Monday, 16 November 2009

Major Row Between Westminster and Holyrood




British-Irish council representatives of Scotland, Northern Ireland, the Irish Republic, the Isle of Man, Jersey and Guernsey all voted for the permanent secretariat of the council to be based in Edinburgh.

Guess who vetoed the move? You're right, the Welsh Secretary Peter Hain (pictured above), who was representing the UK, at a meeting of the BIC on Friday in Jersey.

Listen to this for an excuse for the appalling behaviour of the UK government which was then accused of being spiteful towards the SNP and of anti-Scottish discrimination - "...Downing Street has responded angrily by accusing the SNP of a breach of protocol in going public on the matter."

Mr Hain claimed there had to be a total consensus on the decision and simply refused to agree to it.

In the first round of voting, Edinburgh received 5 votes, the Isle of Man 2 and Cardiff 1. A second vote was held when Edinburgh had 6 votes, the Isle of Man 1 and Cardiff 1. At this point the Isle of Man withdrew and a third vote was held. Edinburgh received 6 votes and Cardiff 2 as Mr Hain, who had previously voted for the Isle of Man, switched to Cardiff. The Welsh Assembly delegate said he was happy to accept the result but Mr Hain refused.

Scottish government officials are furious and are accusing Gordon Brown of ordering Mr Hain to veto any move which would give Scotland more international standing.

Mr Salmond will make a statement to the Scottish Parliament this week.

Those who attended the meeting were:
Alex Salmond, Scottish First Minister
Peter Robinson, Northern Ireland First Minister
Brian Cowen, Irish Taoiseach
Eamon O Cuiv, Northern Ireland Minister for Community Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs
Martin McGuinness, Deputy Northern Ireland First Minister
Rhodri Morgan, Welsh First Minister
Peter Hain, British government
plus heads of administration from the Isle of Man, Guernsey and Jersey.


14 comments:

Idle Pen Pusher said...

This sounds like an example of Sayre's Law in action...

Great Big Billygoat Gruff said...

It is an act of rebellion to speak the truth, when it foes not accord with what London wants.

It will soon be a criminal one too, the way things are going.

subrosa said...

Quite possibly IPP. Weird how he got away with it though.

Great Big Billygoat Gruff said...

You know you've been Tangoed and by Peter Hain, hilarious!

Idle Pen Pusher said...

I saw him on HardTalk recently, and elsewhere, explaining that parties with certain positions, though lawful, should not be allowed to participate on the state broadcaster's political public discussion television programme. He likes to go on about democracy, but only when people vote how they ought to. He's really quite odious.

subrosa said...

It's a far cry from our younger days when a majority usually was enough Billy.

subrosa said...

Ah saw that too IPP. He tripped himself up a couple of times too and I can't remember why. Really I must pay more attention but his voice somehow irritates.

You know these machines with invisible high pitched tones to care off various insects?

His voice goes through my head in what I suspect is a similar manner. Avoid at all costs.

Anseo said...

Brian Cowen is the Irish Taoiseach....not the Northern Irish Taoiseach.

subrosa said...

Many thanks Anseo, amended.

subrosa said...

I should say of course I knew that Anseo, was too busy copying all those who attended from Northern Ireland. That'll teach me for composing when I'm more than half asleep.

Clarinda said...

Veto? - vested power and interest of the undemocratic minority writ large.

How has this seedy man with a past full of court cases - (remember the alleged taking part in a bank robbery?), allegations of fraud relating to hundreds of thousands later found to be placed in a fund apparently not in the remit of said Hain, civil anarchy - here and abroad, and political nuisance-making, political demotions etc. remain with such a power-base? All of these facts are in the public domain - yet he's still voted in and promoted. Oh.... just twigged it, he's a Labour politician and what better credentials does he appear to have to represent the unionist subterfuge as one of their 'hit men'? He will have learned some good lessons from his SA past exploits.

Never mind, according to some attributed remarks from him on the last QT - he likes the Australians and New Zealanders even less than the Scots! Wasn't he quoted as swearing never to appear on QT again after Nick Griffin's appearance two weeks earlier?

subrosa said...

Funny you should mention the bank robbery reference Clarinda, because I was looking for details of it and low and behold - nothing I could find in google!

Indeed he did say he wouldn't appear on QT again if Nick Griffin was permitted.

But we know labour never speaks the truth don't we.

tris said...

Was't he found guilty of an erm "accounting error" back a while ago, and didn't he have to resign? Still with a shortage of talent that they have notwithstanding their huge majority in the Commons, they have to use whatever they can. And let's face it, a bit of "accounting error" is hardly outstanding at Westminster.

Anyway, talking of majorities, where is the council going to meet?

If a majorty isn't enough and the British government can veto it, where will they go? Or will they not have a meeting until such time as the stupid 3/4 come round to his way of thinking? I have a feeling that that is the desired outcome.

Another piece of Labour's democracy?

subrosa said...

He's (allegedly) guilty of many things tris.

The article didn't say where the next meeting would be but, as they still don't have a permanent office, I expect it could be in any of the countries involved.

Democracy? They don't know the meaning of the word do they.

Related Posts with Thumbnails