Friday, June 19, 2015

lighting and reflection test, turned out not too bad

Med Crisis, UK Prime Minister David Cameron says he wants EU reform; it is now time to establish an EU border force of civil and military authorities to combat illegal trafficking of people, EU plans to hold people for 18 months in detention camps before sending them back to home countries, but more needs to be done

Dear All

It cannot have escaped your notice that the borders of the EU aren’t secure; the problem in the Med, bares testimony to that fact. This is a problem that has been exploited by People from Africa are trafficking across the sea illegally, the people aren’t asylum seekers; they are economic migrants involved in a criminal enterprise.

Much has been talked about regarding the humanitarian efforts to save these people, and that is a duty that member states of the EU have been doing at the present moment. However, more needs to be said and addressed regarding arresting them for return to Africa.

Now, the EU commissioner for migration is making plans for the migrants to put in detention camps, but it is clear that a stronger military or multi national border force is needed in the Med. Any ship out the territorial waters of its home nation heading towards the EU should be stopped and searched.    

At present leaked plans suggest that migrants pouring into Europe could be detained in camps for 18 months, normally these people are held for six months, the 18 month detention is said been suggested for ‘non-cooperation’. Once 18 months has elapsed the idea is that the migrants are send home.

David Cameron says political leaders must ‘break the link’ that enables someone to get on a boat in Africa, claim asylum then ‘spend the rest of their lives’ in Europe. Britain is a key destination for migrants.

In places like France at the Channel ports, migrants set up camps as they wait to try and stow away for their attempts to smuggle themselves into Britain. This matter is a running for both the French and British Governments. Now, officers from the National Crime Agency in Britain will join a new ‘intelligence fusion cell’ based in Sicily to help root out the human traffickers.

This should be part of a wider plan of activities in the Med, there needs to be an EU border force which should combine elements of the civil and military authorities developed. Although such a force would met resistance, the sovereign government of an area the force would operate would retain command and control. 

EU commissioner for migration, Dimitris Avramapoulous said:

“To ensure that the illegal migrants will be repatriated effectively they should be detained as a legitimate measure of last resort to avoid the escape of illegal immigrants”.

He added:

“Where there is a reasonable probability of repatriation the prospects of repatriation should not be ruined by a premature end to detention”. As well as the problem in the Med, Hungary also has experienced the problems of illegals passing through it territory as they head west towards the Channel ports. They have vowed to erect a 13ft-high fence along its border with Serbia to stop immigrants entering the EU. The barrier when completed will be 100-miles long. When such measures are being proposed you know that authorities are dealing with a serious crisis which must be sorted, but this isn’t just a Hungarian or Italian problem, this affects the whole of the EU. It should therefore be dealt with as an EU matter, command the same disciplined approach as any other aspect of law enforcement.

Hungarian foreign minister Peter Szijjarto said that Hungary ‘could not wait any longer’ for a solution to the migration crisis. The EU is desperately in need of reform, it would be better if EU Commissioners and MEPs were more pro active in coming up with solutions, illegal migration isn’t just someone ‘hopping over the fence’, it is a matter of national and economic security. It is said that through the Balkans alone 130,000 illegal migrants are expected to pass through by the end of 2015, the trend is increasing.

Mr Szijjarto said plans added:

“Immigration is one of the most serious problems facing the European Union today.”

He is of course absolutely right, the problem in politics is that instead of being concerned by the illegal nature of the criminal enterprise, people use the ‘race card’ to label political opponents as part of their internal domestic power plays to seek public office or advantage.

I have to say that I don’t think having George Osborne’s input into this matter is helpful as Chancellor of the Exchequer, it would be better if this matter was dealt with by the British Foreign Secretary.

If you take David Cameron’s word when he said:

“We need a comprehensive approach … that goes after the criminal gangs, a comprehensive approach where we work with “intelligence fusion cells” in Sicily, where we will be putting people and resources into that.”

Then we need to establish an EU border force rather than some piecemeal approach of sending a few people here and there, placing a ship in the Med, we shouldn’t be responding to a particular problem at a particular time, the overall picture is important.

And that isn’t what is being addressed.

Yours sincerely

George Laird

The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Thursday, June 18, 2015

Wednesday, June 17, 2015

Greece crisis: Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipiras came to power on a wave of Greek discontent of how the previous government refused to standby the people, now, Tsipiras is playing a ‘cat and mouse’ game which benefits no one, Greece needs to default and reset their economy, it’s too late for 'compromise' as proposed by United States

Dear All

The people of Greece have gone through some pretty hard times, more than they should have endured as a member of the EU. They faced what was savage austerity year in, year out, this led to the Greek people getting rid of their government.

It has to be said that the previous government was paralysed by indecision and made bad choices. The rest of the EU stood back and watched as Greek assets were sold off as part of the arrangements to get financial loans to keep the country solvent.

This should have never been allowed to happen.

One story I came across related how Greek pensioners were looking for food in bins. This isn’t the European dream of how the EU should operate. The Euro, although a decent idea on the drawing in a generalised concept was a nightmare in practical operation, the Euro works well if countries are doing well. In times of trouble, it is an anchor round the neck of a country helping pull it under.

The Greeks went to the polls because they had enough of the previous government, so in came a new lot, who were going to stand up for Greece. They were going to fix the problems and set the country back on the road to recovery. That promise came a cropper rather quickly, under the government of Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipiras.

Tspiras has played a really bad political game with other European countries, something which suits no one. At one stage we had the ridiculous spectacle of the Greek Prime Minister waffling on about damages he says is owed to the Greeks from World War 2 when the German Army invade the country.

Part of the Greek problem is that country’s economy could compete with the German powerhouse. Germany has a good mixed economy and decent manufacturing base producing high quality products like cars etc.

So, the Greeks are in limbo, Greek negotiations have failed again as Athens calls for 'realism' from its creditors. In two weeks, the country has to ante up and made a crucial IMF payment; rather then get their affairs in order, we are seeing a rather long winded drawn out play being enacted. To try and appear as a victim of sorts, Tsipiras is calling on European institutions to be realistic in their demands.

Realistic means, we don’t have the money, we can’t or won’t do cuts and we want talks which are meaningless in order to look like there is a dialogue happening when there is actually nothing. Talks between Athens and its creditors collapsed at the weekend, and looking at the passed record, it is likely they will collapse again, leaving the country at heightened risk of a default.

Once Greece does do a default, it would also have to put in place measures to bring back the Greek currency and then do an abrupt exit from the Eurozone. Although the lenders do have legitimate concerns, their position on demanding new cuts in pensions is simply untenable for the Greek Prime Minister to do. In fact, this would lead to crisis upon crisis and a lurch towards more extreme parties.
When you continually strip a people of their sovereignty, dignity and nationhood, you can expect at some point a backlash.

