Hubba Hubba and the Holyrood Sign

While I was comatose last week, a couple of significantly interesting things happened in the capital. First, a beam from the most expensive building in the history of the known universe detached itself from the roof of the Holyrood debating chamber, and damn near restored the Tory party to their traditional number of MPs in Scotland - ie zero. Although the Tories only have MSPs by virtue of the 'last past the post system' it would be quite unjustified to wipe them out by hitting them with the debating chamber. The parliament thus had to decamp to a chip shop at the top of the High Street. It now turns out that the Holyrood architect was known in Catalonia as Enrique Collapso Morales - in fairness, it should be said that only one of his previous buildings had actually suffered a total collapse, but this is the old joke about shagging one sheep writ large, isn't it? When they got to the chip shop our brave members of parliament cravenly voted NOT to have an inquiry in McKie's case, spliting along party lines to conduct their vote. Do you remember when the Scottish parliament was opened? The brave words about a proud nation regaining it's ancient rights, a new nation ready to be open and transparent, to be a government of the people for the people, a light of true democracy in the world, men to men brithers being for a' that', a parliament which would lift the aspirations and lives of Scots to hitherto undreamt of heights - aye a right load of absolute pish. What have we got instead. A bunch of total amateurs, cowboys, degenerates and inadequates who have been unable to spot the single biggest issue which is likely to come before this parliament in a century when it obligingly jumped up and bit them on the arse. The Labour Group who voted en masse against having an inquiry in McKie's case should simply be ashamed of themselves. Jack McConnell took the opportunity of me being unconscious to smear all proponents of an inquiry as being 'politically-motivated'. Jack has started to use words with a meaning different to what everyone else understands. Having recently used the phrase 'honest mistake' to describe a situation where neither the perpetrators of the act nor the victim of it think it was either honest or a mistake, and neither does any other sentient being, he now groups together an aggregation consisting of such as Lord McKay of Clashfern, the most respected Scottish lawyer of his generation, Lord McCluskey, recently retired senator, Derek Ogg representing a significant group from the faculty of advocates, and countless others including wee bloggers like me, some lawyers, some not. What possible political motive could any of these people possibly share? The only motive which they discernibly share is to get at the truth of a scandal which is disfiguring our body politic both from national and international perspectives. At first I gave Jack the benefit of the doubt - I thought he was talking through a hole in his arse because he's an intensely stupid man - but no, it's now very obvious that he is doing it deliberately. But what can you expect? - I saw Alex Salmon asking a question of the Prime Minister in Westminster about the front page of yeaterday's Scotsman - Mr Blair quite obviously lied when he said he hadn't seen it - ok I cannot prove that, but the PM is an habitual liar and astute observers can now tell when he's doing it (ie practically every time he opens his mouth). Here is insight which I gained while wandering on the astral plain when my heart was connected to a pump: - poor old Scotia is NOT undergoing devolution - we are undergoing de-evolution !! And it is proceding at a frightening pace. Think of this sequence: Donald Dewar, Henry McLeish, Jack McConnell.........we're already only a couple of steps away from ordering up an ape from the zoo. What of the Labour MSPs who voted to block the inquiry?. Purely at random I have picked on Bristow Muldoon (anagram) because he is my MSP for West Lothian - he was prominent on the telly the other night expressing his total confidence in the way the executive were handling the matter. I have e-mailed him as undernoted to try to find out what he really knows about the issue that he voted on. I will report his reply in due course. Do not hold your breaths. Dear Mr Muldoon I was delighted to see your remarks on television yesterday indicating that you were entirely satisfied with the explanations given by the various executive ministers in relation to Shirley McKie's case (the net effect of which was that you, me and every other taxpayer are forking out a king's ransom to pay for an honest mistake). I myself was utterly bamboozled by what the ministers said, but since you patently understand the full circumstances, you will hopefully be able to explain it to me, as one of your constituents. I have tried to distil my question as undernoted. Please respond to this question rather than some other one:- How is it possible that 6 experts who were and ARE employed in the SCRO each, INDEPENDENTLY, made precisely the same honest mistaken identification of a questioned fingerprint?.(I am not a scientist, and perhaps you are not either, but you don't have to be a scientist to appreciate that the chances of such a thing occurring are many many times the population of the earth. In fact, it is for precisely the reason that mistakes of that sort CANNOT occur that used to make fingerprints such strong evidence.). If you cannot answer this very simple question then it seems to me we need a public inquiry In fairness, I should mention that both this e-mail and any response may feature on a weblog in due course I look forward to hearing from you.