Ian Hamilton QC

At a recent meeting of the intellectually unwashed Hugh Andrews* said to me, ‘My! Is it no’ terrible? Every email we send is kept by our Server. Think how the Secret Service can know everything we write.’

I decided to see if he was right. By its very nature the Secret Service can be judged only by its failures. Its successes must remain secret. They are boasted about by people like Tony Blair so they are very properly disbelieved.

I devised a way to test the Secret Service. We all have the same faith in electronics as our fathers had in God. There must be some words which will cause the deep sleep of the Secret Service to twitch awake. The two words ‘Semtex’ and ‘Detonators’ should do. Accordingly I sent the following mousemail to my elder son Jamie, the only civilised Hamilton I know.

Jamie,

When you come to Lochnabeith be careful if Jeannette asks you to dig over her sweet pea bed. That’s where I’ve buried the Semtex and the Detonators.

Father.

I sat back and waited for the Secret Service.

They didn’t come.

All that happened was an indignant mousemail from Jamie saying:-

What the fuck are you playing at father. Do you want twenty hairy arsed hooligans rushing up the wrong close here in Leith shouting, ‘Armed police,’ and shooting one of my neighbours six times in the head? Be your age, father.’ Jamie.

I had to pay a man to dig Jeannette’s sweet pea bed.

Just think what this means. When we plot to overthrow the English Government we can quite safely use micemail. The Secret Police will never notice but they won’t be idle. They’ll be plotting to shoot some poor SNP bloke on his way to Arisaig. 

So much for the Secret Service.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

* Owner of Birlinn. Publisher of three Scottish books a week and Master of the Western World.

Publisher also of my book Stone of Destiny available in paperback from any bookshop or signed copies by post from Connel Village Store Tel No 01631710216   

Dear Westminster: a divorce letter

Tuesday, 22 March 2011 00:00

98 Comments (And many more keep coming)

by Paul Kavanagh

Dear Westminster,

There was a time when you wooed me.  Once you promised me the delights of India and the magic of Hong Kong, but these days all you do is sit on the sofa with your American pal playing war games.  You’ve squandered all our money on expensive toys and presents for your mates in the City.  Now you tell me you’re cutting the housekeeping money but you’re still buying two aircraft carriers, only there are no planes to put on them.  You even had the cheek to tell me you were doing me a favour by letting me assemble the airfix kits.  And don’t start me on those bloody submarines.

You treat me like you’re ashamed of me.  You never let me leave the house alone.  Are you afraid that I’ll say something to embarrass you if I was to meet up with some other countries without you being there?  I was really upset when you didn’t let me go to Copenhagen to that workshop on climate change, especially because you know how much work I did installing wind turbines in the back garden and got all those books about tidal energy out the library.  It was hurtful and unthinking.  Does the term ‘control freak’ mean anything to you?

I always knew you were never faithful.  I never mentioned your thing with Wales, you know, the other woman, your kidnap victim from a previous relationship.  I was even your biggest supporter when you wanted to start that menage-a-trois with Ireland.  You know as well as I do how much that particular little escapade ended up costing in therapy sessions and broken crockery.  I can’t believe how naive I was.  It’s all water under the bridge now, but I’ll never have a proper relationship with my own family until you stop claiming the right to speak for me.

I bumped into Norway the other day, she’s looking good and doing so well for herself.  I remember her when she worked in the fish factory and didn’t have two kroner to rub together, then she divorced Denmark and rushed into that rebound affair with Sweden which ended in tears.  Well that’s all changed.  She was just popping off to some important do at the UN and was looking very stylish.  And there was me in an auld coat and head-scarf like the depressive suicide risk in an Ingmar Bergman movie because you say I can’t afford nice things.

I see the banks are Scottish again.  That’s nice.  For years you’ve insisted on controlling all the pursestrings, and now the pursestrings are flapping around your ankles like snapped knicker elastic all of a sudden the empty banks are Scottish and a reason I could never look after myself.  You’re like a wean that breaks a toy then gives it back saying it was broken when you got it.  Funny how you managed to play with the banks for years without noticing how broken they were.

