Libya decision row
Just to make sure, I looked up the phone number for the Scottish Executive. Had they gone ex-directory? Were calls barred to Scotland鈥檚 domestic government?
Apparently not. A few seconds web-trawling and I was informed that the Central Inquiry Unit at the executive can be reached on: 0845 7741741.
Now Downing Street鈥檚 switchboard is legendary. They can patch a Cabinet Minister through to the PM at whatever point he鈥檚 reached in the globe during his farewell peregrinations.
Seemingly, though, it was all too tricky to let the executive know about a deal with Libya which had potential implications for a somewhat high-profile prisoner held in Greenock gaol under Scottish jurisdiction: one Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, convicted of the .
Should Downing Street have tipped off the Scots? Yes, of course. Putative devolved co-operation is specifically cited at one point in the Memorandum of Understanding with Libya. Scottish Ministers should have been given an opportunity at the very least to comment before their powers were featured in an international agreement.
Is this cross-border row The Big One 鈥 the much feared/anticipated bloodbath between the new executive and Westminster/Whitehall? Nah, don鈥檛 think so.
As is widely recognised, Megrahi will remain in Greenock nick until either he appeals successfully or he is despatched to Libya by Scottish ministers. They hold the key, as Lord George Foulkes commented.
However, in his staunch defence of Downing Street, George might care to reflect that he is in a different parliament now. One where his group leader said that the lack of consultation was 鈥渄eeply regrettable鈥 (while also chiding Alex Salmond for political role-play.)
Let us extend that verdict. Such behaviour by Downing Street would have been 鈥渄eeply regrettable鈥 even before Alex Salmond took power. It would have been deeply regrettable under Jack McConnell - (and don鈥檛 think there weren鈥檛 occasions when Labour/LibDem Ministers were tearing their hair out at the crass insensitivity of Westminster.)
More to the point, it would have been wrong even before the advent of a Scottish Parliament. Scotland had a distinct and separate legal and judicial system long, long before the present devolved powers. It dates back to the old pre-Union Parliament.
Way before 1999, then, it would have been the correct course, in such an eventuality, to inform the Lord Advocate and/or the Scottish Secretary of a proposed treaty which had a potential impact on Scotland鈥檚 legal system.
So where do we stand? Is Alex Salmond making hay with this? Yes. Is he entitled to protest? I tend to agree with Annabel Goldie that the Nationalists have been handed a gift, wrapped in constitutional ribbon. Will this turn into a long-running and damaging conflict?
See above: don鈥檛 think so. It would - if the Megrahi case was ripped out of Scottish jurisdiction. Downing Street stresses that won鈥檛 happen - and, indeed, was never envisaged.
To speculate for a moment, it鈥檚 not utterly beyond the bounds of belief to consider that our new first minister might, eventually, care to burnish his consensual statespersonlike image 鈥 by allowing Megrahi to return to Libya, under Scottish dictat, in the interests of international diplomacy.
Not unthinkable - if rather less likely given the stances adopted in the past few hours.
That number again: 0845 7741741.
I'm 
Comments
Spot on Brian!
Your appraisal of the situation cannot be faulted
It was unfortanate that your calm tones were missed last night,especially when a certain doyen got her unmentionables in a twist (no names no pack drill), reulting in Newsnight probably getting its biggest e-mail mailbag (can you have an e-mail mailbag?) yet, not all admiring I believe
Hopefully the communication skills of our travelling Prime Minister or his office at least will get better. I just put it down to those in London accidently deleting Scottish Government contact numbers from their PDA's
What gives me greatest concern about this, even with the contemporaneous protestations of the previous FM, is that this is apparently the normal Westminster decision making processes on display.
As I questioned in 鈥楤-w-B/ Fishing for favours鈥 how many times have such Westminster decisions gone unchallenged or merely rubber stamped? Is this lapse from those at Westminster down to their lack of knowledge of the political changes in Scotland which could be borne out by the lack of phone calls between Tony Blair and Alex Salmond, or is it an indicator of what was the norm before Thursday, May 3, 2007?
Either way my information is that Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi is the only Libyan in Scottish or UK custody so to who else could this memorandum of understanding have referred?
What's the surprise here? Blair is infamous for making declarations on national policy outside of the chamber at Westminster, ignoring our elected representatives there with a cavalier attitude to Parliamentary Democracy.
So why would he give a fig about Scotland? Especially since the election on May the 3rd wrecked Labour hegemony in Scotland at both Holyrood and council level.
I bet Gordon Brown is really happy just now especially with George Foulkes pouring more petrol on the fire in his defence of Blair.