Tsipras says:

‘We will await patiently until the institutions accede to realism.’

This is a sign of a bad leader.

He added:

‘We are shouldering the dignity of our people, as well as the hopes of the people of Europe. We cannot ignore this responsibility. This is not a matter of ideological stubbornness. This is about democracy.’

You may have heard of the word ‘troika’, Max Keiser uses it a lot in his RT programme, the Keiser Report, a mix of political and financial news co host by his wife Stacy. The show is quite good as it gets in some very interesting people such as Reggie Middleton, Jim Rickards and Steve Keen. The ‘troika’ is the Washington-based IMF, the European Commission and the European Central Bank. You could make the case for Commission and the ECB being involved but not the IMF.

Greece owes a lot of money, it missed a £216million repayment and it rather looks like other deadlines in future will be missed. Germany’s EU commissioner Guenther Oettinger said an emergency plan should be worked out as Greece risks to fall into a state of emergency. He added ‘energy supplies, pay for police officials, medical supplies, and pharmaceutical products and much more’ needed to be ensured.

Tsipras is right when he says that years of cuts have only made Greece’s situation worse by shrinking the economy, making it harder to pay off debt. If he follows the demands of the ‘troika’, the Greek people will be permanently trapped in austerity. When you are in a hole, the rule of thumb is to stop digging, in Greece’s case, it is stop paying.

Belgian Finance Minister Johan Van Overtveldt said the euro zone's credibility would be damaged if agreements with Greece were changed, so is face saving more important than preventing people suffering?

Jens Weidmann, the head of Germany's central bank, said:

‘Time is running out for Greece. The willingness to do a deal and act is lacking.’

I would say that depends on what kind of a ‘deal’ Herr Weidmann, thinks is on offer, it rather looks like demands instead of negotiations. The fact that talks collapsed in less than an hour shows there is no common ground. This problem also highlights another concern, EU enlargement and access to the Euro without proper checks, Greece joined the Euro even although it should have been excluded based on it finances which some say were ‘cooked’ to meet the criteria.

The best thing for Greece but not the EU is a default, a lot of talk in European Capitals of late regarding the reform agenda, pushed along by David Cameron, who has his own domestic troubles, mostly sitting behind him on the back benches of the Commons. The Euro needs to be part of the reform agenda, and also a convention or commission for a new European Union with a view to capping membership for a minimum of two decades.

Other issues which should be placed on the agenda is the internal EU immigration policy and creation of a multi national EU border force, with nations seconding military vessels to deal with the illegal migration in the Med area.

The Greek tragedy currently playing out at the moment benefits no one, the ‘troika’ is being unreasonable especially in their demands to the Greek government to cut pensions. Tsipras doesn’t need to wait till ‘institutions accede to realism’, he needs to pull Greece out now or he won’t have a country worth saving.

Yours sincerely

George Laird

The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Tuesday, June 16, 2015

George Galloway enters race to become London mayor, to gain some publicity, he predicts Scotland will back independence within five years, although he gets a lot of points spot on, his analysis of Scottish people is off

Dear All

During the Scottish independence referendum, the Spectator magazine put on a debate, featuring among the guests was George Galloway.

His speech was the best speech by far from anyone on either side of the political divide. It had all the things that the Nationalist speakers lacked, spirited defence, sense of history and importantly, wit, as always being delivered by Galloway’s exceptional oratory skills.

It is certainly worth a read but it is also worth listening to, that way you can get full impact of what he was conveying.

Galloway lost his seat at the General election; he was previously MP for Bradford West. Now, he has set his sights on becoming London Mayor. If anything, the people of London will have one good speaker to listen to, even if you aren’t signed up to his politics.

George Galloway has predicted Scotland will back independence within five years.

It won’t, the reason why it won’t, is like comedy, timing, David Cameron will not allow a second referendum during his term of office, and no political campaign in its true sense can go ahead without a section 30 order from Westminster.

George Galloway says the tide had turned "irrevocably" from Labour toward the SNP. It has to be said that the Labour Party ran an exceptional bad campaign, at 14 weeks out from the vote, I was surprised at the rudderless direction. At 10 weeks out, I wrote ‘fucking it all up’ on the blog, this was because instead of honing in on the serious issues, the Labour campaign was knee deep in doing ‘tat’.

Who starts a political campaign off on fitba, having scrapped the bottom of the barrel, their campaign went down further; this is a surprise when you think how slick the Labour Party had been in the Blair years.

During the BT campaign, I decided to observe the BT staff do an event without taking part, this was to satisfy my curiosity. The event was listed as canvassing in the Govan Ward, the start time was billed as 1.30 pm, five minutes passed and the team of 5 student types hadn’t moved, ten minutes and still they stood there, after allowing 17 minutes to pass, they eventually decided to start, no one else had turned up.

Nearly 100 minutes of work time was wasted.

At another event listed as leafleting, the person in charge turned up with no leaflets and decided that the group should do canvassing; however, they also didn’t bring canvassing packs.

This person is in the Labour Party so I am led to believe. 

Now that the good times have ended, the Labour Party has to change, they will now have to work for every single vote, a sliver lining in their defeat is that the public did the party a favour, they got rid of deadwood which the Labour Party should have done years ago.

2016 is rather looking like the ‘cull’ will be continuing, something which Labour should bare in mind is that prior to the 2012 Council election in Glasgow, the party did do a ‘cull’. This incidentally saved the party from losing at that election, and there had been more than enough ammo to bury the party at that point.

‘Culls’ work, however you have to know what it is you need to cull in the first place, 20 people got the chop as they were seen to be a liability to the party, I didn’t agree with all the selections made or the way the Labour Party had gone about it.

As to Scottish leadership frontrunner Kezia Dugdale, he refers to her as "this woman who is running" and added she "would not be at the races" if Labour had any big political figures left.

Ken Macintosh has also commented on Kezia Dugdale lack of political experience, Labour doesn’t need a touchy empathy minded politician to lead it; it needs someone who will sort out the mess of two decades of decline, some exceptional hard questions need to be addressed. People need to justify their existence especially if time, energy and resources have been put into getting them elected to public office. Some people need to be gotten rid of and some others need to be pushed upwards.

In politics it helps to get noticed, as I wrote above George Galloway has launched his bid to become Mayor of London in 2016. When you launch your bid, some go the way of saying something controversial, George Galloway has went this route; it is if anything what is termed good copy for the press. One of the key issues in his campaign is what he calls greater devolution for the capital. Awhile ago, someone at the LSE wrote an article on the idea of Europe being considered not as member states but as a group of city states. I chuck that in because it is an idea although interesting not practical.