You say the oil money is spent and gone, and you always said that it was never a significant sum anyway.  Well now I’ve discovered the truth that you’ve been trying to keep from me for the past 30 years.  For all that time you’ve known that I could be very wealthy, but you kept schtum so you could spend the money on things for yourself.  

I don’t know what’s more hurtful, the fact that you kept secrets from me and stole from me, or that you didn’t trust me enough to be honest with me in the first place.  Just what other dirty little secrets are you keeping?  You know what Oprah Winfrey said, when trust breaks down there can be no marriage.  You’ve ripped up my trust, thrown it away, and trampled it in the gutter.  You’ve only got yourself to blame for that.

Then there was thon weirdo Thatcherism cult you got seduced into joining.  You gave away all the family silver and kept chanting that mantra about obeying the market.   What a nightmare that was.  You went all wild-eyed and starey and really scared me.  Remember Jack Nicholson in the Shining?  I was Shelley Duvall cowering in terror while you took an axe to everything.  I’m still not entirely convinced you’ve got over that little episode, and there is no power on Earth that would force me to endure another bout of it.  You’ve not done a great deal to boost my confidence on that score.

I’m under the doctor now.  You don’t care, you just mutter about Celts and alcoholism and tell me it’s all my own fault because I’m feeble and useless.  But the truth is I have cancer, the media and political parties that you support have turned against my body, poisoning my system.  They make me weak and cause me to doubt myself and lose my self-confidence.  They eat away at me from within.  The doctors have diagnosed it as Unionosis, it’s caused by a loveless and one-sided marriage.

What makes it worse is that it’s you who is feeding the disease.  I’m not saying you’re doing it deliberately - that would imply you have a degree of self-awareness I don’t think you’re capable of - but I can’t rid myself of the dark suspicion and you don’t help by refusing to accept that there’s a problem.  It keeps me awake at nights and I’ve been drinking more than is good for a person.  

All you do is to accuse me of having a chip on my shoulder.  Well that’s true, and guess what honey - you put it there.  You aren’t just a chip on my shoulder, you’re a whole fish supper with extra sour vinegar all wrapped up in a copy of the Hootsmon.  And frankly the fish smells pretty rank.  Chip.  I’ll gie ye bloody chip.

Anyway, the only cure for Unionosis is to root out the problem at source, and that means leaving you.

We don’t have any reason to stay together.  The children are all grown up.  Australia and Canada are doing so well for themselves.  I used to worry about Canada living in that bad neighbourhood, but he managed to avoid getting led astray by that neighbour of his.  Such a sensible and level-headed child.  He gets that from me you know.  Even little New Zealand has done us proud, and you know how I used to fret about him being so far away with nothing but sheep for company.  It’s worked out well for him, and I’ve learned not to judge who the children choose to spend their lives with.

I know you’re angry.  No one likes to be told they’re a failure, and it’s hard for you to hear you’ve been a failure as a parliament and a partner.  But you react either by screaming abuse at me or by telling me I’m worthless and would fall apart without you.  I don’t believe you any more.  You’re acting every bit the spurned lover.  You’re acting exactly like you’re always accusing France of behaving, and I only broke off my engagement with him because you convinced me he was possessive and jealous.

We’ll always be close, we still share so much and I want us to be friends.  But until you can learn to have adult relationships with the other nations in these islands, and treat us like equals and not as your harem, there’s no hope for us and there’s no hope for the people of England.  People in England deserve a proper parliament and not the pretendy wee excuse for patronage, privilege and dressing up in fancy costumes that you’ve become.  It’s time you got your fat lazy arse up from resting on your Mother of Parliament laurels and went and took a long hard look at yourself in the mirror.  You’re very good at looking after your own interests,  In time you’ll realise that this is in your best interests too. 

Meanwhile I’m taking a leaf out of your book and putting my own interests first.  So I want a divorce.  There, I’ve said it.  There’s not much love anymore, I think you know that as well as I do, and it’s time we learned to live our own lives before what’s left of our feelings for one another turn into hate.  Being in this marriage has made both of us lose sight of who we are, and we need to find ourselves again.  I’ll still stand beside you to defend what we have in common, but I won’t be under your thumb.

xx

Scotland

By Ian Hamilton QC

My article below raises the question of who is responsible for controlling the police. It was followed up in the on-line law magazine, THE FIRM.

