OPEN LETTER
Rod Campbell MSP
Scottish Parliament
EDINBURGH
Dear Rod,
I write to seek your immediate active assistance on a matter of concern which is affecting communities across Scotland, but not least in my ward, East Neuk and Landward, in your constituency of North East Fife.
The concern is about the divisive impact which the Feed in Tariff and Community Benefit, provided to support the erection and operation of wind turbines, is having within communities.
The position is simple and easily understood.
We are witnessing a deluge of planning applications for wind turbines and wind farms in East Neuk and Landward, and across your constituency of North East Fife. The driver clearly is the financial benefit which accrues from the various forms of subsidy. I, and many others, consider that without those subsidies, the systems would be wholly uneconomic. A false market is being created and that is leading to considerable potential and actual change to our landscapes.
I would be content to deal with applications on their planning merits alone but I consider that the subsidies are bribes which distort reality. I consider that Scottish Executive's planned resultant pressure must even Have an undue influence on the objectivity of Planning Authority officials. They are human.
Communities are being offered wealth, based on those handouts. In East Neuk and Landward, we have witnessed the loss of a Community Council at Largoward, solely due to the division caused by just such a subsidised application.
Other Community Councils are also facing internal divisions and it may in fact be the case that the conflict of interests they now face is making fair representation by them of their communities impossible.
Further conflicts will arise through the very nature of these small rural communities. Moreover, it is often the case that many of the people who become members of Community Counils also step forward to run Trusts, of various sorts, set up to facilitate, or to gain access to, the subsidised funding packages. The conflicts are obvious.
I understand you were present for a short time at the beginning of a debate in Holytrood on this matter on Thursday 1st December. I hope you will now turn your full attention to this issue, follow the difficulties and debate within your communities and assess the impact which this SNP and Scotttish Executive policy is having.
I suggest you will be well advised to attend a few community council meetings in the East Neuk, the public meeting on the 1st March in St Andrews arranged by Cameron Community Council, and, yes, some sessions of the East Area planning committee.
I will be happy to meet you to elaborate on my concerns about the communities in my ward and in North East Fife in general.
This is, as you will know from the vast correspondence in our local and indeed, increasingly, in national papers, is a growing matter of public interest. I am therefore releasing this as an open letter.
Yours aye
Mike Scott-Hayward
Councillor
East Neuk and Landward
Chairman UKIP Scotland
Sunday, 19 February 2012
Wednesday, 8 February 2012
It started with Blair
We are approaching a period of potentially huge change for the United Kingdom – its possible destruction. Not good news on which to begin 2012. The build up to a referendum which will decide the fate of the United Kingdom has now begun in earnest and the battleground is here, in Scotland. UKIP Scotland is unlikely to be a major player; the media will focus on the establishment and parties with elected parliamentarians – but we can and must be more than observers.
The battle over separatism will be waged over as much as two years and set against the background of the potential, probably pending, collapse of the Euro Zone. Both battles are vital to us and UKIP big guns must deploy here often. The major parties will do so in strength, and we should welcome a strong Unionist fight. Facts and figures and numerous scenarios will be postulated; whilst I believe that ultimately most people will vote based on their emotive roots rather than on sophistry, we must battle to win over the undecided.
The SNP have the upper hand now, the initiative is theirs. It is vital that we all resist any temptation unwittingly to aide and abet separation; the mistake of creating a wholly separate devolved parliament in Scotland, distinct from Britain’s Parliament, must not be replicated elsewhere in Great Britain. Our UKIP policy of abolishing MSPs and replacing them within the Scotland Act with MPs proper is, I believe, right. Indeed, I think an England Act should create devolved parliament on those same lines – existing English MPs sitting for England, with all MPs still together in the House of Commons. We have messed enough with our constitution, an horrendous mistake started by Blair and leading by Coalition complicity towards the unravelling of all thet we have ever been.
The battle over separatism will be waged over as much as two years and set against the background of the potential, probably pending, collapse of the Euro Zone. Both battles are vital to us and UKIP big guns must deploy here often. The major parties will do so in strength, and we should welcome a strong Unionist fight. Facts and figures and numerous scenarios will be postulated; whilst I believe that ultimately most people will vote based on their emotive roots rather than on sophistry, we must battle to win over the undecided.
The SNP have the upper hand now, the initiative is theirs. It is vital that we all resist any temptation unwittingly to aide and abet separation; the mistake of creating a wholly separate devolved parliament in Scotland, distinct from Britain’s Parliament, must not be replicated elsewhere in Great Britain. Our UKIP policy of abolishing MSPs and replacing them within the Scotland Act with MPs proper is, I believe, right. Indeed, I think an England Act should create devolved parliament on those same lines – existing English MPs sitting for England, with all MPs still together in the House of Commons. We have messed enough with our constitution, an horrendous mistake started by Blair and leading by Coalition complicity towards the unravelling of all thet we have ever been.
