Banner

General

By G.A.Ponsonby
 
A women’s campaign group has condemned remarks made by Scottish Labour MP Ian Davidson to a female MP describing them as evidence of “persistent sexism rooted in political and parliamentary culture”.
 
The newly launched “Counting Women In” (CWI) campaign published a letter today in response to the escalating row over ‘threatening’ remarks made by Davidson to female MP Dr Eilidh Whiteford.

Davidson is alleged to have said to Ms Whiteford that she would get “a doing” if details of a private committee meeting were leaked to the media.

Today the Labour MP issued a statement saying he apologised for "any offence that might have been caused".  However Dr Whiteford has rejected the partial apology and called for Labour leader Ed Miliband to investigate Mr Davidson’s conduct.

Commenting on the Labour MP’s remarks CWI said: “The remarks from Mr. Davidson were exposed by Dr. Whiteford and witnessed by other MPs and Committee officials.

“Mr Davidson’s alleged threat to give Dr. Whiteford “a doing”, and his subsequent – and bewildering - clarification that his remark was “not intended as a sexual threat” underscore the extent of persistent sexism rooted in political and parliamentary culture.”

CWI criticised the slow pace of change at Westminster where men outnumber women by four to one, and claimed that females were “undervalued” and “disrespected”.

The group, who include respected academics from Glasgow and Edinburgh Universities as well as representatives from groups such as ‘Zero Tolerance’, added: “The allegations from Dr. Whiteford go well beyond party politics and our reaction and condemnation is not party-aligned.

“This incident is the latest evidence of the dominance of a sexist and antiquated political culture that underlies our political and economic institutions. So long as sexism is left unchallenged, and ‘casual’ references to violence are left unchecked and unsanctioned, women will continue to be held at arms’ length from the political process.

“Dr. Whiteford has made clear she has spoken out about the incident on the basis that it is unacceptable behaviour in any circumstance, and in recognition of the many women who experience intimidation and threats of violence. It is in that spirit that we support Dr. Whiteford’s stance.”

SNP Westminster leader Angus Robertson welcomed the publication of a letter, endorsed by the academics and equality organisations, backing Dr Whiteford’s stance.

Mr Robertson said:

“Ian Davidson’s behaviour was inappropriate in any circumstances, but it is especially unfitting from the chairman of a parliamentary committee.

“One of the ugliest aspects around this has been the way people around Mr Davidson have immediately sought to attack Eilidh Whiteford for having the courage to speak out.

“In contrast, it is encouraging that organisations and individuals outwith parliament have been swift to condemn Mr Davidson’s remarks and, given his own reluctance to take responsibility for his
behaviour, the question is now for the Labour party over what action it will take.”

Responding to Mr Davidson’s belated apology Dr Whiteford said:

“This was an empty apology from Ian Davidson who clearly, still, does not recognise why his comments during and after last week's meeting were inherently threatening and unacceptable.

“We know now that at least one other member of the committee heard his remarks, and understand that another member passed him a note regarding his comments. I accept that some members of the committee did not hear the remarks, given that they were, as Mr McGovern seems to acknowledge, made in a casual, throwaway manner.  For me, this only served to reinforce their menacing nature, a menace that was compounded by Mr Davidson's subsequent comments immediately following the meeting.

“There is no context in or out of Parliament where such comments are acceptable, and I am surprised that anyone would try to minimise, brush off or try to justify the remarks made by Mr Davidson.

“I am not prepared to be threatened and intimidated, and until Mr Davidson takes responsibility for his behaviour I regret that I will not be returning to the committee.”

Yesterday Labour claimed that no such remarks had been made by Mr Davidson and the claims were an SNP ‘smear campaign’.  However today another un-named committee attendee has confirmed that the remarks were indeed made by the Scottish MP. 

Labour also initially questioned why it had taken a week for the complaint to be made, however it has since emerged that the complaint was made within hours of Davidson making the remark.

Today Labour defended Mr Davidson by describing the remarks as “throwaway”.  The party insist the SNP are simply trying to ‘orchestrate’ Mr Davidson’s removal from the Scottish Affairs Committee.

Comments  

 
# enneffess 2011-10-26 19:05
I cannot see any justification for Davidson remaining on the committee. Even if it was a throwaway remark, the bottom line is that he has damaged his reputation anyway.

But I am a little bit concerned about CWI and comments about Westminster male MPs outnumbering females by a ratio of 4:1.

The last thing we want is a return to "Blair's Babes".

Prospective MPs (and MSPs) should be selected purely on ability. We know this does not always happen (the parachute in a safe seat syndrome), but we cannot start allocating numbers based on gender, or any other criteria.

CWI are talking about institutionalis ed sexism. They are in danger of diluting the criticism of Davidson's remarks. The focus should purely be on his removal without bringing in politcal correctness.
 
 
# gedguy2 2011-10-26 19:52
In my heart I tend to agree with the thrust of your argument but this country is still coming out of a society that saw women as second class citizens. I can remember the time when my mother was unable to get HP [credit for you younger ones] without my father's written permission. [I know some men who would be happy returning to that position] Therefore, to get women back on to an equal playing field with men we are going to have to do this until, basically, the old guard dies out.
 
 
# enneffess 2011-10-26 21:42
I know what you are saying, but artificially increasing the number of female MPs is asking for trouble. The parties make the selections - applying a legal framework is an attack on democracy.

But I'll agree with whatever my wife tells me!!
 
 
# gedguy2 2011-10-26 22:00
The only time I ever agreed with my wife was when she asked for a divorce. Oh happy days.
 
 
# Mad Jock McMad 2011-10-26 20:16
The Chairmanship of the committee is worth another near £16k a year into his trousers plus enhancing his MP pension for Davidson.

That is right Davidson gets the average wage of nearly 600,000 Scots to chair this farrago of a committee on top of his MP salary plus additional expenses allowance as a select committee chair.

Does anyone think this clown is worth and extra £16k a year of our money?
 
 
# Aucheorn 2011-10-26 22:21
Prospective candidates have been chosen on the basis of their gender since parliament started. It so happens that they’re men. How else can you explain many of those incompetents who currently pick up an MP’s salary. Ian Davidson is an extreme example, and remember that tory who force-fed his child a burger during the BSE scare (cant remember his name. He was responsible for agriculture but he was fairly incompetent, so how did he get there? I could go on and on. Yes, there are dumb women, but so too are there dumb men. So lets not fool ourselves that men are selected purely on merit.
 
 
# Aplinal 2011-10-26 19:08
I wonder if the subsequent 'revelation' that Labour's initial response was inaccurate (I am being polite her) will get any feature in the MSM? I will not be holding my breath.

So it wasn't a lie then?
So it WAS heard by others
So it wasn't a smear campaign
So the complaint WAS made immediately

Labour - and Davidson - where are your apologies?
 
 
# UpSpake 2011-10-26 19:17
I equally cannot see the justification for Davidson or, the committee he sits on. No SNP member should be part of it anyway. It is a divisive unionist device to undermine. Of little relevence and ignored by almost everybody. Without controversy, how would really notice these bunch of non-entities ?.
 
 
# jafurn 2011-10-26 19:19
Interesting to contrast the reaction of labour when one of their members was told to 'calm down dear'to what they are saying about this which I think is at least as serious if not more so.

Labour fury as David Cameron tells Angela Eagle: 'Calm down, dear'




Labour's official spokesman branded his remarks as "sexist, insulting and patronising". The party called on Cameron to apologise, saying his comments had been, at the least, not prime ministerial and were arrogant.


Labour's deputy leader, Harriet Harman, said: "David Cameron's contemptuous response to Angela Eagle MP at prime minister's questions today shows his patronising and outdated attitude to women.

"Women in Britain in the 21st century do not expect to be told to 'calm down, dear' by their prime minister."

I would like to hear Harriet Harmon's response to this incident.
 
 
# jafurn 2011-10-26 19:23
Sorry I meant to put the source for thesecomments.
guardian.co.uk/.../...
 
 
# Islegard 2011-10-26 19:20
If Davidson was in a real job his comments would see him facing police questioning and disciplinary action probably resulting in sacking. The other aspect to this is everyone backing him. The Labour Party are saying it's ok to threaten to physically abuse women we're assuming there was no sexual connotation.
Labour are rotten and corrupt to the core. They subvert democracy, steal from the public by commiting fraud and now threaten violence against women.
 
 
# James Irvine 2011-10-26 20:46
It's not just the Labour Party, it's the media as well. The main media in Scotland are backing Davidson - I don't think I've been more disgusted by their behaviour.
 
 
# Angus Ogg 2011-10-26 19:20
It takes a very special kind of woman to work in the environment that the Commons is. It is a medieval macho institution full of bigots like Davidson who get to where they are by bullying and intimidation.

Lanarkshire is famous for them. Reid, Ingram, Martin, McCann, and many more. Reid became so much a parody of him self he took to twitching and shadow boxing like a punch drunk corner man when he gave his last speech to labours conference. He should have been on the stage.

The problem with the likes of Davidson is if they ever did meet a real Lanarkshire hard case they would need to don brown trousers, as they are cowards living behind the cloak of Parliament. His last outing on Newsnicht up against Derek McKay showed us just what a shallow man he is lacking in any finesse or intellect. He just shouts others down, he is the other bookend for Curran and wee Cathy. Loud red faced shouty vindictive people, who got to where they are riding the system of reward patronage and entitlement, as embarrassing as Michael Martin, the ex ennobled speaker. If you don't agree with them they resort to threats, empty as they are.

