Lord_PatrickStewartHodge


INLNews.com  
                           
  Easy to Find...... Hard to Leave..see you there soon at your INLNews.com
                                                                                       International News Limited Domain Pricing Per Year
                                                                          .com* $9.99 | .net* $9.99 | .org* $9.99 | .info* $9.99 | .us* $9.99 | .biz* $9.99 | .ws* $9.75 | .name* $7.95
                                                                                                                 Save even more on multi-year registrations!
                                                       INLNews YahooMail HotMail GMail AOLMailUSA MAILYahooMail HotMailGMail AOLMail MyWayMail CNNWorld IsraelVideoNs
                                                 INLNsNYTimes WashNs 
AustStockEx WorldMedia JapanNs AusNs World VideoNs WorldFinance ChinaDaily IndiaNs USADaily BBC EuroNsABCAust 
                                                                                               WANs NZNews QldNs MelbAge AdelaideNs TasNews ABCTas DarwinNs 
USA MAIL






Your Daily Motivation from Inspiration Line Add Inspiring Daily Quotes to YOUR Website

Click Here For Your Up To Date World Live Sports Scores
INLNews  YahooMail  HotMail  GMail  AOLMail USA MAILMyWayMail 
 CNNWorld IsraelVideoNs INLNsNYTimes WashNs WorldMedia JapanNs AusNs World VideoNs WorldFinance ChinaDaily IndiaNs USADaily BBC EuroNsABCAust 
WANs NZNews QldNs MelbAge AdelaideNs 
TasNews ABCTas DarwinNsUSA MAIL


ABC News Video  FOX News Video  FOXBusiness Video  CNN Video  AP Video  BBC News Video  Reuters Video  AFP Video  CNET Video
CNBC Video  Australia 7 News Video   Rocky Mountain News Elections Video  CBC.ca Video  NPR Audio  
Kevin Sites in the Hot Zone Video
Richard Bangs Adventures Video  Charlie Rose Video   Expanded Books Video  Assignment Earth Video 
ROOFTOPCOMEDY.com Video 
Guinness World Records Video  weather.com Video  AccuWeather Video  You Witness News User Video

NPR Audio BY CATEGORY Top Stories  Politics  World  Business  Sports 
 
Technology  Health & Science  Arts  U.S. 

VIEW LOCAL VIDEO KVUE-TV Austin  WJZ 13 Baltimore  WBZ Boston 
 
WCNC Charlotte  CBS 2 Chicago

Video by Category
 
U.S. Business  World  Entertainment  Sports  Tech  Politics Science 
Health Environment Weather Opinion  Odd 

Video by Topic Campaign '08   Wall Street  Iraq  Gas Prices  Mideast Conflict 
 
Climate Change 

More INL News Video !Finance Sports


Video by Category
 
U.S. Business  World  Entertainment  Sports  Tech  Politics Science 
Health Environment Weather Opinion  Odd 

Video by Topic Campaign '08   Wall Street  Iraq  Gas Prices  Mideast Conflict 
 
Climate Change 

More INL News Video !Finance Sports




AP WORLD
AP NATIONAL
AP WASHINGTON
AP BUSINESS
AP ENTERTAINMENT
AP ON THE HOUR
AP HEADLINES
AP BREAKING
AP REUT PHOTO WIRE
AP AUDIO 
ABCNEWS 
ABCNEWS THE NOTE
AD AGE DEADLINE
BBC
BBC AUDIO
C-SPAN 
CHICAGO TRIB
CHICAGO SUN-TIMES
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE
CNN
CNN POLITICAL TICKER
DAILY SWARM
DAILY VARIETY
ECONOMIST
EDITOR & PUBLISHER
BILLBOARD 
BOSTON GLOBE
BOSTON HERALD 
BREITBART
CBS NEWS 
EMIRATES TODAY
FINANCIAL TIMES 
FORBES
FOX NEWS
FREE REPUBLIC
HOT AIR
HILL
HUMAN EVENTS
IAFRICA
INTERNATIONAL HERALD
INVEST BUS DAILY
JERUSALEM POST
JEWISH WORLD REVIEW
LA DAILY NEWS
LA TIMES 
MEDIA WEEK 
MSNBC
MSNBC FIRST READ 
NATIONAL REVIEW
NEW REPUBLIC
NEW YORK
NY DAILY NEWS
NY OBSERVER
NY POST
NY SUN 
NY TIMES
NEW YORKER
NEWSBUSTERS
NEWSBYTES 
NEWSMAX
NEWSWEEK
N. KOREAN NEWS
PHILLY INQUIRER
PHILLY DAILY NEWS 
POLITICO
R & R
RADAR 
REAL CLEAR POLITICS
REASON MAG
ROLL CALL
SAN FRAN CHRON 
SKY NEWS
SLATE
SMOKING GUN
SPLASH NEWS
SYDNEY HERALD
U.K. DAILY MAIL 
U.K.DAILY MIRROR
DAILY RECORD
UNDER THE RADAR
U.K.EVENING STANDARD
U.K.EXPRESS
U.K.GUARDIAN
U.K.INDEPENDENT 
U.K.LONDON PAPER 
U.K.NEWS OF THE WORLD
U.K.SUN
U.K.TELEGRAPH
U.K.TIMES
US NEWS
USA TODAY
VILLAGE VOICE
WASH POST
WASH TIMES
WEEKLY STANDARD
WORLDNETDAILY


 

Lord Hodge to succeed Lord Hope on Supreme Court and also appointed to the Priy Council.. making Lord Hodge on eon the most powerful and influential Law Lords in the United Kingdom and in fact the world whereever English Law is law....