It's small beer in some ways but it raises the question of how many previous Blair stitch ups' did poor Wee Joke have to swallow and how accurate his pre May comments were that London was costing the party in Scotland votes. For the first time in ages I felt sorry for Joke yesterday because no matter how he put it he had to agree with Wee Eck about London Labour's crass behaviour and for once honesty got the better of him.
Blair seems to be set on ensuring that Gordon ends up unelectable come 2009.
Sorry to be dense, but which George are you talking about ?
There are no acceptable excuses for Tony Blair's cavalier actions in this matter. He's an arrogant man and this episode epitomises all he has come to stand for.
Who can blame Mr Salmond for 'making hay' with this? After all Tony Blair in his role of Prime Minister has shown a lack of respect for the First Minister and indeed the people of Scotland by his failure to acknowledge the new order at Holyrood.
As for George Foulkes. I was totally amazed to here him say on Newsnight Scotland last night that his role at Holyrood was to keep British Government informed of what happens in the Scottish Parliament.
How telling an admission is that? And here was me thinking he was there to represent the concerns of his constituents in Lothian.
Salmond is absolutely shameless - and the inability to make his case stack up was exposed on his interview on Newsnight yesterday - he knows what he was suggesting the agreement amounted to was exaggerated. He also knew that by giving them twenty minutes advance notice of what he was saying that there was a good chance other MSPs would join his manufactured outrage.
What he did not explain - and still has not - is that he knew about this six days before making an emergency statement. That and Kenny McAskill's bizarre hyperbolic response show they just want a row for the sake of it.
They also know that officials from both parts of government have to work together to get anywhere near any agreement - and I would be very surprised if those discussions have not already started.
I find it hard to get excited about this one. The Memorandum of Understanding with Libya simply says that the UK government will seek the agreement of the devolved administrations. What was Blair supposed to do? "Er, hold on Gadhaffi, I'd better give Eck a ring and see if it's OK to agree to seek his agreement."
It would seem that the MSPs are united in their condemnation of Westminster.Why then was Kirsty Wark allowed to screech like a banshee at the First Minister on Newsnight and why,following that,did the presenter of Newsnight Scotland foolishly suggest that Mr. Salmond was unwilling to appear?
Not impressed! and not impressive!
1#
well said Ed.Tony blair who cares he's gone soon ,maybe into the clutches of the police (cash for honours, WAR CRIMES??? etc etc etc...)who knows.As for that charlatan foulkes I'm sure he'll brown nose his way round Gordon brown in the future.As for his constituents in Lothian,well I know what its like to have bad representation in Hollyrood.this time round its better in the Highlands .However this time we all get to see that labour are just as incompetent in opposition as they were in power.Roll on the next election...
We might well ask what the role of George Foulkes is! I find that he comes across as a rude, ignorant and arrogant 'nobody'!
However, what is Downing Street up to? This memorandum and the lack of contact from Blair is beginning to look even more odd. Why are they behaving in this manner? You would almost think that they are provoking Scotland to walk away from the Union or indeed break into a gallop! And then someone brings up a British Day!
Aw come on!
It appears that downing street are actually trying to provoke the Scottish parliament into confrontation by treating it as a side show.This is to serious a matter to deride The scottish law as pretendy.I can't help but think that if Jack had been in charge we would have been kept in the dark about this and after watching Kirsty Wark carry the George Foulkes baton, I take it Alex Salmond will not be enjoying a freebie villa in the sun.
My good Gods...
The sheer level of political incompetence demonstrated by the Westminster crew on this beggars belief.
Quite aside from Tony Blair's churlish (if not to say downright childish) behaviour towards the venerable Wee Eck, this monumental cock-up serves only to demonstrate the contempt with which Westminster holds our government.
Now, it's quite possible that Mr Salmond did pull a bit of wool over the collective eyes of Ms. Goldie, Mr Stephen & Mr McConnell.
He does that.....he's a politician. But I think what he said was quite valid. he maybe overstressed a bit here and there but he's not 'spun' anything much here.....
No, the spinn-age came straight from No 10, who in a succession of misleading and grudgingly given press releases claimed first thatt thee was no MoU, then that there might be, but it's not been signed, then that it has, but it's only a draft, then finally releasing it through the FO, admitted that it was in fact not a draft. But they still (as of me writing this) claim that the MoU doesn't really refer to the Lockerbie 1, and that even if it does' that's not the main thrust of it...
Meanwhile, over in Libya, their govt is bouncing up and down screaming "Of course it is"...what else do they really care about? You think TB and Gadaffi regularly sit down to talk about sharing research materials between uni's. Yeah, sure...