No wonder stands Scotland where it is.


NAE LIMITS.
 
 
# Macart 2011-10-27 07:10
SPOT ON ANGUS, spot on!
 
 
# Roll_On_2011 2011-10-26 19:23
One thing that is puzzling me is the silence emanating from Harriet Harperson, that staunch, vocal, defender and supporter of women’s rights. I can only assume that this is a NuLabour thing.
 
 
# brusque 2011-10-26 19:23
I think Ed Milliband should be "doing" some damage limitation here.

The air was heavy with Labour sleaze yesterday. The implied "lie" by announcing the complaint was an SNP Smear!

And now Davidson thinks all he has to do is smile and say "wisnae meant to offend anyone". His form supports that he has done it before, and unless someone puts his gas at a peep, he will be "doing" it again.

Wee Willie Bain was a disgrace on the Politics Channel when asked if he thought the "apology" was enough, and that Davidson showed no respect..........he launched into wind up mode about how the SNP should respect Scotland. I'm not even wondering when these shysters will be found out! they were found out on taking up their seat in Westminster, it seems that the Labour leader is not prepared to take on the West of Scotland Mafia, even when he has every right, as their leader, to do so!

They are Scotland's shame.
 
 
# Macart 2011-10-27 07:12
Mr Milliband IS doing damage limitation here. I believe the term is COVER UP!
 
 
# Legerwood 2011-10-26 19:26
Quote:
Davidson is alleged to have said to Ms Whiteford that she would get “a doing” if details of a private committee meeting were leaked to the media.


This seems to suggest that Mr Davidson believed Dr Whiteford had previously been the source of leaks from the committee and he was warning her not to leak about the meeting that was taking place. This begs a couple of questions:
i) What evidence did he have that Dr Whiteford had leaked information to the press or was he suggesting that an SNP would always behave in this way?
ii) Were any other members 'fingered' by Mr Davidson as the source of these leaks?

If not then that brings you back to Question i): What evidence did he have that she was the source of the leak or was it just his personal animosity to anything SNP that made him decide she was the leak and to threaten her in this way?
 
 
# Fungus 2011-10-26 20:20
You know it really does not matter a whit whether Davidson thought the leaks were coming from Dr. Whiteford or indeed where they were coming from (if at all). What matter is that this knuckle dragging, mouth breathing, bully of a trougher thought that it was OK to threaten anyone but especially a woman with violence.
 
 
# Legerwood 2011-10-26 22:17
Yes it does matter because it is part and parcel of the disrepsect and bullying directed at her by Davidson.

I have just seen her on Newsnight Scotland and she referred to this issue pointing out that she did not leak material. So not only did he threaten her but he suggested she had behaved in an underhand way by leaking information.
 
 
# the wallace 2011-10-26 19:39
Davidson has propbably just added about another500,0000 female votes to the yes side in the referendum,and labours defense of him will be doing untold damage to them.(good)
 
 
# .Scot 2011-10-26 22:12
The BBC are still even tonight, refusing to broadcast the fact that the incident actually
took place as they are repeating yesterday's old news where "Mr Davidson denies making the remarks" along with "Mr Davidson has now apologised for any distress his remarks may have caused". Both reports can not stand side-by-side! The BBC even called paid license money to have Lorraine Davidson (Any relation?) ex-Labour spin doctor into the studio to imply that Dr Whiteford was a liar and fantasist supporting the Labour claim that this was a plot hatched by the SNP. The SNP are doing it deliberately.
 
 
# Zed 2011-10-26 19:46
Labour response is muddy the waters as best you can. Make it look like it's parties warring against each other.
One side against the other. Her word against his word.
Trivialise it as a throwaway line. Make a partial apology. Let's move on nothing to see here.
WRONG! I hope the SNP are relentless in not only making him resign from the committee but resigning his seat! He is not fit for office of any kind
 
 
# alicmurray 2011-10-26 19:50
Under no circumstances should any woman vote for any member of the labour party until this man goes. Not only that they should not give any money to a party who holds women in such contempt. In addition if you are a member of a union who supports these people then please resign and the goods of any company who finance these people should be boycotted.

It adds insult to injury by London Labour to suggest a smear campaign when a women is threatened with violence for having a difference of opinion with a work colleague.
 
 
# oldnat 2011-10-26 19:58
I've sent this email to Harriet Harman at
harmanh@parliam ent.uk

"I seem to have missed your condemnation of Ian Davidson MP for his suggestion of Eilidh Whiteford MP getting "a doing"

Can you send me a copy?

Thanks."
 
 
# gedguy2 2011-10-26 20:03
lol
 
 
# shackled to a corpse 2011-10-26 20:50
Nice one, Oldnat. It seems to me that this is Ms Harmans first real test of her feminist credentials. A proper opportunity to stand up for women's rights, not a wee pretendy, manufactured incident. Sadly, she has been weighed, and measured, and found wanting.

Quite frankly I think the labour response, to attack the victim, is at least as despicable as the act itself (if not more so as it condones the act, attacks the victim, and perpetuates the cycle of behaviour). These people make me sick.
 
 
# Macart 2011-10-27 07:23
Well done!
 
 
# Astonished 2011-10-26 20:06
Davidson must now go from any public office - simples.

Threatening anyone is unacceptable. The cowardly way he, and the labour party, tried to cover this up is doubly unacceptable.

Secondly those with selective hearing must be forced to explain, publicly, how far away from davidson they were at the relevant moment. And as a consequence of unquestioningly supporting him they must resign from the committee - at the very least.

Thirdly we must find out who at the BBC was responsible for slanting the reporting throughout this saga.


Finally, and most importantly, without newsnetscotland we would be none the wiser.

I doff my cap.
 
 
# Lianachan 2011-10-26 20:10
I would be astonished if any of those things come to pass, sadly.
 
 
# Macart 2011-10-27 07:24
Fraid so Lianachan. This is how its going to be!
 
 
# jafurn 2011-10-26 20:11
On a tangential topic..it concerns Mr Davidson.
I was just watching the recording of the meeting in question

parliamentlive.tv/.../...

In his preamble to the meeting (after reminding members that it was being televised and to mind their language)he raised the issue of the legitimacy of his committee and cited the fact that since63% voted in the 2010 general election and 50% in the Scotish election. He said that more people voted for Scottish members in the general election than did in the Scottish Parliament elections. Therefore ,he concluded that he had a mandate from the people of Scotland. Which would be fine other than for the fact that his committee has 4 English conservative members .
I feel the man should have a serious talk to himself.
 
 
# snowthistle 2011-10-26 20:42
That's a very good point
 
 
# cirsium 2011-10-26 21:03
it would also be fine if the committee actually had a remit to do this. It doesn't. The function of this committee is to scrutinise the Scottish Office. See Alex Salmond's view
holyrood.com/.../salmonds-leap
 
 
# jafurn 2011-10-26 21:29
No argument from me on that but it's quite illuminating to watch them in action...know your enemy.....
 
 
# Scottish republic 2011-10-26 20:14
I came across these ladies on facebook and boy are they ticked off.

Rightly so.

No place in decent society for a bludgeoning bully and certainly no place for this individual in politics.

Brute and bully politics are the politics of the dictator.
 
 
# Mad Jock McMad 2011-10-26 20:17
The Chairmanship of the committee is worth another near £16k a year into his trousers plus enhancing his MP pension for Davidson.

That is right Davidson gets the average wage of nearly 600,000 Scots to chair this farrago of a committee on top of his MP salary plus additional expenses allowance as a select committee chair.

Does anyone think this clown is worth and extra £16k a year of our money on top of the £60k plus he is already packing away?
 
 
# chiefy1724 2011-10-27 09:18
And don't forget all of his arduous work representing the people of Glasgow South West when visiting The Cayman Islands.
 
 
# oldnat 2011-10-26 20:24
This is a comment from an observer of politics over here who is in the "DevoMax" country that is the Isle of Man.

"I begin to wonder about the real problem that there is with some (older, male) sections of Scottish Labour and their pseudo-thuggish behaviour. If you look at those that display these attitudes they seem to be far removed from their working-class roots, having spent their adult lives in politics and/or academia. Or never had any in the first place – George Foulkes went to an English public school for heaven’s sake.
Yet they insist on behaving as if they’ve just come from a Gorbals tenement via a fight in Sauchihall Street (not that either of those ancient Scottish institutions exist anymore). What’s more they expect to have such attitudes accepted, even admired as evidence of their (long-vanished or never-existed) working class credentials.
Is this really protective colouring designed for them to ‘pass’ in the bare-knuckle world of SLab politics? If so are selection committees too stupid to read their CVs and notice their working-class heroes act is a bit of a fake?
In reality I suspect anyone coming up with a genuine hard-scrabble background would be extremely controlled and polite. They’d have to be to succeed. The antics of Davidson, Reid, Foulkes and co were always more about self-indulgence and arrogance and they were allowed to get away with it by a sort of racism (“that’s how the Scots are”). Mind you it wasn’t unknown for Tories to try this on too (think of Teddy Taylor)."
 
 
# Marga B 2011-10-27 09:07
Oldnat - this makes the point that one of the reasons for the Labour hatred of the SNP is a culture clash.

