It’s not exactly a headline election promise, but on page 56 of the SNP manifesto for the Scottish Parliament elections in May you will find;
All that campaigning leads to that half a sentence – hard won, and only a start. But if I had the opportunity to quiz candidates in this election I’d be asking them their views on this subject and making sure that SNP candidates would know that this was important to me and that I didn’t expect the party to allow Fergus Ewing or anyone else to delay the delivery of this promise.
[registration_form]
We all live in hope but the Scottish Government’s record on delivering both major and minor ‘promises’ and ‘commitments’ is not good. On some issues, there’s been a decade or more wait and no progress made. The rhetoric can be strong, although on these wildlife issues it is not that powerful, but detail & timetables on implementation is usually absent. One key minister always seems to favour landowners and powerful private interests. The main economic advisors to the Scottish Government are from the Duke of Buccleuch’s staff and from a corporate lobbying company . We should not expect much and will probably get nothing.
It is really great to read this. Well spotted Mark. What a fantastic difference between this and the absolute rubbish down south, because it really is Defra and Tory rubbish down south.i know in some parts down here it is not the fashion to support the SNP but I really hope they do very well in their Scottish election on 6th May. It would help wildlife in Scotland tremendously.
Also, Scotland voted by a two thirds majority to stay in the EU, so I well understand to have Scottish policy on the EU dictate by these incompetents and antediluvians down south is an effrontery to them.
I wish, Nicola Sturgeon, who I admire and who I think is doing a great job, along with her team, the very best of luck for 6th May.
More carrot-dangling by the Scottish Government. Ignore it and look to what happened in the past year or so. Several incidents of poisoning which cumlinated in a statement about licencing and…. nothing. The a senior member of the government stands up and reiterates the importance of burning heather. Stop listening to their words and start looking at their deeds.
Fool me once…
If Jimmy Crankie thinks she can run an independent Scotland and enforce all this new legislation I recommend Westminster awards Holyrood only the taxation received from that country’s residents; nothing more, nothing less. Perhaps then this tiresome woman will realise the implications and cost of going it alone. That way she and the SNP will soon realise how much external support she receives. We are one nation and should stay as such.
‘ But if I had the opportunity to quiz candidates in this election I’d be asking them their views on this subject ‘
###
In the absence of such an opportunity these links might provide some guidance.
https://raptorpersecutionscotland.wordpress.com/2021/03/12/political-hustings-whos-promising-what-to-the-scottish-gamekeeepers-association/
https://raptorpersecutionscotland.wordpress.com/2021/04/15/political-hustings-organised-by-revive-the-coalition-for-grouse-moor-reform/
It is worth bearing in mind though that SNP MSPs will do what they are told by the Party and will follow the Partly line. Dissent is not tolerated. And anyone who thinks Fergus Ewing will be side-lined does not understand the SNP.
de – it is the Party’s policy to introduce licensing, and it is the government’s too. Neither was the case a few years ago, and progress is most often made, in this country, and in most democracies, by a series of small steps and these steps are in the right direction. Build on progress, bank the progress and seek more.
Fine.
But the other great leap forward was the introduction of vicarious liability, which after a couple of cases, both of which were largely peripheral to the main problem, has achieved nothing.
And any licensing system would be run by NatureScot, or whatever it calls itself. The Scottish government appoint its directors. There’s nothing about that organisation, or the type of people the SNP government have appointed to oversee it, to provide either comfort or confidence.
de – I wouldn’t be so sure that vicarious liability has produced nothing. At the very least it has shown that vicarious liability isn’t enough, and helped produce the right groundswell for licensing. Licensing will fail too, and produce the right conditions for a ban. Progress is a one-way street – you get squashed if you try to back the wrong way.
You can moan all you want, but the alternative is…?
Vicarious liability has not reduced the rate of persecution and I doubt that any licensing system drafted by the SNP Government are overseen by their appointees will achieve anything either. It will be worked around.
And there’s no way an SNP government would ever ban DGS. That would risk alienating too many vested interests. The SNP are experts at being all things to all people (hence the hegemony) but shy away from anything that might alienate any potential reservoir of support.
Look at the people they have appointed to the board of NatureScot. What kind of message is that sending to the shooting industry?
De – you can moan all you like but your alternative is…?
The only party that would introduce a ban on DGS is Labour (or perhaps a minority SNP government relying on Labour support) but they currently are too far off the pace to merit serious consideration.
Maybe relying on a Parliament isn’t the way to go. Maybe direct action would be a better option. Make the whole thing uneconomic.
de – ah, so your alternative is pretty dodgy really. I’d stop moaning and get behind whatever is the best possible option then. And that, according to your aown analysis, appears to be getting behind the SNP on this one. Thanks for making that clear.
No, whether you like it or not the best option in the current circumstances is to get behind Labour in the hope that a minority SNP government has to rely on them for support in getting any legislation passed.
