Half and half
Bumped into Maria Fyfe at the party conference. No, not the LibDem conference.
Don't think, on balance, she's likely to defect. My encounter was at the Labour conference in Dundee the week previously.
You must remember Maria Fyfe. She was MP for Glasgow Maryhill - in the days when that great city's seats were named after community locations instead of points on a compass.
I remember her in particular for her efforts to secure greater representation for women in the Scottish Parliament - which is why, of course, our chance meeting came back to me subsequently.
Maria was one of a Labour group including Johann Lamont, Margaret Curran and many others who advocated a 50/50 approach in the prelude to the establishment of the devolved Parliament.
By which they meant the members of the new Parliament should be gender balanced: half of them women, half of them men.
As I recall, the campaign attempted firstly to prescribe this by legislation. When that failed, they proceeded via internal party action, including a concordat between Labour and the Liberal Democrats that these two parties - signatories to the Convention - would seek as far as possible to achieve gender balance.
I recall interviewing Maria at the old BBC Scotland HQ in Queen Margaret Drive. I was giving her the customary hard time.
Wasn't this political manipulation? Shouldn't women get there on merit? Wasn't there a risk that women, thus favoured, would be seen as second rank MSPs?
Maria listened and answered politely, as was her wont. Then, displaying a moment's exasperation, she paused and sighed: "Look, Brian, this really matters. Have you got any better ideas?"
As I recorded in a book about the advent of devolution (second edition, still available from all....), the interview with the MP from Maryhill ended rather soon afterwards.
This brief encounter - and the one in Dundee - came back to me as I perused the stushie in Airdrie over the attempted imposition of an all-women shortlist in selecting an individual to replace John Reid MP as Labour candidate for Airdrie and Shotts (plus, of course, those all-important surrounding villages.)
One can readily understand the anger in Airdrie. White Lanarkshire males are so under-represented in Scottish Labour politics.
However, perhaps this is also about a power clash.
In Lanarkshire, it seems, they dislike the notion of politics being run by a potent, centralised clique. (Or, more accurately, by someone else's potent centralised clique; by London's PCC.)
Ach, I shouldn't mock. There are serious points to be made on both sides of the argument here.
I well recall the comparable disputes at the advent of devolution - and, as is often the case, they all had salience.
Justice was not solely in one corner.
There were those who said that women's representation was so pitifully low that it had to be boosted by artificial intervention.
They argued - further and with some force - that it was vital to attempt this task when there was a clean slate, before incumbency and inertia froze the females out.
There were those who disliked using party machinery, still less the law, for this purpose.
They argued that parliaments and parties must rather address why they were unable to recruit women in winnable seats.
There were those who said: leave well alone. Party machines play too big a role in the selection of candidates as it is. Leave it to local choice. Leave it, ultimately, to the voters.
This particular row, of course, is about a Westminster seat, not Holyrood. But the core elements of the argument can be set out exactly as above.
Enough, Brian, enough.
As Maria Fyfe will undoubtedly remind me when next we meet, this really matters.
I'm 
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~52~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
And of course, Scottish Labour and the Conservatives have "zipped" male/female lists for the European elections on 4 June.
Complain about this comment
Brian,
This sentence is easily mis-read (AI), and isn't "artificial intervention" a tautology?It is really important. And, so is this.
Slainte
ed
Complain about this comment
Elections based on an open PR list would make things a lot easier to decide and would give power to the electorate to choose the best candidate(s) rather than a few activists or central party hacks.
As it stands, half of Glasgow's electorate are completely unrepresented at Westminster as they don't vote Labour. Voters might decide to vote for female candidates across various parties should they be so inclined.
Complain about this comment
Whilst we wait for the moderators to let us see the first three posts, I will predict that the cyber Nats will quickly resort to hurling abuse about the apparent weaknesses of the Labour women MSPs.
The problem with this debate Brian is that it too quickly becomes personal & vitriolic.
It is an important discussion, and let me make just two points:
Firstly, the Scottish Parliament only looks significantly more representative than the cottish delegations to Westminster because of the artificial intervention by the labour party. None of the other parties has made big advances in the numbers of women MSPs (although SNP deserves credit for having the first ethnic minority MSP). The Lib dems have been particularly rubbish and advancing equality (ironically).
Secondly, there are many who would argue that it actually isn't important what the levels of gender or racial representation are in either parliament. This is a perfectly reasonable argument, it is just a bit unfortunate that it tends to be white men who seem the most vociferous in making this case.
Complain about this comment
Single sex lists for the local parties to choose from are almost always a bad idea. Just look at what happened to Labour in Blaenau Gwent (previously their safest seat in the country).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/vote_2005/wales/4514385.stm
The electorate always feel they are being lent-upon and, generally, reject the party "taking them for granted" … that is to set aside the larger chance of internal party splits due to the "parachuting in" of (sometimes under-qualified) female candidates who probably know more about head office than the constituency (that is, after all, how they got on the centralized list).
Sex parity in parliament is a commendable goal, but this is not the way to achieve it.
Down this route you end up with the ridiculous scenario where Paxman was trying to shame Galloway from displacing grade-A Labour apparatchik Oona King, simply because she is a black women; and he, notably, is not. Not normally a fan of George Galloway, but this is the end result of insisting on the Parliament being 100% representative - and this is what it does to democracy,
"JP: We're joined now from his count in Bethnal Green and Bow by George Galloway. Mr Galloway, are you proud of having got rid of one of the very few black women in Parliament? ?
GG: What a preposterous question. I know it's very late in the night, but wouldn't you be better starting by congratulating me for one of the most sensational election results in modern history? ?
JP: Are you proud of having got rid of one of the very few black women in Parliament? ?
GG: I'm not - Jeremy - move on to your next question. ?
JP: You're not answering that one? ?
GG: No because I don't believe that people get elected because of the colour of their skin. I believe people get elected because of their record and because of their policies. So move on to your next question."
Etc ...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/vote_2005/blog/4519553.stm
Complain about this comment
Goodness, what a sterile topic for a blog. A lively and very interesting debate on the other thread around the latest Yougov poll produced a number if points worth pursuing, pity that this kind of debate never makes it into mainstream media.
Lanarkshire Labour are Scottish Labour in microcosm, nothing fresh and an unseemly scramble to see who get's to the trough, or might get !!
Well, hopefully the chosen one won't have long to wait for the election, the Scottish media are in overdrive at the moment so something is afoot.
Can this be the preclude to a May/June election - all the portents are there.
A poll showing Labour ahead of the SNP.
Orchestrated campaign, Unionist headlines attacking referendum followed by Labour conference followed by poll with loaded question leading to more headlines building on the poll.
The agenda is clear, to deflect from the causes and symptoms of the recession and instead paint the SNP as doing nothing to mitigate it (they have little power anyway) and compound this by suggesting they are obsessed with a referendum when people are losing their jobs.
The poll is a very simple yet effective ploy. It allows the press and media free reign to continue to build in the Unionist spin by extrapolating the poll figures into further attacks on Salmond.
See Alan Cochrane in the Telegraph's Scottish edition to see how it works. Cochrane has used this poll as justification for spouting all of his anti SNP/Salmond prejudices.
Now, before Unionists deign to offer their 'critique' of this comment let's ask one question.
Do you think that the days following the SNP conference we will see a similar poll consisting of series of questions based around the SNP's conference message, building up to something akin to
"In light of the failure of Westminster to invest in an oil fund that might have mitigated the effects of the recession, do you believe that the SNP are right to stand by their commitment to offer the electorate their say in a referendum on independence in 2010"?
Oh. I should also add that the respondents will, this time, reverse the proportion of Unionist party members to SNP party members.
That's what I would call balance, and, I would also dismiss the findings of such a poll as a dliberate attempt at manufacturing a result.
The press of course, wouldn't touch such a poll with the proverbial barge pole.