Monday, 23 January 2012
English Parliament et al
It is my view that the Scottish Parliament, and the Welsh Assembly, should be made up of those Members of Parliament sitting respectively for Scotland and Wales.
English MPs sitting as such would conducted English business but it may well be that there is a need for an England Act, to formalise English MPs sitting as such, with power to elect a First Minister and to create an English Executive. That English Parliament then would have powers similar to Scotland.
There would, of course, be a need for Acts of Parliament to remove MSPs and Assembly Members, to be replaced by MPs, and possibly also to amend and enhance the Welsh Assembly's powers and status to that of a Welsh Parliament, fully equivalent to the Scottish and English Parliaments.
MPs would continue to serve as they do now at Westminster, working together for the UK, and with their feet on the ground within the devolved Parliaments.
English MPs sitting as such would conducted English business but it may well be that there is a need for an England Act, to formalise English MPs sitting as such, with power to elect a First Minister and to create an English Executive. That English Parliament then would have powers similar to Scotland.
There would, of course, be a need for Acts of Parliament to remove MSPs and Assembly Members, to be replaced by MPs, and possibly also to amend and enhance the Welsh Assembly's powers and status to that of a Welsh Parliament, fully equivalent to the Scottish and English Parliaments.
MPs would continue to serve as they do now at Westminster, working together for the UK, and with their feet on the ground within the devolved Parliaments.
Battle for British Unity
It is time that people realise that the Battle for British unity will be fought in Scotland.
The future of the United Kingdom will be decided right here, in Scotland. This is the political battleground. The attack on the UK began when a Labour Government and Donald Dewar created the Scottish Parliament. That was the equivalent of offering the SNP a beachhead and Alex Salmond has long since secured it.
The SNP have carried out political guerrilla raids, creating as many divides as possible, giving away freebies here to cause disgruntlement in England. The Scottish Parliament has been the battlefield tank forcing divides over student fees, prescription charges, and so called free home care. Even Tories in Holyrood have succumbed to the momentum, believing somehow that more autonomous power will mend the widening gap.
The shockwaves are now rippling to the surface, discombobulating the English, many of whom are now reacting exactly as Salmond wishes. We now see the predictable reaction which Salmond wanted as formerly sober minds in England call for an English Parliament.
They would rue it - we all will.
Already, in Scotland, MPs and the proper Parliament are being alienated from the electorate.
Very few people ever go to see an MP about a reserved powers issue - people need to see their highest elected representatives about more domestic concerns: housing, hospitals, pharmacies or schools threatened with closure, vandalism, crime rates and police numbers, yes, even dog dirt. In Scotland, this means that MSPs have the better interface with the electorate while our Scottish MPs become aloof, are channelled towards weighty national and international issues.
These are vital issues but the interaction of Westminster MPs and British subjects in Scotland, and Wales, is waning; the domestic issues that keep MPs in touch, which keep their feet on the ground, are no longer there in Scotland.
The same happening in England as well, will make the UK government increasingly remote from the people. The "assemblies" will become the focus and the Union will erode; that is why I say we must not replicate the error of the devolved bodies as constituted.
UKIP has a firm and sensible policy on this: the electorate should elect one MP for their constituency and that MP should be in Westminster most of the time and in the devolved more local parliament for the remainder.
The devolved body, the Scottish Parliament here, would continue as it is, but devoid of MSPs. In England, when Welsh and Scottish MPs are at work in their devolved home, English MPs would deal with England’s devolved issues. That means both UK national and domestic roles remained linked, through MPs who will keep a direct interface with the electorate and, exactly what is needed, excessive government is cut with fewer politicians overall with time on their hands to think of ways to rule us.
UK party leaders must not be tempted to balance the books by adding more overloaded assemblies to the mix - trim out instead - and engage the UK's number 1 enemy, Salmond, here, in the beachhead which he has established in Scotland
The future of the United Kingdom will be decided right here, in Scotland. This is the political battleground. The attack on the UK began when a Labour Government and Donald Dewar created the Scottish Parliament. That was the equivalent of offering the SNP a beachhead and Alex Salmond has long since secured it.
The SNP have carried out political guerrilla raids, creating as many divides as possible, giving away freebies here to cause disgruntlement in England. The Scottish Parliament has been the battlefield tank forcing divides over student fees, prescription charges, and so called free home care. Even Tories in Holyrood have succumbed to the momentum, believing somehow that more autonomous power will mend the widening gap.
The shockwaves are now rippling to the surface, discombobulating the English, many of whom are now reacting exactly as Salmond wishes. We now see the predictable reaction which Salmond wanted as formerly sober minds in England call for an English Parliament.
They would rue it - we all will.
Already, in Scotland, MPs and the proper Parliament are being alienated from the electorate.