The Honourable Lord Patrick Hodge born 19th May, 1953, in England, and studied at Corpus Christi College, University of Cambridge and then obtained his LLB from the University of Edinburgh,has been appointed to the Privy Council and the the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom by the Queen of England after recommendation from David Cameron.. the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom ...it is all rather strange that Stephen Carew-Reid, founder of the INL News Group,
(who has also spent his life campaigning for fairness and justice in English Law in Australia and the United Kingdom -from outside of the legal profession.... and challenging the integrity of many judges, justices, masters, lords, solicitors, barristers, advocates, politicians, media, police, prosecutors and other people and organisations in power... that he felt where not acting in a proper manner according the duties and oaths they have sworn to uphold is their particular public and/or private office..such as  Lord Patrick Stewart Hodge .... who was born two months before Lord Patrick Hodge with both Mr Carew-Reid's and Mr Hodge's family originally coming from Wigstown in Scotland...with  Lord Hodge heading the official 'English Government Privy Council' and Mr Carew-Reid in effect heading the unofficial 'People's Privy Council' ...with both seeming to having completely opposing views what what fairness and justice means and how fairness and justice should be adminstered with within England Law...
Morore on Lord PatrickavHodge at the INL News web page: http://www.ienlnews.com/Lord_PatrickStewartHodge.php


Organisation:

Prime Minister's Office, 10 Downing Street

Published:
11 April 2013

Hon Lord Hodge appointed to Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council.

Appointments to the Privy Council

The Queen has been pleased to approve the appointment of the Hon Lord Hodge to Her Majesty’s Most Honourable Privy Council following his appointment as Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom.


The INL News over coming weeks will provide a full investigation report into how and why Lord Hodge was selected by the Queen on recommendation from on the recommendation of the Prime Minister and Lord Chancellor  ...quite often with these high level Court appointments, it is not always just what you know and your legal experience and ability.... but also who you know and what club, organisation and social and legal connection one has connections with .... there is no doubt that Lord Hodge is a very bright, experiences, learned and clever judge... but the INL news Legal and Investigative Team have shown over the years in their in depth investigations .....that even though a Lord or Judge that is appointed to a high level legal appoidtment is a very qualified and experienced judge or lord, it does not stop him or her making judgements in the favour of people and/or organisations which will help the career of the Lord or Judge and/or help the  club, organisation and social and legal connection one has connections with .... time will tell if Lord Hodges ends up with a clean bill of health.....

                      "....Lords and Judges are called the watchers of society...."
   however the question remains as posed by Stephen Carew-Reid ( the father of Stephen Carew-Reid's Great Grand Father Sir Bertram MacKennal was born in the same Scottish Town as Lord Hodge's relalatives- WigsTown)   in Stephen Carew-Reid's now infamous series of books .........
                                                                                        
                         The Triumph of Truth (Who Is Watching The Watchers?) 

                                                                             


        Lord Hodge..the question remains
       "... Who Is Watching The 
Watchers? ..."
if you do not make a court and/or legal judgement the is fair, honourable, truthful who will be watching you?...
....now you are one of the most powerful and influential Law Lord in the United Kingdom and every other country which uses English Law where the final legal appeal is to the Privy Council and/or which uses the judgements you make in the United Kingdom;s Supreme Court and the Privy Council.
...

 

26 February 2013

http://www.journalonline.co.uk/News/1012281.aspx

Court of Session judge Lord Patrick Stewart Hodge
is to succeed Lord Hope on the UK Supreme Court bench later this year,
it was announced today.

Lord Hodge is one of three new justices announced, the others being Lord Justice Hughes, who succeeds Lord Dyson (now Master of the Rolls), and Lord Justice Toulson, who will take the place of Lord Walker on his retirement next month.

Lord Hope, currently the Deputy President of the court, retires on 27 June. Lord Hodge will take up his position at the beginning of the new legal year in October.
 
The two Lords Justices will be sworn in on 9 April.

The appointments were made by the Queen on the recommendation of the Prime Minister and Lord Chancellor, following the recommendation of an independent selection commission.

Expressions of interest from the existing justices will be invited to fill Lord Hope's position as Deputy President of the court, and the selection commission that advised on the new appointments will also examine these.

Lord Hodge was admitted to the Faculty of Advocates in 1983 and appointed a Queen’s Counsel in 1996. He was a part time Law Commissioner at the Scottish Law Commission from 1997 to 2003.  At present he is the Scottish judge in exchequer causes and one of the Scottish intellectual property judges. He is also a judge in the Lands Valuation Appeal Court and a commercial judge.

President of the court, Lord Neuberger commented: “Recommending three appointments for a court of 12 naturally represents an important set of decisions. All members of the selection commission were keenly aware of the significance of the task we faced. We encouraged applications from a broad qualified pool, and took careful soundings from all those who were statutorily required to be consulted.

“The three names which have emerged represent a talented trio of judges, all of whom have already made notable contributions to the development of the law in their judicial careers. Lord Justice Hughes, Lord Justice Toulson and Lord Hodge are each replacing an outstanding member of the court, but they are jurists of the highest calibre and I very much look forward to working alongside them in their new roles.”



 
Lord Hodge History
Lord Patrick Hodge, - Lord Hodge
 

The Hon Lord Hodge (Patrick Stewart Hodge)

Lord Hodge was appointed a Judge of the Supreme Courts in 2005.

http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/34/504/The-Hon-Lord-Hodge-(Patrick-Stewart-Hodge)

He is the Scottish Judge in Exchequer Causes and one of the Scottish Intellectual Property Judges.  He is also a Judge in the Lands Valuation Appeal Court and a Commercial Judge.  He is a graduate of the University of Cambridge (Corpus Christi College, BA) and of the University of Edinburgh (LLB).  He was admitted to the Faculty of Advocates in 1983 and appointed Queen's Counsel in 1996.  He was Standing Junior Counsel to the Department of Energy from 1988 to 1991, and Standing Junior Counsel to the Inland Revenue in Scotland from 1991-1996.

Lord Hodge was a part time Law Commissioner at the Scottish Law Commission from 1997 to 2003.

Until his appointment as Judge, he acted as the Procurator to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland since 2000, and served as a Judge of the Courts of Appeal of Jersey and Guernsey since 2000.