Complain about this comment
What happened to democracy, and the local party "Choosing " their candidate. This is the problem with politics, especially here in Scotland, the voter only gets to choose a Party , not a candidate. The result of this ,as has been shown since the Scottish parliament began, is a parliament that couldn't care less about the people, and only about the party line. As far as Labour womanhood is concerned, the several examples you named Brian are about as useful to Scotland as the Welsh national anthem. (apologies to the Welsh) Candidates should be chosen by the people on the strength of their perceived value to the voters, not by parties and definitely not because of their colour, sex or lack of sex. Aye ! Who would make the tea ? (1)
Complain about this comment
Speaking of sub-standard female candidates Brian, I see that Margaret Curran will fight the Glasgow East seat at the next Westminster election. As the BBC dutifully reports:
"She won the unanimous backing of party members at a selection meeting."
Oddly Labour supplies an extra, somewhat revealing level of detail in their release:
"She was unopposed and received the unanimous backing of party members at the selection meeting."
I wonder why the "unopposed" part didn't make it into the BBC version? ("Odd for the Beeb to deviate from a Labour press release!", I hear you cry!) Gives a rather different impression I think...shades of Hobson's choice: "You can choose anyone you want, as long as it's Margaret!" But perhaps I'm reading too much between the lies, sorry lines.
Also, does anyone know whether Ms Curran will give up her MSP seat if she becomes an MP? There's something about seat reductions and boundary changes in the BBC article, but no unambiguous statement either way. I'm sure she wouldn't keep both seats given Labour's attacks over Salmond's dual mandate. After all, that would be hypocrisy of the highest order...
Complain about this comment
I'd be perfectly content with an all-woman Parliament. Don't see a problem, provided they were the best people and selected without discrimination.
"Gender" is a word used in grammar. It can be masculine, feminine, neuter or common. People belong in sexes. So, sex balance, please. Don't be prissy.
Complain about this comment
I totally detest this whole culture of we must have a balance of women/ethnic minorities/catholic/protestant/gay/lesbian/ and I cannot think of any more.
Whatever happened to the old-fashioned idea of the best person for the job and that should include the above groups.
Women have not made such a huge success of the fact that they have been granted equality in all things.
In partnerships, they decide to damage children by refusing them access to their father. In politics, well, all I need say is Maggie.
There are some good female MSPs, Mps, and particularly I look to the SNP in Scotland and some of the Irish women MPs are outstanding.
In the Scottish Labour party well just name me one.
I would object to the fact that my choice of MSP were limited to women, I would spoil my ballot paper rather than vote. It is not democratic to limit choice for reasons of filling a proposal to have more women. What happens if all the women candidates are rubbish at being MPs?
From an older Scottish Granny
Complain about this comment
#6 Westfifer
There are one or two SNP female MSPs who can be considered less than efficient. I refer of course to Linda Fabiani and Christine Grahame.
Not very effective MSPs when you compare them to the likes of Nicola Sturgeon.
Anyway, MPs/MSPs should be selected purely on merit, regardless of race, sex, orientation, or anything else that should not impact their usefulness as an MP/MSP.
Playing the PC card only backfires.
Complain about this comment
What sensible woman would want to get involved in politics? It's a dirty game run by rude and obnoxious boys for rude and obnoxious boys.
Complain about this comment
And no, I don't agree with these stupid lists!
(And despite my football-orientated nickname, I am in fact female.)
Complain about this comment
Definitely believe it should be the best person for the job regardless of gender/race/religion.
If they have honesty, integrity and determinedly pursue the policies they (and I) believe in then I will happily vote for them.
Complain about this comment
If I were an MSP or elected to any office (no, I won't go threre) I would feel like a sulk if I felt I had to get it by means of an all women list - how insulting. It takes away all the pleasure of beating all the men to the job! (I would have to tone down my smugness.)
And if I was a guy I'd be hacked off. It infers inferiority of those who are needing the helping hand. If there are problems getting women into politics, this isn't the answer.
Complain about this comment
I'm with Granny Lydia! (11)
Slainte!
ed
Complain about this comment
#13 GlasgowGooner
You make it sound appealing ;-)
Complain about this comment
I've never really understood the purpose behind single sex lists.
Doesn't it run slightly contrary to the principle of equal oppurtunities for all when you automatically restrict the selection pool by approximately 50% by introducing an artificially imposed constraint?
As the brig said, I'd be in favour of 100% representation by women if they were selected as being the best (or, perhaps least worst would be more accurate) of the candidates available.
Complain about this comment
#15 Sparklet
Based on those criteria, have you actually found anyone you can vote for?Complain about this comment
At Westminster, particularly, I'm not sure it matters. The party system means that most backbenchers are simply lobby fodder.
Sex (the brig is absolutely right in his #10) is as irrelevant as hair colour, when MPs are summoned by a bell from the bars to vote the party line on an issue where they haven't even been in the Chamber to hear the debate. And when they are Scots MPs voting on English issues which don't affect their constituents, it is even more inane.
I would agree with glasgowgooner, as long as she accepts that the "rude and obnoxious boys" are but a subset of my sex!
Complain about this comment
20. At 2:38pm on 17 Mar 2009, Fit Like? wrote:
#15 Sparklet
"If they have honesty, integrity and determinedly pursue the policies they (and I) believe in then I will happily vote for them"
Based on those criteria, have you actually found anyone you can vote for?
********************************
Why do you think I inserted 'happily' ???
Complain about this comment
Surely the simple solution is for ALL elections to be held under STV, whether for single or multiple vacancies. Then each party can put up as many male and or female candidates as it wishes and ditto for religious or ethnic sub-groups.
That way, the voters get to choose, not only between the parties but between the candidates for their choses party.
Doesn't fit in with Labour's top-down model, I suppose, or with Tory ideas of "democracy".
Complain about this comment
Sparklet,
I have finally replied to you on 'Cash cuts'!
I'd welcome your thoughts :-)
Complain about this comment
7 Gboy
A lot of Scots are stupid and gullible to think for themselves that's why the media prays on them. I know lot's of Scots who can't think or debate anything. It's astonishing they can't see through the media lies. I can't say what i'd do to Cochrane, the man's an enemy of Scotland like so many of our countrymen!
Complain about this comment
Back to school tie,
1. [too} gullible
2. preys, not prays
3. lots not lot's
Pedantry rules! ;-)
Complain about this comment
Ed
Sorry but grammar is not my strong point!
;-)
Complain about this comment
#26 Ed Iglehart
Ed, NR's has gone all cool and mowderrn!
Complain about this comment
#28 aye_write: more than can be said for Brian's blog! On my computer the posts go 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 5, 7!! Anyone else see this too? And our user IDs briefly appeared after our usernames at the top of each post this morning, then mysteriously vanished...strange things afoot...
Complain about this comment
#29 forfar-loon
Yeah, that with the numbers happened once before I noticed.
I always like special treatment ;-)
Complain about this comment
So the solution to gender inequality is formalised gender discrimination? The logic of Scottish Labour never ceases to amaze me!
Complain about this comment
Aye & all,
Some (but not a lot) information on the "improvements" underwaay on the blog blog.
The numbers, etc., including a shutdown for 'maintenance' last night, are signs of what's afoot, but no progress indicated on changes in moderation policy....
Slainte
ed
Complain about this comment
I've alway's loved Maria Fyfe's description of independence supporters.
"...Braveheart fantasists still nursing a grudge against Edward the First."
Not a woman to typecast anyone.
However what the stushie in Airdrie does show, whatever the merits of women only lists, is that there is no Scottish Labour Party despite the constant references to it and to the mythical, "Scottish Labour Leader", on the BBC.
This rule is being imposed on the British Labour party members in Airdrie by the Labour National Executive Council. Iain Gray doesn't get a look-in.
Complain about this comment
Worth another mention:
Northern Ireland's First Minister and Deputy First Minister are to meet with President Obama.
