Tom Harris has got a nerve. I know that particular observation is on a rough par with pointing out that dolphins are fond of the odd swim, but he really has got a nerve. This is from a recent speech to the House of Commons, lovingly transcribed (by "Admin", no doubt) onto Labour Hame -
"And if the SNP prove that they are incapable of holding a free and fair referendum, then I want to know from the minister whether he thinks the UK government has any role in ensuring that the Scottish people are properly consulted about the future of our nation."
But how precisely does he want David Cameron (a man who, after all, he did so much to help into office) to ensure the Scottish people are "properly consulted about the future of our nation"? It turns out that he has two main things in mind -
1) Denying the Scottish people the chance to vote on a constitutional option (devo max) that opinion polls currently show to be the most popular. He instead wants the choice to be restricted in the hope that, when forced into a choice between two options they do not want, supporters of devo max will wearily plump for Tom's own preference of the status quo.
2) Denying approximately 2.5% of the Scottish people any kind of say on their future at all. He is quite open about his reasons for this - he fears they would vote the 'wrong way'...
"Polling suggests that younger people are more likely to support independence"
Hmmm. This appears to be the United Arab Emirates definition of "proper consultation of the people". Incidentally, Tom, if it's OK for you to abuse the language by repeatedly referring to a constitutional option that would leave Scotland firmly within the United Kingdom as "Separation Lite", is it OK for us to call your beloved status quo "Colonialism Diluted"?
To paraphrase John Stewart
ReplyDelete"Admin" reminds me of a schoolyard bully who sits there making "Yo' mama" jokes and as soon as anyone comes back at him with "Well. yo' mama is ...."
He's on his feet shouting "Uncool man, UNCOOL"
Not a friend to democracy
Ah... I read the piece on Havers Lame and started writing a piece on it, on reading it back, I reckoned that it compared unfavourably to anything you would have written on the piece...so I binned it in the hopes that you would oblige.
ReplyDeleteI'm relieved that you did and that I was proved correct.
I see a pattern here, the AV/FPTP poll having shown the way. The new democracy concerning referenda seems to involve but two steps.
1. Use polling to establish what it is that the people actually want.
2. Design your referendum to avoid this option.
Two Step Democracy.
Simples.
Tom Harris' comments are actually a symptom of the lack of will, leadership and especially courage that the unionist parties showed in the Scottish Parliamentary session of 2007-2011.
ReplyDeleteIf these unionist parties had had the courage of their conviction that Scotland as a whole is unionist then they should have called the independence referendum in 2007-2011.
With a majority in the Scottish Parliament they would have had control of the number of questions on the ballot paper, the text of the questions and the timing of the referendum.
Now all these issues are under the control of the SNP and what we see with all these calls for conventions to decide on the text of the questions, all the hoo-haa about the number of questions and the desperate attempts to have some control over the timing of the referendum by demanding it is held right now are simply the futile attempts of the unionist parties to gain back some, any control over the referendum.
They had their chance in 2007-2011 and they blew it and they know it.
Normally I don’t like David Cameron and the Tories. But I really felt sorry for them having to listen to that mind numbing drivel. Tom Harris seems set to be in the jelly mould of other waffling blow-hard politicians from all sides of the political spectrum. Why I understand we even have (or had) them in the SNP, Gordon Wilson springs to mind. I sincerely hope that Tom does not become leader of the Scottish Labour group at Holyrood as he will just be another politician who causes you to reach for the “off” switch. I could almost predict what he was going to say before he said it which is good because then I did not have to listen to it and feel like I had been swindled out of 20 minutes of life. The same is true when “admin” posted it on the rather amusingly entitled “Labour Hame” geddit? Its Labour and its also their home but Scottified with a pair of tartan knickers and a Scottie dog so we can all be conned into thinking that the likes of Harris love their country i.e. Scotland instead of what they really love which is the UK gravy train. As far as I’m concerned you deserve a medal for being prepared to put yourself through the medieval torture that is reading that claptrap I only got through the first paragraph before I started to speed read and then just gave up half way through. If that is Tom’s effect on me just imagine how good he will be in convincing people to vote for his selfish ends?
ReplyDeleteAre they worth even talking to?
ReplyDeleteGood lord. The man's paranoid. Nt to mentioned a bit one sided with his paranoia. Has he ever read the Scotsman boards?
ReplyDeleteAnd what made him say it would be worse if you were a woman?
Can I defend Harris by saying that his posts at least have an element of sanity about them. As opposed to the post that complained that Salmond was rotten at puting together a speech.
ReplyDeleteAh, Tris. Here's my own hair loss moment...
http://humbug3.blogspot.com/2011/10/just-what-is-labour-hames-problem.html