Ah, the Executive's Central Enquiry Unit. Conveniently located in Kinlochleven - no wonder you couldn't find it!
An excellent blog Brian. Balanced, fair assessment.
I wonder what the legal establishment in Scotland think?
Funny how the only full report was on the 麻豆官网首页入口 main news, this report stated clearly that the memorandum would continue to hold to the agreement that the Scottish Parliament would continue to have the right of veto on any prisoner exchange. This small yet vital fact was absent from every report in Scotland that I saw.
So what exactly has Mr. Salmond been doing for the 7 days that he has had this?
I just love this blog. Thank you Brian.
If Ms Wark as has been widely reported apologised for her childish behaviour towards our FM, why have her employers not reported it or if they have why can't i find it on this web site?
At the end of the day, Westminster can do what it likes - if they don't mind the political backlash.
Salmond does not have to pick a fight, all he has to do is to continue to highlight the discourtesies which the UK show, and will no doubt continue to do. It seems that McConnell tried to resist this in the past, but was tied by the fact he was only London's representative in Scotland.
Labour need to have an independent Scottish party if they are not to replace the Tories as an "English" party, and suffer the consequences.
When do we get a post-election Scottish opinion poll?
The nub of Alex Salmond's emergency statement was 'concern that it was felt appropriate for the United Kingdom Government to sign such a memorandum on matters that are clearly devolved to Scotland, without any opportunity for the Scottish Government or Parliament to contribute'. (col 586, Official Report, 7 May).
Exactly what was agreed? The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was an agreement to commence discussions with a view to signing an agreement in June 2008 - it was an invitation to treat. The MoU is not legally binding in international law. The UK Government signs MoUs all the time - one was signed with Libya back in 2005 on deportation.
Significantly, the present MoU expressly required negotiations to proceed with the consent of the Scottish Parliament and Executive. So it was wrong for the First Minister to imply that a decision had been taken on a devolved matter by the UK Government. It had not.
As for consultation, isn't the First Minister complaining about not being consulted on being consulted? As to the 'emergency' nature of this matter can I please highlight the following.
In the Scottish Parliament, Mr Salmond confirmed that he first became aware of this matter on Friday 1 June. On 麻豆官网首页入口 Newsnight, Mr Salmond advised that he only arranged to see the MoU on Monday 4 June.
Clearly this matter not a sufficient emergency for the First Minister to ask to see the MoU immediately or over the weekend. The First Minister then delayed consulting the Lord Advocate until Wednesday 6 June.
The only conclusion to be drawn was that this issue was not an 'emergency'.
Cmon friend of Jack McConnel Ms Wark ... how about defending your childlike and unprofessional behaviour on Brian's blog?
It appears the vast majority who say your outbursts think you made a fool of yourself - care to reply?
Brian
Did you manage to get hold of Kirsty Wark? Has she gone ex directory? The conduct of Anne MacKenzie, her producer and editor is also worthy of further investigation.
#12 the Legal establishment will protect their fellow public sector colleagues- no one gets sacked or prosecuted in Scotland's public sector unless they blow the Whistle - just ask Shirley McKie.
Wark will have her job and get away with her bias as long as she wants to.
Must concur with poster 'Artafallie' above - good blog this Brian - light touch, measured & balanced, but also reflective and intelligent. Keep it going.
Hi,
You all just forgot that the deal with Gaddafi was to save six innocent lives - those of five bulgarian nurses and a palestinian doctor who are held as a hostages because of the Lockerbie case. if Scotland does not allow Megrahi to go the scotish people will have the blood of this innocant people on their hands.
For once Toni Blair made the wright decision. god bless him
Box no. 11. N. Kerr seems to be complaining about not being able to find a phone number because the Executive call centre is in Kinlochleven.Surely it`s better there than Kenya or Kazikstan, at least when you get in touch you can *unner stain* the accent.
To #4, Brian was referring to George Foulkes, Baron Foulkes of Cumnock I believe.
I share the comments that other posters have expressed at the hype generated by this non-event story. At no time was there any need to for the first minister of Scotland, or the first ministers of the other devolved administrations, to be involved in the discussions surrounding the drafting of this document - which only notes that some future discussions will take place. Any more formal negotiations would then include all interested parties, as noted in the memorandum of understanding in the first place. This initial step is best made at the highest governmental level. In this respect, I agree with Mike's comments. A line has to be drawn where talks at a governmental level has to proceed between individual countries' leaders with discussions with the devolved administrations conducted at the appropriate time.
