New Statesman Scotland
When our MSPs get down to serious business next week there will be no shortage of folk willing, eager and indeed paid to give them advice. Because the political lobbyists have moved into Scotland, big time. Just about every public relations firm of any size has spent the summer putting in place men and women who are ready to bend the ears of our 129 lawmakers.
And not all of them are from the glitzy world of "media relations". Some of Scotland's most respectable firms of lawyers have been getting in on the parliamentary act. Maclay, Murray and Spens, for example, has joined forces with Beattie Media to form Public Affairs Europe. Shepherd and Wedderburn has gone into action by forming Saltire Parliamentary Consultants.
Now Dundas and Wilson, the most establishment firm of them all, has joined in the fun by setting up its own in-house Scottish Parliament Group. Kenneth Rose, the lawyer who heads the group, recently told the Law Society of Scotland's journal that his aim is to "deepen our relations with the organs of government . . . " This is so that Dundas and Wilson lawyers "can make a valuable contribution determining the people to contact where a client wants information or influence". So that's all right, then.
Actually, the Law Society of Scotland's journal should be required reading for all MSPs. It has a way of being ahead of the media pack. Weeks before Charles Kennedy, the new Lib Dem leader, raised the issue of cannabis - whether it should be smoked and inhaled - the journal was pointing out that Scotland's very own Lib Dem leader, Jim Wallace, was on the case.
At the society's 50th anniversary bash, Wallace had publicly supported Lord McCluskey's call for a royal commission to look into the sentences and sanctions the cannabiz attracts.
Still on matters legal/constitutional: the recent stushie generated by the celebrated tunesmith James McMillan over the hard times dished out to Scotland's Roman Catholics got this diary thinking. Is this not an argument that cuts both ways? In our Catholic schools, for example, the Catholic hierarchy has the right to approve or disapprove of staff (particularly senior staff) on the grounds of their religious zeal, or lack of it.
But does that not fly in the face of article 14 of the European Convention of Human Rights, to which Britain has signed up? And where does this practice stand vis-a-vis the UN's Draft Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Religious Intolerance?
Perhaps the time has come for our lawmakers to sort out (or at least try to sort out) the whole legal tangle that surrounds our various churches. Could this be a job for Dundas and Wilson's Scottish Parliament Group?
Post this article to
We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by using the 'report this comment' facility or by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.
