Lady Carmichael's reasoning for refusing specification of documents today was highly spurious. Hence why Mr O'neill has sought from her a full written opinion on the subject.
But yet again we saw, the Scottish GOVERNMENT legal directorate, representing the Lord Advocate who was called to represent the Scottish PARLIAMENT (Not Scottish Government) advancing arguments for the Scottish GOVERNMENT in a case where the Scottish GOVERNMENT have withdrawn!
This is totally inappropriate to the separation of powers between Parliament and Government and could lead to accusations of the Scottish Government interfering in a case to which it is no longer a party to those proceedings!
Upward and onward then.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The tories keep trying to claim some sort of credit for the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine, but the last time I looked, oxford university was a private institution and its research funding provided by grants from the private sector, and AstraZeneca is a pharma company.
The UK Government might have pre-ordered vaccines from AstraZeneca (like every other country in the world from Pharma companies) but that gives them no claim to the credit for the vaccine itself - that recognition is squarely the fiefdom of the dedicated researchers....
....and scientists who created the vaccine.
The only credit the Tories should get is the mess of the response to COVID, putting lives secondary to vested interests, putting medical workers lives at risk with inadequate resources and...
Sad state of affairs but the local shop where I live has been going downhill rapidly. You can't even go in and buy proper veg anymore. It has become a sweets / crisps / pies and fizzy juice shop.
I think we're starting to get to the point as a society where legislation might be considered to define in law that local shops must carry the staples of diet i.e. veg, meat, rice, potatoes etc because in the middle of a pandemic, traveling miles to a supermarket is a no-go.
And as for trying to get home delivery? Woof! I checked last night, first available delivery slot is January the 26th.
In a time when conservatives are pushing for the re-opening of religious institutions like churches during this pandemic, the Archbishop of Glasgow, the Most Reverend Philip Tartaglia has sadly passed away from COVID 19.
Thoughts and prayers are with him, his family and his friends. But it does highlight the fact that COVID 19 respects no boundaries and the fact that congregations and their religious leaders are just at as much risk as any other public gathering.
I don't believe for a minute that those who attend services and are devout, would for a minute even consider putting their fellow congregation at risk, which tells me that politicians, as per usual, are using religion to manufacture grievance.
So I guess that answers that then. The Lord Advocate is not representing parliament (of which he was called to represent) he's representing Scotgov and also representing bits of constitutional matters of parliament, a position which is antithetical to the separation of powers!
So! They have just CONFIRMED what we've been saying to the national. The Scottish Government have withdrawn in name only and are hiding behind the Scottish Parliament.
So the Scottish Government have only withdrawn in name, by proxy - Exactly as Aidan called it. And the Scottish Government removing itself from proceedings and being represented by the same counsel as the second defender was simply a political exercise....
When will companies learn that private and public sector carers who supplement unpaid carers with their family members are not just "care staff" but instead, are people who are with those families at some of their worst times in life, and therefore, become an extension of family?
It still beggars belief that in the 21st century in health and social care, governments, local authorities and companies fail to realise that in the world of in-home care, "transference" might be something to be avoided with doctors, but has a net benefit....
... when it comes to sustained care provision. A family that welcomes and cares for carers makes staff feel appreciated, and laterally that connection and bond means that care staff look after the person as they would their own family.
The documents prove this to be the case. Yet Evans preaches about a "duty of care" to the complainers. I'm sorry! That doesn't wash. It's not "caring" or even coming close to exercising a duty of "care" to force a complainer of assault into a criminal court case against her will!
Obviously, Alex Salmond was found not guilty by a majority-female jury, but the fact remains that if that wasn't the case - Evans would have been responsible for doing the exact same thing of which she initiated criminal complaint to investigate someone for -
Namely doing things to the complainers without their consent and causing them severe emotional pain!