It appears that the police are answerable to no one. I append the piece from THE FIRM.*

Reference in it is made to ACPOS. This is a coven of senior constables. So far as I can discover it is self created and responsible to no one. Nevertheless ACPOS legislates as though it were an elected body.

Among its do-it-yourself laws is one concerning our roads. After a road death the police close the road for eight or ten hours. They have no right to do this. Power to close roads is a matter for Parliament, not for the police. For a county like Argyll the result is disastrous. The police cut us off from elsewhere more often than the weather.

This is not the only idiocy. Now the Chief Constable of Strathclyde is proposing to rush onto the field at Rangers v Celtic games to arrest players. (Volunteers only for this job.) Few things are more likely to exacerbate a football disturbance than on-the-pitch arrests.

There is a suggestion that all the forces should be merged into one. God forbid! We are better with several private armies than with one Mafia.

We urgently need an all party Watch Committee with a sub-committee to hear complaints against the police.

This is one suggestion. There must be many others. Control of the police must never rest in the hands of the government or any political party. Nor must it rest in the hands of Chief Constables. This gives them the power and responsibility of gang leaders in uniform.

It is a sad comment on our daily papers that they have shown little interest.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

*THE FIRM

NEWS

09 Mar 2011

Scottish Police forces not accountable to devolved Parliament, Holyrood confirms

Following Ian Hamilton QC’s concerns published yesterday in The Firm that the police were not subject to sufficient accountability to Parliament, the Scottish Government has confirmed that the police in Scotland are not accountable to them.

The position is confirmed in legislation that predates the incorporation of the Parliament.

Whilst ministers have a nominal degree of responsibility for aspects of policing, the Government has no role in the key issue of accountability for police acts or policing decisions.

The Scottish Government said that instead, police forces are accountable to police authorities and joint boards for their actions.

However, the full narration of external intervention options provided by the Government in its consultation on policing reform last month confirms that “neither police authorities nor the Scottish Ministers have power to direct chief constables on the enforcement of law or the deployment of police officers.”

And forces across Scotland state publicly that from their perspective, the prime function of the police board is budgetary.

Strathclyde police maintain that Police authorities/boards are responsible for “budget and management of resources for their local force.”

Central Scotland police state that the Board’s main remit “is to ensure that the Chief Constable has sufficient resources to allow him to deliver an efficient and effective police force.

“This involves overseeing the revenue budget and allocating money for resources such as police property, vehicles, clothing and equipment, as well as salaries for police and force support officers,” it adds.

Lothian and Borders police board make no public claim of the forces accountability to them at all, and Grampian Board says its functions encompass setting the Force budget on an annual basis, appointing senior officers, having responsibility for the conduct of senior officers and “having an overall scrutiny role in relation to the way the Chief Constable operates the Force.”

Yesterday, Ian Hamilton QC warned that the police posed “the greatest danger to our freedom” and expressed concern over the lack of a means of accountability.

“To whom are the police responsible? Nobody knows,” he said.

On their public websites, Scottish police forces maintain that policing is shared between Scottish ministers, chief constables and local police authorities/joint police boards, but add that ministerial oversight is restricted to policy and setting the legal and financial framework within which the police service operates.

All accountability for operational matters rests with police force Chief Constables.

The Scottish Government’s “Safer Communities Directorate - Police Division” said that the police are not accountable to Parliamentary in respect of any “operational matters,” and that Government intervention in any case would “not be appropriate.”

“Under the terms of the Police (Scotland) Act 1967, Chief Constables are entirely responsible for operational matters affecting their force, including investigating complaints,” they said.

“It would therefore not be appropriate for the Cabinet Secretary for Justice or any Scottish Government official to intervene in individual cases. This important principle is essential to protect the political and operational independence of the police service in Scotland.”