From my limited understanding of such modern ideas, it seems we now have a "liquid society" and the old society with its certainties and dogmas, in which Labour flourished, has gone.

The SNP has shown the ability to respond pragmatically to new problems and to accompany society. Whether it takes this far enough is another matter.
 
 
# jafurn 2011-10-26 20:26
Interesting watching this meeting (parliamentlive.tv/.../...)

There is Mr Davidson taking evidence from MR Moore and Mr MundellI can see now why Mr Salmond said...


holyrood.com/.../...

“There is no one on the Scottish Affairs Select Committee, apart from Eilidh Whiteford [SNP MP for Banff and Buchan] that has a mandate to say anything about a referendum, apart from the fact that they are opposed to it. The only ones with a mandate to say or do anything are the ones sitting in the Scottish Parliament,” Salmond said.

from the same website Mr Moore said

“It is not only right but essential that those elected by the Scottish people can scrutinise the Scottish Government’s case for independence and weigh up its evidence and arguments. If the Scottish Government thinks it can hold a referendum without real scrutiny and full debate, it is badly mistaken.

By his own words he is condemned
'
that those elected by the Scottish people '
How then can he justify this committe with almost 50% of it made up of members never elected by the 'Scottish people '

Roll on the day when we can be rid of these people .
 
 
# shackled to a corpse 2011-10-26 20:53
Quoting jafurn:
Roll on the day when we can be rid of these people .



Hear hear!
 
 
# brusque 2011-10-26 20:42
Hatty Harman's inbox will be bulging tomorrow.

Thanks for giving me the idea Oldnat:-)
 
 
# chiefy1724 2011-10-27 09:44
I've also done Diane Abbott as a long-term advocate of Equalities and Women's Rights Issues in the Labour Party, and Stairheid Mags, Cathy Jamieson, Anne McGuire, Gemma Doyle and Fiona O'Donnell in their capacities as members of "Team Scotland Union Police".

Now, how about Jackie and Johann....
 
 
# Holebender 2011-10-27 12:31
The only one on your list who might get involved in any way is Diane Abbott.
 
 
# farrochie 2011-10-26 20:45
For some reason BBC have this story on the Scotland news website. This committee and the MPs concerned are acting on behalf of the UK and deserve to be on the UK pages, where this behaviour would be on display to UK readers. Why is it restricted to the Scotland site?

(I think I can guess the answer).
 
 
# Marga B 2011-10-26 20:53
O/T but here's another lovely quote from the minutes of that meeting, when a Labour MP seems to be using the committee to lobby for his own constituency:

"Q154 Jim McGovern: Secretary of State, you said that the UK Government and the Scottish Executive have to work together on matters such as education. You note that I do not say "Scottish Government". I disagree slightly with the Chair when he says that the Scottish colleges are being sacrificed to aid universities, as the universities too are being attacked by the Scottish Executive. I am sure that you will be aware of this, but do you agree with the Scottish Executive’s proposal to allow the Government to force the merger of universities? The top two on the hit list are in my constituency-Abertay university, which you and I visited together, and Dundee university. It is being very much resisted locally, but it may yet be forced upon them. "

Deviates just a little from the task of monitoring the work of the Scotland Office. And judging from the rest of the text, Labour seem to think they have a very weak Moore in their pocket, while the Conservatives only pop up to ask the equivalent of points of order.

Can you imagine what it must be like for the lone SNP representative on that committee?
 
 
# oldnat 2011-10-26 20:57
However, sad that McGovern is so pathetically ignorant not to know the difference between devolved and reserved powers.
 
 
# farrochie 2011-10-26 21:00
Quoting oldnat:
However, sad that McGovern is so pathetically ignorant not to know the difference between devolved and reserved powers.



Just like the BBC, see my comment immediately above. Davidson behaviour is a UK issue, but BBC only treat it as Scottish.
 
 
# Holebender 2011-10-26 21:48
Quoting Marga B:
"Q154 Jim McGovern: Secretary of State, you said that the UK Government and the Scottish Executive have to work together on matters such as education. You note that I do not say "Scottish Government".



Petty petty pathetic little man. It's like that other petty Labour juvenile Davidson refusing to say "independence". They're like bairns!
 
 
# Roll_On_2011 2011-10-26 21:13
At this point it would be worthwhile remembering Winnie Ewing's observations on the Westmidden setup and culture:

As the lone SNP member in the Commons - at best an intimidating place for an inexperienced politician - she found herself without friends, without party colleagues, without any supporting structures. She was completely alone. She was hundreds of miles from her husband and her children in an excessively macho and very hostile environment. "I was treated as the enemy, I was shunned and despised. It's a peculiar experience to suddenly find yourself hated. At times I did feel terribly lonely, close to despair."

She says she was treated with inexcusable boorishness and contempt by many Labour MPs: "These people were dross. I would look at the ranks of them in the chamber and think, 'My God, these people are representing Scotland, my country, heaven help us.'"


'My God, these people are representing Scotland, my country, heaven help us.'
 
 
# Alba4Eva 2011-10-26 21:51
Madame Ecosse...

Part one... m.youtube.com/.../...

Following parts easy to find on YouTube.

Great documentary Roll_on *;o)
 
 
# shackled to a corpse 2011-10-26 21:22
I'm not sure how to use the Westminster e-petitions thing, but is it possible to start one calling for a condemnation of Davidsons actions?
 
 
# Ken500 2011-10-26 21:28
'These people are representing Scotland'

- Hopefully not for much longer.
 
 
# .Scot 2011-10-26 21:36
Oddly, BBC radio Scotland have just berated Dr Whiteford for being churlish and a likely liar by Lorraine Davidson, BBC and ex-Labour Party spin doctor who claims to be unsure whether the belatedly given apology will be accepted. As usual, Newsnet Scotland is away ahead of the Unionist game.
 
 
# balbeggie 2011-10-26 22:07
like this comment on BWB

88.scottish_skier
4 Minutes ago
Out of interest, I assume being "Rude, obnoxious and threatening" is a 'reserved matter'?

Having given it some thought, I'd prefer it was not devolved.
 
 
# Clanky 2011-10-26 21:51
"His apology was accepted by Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat MPs on the committee."

"JENKINS!!! Get in here!"

"M-m-m-mr editor what's wrong?"

"This article, it makes Ian Davidson sound like he was, well, in the wrong! FIX IT!"

"Y-y-y-y yes s-sir."

"He made his comments at the beginning of the committee session and was supported by Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat MPs."


www.newssniffer.co.uk/.../3
 
 
# Glenbuchat 2011-10-26 21:58
I am astounded at the ability of so many Newsnetters to know who precisely said what, and with what intent, during a closed meeting which they did not attend.

Dr Whiteford has one version, an anonymous source is reported as confirming that the word "doing" was used and the rest of the committee appear to accept the version of events given by Ian Davidson MP.

The allegation is serious but, in the absence of anything resembling proof, it is no more than an unsubstantiated allegation. I strongly suspect that Dr Whiteford will stick to her guns but fail to prove her case.

Time to move on.
 
 
# oldnat 2011-10-26 22:30
Your spin is an "admirable" attempt to defend the unacceptable.

Alas, all you do is to place yourself on the side of boorish, insulting, destructive politics.

Since that is your Unionism, it's not surprising that it is being rejected by those people who actually want a decent future.

To defend aggression, is so Unionist.
 
 
# Glenbuchat 2011-10-26 23:11
I have made no effort to "defend the unacceptable" nor, I hope, would I ever do so.

Whatever your views of the Labour party, it cannot that every major legislative advance in the rights of women, to outlaw discrimination and to move towards eqal rights for all citizens of the UK has been delivered by Labour administrations . Were there to be proof positive that, as suggested by Dr Whiteford MP, that Ian Davidson had knowingly made a sexist bullying remark to a fellow MP then I have little doubt that his remarks would be condemned by the PLP.

Despite the continuous suggestions that the Conservatives and Lib Dems are in cahoots with Labour in a unionist conspiracy; I am equally certain that if their Party Whips had proof that Ian Davidson was guilty as charged they would be rushing to the microphones to demand his immediate resignation.

I was not at the meeting Oldnat, neither were you. I recall that Burns said something along the lines of "then at the balance let's be mute", good advice I would suggest.
 
 
# tartanfever 2011-10-26 22:38
Glenbuchat - I do agree with you and I posted about this earlier.
If you are going to make allegations, you need proof or a bloody good witness willing to say so.

If that were the case we would be discussing the demise of Ian Davidson tonight, not embroiled in a 'he said, she said' debate.

I know this will offend some on here, but with the best will in the world, she shouldn't have said anything if she didn't have any proof or anyone to substantiate her claim. We know with the press the SNP receives it would be turned against the party and thats exactly what has happened.

Of course, I could be proved wrong if further information comes out, but as it stands, thats the way I'm reading it.

I do agree it's an outrageous act that has taken place here, but politics is a dirty game and the media presentation is even dirtier. Thats the sad state of affairs the SNP have to deal with.
 
 
# jafurn 2011-10-26 22:57
A reasonable point 'tartanfever' however I feel that the fact that the talk now is whether his apology was enough or as the labour spokesperson on newsnight scotland was saying that perhaps he should give personal apology and then we could move on.
That seems to me to be a tacit admission that these 'comments' were indeed said and it is now up to the labour party or parliament to deal with Mr Davidson and if they do nothing I feel that any sensible person will see that for what it is.
 