 

There may be a good answer to these allegations, but allegations are being ventilated which call into question the probity of proceedings”

End Quote Lord Hodge Judge

http://ukscblog.com/profiles-lord-hodge

On 26 February 2013, it was announced that Lord Hodge will succeed Lord Hope (who is retiring in June) as one of the two Scottish Justices in the Supreme Court. He will commence his appointment at the beginning of the next court year, in October 2013

 

 

On 26 February 2013, it was announced that Lord Hodge will succeed Lord Hope (who is retiring in June) as one of the two Scottish Justices in the Supreme Court. He will commence his appointment at the beginning of the next court year, in October 2013.

Early Life and Education

Patrick Stewart Hodge was born on 19 May 1953.  He studied at Corpus ChristiCollege, University of Cambridge and then obtained his LLB from the University of Edinburgh.

Legal Career

Lord Hodge has enjoyed a busy and varied legal career.  His time in legal practice has seen him focus on commercial law, judicial review and property law, and his work has spanned several industry sectors. 

His legal career began in 1981, when he was appointed as junior counsel to the Department of Energy.  Lord Hodge was admitted to the Faculty of Advocates in 1983 and in 1991, after leaving the Department of Energy, he joined the then Inland Revenue.  His time at the Revenue lasted until 1996 when he was made a QC.

Lord Hodge was a part-time Law Commissioner from 1997 to 2003.  From 2000 he served as a judge in the Court of Appeal of Jersey and Guernsey and was the Procurator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland.   He continued in these roles until his appointment in 2005 as a judge in the Scottish Judiciary.

His role within the Scottish Judiciary saw Lord Hodge being an Exchequer judge in the Court of Session where he listened to predominantly commercial cases.   However, he is also well known for being an intellectual property judge and sitting in the Lands Valuation Appeal Court.  In 2011 he was appointed an Honorary Bencher of Middle Temple, a position he still holds.

Lord Hodge on the Supreme Court

Upon his appointment to the Supreme Court, Lord Hodge stated “I am honoured to have the opportunity to serve as a member of the Supreme Court. I look forward to working with my colleagues from the three jurisdictions of the United Kingdom“.

Personal Life

Lord Hodge married his wife, Penelope Jane Wigin, in 1983 and they have two sons and one daughter.  Lord Hodge enjoys the opera, skiing and playing golf: he is a member of the Bruntsfield Links Golfing Society.   Additionally, he is a trustee for the David Hume Institute, which aims at promoting informed debate on public policy and has been a Governor of Merchiston Castle School, Edinburgh since 1998.

http://www.thelawyer.com/news-and-analysis/practice-areas/litigation/bar-news-and-analysis/three-judges-appointed-to-supreme-court-bench/3001747.article

Three judges appointed to Supreme Court bench

26 February 2013 | By Katy Dowell

The Queen has approved the latest appointment to the Supreme Court bench with Lord Justices Toulson and Hughes and Lord Hodge being promoted.

The court started its search for three new justices in October, with Supreme Court Justices Lord Dyson becoming Master of the Rolls (MR) earlier this year, Lord Walker retiring in March and Lord Hope, the Scottish representative, retiring in June (16 October 2012).

Lord Hodge will succeed Lord Hope as the Scottish representative. Hodge is an IP judge and sits in the Lands Valuation Appeal Court and a commercial judge. He was admitted to Scotland’s Faculty of Advocates in 1983 and took silk in 1996.

Lord Justice Hughes first joined the High Court bench in 1997 sitting in the family division, having taken silk in 1990. He served as presiding judge on the Midland Circuit from 2000 to 2003 and transferred to the Queen’s Bench Division (QBD) in 2004. He is currently vice-president of the criminal division.

Lord Justice Toulson was called to the bar in 1969 and took silk in 1986. He was appointed to the QBD in 1996 before being appointed to the Court of Appeal in in 2007. He has also served on the Judicial Appointments Commission for England and Wales.

The court was under pressure to diversify the bench, which currently has just one woman, Lady Hale, on its 12-strong judicial panel.

According to reports, the application pack included this statement: “The selection commission is anxious to attract applications from the widest field, and in making recommendations will bear in mind the nature of the court and the way it is likely to develop over the next few years.”

As no further departures are expected until 2018 it was seen as an opportunity to embrace inclusivity.

In 2009 then Lord Chancellor Jack Straw commissioned Baroness Neuberger to look into the issues surrounding judicial diversity. She concluded a year later that: “Judges drawn from a wide range of backgrounds and life experiences will bring varying perspectives to bear on critical legal issues. A judiciary which is visibly more reflective of society will enhance public confidence.”

Delivering the Kutton Menon Memorial Lecture earlier this month, Lady Hale said her fellow Supreme Court Justices “mostly fit the stereotypical pattern of boys’ boarding school, Oxbridge college and the Inns of Court”.

The country’s most senior female judge argued that a degree of positive discrimination was needed when appointing justices. She said: “I too used to be sceptical about the argument that women judges were bound to make a difference, but I have come to agree with those great women judges who think that sometimes, on occasions, we may do so […].

“A different perspective can indeed make a difference, not only on so-called ‘women’s issues’, but on the whole range of legal issues which may come before the courts. Different voices add variety and depth to all decision making. Women judges may think that some of the results are only common sense – which just shows how gendered a concept like common sense can be.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-20141946

31 October 2012 Last updated at 20:41

Senators of the College of Justice


Lord Hodge

 approves liquidation of former Rangers FC

Rangers was forced into administration over unpaid tax bills

A judge has approved a motion for the former Rangers Football Club to be handed over to liquidators.

Duff and Phelps took over running of the club when it entered administration on 14 February over unpaid tax bills.

Earlier this month, the administrators said the club's creditors had approved an end to the administration.

At the Court of Session in Edinburgh, Lord Hodge approved a Duff and Phelps motion to hand over what remains of the old club to liquidators BDO.

Moves to end the administration were held up by a last-minute challenge from Collyer Bristow, former lawyers to Craig Whyte.

The law firm, which is also one of the creditors of the old Rangers, is being sued for about £25m damages by Duff and Phelps over its role in Mr Whyte's takeover of the club last year.

Ticketus deal

The administrators are seeking to retrieve money, alleging conspiracy and breach of undertakings.