The United Kingdom is at a crossroads, some people want the status quo, others are pushing towards federalism and then there are the Nationalists wanting the break up of the United Kingdom.

Galloway said:

"I think independence is probably nigh. The only way it could have been stopped is if we had got a Labour government last month and if that Labour government had begun to make a difference. But these next five Tory years are going to be very cold, and the SNP leadership seems to have the ball at their feet and know what to do with it.

"So I'd be very surprised if there wasn't another referendum in the course of this next five years, and I'd be very surprised if we managed to repeat the result we got last year. I'd take the same stand that I did last year. But I wouldn't be expecting to win."

People, ordinary people won the Scottish independence referendum, faced with the possibility of the SNP being the government of an independent Scotland, the people said No!

And despite the fake and insincere attempt by the SNP to have unpopular Nicola Sturgeon as a poor man’s Angela Merkel, likeable and popular, the ‘mouthwash isn’t working’.

When the Scottish Parliament was set up in 1999, some of the Labour MPs wanted to become MSPs, Galloway reflects on that by saying:

"Me, [Ian] Davidson, [ Michael] Connarty, Robin Cook and many others were effectively told by the Blairites, 'You're not wanted at Holyrood'. That was a historic mistake."

I would agree that a mistake was made by Labour on that front, however, you can’t re-run history; you can only write the present and reflect on that past. Another interesting observation by him:

"Labour's problems in Scotland began with the dawn of the Blair era and the decision that was made to send a B team to Holyrood”.

I would have to agree with that point, Holyrood was treated like a plaything, if you were really serious about plying your trade in politics, then you really wanted to be at Westminster.

Given a choice between quality of debates, Westminster is still the place to watch, and I don’t mean the mid session of PMQs which is just a show verging on farce, light entertainment for the masses with a bit of humour chucked in for good measure.

Galloway dryly remarked that Labour destroyed its own brand north of the border.

Certainly whoever is elected leader faces a tough and long haul back towards power, Jim Murphy did less than a year, he carried the can for something which wasn’t his fault; that said when in charge you take the responsibility. Jim Murphy watched as Labour had the worst result since 1918, and to make matters worse, it was against truly second rate opposition.

George Galloway does touch on the Labour figures of the past, such as Willie Ross, Donald Dewar, Bruce Millan, Gordon Brown, John Reid, Helen Liddell and Jimmy Allison.

These people did leave their marks in various forms.

But we live in the present, when Labour lost in 2007; the Holyrood group of MSPs did nothing of note for that entire term of the Parliament. Instead of pandering to see if they can copy the Nationalists, Labour needs a leader who has a vision of a fairer Scotland and will deliver it. So many promises were made in the past and not delivered on.

The new leader needs to ban Councillors being employees of MP, MSP and MEPs, also the salary of councillors should be raised to £30,000, and for that members would be expected to be full time, Monday to Friday, nine to five. Obviously the salary issue would depend on attaining power.

A return to old Labour values that built the party is needed but not old Labour practices.

Although, I would agree that George Galloway has made a lot of good points, his final analysis is off, but it makes for an interesting read, George has been away from the Scottish pond so his overview has gaps not knowing the personalities.

And he is standing for public office so it might explain his doom and gloom scenario.

One thing that Kezia Dugdale better click onto rather quickly is that the 15 minutes at FMQs doesn’t equate to 168 hours in a week.

Finally, as to the London Mayor contest, I would say if no one else comes forward, then Labour should run with Tessa Jowell, and for the Tories, I would take a chance on Sol Campbell, mind you, Zac Goldsmith does strike me as someone in need of promotion to junior Minister.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Monday, June 15, 2015

Horses in Hope Street Glasgow

SNP deputy leader Stewart Hosie raises threat of second independence referendum, given the Tories delivered on their devolution promises, Hosie is grasping at straws; FFA will be voted down at Westminster, no one serious in politics is playing silly games with the UK economic security

Dear All

I first met SNP deputy leader Stewart Hosie at the Glasgow North East by-election, the candidate for the SNP was David Kerr.

At that election, I found David Kerr to be a good candidate but he was totally in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Labour won that seat in the shape of Willie Bain.

Some people thought very little of Willie Bain, but in time they will realise that Anne McLaughlin who replaced him as MP is utterly useless.

Anyway, Stewart Hosie has said that a failure to deliver on devolution could spark calls for another Indy ref.

There is alwaysa call for another indyref but that is from the SNP and the phoney little groups they have set up by their members.

It is a hollow threat, events have moved on and the Scottish National Party far from being a player on the field is actually a spectator on the side lines.

SNP deputy leader Stewart Hosie claims the party could propose a second independence referendum; this is meaningless as David Cameron as Prime Minister has ruled this out. What does this mean, it, means the SNP have no legal authority to call a new referendum.

In order for another referendum to be legal, it would require Westminster to approve another Section 30 order.

The Tory Government has delivered new powers under the Smith Commission, as to the continual claim that there was supposed to be further Smith plus proposals called ‘the vow’, this is a myth.

David Cameron has delivered, it is up to the SNP to prove to the people of Scotland that they can deliver; so far they have failed Scotland. Unpopular Nicola Sturgeon wants new powers but she won’t use the ones she already has, independence by stealth.

Trouble for trouble’s sake, the best thing to do is to ignore calls for further powers and tell the SNP no more.

Hosie says no voters are left thinking they’ve been “sold a pup” because they thought more real powers would come to the Scottish Parliament.

As a no voter, I was sold a pup, I voted against the SNP because the SNP aren’t fit and proper to run an independent Scotland.

Money or powers to Holyrood don’t come into it, and certainly No voters will not be joining Sturgeon’s cause.

No matter how kids she gets photographed with!

The SNP want to use the EU referendum as a vehicle to call for another referendum on independence, if people vote to leave the EU. This is what Sturgeon calls “material change” in the country’s circumstances.

But Sturgeon doesn’t and isn’t in charge of Scotland, David Cameron is, he is Sturgeon’s boss. He holds the real levers of power and of sovereignty, not the SNP.   

In an interview with the Financial Times today, Hosie said a second scenario would be:

“If the public – particularly those who voted no – think they’ve been sold a pup because what has been promised doesn’t go as far as... the unprecedented programme of devolution promised by the prime minister.”

Presumably, SNP supporters posing as No voters will be featuring in campaign literate and youtube videos saying they voted no but they have been cheated by Westminster.

