Month: December 2019

 

 

 

 

 

Edinburgh University 2014 Referendum Analysis

The biggest study of how Scotland made its historic decision on 18 September 2014 found that the votes of people born outside Scotland decided the result.

52.7 percent of native-born Scots voted “yes” but 72.1 percent of voters from England, Wales or Northern Ireland backed the Union.

There were more than 420,000 Britons from elsewhere in the UK living in Scotland when the last census was taken and assuming they cast their ballots in line with the findings of the Edinburgh University study, more than 300,000 of them will have voted “no”.

EU citizens, numbering around 225,000 also rejected independence, with 57.1 percent, around 128,500 voted “no”.

With the foregoing 428,000 confirmed “no” voters, from outside Scotland, the referendum ended with “Better Together” gaining 384,000 more votes for “no”.

The “no” campaigners were “cock a hoop” with their victory and boasted that Scots had voted against independence. A statement totally at odds with the facts. Scots-born and resident citizens did vote for independence.

Political scientist Professor Ailsa Henderson, who wrote the study said it showed the influence of “Britishness” among voters born elsewhere in the UK in deciding the result.  She said:

“Scottish-born people were more likely to vote “yes” and those born outside Scotland were more likely to vote “no”. But the least sympathetic to “yes” were the people born in the UK, but outside Scotland. We think they are more likely to feel British. They are more likely to feel a continued tie to the UK as a whole – because that’s where they are from.”

 

 

The Next Referendum

Lessons need to be learned:

The impact of voters born outwith, but resident in Scotland needs to be marginalized. Voting qualification should be restricted to Scottish income taxpayers. This would disqualify many who are resident outwith Scotland but qualify because they have a second home in Scotland. 

225,000 EU residents were conned last time believing the lies of the “Better Together” campaigners that a “no” vote would ensure their place within the EC would be guaranteed. It is very likely many former “no” voters will change their vote to “yes”.

An unspecified number of “yes” Scots might vote “no” because of the Scottish government’s position on EC membership and the benefits of remaining in Europe will need to be sold vigorously in the course of the campaign.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Navy Veteran Bowie promoted by the Tory party as the champion of the armed forces

This article brings to the attention of readers of this blog information exposing the bloody awful treatment by the Tory Party of the armed services and the abject destruction of the capability of the Royal Navy to defend the UK from attack. And all of this appalling mess stoutly defended by their military veteran Bowie

 

 

 

29 Jan 2016: British warships need multi-million-pound refit to stop power failures

The Royal Navy’s most advanced warships, once described as the best in the world, will need multi-million-pound repairs because of repeated power failures that leave the Type 45 destroyers unable to navigate or activate weapons systems. Admiral Lord West castigated the MoD who had pretended it was a case of teething problems. He said

“they must have known three or four years ago that this was more than that. There’s no doubt this is extremely worrying. It’s an intermittent fault which has quite clearly caused a lot of problems. You don’t expect suddenly to lose all power when you’re steaming along normally. Repairs will cost tens of millions because you’ll have to cut a hole in the ship, get into it, fit something else into it, button it up and get it out. And even more worrying is we only have 19 destroyers and frigates. That is a national disgrace. Someone needs to look at why did we arrive at this position.”

 

 

 

MPs and peers asked questions in parliament about the power failures. Conservative MP Nicholas Soames commented:

“This is an unmitigated disaster and a huge cock-up by the MOD and Royal Navy. The ships don’t work. The secretary of defense, I am sure, will be outraged by this. We should never have got ourselves into the situation where the entire Royal Navy has just 19 frigates and destroyers. It is a disgrace.”

The ever-spiraling costs of the Type 45 destroyers was criticized by the House of Commons defense committee as early as 2009. The Royal Navy had originally requested 12 ships but the cost of the advanced ships meant the force ended up with just six. The ships are powered by integrated electric propulsion, using very high-voltage electrics. Warships with electrical failures are unable to navigate or operate defensively will drift at sea until power is restored, and weapons systems may be unable to function.

At least one new generator is expected to be needed on each ship, requiring a major refit of the vessels where internal space is already very tight. The work will be furthered hampered by a shortage of marine engineers, which has led to the Royal Navy being forced to recruit from the US Coast Guard. It has been estimated that the Royal Navy is short of about 750 engineers, despite recruiting many from Canada and other Commonwealth nations. Peter Roberts, a former naval commanding officer now a senior research fellow at RUSI said:

“You cannot be in the Strait of Hormuz, where things can be tense, with the risk of a power failure. The upgrade is about adding resilience to the ship, it was always thought to be a risk when a ship depended on a high voltage but it is a risk that has come home to roost.” (The Guardian)

 

 

 

Jul 2016: Build of a new fleet of Type 26 global-combat frigates indefinitely delayed.

The National Audit Office heavily criticized the MOD over a backlog of huge financial and technical problems facing the navy’s surface vessels.

Delays in contracting the building of new frigates – a project promised by David Cameron before the 2014 Scottish independence referendum – is threatening shipbuilding jobs on the Clyde in Scotland.

There are even more serious mechanical failures in the navy’s new fleet of Type 45 destroyers, which cannot operate anywhere south of Gibraltar due to the overheating of key systems. The main task of the new frigates and destroyers (which they are incapable of completing) include protecting two new large aircraft carriers as well as Trident nuclear weapons submarines approaching and leaving their base on the Clyde. Tony Douglas, the MoD’s top official responsible for military equipment, when asked by MPs on the Commons Defense Committee said, “I can’t give you a time or a date when the frigate design will be approved”

The number of planned new frigates was reduced from thirteen to eight and the project might yet be abandoned (a costly option) in favour of building five smaller and cheaper general-purpose vessels equipped with quiet engines making it harder for them to be detected by Russian submarines.

Westminster MPs approved the building of four new Trident submarines at an official cost of £28billion (but this has since been adjusted upwards to £167billion) and experts expect further increases over the period of the contract.

The Tory Party Chairman of the all-party Defense Committee warned that further delays could lead to even more money being spent on a new frigate fleet and on extending the life of the existing frigates. He reminded the MoD of many previous navy “disasters”, including those involving the Astute class of nuclear-powered submarines.

The navy’s new fleet of destroyers, (cost £1.5 bn each) has also encountered serious and embarrassing mechanical failures. It is disappointing that the destroyers had been designed to be fully operational in hot climates, their resilience had “degraded catastrophically”, with problems over the high summer in the Red Sea and the Gulf.

The SNP’s defense spokesman in Westminster, Brendan O’Hara, said: “the enormous cost of Trident is spiraling out of control – and it would be completely unacceptable and unforgivable if the Clyde yards had to pay the price for the Tory obsession with Trident, a weapon of mass destruction opposed by a majority of Scots.”

 

 

 

 

Jul 2017: Senior military veterans warn that the Royal Navy’s new destroyers sound like a “box of rattling spanners” to Russian attack submarines.

Highlighting growing fears defense chiefs incompetently ignored the threat from enemy submarines whilst investing in anti-aircraft and missile defense systems, wrongly concentrating too much investment on the war against terror whilst ignoring the resurgence of Cold War hostilities.

Rear Admiral Chris Parry (rtd) claimed the new build destroyers can be detected from over 100 miles away by Putin’s deadly new hunter-killer submarines. Amid damning claims of “huge gaps” left in Britain’s defense, Parry is reported saying:

“We used to put little wooden wedges between the hatch-clip and the hatches in my destroyer to stop them rattling so we could keep the noise down. We have forgotten all about it. It’s crazy. Noise suppression has been probably the biggest dirty secret since the end of the Cold War that people have been cheerfully ignoring. Ships currently in service are noisy as hell. He went on to say: “During the Cold War the ships I was in were the equivalent of a whisper. These ships now are the equivalent of someone shouting at somebody.”

The claims cover a wide range of complaints about bungling MoD chiefs leaving Britain wide-open to attack and making a number of costly equipment mistakes. (The Mirror)

 

 

 

 

Dec 2017: Britain has a navy that cannot put to sea.

Britain had no major warships deployed on operations beyond home waters in what has been described as an “unprecedented” absence of the vessels on the world stage. All six of the Royal Navy’s Type 45 destroyers were docked in Portsmouth, while twelve of thirteen frigates were docked at Portsmouth and Devonport.