This whole situation appears to have been manipulated by Alex Salmond, with the whole-hearted support of the media, particularly in Scotland, to mislead both the Scottish Parliament and the public. Closer scrutiny shows that Salmond's arguments just don't hold water and I think that HE is the one that should be APOLOGISING for his crass opportunism. It is about time that the Scottish media, particularly 麻豆官网首页入口 Scotland, gave the new SNP administration much closer scrutiny rather than the shameful cosy uncritical coverage that they have lauded on the SNP, and Alex Salmond in particular, over the months and weeks leading up to the elections. In this respect, I think that Kirsty Wark should be applauded for her more searching treatment of Salmond on Newsnight - though she would probably agree that it was not one of her best performances. I hope, and expect, that as the new administration beds-in, and inevitably starts to make mistakes, the media in Scotland will give the SNP the scrutiny that's been so sadly lacking to date.
I believe, maybe wrongly, that there is a hidden agenda here. I expect that 麻豆官网首页入口 Scotland are still sore that they were not authorised to schedule a "News at Six" programme of their own and are courting the SNP administration's favour with a view to twisting the arm of the 麻豆官网首页入口 so that this will be instated. I for one wasn't surprised to see the idea floated again shortly after the local elections. I, for one, hope that this never happens.
The politics of this situation apart.I am appalled but not hugely surprised when kirsty wark showed her true and frankly bigoted colours in that newsnight interview with alex salmond.She let herself down very badly and in any case her interview skills have always been seriously overrated. i never thought much of her 'brilliant' Thatcher interview.Not Since the 'drunken ' 麻豆官网首页入口 New Year show at Gleneagles have I witnessed such a lack of professionalism by the 麻豆官网首页入口. very poor.
I've had a classic idea. Blair and the British Government at Westminster could maybe sign a memorandum of understanding with Alex Salmond in a tent at Hampden...
I'm an SNP supporter through and through, but you do have to wonder what the UK government is up to. The way to increase the nationalist vote in Scotland is to treat the people with contempt. At this rate, with Brown refusing to say hi to Salmond, Blair agreeing to remove our terrorist prisoners without our agreement, and everything else, the SNP won't need to even canvass for the next election - they'll be handed it on a plate.
So keep it up Tony and Gordon, you are our dream ticket!!! lol
I echo # 20 -
Cmon friend of Jack McConnel Ms Wark ... how about defending your childlike and unprofessional behaviour on Brian's blog?
#19, This is a bigger issue than the Memorandum, though it is important in that it signifies that no such document should have been signed by Lybia and UK before having the courtesy of contacting the First Minister (he will have a mobile phone or someone close to him)! This is really about how Westminster treats Scotland ie. with contempt. The silver lining in all of this is that what has previously been hidden, the contemptuous attitude of Westminister,is now out in the open.
Brian - where do you stand on the ethics of a senior Newsnight anchor allowing senior Labour party political figures (such as Jack McConnell) to stay at her family holiday home in Majorca? And do such personal friendships ever stand in the way of balanced reporting?
For what it's worth I think Ms Wark's shameful behaviour to wee Eck on newsnight is worthy of a sacking. There was nothing balanced in her outburts. Hurt pride at McConnells loss of office?
Is it not time that the 麻豆官网首页入口 ended Kirsty Wark鈥檚 probation, as she has seemingly given them reasonable cause by apparently breaking most, if not all of the conditions of that said probation; it would take more than a quick chat to convince me that collusion was not in the air when this programme was structured.
If the 麻豆官网首页入口 does not act they will equally be tarnished by the actions and words of Kirsty Wark; 麻豆官网首页入口, consult your Charter.
How touching, all of you jumping to Wee Eck's defence. Be assured - he doesn't need you. He's less than cuddly in his own dealings with people who can't answer back.
#33 it is clear from most posts that it is not to the defence of Alex Salmond to which people are jumping, they are jumping up and down about the supposed impartiality of the 麻豆官网首页入口 and their employees, contract or otherwise.
This lack of impartiality was clearly displayed by Jack McConnell's holiday companion / free accommodation supplier; no amount of protestations about tough questioning will cover her tracks, she was either acting as the political agent of a severely miffed ex First Minister, showing her solidarity with the aforementioned ex First Minister or both.
The 麻豆官网首页入口 Board of Governors must operate to their charter.
One reason that Kirsty Wark gained so much kudos for the Thatcher interview was that she was well briefed and had done her research, or it had been done well for her. The fact that Thatcher was not particularly popular was also a factor no doubt.