A majority SNP government will be consumed by whether or not to hold a referendum and how to go about it, everything else will shelved.
de – ah, so you didn’t make it clear at all. You want direct action but don’t explain how that brings about change. Does the Labour manifesto for these Scottish elections opt for a ban on driven grouse shooting?
No.
According to my analysis the best possible option would be to get behind Labour, not the SNP, in the hope that they (Labour) could hold any minority SNP government to account.
I hope that’s clear enough for you not to be able to misconstrue or misrepresent.
de – de – ah, so you didn’t make it clear at all. You want direct action but don’t explain how that brings about change. Does the Labour manifesto for these Scottish elections opt for a ban on driven grouse shooting?
No one is going to decide how to vote in the forthcoming Holyrood election on anything other than constitutional issues, and certainly not on something as niche and arcane as DGS. That’s the nature of Scottish politics. It’s all about independence, nothing else matters. The state of the education and health systems in Scotland are testament to that.
What’s likely to happen is that there will be a majority SNP government who might eventually introduce a weak and worthless licensing system to be administered by NatureScot an organisation now, due to the composition of its board appointed by the SNP government, largely run for the benefit of landed interests.
And all the while the persecution will continue.
De – and all the while the manifesto commitment of what will almost certainly be the largest party is important. Well we seem to have come round to where this post started. Well done!
Sorry, Mark, but your understanding of Scottish politics is no more than one would expect from someone based in middle England.
Bottom line, there’s more likely to progress on this issue if a minority SNP government is reliant on Labour to keep it in office.
So in the unlikely event that anyone is swithering about who to vote for and the most important issue for them is a licensing system for DGS then their best option is to vote Labour, not SNP.
I hope that’s clear enough.
de – that comment is clear, but it comes at this stage of a string of comments from you which are not consistent so it’s difficult to know what you really think. Are you a Tory in disguise? You started by suggesting that forgetting the parliamentary route might be a good idea and that only Labour would ban DGS in Scotland – I’ll be looking for that promise in the Labour manifesto for the Scottish parliament elections. You now suggest voting Labour to keep the SWNP honest when the SNP already have some sort of a promise in their election manifesto to act on this matter. They might not, but they are quite a long way down the track on this matter. It is when politicians renege on promises that you ditch them – not when they make them (otherwise there isn’t much point in them promising anything).
‘Going further than the Werritty report, Scottish Labour will support the comprehensive licensing of grouse moors as soon as possible, with robust criteria to end the unsustainable practices of driven grouse moors and to promote the sustainable development of our uplands, in the interests of everyone.’
https://scottishlabour.org.uk/where-we-stand/national-recovery-plan/
de – that’s good.
Agree with Mark we have to keep up the good fight and it’s important to have these manifesto statements and then hold SNP or whoever to them. Revive coalition and others doing a good job of coordinating hustings and good questions. But it is pretty depressing in Scotland at the moment – I think ScotGov and ‘NatureScot’ may be even more enslaved/ shackled by the landowning bodies and individuals than is the case in England and Wales at the moment. I see ex-head of SLE (Scottish Land and estates) is a new appointee to the NS Board which doesn’t bode well (see his track record on raptor persecution UK blogs). And NFUS and SLE are now asking their members to help them support NS defence of the Trees for Life judicial review of the excessive killing of beavers – see: https://theferret.scot/farmers-fundraising-to-back-beaver-killing/
Although an SNP, held to account, is probably the best hope for wildlife reforms in Scotland, i am afraid i am with
Austringer as regards the finances of independence, as i understand it.
I just hope that Jamie Blacketts All 4 Unity are crushed underfoot, as is there avowed intention towards the Green party ,or the ” gardening wing of the SNP” as he stated in “Shooting Times”.
Trapit – noticeably both you and Austringer are worried about the bill which you aren’t going to have to pick up. In fact, Scottish independence (which I might well vote for if I lived in Scotland, simply to remove oneself forever from ties to a Conservative England), would allow the English slightly more money to give to the mates of Cabinet ministers. Woohoo!
Mark: Or with a socialist England. No government is in power for ever, whilst independence would be, viz. Brexit. Scotland cannot fund itself without Westminster or swingeing tax increases. The same applies to Wales.
Austringer – in the last 10 UK general elections (which take us back to 1983), English votes have been a Conservative majority in eight (out of 10) and English seats a Conservative majority in seven of them. The split in English seats between Labour and Conservative in the last four general elections have been; 2019, 345Con:179Lab; 2015, 296Con:227Lab; 2015 318Con:206Lab; 2010 297Con:191Lab. even in those four elections, one with a coalition government and another with a minority government, Englnad was strongl;y Conservative. It’s a long way back for those of us who want to see it.
‘ Jamie Blacketts All 4 Unity ‘
I think it’s more George Galloway’s than anyone else’s.
They’re right about the Green Party though who are just a wholly owned subsidiary of the SNP who have gamed the peculiar voting system for Holyrood.