this one I’d be really grateful. Those who exhibit the courage of their convictions, without hurting or harming others, don’t deserve to be punished for doing so.

Jacq Kelly can be found here on Twitter - @jacqkelly. She blogs at In at the Shallow End and Dance, Ricky, Dance


Update, 13th June, by Caron


So, now we know. We've been had. "Amina" is, in fact, a 40 year old American man living in Scotland - and currently on holiday in Istanbul. Let's hope that this irresponsible hoax doesn't stop people who need it getting help in the future.


The thing is, the reason that so many people were taken in by this hoax was that we know that the Syrian regime is repressive and brutal. Just this weekend, they've been firing on their own people.  A brief search on the Amnesty International website for "Syria" reveals some chilling stories of torture and detention of children and adults. These should concern us all, and I think it's important to take on any regime which treats its people in that way, and I include our supposed friends like Bahrain in that.


I can't promise never to be taken in by a hoax again, but I will say that I won't hold back if I feel that a particular report of a repressive act needs action. 

Mike Moore is right on a second referendum

I am really delighted to see that Secretary of State for Scotland Mike Moore has stated that there should be a second referendum on the terms of an independence settlement.

I'm not easily scared. Actually, scrap that, I'm terrified of anything a tiny fraction of my size that wriggles on the ground on its belly, and that's just for starters. My point on this, though, is that when Alex Salmond said that there wouldn't be a second referendum in the final tv debate a couple of days before the election, it shook me a bit.

I wrote about this at the time for The Steamie, (ok, the title of that post is not quite as prescient as I'd hoped it might be, but the main thrust of the article is, I think, valid) saying:

If you're going to vote yes, you'd have to trust the people who were doing the negotiating. But wouldn't an SNP who'd won an independence referendum be a bit ecstatic, like the verger doing cartwheels in the nave of Westminster Abbey after the Royal Wedding the other day? 

They'd surely be more inclined to agree to any cost for separating off the complex tax and national insurance databases and setting out own up, for example.  It's not just as simple as "see, you, bye." Who gets UK Government property in Scotland? How do we disentangle the Pensions system? Do we pay the current UK Government to keep paying them out and if so how much?

Surely whatever deal is made, there should be some brake on the SNP negotiators? If all that was required was for Holyrood to ratify the agreement, and there was an inbuilt SNP/Green majority, we could find ourselves in a situation that most of us don't want.

I don't know how things work in your house, but if we decide between us to buy something, I might well go off and do the research. But I would consider it a courteous thing to do to take the results of my research back to the others in the house and get their opinion before I made a final commitment. If I think it's that important to make sure everyone's on side when I'm buying a holiday or a washing machine, I darned well expect the Government to get my say so on a new constitutional settlement. Not to do so would be downright rude and would demonstrate enormous disrespect and arrogance for me and everyone else in Scotland.

It's really important to me that Scottish people get the say on the final deal. I'm hearing a bit too much "Och, it'll be fine" from the SNP and not much in the way of hard fact about the costs entailed and how an independent Scotland might work on a practical basis. They've had decades to refine their plans. Why can't we see them and look over them?

It seems to me that the new majority SNP are slightly ill at ease with the world at the moment. They're in a situation they didn't expect to be in, where the buck stops with them and nobody else. All we've had from them in the past few weeks is aggressive posturing and picking fights with Westminster - and very little, bar Nicola Sturgeon's efforts on care of the elderly yesterday, else.

I've found the language of the last few weeks overly aggressive and macho for my liking. And I really don't like it when I see Fiona Hyslop dismiss Mike Moore's ideas as "blethers", or Alex Salmond's office saying he's "wittering" or "irrelevant nonsense". This is not an appropriate way for members of one government to talk about members of another. It does kind of make you wonder what they'd be like at the UN.....

And when it came to Willie Rennie's and our MSPs' decision to back them on minimum alcohol pricing, many of them online have been shouting the odds, questioning our motivation and the one that made me bristle, on Lib Dem Voice yesterday, "I doubt you’ll get much credit for arriving at the correct answer only after your opinion had ceased to matter". That speaks to me of a bubble based mindset, one that's so concentrated on the parliamentary chamber that it doesn't see the benefit of an ally to help argue the case in the country. And I don't think that argument has yet been won amongst ordinary people. To be fair, Nicola Sturgeon was much more conciliatory. She and Willie Rennie will have different ways of expressing themselves and I think that's a good thing - and it might even lead to some of our good ideas being put into the legislation. Who knows? Worth a try, surely.


I do think there is a bit of unease and fearfulness within the SNP ranks - their members who comment online are often at their most aggressive at times like this. Maybe they've just had more of paradise than they can cope with.


