March 07, 2006
Welcoming the David Steel Commission
“No self-respecting parliament should expect to exist permanently on a grant from another parliament.” David Steel.
Heartening to see the Liberal Democrats moving towards recommending full powers for Holyrood! The Lib Dems may talk about federalism, while the SNP use the word independence, but if the details are 95 percent the same - David Steel and company want Holyrood to have full control over taxes, with the key areas of immigration, national security, and energy to come under a Scottish Government (not Executive) - there is an excellent basis for common action.
As I’ve noted before, an SNP/Liberal Democrat alliance makes sense because of the geographical distribution of support for both parties. They are strong in different areas.
My sense is that a large number of Liberal Democrat voters would be happy to see the party end power sharing with Labour, while a bold centre left policy initiative would serve to pre-empt any kind of Tory revival in Scotland.
Bravo David Steel!
news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=342882006
Posted by Simon Holledge at 11:14 AM | TrackBack
November 30, 2005
St Andrew's Day
According to the informal poll in the Scotsman this morning, 97 percent of people think St Andrew’s Day should be a national holiday - and why not? Why are the politicians so timid when it comes to raising the status of Scotland’s national day?
I am more inclined to celebrate Robert Burns than an obscure Christian saint with no connection to Scotland - but there is plenty of room for all in the national pantheon.
We have only eight statutory bank holidays in Scotland. This is a relatively small number. Wikipedia has a list of national holidays by country, which can be difficult to interpret, however if I am right the French and the Irish have 10, the Italians 11 etc.
Wikipedia did not list national holidays in Scotland - i have remedied this.
www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2005/01/bankholidays
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Publicholidaysby_country
heritage.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=656
news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=2325712005
Posted by Simon Holledge at 12:09 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
July 30, 2005
Holyrood shortlisted for Sterling Prize
The Scottish Parliament building has been shortlisted for the Royal Institute of British Architects’ Stirling Prize.
Other buildings on the list include the BMW Central Building (Leipzig), the Jubilee Library (Brighton), the McLaren Technology Centre (Woking), Fawood Children’s Centre (Harlesden), and the Lewis Gluckman Gallery, University College (Cork).
The winner will be announced in October.
www.guardian.co.uk/arts/news/story/0,11711,1537143,00.html?gusrc=rss
Posted by Simon Holledge at 11:38 PM | TrackBack
April 20, 2005
Holyrood and the Webby Awards
The Online Parliamentarian report that Holyrood have paid to enter the Webby Awards! What a joke! Can it really be true?
I can’t remember when I discovered the Webbies “the only award show for Internet sites that matters”. Actually I think they found me. I wasn’t sure whether I needed or was worthy of an award, but when I saw the entry fee was between 95 and 195 dollars, I realized it was a scam.
incunabula.typepad.com/parliament/2005/04/thewebbyaward.html
UPDATE 21 April 05
Here is link to a Scottish Parliament news release dated 10 May 2004. It refers to the competition last year. (Apparently this year’s announcement is no longer on the website.)
www.scottish.parliament.uk/nmCentre/news/news-04/pa04-030.htm
I have found the spam email the Webby Awards sent me in December 2001. They offered me a discount if I applied early! See below:
X-Sender: drwatson@mail.webbyawards.com (Unverified)
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 13:47:27 -0800
To: interestedentrants@webbyawards.com
From: Doc Watson drwatson@webbyawards.com
Subject: Webby Awards Call for Entries Has Begun - Discount to 12-21-01
You are receiving this email because you registered to be notified when the call for entries began. Thank you for your interest.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The 6th Annual Webby Awards Seek The Best of the Web.
The Web sites that people go to daily for information, entertainment, community products and services. The Web sites who model the best practices for this year and will set the standards as we enter the Internet’s second decade.
We know you’re out there. Stand up.
Enter Your Site Now for an Early Bird Discount http://www.webbyawards.com/main/submit/index.html
You are large and small, alternative or mass-market, creating content and services in any of our 30 categories from Activism to Commerce, Travel to Education, Film to Personal Web Site, NetArt to Technical Achievement, and our best of the best, Best Practices.