HMS St Albans is the only frigate on duty at sea, as the fleet ready escort protecting home waters. The absence of naval warships at sea is attributed to major cuts to the defense budget contributing to a dangerous shortage of trained naval staff. Vice-Admiral John McAnally, National President of the Royal Naval Association, said:

“The scarcity of frigates and destroyers overseas is unprecedented and indicates the fleet is too small. I am distressed and alarmed. I do not see that it is easily remedied. The only answer is an increase in the defense budget. It is too small to meet what the government wants the armed forces to do.”

Fixed-wing carrier operations ceased in 2010 with the retirement of the last Harrier. This capability will not be restored until the Joint Combat Aircraft (F-35) and the first Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier become fully operational which is not expected to be until 2121 at the earliest. It also emerged during sea-trials that the new carrier (the largest and most expensive in the Royal Navy’s history) leaks. (defense-aerospace)

 

 

 

17 Jul 2017: Bowie’s contribution to the house of commons debate on the future of the UK armed forces

Bowie spoke on the importance of maintaining a strong Royal Navy and had this to say:

“I was proud to speak about how our island nation depends on safe waters and open seaways and therefore a strong Royal Navy for its safety, security and its economic growth. How I am proud that for the first time in many years, the fleet is growing in size, on the government’s commitment to Scotland and Scottish shipbuilding and how we must continue this trajectory, how we must never allow ourselves to become sea blind and how we need a strong and flexible navy, ready to fight the battles of the 21st Century.”  Yes!! He really did say that. What a pillock.!!

 

 

 

19 Jul 2017: Armed Forces Debate in the Commons:

Bowie:

“I stand here proud that, for all we talk today about moving towards a more flexible, agile force, armed and trained to fight the asymmetric wars of the future, the Conservative Government have proven, in not only words but actions, that they do not suffer, as other Governments have, from sea-blindness.

Douglas Chapman (SNP):

“More account needs to be taken of the threats that face Scotland from the north. The fact that we do not have a surface ship based in Scotland to protect our coastline from increasing Russian submarine incursions into our waters needs to be addressed.”

Bowie:

“The hon. Gentleman says that there are no surface vessels based in Scotland, but that is patently untrue. The mine countermeasures squadron is based solely at Faslane, which if I am not mistaken is north of the border in Scotland.”

Douglas Chapman Shadow (SNP):

“What a tremendous example: one single minesweeper to deal with the whole of the North Sea and the North Atlantic. I am sure everyone in Scotland will sleep easy in their beds tonight.”

Comment:

The Tory government has ruthlessly cut funding of the Royal Navy reducing its capability well in excess of operational requirements present and forecast. Badly designed destroyers and frigates need to be replaced as a matter of urgency, but less than 50% are scheduled to be built and new weaponry has been abandoned. Add to this there was the ill-advised sale of the still excellent 72 Harriers to the US for less than £1bn, to be replaced with, as yet unbuilt 100+ US built F35 fixed-wing airplane, (costing around £2.0billion each).

And two new aircraft carriers scheduled for introduction into service will only be securely deployed to their role, protecting the Atlantic sea-lanes, plugging the “Greenland gap” if the US military loans the UK sufficient numbers of their F35 aircraft (which they haven’t yet built) together with American pilots and support staff. What a shambolic mess. And Bowie is effusive in his pleasure in the Tory government in its efforts.

 

 

 

 

Tax and Health and Welfare

8 Feb 2018: Universal credit all-party report raises fears over the workability of the system

The Commons work and pensions committee said the government had yet to produce a full business case justifying universal credit, seven years after the programme started, and there remained considerable uncertainty about its costs and benefits. Government ministers produced no evidence to back up the key, central economic assumption of the biggest reform to our welfare system in 50 years.

The committee warned that the improved job outcomes the reform promises are uncertain, while anticipated taxpayer savings rely on it becoming increasingly automated and “industrialized”, despite evidence that significant numbers of claimants find it difficult to access and use the digital-only system.

Universal Credit aims to roll six major working-age benefits into one monthly payment, including job seeker’s allowance, tax credit, and housing benefit. It has been criticized for design flaws and administrative errors that have left thousands of poorer claimants at risk of poverty, debt and rent arrears.

The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) said that political uncertainties and problems with the design and implementation of the much-delayed project, currently around five years behind schedule, meant universal credit presented a “significant risk” to public spending. Many billions of pounds have been written off to this debacle since Ian Duncan Smith first muted it many years ago and still Bowie and his ilk insist it will all be for the better in time. But who’s betterment?

Bowie (a member of the cross-party Commons work and pensions committee) praised the universal credit (UC) roll out claiming it eased claimants into work mirroring the benefits of employed income. This from a man that has sponged just about all of his salary and expenses from the Scottish taxpayer.

 

 

 

 

23 Dec 2017: Scottish income tax – Army at war over SNP taxes

The Ministry of Defense is to compensate armed forces personnel stationed in Scotland who end up worse off as a result of the Scottish government’s income tax hikes. Tory MP Bowie, said:

“It’s becoming increasingly clear that the SNP has charged ahead with their tax changes without thinking through the consequences. Armed forces are facing a ‘Scottish surcharge’ simply for living north of the Border. There is no good reason why anyone in Scotland should be forced to pay more in income tax than people elsewhere in the UK. It shouldn’t be up to the MoD to have to compensate those being forced to pay more. The SNP needs to think again.”

His assertion is abject nonsense. The reality is that 14,000 military personnel stationed in Scotland are better off when income tax is set against health and welfare benefits provided solely to those who reside in Scotland. The Unionist rag and those who support it are lying through their teeth in yet another disgraceful attempt to smear the Scottish government. Benefits exclusive to armed forces based in Scotland comprise:

Free provision of 600 hours per year of (16 hours weekly) early learning and child care for all 3 and 4 years old’s as well as vulnerable 2-year-olds. Increased further in 2018/19.

Free prescription charges.

All school children from primary one to three entitled to a free school meal.

Additional facts:

12,000 forces personnel will pay less tax, (but the Unionists are not complaining that similar personnel based in England will pay more).

1,500 will pay between £0.50p – £1.50p more tax weekly.

The residue, around 500 personnel, will pay around £14.00p weekly. Hardly onerous when set against their minimum salary band of £50k plus.

Noteworthy is that the bulk of the 500 highest earners are married with children and gain significant benefits, (not available to English based armed forces through the earlier mentioned family orientated provisions)

 

 

 

Bowie (the Blimp) Cocked up Theresa May’s Campaigning Visit to West Aberdeenshire

5 Jul 2017: At Prime Ministers Questions Bowie seized the opportunity to thank Mrs. May for taking time out from her busy schedule during the general election campaign to campaign in his constituency. But the reality was that her visit had been botched from the time of its conception by Bowie. He should have been best advised to keep his mouth shut on the matter. A  look back reveals the following debacle

 

 

30 Apr 2017: Theresa May faces fresh accusations of ‘hiding’ after Scotland rally publicly listed as child’s birthday party

Theresa May faced fresh accusations of “hiding” from voters after a campaign event held in Scotland was publicly listed as a children’s birthday party. Bemused locals in Aberdeenshire were sent on a “treasure hunt” but were unable to find the location of Mrs. May’s visit, which had not been advertised in advance. It was only after Mrs. May spoke to a small audience of specially selected assembled supporters at Crathes village hall that locals discovered it had been booked by Bowie as a “child party”.

A local said he was shocked to find the listing on the venue’s website hours after attempting to put “serious questions” to the Prime Minister. He said: “There was a whole load of us who wanted to go and question her on a lot of important policies and issues. It’s been so secretive, they are supposed to be holding these big rallies but all she’s doing is hiding in little village halls, not saying they are going to be there. So there’s no one apart from local Tory activists standing there boosting her ego. It’s quite pathetic really – for the Prime Minister of the UK to be hiding in a village hall in rural Aberdeenshire.”

 

 

29 Apr 2017: Just for the press, Theresa May (accompanied by Andrew Bowie) attempted to deliver leaflets to four terraced houses…no one answered their door!!!

 

 

 

 

 

2017-18: House of Commons – Contributions to debates and other relevant business

Bowie is very active in the Commons and is determined to establish his place in the Tory Party protecting his future employment should things go pear-shaped in Scotland and he needs to find a constituency in England. He has been on his feet on around 127 occasions and often asks loaded questions of ministers. I extracted a few examples for browsing but his parliamentary record is best followed here:

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mps/#B

 

 

 

 

4 Dec 2017: affordable house building

Bowie: A loaded question. What steps is the housing minister taking to ensure that more homes are built in England?