I want to see an end to fractious language generally. The business of government and politics, which is all about people's lives in the end of the day, is a serious business that deserves passion, yes, but purposeful, reasoned debate. Whether it's the price of booze, or the constitutional future of our country, can we not have some dialogue that deals with the difficult issues in a respectful way? They don't come more calm and rational than Michael Moore. 


What I do want to see from our lot, though, is more advancement of how we want Scotland to evolve. If we spend all our time arguing about the Scotland Bill or independence, where's the space for getting our idea of good old fashioned home rule out there? We do need to talk about that and what it means in practice as our ultimate goal. I don't see much consensus on getting much more added to the Scotland Bill at the moment. Mike Moore's in a tough position - he knows fine that neither Labour nor Tories at Westminster want to cede any more powers, yet he faces an SNP majority which insists on them. There has to be space within that debate for us to articulate what we're aiming for in the future. 

Keep the Liberal in Liberal Democrat Conference - Episode 4: Let's keep it civil. #ldconf

Ok, so there's some robust discussion over the new security arrangements for Liberal Democrat Conference, which is fine. There would be something very wrong indeed if there wasn't, in my opinion.  We have never had to submit passport numbers and Home Office compliant photographs before. And whatever gloss the Federal Conference Committee tries to put on it, there is a serious issue with the police having a effective power of veto over members attending our conference.

As I said when I first wrote about this, Federal Conference Committee, which contains good liberals and has had some very complex issues to grapple with. I acknowledge their struggle, but I feel that  they should have anticipated that there would be legitimate concern and opposition to the plans. They could have managed this process a lot better.  It was wrong of them to issue the new requirements with only 10 days left on the cheaper registration, as well, and I think they need to extend that time.

What has annoyed me is that some elements of the party establishment have seen fit to attack ordinary members while defending themselves. I have been deeply personally upset by some comments made by a fair few people on the other side of the argument, people who are pretty high up in the party establishment, who say that it's not worth bothering about and that we don't care about security. Heavens above - why would I want some of my favourite people on the planet to be hurt? We can surely do this better.

I have worked very hard for this party for almost 30 years trying to win and hold seats at all levels of Government up and down the country. I care deeply about our future electoral success and will be doing all I can to make sure we do as well as possible in the future.

I also care deeply about civil liberties - they are at the core of everything a liberal holds dear. When I see my party accepting a situation that only a year ago we would have been campaigning against, it worries me. I think my concern is legitimate.

This debate is not going to go away. The petition has over 200 signatures now and the letter to the FCC is being put to local parties all over the country to sign. There is a case for the FCC to answer. It would be good if they could do so without belittling, or denigrating those who argue against them. It's not a good look. And to be fair, my side needs always to frame its arguments in respectful terms, too.  I'm sure we can find an acceptable solution but that's more likely if the debate is conducted in a civil way.  The establishment attacking the motives of people who oppose them, particularly when the party needs these people to work hard on its behalf, is never going to end well especially not in this party.

How to wind up the Trade Unions..................

Oh Vince, I'm really not sure this was wise.

And why on earth is a Liberal Democrat going like a lamb to the slaughter threatening to visit some unspecified restriction of the right to withdraw labour on naughty unions if they don't play nice?

Don't get me wrong, I don't always think that union decisions are either sensible or helpful. And I do think that some of them are loving playing a 70s or 80s style class war, to the detriment of their members' interests. But, if a majority of people voting want to go on strike, then surely they have to be allowed to.  They may not have public support for what they are doing, and it may hurt the economy, and it may be highly disruptive - but surely they have to have the right.

Way back in the 70s, it scared the living daylights out of me to see these huge mass meetings where people voted for strike action without any secret ballot. The potential for intimidation was obvious and for that reason, much if not all of the union legislation passed in the 80s was reasonable.

There was no way the GMB were going to do anything other than boo Vince today - they probably would have done anyway. What he's done is give them an excuse to cry foul.

I hope that our people aren't going to get involved in introducing any turnout limits, for example. Saying that there has to be 40% of the union in favour of strike action, rather than 40% of those voting seems to fly in the face of everything we believe about the legitimacy of public elections. By that logic, when exactly would we last have had a legitimate Government in the UK?

I have been very concerned about the idea that the Government might water down employment rights, particularly access to tribunals, or increase in the length of qualifying periods. Jo Swinson asked specifically about any watering down of the Equality Act the other week and was told it wouldn't happen, which is a good sign, but I really don't want employers being given a sign that it's fine to treat their employees badly just at the time when unions are told their right to do anything about it will be tampered with if they, er, use their current, perfectly legal right to strike.

I really don't think winding up the unions is the right tack to take and is likely to make things worse rather than better. It makes destructive industrial action a lot more likely.