You deserve to be recognized for your achievements; to receive acknowledgement from the leading international honor in technology, creativity and individual achievement; to receive exposure only the top award can bring — placing you on the map or reminding people that you’re still the best — more traffic, new visitors, new customers, new members to your community.
You’re there. You’re setting standards, you’re pushing boundaries. Let us see you. Stand up. Stand out.
Enter Your Site Now for an Early Bird Discount http://www.webbyawards.com/main/submit/index.html
Early Deadline: 12.21.01 Final Deadline: 01.31.02
The 6th Annual Webby Awards Honoring the best in creativity, technology and individual achievement. http://www.webbyawards.com
Sponsors include: IDG (http://www.idg.com), Creative Group (http://www.creativegroup.com), SBC Communications, Inc. (http://www.sbc.com), and Elias Arts (http://www.eliasarts.com).
All balloting is audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers (http://www.pwcglobal.com)
Posted by Simon Holledge at 02:49 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack
March 20, 2005
STV and the minor parties
The Centre for Scottish Public Policy is publishing a report by John Curtice on the likely impact of an STV (single transferable vote) system for Holyrood elections, on the Greens, SSP and independents. Apparently STV will not unduly disadvantage them, so we may hope that this is another obstacle out of the way of reform.
Scotland does need one, fair, clearly understood, electoral system to be used at all levels. What alternative is there to STV? The only question at issue is the size of multi-member constituencies.
news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=297922005
Posted by Simon Holledge at 12:41 AM | TrackBack
March 18, 2005
Charlie Jeffrey's view
Charlie Jeffrey has an important article in The Scotsman comparing devolution in Scotland to that in Bavaria, Catalonia, Flanders and Lombardy.
He points out that debates in Scotland have lacked perspective.
“The debate about whether devolution is working or failing has almost always been self-referenced and insular… .it is part of a British disease: all the devolution reforms, in Scotland as elsewhere, have been rolled out without much attempt - as the jargon goes - to “benchmark” other places’ experience of devolved government and apply the insights here.”
” … the Scottish Parliament is powerful. The devolution settlement here is more generous than equivalent arrangements in Catalonia, Bavaria or Lombardy (though not Flanders). But all the opinion poll data so far suggests that, despite these powers, most people think the Parliament and the Executive have not made much difference. Is that right? Or is it a product of Scotland’s self-referenced way of looking at itself?”
“What about the economy? … there has been no big kick forward since devolution. Scotland has not yet summoned up the economic dynamism of Bavaria, Catalonia, Flanders or Lombardy… .[this] has to do, in part, with being on the periphery of European markets… Much of Scotland’s business does not see itself as especially Scottish and instead has a UK mindset, and looks to shape policies in London. Business in Flanders and the other regions is more “rooted”.”
“Political leaders in Bavaria, Catalonia, Flanders and Lombardy wear their regional identities on their sleeves, articulating policy priorities through a regional mindset. … But Scotland’s political leaders, both in government and opposition, have been more managerial in approach, focused more on effective delivery than on mobilising a sense of common project for Scotland.”
“That absence of vividness is one reason why devolution has bedded in so smoothly. Devolution processes in Belgium, Italy and Spain have been marked by tensions between central and devolved governments. Those tensions have not emerged here, or more precisely where there have been disagreements they have been dealt with behind closed doors …”
“Labour will lose somewhere, sometime and as soon as it does devolution’s main conflict management mechanism will be lost. There is not much of a ‘Plan B’ - unlike in Belgium, Germany, Italy and Spain, where there are more formal processes for managing central-devolved differences.”
It is fascinating analysis. It would interesting to know how the SNP fit in with Professor Jeffrey’s scheme of things.
thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=292442005
Posted by Simon Holledge at 01:38 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
February 13, 2005
Macbeth
The Scottish Conservative MSP Alex Johnstone is proposing the rehabilitation of Macbeth for his 1000th birthday - that’s Macbeth’s not Alex Johnstone’s.