Very few people ever go to see an MP about a reserved powers issue - people need to see their highest elected representatives about more domestic concerns: housing, hospitals, pharmacies or schools threatened with closure, vandalism, crime rates and police numbers, yes, even dog dirt. In Scotland, this means that MSPs have the better interface with the electorate while our Scottish MPs become aloof, are channelled towards weighty national and international issues.
These are vital issues but the interaction of Westminster MPs and British subjects in Scotland, and Wales, is waning; the domestic issues that keep MPs in touch, which keep their feet on the ground, are no longer there in Scotland.
The same happening in England as well, will make the UK government increasingly remote from the people. The "assemblies" will become the focus and the Union will erode; that is why I say we must not replicate the error of the devolved bodies as constituted.
UKIP has a firm and sensible policy on this: the electorate should elect one MP for their constituency and that MP should be in Westminster most of the time and in the devolved more local parliament for the remainder.
The devolved body, the Scottish Parliament here, would continue as it is, but devoid of MSPs. In England, when Welsh and Scottish MPs are at work in their devolved home, English MPs would deal with England’s devolved issues. That means both UK national and domestic roles remained linked, through MPs who will keep a direct interface with the electorate and, exactly what is needed, excessive government is cut with fewer politicians overall with time on their hands to think of ways to rule us.
UK party leaders must not be tempted to balance the books by adding more overloaded assemblies to the mix - trim out instead - and engage the UK's number 1 enemy, Salmond, here, in the beachhead which he has established in Scotland
Friday, 20 January 2012
Vote UK Out of EU
I welcome the increasing mood across the country to challenge the government over membership of the EU.
Vote UK Out of EU has been set up by a businessman and the Electoral Reform Society will oversee a referendum in the constituencies of the Coalition leaders. The message has to be heard at some point - and the clarity of though displayed by Vote UK Out of EU is a lesson to the SNP, Cameron and others dithering over a vote on Scottish separation from the UK.
UKIP policy is that there should be a referendum on Scottish separation - it is Scotland's right to choice. UKIP, however, will campaign to keep the United Kingdom intact."
Vote UK Out of EU has been set up by a businessman and the Electoral Reform Society will oversee a referendum in the constituencies of the Coalition leaders. The message has to be heard at some point - and the clarity of though displayed by Vote UK Out of EU is a lesson to the SNP, Cameron and others dithering over a vote on Scottish separation from the UK.
UKIP policy is that there should be a referendum on Scottish separation - it is Scotland's right to choice. UKIP, however, will campaign to keep the United Kingdom intact."
Sunday, 15 January 2012
EU rules prevented checks for faulty implants
EU rules prevented checks for faulty implants
Britain's Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), in some circumstances, is prevented by legislation from carrying out full checks on medical products, including PIP breast implants. UKIP's Chairman in Scotland, Mike Scott-Hayward, is quoting work done by UKIP MEP Paul Nuttall.
"Paul has found that under EU law, national regulatory authorities can grant their own companies and products a CE (European Conformity) mark, which provides a guarantee of quality. EU law then forbids other national regulatory authorities, from conducting further checks.
"Apparently, in the case of the PIP implants, the French authorities granted the appropriate status. MHRA was obliged to permit the import and marketing of the implants as they bore the CE mark, and could not carry out their own checks.
"French Authorities did finally shut down PIP, but not before 40,000 British women had been fitted with these faulty implants. The MHRA is forced, under EU law, to permit the import and marketing of any device which bears a CE mark, even though it has no direct jurisdiction over the manufacturer.
Mr Nuttall said: "The blame is not with the clinics, nor is it with the British regulators - the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). The real responsibility lies in a combination of regulatory failure in France, and then EU laws that prevent British authorities from protecting British consumers."
Mr Nuttall added: "I am writing to the European Commission to demand that in the future British authorities be allowed to make quality control border and spot checks on imported CE marked products, in order that they can in future do their job and protect the interests of British consumers." He is also calling on the Government to require the French authorities to provide compensation that will allow private clinics to remove and replace implants without being driven to bankruptcy through no fault of their own.
Britain's Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), in some circumstances, is prevented by legislation from carrying out full checks on medical products, including PIP breast implants. UKIP's Chairman in Scotland, Mike Scott-Hayward, is quoting work done by UKIP MEP Paul Nuttall.
"Paul has found that under EU law, national regulatory authorities can grant their own companies and products a CE (European Conformity) mark, which provides a guarantee of quality. EU law then forbids other national regulatory authorities, from conducting further checks.
"Apparently, in the case of the PIP implants, the French authorities granted the appropriate status. MHRA was obliged to permit the import and marketing of the implants as they bore the CE mark, and could not carry out their own checks.
"French Authorities did finally shut down PIP, but not before 40,000 British women had been fitted with these faulty implants. The MHRA is forced, under EU law, to permit the import and marketing of any device which bears a CE mark, even though it has no direct jurisdiction over the manufacturer.
Mr Nuttall said: "The blame is not with the clinics, nor is it with the British regulators - the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). The real responsibility lies in a combination of regulatory failure in France, and then EU laws that prevent British authorities from protecting British consumers."