 
# cirsium 2011-10-26 23:46
tartanfever - "Clerks appointed to the Scottish Affairs Select Committee had raised concerns with the Clerk of Committees, the most senior official responsible for House of Commons Select Committees, alleging that Davidson had threatened to inflict "a doing" upon the SNP's committee appointee, Dr Eilidh Whiteford" The Clerks will be taking the minutes of the meetings. Is that not sufficient corroboration?
 
 
# tartanfever 2011-10-27 00:03
cirsium - I totally agree with you, I want to see that so-and-so Davidson done for this outrageous comment.

However, I'm just saying that as far as the press is concerned, this is not good enough, it's allowed room for the labour spin machine to question the allegation and thats what the press have picked up on.
 
 
# JRTomlin 2011-10-27 01:31
And when women are assaulted if the assailant isn't polite enough to make sure there is a witness we should just keep our mouths shut?

Let me supply a short answer to that.

No.

Edit: In fact, there are probably minutes and would seem to be at least one witness willing to tell the truth of the incident, but even if there weren't this kind of intimidation can not be allowed to pass unchallenged.
 
 
# Jacko 2011-10-26 23:56
"Time to move on"

The last bastion of the defenders of the indefensible.

Ref the issue of proof .... finding a Labour MP now who would deny that the phrase "you're going to get a doing" was uttered by Mr Davidson would be akin to finding Lord Lucan. Heck, even Davidson himself doesn't deny the phrase was used!

As to the credibility of the man with regard to the chairmanship he occupies ..... only Mason Boyne would beat Davidson's credentials as an ultra-unionist.

Not by any definition would he be considered impartial or unbiased. That in itself should exclude him from the chairmanship of the "separation" committee.
 
 
# farrochie 2011-10-27 07:54
"even Davidson himself doesn't deny the phrase was used!"

On GMS, Davidson said he used the term in the past tense "you've been given a doing" by which he says he meant she had been rebuked by her colleagues on the committee.

That what he claims.
 
 
# Holebender 2011-10-27 09:52
Aye right!
 
 
# Marga B 2011-10-26 22:05
OT praise for SNP conference in the Independent, but a nice compliment and I think it could be extended to more than the conference:

blogs.independent.co.uk/.../...
 
 
# balbeggie 2011-10-26 22:13
.....except for the deluded comment underneath the Independent article.
 
 
# Drew1314 2011-10-26 22:15
Newsnight Scotland

Willie Bain is clearly a "yes man",(even a pathetic wee man) Pete Wishart is correct yet Brewer drones on in his usual manner.

Now he goes on to ask Bain a question and Bain answers with political points - first time I've heard Brewer being even-handed. Clearly Brewer has been chastised.
 
 
# brusque 2011-10-26 22:19
Wee Willie Bain [ irrelevant insult removed ] is having a right old rant again!! Brewer had, at least, the sense to try to shut him up.
Bain is like a wee wind-up toy, 5 or 6 turns of the key and "Them SNP are just rubbish and Labour is packed to the gunwails with fragrant MPs" comes trilling out.

The boy badly needs an outside interest, maybe he could take up Politics...................oh! hang on:-)

Brusque, you're perfectly capable of making a point without resorting to what you just said. Please don't do that.

NNS Team
 
 
# RTP 2011-10-26 22:27
Must agree with all you have said Lab just don't seem to get it you just can't get away with that sort of language to a female in the work place anymore,Pete Wishart looked really angry and for the petty way that Independence was scored out and separation inserted showswhat the unionist crowd are like.
 
 
# derek 2011-10-26 22:19
Well Done! to SNP Edinburgh councillors for saying no to privatising the bin and street cleaning services.
 
 
# Roll_On_2011 2011-10-26 22:58
derek

Well Done! to SNP Edinburgh councillors for saying no to privatising the bin and street cleaning services.

Aye Derek I read that article earlier:

heraldscotland.com/.../...
 
 
# balbeggie 2011-10-26 22:20
another positive article, this time in the Guardian.

guardian.co.uk/.../...
 
 
# tartanfever 2011-10-26 22:23
I read the article earlier, I'm still undecided how positive it is, if at all.
 
 
# shackled to a corpse 2011-10-26 22:30
Im with you on that, tartanfever. I note it also finishes with the "trump card" of recapitalising the banks. Has no-one told the metropolitan media that this has been thoroughly discredited?
 
 
# Stevie Cosmic 2011-10-26 22:42
Another positive article?

I disagree. It sounds like reluctant acknowledgement that Westminster is on the back foot and Salmond's holding the cards.

The line about the banks :
Quote:
So, when Salmond declares the date of the referendum, Westminster will produce what is seen by many as its strongest card: numbers to show the price of recapitalising the banks – the cost of which, had they gone under in an independent Scotland, could have been borne by Edinburgh.

...is what gives the game away. It's nonsense, always has been, always will be, and if Westminister are foolish enough to play that card, then we can play them the video of Alistair Darling's interview on (I believe) the BBC admitting that the cost of bailing out the banks to the British taxpayer was precisley..... 0 pounds. There was an article on NNS from some months back that put the total cost for the UK at some 2 billion... a drop in the ocean. And, even still, the Scottish banks headquartered in Edinburgh are the retail arms.....they have always been in profit. Their investment counterparts are headquartered in London, and it is them that are in trouble. Besides, the point has been made many many times before, these investment arms are trans-national corporations, and the responsibility for their bail outs falls with all of the territories that they operate in. In essence, the entire argument is red-herring with no basis in fact.

If this is Westminster's strongest card, the referendum is already won. It's just a waiting game.
 
 
# Roll_On_2011 2011-10-26 23:12
Just been surfin the web and noticed the following info:

The Federal Reserve has released details of more than 21,000 transactions after being forced by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act to disclose which institutions it had bailed out in the financial turmoil since December 2007.

Royal Bank of Scotland borrowed $446bn (£280bn), Bank of Scotland $181bn (£114bn), Abbey National $19bn (£12bn) and HSBC less than $10bn (£6bn). The figures show each institution's total borrowing, not the amount they had outstanding at any one point.

The Unionists continual rant on that Scotland was to wee to bail out RBS and BoS the question could the UK have been to wee to bail them out or alternately, as demonstrated above, the banks are Global and even though they are based in London they are Global.
 
 
# Stevie Cosmic 2011-10-26 23:25
Again, useful information for the impending war.

It might be time for us to start an online repository of this information. The unionists have hearsay and a public with short memories, we have facts from official sources both home and abroad.
 
 
# tartanfever 2011-10-26 23:34
good idea stevie
 
 
# ananinginaneana 2011-10-27 02:21
Excellent find.

Could you give us a link please?
 
 
# Roll_On_2011 2011-10-27 02:40
ananinginaneana

Excellent find.

Could you give us a link please?


Aye the link is as follows:

newstatesman.com/.../...
 
 
# Gaavster 2011-10-26 22:52
I know that the irony of this won't be lost on the good folks here at NNS...

www.iandavidsonmp.com/#

{Bottom left of Screen}
 
 
# tartanfever 2011-10-26 22:55
Oh so tempting... good spot Gav !
 
 
# naemairleesplease 2011-10-26 23:01
Well spotted.
Also a peice on the front page about him visiting an amateur boxing club.

"From time to time companies ask me to take part in various surveys and in return offer to pay me. Instead I give the money to local charities, schools and groups."

Pockets too full are they?
 
 
# oldnat 2011-10-26 23:04
Well spotted!

I've reported the abuse as follows

"Your abuse of Eilidh Whiteford was wholly unacceptable, and your apology grudging and inadequate.

You can compensate for your abusive behaviour by resigning from the Committee Chairmanship."
 
 
# Stevie Cosmic 2011-10-26 23:14
Class.

Literally 'laughing out loud'.

:)
 
 
# oldnat 2011-10-26 23:14
I got an automated reply from Davidson

"Thank you for contacting Ian Davidson, MP for Glasgow South West.

We aim to respond to your email as quickly as possible but also have to deal with a large amount of calls and letters. Given the high volume of emails Mr Davidson receives it may not be possible to reply immediately."

I hope that there is an extremely high level of emails (non-abusive) to the man.
 
 
# whitburnsfinest 2011-10-27 06:05
Oldnat, the feedback from the abuse form goes back to the techie folk who run the site, not to Mr Misogynist himself.

Still, though.... that was funny :-D
 
 
# JRTomlin 2011-10-27 01:45
Haha! I have no resistance to temptation.
 
 
# Holebender 2011-10-27 09:55
Oscar Wilde lives!
 
 
# Independista 2011-10-26 23:12
I have to disagree that Brewer was even handed. I thought his 'interogation' of Dr Whitford was an absolute disgrace, when he responded to her query- when was the last time someone used that kind of language at the BBC, he replied "about five minutes ago".
It was clear to me then, who's side HE was on.
A bit off topic but I see that the non story of the rape case that never was and raised by Johann Lamont at FMQs is still up on her website. How about Brewer and co raising that on Newsnight?
 
 
# J Wil 2011-10-27 00:12
I thought she was quite clever when, in her response to Brewer's question she turned that back on him by suggesting that BBC Scotland must be the only organization that used these types of remarks on their staff.
 