Given that our newspapers saw fit to plaster Ming Campbell's very bitter attack on the Scottish First Minister, suggesting he lacked the qualities and experience needed in order to carry out such foreign engagements, when will we see a Scottish journalist seek Campbell's views on the Northern Irish visit?
Let's see Wee Glen Campbell sneer "Will you apologise" at Ming, repeatedly.
Complain about this comment
#34 greenockboy
As a matter of interest, it is not unknown for the Premier of Quebec to meet the President of France. Such meetings have taken place on both sides of the Atlantic, whether for the transacting of substantive business between the governments of Quebec and France or to allow Mr Sarkozy to make Mr Charest a 'chevalier de la legion d'honneur'.
As a matter of further interest, the Quebec premier led a Quebec government delegation to the Davos get-together this winter. Yet nobody said he should not be there so far as I am aware, even though Quebec is constitutionally only a province of Canada.
US Secretary of State Clinton and First Minister Salmond probably had substantive business to transact during a two-hour meeting. Let us hope it included the topic of what is to be done for Scotland internationally if a referendum on independence continues to be blocked by the anglo-unionists.
Complain about this comment
Even The Archers is "reactively moderated"!
Oh, to be a grown up!
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
The good times of "Giving a politician a hard time" as the way of political reporting/interviewing may be coming to an end, Brian.
There's need for a new approach to social, business and political interviewing/reporting.
Mr. Stewart in America, last week showed the way...experts were asked apropos the financial situation "if you knew so much then, why didn't you tell us? For if we'd known what was going on we could have done something about it ourselves".
Brian, you are an expert, one with access to the inside track of politics in the UK.
Please take care that you don't end up being asked "If you knew, why wait till now with "hindsight"..why didn't you tell us then? We didn't ask for entertainment at a politician's expense, we wanted old-fashioned let- the- facts- tell- the- story type reporting.
The days of nudge,nudge, don't ask for if you knew what I know..ah-ha..chuckle, chuckle .... are,I think, over..we want truth and we want it now.
We want it so we can have the facts we need to make good decisions, particularly political decisions and you are in a position to provide it.
You could be among the first to regenerate the trust that's gone from what we read and hear in the media.
Complain about this comment
#34 & #35
The President of the USA will meet leaders of as many countries as possible. There is nothing overly special about these meetings, and business dealings are normally carried out by the lower staff.
Only high priority issues are discussed directly between state leaders, and the only thing of major interest to the USA is what happens to Faslane if Scotland goes independent.
Northern Ireland is of more importantance to the USA, and is more newsworthy because of the situation there.
Start attacking Labour's policies, not minor issues with Ming the Toothless. Look at the scandal with Stafford Hospital, caused by targets set by the Government. Alan Johnson should resign over this. But does the issue there have any implications in Scotland? What targets have been set? I there a potential banana skin for Sturgeon?
Labour will be deflecting all attention from themselves over this. They will also be looking for any opportunity to point the spotlight elsewhere, and that elsewhere is Scotland. They will be itching for a similar issue to occur, so they can then criticise the Scottish Government over "failings".
One big problem with some SNP supporters is that they focus on what are basically minor issues, and forget to look at the big picture. The SNP themselves keep falling into this trap.
Returning closely to topic, Christine Grahame is a prime example. She witters on and on about minor issues, people get deaf to her, and then when she actually raises a serious issue, she is ignored.
Labour are still managing to hold ground in Scotland, despite all the problems. If the SNP for once would focus on the main issues, and think before engaging mouth, they could do some serious damage to Labour.
Labour did this to the Tories in 1997, despite the fact that the economy etc wasn't too bad, it was simply that the Tories had been in power for too long. The SNP are still high in the polls, they must capitalise on this now, otherwise they will lose their chance. If the Tories win the next election, Brown will certainly go as most likely will Gray, then Labour will start to regroup.
Being in opposition is easy.
Complain about this comment
aye-write.
Googled it before you posted. Looks good.
But, be warned, if the SNP P me off I will lay in to them with as much integrity and vigour as I would into anything/one who want's to deter me from what I believe in because they have no ambition: Those who are easily led by the lure of silver and gold and the need to feel as if they have taken the world into a new civilised order and can't except it when someone questions its credability.
God they test my patience, and our numbers are growing fast.
Unsionists would like to believe that's a direct cause of that mythalogical story of braveheart - hahahahahHEHEH! And often do patronisingly through it in your face when they feel their backs against the wall and the superhuman intelect can't think of anything else. Oh aye ,then there's the illousion of the spoils of oil that they seem to think is the only other thing that makes us want to breakaway. Just accept it! Its just you we want away from. Go on impress some one on the disney forum. They'd probably see through faster than most on here. LOL!
Complain about this comment
#38 Neil_Small147
Neil, I like your geeing up stance there towards the SNP. A man with ideas?
Make more use of the local media is one area the SNP focus on to improve communication. Do you see others? If you were looking to improve your party's performance, what would you do?
(I'd get some sort of prodigy (extremely well read), charismatic types in to wow the audience. Maybe you'd already include Nicola in that?)
Complain about this comment
One woman that shouldn't be in politics is Jackie Bailie. More content to be bag carrier and bodyguard to Wendy Alexander than anything of real substance.
Complain about this comment
No 38 Neil
Neil, please don't insult my intelligence. If you must willfully ignore the point I was making then fine, but please, no lectures.
We all know how concerned you are regarding the SNP, so much so that you spend most of your time on here constructively (ahem) criticising them and their supporters.
If you believe the poll from yesterday and insist that Labour are holding ground then fine, my belief however is that they are in trouble.
The de-facto opposition in Scotland are not Labour my friend, you are naive if you believe otherwise.
My view is that independence supporters do well to highlight media imbalance and news manipulation. Labour under Gray are at best treading water at worst slowly sinking.
The hospital story will be covered by the UK broadcast media and the English press, there is no need to highlight it on these boards. What we need to concentrate on are stories that are suppressed, ignored and those that disappear.
The SNP cannot dance to a 'Scottish' media tune, that would be akin to old Eastern bloc dissidents altering their tactics because Pravda gave them a bad press.
Complain about this comment
40. At 9:32pm on 17 Mar 2009, aye_write wrote:
#38 Neil_Small147
Neil, I like your geeing up stance there towards the SNP. A man with ideas?
Make more use of the local media is one area the SNP focus on to improve communication. Do you see others? If you were looking to improve your party's performance, what would you do?
(I'd get some sort of prodigy (extremely well read), charismatic types in to wow the audience. Maybe you'd already include Nicola in that?)
--------------------
Local media is one. So is the Internet, but the danger in any form of communication is keeping it up to date. I pointed out that Alex Salmond's campaign site was still up in November last year, with lots of quotes about Iceland.
Not keeping communications of your own party leaves the question "how can we trust you when you cannot maintain you own stuff" etc etc. If I was in opposition I would be using those sort of arguments.
Nicola Sturgeon is a good example of how a politician should behave in public: friendly, charasmatic and bar the odd glitch not dropping down to the sour grapes of defeat.
She also sticks to the main issues, and remarkably avoids the "it's Westminster's fault" argument, something Alex Salmond needs to stop using all the time.
Who else can the SNP use? Sean Connery is not the nest example to be fair. Someone who lives outside the UK demands independence for Scotland?
There must be some more good PR people out there they can use. And people who live in Scotland. I'd avoid business types, as they - in the main - are there for their own business opportunities.
But local issues are where you gain your support. Do well, and people place less importance to the party you represent, rather than who you are as a person. Then, when it comes to an election, you will always have a loyal base of supporters, even if they do not necessarily support your party.
Complain about this comment
42. At 10:06pm on 17 Mar 2009, greenockboy:
The SNP cannot dance to a 'Scottish' media tune
How do you then propose they deal with the press? Very few of the general electorate read these or other blogs.