The hearing at the Court of Session on Wednesday went into detail about the administration process.

Continue reading the main story



“There may be a good answer to these allegations, but allegations are being ventilated which call into question the probity of proceedings” Quote by Lord Hodge Judge

Lord Hodge said he was "very concerned" that allegations were being aired which called into question the integrity of proceedings during the Rangers administration.

The judge said he was aware of an investigation by the Insolvency Practioners Association, the administrators governing body.

Lord Hodge said there was sense in the IPA producing a report which he could then review. He added: "I am taking no view on these allegations one way or the other."

In June, Lord Hodge asked for a report into BBC allegations that Duff and Phelps had a conflict of interest, as one partner of the firm knew about the controversial Ticketus deal to use advance sales of season tickets to pay off the club's debt to Lloyds bank.

More evidence that Duff and Phelps was aware of the funding deal at an early stage was broadcast by BBC Scotland last week, including excerpts of a secretly-recorded conversation.

'Objectives achieved'

Lord Hodge said on Wednesday: "I have asked the BBC to provide me with a DVD of their allegations in May and October and may be requesting them to give a transcript of the entire telephone conversation so that I can see it in context.

"I may have to make a court order and if I do, I will give the BBC a chance to be represented.

"There may be a good answer to these allegations, but allegations are being ventilated which call into question the probity of proceedings."

It also emerged during the court hearing that the administrators have £1.7m in cash.

Following the case, Paul Clark, joint administrator of Rangers, said: "As administrators, our primary function was to keep the business going and effect a sale of the club in order that it could continue, while maximizing the return for the creditors.

"These objectives were achieved. It will now fall to the liquidators to realise any further potential funds that may go to creditors. We have worked closely with the liquidators over the last few months to ensure an orderly transition."

 

 
Lord Hodge-Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom Taking office- October 2013
Senator of the College of Justice - Incumbent - Assumed office - 2005-

Monarch- Elizabeth II - Nominated by - Jack McConnell

 

Personal details
Born Patrick Stewart Hodge
(1953-05-19) 19 May 1953 (age 59)
Alma mater Corpus Christi College, Cambridge;
University of Edinburgh
Profession Advocate
Religion Church of Scotland

 

 
EARLY LIFE
Hodge was educated at Croftinloan School, an independent junior boarding school in Perthshire, and Trinity College, Glenalmond, also in Perthshire. He studied at Corpus Christi College, University of Cambridge (BA), and the School of Law of the University of Edinburgh (LL.B.), and worked as a civil servant at the Scottish Office between 1975 and 1978,[1] before being admitted to the Faculty of Advocates in 1983.[2]

Legal career
Hodge was appointed Standing Junior Counsel to the Department of Energy from 1989 to 1991, and to the Inland Revenue from 1991 to 1996, in which year he took silk. As a QC, his practice was mainly in commercial law, judicial review and property law.[1] He served as a part-time Commissioner on the Scottish Law Commission from 1997–2003, and from 2000 to 2005 was a Judge of the Courts of Appeal of Jersey and Guernsey, and Procurator to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland. He was appointed a Senator of the College of Justice in 2005, taking the judicial title, Lord Hodge.[1][2] Like all judges of the Supreme Courts, he sits in both the Court of Session and High Court of Justiciary, but has particular responsibility as the Exchequer judge in the Court of Session.[2] On 26 February 2013 it was announced that Lord Hodge will succeed Lord Hope as a Justice of the UK Supreme Court from October 2013.[3]
 
Personal life
Hodge married Penelope Jane Wigin in 1983, with whom he has two sons and a daughter. His interests include opera and skiing, and he is a member of Bruntsfield Links Golfing Society. He has been a Governor of Merchiston Castle School, Edinburgh, since 1998.
 
See also
 
Senator of the College of Justice

The Senators of the College of Justice are judges of the College of Justice, a set of legal institutions involved in the administration of justice in Scotland. There are three types of Senator: Lords of Session (judges of the Court of Session); Lords Commissioner of Justiciary (judges of the High Court of Justiciary); and the Chairman of the Scottish Land Court. Whilst the High Court and Court of Session historically maintained separate judiciary, these are now one and the same, and the term, Senator, is almost exclusively used in referring to the judges of these courts.

Senators of the College use the title Lord or Lady along with a surname or a territorial name. Note, however, that some Senators have a peerage title, which would be used instead of the senatorial title. All Senators of the College have the honorific, The Honourable, before their titles, while those who are also Privy Counsellors or peers have the honorific, The Right Honourable. Senators are made Privy Counsellors upon promotion to the Inner House.

Under section 11 of the Treason Act 1708, it is treason to kill a Senator of the College of Justice "sitting in Judgment in the Exercise of their Office within Scotland".

History

In the past other officers of state were included as Senators, including the Lord Advocate, Lord Clerk Register, Master of Requests and the Secretary of State.

List of Senators

The Court of Session Act 1988 limits the number of Senators of the College of Justice (aside from the Chairman of the Scottish Land Court, currently The Hon. Lord McGhie, who ranks as a Senator) to 34.[1]

Inner House

The Lord President is the president of the First Division, and the Lord Justice Clerk is the president of the Second Division. The puisne judges are limited to five assigned to each of those two divisions.[2]

 

 