Mr Nuttall added: "I am writing to the European Commission to demand that in the future British authorities be allowed to make quality control border and spot checks on imported CE marked products, in order that they can in future do their job and protect the interests of British consumers." He is also calling on the Government to require the French authorities to provide compensation that will allow private clinics to remove and replace implants without being driven to bankruptcy through no fault of their own.
Wednesday, 2 November 2011
Fife Council - Pick a School - but only the one we allow....
Mike Scott-Hayward, UKIP councillor, has declared that Fife Council is now seen BY MANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC as being guilty of using guesswork to determine public opinion, and technological flannel to circumvent consultation.
"The councillors on the Education Committee should avoid the mistakes made by the Policy Finance and Asset Management Committee (PFAM) when deciding the future of secondary education in North East Fife. PFAM rejected a proposal to have a referendum of parents and locals to assess whether or not full reliance should fall on a single new, and therefore large, secondary on a site in St Andrews, or two smaller schools - one for St Andrews and the other for the Tay Bridgehead.
"The view in support of two schools has been quoted in local newspapers, but mention of that is ruled out, almost forbidden, by the parties in power; one of which was elected on the promise of two schools. Labour opposition also stands against a Bridgehead school.
"The rejection of asking the people, whom we trust to elect governments, means we are now either in the hands of the unelected wielding complex matrixes, the tick box approach, or in the hands of ad hoc groups pushing single views. I applaud the effort of those who have raised a petition of over 2000 names but note that sadly, those signing were offered only one choice to support.
"Others have raised the very valid point that one option, South Street, is ruled out simply because the size of school serving the whole area won't fit there, and on transportation grounds, too many busses: a two school option would allow that choice to be on the table and also cut bussing - now a seemingly also banned topic.
"No one now knows what level of support there is in reality for two schools; nor does anyone really know the level of support for each possible site in St Andrews. We would do, though, had PFAM not chucked out the idea of a referendum, which the Conservatives and I had proposed. This way, the Council's way, means we will all still be in the dark. The lid will not go back on this can of worms by these means. Do the public even know that they could have had a referendum?"
Cllr Scott-Hayward was also critical of the consultation with parents. "The first meeting of the so called working group, decided that the impact of public opinion had to be a criteria in the magic matrix, the table to be used to assess options. I asked if the assessing group would include parents or public and was soundly told that the assessment was a matter for the experts! At the meeting of Fife Council, I asked how officers would determine 'public opinion' and the Leader of the Administration told me that there are officers who are well versed in assessing public reactions. Yet at the meeting informing parents of the result of the deliberations, the first point made by officers was that they had decided to merge that criteria with others as they found it too difficult to assess and so public views will only be able to made as part of the planning application process. That, of course, is post decision.
"It's a mess"
"The councillors on the Education Committee should avoid the mistakes made by the Policy Finance and Asset Management Committee (PFAM) when deciding the future of secondary education in North East Fife. PFAM rejected a proposal to have a referendum of parents and locals to assess whether or not full reliance should fall on a single new, and therefore large, secondary on a site in St Andrews, or two smaller schools - one for St Andrews and the other for the Tay Bridgehead.
"The view in support of two schools has been quoted in local newspapers, but mention of that is ruled out, almost forbidden, by the parties in power; one of which was elected on the promise of two schools. Labour opposition also stands against a Bridgehead school.
"The rejection of asking the people, whom we trust to elect governments, means we are now either in the hands of the unelected wielding complex matrixes, the tick box approach, or in the hands of ad hoc groups pushing single views. I applaud the effort of those who have raised a petition of over 2000 names but note that sadly, those signing were offered only one choice to support.
"Others have raised the very valid point that one option, South Street, is ruled out simply because the size of school serving the whole area won't fit there, and on transportation grounds, too many busses: a two school option would allow that choice to be on the table and also cut bussing - now a seemingly also banned topic.
"No one now knows what level of support there is in reality for two schools; nor does anyone really know the level of support for each possible site in St Andrews. We would do, though, had PFAM not chucked out the idea of a referendum, which the Conservatives and I had proposed. This way, the Council's way, means we will all still be in the dark. The lid will not go back on this can of worms by these means. Do the public even know that they could have had a referendum?"
Cllr Scott-Hayward was also critical of the consultation with parents. "The first meeting of the so called working group, decided that the impact of public opinion had to be a criteria in the magic matrix, the table to be used to assess options. I asked if the assessing group would include parents or public and was soundly told that the assessment was a matter for the experts! At the meeting of Fife Council, I asked how officers would determine 'public opinion' and the Leader of the Administration told me that there are officers who are well versed in assessing public reactions. Yet at the meeting informing parents of the result of the deliberations, the first point made by officers was that they had decided to merge that criteria with others as they found it too difficult to assess and so public views will only be able to made as part of the planning application process. That, of course, is post decision.