I've just stuck a post on #42. The SNP need to get more active in local issues as well as highlighting national ones.
My local list MSP is Linda Fabiani. She might as well be invisible bar the odd comment in the local paper - which believe me is NOT Labour supportive.
A few years ago, I raised an issue about the local Labour-led council, and it hit the front page, causing a stir. I had also written to all my main MPs/MSPs. Both Andy Kerr and Adam Ingram responded within 48 hours. Two attempts to Linda Fabiani got zero response. She only responded when I criticised her in an open letter to the paper!
Too late, the damage was done.
Labour are sinking, but you cannot get complacent. If you cannot deal with the press, then you must take things to a local level. Neither can the SNP rely on Alex Salmond's personality to drive things through.
You obviously think I am some Labour/ Unionist plant. Well, sorry but I am not. But you are looking at the SNP via rose-tinted spectacles. Not everyone has the same opinion. Many people want Labour out, me included. But they want to know what will happen under independence. No matter what arguments are put forward, even with backing evidence, it is still a huge leap into the unknown for many people.
Come the next Westminster election Brown will be gone, as will Gray. That leaves a void to be filled, and there are still some heavyweights out there who can stand up to Salmond.
My point at #38 is that meetings between US leaders and those of the NI leadership are of no interest to most Scots. Sure, we have close connections (me included), but the political landscape there is more complex than in Scotland.
And to be honest the comment by frank at #35 about "Let us hope it included the topic of what is to be done for Scotland internationally if a referendum on independence continues to be blocked by the anglo-unionists" is nonsense. If Scotland goes independent England will be far more important to US interests.
Business would have been discussed, but do you honestly believe Hilary Clinton cares if independence is blocked or not? An independent Scotland means the US lose a strategically important military location - ie Faslane.
Complain about this comment
@ 42Greenockboy
You do highlight a real problem for the SNP (and all independence parties in fact) the Scottish media (and not just the BBC) are in fact very good at phasing the SNP and the whole independence argument out into the margins of political centre ground.
This has to be significant reason (other than the economic recession wrong-footing the Nats) for the fall in the % in favour of independence even in principal (was 73% two years ago, according to Scot. Sunday Times now just 57%, still a majority in principal but a rather steep fall.).
So sorry, but the SNP need to learn to dance to the media tune in Scotland otherwise they will start to slip back in Westrminster Voting intentions just like in the Regional list at Holyrood (and the FPTP constit. as well in fact).
But, for balance sake- the Nats haven't exactly helped themselves recently when Salmond blamed spivs and speculators for the demise of RBS- this did dent the SNP economic image of responsibility (rightly or wrongly).
Complain about this comment
I note that Neil-Small is on again about Christie Grahame who is a hard working and active MSP who is presently carrying forward the Scottish Governments's Dangerous Dogs legislation. Still ,I don't suppose our MSPs should really have any opinions at all unless they suit Neil.
I'm a with Winnie Ewing on women in politics. She believed that any woman who was good enough would make it in their own right and choosing someone just because they were female would put in place womwn who weren't good enough and damage the women's cause.
Most assured women I have met agree.
Complain about this comment
This is ashame,in order for equality, we have to force the public to accept a something, in this case a woman.
How come when we attempt to increase equality the middle class male suffers?
Labour may interoduce a woman short list, it's their right as a party to decide their own rules. However they are being discriminative towards males, we should never hear the sentence, "You can't do that your ".........."."
Do woman agree with this method?
Even in the workplace, how'd you feel knowing you reached managerial level because the directors felt that they should only accept a woman?
You don't deserve it, and you will never gain the respect of the workforce if ever they find out.
This is the same case. If a Labour person became MP and through Labour they became a candiate for the area through a shortlist which banished all other potential candidates then you do not deserve the positon.
You simply got there by forcing the party and her supporters to accept, in this case a woman to be their local representative.
We are simply giving more ammo to the BNP.
It's reverse discrimination. It did not work in America, it won't work here.
You can change a law, but you can not change the mind of man.
Complain about this comment
Neil:
"She also sticks to the main issues, and remarkably avoids the "it's Westminster's fault" argument, something Alex Salmond needs to stop using all the time."
Is this even possible?
Alex Salmond is First Minister of Scotland, Head of the Scottish Parliament, with Westminister as the overlord of the whole system.
You should give Salmond a break, let's appreciate we have someone here willing to defend Scottish interests till the end, could you imagine having Wendy as First Minister during the recession?
Complain about this comment
45. At 11:24pm on 17 Mar 2009, deanthetory wrote:
"This has to be significant reason (other than the economic recession wrong-footing the Nats) for the fall in the % in favour of independence even in principal (was 73% two years ago, according to Scot. Sunday Times now just 57%, still a majority in principal but a rather steep fall.)."
Dean,
At 33% only a minority were in favour of 'Independence' with 53% against. The figure you quote of 57% were those in favour of having a referendum!
Complain about this comment
No, sorry- I was quoting the figures for in principal do you think that there ought to be a referendum. Thats it. Sorry: see attached file:
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
Thats the one thatd fallen from 73%. Still, it still supports my original point however.
(Don't you just love the semantics? The last stand of a despirate argument?)
Complain about this comment
http://www.theherald.co.uk/features/featuresopinon/display.var.2495887.0.How_to_bring_balance_to_gender_politics.php
Complain about this comment
Was it just me or did I hear Gary Robertson TWICE this morning on GMS refer to The Grey Man not as "Scottish Labour Leader" but as "Leader of Scottish Labour at Holyrood" ?
Is the message finally starting to get through to the Northern British branch of the BBC ?
Complain about this comment
Women are excelling in education and in the work place.
In my opinion, women in Scottish politics are also excelling, young women particularly so. They come across as well informed, motivated into helping people and empathetic of Scotland’s needs.
All of the above is to be welcomed, there may be a time when in an independent Scotland we need all male lists?
Out with Scotland, that other place, it is a different story.
Harriet Harman's motivation appears to be denigrating crash Gordon at every opportunity, certain tad of irony there. Jackie Smith, rather than keep crime of the streets, appears to be focusing on maximising her expenses by kipping at her sister’s pad twice a week and calling it her main residence, fancy that!
I trust Scottish women, based in Scotland to run the affairs of Scotland. I do not trust women from out with Scotland, including Scottish unionist women in that other place, to run the affairs of Scotland in Scotland’s best interests.
TDBs
Complain about this comment
I've never been a great lover of 'lists'. It should always be the best person for the job. However, approximately half the population is female and, as such, should have access to the reins of power. History is riddled with prominent women who have added to the annals of science and military endeavours.
I have always argued that womens' natural role of bringing up the family has, too often, been looked upon as unimportant, but we all know that this is probably the most important job in our society. The raising of our children has mostly been the role of women, who are far better equiped, mentally and physically, to undertake this task and anything that takes them away from this should be looked upon with suspicion.
I am not advocating that women should not enter politics or business as those worlds would be the lesser if women were blocked from entering them. I just feel that women have more important things to do than playing at the stupid game of politics.
Complain about this comment
48. At 00:21am on 18 Mar 2009, Thomas_Porter wrote:
"You should give Salmond a break, let's appreciate we have someone here willing to defend Scottish interests till the end, could you imagine having Wendy as First Minister during the recession?"
"defend Scottish interests till the end" ???
Though an excellent Orator how did he represent that strong voice for Scotland in the westminster parliament.
Look it up on publicwhip.org.uk
Voting attendance record
Current parliament..17 percent (164 of 959)
2001 - 2005.......... 38 percent (474 of 1246)
1997 - 2001...........16 percent (205 of 1203)
Not very reassuring!
How about parliamentary transparency? Something we're all very concerned about,
aren't we?
Out of 8 votes on the FOI bill (apr' 07-jul' 08) - he was absent for all 8.
Perhaps not concerned after all!
And how about that most crucial of all votes affecting our freedom & sovereignty - the Lisbon Treaty, of the 18 votes held he attended 5.