Historical assessments are normally the job of historians not legislators. The Pope does this kind of thing, and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union used to be expert at it, but should Holyrood get involved? As far as I know, Westminster have not been debating whether or not Richard III was a nice man.
Should we be protecting ancient reputations, when actual heritage sites are neglected and allowed to deteriorate?
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/4232221.stm
Posted by Simon Holledge at 05:46 PM | TrackBack
January 28, 2005
Holyrood worth only 350M
George Reid announced yesterday that Holyrood is only worth 350 million pounds, 80 million less than we paid for it!
news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=103092005
Posted by Simon Holledge at 10:49 AM | TrackBack
December 20, 2004
Outside talent
According to the Scotsman, Lord Sewel says there is a lack of ministerial talent in Scotland. He thinks the Scotland Act should be changed so that ministers could be appointed from outside parliament. Apparently this would be similar to the system In Scandanavia.
Excellent. Why not? How else can we get competent specialists into government to advise on technical matters? Many of the current MSPs (of all parties) lack the most basic 21st-century skills. They can’t mange their own websites, how can they run government departments?
It would be even better if foreigners were eligible. If Scotland wishes to emulate successful policies in other parts of northern Europe, the best way to do this would be to invite appropriately qualified people from these countries to help us. Why not?
news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1449932004
Posted by Simon Holledge at 03:18 PM | TrackBack
November 27, 2004
Holyrood: officials blameless
Once again we have an inquiry which finds that no-one has done anything wrong.
Alistair Macdonald, directed by the Scottish Executive to look at the actions of civil servants following the Fraser report on the building of the Scottish Parliament, has found ‘errors’ but no wrongdoing.
I don’t understand this. How exactly is it possible to run 380 million pounds over budget on a project and then exonerate everybody involved from any kind of blame?
Perhaps protecting officials and politicians is more important than protecting the public? But isn’t there a word for this? I think it’s corruption.
news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1356822004
Posted by Simon Holledge at 02:40 AM | TrackBack
November 22, 2004
Not proven
Allan Massie has an interesting article in the Scotsman about the Scottish ‘bastard verdict’ - ‘not proven’.
Michael McMahon MSP intends to bring in a private member’s bill to abolish it, however perhaps it could be retained to (occasionally) keep open the possibility of a re-trial based on new evidence.
news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1341552004
Posted by Simon Holledge at 12:36 PM | TrackBack
October 10, 2004
Queen opens Holyrood
The Queen opened the Scottish Parliament yesterday and a lot of people had a lot of fun, Scotland’s poet laureate Edwin Morgan said the Queen shouldn’t be there. Sir Sean Connery thought Tony Blair should have been there, and folksinger Eddi Reader would have been happy with a double booking with the republican counter-ceremony on Calton Hill.
Gawking at people in funny clothes has never appealed to me. I didn’t go and I wasn’t surprised to hear that few other people went. After all, the parliamentary doors are already open, and the building isn’t actually finished. The Queen’s opening was a formality to be gone through at some arbitrary point.
The best description of the event was from Bill Jamieson, the Executive Editor of the Scotsman: “I waited in a crowd one deep near the bottom of the Canongate. … First down was an oompah band that could have been hired for a garden centre opening in Surbiton… .”
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3727526.stm
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3731882.stm
news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=1180942004
scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1179492004
Posted by Simon Holledge at 03:21 PM
September 21, 2004
MacAskill calls for a reformed, devolved civil service
In the aftermath of the Fraser Report (into the management of the Scottish Parliament building project), Kenny MacAskill MSP has called for the civil service to be properly devolved (“led from and accountable to Scotland”), noting precedents in Belgium and Canada.
