Does it matter what Borg thinks?

OK, so back to my thoughts on EU Commissioner Borg's thoughts on why Scotland would have to apply to join the EU.

To set this in context, this Commissioner is from the EU's smallest Member State, Malta. Malta has a population of 0.4 Million - roughly the size of Edinburgh and representing 0.1% of the EU's population. Mr Borg is a former Foreign Minister of Malta. Mr Borg is appointed by his Government to work in the interests of the EU as a Commissioner, and is responsible for Fisheries and Maritime Affairs, issues of vital importance to Scotland.

You would think, as someone who has come from the perspective of a very small nation in Europe which successfully acceeded to the EU, Mr Borg would be far less sceptical of the probability of Scotland's membership. It may have taken the accession countries some time to join, but many were coming from a very different position than that of Scotland for a number of historical reasons.

Scotland is already subject to EU laws and is a constituent part of an EU member state. There would not have any significant adjustments made to prepare for membership; we are in a sense already there. In addition, Scotland would is of significant value to the EU in terms of land mass, industry, oil and security. In reality, on what grounds could an independent Scotland see EU membership withheld or delayed?

Busy times

Apologies for the lack of updates - I've been incredibly busy with surgeries, meetings, turning 25 and packing to move house on Friday.

It feels like I've hardly spent any time in the office for the past couple of weeks, as I've been out and about in my ward. It's good for people in the ward to see their representative, but not so good when that creates a backlog of casework. I may need two of me!

Anyway - more later on why this article in the Scotsman has wound me up, and some of what I've been up to since I last blogged...

Executive no more!

Very chuffed to read in the Sunday Herald, the Scotland on Sunday, the BBC's website that the "Executive" will now be the Government. I know some people in the SNP who don't believe it should be changed until Scotland has the full powers of a Government, but I think it's a step in the right direction. It might sound like semantics, but I think it's important for a number of reasons.

Firstly, the term "Executive" means nothing to ordinary people. The only people I hear referring to the "Executive" are public sector and voluntary agencies. So many folk - even intelligent people who really should know better - seem to think that "Executive" "Government" and "Parliament" are synonymous. Oddly, their confusion doesn't extend to Westminster - they wouldn't blame the Parliament there for something the Government has or hasn't done. While you could always pin the blame on the public for not taking an interest in their political system, my view is that the lack of vision and personality of the previous "Executive" has pretty much bored people into submission. A change in name and, more importantly, in attitude ought to help turn things around.

Secondly, renaming is a big decision - one Labour in London wouldn't let Henry McLeish (remember him?!) take. I think it's telling that the SNP Government has done so, and that there - at least so far - seems to be no move from Westminster to stop the change. Does the Labour Government in Westminster believe that to intervene would be unpopular or play directly into the SNP's hands? Are they playing a longer game? I'm not sure it matters - once we are called a Government, act like a Government, people will begin to demand the powers of a Government.

Lastly, it's a change that the Unionist parties in Scotland will have to take heed of - and a change they'll find it hard to reverse. We're in a period where they have to react to the SNP's agenda, and this is something they're finding it hard to do. Labour, for example, have shifted already from saying the Scottish Parliament shouldn't have any more powers, to saying they'll reconsider. The Tories are dead on their feet in Scotland - could a distinctively Scottish Conservative party change their fortunes. And the Liberals... well, they're increasingly irrelevant under their current leaderships. These three need to decide within their own party membership what the direction should be. Playing constitutional musical statues isn't going to work.

As for the SNP - we need to be careful not to lull ourselves into a false sense of security - we may now be the Government, but we're not yet the Government of an Independent Scotland.

Football not Newsnight?!

Just realised that Newsnight Scotland isn't on tonight; instead we have last weekend's Scottish football highlights. I'm not pleased at this sacrificing of what limited political coverage we have, and particularly because I'm not entirely convinced that the football coverage is worth it.

I love football; watching it live, on tv, and occasionally playing (despite the fact I'm pretty poor at it!). I also love politics, news programmes, and debate. Why does BBC Scotland appear to have such little control of the schedules that they have to sacrifice one for the other? Is this a one-off, or indicative of the recently bemoaned state of Scottish television coverage?

BBC Scotland's football highlights show fits poorly on a Wednesday night in any case. By this point in the week, I've practically forgotten about last weekend's matches, and I'm looking forward to the upcoming fixtures. Monday night is a better timeslot, but Scotsport's coverage is pretty dire.

Match of the Day and MotD 2 are in my view the kings of football highlight shows. They do replays, analysis with fairly knowledgeable pundits, and high quality camera work. I enjoy watching it, and wouldn't want it removed from the schedules, even in an independent Scotland (if we had the same situation as in Belgium, we could continue to watch BBC anyway). I'd also like to see more football from the rest of Europe, and I'm pleased to see that Channel 5 have now started showing Italian games. Perhaps in the interim, we could have a BBC sport digital channel?

Present Scottish football coverage, and often Scottish football in general, can't hold a candle to MotD, and that's a real shame. It may be a funding issue; it may be a demand issue (would most lovers of the game rather watch Caley Thistle and Gretna, or Chelsea and Arsenal?), but Scottish fans (and Scottish politics enthusiasts!) are losing out.

Surgeries

For those readers who are also my constituents, I've put my surgery times and contact details on the side bar. Feel free to pop by and see me!

Working weeks, and a weekend off

Apologies for not having updated my blog - I've been a bit busy for deep thoughts on the world - or at least too busy to write these thoughts down!

I spent last week running around chasing up constituent casework and meeting organisations (including a visit to John Wheatley College's impressive new Haghill Campus, the employability and training organisation Right Track, and a meeting at the East End Healthy Living Centre).

So far this week, I've attended a meeting of the East End Drugs Forum, popped in to see the folk at Parkhead Credit Union, attended a public meeting in the Calton, and had a briefing from East End Community Homes on their plans for the Gallowgate. I've had surgeries too, as well as trying to get answers on constituency cases. I'm pleased to say that I've used public transport to get to the majority of these meetings (even taking my shopping to the public meeting!).

The weekend, of course, saw two of my fellow SNP colleagues Councillor Jennifer Dunn and Councillor Craig Mackay get hitched. They had a beautiful wedding down in Girvan, and I think it's fair to say a fantastic time was had by all. I'm sure they're going to be really happy together.

Should Scots withhold the licence fee?

The call for broadcasting to be devolved to the Scottish Parliament has recently been superseded by the Independence White Paper, but in Wales, their parallel debate on broadcasting just seems to be getting warmed up. Adam Price MP, backed by new Bethan Jenkins AM, has threatened to withhold some of his licence fee as he believes Wales is not adequately covered by the "national" BBC news.

He has a very valid point - when was the last time you heard about anything that the Welsh Assembly did? You have to hang around on the BBC Parliament Channel for even a glimpse of proceedings in the Assembly, squeezed in somewhere between some obscure Westminster Committee and coverage of old men in the Lords having a snooze. Why should this be?

Surely the development of Digital TV should lend itself to increasing the diversity of news available? When I attended the Board of Governors meeting in Glasgow last year, the talking heids of the BBC said it was both possible and desirable, but since then nothing seems to have changed.

It really seems that the only way we'll get decent coverage is to push forward with the independence cause.