But at least he voted against (when he bothered to attend that is!!)
And why oh why did he vote (WITH Labour)AGAINST this to -
"reduce the burden of centrally-imposed targets, bureaucracy and regulation on the NHS and the Education Service; call on Ministers to implement urgently the action needed to deliver cleaner hospitals and to strengthen school discipline; regret the omission of measures to abolish top-up fees; note that legislation to reduce the size of Ofsted will merely reverse part of the huge increases in its staffing levels since 1997; reject the Government's intention to impose additional fees on those attending further education colleges and deprecate the damage this will cause to adult and vocational education"
Complain about this comment
Being a democrat I would always argue for the right of the voters to decide. There should be no artificial tampering with the electoral process which favours any one gender, race or faith over another. MSPs and MPs should be elected on their merits as individuals and - crucially - on the basis of their beliefs.
The voting public do not cast their votes on the basis of the gender of the candidate but they might, and often do, cast their vote on the basis of what the candidates have to say about gender issues.
The obsession with the gender, race, sexuality, personality etc. of politicians is not healthy.We need to focus on their policies and their effectiveness.
Complain about this comment
@38 Neil Small wrote "Is there a potential banana skin for Sturgeon?"
Thing is Neil, if there is , a two tonne box of the bendy yellow things will be distributed amongst the "Scottish " media to be rapidly consumed by concerned journalists and then cast in her path.
How delightful to see Maria Fyfe and Harriet Harperson, singing from the same hymnsheet and without Hatttie even needing an interpreter for her North British sister.
Complain about this comment
#46 snecked
My point highlighted here.
Christine is leading an important piece of legislation, one I fully agree with, but this is overshadowed by the William Wallace letter. Now, let me make it clear I'd like to see the letter returned, but it is not exactly a critical issue in the current climate.
Had she left Wallace alone, the other legislation might be given some more coverage.
Complain about this comment
Thomas,
Hint: "Equality"Complain about this comment
I have been pondering this question and hesitated to comment, trembling at the prospect of being descended upon by the monstrous regiment that has broken society and is not finished yet unless we come to our senses and restrain them:
"For who can denie but it is repugneth to nature, that the blind shall be appointed to leade and conduct such as do see? That the weake, the sicke and impotent persons shall norishe and kepe the hole and strong? And finallie, that the foolishe, madde and phrenetike shal governe the discrete and give counsel to such as be sober of mind. And such be al women, compared unto man in bearing of authoritie. For their sight in civile regiment is but blindness; their strength, weaknes; their counsel, foolishnes; and judgment, phrensie, if it be rightlie considered." (The First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstrous Regiment of Women, John Knox, 1558)
Only joking, aye_write. Keep your hair on. I just thought it was getting a bit quiet around here.
Complain about this comment
Brian,
Any particular reason wy the name of this entry has mysteriously changed from 'Blog Women' to 'Half and Half'?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#60 Anglosaxophone
Good afternoon Saxy,
Having realised you are not the great, the groovy moustache twirling one, I can let rip...only joking, women never do that.
"For their sight in civile regiment is but blindness; their strength, weaknes; their counsel, foolishnes; and judgment, phrensie, if it be rightlie considered."
Something tells me Knoxy was either soundly whipped in an argument with a "wummin", or had much failed in getting his leg over, in which case no whipping. Either way, his statements are a bit too emphatic to be taken not as a humph. Shame, aw. I rather like him!
Complain about this comment
Just announced:
Prescription charges will fall from 5 GBP to 4 GBP from 1st April.
Enough for a front page headline or lead item on BBC news?
No? Then try this one:
Just announced that the SNP are on track to recruit an extra 1000 police officers by the end of this parliament.
The police federation backed the claim and added that they are happy that the SNP are doing everything in it's power to ensure the figure is reached.
Now then, let's see if 'our' press and broadcast media will give this announcement the prominence that they gave to Labour attacks on the same policy.
Complain about this comment
#55 Sparklet
Sparklet, could you stop impersonating Derek - all this glee is getting to me ;-)
And please be so kind as to read my response to you on 'Cash cuts'. If you don't reply, that's OK, I just wasn't sure if you'd seen it.
Basically I agree with you on the EU's failings (though I wonder about its supposed global benefits for, well, I don't know yet! - whole thing smacks of an enormous trade off).
I disagree on Scotland's need to not be independent to deal with any such matters.
I agree with you a debate ought to be had on which options the UK, whether that be England or the remaining three nations, and Scotland should consider as far as European international organisations go, as there are several, not just the EU!
I think the EU, if not carefully handled, or rather if wrongly handled, could make some feel rather more negatively about independence - you have a point!
You need not address independence - I hope you just aren't against it because you want to be a "bigger boy" in the EU, we'll be OK - as I think much of the arguments apply to both the UK and Scotland, but your thoughts on the benefits of EU membership verses other options would be appreciated. For example, what is your ideal international scenario for your country?
Thanks.
PS I don't bear a grudge. If you want me to apologise for being rude if I was earlier, then I do.
Complain about this comment
#55 Sparklet
The FOI bill, you refer to, applies south of the border. Scotland has its own FOI Act. The SNP don't vote on issues that don't affect Scotland.
Complain about this comment
Further to my #60, she's on her way, I see. Batten down the hatches, chaps.
Complain about this comment
#61 Fit Like?
The mods objected?
Complain about this comment
One of the first things that happened on The Herald forums when it was clear that many comments were informative and highlighted many aspects of Scottish politics that didn't see the light of day, was that posters emerged who began posting insults and abuse at other posters.
The result was that very quickly the thread descended into a tit for tat posting of personal insults. It wasn't long before The Herald closed down the facility.
This is happening now on this blog. Some posters have begun to post abuse at either individuals or groups. They are also prone to fabricate and attribute views to these groups or individuals that they do not hold nor have expressed.
Let's see if it is allowed to continue.
Complain about this comment
#43 Neil_Small147
Neil, thanks, interesting :-)
"But local issues are where you gain your support. Do well, and people place less importance to the party you represent, rather than who you are as a person. Then, when it comes to an election, you will always have a loyal base of supporters, even if they do not necessarily support your party."
Yes, I think you can be doing spectacularly with prominence at national level but can't think the grass roots aren't as important. I'd have a team of people looking at this, maybe even setting targets such as having a positive news story featuring the local party in some way in their local media every, what, month? You want it to remain subtle - natural not organised! I'm not saying make one up to achieve it but it would get them thinking that way.
I don't think there are any groovy figures out there, we'll have to see if somebody pops up. I like Nicola as you say, but also because all the men seem to like her, so go girl!
I'd also really organise my communications team. Have some fuss pot who likes to have no loose ends to head up the web part. I agree that out of date is worse than none.
It's a lot of work isn't it! ;-)
Complain about this comment
It strikes me that the argument over redressing gender balance is misdirected in that it addresses a symptom rather than a problem. Ordinary voters have consistently demonstrated that they will cheerfully vote for the candidate of their choice irrespective of gender. I can’t recall a single case in recent years where it was an issue. The problem lies at the selection stage and there there are two questions; just how democratic is the local party leadership and its selection committee? If that is where the problem lies then there is a far more fundamental problem that cannot be tackled by the sticking plaster approach of imposing an all-woman shortlist from above. The other question concerns the constituency itself. Does the problem arise because a there is a genuine local party member trying to break down centuries of tradition, or is it because an external (female) party apparatchik wants to be parachuted into what is seen as a safe seat where the good electors will loyally vote for anything with the appropriate coloured rosette? Not much apparent pressure for all-woman tickets in marginal seats
Complain about this comment
#63 aye_write
The two of you might just have got on famously, if he could ever have got a word in edgeways and if you hadn't mistaken him for someone else.