Sajid Javid: In the autumn Budget, we announced further reforms and financial support to increase housing supply in England. This includes more than £15 billion of new financial support, at least £44 billion of funding to 2022-23, and reforms to ensure that more land is available for housing.

Bowie: The work of his Department and the pledge in the Budget to build 300,000 new homes in England are very welcome, and will go some way to address growing inter-generational unfairness when it comes to getting on the housing ladder. Will he join me today in calling for the Scottish Government to match the Scottish Conservatives’ pledge to build 100,000 new homes north of the border so that young people in my constituency can have the same opportunities to buy as those in constituencies in England?

Sajid Javid: He is right to highlight this issue. The Scottish Government, have been failing consistently on house building, especially affordable house building. I commend the ideas, energy, and ambition shown by the Scottish Conservatives in challenging the Scottish National party to build more homes in Scotland.

Alison Thewliss (SNP):

The Scottish Parliament has delivered more than 69,500 affordable homes since 2007, during the period of SNP government, and the new-build social sector completion rate is at 72 per 100,000 population, compared with just 49 in England. And why exactly was there no commitment to increase social rented housing in the Budget?

Sajid Javid, the Tory Minister was remiss in his answer – The fact is that house building under the Tories is at its lowest level since the 1920s. An analysis of house building going back more than a century shows the most recent years of Conservative rule has seen the lowest average house build rate since Stanley Baldwin was in Downing Street in 1923. A political commentator said: “These humiliating figures show that Ministers’ promises on housing have been nothing more than empty words.  Official statistics confirm that since 2010 not only have Conservative Ministers built many fewer homes than claimed and after seven years of failure the Tory’s have no plan to fix the housing crisis. (Huffington Post)

 

 

 

12 Sep 2017: Questions to Mundell – Decommissioning of Oil Platforms Scotland

Bowie: Does the UK Government have plans to develop an ultra-deepwater port on the East Coast of Scotland?  Without such a port the bulk of the anticipated multi-billion pounds work will be awarded to contractors outwith Scotland.

Mundell: The Government is committed to supporting the development of a world-leading decommissioning industry. But no UK port currently has the ultra-deepwater facilities needed to directly accommodate the fully-loaded heavy lift vessels commonly used for decommissioning large platforms. So! No plans in place. The work is destined for foreign shores.

 

 

 

Scottish Tories expected to vote as a bloc to protect Scotland’s interests

Leader Ruth Davidson ordered Scottish Tory MPs to champion Scotland in Westminster. The instruction included fighting for the devolving of additional Scottish powers and spending on fisheries and agriculture during and after the Brexit negotiations reinforcing Holyrood’s existing powers in both areas under devolution. Davidson and other senior figures in the Scottish Tories also considered options to reinforce or indeed increase their independence from the UK party after clear differences emerged between the group and Tory headquarters in London over the style and tone of the election campaign. The baker’s dozen Tory MP’s ignored Ruth the Mooth which is the true cause of her resignation as leader of the Tories in Scotland.

 

 

 

17 Dec 2017: Brexit – The Scotland Act and the infamous Henry the VIII Act

The EU Withdrawal Bill was the subject of a heated debate in the Commons. There were 11 divisions all requiring a vote on amendments submitted by the SNP. Every single amendment was voted down by the Tory Party assisted by their Scottish MPs and DUP cronies resulting in the retention of draconian powers being retained at Westminster.

A key amendment submitted and rejected was one which, if accepted would have prevented Tory Government ministers from using Brexit as an excuse to modify the Scotland Act reducing the powers granted to the Scottish Parliament. This means that the SNP Government in Scotland and any future governing body are hanging their coats on shuggly pegs. Westminster can now remove some or all powers on a whim and remove all devolved authority back to London. The 13 Scottish Tory MPs all voted against the amendment which is astounding. In acting against the best interests of Scotland the Scottish Tory Party revealed its true agenda. Well knowing it will never become the elected government of Scotland it’s Scottish MP’s have no wish to retain the Scotland Act. (the guardian)

 

 

 

17 Oct 2017: debate in the Commons on devolved powers in Scotland

Stephen Kerr Conservative, Stirling had called for the debate and spoke first:

“Twenty years ago, I was in the minority. At the referendum in 1997, I campaigned against the establishment of a Scottish Parliament, not from party loyalty but from the starting point that any dilution of the Union could lead to its ending. I urged the people of Scotland to think twice and vote no. They did not; instead, they voted yes to a future with a devolved Parliament in Edinburgh. However, I now realize that I was wrong. With the zeal of the convert, I have trodden my own road to Damascus and now I stand here today to extol the virtues of the Scottish Parliament and devolution. The Scottish Parliament has helped and is helping to create a better Scotland, and a more comfortable and confident Union, too; but more than that, I firmly believe that devolution is a principle worth arguing for. I am not talking about devolution in the sense of the establishment of a Scottish Parliament or Welsh Assembly, but about the concept of devolution. It is core to my credo that politics should be and is local. It is personal to communities that decisions that impact on people’s lives should be made as near to them as possible. Edinburgh is not the end of the road; Holyrood should just be the beginning. Politics should be local and we should seek to localize decision making.”

Bowie: It is right that we in this place—the place that passed the original Scotland Act 1998—consider the use of devolved powers. It is a fact that thanks to the actions of this Government, the Scottish Parliament is one of the most powerful devolved legislative Assemblies in the world, with powers over justice, education, health, transport, the environment, and now taxation and elements of social security. That is a good thing. However, for the people of my constituency, and indeed for the people of the wider north-east of Scotland, far from the renewing or revitalizing experience promised in 1999, the reality of devolution has been cuts, tax rises and the perception of a central-belt bias in all decision making.”

What followed was an acrimonious slagging match with each of the Scottish Tory MP’s, in turn, attacking the performance of the SNP Government on just about any minor grievance they could muster. It fell to Tommy Sheppard to set the record straight and to remind those present of the inappropriate nature of the so-called debate which should never have been permitted. He said:

“It is customary when I rise to make the third party submission, to thank the Member who has brought the debate. On this occasion, I will decline to do that. The Scottish Government is accountable to the elected Members of the Scottish Parliament, who are elected by and accountable to the Scottish people. It is not a matter for this Westminster Parliament—indeed there is an explicit constitutional convention that forbids it—to try to hold to account the Scottish Government, so I wonder why Stephen Kerr has chosen, among all the things he could discuss that affect his constituents, to bring this motion here today. I conclude that the only possible reason for this debate is not to try to advance or develop public policy but purely and simply political point-scoring and to have a go at the SNP. It is a matter of some regret that he has been aided and abetted in that endeavor by the Labour party. It seems that contributors to the debate cannot make up their mind about whether the problem is that the Scottish Government are not using the powers they have, or whether they are using their powers, as some speakers have complained. The truth is that the Scottish Parliament and Government use their powers every day and in every way to try to make things better for the people of Scotland, but they do so within considerable legislative and financial constraints, which have seen Scottish public funding cut by almost 10% in real terms in a decade.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The British Secret Services

Agents are recruited from all walks of life which is at odds with a commonly held view by the public is that all employees of MI5/6 are trained to kill and then deployed to duties worldwide equipped with the assassination skills of James Bond. But the reality is that 90% of the British Secret Service staff are employed completing administration duties such as information gathering, monitoring, telecommunication, cipher coding, bugging, etc. and at any time, without informing politicians, police, etc. there may be up to 250 Secret Services agents operating in Scotland. Many for years on end.

The diplomatic service, politics, armed forces, and business are fertile recruiting grounds for the Secret Services. The primary training establishment is at HMS Davenport ( the naval training centre). James Bond? Yes!!! the place where Commander James Bond was trained.

Agents released to political careers are normally registered with the political party of their choice and are activated, with the expectation that the next 40 years of their lives will require their presence at Westminster. They enjoy “protected” status and are able to avoid detection and retribution for misdemeanors in their time in politics.

Can political agents be identified? Yes!  but only in the early years. Senior agents are well capable of disappearing within the system. Look for young politically inexperienced persons, educated to university degree level, surfacing from nowhere as candidates for political office, supported by larger than usual canvassing teams. Those that are successful are given early promotion requiring them to be in Westminster longer than would be expected early on. Their sphere of interest will become apparent over time.