"It's a mess"
Friday, 2 September 2011
Falkland Responds
Thanks to the Fife Herald publishing my call for a referendum in Falkland, local people got up a petition. Now the SNP councillor is delighted!
And I don't mind in the least that he is now following UKIP policy. He might have said thanks!
He will now carry the message of the people to the Council - they do not want "no alcohol" on the village green. We'll see; local Lib Dems are for the ban - one of them, a leading light, even said that I should stay away as he was best placed to decide who should vote in any referendum...........
You couldn't make it up.
And I don't mind in the least that he is now following UKIP policy. He might have said thanks!
He will now carry the message of the people to the Council - they do not want "no alcohol" on the village green. We'll see; local Lib Dems are for the ban - one of them, a leading light, even said that I should stay away as he was best placed to decide who should vote in any referendum...........
You couldn't make it up.
Wednesday, 17 August 2011
Let the Villagers decide.....
The Community Council in Falkland, Fife, wants the Scottish Parliament to approve an alcohol free zone in the viallge.
I think that all the residents of Falkland should be given the opportunity to comment on whether or not the village should be an alcohol free zone.
UKIP policy is to have a local referendum on such issues - it could very easily be organised by the Community Council by simple having a copy of the electoral register to hand, crossing out the names of those appearing to cast a vote, and asking them to fill in a simple slip.
There are always strong views on both sides of this sort of matter and unless there is an over-riding issue, local views should swing the day. A good turnout will soon let all vested interest know the real common view.
I think that all the residents of Falkland should be given the opportunity to comment on whether or not the village should be an alcohol free zone.
UKIP policy is to have a local referendum on such issues - it could very easily be organised by the Community Council by simple having a copy of the electoral register to hand, crossing out the names of those appearing to cast a vote, and asking them to fill in a simple slip.
There are always strong views on both sides of this sort of matter and unless there is an over-riding issue, local views should swing the day. A good turnout will soon let all vested interest know the real common view.
Wednesday, 20 July 2011
RAF Leuchars closure and UK's Defences
Whilst the impact on St Andrews matters locally, the economic implications will be balanced by the use of the base by the army.
The real implications of what the Cameron and Clegg Government, however, is doing is unforgiveable.
From the time he first came forward to lead the Conservatives, in a contest against David Davies, Cameron dismayed me - he showed then in answers to questions about restoring our traditional regiments, that he has a poor grasp of the overall value of the Armed Forces. It is one reason why I left the Conservatives and joined UKIP.
Other politicians have been parochially vigorous but have not put their careers on the line in the defence of the Armed Services overall. This base closure is just another drastic step in a disastrous chain of events which MPS have sat and watched - indeed, condoned.
Coupled with the concept of building aircraftless aircraft carriers, scrapping ships and reducing the Britsih Army to the point where they couldn't fill Wembley Stadium, this new round of cuts puts us in a position now where we will not be able properly to defend the interests and safety of Britons. The Coalition clearly believes our future role is to play a second fiddle within a European Union Force. Holding on to the nuclear deterrent is all that will gives us credibility within that Force. Balance has gone - the impact is greater than any local disruption we may see North East Fife in the base changing from the RAF to the Army. Folk need to look at policies in future and not have simple pavlovian responses when we have the chance to influence, or choose, future governments.
The real implications of what the Cameron and Clegg Government, however, is doing is unforgiveable.
From the time he first came forward to lead the Conservatives, in a contest against David Davies, Cameron dismayed me - he showed then in answers to questions about restoring our traditional regiments, that he has a poor grasp of the overall value of the Armed Forces. It is one reason why I left the Conservatives and joined UKIP.
Other politicians have been parochially vigorous but have not put their careers on the line in the defence of the Armed Services overall. This base closure is just another drastic step in a disastrous chain of events which MPS have sat and watched - indeed, condoned.
Coupled with the concept of building aircraftless aircraft carriers, scrapping ships and reducing the Britsih Army to the point where they couldn't fill Wembley Stadium, this new round of cuts puts us in a position now where we will not be able properly to defend the interests and safety of Britons. The Coalition clearly believes our future role is to play a second fiddle within a European Union Force. Holding on to the nuclear deterrent is all that will gives us credibility within that Force. Balance has gone - the impact is greater than any local disruption we may see North East Fife in the base changing from the RAF to the Army. Folk need to look at policies in future and not have simple pavlovian responses when we have the chance to influence, or choose, future governments.
Tuesday, 5 July 2011
Fife Health Board Experiment going wrong........
It is time to question the value of the elected local Health Board being piloted in Fife.
The Health Board is in charge of NHS Fife - with half its members being elected. This is a move designed to make the Board more accountable to users, more democratic and in tune with local need.
