What Priti Patel says about the law enforcement & judicial co-op parts of the deal is simply wrong. It affords us considerably less protection than we had with #EU membership -
PM's Brexit deal makes UK safer, Priti Patel insists theguardian.com/politics/2020/…
Such data sharing as we retain will be slower as not in real time. Information exchanges between police forces will be significantly reduced. We are out of the European Arrest Warrant with a poor relation replacement
Plus it’s all conditional on the #EU Commission making a positive data adequacy ruling within 4 month window
And if the U.K. denounces the #ECHR or significant parts of it all co-operation is suspended
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
What a shame @thetimesscot didn’t seek comment from me on this news story particularly as it reads like another sly attempt to smear me. Please read this thread. thetimes.co.uk/article/foreig…
Had @thetimesscot spoken to me I could have told them that yes frequently posts in the US do feature me usually when they are abusing me & threatening me for standing up for #WomensRights in my work on @HumanRightsCtte. Frequently I’m sent this violent image
Unfortunately this problem started close to home & continues led by a number of actors some of whom are @theSNP members & close to Mr Smith. Despite my complaints indeed pleas for help nothing has been done to address this issue
Thread of my short #SNP20 speech - The British Government are pressing ahead with their constitutional priorities regardless of the current pandemic. Brexit has happened and our parliament is under attack.
Whilst our Scottish Government is rightly focused on Covid, we must act quickly to protect our democracy.
To those who say that a referendum can happen only once in a generation I say there is nowhere that is written in stone. Not in the Edinburgh Agreement. Not in the Smith Commission.
Thread - We cannot have a situation in politics or public life whereby as soon as allegations, particularly of criminality, are made against a man or woman, he or she is presumed guilty until proven innocent. 1/4 thetimes.co.uk/article/ross-t…
People who make complaints must be taken seriously and supported to do so, but we must have due process before those complained against are condemned. Otherwise no one will want to enter politics . 2/4
There are parallels here with the treatment of Alex Salmond and Michelle Thomson both of whom were defenestrated by their own political party and savaged in the media before being exonerated. 3/4
Since I entered politics 6 years ago I’ve experienced more #misogyny than in 25 years of legal practice. I can honestly say that one person I never encountered it from was @AlexSalmond. On the contrary he was supportive while others were strangely silent
I do wonder where all those calling out #misogyny today were when @JoanMcAlpine & me were being called c**ts by young male activists & when they drew a target round a young female candidate simply because we supported women’s rights under the Equality Act?
Is it that some #misogyny is acceptable? Or is everyone so intimidated by these young men that they are afraid to speak out? Neither explanation is acceptable but I am genuinely puzzled 🤔
Oh dear Gordon Brewer on #politicsscotland has misunderstood the process I’ve advocated regarding a consultative referendum. He’s still stuck on the outdated idea of a wildcat referendum which I have never advocated. What I’ve advocated is the following
Holyrood passes a bill to hold a consultative referendum then lets Johnson mount a legal challenge on whether they had the power to do so. The @UKSupremeCourt decides whether such a referendum is lawful Many legal experts think we would win the argument.
To lose would not set us back any further from where we are now. It’s a thought through political & legal strategy that’s not really that hard to understand and I do wish @BBCScotPolitics would get it right
I do wish Brian Taylor would stop saying “it’s quite clear” that the power to hold a referendum resides at Westminster because that simply isn’t the case. The weight of legal opinion is that the Scotland Act is open to a different interpretation. #indyref2
If Holyrood passed a bill to hold a referendum it would be up to the UK Govt to challenge its competency & the @UKSupremeCourt would decide if it was competent. If they held that it was then you would have a “legal” referendum which might be hard to boycott
I’m not suggesting that this is a magic bullet. As @AileenMcHarg has pointed out the U.K. Govt could retaliate by retrospectively amending the Scotland Act to put beyond doubt that Holyrood could not hold a referendum