Look out for activities in support of Atlanticist groups, visits abroad funded by ultra-right-wing organizations and membership of Common Purpose, Bilderberg, The British American Project, and similar organizations. Happy spy hunting!!!!!  Bowie fits the profile.

 

 

 

 

Andrew Bowie

1988: Born Aberdeenshire 1999-2005: Education Inverurie Academy

2007-2010: The Royal Navy: On completion of an 11-month recruit training course at the Britannia Royal Naval College in Dartmouth, he was posted to ships for fleet training with the purpose of qualifying as a Junior Warfare Officer. His ship was deployed to the gulf, (in a non-combat role) tasked to counter piracy, smuggling together with oil security activities protecting the Basra Oilfields in the Persian Gulf.

Royal Navy combat deployment to the Gulf ceased in 2006 and was followed up with peacekeeping duties until 2009, after which, at the request of the Iraqi Government the Royal Navy took on the task of training the reformed Iraqi Navy to defend its territorial waters and offshore oil infrastructure. The cost to the taxpayer of Bowie’s training at Dartmouth and short development as a Junior Warfare officer (in excess of £1m) was written off as a loss to the exchequer when he terminated his contract of employment at the end of 3 years. Poor return on an expensive investment.

 

 

 

 

2010-2013: Aberdeen University

On leaving the Royal Navy he signed up to complete a degree in History and Politics at Aberdeen University. At University he joined the Tory Party becoming an active member of the Aberdeen University Graduate Tory group and was appointed to the post of Chairman. This extended period of higher education was provided free of charge, thanks to the further education policies of the SNP government.

 

 

 

 

2013-2013: Divex Ltd

Employed (7 months) with a deep-sea diving equipment supplier. Utilizing knowledge of diving equipment gained in the Royal Navy. Short term stop-gap employment. Politics being his chosen future.

 

 

 

2014-2015: Tory Party North of Scotland European Referendum Campaign Manager.

Salary and on-costs estimated to be around £15k, plus expenses. Funded by campaign funds donated to the party.

 

Bowie organizes Hard right-wing “Scotland in Union” with the Aberdeen “rich boys club”

 

 

2015-2016: European Parliament, Brussels

Appointed to the role of Parliamentary Assistant and Rural Affairs Policy Advisor to Tory MEP Ian Duncan, a reward for his efforts in the referendum campaign. Salary and on-costs £35 – £50K plus expenses annually. All expenditure charged to the Scottish taxpayer.

 

 

2016-2017: Parliamentary Assistant at Holyrood

Employed in the office of Liam Kerr MSP in the Scottish Parliament. Salary and on-costs £20-£30K plus expenses. All expenditure charged to the Scottish taxpayer

 

 

 

 

May 2017: The 2017 General Election

Bowie selected as Tory candidate for Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine and won. Salary and on-costs £87K approx.  Plus: Westminster postage £10K. Constituency Office Running costs £25K. Constituency staffing. 151K. Stationery: £6K. London Accommodation  £23K. Travel & subsistence (no limit but projected). £40K.  The annual cost to the Scottish taxpayer. £342K plus

The total cost to the Scottish taxpayer 5-year parliamentary session not far short of £2m. And there we have it. Over eleven years of employment (apart from a few months) he has been fully supported financially by the Scottish taxpayer.

 

 

 

Oct 2016: no way to treat a lady

Andrew Bowie, then chief of staff to Liam Kerr MSP, sent an offensive message to Geva Blackett, an SNP Councillor in the north-east of Scotland claiming she “had it in” for one of her Tory rivals.

The SNP Councillor was shocked to receive the disrespectful reply from Bowie in response to an email she had sent to Liam Kerr (MSP) soliciting his support to a local motor neuron disease charity campaign.

Bowie (in a separate message to his boss) wrote:  “This flipping woman is an SNP Councillor who has it in for Alex B (Alexander Burnett, Tory MSP for Aberdeen West)!”

Cllr Blackett, Councillor for Aboyne, Upper Deeside and Donside, said:

“I emailed all of the North-East MSP’s asking for them to lend their support to those living with motor neuron disease who are constantly being reassessed for benefits. I received the reply around 10 minutes later from Liam Kerr’s chief of staff and I was shocked. He accused me of having it in for Alex Burnett but I work across the political spectrum and I hold no malice against Alex. I sent the email as a constituent, not as a Councillor, about a serious illness and he used it as a political football. I am so angry about it. It wasn’t a party political issue I was emailing him about, I emailed Mr. Kerr asking for his support.”

In her reply to the email, she asked Mr. Bowie if the phrase “flipping woman was an appropriate way to describe a constituent”.  Adding, “He sent me an apology soon afterward but didn’t even spell my name right!”

An SNP source said:

“Though this wasn’t intended for public consumption, it rather underpins the deep disdain the Tories have for their constituents. Kerr is already in trouble for using taxpayers’ money to promote the Tory Party in the north-east. But sadly these sorts of blunders from a reckless right-wing, a rabble of Tory MSPs have become all too common.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LIst of Blue-Blooded Unionists – many of whom in the months ahead will be actively plotting and agitating in favour of retaining the UK. These chappies recognize no Party affiliation in regard to their fervent support of the Union. 

Adam Tomkins: Conservative Glasgow
Alex Johnstone: Conservative North East Scotland – Deceased
Andrew Morrison: Conservative Uddingston & Bellshill
Alex Burnett: Conservative Aberdeenshire
Annie Wells: Conservative Glasgow
Brian Whittle: Conservative Kilmarnock
Charles Kennedy: Conservative Linlithgow
Ross Thomson: Conservative Aberdeen
Edward Mountain: Conservative Inverness & Nairn
Dean Lockhart: Conservative Stirling
Donald Cameron: Conservative Argyll & Bute
Graeme Brooks: Conservative Inverclyde
Grahm Hutchison: Conservative Glasgow
Huw Bell: Conservative North East Fife
Iain McGill: Conservative Edinburgh
Jackson Carlaw: Conservative Eastwood
Jamie Johnston: Conservative Orkney
John Lamont: Conservative Berwickshire
John Scott: Conservative Ayr
Kyle Thornton: Conservative Glasgow
Lee Lyons: Conservative Doon Valley
Margaret Mitchell: Conservative Hamilton
Martin Laidlaw: Conservative Kirkcaldy
Miles Briggs: Conservative Edinburgh
Murdo Fraser: Conservative Perthshire
Paul Masterton: Conservative Paisley
Ruth Davidson: Conservative Edinburgh
Struan Mackie: Conservative Caithness
Taylor Muir: Conservative Rutherglen

 

 

 

 

Alex C-Hamilton: Liberal Democrat Edinburgh
Alison McInnes: Liberal Democrat N E Scotland
Angela MacLean: Liberal Democrat Skye
David Evans: Liberal Democrat Banffshire & Buchan
Eileen McCartin: Liberal Democrat Paisley
Carolyn Caddick: Liberal Democrat Highlands & Islands
Jacquie Bell: Liberal Democrat Midlothian
James Calder: Liberal Democrat Dunfermline
James Harrison: Liberal Democrat Glasgow
Hannah Bettsworth: Liberal Democrat Lothian
Clive Sneddon: Liberal Democrat Angus South
Euan Davidson: Liberal Democrat N E region
Jane-Ann Liston: Liberal Democrat Fife
Liam McArthur: Liberal Democrat Orkney
Mike Rumbles: Liberal Democrat N E Scotland
Pramod Subaraman: Liberal Democrat Edinburgh
Robert Brown: Liberal Democrat Glasgow
Tavish Scott: Liberal Democrat Shetland
Willie Rennie: Liberal Democrat Fife

 

 

 

Alison Evison: Labour Aberdeen – Reported to support a second referendum following the 2017 GE. But is she speaking as the President of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (Cosla) or as a local councillor suspended from the Labour Party in Aberdeen? 
Altany Craik: Labour Fife
Anas Sarwar: Labour Glasgow
Barrie Cunning: Labour Midlothian
Ben Proctor: Labour West Scotland
Bill Butler: Labour Glasgow
Blair Heary: Labour Edinburgh
Craig Martin Labour Falkirk
Elaine Smith Labour Coatbridge
Gerry McGarvey Labour Orkney
Jackie Baillie Labour Dumbarton
Jenny Marra Labour N E Scotland
Joanne McFadden Labour Angus
John Ruddy Labour Angus
Ken McIntosh Labour Eastwood
Leslie Hinds Labour Edinburgh
Leah Franchetti: Labour Caithness
Liz-Anne Handibode: Labour East Kilbride
Margaret McCarthy: Labour Strathkelvin
Mary Fee: Labour Renfrewshire
Mick Rice: Labour Argyll & Bute
Neil Bibby: Labour Paisley
Paul Martin: Labour Glasgow
Paul Sweeney: Labour West Scotland region

Sarah Atkin: Labour Highlands & Islands

Adam Wilson, Labour councillor for Annandale North

Thomas Rannachan: Labour Glasgow

 

 

 

 

 

Labour list MSP’s (rejected by voters but provided with employment as a Regional MSP courtesy of the Labour Party encouraging the devious practice of “jobs for the boys”. Those elected to office by the backdoor, twice or more are highlighted.