In their consultation on the future of policing launched last month, the Scottish Government said that the powers of ministers to intervene in policing extended only to making grants to police authorities and joint police boards; approving the appointment of chief constables and requiring a police authority to call on a chief constable to retire in the interests of efficiency; directing a chief constable to provide reinforcement or assistance to another force in the interests of public safety or order; directing chief constables to enter in to collaboration agreements to ensure the efficient discharge of police functions; and requiring the inspectors of constabulary to carry out an inspection of any police force and, where that inspection finds the force inspected is not efficient, directing the police authority or joint police board to take appropriate measures.

There is no mention of accountability to Parliament in respect of the forces’ operations. The Police Complaints Commissioner for Scotland, the conduit which all public policing concerns are directed through, does not appear on the Government’s list of “key bodies responsible for delivering Scotland’s police service” in the consultation.

The government consultaton proposes merging all eight Scottish forces into a single body, under the control of a single Chief Constable.
A prior review in January 2009 conceded that police chiefs had seized power from central government in the post-devolution interregnum as the devolved authority was finding its feet.
“Post-devolution, it appears that the first administration, then known as the Scottish Executive, saw the reform of the criminal justice system as its number one priority in the field of justice. Perhaps…there was initially less attention given to policing in Scotland than there had been pre-devolution,” it said.
“The combination of the growing strength of ACPOS with this understandable change of emphasis from Scottish Ministers and their staff may therefore have led to ACPOS filling something of a vacuum in the national strategic direction of policing - a role performed in England and Wales by the Home Secretary and Home Office. This situation did not persist for long but, when Scottish Ministers and civil servants turned their attention to policing as was inevitable and wholly to be expected, the dynamic had changed enough to make chief officers perhaps feel that some of their territory was being threatened.”

The review concluded that “an elected government in Scotland is the final arbiter of how the preservation and promotion of law and order and community wellbeing is achieved, and Scottish Ministers are therefore held to account for that by the electorate.”

“We believe any future reform will improve services for local communities, increase accountability and protect frontline delivery in the face of budget cuts,” a government justice spokesman told The Firm.

By Ian Hamilton QC

Glory to our Chief Constables!

Glory to our Superintendents of Police!

Glory to our devoted constables, man and woman, who kept the students in order!

Wherever three or four are gathered together in protest our vigilant police are there to kettle them in.

BUT WAIT A MOMENT.

Our democracy sometimes fails. Sometimes it even takes us to war on false pretences.

Our banking system has failed. It will only be propped up by the dismissal of hundreds of thousands of people. A penury is coming none thought possible. Mortgages will go unpaid. Children will suffer. Marriages will break. The salary-earner will find his, or her, ‘secure job’ has gone with the wind.

WHAT IS SUCH A PERSON TO DO?

He, or she, can listen to the Prime Minister.

THEN

He, or she, can take to the streets in protest marches.

OR CAN THEY?

The police have now found how to stop any protest march. They call it KETTLING.

It may be a new word but we all know what it means. If we have not ourselves been kettled we have seen it on TV.¬

It means the police form a violent cordon round the protest marchers and keep them in one spot for hours. It denies them the right to march in protest.

Where did the police get the power to act like this?

The answer is from nowhere. Ours is a democracy. A democracy means rule by the people. Neither the Scottish nor the English people gave any such power to anyone and certainly not to the police.

They have taken this power to themselves. The police are there to protect our rights. These rights include marching in protest. In the past these marches were part of democracy. They made it known to our rulers that there was discontent.

Now there is no way we can tell our rulers there is discontent. When the unemployed, the new unemployed, the people who until now have always held down good jobs………when the unemployed take to the streets in protest they will be violently kettled.

What is our Lord Advocate doing about these policemen? Prosecuting them for breach of the peace?  Don’t make me laugh.

What is our Minister for Justice doing? He doesn’t control them but could utter a word of condemnation.

The answer to both questions is therefore ‘NOTHING’.

To whom are the police responsible? Nobody knows.

It suits any government to have police that make the public conform to ideas of decorum set by the police.

The greatest danger to our freedom comes from those who are there to protect it.

The greatest danger to our freedom comes from the police.