 
# call me dave 2011-10-26 23:15
Nothing new here then:

No mention of the apology that was made to the committee by Mr Davidson either.
Typical MSM.

........................................
express.co.uk/.../...

Affairs Select Committee.

Thursday October 27,2011
By Kerry Gill

THE Scottish Labour Party last night demanded an inquiry into what they say are false and “disgraceful” claims that a senior MPs threatened an SNP committee colleague.
Labour claimed that the “dirty tricks campaign” appeared to have been orchestrated at the highest levels of the SNP to smear their MP, Ian Davidson, chairman of the Scottish Affairs Select Committee.
The row erupted after SNP MP Dr Eilidh Whiteford claimed she had been threatened by Mr Davidson during a meeting of the House of Commons committee last week.

Dr Whiteford, who alleged that Mr Davidson threatened her with “a doing” if any details of the committee’s private deliberations emerged in the media, withdrew from the committee until Mr Davidson was prepared to stand down.
But Labour said that they “totally” refuted the allegation after looking into the matter “very carefully”.

......................................


Move along quickly please nothing to see here!
 
 
# naemairleesplease 2011-10-26 23:19
The bbc has the story up on they're UK Politics section.
Comments allowed!

bbc.co.uk/.../...
 
 
# tartanfever 2011-10-26 23:32
Quick lads and lasses, get over to the BBC, no mods around..say what you like !!
 
 
# Independista 2011-10-27 00:24
Thanks. Ive posted a comment!
 
 
# jafurn 2011-10-26 23:21
I was curious about the remark made by Pete Wishart on newsnight (SNP members surrounded in the commons...or words to that effect)so I went and had a look...very interesting
Labour making a move to take over the referendum for westminster..
Tom Harris moving and David Mundane oops Mundell replying for the uk government

parliamentlive.tv/.../...

you have to fast frward till about07:40:00 or thereabouts. It is quite illustrative the way the SNP members are encircled. I am surprised not to have read about this anywhere else.
Well worth a look in my opinion.
 
 
# Jimbo 2011-10-27 00:18
Labour and Tory politicians working hand in hand to shaft Scotland.

Pete Wishart should have asked them: Why are the Labour and Tory Parties so keen to have a referendum asap, when they've joined forces for years to stop the people of Scotland from having their say?

As a businessman I'm concerned about the future of my own, and other businesses, if Scotland remains tied to the bankrupt UK. The possibility of Scotland remaining in the UK must be causing much concern and unrest among other business owners also. In my opinion, the only real opportunity for Scottish businesses to prosper is within an independent Scotland.

Perhaps the SNP should compile a list of business owners who are concerned about their future in a bankrupt UK?.
 
 
# Glasgow 2011-10-27 00:18
Very interesting viewing! I can hardly describe how I feel watching these Scottish people talking that way about their country and their fellow Scots.

Could the behavior shown towards the apparently lone SNP gent not be described as bullying?

He asked if Mundell could foresee any occasion where the UK government would take it upon itself to hold a referendum (or similar words) and Mundell dismissed him and his 'diatribe'.

Disgusting!
 
 
# snowthistle 2011-10-27 08:31
Yes, but why "apparently lone SNP gent"?
Where are the rest of them? You don't get much of a view but i can only find Pete Wishart and Mike Weir.
Think we need a spot the SNP MP competition because I'm sure they are all there, I just can't find them.
 
 
# snowthistle 2011-10-27 08:47
Having watched it all through a second time, pausing at the times when you get a good view, it wasn't Mike Weir I saw only Pete Wishart.
The question has to be asked, where the hell were they?
 
 
# J Wil 2011-10-27 00:20
It is not new by any manner of means. Watching the antics of the Commons over a period of time they have been doing all sorts of spoiling tatics against the SNP. From both Brown and Cameron at PMQs to Murphy and the present Scotland Office lot at Scottish Questions, to Davidson's remarks about neo-fascists, there has been a distinct lack of respect for elected SNP members of Parliament from the other parties.
 
 
# Taldor83 2011-10-27 16:42
I think it says it all when the first speech being was being made he said "Alec Salmond is a substantial politician..." to which you could JUST hear someone making a jibe about his weight.

Real mature. That's what undermines the mature debate. They're all...
 
 
# call me dave 2011-10-26 23:23
Here is another front page spoiler!
But it turns out further down the article that the time frame starts from 1994 to the present year.

Also it cites a similar situation in the other 3 UK countries.
.....................................


scotsman.com/.../...

EU cash blunders cost Scots £100m

The Scottish Government is forced to refund European grants claimed in error. Picture: PA
By Scott Macnab
Published on Thursday 27 October 2011 00:00


SCOTLAND is being forced to pay back more than £100 million to Europe because of Scottish Government blunders in the way funding was applied for.

Public spending watchdog Audit Scotland hit out at the lack of “oversight and controls” in the system, saying: “The buck stops with the Scottish Government.”
 
 
# jafurn 2011-10-26 23:39
The headline and the implication at the start of the piece are an obvious attempt to imply that this is all the fault of the current administration.

However on further reading we discover that...

A Scottish Government spokeswoman insisted last night that improvements had been made that will avoid a repeat in future.

“The issues previously raised by the European Commission, which relate to systems and spending that largely pre-date this administration, have been fully acted upon,” she said.

“We are satisfied that our management arrangements are now both appropriate to safeguard public funds and proportionate to allow proper investment to support growth in the rural economy.

“We will continue our dialogue with the commission and keep pressing for simpler and more proportionate arrangements in future.”

The £51m which has already been repaid by the Scottish Government includes £31m that was handed back in the 2010-11 financial year.

This is on top of £14m which had been reimbursed in the previous year and £6m which has already been paid back in the current 2011-12 financial year. All of this money relates to the findings of EC audits undertaken between 2003 and 2005 and covering the 2000-2006 programmes.
 
 
# chiefy1724 2011-10-27 08:39
You will also notice that the North Briton buried this one very deep. Millibrand in Edinburgh yesterday.

scotsman.com/.../...

In a speech later at the University of Edinburgh, the former foreign secretary admitted Labour had ‘failed’ Scotland in the 2011 Scottish elections. He said the SNP had ‘the right ideas’ for Scotland.
 
 
# J Wil 2011-10-27 00:14
It seems that Davidson is not partial to giving wholehearted apologies.
 
 
# Marian 2011-10-27 00:26
Ian Davidson appears to be an old fashioned misogynist with street thuggery tendencies who has somehow succeeded in rising to become an MP in the Labour Party.

The suggestion by Labour that this is somehow a smear campaign against him by the SNP is too ludicrous for words coming from the Labour party that gave a whole new meaning to the term smearing under Gordon Brown and Damien McBride.

Most people I know who are either members of the Labour party or vote Labour are horrified at the realisation that someone like Davidson should have achieved the position he enjoys and the prospect of his succeeding to become their leader in Scotland.

Tony Blair and Gordon Brown mapped out the present road map to ruin for the Labour Party and Davidson is its unfortunate product who is doing his very best to give it the kiss of death with voters every time he makes one of his well documented inflammatory utterances.
 
 
# grizzly 2011-10-27 01:23
Why does he remind me of 'Rab C' in a suit
 
 
# oldnat 2011-10-27 01:29
Insult not Rab C!
 
 
# grizzly 2011-10-27 01:37
But Rab is from Govan and Davidson is his MP
You don't think there is any connection
 
 
# Roll_On_2011 2011-10-27 02:44
Just one query, is this where yon man takes his breaks?

independent.co.uk/.../...
 
 
# JRTomlin 2011-10-27 03:14
Sorry very OT, I found this rather interesting, especially considering its promenence in The Herald: "45% for independence: Facebook poll"

.../?mode=article&site=hs&id=N0290241319634799386A

Yes, OldNat (preemptive reply ;-) ), I know it's not a valid poll. However, I don't think one should underestimate the effectiveness in this kind of coverage in swaying voters that they really should seriously consider voting Yes.
 
 
# GrassyKnollington 2011-10-27 09:48
Hi JR the comments from the chap at Orbit Communications who said the results were questionable (although probably fair comment in this instance) put me in mind of Peter Curran's excellent Unionish Phrase book on his Moridura blogspot.

democratic mandate : unionist party won

no mandate : nationalist party won

The rest are here for anyone who missed them.

moridura.blogspot.com/.../...
 
 
# dogbite 2011-10-27 07:44
Davidson now saying he said she had had a doing not that she was going to get a doing. So that is the matter finished then.
 
 
# heraldnomore 2011-10-27 08:22
In which case she would have known if her doing had been sexual or not, and his affirmation later that it was not intended as such would not have been required. Hoist by his own petard. He must be recalled, he must resign, and Eilidh Whiteford is quite right not to sit at his table.
 
 
# dogbite 2011-10-27 09:59
No my friend he said that he had said to the Eilidh that she had ben given a doing and apologised saying that he should have used other language. Nice to hear him admit that she had being making a nuisance of herself
 
 
# Macart 2011-10-27 08:02
Can you imagine what it must be like for the lone SNP representative on that committee?

Marga made a very excellent point above with this very simple question. It really was only a matter of time before something cracked in that atmosphere.

A rigged committee
A rigged set of attendees
A rigged set of questions

A token independence voice.....