Complain about this comment
65. At 1:22pm on 18 Mar 2009, aye_write wrote:
#55 Sparklet
"Sparklet, could you stop impersonating Derek - all this glee is getting to me ;-)
And please be so kind as to read my response to you on 'Cash cuts'. If you don't reply, that's OK, I just wasn't sure if you'd seen it."
Sorry - can't help it!!! ;-)
But yes I am desperately trying to respond to your Cash cuts blog - however am being pre-moderated ie not even making it to the list!!!
Have managed to post half so far - will follow up asap.
3. At 12:40pm on 17 Mar 2009, Ed Iglehart wrote:
"It is really important. And, so is this."
(Help, Ed. - I do keep a close eye on your postings - the info. is much appreciated - am getting 'dnaacs' even after taking out the link). Have tried to copy and repaste without success!!)
Complain about this comment
66. At 1:27pm on 18 Mar 2009, oldnat wrote:
#55 Sparklet
"The FOI bill, you refer to, applies south of the border. Scotland has its own FOI Act. The SNP don't vote on issues that don't affect Scotland."
Thanks for the input oldnat but I believe transparency of the UK Parliament would be in the interests of BOTH England and Scotland!!
Complain about this comment
#54 gedguy2
Ah, my other favourite subject - the importance of the job of parenting!
"I have always argued that womens' natural role of bringing up the family has, too often, been looked upon as unimportant, but we all know that this is probably the most important job in our society."
Agreed!
But for it being the natural job of women, no, that is a myth.
Sounds like it makes sense doesn't it. The women give birth, therefore they know best. I think this misconception (ha!) has been a major problem in parenting theory, such as there isn't, all across the spectrum.
Men ask their pregnant partners, what do you do if...this that and the next thing. They expect women just know. They don't. What happens, you get foundering parents, and mothers who feel they are a let down. If support isn't coming from extended families anymore then it must come from somewhere.
"The raising of our children has mostly been the role of women, who are far better equiped, mentally and physically, to undertake this task and anything that takes them away from this should be looked upon with suspicion."
Yes, Anglosaxophone's right, batten down the hatches, I'll not be standing for any of that nonsense!
That's a bit of a cop out. Though I can understand your point. Many men don't feel like they do as well at parenting than their partners, but like Mr Frost, lets look at the evidence.
If your thesis is right then men invariably are worse parents than women. Not true. Some are, but there can be many reasons, not just through genetic deficit I might add.
If a man's experience of his father was distant as a person and uninvolved in parenting, this is not a good role model. Some men kick back and resolve to be the fathers their own never were, but not the majority, I don't think.
There is a certain confidence required to parent effectively and it is not easily bestowed on men in our society. For example, when out in the supermarket, besides the fact there is usually no small urinal in the gents, Dads with their children get sympathetic looks and advice such as "Oh, don't let them stand up in trolley" from staff and others, that it would be considered insulting to give to mothers.
It is assumed, because he is the father, Dad is less able and struggling.
I'll let the mod queue function and return to this later. ;-)
Complain about this comment
#72 Anglosaxophone
Well, damn.
I think that makes it worse!
I know I can't undo it. Oh, well, step ye gaily....
Complain about this comment
73. At 2:17pm on 18 Mar 2009, Sparklet wrote:
"But yes I am desperately trying to respond to your Cash cuts blog - however am being pre-moderated ie not even making it to the list!!!
Have managed to post half so far - will follow up asap."
AW,
Finished at last - see Cash Cuts #162,#163,#164
PS
Still don't know why it didn't go through before though!!!
Complain about this comment
I'm entirely opposed to single sex lists; they're discriminatory by nature and probably counter-productive.
Given the low number of women wanting to become involved in politics, assuming an equal spread of abilities to men and that the selection process is based on merit, the women selected as a result of single sex lists will be, on average of lower quality.
If we want the best for the country, the entire selection process should be based entirely on merit.
Single sex lists are not the answer, they're devisive and artificial. politically correct tokenism; the issue is the low number of women, with a lot to offer, wanting to be involved in politics.
Breaking down the barriers to such involvement is key.
(Of course there may be other underlying psyvhological issues meaning women are less inclined to want a confronational political life; which is more a matter of choice than a barrier).
After that, equality would be an equal proportion of men and women wanting to be involved in such roles getting the opportunity, assuming equal merit of course.
Complain about this comment
#54 gedguy2
"The raising of our children has mostly been the role of women, who are far better equiped, mentally and physically, to undertake this task and anything that takes them away from this should be looked upon with suspicion.
That is both untrue and unfair.
Women are better equipped for giving birth and breastfeeding, and perhaps for sleep deprivation, in that power naps seem to do the job for the first few months anyway. But if a man had to do the last two he would not be found wanting. He can't just say he's no good. Plenty have proved otherwise.
You cannot restrict women's lives like that. It's quite different from responsibility. We are human, just like you, and will go insane if trapped in a very narrow world for 20 years. And that leads to bad parenting! A bit of a balance seems to be the key.
"I am not advocating that women should not enter politics or business as those worlds would be the lesser if women were blocked from entering them. I just feel that women have more important things to do than playing at the stupid game of politics."
Society is mixed, so agreed, let all of it be allowed to enter politics. I think the difficulty is for women it can be seen as having to be one life or the other. You wouldn't want to have to feel like it would be necessary to put your children into storage to be able to hold political high office!
But then the stupid game of politics can be a fine change. Though combining the two worlds is probably more tough, and most women who can spend time on politics don't have that opportunity.
But the balance is wrong for men too. Many times they work so much that they see their kids for a fraction of the time they would want to.
OK, finished ;-)
Complain about this comment
#72 Anglosaxophone
I've had a think and I think you're wrong. It was never going to be. But thanks anyway.
Complain about this comment
#78 Reaper_of_Souls
"(Of course there may be other underlying psyvhological issues meaning women are less inclined to want a confronational political life; which is more a matter of choice than a barrier)."
Good grief! Men too! I am a woman and confrontation has never repelled me (as you can probably tell, sorry!)
Complain about this comment
RE33 Digthedug
"The concern about the rise in support for the SNP cannot be waved away as simply a case of Labour needing its Scottish vote at Westminster, important though that is for Labour voters in England, who have seen the Tories in power for too much of the past century (Comment, November 29). The union is nearly 300 years old, and for two-thirds of its existence there was no Labour party. Who knows what the next 300 years will bring?
It is to be hoped that people in England will not make the mistake of believing Alex Salmond speaks for all of Scotland. There are plenty of us who are appalled at the idea of breaking up Britain and we do not want nationalism, full-strength or lite. We feel we have more in common with the citizens of Birmingham or Manchester, facing similar problems to ourselves, than with Braveheart fantasists still nursing a grudge against Edward the First.
Any current dissatisfactions, small or large, should not distort our perspective on a decision that will be with us for centuries. Are we better together or apart? Which makes us more likely to tackle whatever the future holds? The past 300 years shows that our two nations have benefited. Long may it continue.
Maria Fyfe
(Labour MP, Glasgow Maryhilll,1987-2001)"
Oh how I wish this were true! HAHAHAHA! The past 300 years shows...aye your 2 right it shows! RAL (rolling about laffin!)
Anything the future holds will be totally fabricated ou of all proportion for the end game of london and forced down our throats by the media and even the likes of eastenders, to disturb and fear the general poulation into thinking that we are all doomed outwith the UK! Its called subliminal propaganda, min. God I miss dads army. A favourite of my Grandads, a 2nd war veteran who believed in "buying british" and had admiration for Winston C. But he had two failings, he didn't like crows or english lairds :) I asked him once, why was it that Winston Churchill, one of the greatest british icons the world has ever know, was brought to his knees by the brits after he'd contributed so much to the war?
He replied, "well we gave him a fair bit of help in his effort and that's just how gratefull the british are." "Well that's not for me thanks". I said. But of course he became the world hero we hear of today after he died!
The past 300 years my..pha!