Scotland 2016, 2011, 2007, 2003, 1999, (maximum 5*)

Richard Leonard *
Monica Lennon *
Mark Griffin *
Elaine Smith *
Anas Sarwar *
Johann Lamont *
James Kelly *
Pauline McNeill *
Hanzala Malik *
Drew Smith *
Anne McTaggart *
Rhoda Grant * * * *
David Stewart * * *
Kezia Dugdale * *
Neil Findlay * *
Alex Rowley *
Claire Baker * * *
Jenny Marra * *
Lewis Macdonald * *
Claudia Beamish * *
Colin Smyth *
Neil Bibby * *
Mary Fee * *
Ken Macintosh *
Siobhan McMahon *
Mark Griffin *
Margaret McCulloch *
Richard Lyle *
John Wilson *
Clare Adamson *
Humza Yousaf *
Bob Doris * *
Sarah Boyack *
John Park *
Richard Simpson * *
Richard Baker * * *
Nanette Milne *
Graeme Pearson *
Margaret McDougall *
Bashir Ahmad *
Bob Doris *
Bill Kidd *
Sandra White *
Peter Peacock * * *
George Foulkes *
John Park *
Marlyn Glen * *
Maureen Macmillan * *

 

 

 

 

 

The UK National Security Council

Established on 12 May 2010 by Prime Minister David Cameron, the (NSC) of the United Kingdom is a Cabinet Committee tasked with overseeing all issues related to national security, intelligence coordination, and defence strategy.

At a stroke it increased the power of the Prime Minister, who chairs the Council, and brought senior Cabinet ministers into national security policymaking, giving them access to the highest levels of intelligence.

From 1 April 2015, the council oversees a newly created Conflict, Stability and Security Fund, (CSSF) financed with more than £1 billion annually for tackling conflict and instability.

 

 

 

 

Secretary of the UK National Security Council

Mark Sedwill, (a very senior spook). Former Director General at the Foreign Office then Permanent Secretary at the Home Office was appointed by then PM, Mrs May (from a shortlist of one) in 2015, to the post of Cabinet Secretary, after the death of the previous office holder.

As Cabinet Secretary, he is the Government’s most senior adviser on strategy, policy and implementation.

He is Secretary to the Cabinet and the National Security Council, responsible only to the Prime Minister and Cabinet for the propriety and effectiveness of Cabinet governance.

As Head of the UK Civil Service, he leads over 400,000 civil servants in HM Government and the Devolved Administrations, over 90% of whom are involved in the delivery of public services to the citizens of the UK.

 

 

 

 

UK National Intelligence

Headquartered in Whitehall, City of Westminster, London the intelligence agencies are at the heart of the national intelligence machinery

The national intelligence machinery has the three Intelligence and Security Agencies, SIS, GCHQ and MI5 at its heart, with important work also carried out by Defence Intelligence and the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre.

 

 

 

 

The Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC)

the (JIC), operates within the Cabinet Office and is responsible for assessments and intelligence briefings that look at both tactical and strategic issues of importance to national interests, primarily in the fields of security, defence and foreign affairs.

The JIC’s permanent members are senior officials from the Cabinet Office, including the JIC Chairman, the Chief of the Assessments Staff and the National Security Advisor, as well as officials from the Foreign & Commonwealth Office, the Ministry of Defence, the Home Office, the Department for International Development, HM Treasury and the agency heads.

The JIC also feeds their assessments into the NSC which is the main forum for the collective discussion of the government’s objectives for national security, in which a range of relevant departments participates.

It is charged with examining more specific national security areas and overseeing and coordinating all aspects of Britain’s security.

The Prime Minister is advised by the head of the NSC secretariat, the National Security Adviser, who is responsible for coordinating and delivering the government’s international security agenda.

 

 

 

 

 

The UK Stabilisation Unit

formed by the Labour government in 2003 it provided a 1,000-strong civilian force ensuring greatly increased capacity for planning and rapid reaction. Deployment of military reservists in a civilian capacity and police deployments was also in place.

The unit’s remit was expanded in 2015, to include crisis response and conflict prevention and control of it was transferred to the UK National Security Council. The unit, located in Whitehall is funded (£1 billion annually) by the Conflict, Stabilisation and Security Fund.

It is now a much enlarged and powerful cross-government team tasked with ensuring all departments of government have unfettered access to specialist support and resources when dealing with some of the trickiest policy challenges.

 

 

 

 

 

Andrew Dunlop

The quiet man of UK politics. He has been closely associated with the Conservative Party for most of his adult life. He was a special adviser to the Defence Secretary (1986 – 88) and a member of Margaret Thatcher’s Policy Unit (1988 – 1990).

The demise of Thatcher brought his budding career to a halt and he moved away from active politics to found and develop his own strategic communications consultancy business. Over 20 years later he sold the business, for a very tidy sum of money, to the Brussels-based Interel Group (lobbyists).

The return to power of the Tory Party in 2010 sparked his interest in politics once again and he linked up with his friend and former colleague David Cameron, in his former role of special advisor, (2012 to 2015), with specific responsibility as the principal adviser on Scotland and devolution to the Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer.

He was elevated to the House of Lords in 2015 which allowed Cameron to take him into government where he served as a minister in the UK Government as Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland and Northern Ireland between 2015 and 2017.

In the Lords, he is a member of the UK Constitution Committee and an Expert Member of the UK Civilian Stabilisation Group. Retaining contact with Scottish affairs he is currently a Board member of the Scottish Council for Development and Industry.

A supporter of Boris Johnson he is reputed to be formulating and implementing Tory government policies for Scotland. In this respect, he revealed his thinking in a speech he made in the course of a debate on the “possible effects of Brexit on the stability of the Union of the parts of the United Kingdom”. He said:

“Attention should be paid to the machinery of intergovernmental relations, which needs to be strengthened. We also need to look at the cross-UK synergies, weakened since devolution, which need to be reinvigorated. We need to pursue a decentralised, pan-UK strategy for rebalancing the economy, driven by city regions across the country. This means moving away from seeing everything through a four-nation prism. Many of the problems confronting Glasgow, for example, are similar to those of Manchester or Birmingham. They provide embryonic structures which can be built upon. There are two years until the next Holyrood elections. Strengthening our union must be an urgent priority whatever our post-Brexit future.”

 

A long read but a very enlightening one

https://caltonjock.com/2015/05/26/andrew-dunlop-the-murky-world-of-the-lobbyists-this-takes-a-bit-of-reading-but-all-the-inter-personal-links-are-included/

 

 

 

 

 

Summary

This is the direction Boris Johnson is headed. So far as Scotland is concerned there will be no further independence referendums and devolution is to be rendered impotent being bypassed by UK government agencies working within Scotland but not responsible to the Scottish government.

The UK Stabilisation Unit is closely monitoring Scottish politics, events and personalities and has resources available to deal with any disruption or attempts at destabilisation of the UK.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

29 Feb 2020 – Home Office Boss quits over campaign against him

The top civil servant in the Home Office has resigned and said he intends to claim against the government for constructive dismissal.

Sir Philip Rutnam said there had been a “vicious and orchestrated” campaign against him in Home Secretary Priti Patel’s office.

Reported tensions between the pair included claims she mistreated officials – which she has denied.

Sir Philip, who has had a career spanning 33 years, said he received allegations that Ms Patel’s conduct towards employees included “shouting and swearing” and “belittling people”.

He said he believed his experience was “extreme” but part of a “wider pattern” in government.