Well, that is falling apart, as far as I am concerned. I have watched in disbelief as the Board has jiggled pharmacy services in Leuchars and Balmullo, going from bad to worse. In an exercise which now seems to me to have been designed to kick the issue into long grass, the Board set up a special sub committee to examine and resolve the question of who gets what pharmacy in this rural part of Fife.
Two appointed board members were joined by two elected members, none of whom, I understand, represents East Fife, to make the important decision to either allow the GPs in Balmullo to have a pharmacy, or not.
The vote against the local plans, supported by the local people, was 3 to 1 against local needs. I don't call that a system designed to represent local views.
UKIP has a policy whereby this is exactly the sort of issue that should be decided by a local referendum - especially where a so-called local board is seen to be biased against local views.
The Health Board is in charge of NHS Fife - with half its members being elected. This is a move designed to make the Board more accountable to users, more democratic and in tune with local need.
Well, that is falling apart, as far as I am concerned. I have watched in disbelief as the Board has jiggled pharmacy services in Leuchars and Balmullo, going from bad to worse. In an exercise which now seems to me to have been designed to kick the issue into long grass, the Board set up a special sub committee to examine and resolve the question of who gets what pharmacy in this rural part of Fife.
Two appointed board members were joined by two elected members, none of whom, I understand, represents East Fife, to make the important decision to either allow the GPs in Balmullo to have a pharmacy, or not.
The vote against the local plans, supported by the local people, was 3 to 1 against local needs. I don't call that a system designed to represent local views.
UKIP has a policy whereby this is exactly the sort of issue that should be decided by a local referendum - especially where a so-called local board is seen to be biased against local views.
Monday, 25 April 2011
Let the People decide...............
The elephant in the room is the European union bureaucracy against whose weight I will always lean. But I am realistic – as an MSP I want to remove the gags now placed on your councillors, who should be free to fight for their people.
We must introduce ways in which we, local people, will have the final say in what goes on in our communities. Planning appeals must be decided by the vote of local communities, not by remote imposed Reporters. They will advise: we will decide.
I want referenda on Scottish Independence and on our EU membership.
We must introduce ways in which we, local people, will have the final say in what goes on in our communities. Planning appeals must be decided by the vote of local communities, not by remote imposed Reporters. They will advise: we will decide.
I want referenda on Scottish Independence and on our EU membership.
Tuesday, 12 April 2011
STANDING IN NORTH EAST FIFE
I want the powers over our daily lives and our county’s future to be in our own hands. We, the people, must have the right to a local referendum over important local issues, such as major local planning decisions, over windfarms, the future of school and libraries etc.
I will be available to discuss policies and local issues from 6.30 pm to 7 .30:
Wednesday 20th April - Kingskettle Primary School
Thursday 21st April - Wormit Primary School
Tuesday 26th April – Pittenweem Primary School
Thursday 28th April – Auchtermuchty Primary School
Tuesday 3rd May – Newburgh Primary School
I am also holding a
PUBLIC MEETING
LARGOWARD COMMUNITY HALL
Tuesday 19th April from 7 pm
Accompanied by CHRISTOPHER MONCKTON
Renowned Anthropogenic Climate Change Sceptic and UKIP Lead Candidate for Mid Scotland and Fife
Promoted and published by Mike Scott-Hayward, Sawmill House, Kemback Bridge, Fife KY15 5TP on his own behalf
I will be available to discuss policies and local issues from 6.30 pm to 7 .30:
Wednesday 20th April - Kingskettle Primary School
Thursday 21st April - Wormit Primary School
Tuesday 26th April – Pittenweem Primary School
Thursday 28th April – Auchtermuchty Primary School
Tuesday 3rd May – Newburgh Primary School
I am also holding a
PUBLIC MEETING
LARGOWARD COMMUNITY HALL
Tuesday 19th April from 7 pm
Accompanied by CHRISTOPHER MONCKTON
Renowned Anthropogenic Climate Change Sceptic and UKIP Lead Candidate for Mid Scotland and Fife
Promoted and published by Mike Scott-Hayward, Sawmill House, Kemback Bridge, Fife KY15 5TP on his own behalf
Saturday, 5 February 2011
Bats - did you know?
The Committee of Auchtermuchty Landscape and Environment Group are concerned about windfarms being installed throughout Fife and beyond. You may not be aware of the threat to bats posed by wind turbines and the fact that the legal position in Europe is that in order to implement the EU Habitats and Species Directive, Member States have to enact their own domestic legislation, and in the UK this is done through the Conservation (Natural Habitats etc.) Regulations 1994 (amended in Scotland in 2004). The European Commission keeps a close eye on how well member States are implementing the Directive. During the past couple of years, the UK has been obliged to make some changes. Thus in the UK, the legal protection of bats was strengthened in relation to the EU Habitats Directive, and in Scotland the previous laws were again amended. We now have: The Conservation (Natural Habitats etc.) Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2007. This states that “It is an Offence, intentionally or recklessly, to kill, injure or take a bat.”