After the Holyrood farrago, reform of the civil service is obviously well and truly overdue. May the SNP continue to energetically pursue it!
www.snp.org/html/news/printerfriendly.php?newsID=2443
Posted by Simon Holledge at 11:50 AM | Comments (1)
September 15, 2004
Holyrood Security V: Reid Vs The Scotsman
George Reid, the Parliament’s Presiding Officer, is unhappy about the reporting of Holyrood security failures by the Scotsman.
He writes to MSPs and staff: ” . . . we have difficulty with the accuracy of parts of the articles and, in consequence, with the heavy emphasis which the paper has put on terrorist threats …”
“The key issue, common to all public buildings these days, is the difficulty in enforcing a rigid policy of everyone wearing a badge - and of guests being accompanied at all times. This is a matter of shared responsibility for MSPs, researchers, journalists and all staff who work at Holyrood.”
Any comment would probably be superfluous.
thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1080572004
Posted by Simon Holledge at 05:46 PM
Fraser Report: Holyrood pre-disastered
The Fraser Report into the [mis]management of the Scottish Parliament building project was published today.
Lord Fraser:”I’m delighted to say that my report is by its due date and within budget.”
Alex Salmond and Linda Fabiani commented (below) for the SNP. Fabiani should be credited for coining the term ‘pre-disastered’.
www.holyroodinquiry.org/FINAL_report/report.htm
www.snp.org/html/news/printerfriendly.php?newsID=2430
www.snp.org/html/news/printerfriendly.php?newsID=2434
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3659940.stm
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3656166.stm
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3658840.stm
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3659766.stm
thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1086962004
Posted by Simon Holledge at 05:21 PM
September 14, 2004
Holyrood Security IV: Another Investigation
Would you believe it? More in the saga of the so-called security at Holyrood. This time GBP 10,000 has been stolen from a catering company’s safe. There will (of course) be another investigation.
Quote from Margo MacDonald: “This latest incident spreads the myth that we couldn’t run a raffle.” Myth? Did the lady say myth?
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3653408.stm
news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1077322004
Posted by Simon Holledge at 12:09 AM
September 13, 2004
Holyrood Security III
There is a follow-up to the Holyrood security story (September 11), again by Angie Brown of the Scotsman, in conversation with a ‘security insider’. Apparently the whole complex is being (expensively?) re-checked.
thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1073102004
Posted by Simon Holledge at 02:59 PM
September 11, 2004
Holyrood Security II: 'The Investigation'
A Holyrood spokesman has responded to the report in the Scotsman (entry below) as follows:
“The Scottish Parliament treats security-related issues very seriously. The parliament’s security team immediately launched an investigation on being informed of these reports.”
A security team? There is a security team? As sure as day follows night, bureaucratic pomposity follows bureaucratic incompetence. Why not simply admit there was no security, team or no team, and promise to introduce it right now?
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3647846.stm
Posted by Simon Holledge at 08:42 PM
Holyrood security I
Some journalists from the Scotsman have had some fun testing the (non-existent) security at Holyrood, according to an amusingly written account by Angie Brown. It’s another illustration of just how far you can go in life if you are wearing a suit.
The highlight was a conversation with a workman who “talked openly” about entering the office of the SNP deputy leader one night. “We were in Nicola Sturgeon’s office and some of the guys were playing around with her laptop. We didn’t switch it on, but if we had I don’t know what we might have found. We probably could have seen all her secret files.”
In a way this is reassuring. I had no idea that Nicola Sturgeon had a computer.
Hmm … I suppose this is a serious subject and the newspaper deserves credit for the exposure, but what did anyone expect? It reminds me of a comment by Portillo, at the time of the Bush visit, that the Americans should bring their own security as there wasn’t any here.
Does anyone know any Holyrood lightbulb jokes?
news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1066632004
Posted by Simon Holledge at 10:38 AM
September 09, 2004
'Restricted view' in the public gallery
It has already been pointed out (in the Scotsman?) that the Holyrood public gallery is in the wrong place. It should be facing the Debating Chamber, not at the back of it. Now, as Fergus Ewing has noted, about 10 percent of the public seats have no view.