Sir Mark Sedwill, cabinet secretary and head of the civil service, thanked Sir Philip for his “long and dedicated career of public service”.

Full Story here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51687287

 

 

 

 

 

December 2014: Westminster Civil Service, “Devolved Countries Unit”, (Dirty Tricks) campaign team wins “special” Cabinet Secretary and Head of the Civil Service Award

The three amigos who actually run the UK: Sir Jeremy Heywood, Sir Bob Kerslake and Sir Nicholas McPherson collaborated and plotted against Scotland marshalling the full resource of the civil service attacking the Scottish government and anyone in support of the “Yes” campaign.

In the months after the referendum, they expressed great satisfaction that their “Campaign of fear” had generated “fearties” in sufficient numbers so as to win the day for the Unionist coalition.

Any mention of the team members in the New Year honours list would be the ultimate kick in the teeth.

My understanding is that Civil Servants are obliged by their contract of employment to be strictly apolitical and deployment to duties such as described were forbidden.

But Sir Jeremy Heywood simply ignored the rules and instructed staff to ignore protocol:

Leaflets produced by HM Treasury and civil servants at the Scotland Office were also savagely criticised during the Scottish independence referendum.

A democratic political process in which the Whitehall civil service should not have been interfering. The behaviour of the Whitehall Civil Service will ultimately be seen to be greatly damaging to any concept of the supposed ‘apolitical’ claims of the UK civil service.

 

 

Civil Service referendum Wreckers

 

 

An award, in recognition of the team’s outstanding achievement in making a difference on an issue of national significance, (the Referendum) was presented by the Cabinet Secretary and civil service head Sir Jeremy Heywood.

The proud team commented afterwards:

* Paul Doyle;

“This award is not just for the Treasury, it’s for all the hard work that was done by all government departments on the Scotland agenda. The reality was in all my experience of the civil service, I have never seen the civil service pull together in the way they did behind supporting the UK government in maintaining the United Kingdom. It was a very special event for all of us.”

* William MacFarlane;

Deputy Director at HM Treasury, (Budget and Tax Strategy): “As civil servants, you don’t get involved in politics. But for the first time in my life, suddenly we’re part of a political campaign. We were doing everything from the analysis to the advertising, to the communications. I just felt a massive sense of being part of the operation. This being recognised [at the Civil Service Awards], makes me feel just incredibly proud.”

* Shannon Cochrane:

“we’ve learned that it is possible for civil servants to work on things that are inherently political and quite difficult, and you’re very close to the line of what is appropriate, but it’s possible to find your way through and to make a difference.”

* Mario Pisani Deputy Director at HM Treasury, (Public Policy):

“In the Treasury, everyone hates you. We don’t get thanks for anything. This is one occasion where we’ve worked with the rest of Whitehall. We all had something in common, we’re trying to save the Union here, and it was close. We just kept it by the skin of our teeth. I actually cried when the result came in. After 10 years in the civil service, my proudest moment is tonight and receiving this award. As civil servants, you don’t get involved in politics. But, for the first time in my life, suddenly we’re part of a political campaign. We were doing everything from the analysis to the advertising, to the communications. I just felt a massive sense of being part of the operation. This being recognised [at the Civil Service Awards], makes me feel just incredibly proud.”

 

 

 

 

My Comments

Any mention of the team members in the New Year honours list would be the ultimate kick in the teeth.

My understanding is that Civil Servants were obliged by their contract of employment to be strictly apolitical and deployment to duties such as described were forbidden. But Sir Jeremy Heywood simply ignored the rules and instructed staff to ignore protocol:

Leaflets produced by HM Treasury and civil servants at the Scotland Office were also savagely criticised during the Scottish independence referendum. A democratic political process in which the Whitehall civil service should not have been interfering.

The behaviour of the Whitehall Civil Service will ultimately be seen to be greatly damaging to any concept of the supposed ‘apolitical’ claims of the UK civil service.

Ann Doyle is quoted as saying: “This award is not just for the Treasury, its for all the hard work that was done by all government departments on the Scotland agenda. In the interests of transparency and democratic accountability would it not be essential to hear more from them.”

 

 

 

Public Comments

I expect they will enjoy spending their forty pieces of silver in London. They destroyed the hopes and aspirations of future generations to protect their jobs and to support the gentry. Shame on them! – No impartiality whatsoever.

For the first time in my life, suddenly we’re part of a political campaign So, not really evidence-based policymaking then?

So these are the ones we have to thank for how Scotland is now being treated, removing one of our safety lines Kinloss rescue for all the children who are below the poverty line and wondering what sort of Christmas the other people enjoy.

I hope they do not bask in the false praise of the Whitehall mandarins for long.

Now that Bitter Together has won the day Scottish pensioners will continue to be the lowest paid in Europe and heating bills will increase manyfold.

Faslane will be greatly expanded and the US will be invited back. (and they were)

Westminster politicians are keen on stating that the UK needs nuclear weapons. If this is the case they should be located near to where the civil servants who received the award live. Let them sit on the threat. Have a Merry Christmas I know loads of children that won’t.

 

 

 

 

 

The Whitehall Civil Service and Brexit

The Whitehall Civil Service gets involved in politics tactically delaying Brexit and the Tory’s didn’t like it. But when they did the same thing in the 2014 Scottish referendum the same lot were praised, promoted and awarded top civil service awards

Sir Oliver Robbins was until September 2019, a senior British civil servant who served as the Prime Minister’s Europe Adviser and Chief Negotiator for Exiting the European Union from 2017 to 2019.

He previously served as the Permanent Secretary at the Department for Exiting the European Union from July 2016 to September 2017, and as the Prime Minister’s Advisor on Europe and Global Issues from June 2016 to July 2016.

In January 2014, Robbins was appointed Director-General, Civil Service at the Cabinet Office.

In September 2015, Robbins moved to the Home Office as Second Permanent Secretary alongside Mark Sedwill.

He had responsibility for immigration and free movement, as well as the borders, immigration and citizenship system.

In July 2016, Robbins was appointed the head of the European and Global Issues Secretariat, advising the Prime Minister on the EU and to oversee Britain’s exit from the European Union.

Shortly thereafter, the secretariat was moved out of the Cabinet Office to become a full department, the Department for Exiting the European Union, of which he became the permanent secretary.

In September 2017, Robbins moved from the Brexit department to become Prime Minister Theresa May’s personal Brexit advisor.

Robbins’s role in negotiating a deal for the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union led to some Conservative MPs blaming him for an anti-Brexit “establishment plot”, criticising him as “secretive” and comparing him to Grigori Rasputin.

Acting Cabinet Secretary Mark Sedwill sent a letter to The Times defending Robbins, highlighting that civil servants implement the decisions of elected governments.

Responding to Sedwill’s letter, Andrew Adonis said that civil servants should “start getting used to criticism”, as they had the option to work on other policies.

A group of former military and intelligence officials associated with pro-Brexit pressure group Veterans for Britain including the former head of the Secret Intelligence Service Richard Dearlove said Robbins had “serious questions of improper conduct to answer” over defence and security co-operation between the UK and the EU after Brexit.

Former Department for Work and Pensions Permanent Secretary Leigh Lewis backed up Sedwill’s letter, noting the “occupational hazard for senior civil servants to be held responsible for the political decisions of ministers”, of which he considered the attacks on Robbins to be a blatant example in a particularly toxic environment.

Robbins resigned when Theresa May left office and took up the Heywood Fellowship at the Blavatnik School of Government in September 2019, after which he joined Goldman Sachs as a managing director in the bank’s investment banking division.

 

 

 

 

 

Public comments

Robbins complicit in running secret parallel policy undermining his minister. Is that “impartial public service” or is it a civil service fighting a rearguard action against democratic decisions?

The problem is that significant numbers of your fellow citizens ‘know’ nothing of the sort; we no longer trust you. An investigation is required to determine whether the ‘service’ has worked in accordance with the codes of practice and in the national interest at all times.

What happens when the national interest and the ‘code’ are opposed?

At Oxford, Robbins was president of the Oxford Reform Club, a group promoting a federal European Union.

Maybe he is getting unfair criticism, but can you understand why? Is Robbins really the only civil servant without such a clear conflict?

The politicisation of the civil service has gone too far. Root and branch reform required. The senior civil service is no longer trusted. If civil servants are going to interfere in political decisions, undermining ministers, then they need to be properly held to account.