At present the SNP is trying to cause further division in the UK by calling for FFA, this will not happen; the reason for this is that Westminster knows that the SNP would create a financial crisis in Scotland which would ripple into the UK causing problems for the money markets.

The Tories have already worked this out, FFA isn’t going to happen.

The SNP are presenting mixed messages which shows not that they are pro FFA but that they are playing silly games,  SNP's finance minister, John Swinney, is at odds with Hosie’s stance on a second referendum.

He said:

“The First Minister was very clear that there would have to be a material change in circumstances before the SNP brought forward proposals for a further referendum”.

Translated, Sturgeon will only stick her neck out if she feels that she can win, the people’s call which the Nationalists hark on about is a scam; Sturgeon doesn’t give a shit about the people.

Having called for FFA and seeing it rejected by Westminster puts the spotlight firmly on the Nationalists who will be shown as not being able to deliver.

When people go see their SNP MP for help, they will experience the other side of the political coin; they won’t be getting the help they thought they would get!

People have been ‘sold a pup’ alright, they voted SNP, the only silver lining is that the Labour Party needed a clear out of some of its MPs, the public did that ‘cull’ for them, and they will keep ‘culling’ Labour till the light dawns.

Labour cannot take people for granted; they need new people, new policies and a new vision for Scotland.

Stewart Hosie is just waffling, expelling hot air that doesn’t amount to anything important; it really is the ‘cry in the night’.

Yours sincerely

George Laird 
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Friday, June 12, 2015

SNP Convenor Brian Smith accused of trolling Charles Kennedy weeks before his death is forced to resign, information in the public domain suggests he was close friends with Ian Blackford, the SNP candidate; Blackford should be made persona non grata at Westminster

Dear All

As a former member of the Scottish National Party, I found out as I went along to meetings at the Pollok SNP branch that I was regarded as an outsider.

Because I had the ability to have my opinions, I wasn’t accepted.

Later on, I discovered that the SNP is really a cult in the way it operates, it doesn’t stand for fairness, equality and social justice.

Under Alex Salmond and unpopular Nicola Sturgeon, the ‘seeds of hatred’ had been sown against people and specifically politicians. Salmond and Sturgeon stood at Conferences blaming the English under the guise of using the term ‘Westminster’ for all Scotland ills.

When I stood as an independent candidate in the Govan by-election, I was abused at the polling station by spomeone who I knew as the organiser of Pollok SNP, Neil McDonagh, who wanted to start an argument, then, the SNP complained to the polling station staff about me ‘hassling’ people.

When the staff came out, I informed them of what went and later the Police turned up, so I had a word with them. Later on the same troublemaker appeared at the council count which John Kane of the Labour Party was the eventual winner. 

I came 7th out of 14 people standing.

Oh how the SNP looked so unhappy, they banked on winning and me doing rather badly.

When John Kane gave his victory speech, I stayed like the other candidates to listen, the SNP walked out; it was a nasty petty display.

The fact of the matter is, the SNP is a nasty vicious party and what happened to me is something done in isolation.

2015 saw what was one probably one of the most vicious political election campaigns in Scotland for decades by the SNP. Opposition candidates were targeted in Glasgow, Margaret Curran was specifically targeted, in the Ross, Skye and Lochaber seat, the Nationalists targeted on Charles Kennedy.

Charles Kennedy wasn’t a well man, during his campaign, his father passed away, but despite all of that the SNP hounded him leading to his death. Former policeman Brian Smith called Kennedy a “drunken slob” and a “Quisling”, and as per the norm, it was suggested that he was a traitor to Scotland.

Brian Smith was very much a centre piece in getting Ian Blackford, the SNP candidate elected.

Now, Smith has been forced to resign from the SNP to bury the story of bad PR against the Nationalists. A National newspaper found out far from being just an normal member, he was close friends with Blackford.

The abuse he dished out was so high volume and never ending in the run-up to the election that Kennedy’s campaign team was forced to employ staff to monitor his own Facebook page, from which Smith was blocked.

Charles Kennedy has been laid to rest today, he was one of Scotland’s great politicians, he didn’t deserve what happened to him, he didn’t deserve to be targeted.

The death of Charles Kennedy will not end the abuse of the cybernats are seen by many as the real face of the SNP led by Nicola Sturgeon.

Scotland is at war, Charles was a casualty of a war, he is the highest profile casualty but he won’t be the last, and in this war, no prisoners are taken.

Brian Smith was a Convenor in the SNP when his pal Blackford won, Smith tweeted:

‘You drunken slob Kennedy. Lies, smears and deceit didn’t work. Bye!!!’

Brian Smith maybe gone, but there are many more like him in the Scottish National Party, and personally known to Nicola Sturgeon.

Interestingly, it has been pointed out to me that Brian Smith is an ex Police Officer, perhaps the Police need to visit him and discuss his online activities.

Yours sincerely

George Laird 
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Thursday, June 11, 2015

‘Fake Scot’ Angus Robertson of the SNP wants to amend the new Scotland Bill to allow full fiscal autonomy, this is a move designed to wreck the economic security of the United Kingdom, if SNP want to play silly political games with people’s lives, let’s introduce pain into the equation and remove some powers

Dear All

To show how much contempt the Scottish National Party has for the people of Scotland, they are willing to destroy Scotland’s life line services to the people.

‘Fake Scot’’ Angus Robertson wants to amend the new Scotland Bill to allow Holyrood to bring in full fiscal autonomy.

This would be a financial disaster of mega proportions that would put Scotland form in the same bracket as Greece.

The Nationalists have submitted an amendment to make MSPs responsible for taxation, borrowing and public expenditure north of the border.

Given the quality of Scotland’s MSPs who are regarded as second class politicians of limited ability, this proposal by the SNP at Westminster will be voted down!

It is an amendment which has no chance of success because it is all about creating division not helping Scotland make its way in the economic world.

Angus Robertson challenged the Labour Party to back their bid to bring in “meaningful new powers for Scotland”, they should do what David Cameron did to Angus Robertson, tell him to fuck off.

The SNP ran a campaign for Westminster based on deceit, yesterday they didn’t want an inquiry into FFA despite the fact; it was a central plank of the SNP’s general election manifesto campaign.

To the Nationalists, this is all a game; and one that the Unionist parties should ignore, the more people who refuse to do business with the Nats the better Scotland’s prospects will be.

How are the SNP going to fix the black hole of a funding gap of £7.6 billion?

The SNP want to jack up taxes, Scotland would become the highest taxed place in the UK, and we would see no difference to the services in Scotland. Despite the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) warnings that the SNP want to press ahead but I suspect this is more show than policy.