Senator Mandatory retirement Inner House appointment Outer House appointment Division
1 Gill, The Rt Hon. LordThe Rt Hon. Lord Gill (Lord Justice General
and Lord President of the Court of Session
)
02017-02-2525 February 2017* 02001-11-01November 2001 01994-01-011994 10 !First
2 Carloway, The Rt Hon. LordThe Rt Hon. Lord Carloway (Lord Justice Clerk) 02024-05-2020 May 2024 02008-08-01August 2008 02000-02-01February 2000 20 !Second
3 Eassie, The Rt Hon. LordThe Rt Hon. Lord Eassie 02015-01-012015 02006-10-01October 2006 01997-01-011997 11 !First
4 Paton, The Rt Hon. LadyThe Rt Hon. Lady Paton 02022-01-012022 02007-04-01April 2007 02000-01-01January 2000 21 !Second
5 Clarke, The Rt Hon. LordThe Rt Hon. Lord Clarke 02015-01-012015 02008-08-01August 2008 02000-02-01February 2000 22 !Second
6 Mackay of Drumadoon, The Rt Hon. The LordThe Rt Hon. The Lord Mackay of Drumadoon PC 02016-01-033 January 2016 02010-05-01May 2010 02000-03-01March 2000 23 !Second
7 Menzies, The Rt Hon. LordThe Rt Hon. Lord Menzies 02023-08-2828 August 2023 02012-02-01February 2012 02001-01-012001 13 !First
8 Smith, The Rt Hon. LadyThe Rt Hon. Lady Smith 02025-03-1616 March 2025 02012-01-012012 02001-01-012001 14 !First
8 Brodie, The Rt Hon. LordThe Rt Hon. Lord Brodie 02020-07-1414 July 2020 02012-01-012012 02002-01-012002 15 !First
10 Dorrian, The Rt Hon. LadyThe Rt Hon. Lady Dorrian 02017-06-1616 June 2017 02012-01-012012 02005-01-012005 24 !Second
11 Bracadale, The Rt Hon. LordThe Rt Hon. Lord Bracadale 02019-09-1818 September 2019 02013-03-011 March 2013 02003-01-012003 25 !Second

 

Outer House 

 

Senator Mandatory retirement Appointment
12 Drummond Young, The Hon. LordThe Hon. Lord Drummond Young 02020-02-1717 February 2020 02001-01-012001
13 Hodge, The Hon. LordThe Hon. Lord Hodge 02023-05-1919 May 2023 02005-01-012005
14 Glennie, The Hon. LordThe Hon. Lord Glennie 02020-12-033 December 2020 02005-01-012005
15 Kinclaven, The Hon. LordThe Hon. Lord Kinclaven 02021-06-022 June 2021 02005-01-012005
16 Turnbull, The Hon. LordThe Hon. Lord Turnbull 02006-01-012006
17 Clark of Calton, The Rt Hon. The LadyThe Rt Hon. The Lady Clark of Calton PC (Chair of the
Scottish Law Commission)
02019-02-2626 February 2019 02006-01-012006
18 Brailsford, The Hon. LordThe Hon. Lord Brailsford 02024-08-1616 August 2024 02006-01-012006
19 Uist, The Hon. LordThe Hon. Lord Uist 02021-02-011 February 2021 02006-04-01April 2006
20 Malcolm, The Hon. LordThe Hon. Lord Malcolm 02023-10-011 October 2023 02007-01-012007
21 Matthews, The Hon. LordThe Hon. Lord Matthews 02023-12-044 December 2023 02007-01-012007
22 Woolman, The Hon. LordThe Hon. Lord Woolman 02023-05-1616 May 2023 02008-03-01March 2008
23 Pentland, The Hon. LordThe Hon. Lord Pentland 02027-03-1111 March 2027 02008-11-01November 2008
24 Bannatyne, The Hon. LordThe Hon. Lord Bannatyne 02008-11-01November 2008
25 Stacey, The Hon. LadyThe Hon. Lady Stacey 02024-05-2525 May 2024 02009-01-01January 2009
26 Tyre, The Hon. LordThe Hon. Lord Tyre 02026-04-1717 April 2026 02010-05-01May 2010
27 Doherty, The Hon. LordThe Hon. Lord Doherty 02028-01-3030 January 2028 02010-05-01May 2010
28 Stewart, The Hon. LordThe Hon. Lord Stewart 02016-12-1414 December 2016 02010-11-01November 2010
29 Boyd of Duncansby, The Rt Hon. The LordThe Rt Hon. The Lord Boyd of Duncansby PC 02023-06-077 June 2023 02012-06-2626 June 2012
30 Jones, The Hon. LordThe Hon. Lord Jones 02012-07-1111 July 2012
31 Burns, The Hon. LordThe Hon. Lord Burns 02012-07-1212 July 2012
32 Scott, The Hon. LadyThe Hon. Lady Scott 02030-01-012030 02012-11-022 November 2012
33 Wise, The Hon. LadyThe Hon. Lady Wise 02013-02-066 February 2013
34 Armstrong, The Hon. LordThe Hon. Lord Armstrong 02013-02-1515 February 2013

 

 

Retired judges

There are also some retired judges who still sit occasionally in the Court of Session or the Court of Criminal Appeal to hear cases if needed when there is a shortage of available judges. They are also called Senators of the College of Justice.

See also

  • Historic List of Senators of the College of Justice
  • Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom
  • List of Lords Justices of Appeal
  • List of High Court judges of England and Wales
  • References

    1. ^ Court of Session Act 1988, s. 1.
    2. ^ Court of Session Act 1988, s. 2.

    External links

    Biographies of Senators

     

     References

    1. ^ a b c "Appointment of new judges". Scottish Executive. 2 February 2005. Retrieved 18 August 2009. 
    2. ^ a b c "Biographies - The Hon Lord Hodge". Scottish Court Service. Retrieved 18 August 2009. 
    3. ^ http://www.supremecourt.gov.uk/news/trio-of-judicial-appointments-to-the-supreme-court.html

     

    [hide]
    Senior Judiciary
    Royal Coat of Arms of the United Kingdom (Scotland).svg
    Inner House
    Outer House
    Retired (under 75)

     

     http://www.geni.com/projects/Senators-of-the-College-of-Justice/12512

    Senators of the College of Justice


    Scope of Project

    This project is a place to gather together profiles of those men and women who have been appointed Senators of the College of Justice in Scotland.

    Overview

    The Senators of the College of Justice are judges of the College of Justice, a set of legal institutions involved in the administration of justice in Scotland. There are three types of Senator: Lords of Session (judges of the Court of Session); Lords Commissioner of Justiciary (judges of the High Court of Justiciary); and the Chairman of the Scottish Land Court. Whilst the High Court and Court of Session historically maintained separate judiciary, these are now one and the same, and the term, Senator, is almost exclusively used in referring to the judges of these courts.