Doing one’s duty to the government is one thing. Doing one’s duty to the people of the country who pay your wages is a higher calling that far too many fail to achieve.

I’m staggered people can’t see that Robbins is an agent of the Commission. He is part of its internal political network. The civil service has all but been annexed by the Commission. May is an impotent messenger girl to keep Parliament from the truth of its almost total impotence.

Imagine getting this far and not noticing the scapegoating or realising that politicians made decisions that they couldn’t deliver. Nor that they are being played by them, not by civil servants trying to keep the rickety old Brexit cart on the road.

Problem is the Civil Servants have allowed their strongly held personal political Views to become public and influence their behaviour. They can’t complain that having entered the political kitchen they are experiencing its heat.

The government was elected on a manifesto to leave the SM and CU, notwithstanding the largest democratic mandate ever from the British people. Yet your kind always seems to manufacture obstacles to this end which aren’t there, which ultimately leave us dancing to the EU’s tune.

The crucial thing here is to remember that it is Theresa May who allowed this to happen. It is Mrs May who is ultimately responsible for this latest mess and the incredibly bad Chequers deal (capitulation) that Robbins, unchecked, has negotiated.

Robbins has been letting pro-EU tendencies shape our whole approach.

To negotiate with UK Services for 18mths, then simply phone to say you’ve changed tactics is not only incompetent, but it’s also arrogant.

That those tactics are wrong & you simply won’t be told? That’s something else.

I found myself listening to a civil servant at a private party. He was absolutely not impartial. In fact, it shocked me at how entrenched he and others (his words not mine) are about remaining. He had even moved jobs to not be involved.

When you’re not working, you’re one of us. When you’re working, you work for us. Don’t forget

Impartial? By what measure? You just made that up.

I’m sure they’re a great team – yet here we are with a Chequers deal that nobody else likes.

Worse still, the negotiations provide a clear & present threat to UK integrity & public faith in democracy.

I’m not sure ‘respect’ is quite the right word. ‘Sympathy’ might be closer. The moral dilemmas involved in attempting to deliver the impossible must be quite schizophrenogenic.

A dedicated and impartial public service. Oh, my word!

Surely, Mark, the time has now come to report May directly to the Commissioners for her ongoing attempts to damage the UK? Civil Servants are not allowed under your Charter to ruin Britain, but that is what May is now trying to do. Why not ask the Commissioners for a Ruling?‏

But we KNOW this not to be true? Robbins has a clear personal predisposition to the UK remaining far more closely tied to the EU than we, the people, voted for. This has led to our Government failing to implement our clear instruction to completely leave the EU.

No, that’s not what you voted for. Did you get a special, personal ballot? You voted to leave the EU. Nothing more.

Absolute nonsense. You’re just the Appeaser’s henchman who has set out to con the public since Day 1. You’ll all be shipped out once May is dumped though! Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Disturbing, and evidence that the civil service is far too ready to see itself as a separate power base within our constitution, whose leaders should defend it in public if they feel it has been attacked.

It needs root and branch reform.

Oh grow up, you & Robbins are certainly not above criticism-for once forget your precious egos,the future of the U.K. is infinitely more important.

Its the duty of civil servants to advise the PM her Chequers plan is insane.

Every hour of every day. Head of civil service told MPs e-border “we haven’t looked at that”.. what ! You are jesting right..

The phrase “only following orders” springs to mind. There is another option for civil servants. It’s a hard one, I realise, but they could always resign rather than help the government push the UK over a constitutional cliff with a dodgy mandate.

Lots of civil servants have resigned. They need to take on thousands more to cope with the extra work of Brexit.

Well said. I was never a huge fan of Olly personally but the vitriol being thrown at him and blaming him for this shower is unbelievable. If the Government wants to implement a bad policy the civil service are stuck with implementing it. Olly has all CS and former CS sympathy!

“Dedicated and impartial” but more highly paid than the prime minister with greater benefits, no accountability and then you receive a knighthood….. wastrels.

Civil servant? There are two dubious claims, just in the job title

That you post this spin just further underlines the concerns of the public. it isn’t necessarily your fault, but the perception amongst the public and even MPs is that Robbins has more pull than the DEXU secretary. Something that was evident under Davis and now Raab.

I support the civil service, currently being used by many in the UK as a scapegoat for every Brexit fantasy that has (obviously) been unable to come to fruition. Red lines need to be revised.

 

 

 

 

 

 

15 September 2011: Tory List MSPs will be forced to stand down

Long-serving Conservative MSPs will be forced to stand down from the Scottish Parliament at the next election if they fail to win a constituency seat, under a radical plan by a leadership candidate to introduce fresh blood into the party.

Jackson Carlaw told the Daily Telegraph they would only be able to serve three or four consecutive terms as list MSPs, who are elected using a complicated system of proportional representation to represent one of eight regions of Scotland.

Significantly, Carlaw said he would apply the change retrospectively, meaning a series of the party’s most high-profile figures would have to win a constituency at the next election or step aside if a three-term limit was imposed.

They include Murdo Fraser, who is serving his third full term as a Mid Scotland and Fife regional list MSP.

The change aims to address the situation whereby the same people are elected time and again, regardless of their performance, because rankings on the regional list are decided by loyal Conservative members.

Carlaw, whose candidacy has not been endorsed by any Tory MSPs, argued the change would be a far more effective method of reinvigorating the party than Fraser’s “superficial” plan to change its name.

“I was very impressed by what David Cameron did at Westminster to refresh the party,” he said. “I would ask the (party management) board to consider term limits of MSPs being elected three times or re-elected three times consecutively on the list.

“I realize that’s going to be unpopular with some, I realize it’s controversial, but I believe we have to substantially renew the face of its party, not its name. Leadership requires that you take tough decisions.”

Carlaw emphasized the new rules would apply to himself. The 52-year-old is serving his second term as a West Scotland list MSP having failed to win the Tory target seat of Eastwood in May.

The changes would apply in the 2016 election and he said he would be “happy” for them to be retrospective.

Only three MSPs of the 15-strong Conservative group at Holyrood have constituencies of their own, with the remainder relying on the regional list for their seats.

Some have used the system to win re-election since devolution started in 1999.

 

 

 

Conservative 2016 2011 2007 2003 1999

Margaret Mitchell * * * *
Graham Simpson *
Alison Harris *
Adam Tomkins *
Annie Wells *
Ruth Davidson *
Douglas Ross *
Edward Mountain *
Donald Cameron *
Miles Briggs *
Gordon Lindhurst *
Jeremy Balfour *
Murdo Fraser * * * *
Liz Smith * * *
Alexander Stewart *
Dean Lockhart *
Alex Johnstone * * * * *
Ross Thomson *
Peter Chapman *
Liam Kerr *
Rachael Hamilton *
Brian Whittle *
Jamie Greene *
Maurice Golden *
Maurice Corry *
Jamie McGrigor * * * *
Mary Scanlon * * * *
David McLetchie * *
Gavin Brown * *
Annabel Goldie * * *
Jackson Carlaw * * *
Bill Aitken * * *
Ted Brocklebank * *
Nanette Milne * *
Derek Brownlee *
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton * *
Brian Monteith * *
David Davidson * *
Phil Gallie * *
David Mundell * *
Murray Tosh * *
Lyndsay McIntosh *
Mr Keith Harding *
Nick Johnston *
Ben Wallace *
Alex Fergusson *
John Young *

 

 

 

 

The Labour Party in Scotland is a dead parrot

The disastrous result of the 2019 GE will most likely lead to civil war within the Labour Party in England, the fallout from which will spread rapidly to its branch office in Scotland where the Corbyn inspired leader, Richard Leonard and his policies were similarly rejected by the Scottish electorate.

The adoption, (chapter and verse) by the Scottish Branch office, of the extreme “left-wing” manifesto of the Westminster Labour Party, was firmly rejected by a Scottish electorate who wanted Brexit and Independence to be in the forefront of party political campaigning. The Labour Party in Scotland, “missed the bus” yet again.

The return to Westminster from Edinburgh South, of “Benito” Murray, MP, a confirmed Labour “right-wing “Blairite”, cannot construed as a beacon of light for the future of the Labour Party in Scotland given that the reason for his success is attributed to the affluence of the electorate of the community.

He is a voice in the wilderness within the Labour Party since he does not recognise or bend the knee to any politician in Scotland or for that matter any of his so-called colleagues at Westminster.