Moving towards more Private Care Homes
Scotland's only UKIP councillor, Mike Scott-Hayward, believes that there should be an end to the expressions of alarm at the change in direction of the management and operation of Fife Council care homes.
"As long ago as 2001, I could see that the direction now decided upon was necessary: the Council simply does not deliver as much care as can be achieved by using the private and voluntary sector. There are too many people, some councillors included, who are hung up on an ideology that the job can only be safely done by the council.
"That simply is not the case. Already, nine out of ten people in care homes in Fife are in the private and voluntary sector. The Care Commission sets and inspects the standards, be that in private or public sector. Clearly, the 3000 spaces delivered in Fife, only ten percent of which are by the Council, meet the standards and generally do so well.
"I have no criticism of the standard of care in council run homes; and certainly no criticism of the staff. Indeed, many staff in private homes joined from council run homes. The problem with delivery by the Council is in the nature of the beast: budgets are set by a bureaucracy, then spent regardless, mostly using laborious and convoluted procurement processes. The "state" usually makes a pig's ear of delivering new builds. The cost of new council owned and operated homes is not as efficient as can be achieved in the private sector.
"Moreover, the running cost, because of the bureaucrat systems, of a council home is more expensive, approaching almost twice as much, as the private sector.
"Ten years ago, and repeatedly since then, I advanced the budget proposal for a phased changeover to increased private sector use. The move now, belated as it is, was inevitable - it is a logical and sensible step, and not one for any alarm.
"Councillors, both in the opposition and some in the administration who equivocate seeking popularity, should stop disparaging this new sensible approach. The provision will still be local, will still be subject to the Care Commission regime, and will be able to provide for more people who need the care. The plan does not portend the end of care, or the turfing out of those currently in council care."
"As long ago as 2001, I could see that the direction now decided upon was necessary: the Council simply does not deliver as much care as can be achieved by using the private and voluntary sector. There are too many people, some councillors included, who are hung up on an ideology that the job can only be safely done by the council.
"That simply is not the case. Already, nine out of ten people in care homes in Fife are in the private and voluntary sector. The Care Commission sets and inspects the standards, be that in private or public sector. Clearly, the 3000 spaces delivered in Fife, only ten percent of which are by the Council, meet the standards and generally do so well.
"I have no criticism of the standard of care in council run homes; and certainly no criticism of the staff. Indeed, many staff in private homes joined from council run homes. The problem with delivery by the Council is in the nature of the beast: budgets are set by a bureaucracy, then spent regardless, mostly using laborious and convoluted procurement processes. The "state" usually makes a pig's ear of delivering new builds. The cost of new council owned and operated homes is not as efficient as can be achieved in the private sector.
"Moreover, the running cost, because of the bureaucrat systems, of a council home is more expensive, approaching almost twice as much, as the private sector.
"Ten years ago, and repeatedly since then, I advanced the budget proposal for a phased changeover to increased private sector use. The move now, belated as it is, was inevitable - it is a logical and sensible step, and not one for any alarm.
"Councillors, both in the opposition and some in the administration who equivocate seeking popularity, should stop disparaging this new sensible approach. The provision will still be local, will still be subject to the Care Commission regime, and will be able to provide for more people who need the care. The plan does not portend the end of care, or the turfing out of those currently in council care."
Votes for Convicts? I don't believe it!
I take my hat off to Jack Straw and David Davis - they are doing what the government ought to do - standing up for our sovereingty.
It is the sovereign right of the British to decide who shall represent us in Parliament, and who shall have the right to vote for what should be our wholly sovereign parliament.
Messrs Straw and Davis rightly wan to block prisoners, people who have gone beyond the law, from having the right to vote. The EU has dictated that prisoners should have that right - and the Coalition Government is rolling over for them. Cameron pledged he would not surrender any more sovereignty; here another slice will go unless Straw and Davis succeed in getting the support of parliament. Parliament can assert our sovereignty, even if Cameron and Clegg are too weak to stand up against the EU.
I applaud Straw and Davis - but it is only an element of what is necessary: there are those of us who would reclaim all our sovereignty.
Mike Scott-Hayward
UKIP
It is the sovereign right of the British to decide who shall represent us in Parliament, and who shall have the right to vote for what should be our wholly sovereign parliament.
Messrs Straw and Davis rightly wan to block prisoners, people who have gone beyond the law, from having the right to vote. The EU has dictated that prisoners should have that right - and the Coalition Government is rolling over for them. Cameron pledged he would not surrender any more sovereignty; here another slice will go unless Straw and Davis succeed in getting the support of parliament. Parliament can assert our sovereignty, even if Cameron and Clegg are too weak to stand up against the EU.
I applaud Straw and Davis - but it is only an element of what is necessary: there are those of us who would reclaim all our sovereignty.
