Things just seem to be getting worse and worse for the Labour Party in Scotland and at Westminster. Squabbling about about who said what to whom and when can be never productive and will only further damage relationships within the party. The donors who did not wish publicity in the first are getting plenty publicity now and it’s the type of publicity that I’m sure they’d rather not have.

Delicate relationships within and outwith the party have been exposed and I would imagine that there are many arguments currently taking place that are not related to this particular issue but are a reflection of wider, underlying disagreements and fractured working relationships.

Wouldn’t it be better if people were open to acknowledging the wider issues instead of hiding them away again?

Shouldn’t politicians use this opportunity to work hard to rebuild and nurture positive working relationships within their own parties as well as between Holyrood and Westminster?

Listening to last night’s, Question Time on BBC, I was interested to hear the discussion about free speech and the invitation the Oxford Union recently made to two speakers to discuss racial hatred and the holocaust. The panel were asked to consider whether the invitation was a triumph for free speech or an irresponsible act of provocation.

Paul Myners made an interesting point, quoting Voltaire, stating that although he may not agree with their views, he defended their right to say it. It is difficult to disagree with this view but the issues around free speech are becoming increasingly more complex. I don’t envy law makers and enforcers the task of clarifying the boundaries between what is fair, what is disagreeable and what is illegal.

When politicians are debating the law, they consider

• The right to free speech,
• The right to be protected from discrimination,
• Inciting hatred and
• Expressing extremist views

If people have the right to state their views even if I disagree them then do I not also have the right not to listen to them?

Really understanding what people are saying can be difficult, time consuming and sometimes exhausting especially when people have a brain injury, speech or communication difficulty, learning disability, or a mental health disorder, etc. It seems to me that there are many disadvantaged, excluded and impoverished people who currently have no voice but whose views I would rather hear.

What is going on with Scottish Labour? Things just seem to get worse and worse. It is bad enough that an unlawful donation was accepted in the first place but why did someone not check the facts about the donations before now?

I would have thought that the publicity surrounding Harriet Harman and co ought to have acted as a warning trigger – but apparently not. I keep asking why politicians don’t appear to learn from previous mistakes. Shouldn’t it surely be a fairly simple job to make sure that everyone knows what the process for donations is, who should check them and how that should be recorded?

It appears that politicians don’t understand the importance of good administration, clear audit trails and strong support mechanisms for inexperienced staff. Politicians seem to like to talk about responsibility, accountability and good leadership but it does not appear that they actually know what that means. Will this situation have a positive outcome? Will all political parties finally use this opportunity to get their own houses in order? I’m not going to hold my breath!

Sky News reports that

“Lorry drivers are suffering an increase in violence from illegal immigrants striving to enter the UK.”

I think this problem is only going to get worse as people who are desperate take more and more risks and become increasingly aggressive.

Africa

There have also been reports of thousands of African immigrants risking their lives trying to enter the Canary Islands by boat. They must believe that any possible opportunities are worth the risk and are therefore prepared to display irrational behaviour.

Paris

I also think that events in Villiers-le-Bel, Paris are a huge cause for concern not just for France but for the rest of Europe too. The BBC reports that

“The violence happened despite appeals for calm from the families of the two teenagers of Algerian origin whose deaths sparked the violence on Sunday evening.“

Should it not be a matter of priority for politicians to look at the issues facing increasingly desperate people because what is happening in Europe is bound to have an effect on the UK at some point?

First Minister’s Questions

Alex Salmond has changed the nature of First Minister’s Questions and it seems that he is thoroughly enjoying his new role. I am concerned that he only appears to have two types of reply for opposition colleagues. Firstly, he states that lack of his government’s progress is because of poor management by the previous Labour/ Liberal Democratic administration and this is general followed by a repeat of his aspirations for governing an Independent Scotland. His other type of reply tends to blame a poor financial settlement for Scotland by Westminster and again he repeats what he would like to do if Scotland were independent.

I would like to suggest that Mr Salmond is risking turning people away from his cause by blaming Westminster and opposition parties for a lack of achievement instead of taking responsibility and doing the best with the resources that are currently available.

Independence for Scotland

“I think the Scottish Government should be responsible for all matters affecting the Scottish people, and that includes the waters around Scotland.” - Alex Salmond

It is not surprising that Mr Salmond believes that Scottish Independence will solve every problem, however, the reality is that we have a devolved parliament that needs competent solutions to difficult problems now and not just at some undetermined point in the future.

Do Mr Salmond and his government recognise that by constantly reminding people that they wish for independence, they may be more likely to turn people against their cause instead of promoting it?