    Senators of the College use the title Lord or Lady along with a surname or a territorial name. Note, however, that some Senators have a peerage title, which would be used instead of the senatorial title. All Senators of the College have the honorific, The Honourable, before their titles, while those who are also Privy Counsellors or peers have the honorific, The Right Honourable. Senators are made Privy Counsellors upon promotion to the Inner Court.

    List of Senators of the College of Justice

    Commissioners for the Adminstration of Justice to the People of Scotland

    • Robert Murray - page 355
    • Sir John Hope - page 346
    • Col. William Lockhart - page 346 - Wikipedia Entry
    • John Swinton - page 346
    • Edward Mosley, Esq. - page 346
    • March, Esq. - page 346
    • Owen, Esq. - page 346
    • George Smyth, Esq. - page 346
    • William Laurence, Esq. - page 347
    • Hopkins, Esq. - page 347
    • Alexander Person - page 347
    • Henry Goodeir - page 347
    • Sir James Learmonth - page 347
    • Andrew Ker - page 347
    • James Dalrymple - page 347
    • Sir Archibald Johnstone - page 347
    • Alexander Brodie - page 347
    • Crook, Junior, Esq. - page 347
    • John Hewat, Esq. - page 347
    • Sir John Wemyss - page 347
    • John Scougall - page 347
    • James Roberton, Esq. - page 347
    • David Falconer, Esq. - page 347

    Restoration

    Revolution

    SOURCE: An Historical Account of the Senators of the College of Justice from its Institution in MDXXXII by George Brunton and David Haig, published by Thomas Clark MDCCCXXXII; and Wikipedia contributors, 'List of historic Senators of the College of Justice', Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 22 March 2013, 15:41 UTC, <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_historic_Senators_of_the_College_of_Justice&oldid=546314075>
     [accessed 29 April 2013]




     

                               Inside United Kingdom's Supreme Court
                                                                   
                           

    Alex Salmond rings the bells of his proposed Legal, Political, Economic and Social Independence for Scotland

                                      

     


               Scotland's First Minister Alex Salmond and Deputy Nicola Sturgeon (2013)


      
      Alex Salmond   

    First Minister of Scotland
    Incumbent
    Assumed office
    16 May 2007
    Monarch Elizabeth II
    Deputy Nicola Sturgeon
    Preceded by Jack McConnell
    Leader of the Scottish National Party
    Incumbent
    Assumed office
    3 September 2004
    Preceded by John Swinney
    In office
    22 September 1990 – 26 September 2000
    Preceded by Gordon Wilson
    Succeeded by John Swinney
    Member of the Scottish Parliament
    for Aberdeenshire East
    Incumbent
    Assumed office
    5 May 2011
    Preceded by Constituency established
    Member of the Scottish Parliament
    for Gordon
    In office
    3 May 2007 – 5 May 2011
    Preceded by Nora Radcliffe
    Succeeded by Constituency abolished
    Member of the Scottish Parliament
    for Banff and Buchan
    In office
    6 May 1999 – 7 June 2001
    Preceded by Constituency created
    Succeeded by Stewart Stevenson
    Member of Parliament
    for Banff and Buchan
    In office
    11 June 1987 – 6 May 2010
    Preceded by Albert McQuarrie
    Succeeded by Eilidh Whiteford
    Personal details
    Born Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond
    31 December 1954 (age 58)
    Linlithgow, Scotland
    Political party Scottish National Party
    Spouse(s) Moira Salmond
    Residence Bute HouseScotland (Official)
    StrichenScotland (Private)
    Alma mater University of St Andrews
    Profession Economist
    Religion Church of Scotland[1]
    Website Scottish National Party


    Alexander Elliot Anderson "Alex" Salmond
     (pron.: /ˈsæmənd/; born 31 December 1954) is a Scottish politician and current First Minister of Scotland. He became Scotland's fourthFirst Minister in May 2007. He is the Leader of the Scottish National Party (SNP), having served as Member of the Scottish Parliament (MSP) for Gordon. From 1987 to 2010 he served as Member of Parliament for Banff and Buchan in the House of Commons of the United Kingdom. Salmond previously held the position of leader of the SNP from September 1990 until he stepped down in September 2000.

    Following the establishment of the devolved Scottish Parliament in 1999, he was elected MSP for Banff and Buchan, thus simultaneously representing the area as both Member of Parliament (MP) and MSP. Salmond resigned as SNP leader in 2000 and did not seek re-election to the Scottish Parliament. He did however retain his Westminster seat in the 2001 general election. Salmond was once again elected SNP leader in 2004 and the following year held his Banff and Buchan seat in the 2005 general election. In 2006 he announced his intention to contest the Gordon constituency in the 2007 Scottish Parliament election, an election in which Salmond defeated the incumbent MSP and in which nationally, the SNP emerged as the largest single party. Salmond was voted First Minister by the Scottish Parliament on 16 May 2007.

    As First Minister, from 2007 to 2011 Salmond headed a minority Scottish Government, but after the 2011 Scottish Parliament election the Scottish National Party, which he leads, emerged with an overall majority. Politically, Salmond is one of the foremost proponents ofScottish independence, repeatedly calling for a referendum on the issue. Salmond has campaigned on global warming and in government has committed Scotland to legislation on emission reduction and the generation of renewable energy.

