Pages

Monday, 23 February 2015

Crumbling feet of clay

Malcolm Rifkind
Malcolm Rifkind (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Whether or not Jack Straw and Malcolm Rifkind have been guilty of wrongdoing according to the evidently rather lax standards which British politicians require of themselves is a matter to be decided by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. But the very fact that they so much as met with what they believed were people willing to pay for their services demonstrates an appalling lack of judgement and is symptomatic of the corruption at the heart of the British state.

Let us not forget that both these individual lately strode the stage of our independence referendum campaign, draped in all the trappings of status and power with which the British state rewards its loyal servants, loudly denouncing SNP politicians and Yes campaigners of impeccable character in the highest moral tones. They used the standing and influence which the British state has bestowed upon them to cajole the people of Scotland into sacrificing their sovereignty for the benefit of the British establishment.

They purported to be doing this in the interests of the people of Scotland. But how are we to believe this when they have been shown to be at least willing to consider prostituting themselves to corporate power for personal gain?

Jack Straw small
Jack Straw (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Let us not forget either that in the wake of the referendum it was Jack Straw who demanded that the people of Scotland be stripped of their democratic right of self determination. In a fit of hypocrisy that speaks to fairly of what we have come to expect from the British establishment, he declared the people of Scotland unfit for such responsibility when he was apparently quite prepared to act in a way that calls into question his own fitness as an elected representative.

For the people of Scotland the coming election is, above all, about trust. It is about whom we can be reasonably sure will most effectively represent Scotland and its people in the British parliament at a time when our interests sorely need to be effectively represented. Surely by now it has been sufficiently demonstrated that those embedded in and wedded to the British political system cannot ever be trusted to speak for the people or for Scotland.

The British state needs to be shaken to its very foundations. It needs to be reminded of the democratic power that can be wielded by the people, just as people need to be reminded of the power that they own. The people of Scotland, inspired by the Yes campaign, have experienced their awakening. It is time to send a clarion call that will resound throughout these island and inspire others to challenge the old order and the old ways.

We do this quite simply by voting in huge numbers for the one viable alternative to the British parties. Only the SNP is in a position to be the catalyst for meaningful change. A vote for the SNP is a vote for a better politics.

3 comments:

  1. You could not make it up;

    Joan McAlpine is attacking expenses abuses in her column today, for which she gets paid £20k per annum, but its not a second job, oh no...

    Is it me?

    Expenses, Joan?

    Photography?

    Ring any bells?

    Irony is obviously lost on the SNP..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not sure what to make of this incoherent rant. Does Joan McAlpine claim that her journalism isn't a second job?

      Are you genuinely unable to make a distinction between open and perfectly legitimate additional work and the kind of sleazy corruption of which Messrs Straw and Rifkind stand accused?

      As to your reference to "photography", you judiciously provide no details, preferring snide and cowardly insinuation to a direct allegation. Allow me to fill in the information that you don't want people to be aware of.

      Joan McAlpine had photography work undertaken for purposes relating to her role as an MSP. She was reimbursed in accordance with rules of the Scottish Parliament's expenses scheme.

      Ms McAlpine later repaid the expenses claimed at her own instigation on the grounds that the photography work had not been completed and was of unacceptable quality. The reasons for the work not being completed are of interest only to those with a penchant for salacious gossip.

      In short, Ms McAlpine committed no breach of any rules. If you have evidence to the contrary then perhaps you should inform the relevant authorities rather than skulking around here peddling malicious innuendo.

      Your attempt to divert attention from the scandals currently embroiling British MPs is an abysmal failure of the type that I suspect you are well accustomed to.

      Delete
    2. Er so I wrote an 'incoherent rant' Peter?

      I love your legalistic reply it might almost have been written by Sir Malcolm Rifikind himself...

      Or his lawyers...

      But never mind your hypocrisy, and that of the SNP.

      Wee Joanie has written a column in the Daily Record attacking those who have second incomes...

      Hello Peter, when is one second paid job more acceptable from a politician than another?

      So can you kindly inform me what wee Joanies £20k per annum for writing columns in the Daily Record counts as?

      Never mind her fees to lawyers to try and supress the story in the first place, or paying public money to her lovers wife, only when she was found out did Ms MacAlpine repay it.

      http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/462043/Alex-Salmond-stands-by-aide-Joan-McAlpine-who-paid-public-cash-to-lover-s-wife

      I assume irony is not lost on you.

      PS I';m still waiting to buy the kipper.tie and flared trousers...

      Oh and er How is Scotland's 'Ambassador' getting on with nurses these days?


      Delete