In his election campaign, Murray studiously avoided any association with the Labour Party preferring to sell himself to the electors as a politician of the centre-ground of politics, independent of mind and body from the Party he purported to represent.

The “Beast of Bolsover” is no more, (with the defeat of Denis Skinner) but true to form the Labour Party have found a ready replacement in little babyfaced “Benito”.

 

 

Where Now for the Labour party in Scotland?

Alex Rowley is not an obvious choice, to take up the reins of leadership but he is an astute politician of conviction who has argued for many years for a fully autonomous Scottish Labour Party.

He is no Puppet and under his leadership, the Labour Party in Scotland would change its spots and become a Scottish Labour Party fully autonomous from Westminster.

 

 

About Alex Rowley

Alex Rowley was born in Dunfermline and raised in Kelty. He attended Edinburgh University, graduating with an MA Honours in Sociology and Politics, and an MSc in continuing education.

He was also a local councillor with Fife Regional Council between 1990 – 2012 and was elected to the post of the first leader of the new Fife Council in 2012 and served the Council until his election to the Scottish Parliament in 2014.

He was also muted to be a strong contender for the office of First Minister of the recently formed Scottish parliament.

 

 

 

Rowley Sacked by New Labour Party Bosses in London

He was elected to the post of General Secretary of the Labour Party in Scotland in May 1998 and held the post until May 1999 when after outlining his vision for the future growth of the party in Scotland he expressed a view that having modernised Scotland’s political institutions and introduced a Scottish Parliament, the party needed to change its structure including proposals giving the Labour Party in Scotland freedom from London control.

All hell broke loose and he was summoned to Millbank in London, where he was told the party had nowhere for him in its future planning.

He was then invited to resign from his post as General Secretary of the Scottish Labour party a decision which provoked great anger in Scotland.

Senior Labour sources in London denied that the general secretary of the Labour Party in Scotland had been sacked on the instructions of London-based officials.

They said that he had left the post of his own volition saying his task of helping the party win the Scottish Parliamentary elections had been completed and he wanted to move on to new challenges.

 

 

Interviewed shortly afterwards ( through gritted teeth) Rowley said:

“After the election, there was a discussion about the future direction of the party. The “discussion” continued for a couple of weeks and I decided it was best for me to leave. I am not getting into a debate about this now, but there is a discussion for the Labour Party in Scotland to hold.

If you modernise the political institutions it is only natural to see how the party organisation has to change. You ask yourself if the party is still in line with the political institutions.  All I have ever said is that there needs to be a far greater discussion about that.

It would be inappropriate to go into detail but a number of factors were involved in my departure after only a year in the job. I think the party has to change quite a lot. We have to have a good look at this and also at how policy is made. There must be a real partnership in power in Scotland.

We have the Scottish Policy Forum and that can be seen as positive. But we also need to look at the membership and how it can have a greater say. I point to the fact that 30,000 members are not something to be proud of.

We need to increase party membership. I flagged this up at the Scottish conference and said that there should be a root and branch rethink about the party organisation in Scotland. But it became apparent in recent weeks and months that this was going to be difficult.

I won’t go into the reasons, but I decided it was in my best interests to leave. Now I have a number of things to consider and I have been having discussions with various people.  There are several options for me to consider. But in the meantime, I will be taking a well-earned rest.”

 

 

 

Labour’s London Bosses confirm sacking of Scots party chief

The Labour Party in Scotland launched a month-long review of its structures yesterday after its dismissal of Alex Rowley, its general secretary in Scotland. The sacking provoked consternation in Scotland, where Labour is sensitive to claims that it is run from England.

There were suggestions Rowley had fallen foul of the continuing battle for power between Blair and Brown, (Rowley is very much Brown’s man).

The recent surprise appointment of “Unfit for Purpose” John Reid as Secretary of State for Scotland, was also seen as confirmation of the party’s London headquarters exerting a firm grip on power in Scotland.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The 2019 GE Labour Manifesto

Contains a commitment that a Labour party in government will:

End zero-hours contracts and “bogus” self-employment.

Require employers to work on tackling the gender pay gap or face fines.

But Richard Leonard has no authority to do anything. He must comply with the instructions of the Labour Party leadership in London. Any failing on his part will bring about his speedy end.

And, in regard to his commitment to end zero-hours contracts he is remiss in his recollections of recent past events.

 

 

 

In April 2015 Ed Milliband attacked the Con/Dem government over the issue of zero-hours contracts and promised the next Labour government would bring an immediate end to the practice.

But his strategy failed when it was revealed that 68 Labour MPs Employed Staff on Them? So much for the Labour Party sticking up for ordinary workers who are being exploited.

This is what he said:

“Less than a week ago, you may have heard the Prime Minister say that he couldn’t live on a zero-hours contract. Well, I couldn’t live on a zero-hours contract either. I’ve got a simple principle – if it is not good enough for us, it’s not good enough for you and it’s not good enough for Britain. “That’s the way I will run our country. One rule for all.”

But there was one small problem for Milliband. It was revealed by the pay and expenses watchdog IPSA that a large number of Labour MPs (68 in total, including Edinburgh South MP Ian Murray) employed workers on “zero-hours” contracts.

 

 

The equal pay policy commitment is most certainly yet another Labour party joke, to be pulled on Scottish workers by the very people they elect, the Unions, to protect their rights at work.

In Glasgow, women involved in the pre-2007 pay claims recall how the GMB union and the Labour Party council pressurized them into accepting low settlements by offering them cheques for a few thousand pounds just before Christmas so long as they signed quickly. Many signed.

But many more held out against the injustice and badly judged advice from their Unions and took their cases to another source of advice. Namely, Action 4 Equality – Scotland managed by Solicitor Stefan Cross.

In doing so they had to wait longer but received far greater settlement sums. Not only did Cross take on Glasgow District Council, but he also sued the unions for failing to properly represent their female members, forcing them to up their game.

In so doing, he made himself hugely unpopular and many still regard him as an ambulance-chaser who got rich off the back of driving English councils to the brink of disaster.

To the women, however, he is a hero, which explains why Cross retained 80 per cent of the claimants. “I will have to give him 10 per cent of the payout, but he deserves it,” one woman tells me. “He stuck with us when the unions couldn’t be bothered.”

It reveals the duplicity of the Unions who unconditionally supported the policies of their Labour Party Councillor colleagues assisting their efforts to deny women workers a fair wage.

 

 

 

 

12 Jun 2017: North Lanarkshire Labour/Tory Alliance Council forced to pay pension costs of hundreds of women it underpaid

And, not to be outdone the North Lanarkshire Labour/Tory Council set about screwing their female staff out of their pensions.

Yet again the Unions and the labour party were complicit in heinous acts against women employees.

As events unfolded it became evident that the Labour/Tory Alliance run Council would incur a £1million bill after systematically ducking its pension responsibilities to hundreds of female staff it previously tried to squeeze out of equal pay.

The Council was ordered to cough up after a Scottish Public Pensions Agency (SPPA) investigation found it tried to “obstruct” a fair deal for almost 700 women who were systematically underpaid for years by the council, earning lower wages than male colleagues doing jobs of equivalent worth.

Last year, after initially forcing the authority to give them back-pay through a tribunal, they reached a second negotiated settlement worth a further £7.1m, after being represented by equal pay experts Action 4 Equality Scotland, (note the absence of Union support).

However, their final salary pension deals remained below those of male counterparts, as their contributions were lower while they were underpaid.

According to recent local government pension regulations, all back-pay must be treated as “pensionable”, meaning bigger pensions and bigger lump sums for those affected. The change required the Council to top up their employer contributions to pension funds.

However in February, North Lanarkshire once again tried to sidestep its duties to the Strathclyde Pension Fund, which covers the female staff, by claiming the women’s second round of back-pay was actually a form of negotiated “compensation” and therefore not pensionable.

The women’s lawyers appealed to the SPPA in March, pointing out the potential differences would be profound if the back-pay was not made pensionable.

Some of the North Lanarkshire women would be denied a pension rise of £1500 a year and lump sums of more than £4000, a lifetime difference of around £50,000.

The SPPA has now ruled the council “misconstrued” the law, and criticised its arguments as “confused and an obstruction to finding an equitable solution to the disagreement”.

It said the council must pay the income tax and national insurance on the second wave of back-pay as well as employer contributions, an estimated total of £1m.