Mike Scott-Hayward
UKIP
Friday, 24 December 2010
Nick Clegg, Vince Cable and the Lib Dems just don't get it
Nick Clegg, Vince Cable and the Lib Dems just don't get it. MPs' surgeries, supported by taxpayers' funds, are indeed confidential and are for the purpose of dealing with constituents facing some difficulty or other.
The confidentiality of a surgery does provide cover for the MP to parade their egos, to boast of their use of official powers to pursue a personal ideology or a secret party political aim (itself wholly reprehensible behaviour, well exposed here!), or to insult other MPs. The MP must know that, and should appraise the constituent, real or impostor, of the form, rather than themselves misbehave.
Too late to appeal to the third umpire; they were naive, and well caught behind the wicket.
The confidentiality of a surgery does provide cover for the MP to parade their egos, to boast of their use of official powers to pursue a personal ideology or a secret party political aim (itself wholly reprehensible behaviour, well exposed here!), or to insult other MPs. The MP must know that, and should appraise the constituent, real or impostor, of the form, rather than themselves misbehave.
Too late to appeal to the third umpire; they were naive, and well caught behind the wicket.
Thursday, 6 May 2010
Finally, before you place your cross today....
A remimder:
The Treaty of Lisbon (initially known as the Reform Treaty) is a treaty that was signed by the European Union (EU) member states on 13 December 2007, and entered into force on 1 December 2009. It amends the Treaty on European Union (TEU, Maastricht; 1992) and the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC, Rome; 1957). In this process, the TEC was renamed to Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).
Of which Article 288 states:
A regulation shall have general application. It shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
A directive shall be binding, as to the result to be achieved, upon each Member State to which it is addressed, but shall leave to the national authorities the choice of form and methods.
A decision shall be binding in its entirety. A decision which specifies those to whom it is addressed shall be binding only on them.
Recommendations and opinions shall have no binding force.
The Treaty of Lisbon (initially known as the Reform Treaty) is a treaty that was signed by the European Union (EU) member states on 13 December 2007, and entered into force on 1 December 2009. It amends the Treaty on European Union (TEU, Maastricht; 1992) and the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC, Rome; 1957). In this process, the TEC was renamed to Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).
Of which Article 288 states:
A regulation shall have general application. It shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
A directive shall be binding, as to the result to be achieved, upon each Member State to which it is addressed, but shall leave to the national authorities the choice of form and methods.
A decision shall be binding in its entirety. A decision which specifies those to whom it is addressed shall be binding only on them.
Recommendations and opinions shall have no binding force.
Wednesday, 5 May 2010
It's nearly time......
You should vote for UKIP for North East Fife because our policies would
• End the poverty trap with the combination of benefits and income tax plans
• Make no cuts in NHS frontline services
• Move to a universal non means tested Citizen’s Pension of £130 pw each
• Invest £1.5bn in new social housing immediately we are free of the EU
• Invest £3bn in the UK’s road and railway infrastructure
• Introduce binding local referenda on important major planning decisions
• End undemocratic planning targets in favour of local decision-making
• Old railway lines to be re-opened: a chance for St Andrews rail link.
• Abolish the Scottish Reporter: Local Referenda have final say.
• Bring RAF up to strength with extra 6,000 personnel
• Buy C17s, add 50 more Typhoons.
• Enlarge the tanker fleet
• Buy more helicopters and put Maritime Patrol aircraft back on track.
You should vote for me as I have shown my commitment as a long standing councillor and I am the only candidate who cares enough for North East Fife to have made my home here. I will work as ever without fear or favour.
• End the poverty trap with the combination of benefits and income tax plans
• Make no cuts in NHS frontline services
• Move to a universal non means tested Citizen’s Pension of £130 pw each
• Invest £1.5bn in new social housing immediately we are free of the EU
• Invest £3bn in the UK’s road and railway infrastructure
• Introduce binding local referenda on important major planning decisions
• End undemocratic planning targets in favour of local decision-making
• Old railway lines to be re-opened: a chance for St Andrews rail link.
• Abolish the Scottish Reporter: Local Referenda have final say.
• Bring RAF up to strength with extra 6,000 personnel
• Buy C17s, add 50 more Typhoons.
• Enlarge the tanker fleet
• Buy more helicopters and put Maritime Patrol aircraft back on track.
You should vote for me as I have shown my commitment as a long standing councillor and I am the only candidate who cares enough for North East Fife to have made my home here. I will work as ever without fear or favour.
Sunday, 2 May 2010
Candidate Briggs (Con)
Miles Briggs (con), in his election address, a "record of action" in North East Fife, says "I believe we live in one of the best parts of Scotland." Implication?
Truth: Miles lives in Edinburgh. What's the harm in that?
Promoted by Mike Scott-Hayward of Sawmill House, Kemback Bridge, Fife KY15 5TP on his own behalf.
Truth: Miles lives in Edinburgh. What's the harm in that?
Promoted by Mike Scott-Hayward of Sawmill House, Kemback Bridge, Fife KY15 5TP on his own behalf.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)