Events from the past week or so have been distressing and have truly tested the competence of the government at Westminster. Alistair Darling, Jackie Smith and Gordon Brown are all looking a bit worse for wear. The floods, foot and mouth disease and the terror attacks during the summer are obvious examples of events that could not have been foreseen. People generally seemed confident that the government’s response was appropriate and proportionate.

However….

Economy

The more recent events at Northern Rock has raised general public anxiety as the implications for the whole economy becomes apparent. The government has responded but it is reasonable to consider “how much did the government’s own actions or lack of actions contribute to this problem?”

Data Protection

HM Revenue & Customs has no excuse for losing such a large amount of personal data but has apportioning blame to a junior official so quickly made things worse? Shouldn’t senior managers have undertaken a full investigation first before blaming someone and shouldn’t ministers have already established that all government departments are fully compliant with data protection and every other legislation? Is it not reasonable to expect all government departments and quangos to be models of excellence?

Defence

Criticism from former military chiefs about Mr Brown’s commitment to defense also causes concern. I am sure that I must be misunderstanding something. Are the former military chiefs not guilty of “insulting” troops in the same way that they are criticising Mr Brown? It seems to me that there will always be differing views on what action should be taken and how resources will be used. Is it not reasonable to expect military leaders to express their views within the team and then, whether they agree with the decisions or not, accept the decisions and get on with job to the best of their ability. Shouldn’t our armed forces expect senior chiefs to demonstrate unity and confidence instead of whining like school boys?

Donations

Today’s revelations about party finance does nothing to inspire confidence. Gordon Brown is right to rectify the situation but why is this necessary? The government generally states that lessons will be learned but it seems that similar mistakes are made over and over again. Shouldn’t the government sort out basic competences and responsibilities and ensure that the process of accountability is crystal clear from local government right up to the highest level?

“More than one in three servicemen killed in Iraq and Afghanistan might still be alive if not for avoidable blunders and equipment problems, an investigation by The Independent on Sunday has revealed.”

I feel so sorry every time I hear about the death of one of our soldiers but I truly despair when I hear stories like this. Whether you agree with the war or not, the one thing that is certain is that we cannot do without the armed forces and security service personnel who are prepared to give their lives to serve our country. It sometimes seems that we take our safety and security for granted and just expect that there will be a long line of patriotic people who are unselfishly prepared to put themselves in dangerous situations. Should we not acknowledge their courage and commitment and demonstrate that we truly appreciate their work?

It is difficult to disagree with the view that we should make sure that not only are the risks to their welfare kept to a minimum when on active duty but also that they are confident in the knowledge that their families will be protected during their absence. The risks to their physical and mental health are clearly recognised.

What kind of country do we want them to protect? Do politicians have any business that is more important than the welfare of people?

“The Home Office has admitted illegal immigrants have been mistakenly cleared for jobs as security staff.”

What kind of ridiculous games are they playing?

I was pleased to read the guidance document “With Inclusion in Mind: The local authority’s role in promoting wellbeing and social development: Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 Sections 25-31″ that was published by the Scottish Government on the 9th November. I believe the guidance will be a useful resource for Local Authorities and note the the document promotes corporate responsibility, highlighting the fact the “duties have implications for many services delivered by the local authority, not only those directly concerned with social care”.

I believe that if this agenda is to be successful, it must be fully embraced by council officials and politicians. It would be tragic if the importance of such a practical tool was not fully recognised because the longer term aim of positive change will happen more quickly if there are enthusiastic champions with corporate responsibility to drive the agenda. Elected and unelected politicians from all political parties have an excellent opportunity to make a real change to lives of many disadvantaged citizens in a way that can be clearly agreed, measured and monitored.

Won’t politicians who can talk and listen to socially excluded people have the best opportunity to demonstrate that they are truly representing their constituents?

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/10/18092957/11

I have been smiling all morning listening to David Cameron tell Michael Parkinson about his meeting with Kate Moss. He tells the story very well and it is very funny.It has made me think though about how isolating the world of politics can be. People hear words coming out the mouths of politicians, they think “that sounds wonderful”, share their enthusiasm with their friends, are shocked by their cynicism, learn to share that cynicism, and then get on with living their lives the best way they can, leaving politicians to their own devises at best humouring them and at other times calling for their resignation.

It’s a shame that what politicians are saying does not seem very relevant to most people and Kate Moss is not the only person who would fail to recognise David Cameron and take advantage of an opportunity to improve her own personal situation. What I find frustrating is that, when politicians are elected and they are charged with the responsibility of representing the people who live in their constituency, they seem to be immediately consumed by the whole parliamentary culture, language and behaviour. Even the media reporters have to learn the “political language” in order to understand. Why is this the case?

Are not the best politicians, those who can relate to the concerns of ordinary people but also to the concerns of all the people, from the least affluent and resourceful to the most the affluent and resourceful and from those who agree with their views to those who do not?