    Alex Salmond's Early Life and Career

    Salmond was born at LinlithgowWest Lothian, Scotland on 31 December, (Hogmanay) 1954.[2] He is the second of four children born to Robert Fyfe Findlay Salmond and Mary Stewart Salmond (née Milne), both of whom were Civil Servants.[3] His father's family had been previously resident at Waterfoot, near Keswick.[4][5] His middle names come from his family's tradition of naming their children after the local Church of Scotland minister, in this case the Reverend G. Elliot Anderson of St Ninian's Craigmailen Parish Church in Linlinthgow.[6][7]

    Originally from Linlithgow, West Lothian, Salmond is a graduate of the University of St Andrews, where he achieved a Joint Honours MA in Economics and History. After earning his degree he began his career in the Government Economic Service (GES), and later joined the Royal Bank of Scotland as an energy economist where he wrote and broadcast extensively for both domestic and international media outlets. Salmond attended the localLinlithgow Academy before studying at the University of St Andrews, where he lived in St Salvator's Hall and graduated with a Joint Honours MA in Economics and History.[8]

    In 1978 he entered the Government Economic Service as an Assistant Economist in the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland, part of the now defunct Scottish Office. Two years later he joined the Royal Bank of Scotland where he worked for seven years: first as an Assistant Economist before being appointed Oil Economist in 1982, and from 1984 combining that role with duties as a bank economist.[8] While with the Royal Bank, he wrote and broadcast extensively for both domestic and international outlets. He also contributed regularly to oil and energy conferences. In 1983 Salmond created a "Royal Bank/BBC oil index" that is still used.

    Personal life

    Salmond and his wife Moira have never had any children and the couple closely protect their private lives.[2] Moira Salmond, formerly McGlashan, was a senior civil servant and became her future husband's boss when he joined the Scottish Office in the 1970s. The two were married in 1981.[9]

    Salmond's main interests outside work and politics are golfhorse racingfootball and reading.[10] He supports Scotland and Heart of Midlothian F.C.[11] and sometimes attends matches. He also attended the 2008 UEFA Cup Final between Rangers FC and Zenit St Petersburg.

    He takes an interest in Scottish cultural life, as well as watching Star Trek and listening to country and western music.[12] For Children in Need in 2008, Salmond performed an impersonation of the Rikki Fulton character, the Reverend I M Jolly.[13]

    He has also been a Visiting Professor of Economics at Strathclyde University. He and his wife Moira live in a converted mill in the village of Strichen in Aberdeenshire.[9]

    Political career

    Early career in politics

    Salmond became active in the SNP when he joined the Federation of Student Nationalists at the University of St Andrews in 1973. Although a left-winger at the time he joined, he had considerable doubts as to whether or not the Labour Government would legislate for a devolvedScottish Assembly.

    Salmond started his political life as a committed left-winger inside the SNP and was a leading member of the socialist republican organisation within it, the 79 Group. He was, along with other group leaders, suspended from membership of the SNP when the 79 Group was banned within the larger party. In 1981, he married Moira French McGlashan,[14] then a senior civil servant with the Scottish Office.

    Following the SNP's National Council narrowly voting to uphold the expulsion, Salmond and the others were allowed back into the party a month later, and in 1985 he was elected as the SNP's Vice Convener for Publicity. In 1987 he stood for Parliament in Banff and Buchan and defeated the incumbent Conservative MP,Albert McQuarrie. Later that year Salmond became Senior Vice Convener (Deputy Leader) of the SNP. He was at this time still viewed as being firmly on the left of the party and had become a key ally of Jim Sillars, who joined him in the British House of Commons when he won a by-election for the seat of Glasgow Govan in 1988. Salmond served as a member of the House of Commons Energy Select Committee from 1987 to 1992.

    First time as SNP leader

    When Gordon Wilson stood down as SNP leader in 1990, Salmond decided to contest the leadership. His only opponent was Margaret Ewing, whom Sillars decided to support. This caused considerable consternation amongst the SNP left as the two main left leaders were opposing each other in the contest. Salmond went on to win the leadership election by 486 votes to Ewing's 146.[15]

    His first test as leader was the general election in 1992, with the SNP having high hopes of making an electoral breakthrough. Whilst considerably increasing its share of the vote, it failed to win a large number of seats. Sillars lost his, causing him to describe the Scottish people as '90 minute patriots'. This comment ended the political friendship between Salmond and Sillars, and Sillars would soon become a vocal critic of Salmond's style of leadership.

    The SNP increased its number of MPs from four to six in the 1997 general election, which saw a landslide victory for the Labour Party. After election, Labour legislated for a devolved Scottish parliament in Edinburgh. Although still committed to a fully independent Scotland, Salmond signed the SNP up to supporting the campaign for devolution, and, along with Scottish Labour leader Donald Dewar and Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Jim Wallace, played an active part in securing the victory for devolution in the Scotland referendum of 1997. However, many hard line fundamentalists in the SNP objected to committing the party to devolution, as it was short of full political Scottish independence.

    Salmond's first spell as leader was characterised by a moderation of his earlier left-wing views and by his firmly placing the SNP into agradualist, but still pro-independence, strategy. Salmond was one of the few politicians in the UK to oppose the NATO bombing of Serbiain 1999.[16] He was opposed to the conflict because it was not authorised by a United Nations Security Council resolution, which was acontroversial subject at the time. Despite this, Salmond was heavily criticised in the media for describing Tony Blair's decision to intervene militarily as an "unpardonable folly".[17]

    Several years as party leader earned Salmond an unusually high profile for an SNP politician in the London-based media. In 1998, Salmond won the Spectator Award for Political strategist of the Year. Following an appearance on the entertainment programme Call My Bluff, Salmond used one of the 'bluff' cards that are used as props in the show in the run-up to the first elections to the Scottish Parliament. To counter his frustration at having to sit in silence through what he claimed was an inappropriately political speech by Tony Blair at a charity lunch, he held up the bluff card as the Prime Minister began querying Scotland's economic prospects should independence occur.[18] Throughout his time in politics, Salmond has maintained his interest in horse racing, writing a weekly column for The Scotsman and appearing a number of times on Channel 4's The Morning Line.

    Salmond was elected to the Scottish Parliament in 1999 and was one of its highest profile members. He stood down as SNP leader in 2000, facing internal criticism after a series of high profile fall-outs with party members,[19]and was replaced by his preferred successor John Swinney, who defeated Alex Neil for the post. He left the Scottish Parliament in 2001 to lead the SNP group in the House of Commons.