Clearly with Salmond the reverse was the case.
At one point in the interview she states "this memo was shown to you as part of a formal consultation exercise" even Downing Street have not, so far, claimed this.
Anyone who had carried out any research could not have considered this as a possibility. Only KW could resolve whether this was raised as a fact through ignorance or for some other reason.
As far as I can see from the "apologies" made they regret the way the interview was terminated but believe no apology is required for the way in which it was carried out.
It seems clear that Salmond was at some time going to clash with the London Parliament but it is astonishing that Downing Street has handed him the ammunition for a fight and from todays comments is replenishing his supplies.
#34 - so perhaps they feel they don't have to?
Salmond has been conducting his politics in the media instead of the Parliament since he was elected. The Libya deal row is a case in point - he knew about this MoU on 1 June, yet was so unconcerned that he waited till 4 June to ask to see the document - then suddenly he's bellowing to the media about insults to Scotland! When in fact the document makes clear that the devolved administrations will be involved in any decisions.
And then was was harshly dealt with by a member of said media.
I shed no tears for him. If he's going to run with the media pack, he should expect them to turn on him every now and again.
Your remarks about Ms Wark's motiviation seem to me to fly a tad close to the legal wind - don't get yourself into bother in your eagerness to fight Salmond's corner. He has enough flunkies to do that.
#35, Poppaea
Salmond found out about the document on the 1st of June, a Friday. The document was requested and was given to the First Minister on the 4th of June, a Monday. The cabinet discussed it on the 5th, a Tuesday.
You seem to be unware that there are such things as *weekends* and politicians have them off too. In fact, politicians get an awful lot of time off, as I learned when I took my Holyrood tour.
I suggest you review the evidence of 鈥榁illagate,鈥 the evidence was sufficient for the 麻豆官网首页入口 to place Kirsty Wark on probation and remove her as News Night anchor although not sufficient apparently to officially reprimand the First minister purely because their was no evidence of financial gain on his behalf.
I wish someone would give me a free holiday in Majorca; I may also not make a financial gain but I would certainly make a financial saving. What is the difference?
Kirsty Wark was appointed to the Scottish Parliament Building Design Selection Panel by her close friend Donald Dewar, former First Minister of Scotland. The Villagate row erupted after Kirsty Wark invited Jack McConnell and his wife, Bridget, to spend Hogmanay with her and her partner Alan Clements at their house in Alaro, Majorca; the families also holidayed together at the villa in December 2002.
It has subsequently emerged that Kirsty Wark and her family have twice been overnight guests at Bute House, McConnell's official residence in Edinburgh.
Am I or any reasoning individual supposed to believe that she would be unbiased in her attitude to Scottish politics; we taxpayers have funded the lifestyle of Kirsty Wark since 1976 through her and her families connections and employment with the 麻豆官网首页入口 whilst also funding her entertainment at Bute House.
It is not I that is flying too close to the legal wind, I merely express an opinion, I suggest you read again my post of the 11th of June.
While I think that Kirsty's interview with Alex was terrible I think that this is being blown up out of proportion. She did treat him with contempt(but I am surprised at people being shocked by that); however, the amount of politicians who are dragged over the coals by political pundits is high. I ask if Mr Paxman or Mr Boulton treated a English MP in the same way would there be an outcry?
It is the same with Anne Mackenzie, who seems to get on fine with Alex Salmond. You can tell by the way the converse they are fine with each other (just watch this week's Newsnight Scotland). Anne has been interviewing Alex since the he became an MP when she hosted Crossfire on the now defunct Grampian TV. My only criticism is that Kirsty, like many news presenters, likes to live it up with celebs. Yet Anne Mackenzie is quite the opposite, and is one of the few respectable news presenters to exist!
I doubt Anne meant any malice and I doubt Kirsty wanted to create 120 odd complaints. Time to move on to more important matters like the 'story' itself methinks!!
Brian,
What do you think of the possibility of Gordon Brown calling, not an election after he becomes Prime Minister, but a referendum in Scotland on Independance?
Like the independance of the Bank of England this could be pulled out of the hat at little cost to Gordon.
The nationalists could hardly object, they would have to welcome it through gritted teeth as it would not be at a time of their choosing
It doesn't really matter what Jack McConnell thinks although no doubt he would come round to thinking it was a good idea and he had been behind it all along.
The Lib dems would be against it, then for it, then who knows.
The Tories would be for it as they would assume it would result in defeat of the nationalists.
Just a thought.
Do you fairly think this is news? I like and read your blog to get necessary information, but sometimes melancholy kills me