The Government actually needs to be calm and conciliatory with the unions. Anything else subscribes to their narrative that this is the 80s all over again.

Keep the Liberal in Liberal Democrat Conference: Episode 3 - Insurance companies have way too much power #ldconf

I have been a bit preoccupied over the last couple of days so haven't had the time to blog about the continuing campaign to ask the party's Federal Conference Committee to rethink the draconian security requirements for this year's Autumn Conference.

If you want to see more of the background, my previous posts on this are here and here.

On Friday, FCC Chair Andrew Wiseman responded to the concerns raised on Liberal Democrat Voice. I have to say that while I appreciate the fact that he did so, I'm not convinced by his remarks. He said that:

The police will carry out the accreditation process, as they do for other parties, but if this process does flag up any issues then these will come straight to myself as FCC Chair and the Chief Executive. It is explicit that we have the power to overrule the police – as I said, it is our conference. Can I guarantee now, in advance that whatever information is given us, we would never agree that a particular individual would pose such a severe personal security threat that for the safety of all our conference goers they should be excluded? Of course not – and I can just about conceive of circumstances in which there was very strong evidence relating to an individual that we might feel we had to take that view. But I think it unlikely this will happen, and you know how seriously we will approach any such decision.

What I'm not clear on is how that sits with:

 Our insurers want to know that we act on police advice and if we do not we run the risk of invalidating our insurance. Without the necessary insurance no conference venue will accept our booking.

So, just say, I was on a demo. I managed to get myself photographed next to someone the Police suspect of doing something unpleasant. I will most likely never even have spoken to this person, but it gives the police cause for concern, such that they recommend my exclusion from Conference. They are, after all, going to be cautious. If FCC ignore that advice, would it invalidate the insurance? Obviously I'm not going to do anything wrong, but say our set design people bang a lectern on the official mayoral rolls royce or something, might the insurance company refuse to pay on any claim if we hadn't accepted all police advice? Insurance companies are always on the look out for an excuse not to pay out, after all.

What right of appeal would I have, and would I be able to see and rebut any "evidence" against me? That's just not clear.

If the Police are unnecessarily vigilant,  insurance companies take caution to levels between the sublime and the ridiculous. Health and safety advisers of my acquaintance tell me that the things which give their profession a bad name have nothing to do with legislation, or even Europe, but with the requirements and restrictions of insurance companies. These organisations are indirectly exerting unreasonable demands on our freedom to associate. We may well face a situation where a democratically elected voting representative is, against our constitution, ejected from conference, on the whim of the police or a large corporation. That is distinctly sinister.

The responses to Andrew Wiseman's post on LDV have been substantially against the new requirements. It is really important that they are reviewed and proper consultation takes place with party members.

I understand that complexities of the Federal Conference Committee's position, but I still believe that these measures will make nobody safer. There is an issue with the police retaining data, as well which Andrew Wiseman has accepted and is taking forward with the Police.

There are also issues for transgender people as Sarah points out.  She's already suffered the stress of her previous identity being discovered, when it should not have been, by an organisation.

We're the party that stood up against ID cards, saying that they were ineffective, instrusive and expensive. We were right then. We should lay down markers as a party, provide evidence to the insurers and the police that what they are insisting upon is too much and resist implementing measures we consider too intrusive and unnecessary. We have to find some other solution.

Spidey is wanting us all to write to Nick Clegg and party president Tim Farron to ask them to call for a review. And if you haven't already, please sign the petition which now has over 200 signatures. You may also want to read this blogpost from Mark Thompson which says the party really needs to walk the walk as well as talk the talk.

Scottish Blogs on Wikio - June 2011

The Wikio rankings for June are out. There are still, sadly, only 7 Scottish blogs in the top 100 - and as there are a darned sight more than 7 brilliant Scottish blogs, I make my usual nagging effort to get you to register yours.  I suspect that the new Labour blog, Labour Hame, will be in there soon. Go and take a look at the project which has tempted Tom Harris MP back into blogging.

1  Alex Massie at 16

2  Caron's Musings at 28 - first time I've ever been in the top 30

3  Better Nation at 39, continuing meteoric rise

4  Lallands Peat Worrier at 43

5  Underdogs Bite Upwards at 58

6  Subrosa at 72

7  A Burdz Eye View at 88

Just outside the top 100, at 106, is Andrew Reeves Running Blog. He was finally finding the time to start blogging again last week, and I'm sure he'd have made it back into the top 100 again next month. I also noticed that he'd missed a big milestone. This post, about Malcolm Chisholm's resignation, was his 1000th, and what nobody expected to be his final post, a typically snappy and pugnacious effort on Spanish cucumbers, was his 1001st. Just over 1000 snippets of a life well lived. We'll miss him.