Village Law

Every change – in business, in technology, in life – brings some new words into general use. I doubt that ‘Unicameral’ will ever grace the front page of every newspaper but it is a word much more used than in days of yore.

And its meaning? It describes the system of government provided by the Scottish Parliament. It means that we have one chamber of parliament.

At Westminster, the House of Lords revises legislation passed by the Commons. It is a ‘second house’.

In the USA they have a House of Representatives and a Senate. A system of checks and balances.

But in Scotland we review and revise proposals for changes to our law with our committee system.

And sometimes that is an onerous task for a small number of people.

The Justice 2 Committee, of which I am one of seven members, is ploughing its way through the government’s Land Reform Bill. It puts into law our right to access the countryside and creates a legal framework for community and crofting ‘buy-outs’ of land.

And to date it seems to have attracted the largest number of amendments of any Bill before Parliament so far.

So when we started our debate four business days ago it was on a schedule that said we would reach clause 12 on day 1. Well when we finished day four we had only completed four pages of a sixty-nine page Bill.

Time for desperate measures.

Have you heard of the clock being stopped at five to midnight at important international conferences? That way they can reach agreement before a deadline expires.

We have adopted a similar tactic. Day 6 of our debate took place over the 24th and 25th September and day 7 will cover two days the following week.

But even so the flood of suggested amendments continues.

Friday is my ‘surgery day’. I am scurrying from town to town across the North-East. And my mobile phone rings.

I have been talking to Aberdeenshire Council officials about the ‘local authority’ part of the Bill. And I have put forward a number of their suggested amendments.

But COSLA, the association representing most of Scotland’s councils, is running late with its list of changes. And hasn’t yet found an MSP to put them forward.

So, strange but true, they have asked the Ramblers Association if they can help. And it’s from them that my phone call has come.

Sure, I will submit the changes in my name if I can get to a ‘landline’ telephone and connect my portable computer to the parliament’s system.

If you saw me risking indigestion as I rapidly gulped down my egg, bacon, sausage and chips in the “Four C’s” café in New Pitsligo last Friday, this was why.

The email with the suggested changes reached me at 1 p.m. and the deadline for submission to the parliamentary clerks was one hour later. And checking and understanding twenty-one amendments to a complex piece of law is not that easy.

Unless I had told it here, I don’t think many people would have realised the key role the community café in Pitsligo will have played in framing an important change to our country’s laws.

A Parliament for all of Scotland indeed!

The Sporting Life

Plans for Fraserburgh and Banff to have better community facilities are being strongly promoted by members of these communities. And I support both.

After a false start for Banff, the Princess Royal seems to getting the attention and support that their complex project deserves.

And I enjoyed the Vale vs. Buckie match. Especially as my father used to tell me of his times playing in the Highland League for – whisper it – Ross County. My loyalties will be sorely tested again this year if Fraserburgh and Vale are once again competing at the top – and I hope they will be.

But is it not a paradox that in an area dominated by proximity to the sea, not all our secondary schools have access to swimming pools.

I hope that we can find a way to ensure that ‘access for all’, a recurring theme in the government’s policies, actually includes the North-East.

But with a drop in Lottery receipts, and it is payouts from there that have become core to so much of our leisure life, we may have to work even harder to catch up with the rest of Scotland and get our share.

Criminal Justice

As a member of the Scottish Parliament’s Justice 2 Committee much of my time over the past few months has been taken up helping take evidence on the government’s Criminal Justice Bill.

So it has been particularly disappointing that the conclusions of our Committee were leaked before our report was published and in a way that distorted what we had decided.

There has already been a considerable public debate about the proposals to ban the smacking of children albeit that few people commenting seem to have actually read the Bill’s proposals.

So now we have headlines that our Committee has decided that the government’s smacking ban should be rejected. Yes but.

The reality is that all members agreed that striking a child on the head or with an implement – a spoon, a belt or whatever – must stop. Some thought the law already banned that, the majority like me thought we should make it clear in law that Scottish society won’t tolerate it.

And smacking was not something we were keen on. But none of us wanted parents to become criminals for lightly tapping a child when no other punishment was available.

The trouble with the government’s proposals was that they wanted to make it illegal to smack a young child. But then also to persuade us that Procurators Fiscal would not prosecute.

Minister Jim Wallace was trying to promise something he couldn’t deliver. Because he does not control the Fiscals.

So we actually recommended more support and education for parents. Especially for those – the majority? – who are finding their children more of a handful than they expected.

Who said parenting was easy!

Emergencies

There are many groups across Scotland organising meetings, setting up conferences, having debates. And on a wide range of subjects.

It may be curious to some, but many feel that it adds credibility and spice to invite along a politician or two.

It was my turn. And the topic? - "How Politicians Relate to Emergency Situations" with the meeting set up by Scotland’s Emergency Planning Officers. An all too topical subject for the week.

My initial conclusion was that it wasn’t a hot topic for Parliament.

An exploration of the Parliamentary Questions database revealed that only 13 questions on the subject had been asked on the subject in over 3 years. That out of a total of 29,563 questions answered. Mine was on arrangements for detecting anthrax in letters to Parliament – and the answer told me little.

But one was particularly revealing. It showed that our government only allocated £3.5 million a year to local councils for this subject. Just about enough for each to employ a couple of people in a back room.

And yet the cost of our most recent emergency – foot & mouth disease – cost several hundred times as much. So it seems clear that the money may be here to clear up afterwards but not to plan for or prevent them happening.

For the Emergency Planning Officers the ultimate paradox is that if they talk up the risks, they are scare mongering. And if they do not, they are denied the funds they need.