Only a fool would destroy a country.

And the news just got worse for the SNP as ‘Scotland’s oil’ as the SNP describe it has taken a sever battering as a new report suggested that oil revenues will almost be wiped out.

So, in the real world, the SNP don’t have any credibility whatsoever, they think the UK could be their proxy piggy bank, when they crash the economy, the English will simply write a cheque.

Life doesn’t work that, and the people of Scotland should release that once the money dries up, unpopular Nicola Sturgeon would then go the way of trying to get loans to bail her out, this would be like quicksilver and speed Scotland towards even greater disaster and debt. 

It is a moved designed to wreck the UK.

The independent Office of Budget Responsibility predicts tax revenues from oil and gas will be just £2 billion from 2020/21 to 2040/41 down from its original projection of £37 billion. Oil is not the way to base the success of your country on, you need a mixed economy and the SNP cannot provide the circumstances to enable that to happen.

OBR director Robert Chore described the fall as “dramatic”.

If Angus Robertson amendment was voted through everything would get hit, then the SNP would whip up anti English hatred saying that the English deliberately forced FFA through too soon.

This amendment is the same old SNP tactic of grudge, grievance and malcontent.

56 SNP MPs at Westminster who were supposed to ‘stand up for Scotland’, but the reality is that they are solely standing up for SNP interests.

Someone should teach them a lesson, and use the Scotland bill to take back some powers so that Scotland can build new nuclear power stations.

If people want to play games, let them play but let’s introduce pain and see how long and how much the can take before they break.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Wednesday, June 10, 2015

Having conned, tricked and deceived Scots into voting SNP on the back of claiming FFA would make Scotland, a land of milk and honey, the SNP is now hostile to full Scottish tax powers inquiry, they have broken their election promise and now they want a cover up, let’s have the independent inquiry, nothing to hide, nothing to fear, right Nicola?

Dear All

It should come as no surprise to people who watch politics or even dabble in politics at the full extent of the dishonesty of the Scottish National Party.

During the Westminster election, the Nationalists sold the people of Scotland a ‘pig in a poke’ called full fiscal autonomy.

Their argument is that Scotland is a rich country and the English in the form of Westminster is robbing Scots.

In the Scottish independence campaign, the SNP tried to deceive people by saying Scots pay more in tax than the rest of the UK. But as we see and will continue to see is that SNP only paint a small part of the picture.

Scots get £1,200 more per head than we pay into the system, the UK because of the pooling and sharing of resources makes sure that Scotland because of unique problems doesn’t lose out.

On this blog for years, I said that the second term of the SNP Government needed to be local and National Government reform.

Nothing was done in this regard; everything was left hanging as the SNP leaders chased the indy dream while Scotland was falling apart.

As I noted above, the people of Scotland were offered a ‘pig in a poke’ called full fiscal autonomy, now; it seems that not only do the SNP not want FFA but they are also hostile to full Scottish tax powers inquiry.

So why are Nationalists angry about an amendment to the Scotland Bill creating a commission that would investigate their plan for full fiscal autonomy? Because, imply put their lie would be exposed, not by people offering a different opinion but by people, in this case experts submitting evidence which the SNP cannot refute.

Yesterday the SNP reacted rather badly and with hostility and horror that an impartial commission would examine the economic consequences of their plans. The SNP are slap dash, the leaders have half-baked ideas while at the same time trying to put on airs and graces that they are so smart.

Scotland cutting its financial ties with the UK is economic suicide; it takes Scotland out of economic security and into the realm of economic insecurity. This means an additional extra burden on Scotland if it was to go the FFA route of paying more, and when Scotland pays more, services and jobs get cut.

Labour has tabled an amendment to the Scotland Billso that an inquiry into full fiscal autonomy that would report back to MPs by the end of March next year.

This would be the short campaign in the run up to Holyrood 2016.

The UK Government said it would examine the proposal.

‘Fake Scot’ Angus Robertson, the SNP’s Westminster leader has attacked the idea as “ridiculous” because he claimed it holds Scotland to a different financial standard than the UK.

But surely this is what the SNP want a different financial standard, so what’s his problem, the SNP stood on a promise of wanting FFA and then post-election broke the promise immediately. Either their numbers stack up in which case this helps their case or their numbers don’t stack up in which case the people have to consider, either they are liars or financially incompetent.

I think Scots will go with liars.

The Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS) have repeatedly stressed Scotland would be £7.6 billion deeper into the red than under the SNP’s proposal.

And, things would get worse after rising to £9.7 billion, about a third of the Scottish budget.

What happens if you have such a huge black hole?

In this scenario taxes would go through the roof, budgets would be cut, services would be reduced and people would lose their jobs in the public sector, mostly local government. Colleges would lose even more funding and student places as Nicola Sturgeon shored up the University sector to create the false narrative of ‘record number of students in higher education’.

And stupid unthinking people would swallow that line!

To show the utter dishonesty of the SNP and their own Scottish Government both have refused to provide any figures of what their proposal would mean , for taxpayers. Instead we get lies and lies and lies, remember the ‘second oil boom’ by Salmond?

Where is it?

It didn’t exist, in his world, at some time in the future, God knows when, Oil will rise up to a price he stated, and at that point, Salmond would say I told you so.

Unveiling the amendment is Scotland sole Labour MP, Ian Murray said:

“The reason the SNP have been so reluctant to talk about full fiscal autonomy is because they know it would be a disaster for Scotland. Only the SNP's constitution spokesperson Tommy Sheppard was honest enough to admit this. If the SNP have confidence in their policy they should have no problem backing an assessment of the impact of full fiscal autonomy on Scotland's finances by an independent expert commission. It's time for the SNP to have the courage of their convictions."

The SNP doesn’t have the courage of their convictions, they are a cult, they have no interest in the damage or misery, they cause in much the same way as their cybernats do online while running hate campaigns.

Murray’s amendment is rather interesting because it create an “Independent Commission on Full Fiscal Autonomy” of between four and 11 expert members. These people would be barred from serving if they were employed by the Scottish or UK governments or if they were a member of a political party.

What a pity for the SNP, a committee that can’t be bought or rigged in their favour, and one which they can’t waffle on and get away with it.

A UK Government spokesman said:

“We already know that full fiscal autonomy would be damaging to Scotland’s economy to the tune of £10 billion a year. We will be looking closely at any full fiscal autonomy amendments to the Scotland Bill in the hope they provide some much-needed clarity from its supporters.”

I support an “Independent Commission on Full Fiscal Autonomy” because it might just persuade unpopular Nicola Sturgeon to start local and national government reform, it might start the idea that the college sector rather than being cut needs to be expanded and Universities slimmed down.