Complain about this comment
#80 aye_write
"I've had a think and I think you're wrong."
If it will make you happy, dear, I was wrong. You would have driven the poor man round the twist and made him an irredeemable misogynist . . . if he hadn't been one already.
I am away now, as a gentleman should always let a lady have the last word. On you go now. Let rip, even though "women never do that."
Complain about this comment
#82 waitingformyman
Thanks for reminding me how old oldnat is!
It was my Dad, not my Grandad who was the veteran. Still, I have faith that your generation will take the cause further than ours did, (though we've given you a good start!)
The "300 years" of the Union (while technically true) is wholly misleading. Even with devolution, Scotland lacks many of the powers that it effectively retained during the 18th and most of the 19th centuries.
The current "Union" doesn't really start affecting Scottish affairs until WWII and post-war central planning (and would have been much worse had it not been for Tom Johnstone - Labour SoS for Scotland, and the man who defied both Churchill and Atllee over fully incorporating Scotland into the UK - a great man!).
Maria Fyfe's centralist Union is less than 70 years old - and pretty bad years many of them have been!
Complain about this comment
Re Parliamentry representation
I don't like all women shortlists, Locals should decide their own candidates.
However I also feel all parliaments will deliver better legislation if there is adequate representation of society in the make up of the parliament.
So if positive discrimination is not the way forward then what is?
There is a serious problem with a lack of female and minority representation. This should be addressed.
Re parenting
This is a job that is best done by two parents and if poosible a limited intervention by grandparents.
Fathers are key to balanced children. I have contributed greatly to the parenting role, enjoy it and would never agree that it is my wife's job. I wouldn't dare!
Complain about this comment
#81 aye_write
"Good grief! Men too! I am a woman and confrontation has never repelled me (as you can probably tell, sorry!)"
No problem at all.
It may not be the confrontation, but there's certainly something that makes women less inclined to seek public office than men.
Perhaps its the lack of positive examples, perhaps its a recognition of the corrupt futility of it all and having better things to do.
Very few real people seem to get anywhere in politics, I guess they;re just not part of the "phoney" club.
Complain about this comment
Quite a stark description of the UK economy in this article, very bad for Brown.
UK recession will be longer and deeper, says IMF
Will Labour hold off until 2010 for an election or cut their losses and go for May/June?
Unemployment level 'will rise to 3.3m by end of 2010'
Seems everyone is desperately urging Brown to apologise. Of course Brown can't as this will destroy any credibility he has left whilst at the same time admitting partial liability for what is now happening in the UK. Question is, are these plea's for him to apologise signs that Labour MP's are nearing 'self preservation mode' as they distance themselves from 'Global'?
Brown ally says PM should apologise
Complain about this comment
#83 Anglosaxophone
"made him an irredeemable misogynist . . . if he hadn't been one already.
Well, I'm lost!
Do you think that's true?
You're post #72 was right, except I don't think it would have made any difference if I hadn't messed up is all I'm saying. You can't be liked by everyone that you'd like, I suppose.
So on we go.
Last word ends ;-)
Complain about this comment
#85 northhighlander
I agree with your comments on two parents and grandparents being a good scenario.
I'd add a point that one result of better educated and successful women with careers has been that they are still working full time when their children have their children. This means it is a strain on them to help as much as is either necessary or that they'd like, because of their working.
In contrast, those women who you might have said were left behind and who didn't get "successful" jobs (no disrespect intended) and who now either don't work or have "tide you over" part time jobs, can practically bring up their grandchildren if it's what both parent and grandparent want.
They have the time to take the grandchild maybe several mornings or days a week and have them every second weekend for example. And in many cases, with both sets of grandparents, times that by two - oh, the luxury!
I'm not necessarily criticising those lucky families, though with school gate grannies it is taking it a little too far in my book, but I am highlighting that all too often now that isn't an option for parents, and they are in the position of having to just get on with it themselves. That's an interesting change (not really an improvement) and much tougher.
Complain about this comment
#86 Reaper_of_Souls
I'd agree, there are less of these women, but I'd say it's as simple as it's tougher to juggle a family and that job if you're a woman than if you're a man (as husbands are usually already at work).
Complain about this comment
Sparklet:
#55.
"Though an excellent Orator how did he represent that strong voice for Scotland in the westminster parliament.
Look it up on publicwhip.org.uk
Not very reassuring!"
You are rather simple. Alex Salmond is not Leader of the Scottish National Party at Westminister, keep in mind that they are also MSP and First Minister of Scotland.
Alex Salmond has a greater inpact speaking as First Minister of Scotland rather then leader or MP even of a minority political party at Westminister.
"And how about that most crucial of all votes affecting our freedom & sovereignty - the Lisbon Treaty, of the 18 votes held he attended 5.
But at least he voted against (when he bothered to attend that is!!)"
You really have no idea what you are talking about. The European Union will one day become another Westminister Parliament through the eyes of the Scot's, Brussels who already passes many laws will one day have greater military etc responsibilities.
Please explain, why is Westminister good, and Brussels bad?
The European Union is the future, and it's up to each individual country to help chart the course of which this Union takes.
"And why oh why did he vote (WITH Labour)AGAINST this to -
"reduce the burden of centrally-imposed targets, bureaucracy and regulation on the NHS and the Education Service; call on Ministers to implement urgently the action needed to deliver cleaner hospitals and to strengthen school discipline; regret the omission of measures to abolish top-up fees; note that legislation to reduce the size of Ofsted will merely reverse part of the huge increases in its staffing levels since 1997; reject the Government's intention to impose additional fees on those attending further education colleges and deprecate the damage this will cause to adult and vocational education""
Yes, you are an idiot.
Holyrood controls Health in Scotland, Westminister controls Health in England and Wales?
Why would Salmond vote in favour something that will not effect Scotland?
Now please stop embarressing yourself.
Complain about this comment
# 75 & 79 aye_write
I don't disagree with you on any of the points you have brought up. I think it is unfair on the way women have always been lumped (pardon the pun) with children. However, I still maintain that the best person to bring up children is the mother with the help of the father or fathers (as we tend to see more often).
Sorry if that previous posting annoyed you but I didn't mean for it to have that effect. I just wanted to point out that I believe that the family should be the priority and, as such, it may be counter-productive for the 'main' focal point for the family to engaged in other activities.
I take my hat off to those decent women who struggle to bring up their kids. I wouldn't like to do their job (luckily I had my own job to get on with which was supplying the mother with the financial benefits to bring up the children).
Ps I tried to register on your site but it wouldn't let me.
Complain about this comment
#92 gedguy2
"However, I still maintain that the best person to bring up children is the mother with the help of the father or fathers (as we tend to see more often)."
That's a dangerous assumption. You get as many unfit mothers as fathers. Don't assume because she's a mother she will be alright. Nice if it were true.
Sexist too. Fathers have a heck of a battle where the mother is deficient and the father the better parent for the child/ren, in cases of divorce for example. The burden is on him to disprove an assumption, rather than in all other law where the assumption is that something is not the case until proven, beyond all reasonable doubt, otherwise.
Extremely unfair on fathers, and heart-wrenching. I'm glad you have never found yourself in that situation.
And it's all based on a sexist view of women as earth mothers which I find restricting and down right ignorant (no offence). Plus it suits men to think that way - gets them off the parenting hook, better to be a helper and have someone else shoulder the responsibility. Thanks.
I wasn't and am not annoyed by the way, merely assertive on this one. I willingly hear your interesting views.
One hundred per cent agreed that the family is priority - what more important job can there be than bringing up the next generation. We depend on it. But, it is precisely because I think it is important that I mention women's role in parenting.
We aren't in the main better equipped than you (men) to deal with a narrow, repetitive world so often devoid of adult interaction and the mental stimulation that is necessary and comes from that. Your life does not stop when you become a mother and devoted to your children. That is crisis management, not living. And as such is unhealthy.
