Here are the relevant bits of the Scotland Act on the the office of First Minister, for people who like primary sources. There will be more about this in the Parliament's standing orders, but this is the basic legal framework. legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/46/…
The FM must resign if there's a vote of no confidence in the SG.
If the FM resigns, for any reason, the Parliament has 28 days to agree a replacement.
If MSPs can't agree a new FM within that period, there has to be an election.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Right, with my account working again, I can post the thing I've wanted to for a while (it needs my threads to work).
A Modest Proposal for dealing with concerns about the new hate crime legislation in Scotland.
A 🧵** in satire font**, with apologies to Jonathan Swift.
The chilling effect happens because people fear being drawn unfairly and too easily into the criminal justice system, even if eventually no charges are brought, or charges are dropped, or Crown Office decides not to prosecute, or the prosecution fails./
The sooner you can involve a good lawyer, the sooner you are likely to get yourself out of any unjustified police etc attention, and so the less you are likely to be affected, and you can carry on as before without worrying. /
This letter contains in its annex a short story that illustrates as neatly as anything that's happened over the past 5 years the arrogant dishonesty that we and others have encountered from government, for being the wrong type of people, outside the tent, annoying, unwelcome.🧵/
In February 2021 a row blew up over the lack of protection for freedom of expression in the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Bill. There was an emergency extra committee meeting on 22 February. At it, Humza Yousaf made a very clear promise, that came at us out of blue.
Pretty unambiguous, yes?
The government was under pressure and keen to defuse it.
In autumn 2019 a very close long-time friend of mine who was raped when we were both younger was traumatised - there's not other word - by a meeting she attended. For a long time, she and the other women were too distressed to say anything in public/ rapecrisisscotland.org.uk/news/news/our-…
It was this one. The behaviour of the people who were there from RCS, ERCC and Edinburgh University could have been made public much sooner, but the women they had left so distressed *could not bear to say anything*. /
I've since met several of the others who were there. They are women who have showed great courage doing the very hard thing of constantly having to remind themselves of this part of their lives, because they are so determined women like them have a voice./
🧵The Labour MPs in yesterday's debate had not been briefed by people who cared about those MPs' personal reputations as competent, let alone skilled, legislators./
*Labour* promised to make sure the overseas list only included countries with a similar approach to GRCs as the UK, when it passed the GRA in 2004.
The govt is fulfilling a *Labour* commitment (which it has neglected but that hyperbole was not about that).
The list names the places having a GRC from which allows you to short-circuit the UK GRA application process - to enter a fast track.
That's it. That is literally all that it means to be on the list.
I'm not convinced most Labour MPs speaking understand that.
When the article associated with this inquiry finally ran, months later, oddly enough it didn't mention this response at all (and didn't make this sort of mud stick to anyone, albeit not for want of a bit of smearing about). x.com/mbmpolicy/stat…
I had some spare time this evening, so I thought I'd look at OD's funding sources and, out of curiosity, see how easy it is to work out what proportion comes from outside the UK, and specifically, the US.
Women politicians! Your job is to smile. If done while standing in front of a sign saying people should be decapitated, it's a trivial error. You must not, however, roll your eyes or pull faces when people say ridiculous things. That's so serious it invalidates all your arguments
I think it's worse in a debating chamber to be performatively bored and disdainful of the speakers, than to engage with what they're saying, including with obvious exasperation. It's an adult debating chamber not an S1 modern studies class.
What I also think is that if that's what people who disagree with what you said most want to draw attention to, you've probably done alright with the speaking.