And if Nicola Sturgeon could fix Police Scotland’s ‘vat problem’ it wouldn’t be classed as miracle, rather than an attempt to do the job she is paid for!

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Tuesday, June 9, 2015

SNP leadership of Nicola Sturgeon and John Swinney consider making Scots pay the highest income tax in the United Kingdom, when Sturgeon’s newfound friends and voters realise she screwed them like a bitch, expect a huge backlash, will it be “fuck you, you ‘yellow Tory’” on the doorsteps of Scotland?

Dear All

It seems that the SNP leadership of unpopular Nicola Sturgeon and John Swinney have a gift for all those people who vote SNP at Westminster 2015.

The Nationalists have admitted they are actively considering increasing income tax in Scotland.

SNP who use the con trick of standing up for Scotland are faced with the harsh reality of government.

In the past the SNP ran with a disaster campaign called “penny for Scotland” in the first Holyrood election in 1999.

In that election they got slaughtered, now Nicola Sturgeon will be taking a damn sight more than pennies off Scots, every single week out of their pay packets.

Vote SNP get shit service and higher taxes.

I assume that the Nationalists will hold off until post 2016; then bring in a budget once they have tried to secure a majority.

Don’t expect to see the raises of taxes in the SNP manifesto; it might come in the form of an emergency budget hyped up to blame Westminster with Nicola Sturgeon probably using kids, possibly at a Hospital to sell it.

If there is going to be tax rises; then also expect the SNP to aim high with something along the lines of 5 p in the pound to be drastically reduced at a ‘ten to midnight’ scenario.

When the SNP want to screw you financially, their narrative is that they are the ‘heroes’.

An increase of 1p in income tax north of the Border would raise £330 million for the Scottish Government; however that is meaningless, I would think that if you are going to inflict pain, you might go with 3 pence in the pound.

Might you, this might tempt George Osborne to do higher cuts, so it is a double edge sword.

Incidentally, higher taxes in Scotland in Scotland wouldn’t lead to a Scottish Conservative revival, just in case you didn’t know that.  

Ruth Davidson, and I say this in passing failed her real test of leadership in 2010, although she benefited from tactical votes, she stands to have a bad 2016 election. The men in grey suits can’t have failed to notice her first loss; then will come the second.

The Scottish Conservatives haven’t paid the blood price in Scotland.

Down the road, the Treasury said cuts announced last week will not hit Scotland as hard as expected.

This is classic politics, tell people a tale of woe and then get cut down to the number you had already intended to do.

Given it is £107 million, I would think there is a case for 2 pence in the pound on income tax, which is what I would go, big enough to be useful and small enough to look trendy.

In a move to appear reasonable, George Osborne also confirmed that any decreases could be postponed until 2017.

This, he said was to allow the Scottish Government time to adjust its budget, an offer which is not available to Whitehall departments.

Presumably, the Conservatives hope that Labour do as badly as they did in 2015 and therefore usher in Ruth Davidson as the official opposition, although a tactic, it won’t work.

Asked by the press if he would raise taxes to offset austerity cuts, Swinney said:

“We’ll consider all these questions as we prepare our budget. What we will consider is how we can best take forward investment in our public services given the fact that we’ve had a further reduction in the budget that we expected from the Chancellor.”

He added:

“We will have the powers, the question is whether we decide to change the tax arrangements of the UK and we will give the answer to that during the budget process of the Scottish Government.”

So, two choices; cut services and face a backlash from people or raise taxes and be disliked as ‘yellow Tories’.

2 pence on income tax is the way forward.

Yours sincerely

George Laird 
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Monday, June 8, 2015

Kezia Dugdale dismisses Scottish Labour breakaway in her bid to be leader, Ken Macintosh has a rather novel idea, let the Deputy Labour Leader come from local government, whoever wins this election; this idea should be taken up and made permanent, Labour needs a new vision and to reconnect with people

Dear All

In the Labour Party in Scotland, some people believe that their ‘problems’ could be solved if the Party in Scotland was separate from the main party.

This wouldn’t solve Labour problems.

In that vein it is easy to understand why Kezia Dugdale dismisses a Scottish Labour breakaway; it would at best create a few headlines.

Labour in Scotland is stuck, if they continue with the present system, were they have little effect on policy, they are screwed, if they go their own way, there is a vacuum regardless talent need to make the party into a force.

Two people are standing for the Scottish Labour leadership Kezia Dugdale who is regarded as the favourite and Ken Macintosh.

Ms. Dugdale has backed greater autonomy for Scottish Labour, but the question is, if a devolved decision conflicted with what some term as ‘London Labour’, what happens then?

The obvious answer is that if Ms. Dugdale was leader, she would be overruled.

The idea of a Scottish Labour leader is somewhat silly; the reason for this is that the leader of the Labour Party is the leader for the Labour Party in all of the UK.

 The Scottish leader simply is allowed to lead when the Labour leader of the UK isn’t here, so I see the title as not leader but simply ‘manager’.

Ms. Dugdale said:

“I favour a much more autonomous Scottish Labour Party, I’d like to see us set our own policy here but I don’t support an independent party, I think that’s wrong”.

Having your own devolved policy isn’t anything new, the crux is that when a Scottish Labour MP goes to Westminster, the party whips in London tell them what to do, not Ms. Dugdale.

Cowdenbeath Labour MSP Alex Rowley believes the party should be free from the “constraints” of the UK party in order to rebuild.

This is an idea worth kicking about as there are a large body of Scottish Labour who see this as a way forward.

May’s electoral defeat brought home to the party the simple fact that their internal problems, voter disengagement, lack of grassroots and lack of work ethic by some of those elected to public office killed off the party.

Ms. Dugdale added:

“I’d like to see us on more regular occasions have a slightly different, a more nuanced position on the issues in Scotland, standing up for Scotland’s interests. We can do that with greater party autonomy, that doesn’t mean we are an independent party, that would mean completely separating ourselves off from our UK colleagues and I don’t want to do that, I don’t think that’s right. Especially if you follow the logic of the referendum, which is that we pull and share the resources of our great country.”

Let’s say for talking sake, she gets her ‘greater autonomy’, does a bit of tinkering and still her grassroots don’t come back, what does she do play the wanting more autonomy game, and for how long? Or does she try and shift the focus towards something else and hope that will permanently closed down discussion on this issue.

Labour needs a united party in the UK because of the numbers game of who becomes Prime Minister.

Macintosh has said something rather novel that the next deputy leader of Scottish Labour should be drawn from local government.

I would say this idea has merit regardless of who wins and should be considered, at present if you aren’t an MSP or MP, you don’t get a look in.