Mothers as parents must be adults too. Some kind of interest or other activity to keep the brain alive is something we all need, whether it be work or not. Without it, it is a heck of a lot more difficult, or even impossible, to be the good parent you always wanted to be.
I think once, perhaps with extended families, the parenting burden was more shared and a better balance obtained. But things have moved on. Whereas parenting hasn't.
Like any job, wonderful or no, if you are doing it day in, day out, 27/7 without a break or a hand, with no end in sight (I overdramatise but it can get to the stage where the irrational takes you), you inevitably wonder whether you really want to do it, but you've no choice, so how do you feel?
It's only a failing in so far as being human is a failing. But is it. I hope I am making sense.
(I will get back to you about the site :-)
Complain about this comment
91. At 10:45pm on 18 Mar 2009, Thomas_Porter wrote:
"You are rather simple. Alex Salmond is not Leader of the Scottish National Party at Westminister, keep in mind that they are also MSP and First Minister of Scotland.
Alex Salmond has a greater inpact speaking as First Minister of Scotland rather then leader or MP even of a minority political party at Westminister."
Then if he prefers the "greater impact" of the Scottish Parliament shouldn't he cede his position as Westminster MP and allow one of his colleagues to properly represent Scotland?
And why Salmond's claims -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1896237/Alex-Salmond-sets-20-seat-target-for-elections.html
And further your comment -
"You really have no idea what you are talking about. The European Union will one day become another Westminister Parliament through the eyes of the Scot's, Brussels who already passes many laws will one day have greater military etc responsibilities."
Please explain, why is Westminister good, and Brussels bad?
The European Union is the future, and it's up to each individual country to help chart the course of which this Union takes."
Then why did Alex Salmond vote AGAINST the Lisbon Treaty (when he did bother to vote).
You are welcome to read through my profile to see my thoughts on the EU - you may learn something.
Further - your comments
"Yes, you are an idiot.
Holyrood controls Health in Scotland, Westminister controls Health in England and Wales?
Why would Salmond vote in favour something that will not effect Scotland?
Now please stop embarressing yourself."
Then why did he vote AGAINST this whilst 3 of his SNP colleagues voted in favour!!!
I would suggest it is not me who is being 'simple' and 'embarrassing'.
Complain about this comment
# 93 aye_write
I see that we are agreeing on 90% of womens' role in the family apart from the point as to who is better suited for that purpose. I can only agree with you that there are some women who are not fit to be women; never mind being mothers, and, of course, the same applies to some men. However, I still maintain that if you took the average of the two sexes then I should imagine that women will come out on top when it is applied to parenting skills. This is not being sexist; it is being realistic. The majority of women are far better at parenting than men.
Glad to see you will get back to me on the site. I couldn't get passed the confirmation code. It won't let me in.
Complain about this comment
#95 gedguy2
"However, I still maintain that if you took the average of the two sexes then I should imagine that women will come out on top when it is applied to parenting skills. This is not being sexist; it is being realistic."
That is based on what? A feeling? Your relationships?? I urge you to inspect, not generalise.
It is wrong, and it is most certainly sexist - to both sexes! An opinion that does not belong in the 21st century I'm afraid.
Some people feel/assume that Scotland is better "looked after" by Westminster, but on inspection that is also wrong.
Finished now, I've made my point ;-)
Now, that site...................
Complain about this comment
# 96 aye_write
Are you trying to say that women, as a whole, are not better at child rearing than men. This is not sexist, and if you knew me than you would know that I have ever been a great friend of the fairer sex. In fact, I can say that I love women.
It doesn't matter what you or I think about what should be when it comes to women. The fact is that women are physically and mentally more suited to child rearing than men are. This is not a point of view but has been shown time and again by scientists; even female scientists. Your body is made differently from ours and your brains are wired differently from us too. Please don't think that this last statement is meant to derogatory; it is not. Both the sexes are different and, through evolutionary pressures, we have both been designed to perform seperate functions. You are designed for child bearing and rearing of the children and we are designed to drink beer in pubs. OK, don't have a heart attack, I'm only joking on that bit.
I have never been an advocate of this theory that men and women are equal; we are not. Women are better at some things while men are better at others. It is the sum of the two which moves us towards the perfect partnership. Still waiting to find mine, though.
Complain about this comment
#97 gedguy2
Ok. But I didn't mean men and women are identical, just both are equally capable of rearing children, as you say. To say otherwise is a right cheek to men! (Don't tell Mr Write.)
"Are you trying to say that women, as a whole, are not better at child rearing than men."
I am saying that. Where men aren't doing as good, it isn't because they are men!
I am well aware of the differences (I knew for example that you would tell me you love women ;-), but as for your scientific proof, hmm, I'm sure you could find just as many scientists who could pick holes in it. The brain differences, yes, but to extrapolate findings from that, very subjective. I'd say you believe it probably because you already thought it.
I'll agree to disagree.
I make no comment on your views influencing your ongoing search for Ms Perfect ;-)
Please don't you have a heart attack!! I truly hope you get lucky.....
Complain about this comment
# 98 aye_write
I haven't even seen your posting yet but I'll bow to your superior knowledge and your superior sex.
Complain about this comment
#99 gedguy2
I've changed my mind. You have every hope of succeeding in a relationship!
;-)
Complain about this comment
gedguy2,
Please try again. If that doesn't work, there's some new info in the 'Information' section.
Complain about this comment
# 101 Richard_the_Rogue
OK
Complain about this comment
# 101
Still telling me the confirmation code is either wrong or too long
Complain about this comment
Blog Women, Blog Men, Blog Kiddies,
All Bloglodytes
I claim this neologism in the name of Obama!
;-)
bae
Complain about this comment
Sparklet:
#94.
"Then if he prefers the "greater impact" of the Scottish Parliament shouldn't he cede his position as Westminster MP and allow one of his colleagues to properly represent Scotland?"
Yes, you are simple, very simple, so simple that you are loosing ground and changing what I wrote.
I never said Salmond prefers a 'greater impact' of the Scottish Parliament...
I said as First Minister Salmond has a stronger inpact rather then being an MP of a minority party at Westminister, where they are not leader.
"And why Salmond's claims -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1896237/Alex-Salmond-sets-20-seat-target-for-elections.html"
Like I said, Salmond at the moment has a stronger impact as First Minister of Scotland rather then MP of Westminister.
The Scottish National Party are pinning their hopes on remaining popular enough to return up to 20 MP's at a hung Westminister Parliament.
This will give the SNP a stronger standing and make Westminister more preferable of the party. They could act as a Kingmaker between Labour and the Conservatives.
Understand so far, nothing tricky?
"Then why did Alex Salmond vote AGAINST the Lisbon Treaty (when he did bother to vote).
You are welcome to read through my profile to see my thoughts on the EU - you may learn something."
And now you have the cheek to ignore one of the simplest questions.
How come Westminister is good, and Brussels bad?
You can't ignore questions which you do not like or can not answer when the other person is making the effort too, and yes I do find it embarressing for you, your practically a doormat here at the moment.
"Then why did he vote AGAINST this whilst 3 of his SNP colleagues voted in favour!!!"
Salmond is not leader of the SNP at Westminister, different leaders have different ways of doing things. However Salmond, as First Minister of Scotland could face trouble at the Scottish Parliament depending on the issues they voted in for England, and England alone.
But have you thought of writing to Salmond yourself?
It's common here for certain posters to demand to know why certain others do things, but they never bother to email the person themselves!
"I would suggest it is not me who is being 'simple' and 'embarrassing'."
You think? Refusing to answer questions, and showing a closed mind when it comes to the SNP, their leaders and the Westminister and Scottish Parliament...
Sometimes a persons dislike for a person or group can sometimes blind you from reality, just because you want it to be the way you think you see it does not make it fully correct.
Complain about this comment
#103 gedguy2
Have you got in touch with the administrators using the details in the info section yet?
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS