SCOTLAND could get its first trespass law under emergency rules being considered to protect royal palaces.Of course the Queen should be protected but shouldn't all property owners be able to stop trespassing? I rather think that Her Majesty would agree.Under the devolution settlement, the Home Office has no responsibility for either Holyroodhouse in Edinburgh or Balmoral in Deeside.
But a department official revealed that the Home Office is "in negotiations" with the Scottish Executive about the possibility of the proposed law applying in and around the Scottish palaces.
A libertarian returns to Scotland
"Freedom and Whisky gang thegither"
- Robert Burns
Monday 18 October 2004
One law for some...
It looks as though Westminster will lean on the Scottish Parliament to reduce the impact of the "right to roam" legislation:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Comments made on previous template:
Neil Craig
Adam Smith is generally accepted as a founder of British Liberalism.
I had heard that her husband also wrote, but, not being a science fiction writer, is not so relevant nowdays.
24 October 2004, 21:55:23 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Stuart
Of course it was too dangerous in those days to voice pro-independence aspirations, but his writings illustrate his strong independence of thought.
That he voted Whig (note: the Liberals not then existing) is no surprise because in those days to be a Tory was to be a Jacobite (romanticist, old-fashioned) and to be a Whig was to be a Good Hanoverian (enlightened, modern).
Neil, where did you get the info that he voted Whig?
Mary Shelley was a suggestible. She may have voted Labour in 97, but she does not strike me as being the type to get fooled twice. (I was actually referring to Percy Bysshe Shelley.)
23 October 2004, 07:08:56 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Alastair Ross
'Shelley would vote Tory' is wildly inaccurate even in the dicey world of counter-factual historicist judgements. A reading of the late Paul Foot's 'Red Shelley', in which the old Salopian deconstructs the political complexion of the old Etonian, would illustrate the case to the point of tedium( familiar territory for my interlocutor). As for Coleridge, his vote would probably go to the party which enabled tincture of laudanum to be had at the best price.
23 October 2004, 01:18:20 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Neil Craig
Adam Smith DID vote Liberal. I think Mary Shelley would have voted for Blair's Babes.
22 October 2004, 20:07:27 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Stuart
-"Libertarians are gentle souls"
You clearly have not read the vicious outpourings of Mistress Verity!
There is nothing more romanticist than British nationalism, and unlike the Scottish variety, it has a very ugly face.
Scottish nationalism is civic and rationalist, republican, indeed one could say pragmatic (no bad thing). In short: enlightened.
British nationalism is based on an invented British ethnicity; is emotive, monarchist (the root of all dictatorial philosophies) and colonial. In short: thuggery.
Adam Smith and David Hume would vote SNP. Shelley and Coleridge would vote Tory.
We should never forget that it was trade-restricting English Mercantilist policies that coerced Scotland into the suffocating Union.
22 October 2004, 09:09:06 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Alastair Ross
To extend a fundamentally bad tax is true unfairness, which I suppose, in Mr Dickson's real world, makes sense. Libertarians are gentle souls who may lack the unprincipled 'pragmatism' required for political party hackery. The word agitate has, of course, several meanings, including 'to try to arouse the public interest'.However Mr Dickson, like the caterpillar in Alice in Wonderland, believes that 'when I use a word, it means exactly what I intend it to mean, no more ,no less'. The ' easy' in Adam Smith's dictum refers,of course, to absence of financial burden, and not to degree of political difficulty. Being accused of romanticism by a supporter of a party comprised entirely of romantic irrationalists whose boundlessly misplaced political optimism outstrips their objectivity is cause for amusement.
22 October 2004, 07:41:16 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Stuart
Neil,
Shucks.
Alastair,
Meanwhile, back in the real world, would it not be more sensible to make taxation less unfair while waiting for your "libertarian" eldorado to materialise?
Why do libertarians never put themselves up as candidates for election? You seem to think that one day your dreams will come true, and yet you do not make the slightest effort to acheive the elected offices required?
It makes me suspect that "libertarians" seek to achieve their goals by subvertibg democracy. eg: "Libertarians should be agitating to reduce excessive taxation ..."
"Agitating" is the political language of the extreme left and the extreme right. What form of "agitation" do you propose?
You are not so much a "purist" as a romanticist. Romanticism is the opposite of Adam Smith's enlightenment world, and led the world down some very dark roads.
There is nothing "easy" about trying to campaign for land taxes. Scots have been campaigning for it since the 19th century, so far without success.
22 October 2004, 06:44:32 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Alastair Ross
Libertarians should be agitating to reduce excessive taxation, not attempting to rationalise it. Adam Smith's desideratum ,'easy taxes',should be at the forefront of Libertarian thinking.
22 October 2004, 04:09:50 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Neil Craig
Thanks Stuart.
The difference is I thought you would agree with that one.
21 October 2004, 21:56:28 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Stuart
Dear Neil,
Where are my thanks?
21 October 2004, 06:58:18 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Neil Craig
Thanks David that was appreciated - it is also good to see that when there is a dichotomy between libertarian & tory values you walk the walk.
In that spirit may I also acknowledge, as you probably guessed, that tho' I am a moderately loyal lib dem I do get annoyed at the number of nanny statists & luddites in the party, particularly the Scottish party.
20 October 2004, 23:41:59 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Stuart
Very, very, very few come to see Mrs Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. Wisely she keeps her head down.
The less we see of that family, the less likely we are to sack the lot.
20 October 2004, 17:27:15 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Rob Read
How many come to see the old woman (Queenie) and how many come to see the old buildings (Buck House etc)?
20 October 2004, 13:46:48 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Stuart
Woof, woof.
20 October 2004, 06:39:46 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Alastair Ross
In purely financial terms, the Queen's Civil List income is considerably lower than the income she agreed to forego by turning over the Crown Estate revenue to the state. Northern European monarchies such as those of Scandinavia and Holland have adapted very well to modernity,( as has Britain's),thereby consolidating their security of tenure. To the abolitionist minority ,of course, this doesnt matter.Fortunately,the pariah dogs can only yelp and the caravan moves on.
20 October 2004, 00:48:07 GMT+01:00
Post a Comment