Kezia Dugdale said in the past I believe, she wasn’t leader material, at  FMQs, she has scored some decent success, however I was told at the weekend, when interviewed she didn’t do as well. In politics, you have to be able to think on your feet, it should be noted that at FMQs, this is a team effort which isn’t representative of her abilities.

Dugdale insists she was the right person to lead the party despite being branded “deputy disaster” by presenter Gordon Brewer.

In case you don’t know who Gordon Brewer is, he is a BBC interviewer, he is every quick and is lazer sharp in tearing apart politicians.

Ms Dugdale said of the ill-fated election campaign:

“I take responsibility for my part in that campaign but let’s be honest, the Scottish Labour Party’s problems didn’t happen overnight and they won’t be fixed overnight. That’s why I’m setting out a platform of how I’m going to rebuild the Labour Party, I’m saying let’s take forward our values, everything else is baggage, and let’s rebuild over the long term.”

In respect of the problems, she is right, this didn’t happen overnight, but over several decades, and it won’t be a simple fix, actually it will involve quite a lot of pain, you see it isn’t just some of the elected that need removed, some of the Labour staff need to be replaced by more experienced and dare I say it passionate campaigners.

Labour needs a new approach to dealing with people, organisations and civic Scotland.
At present, the Scottish Labour Party will be staying as part of the Labour Party in the UK; however, continual defeat may mean that position will be looked at again.

When a party has been seen to lose its way and doesn’t represent the majority of people, it will struggle badly.

It will be interesting to see if whoever is appointed as leader will be leading from the front because in 2016, things don’t look that it will be a good year for Labour at Holyrood, then comes 2017, the council elections, if Labour doesn’t change then whoever is leader will have effectively an untenable position.

Defeat after defeat followed by impeding defeat.   

2016, Labour need to produce a new vision of the Scottish Government.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Friday, June 5, 2015

Conservative MEP Daniel Hannan wants to see the scrapping of the Human Rights Act 1998 to be replaced by a British Bill of Rights; the question should be asked, ‘who do you trust to protect your legal rights, Parliament or the European Court’, given the bar is set so low for Parliament, I will stick with the Court

Dear All

Daniel Hannan is a Conservative MEP at the European Parliament; he has done an article on Human Rights for the CAPX website.

So, let’s crack on regarding his pro scrapping of the Human Rights Act 1998 article and make some observations on his comments.

“What specific benefits accrue to the United Kingdom as a result of our adherence to the European Convention on Human Rights? That question ought to be our starting point, but it is almost never asked”.

Why should a Convention of Human Rights designed for the ‘benefit’ of citizens have included provisions to ‘buy off’ the member state?

I am asking him that question because I think that is important, does he think justice should be bought?

Daniel also writes:

“Were there habitual violations of civil freedoms before 1953 when the Convention entered into force? Were we deporting whole populations, expropriating our citizens without due process, throwing dissidents into internment camps? No? Then what is it we’re supposed to have gained?”

To the first part, Ireland seems to be a good example of habitual violations of civil freedoms before 1953, other areas of British controlled jurisdiction like South Africa had concentration camps and then there was India. So domestically as well as internationally there is a history to be accounted for.

I am sure there is a Monty Python sketch in there somewhere along the lines of Life of Brian, ‘whose had their rights violated’, followed by many people reeling off names.

I am a big fan of the Human Rights Act 1998, and also the European Convention on Human Rights. The Conservatives wish to scrap the Human Rights Act and replace it with a British Bill of Rights.

So, does the British Bill of Rights give us more rights, less rights or no change?

If the Bill gives us more rights, then surely the current Act could simply be amended, if it gives less rights or protection, why would anyone support it, or if it makes no difference who would support that either.

I think that many people must be of the conclusion that the British Bill of Rights gives people less protection. The Human Rights Act has a problem, that problem is some of the judgments have been perverse.

Incidentally Daniel isn’t calling for the removal of bad Judges because as part of the ‘establishment’, you don’t attack other members of the establishment. But removing poor people’s rights is another matter, that’s fair game.

And it is especially funny to couch it in terms of ‘standing up for Britain’. 

I would say that in his argument Daniel has been quite clever, he invites people early on to believe that things were ‘okay’ in the past, so effectively take his word for it and continue reading, gloss over doing any research and buy into the concept, bad Human Rights Act.

Recently Conservative MP Charles Walker said something in the House of Commons:

“I would rather be an honourable fool, than a clever man”.

This is because William Hague, a former UK Government Minister tried to introduce measures behind Mr. Walker’s back to oust the current Speaker of the House of Commons John Bercow.

It was a nasty shoddy trick unworthy of William Hague and certainly of a Government Minister because we expect better.

The footage is available online for those who wish to view it.

Bearing this in mind, Daniel Hannan stated:

“A couple of weeks ago, I wrote an article in the Spectator backing the government’s policy of ensuring that, in the event of a conflict of jurisdiction, Parliament, rather than the Strasbourg Court, would have the final word”.

This is the nub of the matter; would you rather trust a Judge or an MP to uphold your rights?

I would say that most people would lean towards a Judge.

At present Amnesty International is campaigning against the scrapping of the Human Rights Act. They effectively seen as the establishment’s opposition but the reality, Amnesty International isn’t really for the people. The ones that run it are all connected to the same social circles as the people in power.

A conversation is ‘taking place’ but the public are excluded except of course when invited to agree with a ‘done deal’.

I have no respect for Amnesty International.

Daniel does point out that “a government cannot give human rights or take them away”, however, he then later goes onto talk about prisoner voting rights. A government cannot give human rights or take them away but they can ignore them for political purposes. Prisoners don’t get the vote, not for a legal reason but for political reasons of attempting to hold onto power.

If you can’t trust the government to uphold the law who can you trust?

Britain is a law-based liberal democracy”.

In fact we are so ‘liberal’ we break the law, but that’s okay, also to cast back into history, why in a law-based liberal democracy did torture take place on UK soil?

During the IRA bomb campaign on mainland Britain, innocent people were convicted, and tortured to confess. In any organisation there are bad people, but as people fought for the truth on behalf of the innocent, the establishment closed ranks to cover that up.

Britain is a law-based liberal democracy”.

The Shirley Mackie case in Scotland, it took 9 years for Shirley Mackie to get justice, again, another cover up by the establishment. Individual cases which Daniel Hannan would simply dismiss and probably write off as ‘one offs’, but everyone who is abused and mistreated is an individual case.

In Human Rights, a single person in the right has more credibility than 50, 100, 200, a million in the wrong.  