This was always going to and was intended to, end in one outcome only. IMHO we should never have given it any weight or credence at all. The very second we saw who was on the committee, the SG should have binned any attendance. Still we do have to go through the very painful motions, don't we? For a heartbeat I was almost convinced that it may work out to be a good thing and that Independence whilst not getting a fair hearing may get a fair airing in Westminster. That the FM alone, in attendance would certainly run rings round his inquisitors.

(MODS please note I am struggling at this point not to become extremely abusive)

But after this blatant closing of ranks, this blatant intimidation by a thug of the lowest mean, they deserve no recognition of their powers or remit. They deserve no respect and they deserve no loyalty from their respective constituency voters. They certainly do not deserve to sit in a big leather chair and tell the Scottish people how they should or should not vote, or even if they can or cannot vote on their future.

I don't know about anybody else, but ahm fr geein this loat the bum's rush oot o' toon.

Thank you for your constraint, Mods : )
 
 
# farrochie 2011-10-27 08:06
Behaviour learned on the terraces of a well-know football club?

Mr Ian Davidson (Chair):
Sponsorships: Unite £1,500; RMT £2,359; FBU £1,1750; UCATT £1,000; GMB; CWU; UNISON
Employment of Family Members: Wife, Office Manager
Shareholder Glasgow Rangers Football Club.
Member Glasgow Rangers Supporters Trust.
 
 
# takhisis1 2011-10-27 09:53
I am in agreement with the fact that Davision is most likely a thug in his manner and I definitely agree that there is a significant elements of nasties within the ibrox terraces. Could you please not make generalisations as I am an SNP member as well as a lifelong Rangers fan.
 
 
# farrochie 2011-10-27 10:13
I hope I am not generalising, just giving a fact and opinion about where behaviours are learned, and I stood on plenty terraces in my time. The voting patterns of Scots has completely changed now. All creeds and classes are turning towards the SNP as the party that puts Scotland before other countries.
 
 
# GrassyKnollington 2011-10-27 08:35
A librarian as furious as the rest of us......

3.bp.blogspot.com/.../...
 
 
# Jim Johnston 2011-10-27 08:45
Davidson doesn't have a leg to stand on, that still leaves him a bum.
Like every other bully he is a coward who thinks he is a "hard man", like that other little cretin John Reid.

Aye, a right pair o' hard men, who wouldn't frighten a Brownie, (just ask their old gaffer).
 
 
# admiral 2011-10-27 08:48
Davidson now saying he said she had had a doing not that she was going to get a doing. So that is the matter finished then.

Well, if that is true,IF, it shows that he is not fit to be Chairman of any Committee. Whoever heard of a Committee Chairman openly gloating about a member's treatment at the hands of other members? Chairpersons (hate that word!) are meant to ensure fair play and equity for all members.
 
 
# J Wil 2011-10-27 10:46
I agree. Even that, if true, was out of order.
 
 
# Old Smokey 2011-10-27 09:12
Both Ian Davidson and Dr Eilidh Whiteford were interviewed on Good Morning Scotland this morning
Davidson was farcical
He said he had appologised properly, but then went on to say that when he had spoken to Dr Eilidh Whiteford, he was saying that it was in the context of talking about a rebuke that she had earlier during the 'private' session and he actually said 'you had a doing, meaning rebuke for her conduct during the meeting'
 
 
# Stevie Cosmic 2011-10-27 09:18
That statement would then seem to be completely at odds with all the information provided before, especially the 'not in a sexual context' conundrum.

Who is Davidson trying to kid?

If that were me, and I had been accused of saying what he is reported to have, but I'd actually said 'yeah, you got a doing over that'....that would be the FIRST thing I would say to the press. A simple misunderstandin g that was taken out of context. Instead, it's taken Davidson a week to say this, and it seems utterly at odds with the other information we have.

Davidson is digging an ever deeper hole for himself.
 
 
# pa_broon74 2011-10-27 09:24
Davidson also alluded to some sort of bad behaviour from Dr Whiteford, one assumes in an attempt to muddy the waters around his own conduct?

He was extremely patronising in explaining that she'd 'been given a row' from the rest of the committee about some sort of behaviour that was out of order but didn't elaborate.

On the whole, if you didn't know the background to this (Davidson's boorish behaviour on other occasions and the way the committee is stacked up against Scotland in general) then you might think its a storm in a teacup.

Personally, they committee should be closed, Davidson has already shown his spots on previous occasions so should've been gone already. He typifies old Glasgow labour in Scotland, he's an anachronism and not indicative of a Scotland looking to the future.
 
 
# Marga B 2011-10-27 09:36
I think that all this personal stuff is distracting people from the real problem which has been thrown up: the composition and remit (and abuse of its remit) of the Scottish Affairs Committee.

The committee's remit has been questioned already (and defended with total lack of rigour by Davidson in the preamble to the last committee). But its composition has to date only been examined in detail by NNS and other commentators, as far as I can see.

First, who were the "people who ought to know better" (minutes) who originally challenged the committee's remit, and why is this line not being pursued?

As things stand, Labour has highjacked the committee for use as a battering ram against the SNP, with the feeble 4 conservatives contributing points of order while Labour shamelessly injects political content (see Davidson's rant about colleges in his constituency).

And if you read the committee minutes, you see Moore being verbally harassed by Davidson and showing himself to be a very weak minister indeed.

Methinks it suits Labour to turn this into a personal spat when it is very much a constitutional and governance one.

Can anything be done? Should anything be done? If so, what and by whom? Or is it enough that this whole issue has opened a few eyes to the real nature of these Westminster organs of control?
 
 
# Macart 2011-10-27 11:20
Marga - I suspect not! This committee was set up to be a battering ram in the first place. It was always meant to be partizan and destructive toward independence. It is fulfilling its actual objective very effectively as far as Westminster is concerned.
 
 
# Clarinda 2011-10-27 09:39
Was wheeling on Wee Willie Bain on Newsnicht really the best or the only option available. At least his appearance reminded me not to buy a Halloween Cake this year.
Mr Wishart's barely concealed rightful indignation in response was robust making the automated Labourite reflex more inappropriate and incompetent.
Surely even Labour at Westminster must remove Mr Davidson to distance themselves from what is turning into a legitimate concern over political committee probity....or is it all part of their cunning plan.
 
 
# pa_broon74 2011-10-27 09:47
As a result of this, I think more and more people will realise there is a streak of real hatred in some labour MP's for the SNP, in a sense you can kind of undertsand it because they're going to be put out of a very cushy job.

But, as you know, that won't wash with the electorate who've had more than enough of the troughing that seems still to be going on.

What we've got are Scottish Labour politicians that seem to be fixated on their hatred of the SNP, the don't realise that it'll be their downfall.
 
 
# mountaincadre 2011-10-27 10:00
Aye Pa even Mr Braur felt the need to say something about it,"Mr Bain did'nt look to comfy after it was mentioned".As i see it though they are the agents of there own doom,the more they rage against what is the legitimate Goverment of Scotland the more the people of Scotland will rightly say enough is enough.My own take on this will be that in the next 12-18 months the labour party as it stands just now will implode,with those of the old school Labour movement backing Independance and cutting all and any ties with West Minister.
 
 
# dogbite 2011-10-27 10:54
my sentiments exactly cadre i feel the Labour party will inplode with huge casulties those who have not done down the SNP such as Malcolm Chisholm will survive. The English backlash at Scotland becoming independent will toss all Scots from Westminster.
Watch my words
 
 
# pa_broon74 2011-10-27 11:05
Agreed.

I don't whether its just because the press report it more but it is really Scottish MP's in Westminster who are being the most vocal about 'seperation'. The anti-SNP talk has been vitriolic and it's not just anti-SNP, more and more its also anti-Scottish. Whether you think that's because the SNP have managed to align themselves with the Scottish identity (which for now I'm comfortable with) is really a bit moot because the end result is the same.

Its been mentioned before about conflicts of interest but its a point worth making again. Ian Davidson earns in excess of £70k per annum, not including perks (meaning expenses) Its a very comfortable existence indeed.

I think in terms of Scottish Labour MP's, they're finished, even those who are more temperate in attitude and language. They'll be dragged down by the Currans and Davidsons of the party. They wouldn't be able to cross over to a Scottish Labour Party because their bridges will have been burnt, also, Holyrood I think is totally different in atmosphere from Westminster. I remember when it opened they specifically said they didn't want it to descend in to the 'ya boo' pantomime of Westminster (even although it did if you remember those who sat behind Iain Grey on a Wednesday afternoon.)

I'm not even sure its going to be possible for unionist parties to reinvent themselves in an independent Scotland, its a subjective thing though, for me Labour are just awful, I think the lib dems will do it if they're clever (and get rid of Rennie) and I think perhaps even something like the SDA might pop up and occupy Tory ground.

More over though, I think in Scotland the SNP are prime and will be so for the foreseeable future. It would be really interesting to see what the scottish demographic in terms of westminster would be if we had a GE now.
 
 
# Diabloandco 2011-11-01 11:31
Actually Pa , I think it reveals their lack of intelligence and their total unsuitablility for office.
 
 
# Ken500 2011-10-27 10:20
The Unionists in Scotland are toast. Intransigence

The harder they are, the bigger the fall.

The more they cling, the more folk detach.
 