How was it possible to design a public space like the chamber and not employ anyone who knew about sightlines?
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3640776.stm
Posted by Simon Holledge at 03:33 PM | Comments (1)
September 08, 2004
The Wimpy Voices of Holyrood
Imagine - It is 16 March 44 BC, Marcus Antonius strides into the packed Roman Forum. “Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your … “. [Voice goes dead. Yell from behind the plinth] “Hey you, you bleeding idiot - you pulled out the bleeding cable …”
It is 3 April 1917. Lenin arrives at the Finland Station. He is met by his multimedia and sound team. “Vladimir Ilyich, we have had to postpone everything …”
It is 4 June 1940, Britain’s darkest hour, the Prime Minister is in mid-speech, “We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall …” [Voice goes dead. Civil servant rushes in.] “Awfully sorry PM. Tech probs. Can we do it again tomorrow? “
Fact - yesterday the BBC reported on the first day at Holyrood, “The debate ended when MSPs were cut short after microphones failed and business stopped early.” news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3635060.stm
Whatever happened to the human voice?
Gladstone could address 10,000 people in a market square. Did he need a microphone? Did Lincoln? Or Lloyd George? What do we have now? MSPs hiding behind microphones like lung-collapsed pop singers! Shame on you all!
Posted by Simon Holledge at 07:16 PM | Comments (1)
September 07, 2004
Holyrood in business!
Holyrood enjoyed a low key opening today with a low-key address by our First Minister. Linda Fabiani (SNP MSP), to her great credit, has said that she hopes Holyrood will inject “a bit of fun into politics” and energize the electorate. news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3631816.stm
Great. However visitors must behave with due decorum. I don’t have the dress code here, but I do have a copy of the code of behaviour.
Interesting that laptops and recording equipment are not allowed. Maybe concerned citizens attending committee meeting have to take an old-fashioned shorthand secretary with them, use longhand, or rely on official transcriptions? Powerpoint presentations are out anyway. Are PDAs allowed? Maybe they forgot to add them to the list?
If you take a tour they are going to ask you to pay 3.50 on top of the 431,000,000 pounds you have already given them. Be magnanimous! Just wear a very large lapel button with the word SPONSOR on it.
[The public may visit on business days between 09.00 and 19.00 and on non-business days from 10.00 to 18.00 (April to October), 10.00 to 16.00 (November to March), and on weekends from 10.00 to 16.00. It’s closed on December 25/26 and January 1/2. Telephone number 0131 348 5000, email sp.info@scorrish.parliament.uk.]
Posted by Simon Holledge at 09:11 PM
August 20, 2004
Holyrood: no natural acoustic?
This afternoon, we visited the new parliament: the public areas, the debating chamber (where we sat in the second SNP row) and some committee rooms.
I am still not sure whether I like the building. It is, of course, unfinished and it isn't easy to imagine the final effect in many places (apparently a fair amount of the concrete inside will be covered up).
Outside the Debating Chamber. Photo © S Holledge
Much of the light comes from above, so the weather really influences the mood inside the building. It's better when the sun is shining, otherwise it is a bit dark, and in some places claustrophobic, because of the heavy, low, almost medieval, ceilings, especially at ground level, but also in some committee rooms.
It's a building of extraordinary complexity and must have been a builder's nightmare. Every room is an irregular shape. It's noticeable how many of the sharply-angled corners of the floors are still unfinished.
My impression - based on hearing a talk in the debating chamber and attending a mock committee meeting - is that almost all speakers will be using microphones.
The debating chamber appears to lack a natural acoustic. This may be because of the way the high roof is constructed. The carpeting may also be a factor. However it's extraordinary that Westminster, with over 600 MPs, doesn't need microphones (except obviously for broadcasting), but Holyrood with 129 MSPs does!
In the committee rooms members apparently have to press a button to activate their microphone if they wish to speak (a light comes on) - rather like a TV quiz show!
Posted by Simon Holledge at 07:47 PM