When Daniel says:

“in the event of a conflict of jurisdiction, Parliament, rather than the Strasbourg Court, would have the final word”.

During the Westminster expenses scandal which hit the public domain circa 2008, a few MPs and Peers were tossed to the wolves to ‘buy off’ the public that something had been done, how many people not just lost faith but trust entirely in politicians?

I would venture a lot.

Politics is still in disrepute, the SNP has 56 MPs at Westminster, not the greatest thinkers, not fountains of knowledge or wisdom.

Does Daniel Hannan trust their judgment?

I have to say, he later on added a bit of comedy when he wrote:

“As I expected, the most common response to my column was the babyish one which even a surprising number of barristers adopt on this subject: “Why do you Tories have a problem with basic human rights?”

Not all Tories do have a problem with human rights, but I would imagine the obvious answer is two fold, firstly they are the power elite who work hand in glove with big business, and secondly they are rich. They can easily go to Court if their rights are abused because they can afford it; it is an entirely different matter for poor people who have seen access to justice restricted.

In the main, the real problem with the Human Rights Act 1998 is that politicians who Daniel Hannan seems to rely on to provide ‘best judgment’ allowed the Act to be vague and rather loose. Incidentally, there are many lawyers who have become MPs, and given the loopholes in tax avoidance etc exploited by other lawyers, maybe parties should ban lawyer MPs having any input in drafting legislation.

This won’t happen.  

“All rights by definition apply to humans, since – unlike oysters or grasshoppers – we are legal persons, able to enter into relations with other persons mediated by the law”.

If you take that at face value then:

“What specific benefits accrue to the United Kingdom as a result of our adherence to the European Convention on Human Rights?”

Isn’t a serious question!

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Thursday, June 4, 2015

International affairs and domestic affairs, SNP MP Angus Robertson gets the tone spectacular wrong regard the refugee crisis in the Mediterranean, on domestic matters Nationalists are prepared to order ‘Blitzkreig’ to ‘bully’ elderly MP pensioner out of his seat, the lie of unpopular Nicola Sturgeon about working positively at Westminster exposed again

Dear All

The leader of the ‘feeble 56’, at Westminster, ‘fake Scot’ Angus Robertson has decided to venture into foreign affairs. Robertson has gone all fuzzy over the Mediterranean refugee crisis.

In a bizarre intervention at Prime Minister’s Questions, Robertson used the crisis to claim the UK has an “appalling record” compared to this country taking in the victims of the Nazis.

Of course, it should be pointed out that Jewish people and others fled the Nazis because of torture and murder. This is hugely different than people being currently trafficked in the Med who are just economic migrants.

In a fit of misguided self indignation against Europe, he stated it was a “stain on the conscience of Europe that thousands and thousands of refugees have been dying in the Mediterranean when many lives could have been saved.”

The point, which is relevant here, is that the UK and other EU countries don’t get advance noticed of the criminality of the economic migrants whose sole aim is to escape poverty via illegal immigration.

I would also seriously suggest that ‘fake Scot’ Angus Robertson who doesn’t have any responsibility and therefore can talk the most pathetic rubbish is engaged in a point scoring exercise.

Petty politics although amusing isn’t to be taking seriously at all, in fact, the more Angus Robertson talks the more watered down his bile becomes, people get de-sensitised to the cry of ‘wolf’.

David Cameron who previously silently mouthed to Robertson, ‘will you fuck off’, replied that the Libyan government need to act with other nations so that the economic migrants can be returned to Africa.

He added:

“In the meantime everything Britain can do as a moral and upstanding nation to save lives we will do. We should be proud that we are doing.”

Robertson responded:

“Why does the Prime Minister think it is fair for Sweden and for Germany and other countries to accept refugees while the UK turns its back on them.”

Firstly, they aren’t asylum seekers, second, they are criminals and thirdly, they are economic migrants and as such they have no legal basis to claim asylum.

As David Cameron retorted:

“We have record of giving asylum in this country that we should be proud of. When people are fleeing torture and persecution they can find a home in Britain. Let’s be clear, the vast majority of people who are setting off into the Mediterranean are not asylum seekers. They are people seeking a better life. They have been tricked and fooled by criminal gangs and our role should be going after those criminal gangs, sorting out the situation in Libya. Turning back those boats where we can and making sure with our generous aid budget that this Government achieved – that we use that money to mend the countries from which these people are coming that is our moral responsibility.”

‘Fake Scot’ Angus Robertson is just an embarrassment, no one takes him seriously, he comes across as  petty and small minded, his points in my mind on this Med crisis issue are the rank nonsense that you would hear at a student union.

If you take his demented view and open up the floodgates to accept all comers then you would see terrorists, murderers and rapists; just waltz on by to set up shop here.

Britain needs to protect its borders at all times.

Apparently ‘Sein Fein’ SNP gets to ask two questions at Prime Minister’s Questions, so we can expect the most puerile and infantile rubbish to be spout by Angus Robertson as he tries assert the Nationalists are a force.

The latest ‘military’ action from the SNP is the fight by its 56 MPs to take the Commons seat of an old age pensioner called Dennis Skinner.

It seems entirely possibly that ‘fake Scot’ Angus Robertson will play a key role as the Nationalist leader in the upcoming Blitzkreig against Skinner. There is to be a major escalation in the Commons over seating apparently, the rules of the Commons state that no one can reserve a seat, so having a row over who sits where is absolutely pointless.

To show what kind of dross has been allowed to be SNP MPs, the leadership is willing to order MPs to get into Parliament at 7am to play silly games. What kind of asshole is willing to humiliate and debase themselves; as little more than a seat warmer?

Will Angus Robertson use MPs in the winter to sit on a toilet seat to get it warm for him?

To further show how pathetic their thought processes are, instead of making a complaint to the Speaker John Bercow and be seen to be working within the rules, the SNP are said to favour what is termed ‘direct action’ like a student union politics. Expect the nonsense of clapping to continue to stir up trouble and show contempt for the Speaker and inane drivel as the SNP try to pass them selves off as ‘Statesman’ with smug Salmond letting his goons make fools of themselves while he sits there smirking.

Some clown said:

"We can march our MPs to get in at 7am every day. We can block every Labour change in committees. There is a lot we can do."

And the rules can be re-written to put a stop to it.

It is one thing to be a bad loser; however, it is entirely a different kettle of fish to be a bad winner.

Unpopular Nicola Sturgeon in the election parroted some crap that ‘Sein Fein’ SNP would be and act constructively at Westminster.

I guess her word doesn’t mean shit, people should have expected this; Sturgeon is utterly common and displays a startling lack of class!

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University