 
# ianbeag 2011-10-27 10:41
Surely it cannot be too difficult to get confirmation of what was said during this confrontation. I assume that the proceedings of the committee will have been recorded electronically or by stenographers and it cannot be too difficult to check the content. That there were non-MP witnesses to the comments from Ian Davidson was highlighted on Tuesday in a posting on NNS at 21;56. Here is the link newsnetscotland.com/.../....
Here is the posting
Clydebuilt 2011-10-25 21:56
From Wikipedia:-

On 25 October 2011 it emerged that Clerks appointed to the Scottish Affairs Select Committee had raised concerns with the Clerk of Committees, the most senior official responsible for House of Commons Select Committees, alleging that Davidson had threatened to inflict "a doing" upon the SNP's committee appointee, Dr Eilidh Whiteford, in the event that details of the committee's discussions during a private session were leaked to the media. Following these allegations Dr Whiteford withdrew from the committee and a formal complaint was made by the SNP Parliamentary Leader, Angus Robertson, to the Speaker of the House.[7]
 
 
# J Wil 2011-10-27 10:43
The story was wiped from the Scottish News this morning.
 
 
# Lianachan 2011-10-27 10:59
 
 
# hektorsmum 2011-10-27 11:59
Would that be when the BBC encountered difficulties with their discussion with the Gentleman Tim, something or other who was also one of the few persons to over hear the remarks made by Ian Davidson. Now I for one would not like to draw a conclusion for this other than someone got told to drop the call.
I am really fed up with the National Broadcaster who cannot in anyway be fair. I have changed my radio station in the kitchen to Radio Four, as it is a new radio and I cannot afford to boot i out the window.
 
 
# chinacatalba 2011-10-27 10:58
Is that why we can't get Newsnicht on i-player?
 
 
# RTP 2011-10-27 11:38
I have it on tape and have just listened to it again,what a smarmy looking man Bain is.
 
 
# AndyLabourAllTheWay 2011-10-27 11:07
This is a farce Wee Eck told her to do it.She got moaned at FROM OTHER MP,S for leaking things to the media ,the guy said "you got a doing "and one week later Eck tells her what to do.Why dont the SNP get jobs for the 1000 a week they are puting on the dole ? or the 80k kids not working .
 
 
# Aplinal 2011-10-27 11:50
Except that isn't what happened, is it. She denies ever 'leaking' anything to the media. If I have to choose the veracity of a comment, NuLabour lying machine comes well down the list.

She complained immediately - the fact that it did not come into the open until a few days later is irrelevant. Alex Salmond did not "tell her" to do anything. This was her, justified, response to a disgusting situation.

Davidson has 'form' in this. He DID apologise, but is now trying to make it sound different. There have been at least three versions of events by Labour. Smoke and mirrors in an attempt to divert attention. The MSM is already under orders to play it down.

And what about Davidson's expenses? He is a money-grabbing oik, who serves himself, his party and Westminster in that order. Scotland and his constituents do not appear on his 'to do' list! Except in a negative context.
 
 
# mountaincadre 2011-10-27 11:57
Don't bother Alpinal he is a Labour hq plant,have a look over at the Daily Rag and you'll see him over there.His latest posts are to say that its ok to threaten women and that they should just,"Grow a Pair" i kid you not. There is absolutely no point in trying to argue a point with him,he just spouts the same nonsense every day,1000 on the dole every week 80k younsters out of work,i think if you did a quick IP address search it would be an eye opener.
 
 
# Aplinal 2011-10-27 11:58
Cheers. If I knew how to do it, I would! I'm a complete IT-Numpty!

Take care
 
 
# Louperdowg 2011-10-27 12:04
He's more likely to be an SNP plant although I think they may have overdone it a bit.
 
 
# J Wil 2011-10-27 13:19
The fact that she reported the incident right away has not got through to the media, who prefer to leave half a story on their pages if it is hurting the SNP.

Also, it is in the interests of all the other committee members to have preferred to have seen or heard nothing because they also want to damage the SNP.

If he manages to get away with this and tries something like it again people will have no doubt that he is the common factor in all this.

Davidson's statements have been so incongruous that he would not have got away with his explanation in a court of law. Hopefully the public will make a similar judgement.
 
 
# Louperdowg 2011-10-27 11:51
You are Ian Gray and I claim my tenner.
 
 
# Islegard 2011-10-27 12:00
Are you really Labour all the way? Do you tick all the Labour boxes? Do you?
1) Support fraudulant claiming of expenses?
2) Threatening women with violence?
3) Electoral fraud?
4) Lying to parliament and the public?
5) Subverting democracy?
6) Control and of the media for anti democratic purposes?
7) Putting down Scotland at every opportunity?
8) Selling Scotland out?
9) Control from London.

If the answer is yes then you are indeed Labour all the way.
 
 
# hektorsmum 2011-10-27 12:02
I am going to make the same remark that I make on other comment pages. I show complete respect for all Unionist Politicians, I do not call them by pet names, much as it sticks in my craw, I tolerate the rubbish that they spout. So I will ask you to respect the position of Mr Salmond. The 1000 a week losing their jobs have much to do with the actions of your previous UK Government. May I suggest you address this remark to the Right Honourable Member of Parliament (Absent) for Kirkcaldy.
 
 
# Alba4Eva 2011-10-27 12:32
Quote; "Why dont the SNP get jobs for the 1000 a week they are puting on the dole ? or the 80k kids not working?"

Reference this Andy... Supporting ambitions of a new generation 09/02/2011

A £34.5 million package to support thousands of additional employment, training and college places was announced today as part of next year's Scottish Budget.

Despite a £1.3 billion cut imposed on Scotland by the UK Government, the Budget will deliver a total of 46,500 training opportunities, invest an extra £15 million in college bursaries and boost college places by a further 1,200.

The Scottish Government will protect frontline services and:

* Invest a further £11.5 million to create 25,000 modern apprenticeship places - a record high for Scotland

*Provide 7,000 flexible training opportunities for Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) - 2,000 more than originally planned in the draft Budget

*Protect the total number of core university places and invest £8 million for an extra 1,200 college places

*Invest an additional £15 million across 2010-11 and 2011-12 in funding for college bursaries

*Maintain the educational grants for pupils and college students most in need (Educational Maintenance Allowances (EMAs)) which were cut south of the border

*Guarantee a probation place for every newly-qualified teacher and provide enough teaching jobs for every post-probationer in 2011-12

*Maintain pupil teacher ratios in P1 to P3

*Create a new Early Years and Early Intervention Fund, with start-up funding of £5 million

Michael Russell, Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning, said:"This budget ensures all young Scots will get access to the education and training they need to find lasting, sustainable employment. Economic conditions are tough. Our budget was slashed by 1.3 billion pounds. Yet, this Budget does not allow our young people to become another lost generation. It drives investment to create opportunities which unleash the potential and support the ambitions of Scotland's young people.

"A record high of 25,000 modern apprenticeships and an extra 7,000 flexible training opportunities brings total training places to 46,500 despite the financial pressures we face. We have also funded an extra 1,200 college places.

"On student support we have saved the EMAs which were cut down south, after listening to the compelling case made by the NUS, and will make an additional £15 million available for college bursaries. This means every student from school, college or university can access education and training based on the ability to learn and not the ability to pay.

"A greater proportion of school leavers than ever before are going onto further study, training or employment. Scotland's youth employment rate is higher than the UK as a whole and our youth unemployment rate is lower. We are continuing to provide the opportunities our young people need and deserve. All benefits will be realised in Scotland's economic growth.

"The agreement with COSLA on teacher employment is also a significant achievement. The 2,800 probationary teachers leaving education training this year will have the same number of job opportunities available to them. More jobs will also be created so we can make a significant contribution to tackling longer term teacher unemployment.

"We remain committed to giving every child the best start in life, raising standards in teaching and learning, providing strong and better learning opportunities for school leavers, protecting access to education on the ability to learn and not the ability to pay, and supporting skills development that benefits current and future workforces."

Source: scotland.gov.uk/.../10085027


...So we know what the SNP government are planning and doing to address the Youth Unemployment issues... What are Labours Plans;
AndyLabourAllTh eWayToPolitical Oblivion?
 
 
# AndyLabourAllTheWay 2011-10-27 13:35
If puting 1000 a week on the dole is adressing unemployyment issues, we beter hope the SNP don,t take their eye of the ball then.
 
 
# Alba4Eva 2011-10-27 18:00
I simply asked you what Labours specific policies are on the topic, Co's as a voter, I can't seem to find that information... your assistance would be very welcome?
 
 
# Drew1314 2011-10-27 14:46
Wow a Labour "troll". Let us salute his bravery and not feed him.

Poor thing has been bullied by Mr Davidson in all probability, to come on here and disseminate Labour propaganda.
 
 
# Alx1 2011-10-27 15:39
Oh dear look what the Daily Retard has let out!
 
 
# UpSpake 2011-10-27 11:37
Continuing on the theme of dis-respect, the BBC Scotland's Politics Show at 12 today started when the FM was on his feet already answering a question, not, as Glan Campbell reported hightlighting his appointments of the day.
Not only are the BBC disrespecting the FM and the Parleiment by not being on-air prior to the debate but their nonsense of hearing from Flubber merely serves to dumb down the whole affair. Then to cut off before FM Questions was over is just tardy.
Of-course only the bare minimum of exposure can be expected from the BBC who view the democratically elected government of the people of Scotland, with contempt !.
 
