There's nothing like a good (alleged)
political scandal to start the week:
DAVID Davidson, the Tories’ health spokesman, was fighting for his political career last night after he was forced to deny allegations of binge drinking and having an affair with an SNP MSP.
In a sensible world this sort of thing would be a matter for Mr Davidson and his family as this statement suggests:
A spokesman for the Conservative Party would not comment on the relationship between Mr Davidson and Ms Grahame, insisting it was "a private matter".
Ah, but we
don't live in a sensible world:
But David McLetchie, the Scottish Conservative leader, was drawn into the row when it emerged that Mr Davidson had spoken out about the dangers of binge drinking in his capacity as health spokesman.
I would put it differently: Mr McLetchie was drawn into the row when he appointed a "health spokesman" in the first place. If there's any point in having a Tory party it's to argue
on principle for a small state. After all, it's not as if we can expect the Liberals to revert to that historical role. So Mr McLetchie, just don't have a "health spokesman". All of your MSPs should be proclaiming that health (like education) should be a matter for individuals and not politicians.
2 comments:
Comments made on previous template:
Munzenberg
Sorry Stuart but the SNP's opposition to ID cards is not proof that they are anti state control. Look at their attitudes to PFI or the introduction of market practices into the state sector.
The SNP far less statist that Labour? Get real mate!
7 February 2005, 19:57:06 GMT
– Like – Reply
Stuart Dickson
Eh...where did you get that cracker from?
Just one recent example, much debated on F&W, shows the SNP to be far less statist: compulsory state ID cards and the subsequent database state. A Labour cornerstone, and comprehensively opposed by the SNP.
6 February 2005, 20:54:38 GMT
– Like – Reply
Munzenberg
"campaigning against the British state" does not mean you oppose state control, in the SNPs case they definitely do not oppose state control. In fact they SNP promise to be even more statist than Labour do!
6 February 2005, 16:30:27 GMT
– Like – Reply
Stuart Dickson
If you think that campaigning against the British state for several decades is not anti-state, then think again.
There are few more suffocatingly centralised states in the world. The British establishment (in Scotland represented by the Labour Party) aims to collectively level-down variety in the United Kingdom. The SNP and our supporters refuse to accept the British lowest common denominator.
5 February 2005, 21:57:42 GMT
– Like – Reply
Munzenberg
I am resident in Canada (have been a couple of years), but am originally from Scotland (Edinburgh to be precise).
They may be anti establishment, though they hope one day to be the establishment themselves, but they are hardly anti state. They do not, and have not opposed state control and state power. Indeed if what they say is to be believed they - if the took power - promise to extend state control even further.
5 February 2005, 11:18:03 GMT
– Like – Reply
Stuart Dickson
-"you cleary understand nothing about them"
I understand a lot about them. I have been a member for 18 years. There is a very strong streak of liberalism in the party, and we are not socialist, we are social democratic.
The SNP are the anti-state, anti-establishment party of Scotland.
I also support self determination for Quebec, if you are from Canada Munzenburg.
2 February 2005, 22:20:49 GMT
– Like – Reply
Munzenberg
"the SNP is not in the habit of telling individuals how they should conduct their family lives"
Ha! The SNP with their shameless gesture politics, their advocation of high public spending, pseudo-egalitarianism, and obsession with state control. If you think the SNP are "libertarians or liberals" then you cleary understand nothing about them. Socialists they were, are and will remain.
The party of freedom? Don't make me laugh!
2 February 2005, 20:31:09 GMT
– Like – Reply
Stuart Dickson
As all sensible politicians should, the SNP is not in the habit of telling individuals how they should conduct their family lives.
Moralising tends to be the odd obsession of the Conservative personality, and should be of no interest to libertarians or liberals.
We don't care if families are Scottish. We consider all nationalities to have an equal worth.
2 February 2005, 15:42:19 GMT
– Like – Reply
Squander Two
It's that families should be Scottish and independent, of course.
2 February 2005, 09:55:35 GMT
– Like – Reply
Giles
But what *is* the SNP's position on "family values"?
2 February 2005, 00:53:23 GMT
– Like – Reply
Neil Craig
Interesting that for him to be a Adulterous Tory Love Rat is a news story but for her to be a Homebreaking SNP Scarlet Woman isn't.
1 February 2005, 22:04:13 GMT
– Like – Reply
Andrew Ian Dodge
Lol...I missed that...doh. Yet another example of why I should not comment right after I get up.
1 February 2005, 12:16:10 GMT
– Like – Reply
Stuart Dickson
Christine is all woman. (Andrew Ian, the abbreviation Ms usually provides that information, for your future reference.)
Very feisty. Some men like that kind of thing, I'm told.
31 January 2005, 15:57:23 GMT
– Like – Reply
Andrew Ian Dodge
Could be anything but drunk ending up in bed with an SNP MSP? BTW is the MSP male or female? (Not that it matters...)
31 January 2005, 13:47:04 GMT
Post a Comment