 
# roguesquadron 2011-10-27 13:03
I was disappointed with that too.

Did you notice that Ian Gray was awfully shouty today? It's as if he equates the volume of his voice to competence and a good performance. He's a total berk!
 
 
# J Wil 2011-10-27 13:12
Its the usual half-baked offering from BBC Scotland, with Glenn interjecting periodically during the proceedings so that the question or the answer is not heard in full. Brian also seemed to be defending Iain Gray's questions today. What was that all about?

The whole of FMQs, unadulterated by Brian and Glenn, can be heard on the parliament channel tonight at 11:30 pm.

"...Of-course only the bare minimum of exposure can be expected from the BBC..."

Compare that with the Daily Politics and PMQs, where they get a full half hour for discussion before PMQs, then the whole of PMQs, then another half hour for further discussion after PMQs.
 
 
# raisethegame 2011-10-27 12:31
Dr Eilidh Whiteford and Ian Davidson were interviewed (separately) on Radio Scotland this morning. You can listen to the 2 interviews, then the 3rd with Dr EH's reaction to ID's interview here:
www.bbc.co.uk/.../b0169n3d
It was the first item after the 8:30 news
so that's 2hr:32m into the programme.
 
 
# SolTiger 2011-10-27 12:34
I fully agree that Davidson needs hit with everything including the kitchen sink for this, as would happen in any place of work should someone make threats to a colleague.

However I am left scratching my head somewhat at it being called sexist, have I missed some previous incident with Davidson or that he uttered some slur about Dr Whiteford's gender during this incident?
 
 
# Marga B 2011-10-27 16:10
SolTiger - According to reports, Davidson himself raised the issue, by approaching Whiteford later to assure her thet "the remark" whatever it was had no sexual connotations. A remark which apparently he now denies making.
 
 
# jafurn 2011-10-27 13:03
' chinacatalba '

Is that why we can't get Newsnicht on i-player?

bbc.co.uk/.../...

You can ......remember you have to search for newsnight scotland as opposed to newsnight.
 
 
# snowthistle 2011-10-27 13:18
Jafurn,
it seems to be working now, there had been a fault earlier where you got through the opening credits and then an error message came up
 
 
# chinacatalba 2011-10-27 15:16
Yes it is working now. Watched it and was appalled. Even Brewer had to make some attempt at pinning down Willie Bain but of course it ended up veering off topic.

If what Peter Wishart described is true then I am aghast at these imbeciles representing Scotland. Nothing has changed from Winnie Ewing's time it would seem.

Not in my name.
 
 
# Roll_On_2011 2011-10-27 13:58
Davidson’s old boss Jimmy Brown was very adept at using leaks:

www.youtube.com/.../

It’s in the NuLabour DNA.
 
 
# alexmc8275 2011-10-27 14:23
Is anyone really surprised at these tactics being used. Now we know it's out of order. But it is working for them we are getting caught up in it all when we should be letting others know more about Scotland's future and how we realise our true potential, instead we have lost two days of positive discussions on what Mr Salmond and his team are trying to do for the nation. Yes we are all raging and can see through the union parties nonsense, so let's get back to positive well informed facts that most posters on this site ar capable of which help the likes of myself to try and inform others on the building sites where most guys read well you see where I'm going. For we need to persuade people that independence is the only course.
 
 
# Alba4Eva 2011-10-27 15:02
Plenty of time.

The Unionists will keep getting more and more desparate the closer the time comes and they will make far more extreme gaffs than this one in their attempts to obfuscate.

The long game is what counts and keeping the unionists predictable and despicable behaviour in the headlines does us no harm.
 
 
# Saporian 2011-10-27 15:28
BBC headline - Salmon "misled" MSPs on expert.
You couldn't make it up. But they could!
 
 
# tartanfever 2011-10-27 15:42
This is a paragraph from the BBC website concerning this allegation:

Mr Salmond told MSPs: "I've been handed a statement from Matt Qvortrup, a professor and the world's foremost expert on constitutional referendum - a letter that he's sending to the Times newspaper.
"It closes by saying, 'while it is a matter for the Scottish people and parliament to determine the form of their own referendum and while asking about a single question would be much more common, such a two-question proposition would be fair, reasonable and clear'."



Full report here:

bbc.co.uk/.../...

Either the professor's statement says this or it doesn't. I'm sure he'll be able to clear this up one way or the other.
 
 
# Drew1314 2011-10-27 15:44
@ Saporian

Yep, that's what the headline reads, yet the first line of the of the article reads:

Opposition leaders have accused the first minister of misleading parliament by making up a quote from a leading academic.

Joseph Goebbels is alive and well and working at the BBC.
 
 
# tartanfever 2011-10-27 16:07
BBC now reporting that the FM has apologised for misleading parliament.
 
 
# Marga B 2011-10-27 16:13
But weren't Labour's London people saying last week that negativity and concentrating on attacks on the SNP instead of ideas were what caused their downfall in Scotland? Is this their way of asserting their independence of London?
 
 
# J Wil 2011-10-27 16:43
For them it's sufficient to say it as a cover, but the actuality is very different.
 
 
# Glenbuchat 2011-10-27 16:27
So who was responsible for writing a supposed quote from Professor Qvortrup which turned out to be the complete opposite of what the good Professor actually thought?

The FM has apologised but this is a gross example of deliberately misleading Parliament and abusing the name of a leading academic. I await the Newsnetter call for resignations.
 
 
# oldnat 2011-10-27 16:53
Deliberately? Your evidence for that?

Salmond was "handed a statement". Whether, the bit of paper was wrong, or whether he misread it, I have no idea. However, he made an error. When the error was pointed out he apologised.
 
 
# tartanfever 2011-10-27 17:31
It's the First ministers fault, he's admitted it in Parliament. As he said, he should have checked with Professor Qvortrup before making the statement, but he didn't.

However, in the interim the FM spoke to Professor Qvortrup and asked about the second question in the referendum. The prof has replied that a second question is perfectly acceptable. The FM also told parliament that the prof has agreed to make his services available for all if they require guidance with the second question issue.

Now thats what I call an apology, open and honest, apologising to the chamber and also going further by agreeing with the Prof. that his skills will be made available to Parliament if required.

If only Davidson could apologise like this, or indeed, Johann Lamont apologise at all for her misuse of a fabricated rape case.
Glenbuchat - get Lamont on the phone will you and sort her out will you as you seem to be keen that those caught lying should be held to account.
 
 
# brusque 2011-10-27 16:28
Newsnight has finally reached the dizzying heights of Newspaper stardom.................its' very own Troll.

They are such fun, even if predictable to the point that you would bet Ian Davidson's salary on what comes next.

Bless:-)
 
 
# Drew1314 2011-10-27 16:34
He never fails to manage to promote the unionist cause, even if it means being economical with the truth about the above story.

I give you Cochrane of the Telegraph:

telegraph.co.uk/.../...
 
 
# oldnat 2011-10-27 16:58
Thank you for your generous offer of a Cochrane.

Alas I must decline your offer.
 
 
# Drew1314 2011-10-27 17:09
@oldnat.

I take no offence. I just think every boorish article spouted by him adds another thousand Yes votes to the Independence referendum.
 
 
# shackled to a corpse 2011-10-27 17:49
This one goes further than his usual rants tho: i normally find them quite amusing. This one is absolutely disgusting in its tone, suggestions and implications. I hope he chooses not to grace the new scotland with his presence when the time comes.
 
 
# Old Smokey 2011-10-27 17:44
Hate to say this but Alx Salmond needs to get to grips with his own staff in the Scottish Government
Analying what has gone on regards the Dr Matt Qvortrup matter
If I undrerstand this correctly
The Government have asked Dr Matt Qvortrup to advise on the referendum
But Dr Matt Qvortrup has told the Times that a 2 question referendum was untenable.
So the first question I have, is why is Dr Matt Qvortrup advising the Times and not the Scottish Government, if he has been retained to give advise?
So then we have the spectacle of Dr Matt Qvortrup telling the Times that a 2 question referendum is untenable, being brought up at FMQ's, but Alex Salmond is given a note, which he thinks is from Dr Matt Qvortrup, but in fact is from first minister's official spokesman and Murdo Fraser is quick of the mark to know about this and requested a clarification from Alex Salmond.
The Second Question is then, why did a spokesman provide a fictious note, why not tell Alex Salmond that Dr Matt Qvortrup is clear that a 2 question referendum will not work, and state that at FMQ's.
This is a mess, not of Alex Salmond's making but by his staff and others.
Frankly this has given ammunition to the unionists, who are revelling in it
The Scottish Government cannot afford even the slightest slip up as they have to keep up the pressure and keep pusing the unionists on to the backfoot 24/7!
Have I missed anything?
 
 
# mato21 2011-10-27 17:49
I think the academic has only just agreed to advise the Parliament if they so wish As a result of FM contacting him after FMQs I may be wrong of course
 
 
# J Wil 2011-10-27 18:38
The mealy mouthed muckers at BBC Scotland had a field day over the mistake.

You could sense the elation from the whole gang at BBC Scotland News. They had a hit. Hooray! It doesn't take much to turn them on. Perhaps they will give us a whole Newsnicht about it tonight, just to let Gordon have is moment of gloating or will it disappear from our screens as quickly as the Davidson affair.

It think it is no more than a little local inconvenience for the SNP.
 

You must be logged-in in order to post a comment.

Donate to Newsnet Scotland

Latest Comments