    During the prolonged parliamentary debates in the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq he voiced strong opposition to the UK's participation. In the aftermath of the war, he lent support to the attempt of Adam Price, a Plaid Cymru MP, to impeach Tony Blair over the Iraq issue. Salmond has gone further than many anti-war politicians in claiming that Blair's statements on the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq were consciously intended to deceive the public.[20] He has also claimed that Blair had made a pact with George W. Bush "to go to war come what may".[20]

    Return as leader

    On 15 July 2004, Alex Salmond said that he would be a candidate in the forthcoming election for the leadership of the SNP.[21] This came as a surprise because Salmond had previously declared that he would definitely not be a leadership candidate.[21] In the postal ballot of all members he went on to receive over 75% of the votes cast, placing him well ahead of his nearest rival Roseanna Cunningham.[22] Although he was re-elected in the 2005 general election, he made clear his intention to return to the Scottish Parliament at the 2007 Scottish parliamentary election in an attempt to win power for the first time.[22]

    In that election, Salmond stood as a candidate for the Gordon constituency, which had been represented since 1999 by the Liberal Democrat Nora Radcliffe.[23] Salmond won the seat with 41% of the vote, and a majority of 2,062, returning to the Scottish Parliament after six years' absence. In the election the SNP emerged as the largest party, winning 47 seats to Labour's 46.

    First Minister of Scotland

    Having won more seats than any other party in the 2007 Scottish Parliament election, the SNP initially approached the Scottish Liberal Democrats to form a coalition, but they declined to take part in negotiations.[24] This left the SNP without any possibility to form a coalition with an overall majority. The Scottish Green Party agreed to support an SNP minority administration on a confidence and supply basis.[25]

    Salmond was elected by the Scottish Parliament as First Minister on 16 May 2007, and was sworn in on 17 May after receiving the Royal Warrant from the Queen and taking the official oath of allegiance before judges at the Court of Session.[26] Under section 45(7) of the Scotland Act 1998 he became Keeper of the Great Seal of Scotland at the same time.[27] Salmond is the firstnationalist politician to hold the office of First Minister.[28] He reduced the size of the Cabinetfrom nine members to six, and said he would seek to govern on a "policy by policy" basis.[28]In order to concentrate on his new role as First Minister, Salmond stood down as the SNP group leader at Westminster and was replaced by Angus Robertson.[29]

    The Guardian reported in November 2007 that Salmond believed Scotland would be independent within "the next decade".[30]

    In November 2007, Salmond received the The Spectator's Parliamentarian of the Year award for his "brilliant campaign" and "extraordinary victory" in the Scottish Parliament elections, thereby ending eight years of Labour rule.[31]

    UK general election debates

    Salmond said it would be "unacceptable"[32] for the SNP to be excluded from the 2010 UK election televised debate and has sought "guarantees of inclusion from the broadcasters, given their inescapable duty to ensure fairness and impartiality in election-related coverage in Scotland" in the build up to the 2010 UK general election. The party used the Freedom of Information Act to see if the BBC could have broken its own rules. Salmond said it was entirely unacceptable to Scotland as well as to the SNP for the broadcasters to exclude the party that forms the Scottish Government and leading in Westminster election polls. He emphasised, however, that he was not trying to stop any debates from being broadcast.[33]After having failed to change the BBC's decision to not include the SNP in the final British debate, in line with the decision by ITV and Sky News, the SNP mounted a legal challenge to the BBC at the Court of Session in Edinburgh. Despite earlier reassurances by the SNP that it was not trying to stop the broadcast, it sought an 'interim interdict' to prevent the debate being broadcast without the participation of the SNP. However, the Court of Session dismissed the SNP's complaint, and refused to ban the BBC from broadcasting the third debate in Scotland, on the grounds that the SNP had left the bringing of the case "far too late", had not contested the broadcasting of the first two debates by ITV and Sky Television, and that the third debate would in any case be broadcast by Sky on satellite across Britain, which a Scottish court had no power to block. The judge, Lady Smith, further ordered the SNP to pay the BBC's legal expenses. The SNP's political opponents described the SNP's contesting of the case as a "stunt".[34]

    There were Scottish debates dealing with specifically devolved issues which Salmond had accepted the invitation to attend along the other parties within the Scottish Parliament on Sky TV. Salmond declined to attend those held on the BBC and ITV, and Angus Robertson agreed to take his place in these debates.[35]

    Renewable energy

    Alex Salmond in his 2010 New Year message highlighted the importance of sustainable development and renewable energy in Scotlandand the required increase in powers of the Scottish Parliament needed to help harness Scotland's green energy potential and therefore take full advantage of the "renewable revolution".[36]

    Earlier in December 2009, he campaigned for climate change legislation at the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen to promote Scotland's role in tackling and mitigating climate change. This included signing a Partnership Agreement with the Maldives, one of the most exposed countries to the consequences of rising sea levels.[37][38]

    Although energy is mostly a matter reserved to Westminster, administrative devolution of Sections 36 & 37 of the Electricity Act (1989) coupled with fully devolved planning powers enabled the Scottish Government to establish Scotland as a leader in renewable energy developments. Other recurring campaign themes include nuclear disarmament and Salmond's strong opposition to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Foreign policy, defence, national security and nuclear weaponry are reserved to Westminster.

    Second term

    2011 Scottish election

    In the 2011 Scottish Parliament election, the Scottish National Party won by a landslide and emerged with an overall majority. As a result of this Salmond now has the ability to call a referendum on Scottish independence. On the 9 January 2011 he announced that referendumwould be held in Autumn 2014. The Scottish National Party (SNP) became the minority government of the devolved Scottish Parliament after winning a plurality of seats in the 2007 Scottish election. A white paper for the bill, setting out four possible options ranging from no change to full independence, was published by the Scottish Government on 30 November 2009. A draft bill for public consultation was published on 25 February 2010, setting out a two question yes/no referendum, proposing both further devolution or full independence. The SNP failed to obtain support from other parties and withdrew the draft bill.

    The SNP again pledged to hold an independence referendum and won an overall majority in the 2011 Scottish election. On 10 January 2012, the Scottish Government announced that they intend to hold the referendum in the autumn of 2014. An agreement was signed on 15 October 2012 by David Cameron and Salmond which provides a legal framework for the referendum to be held. The principal issues in the referendum are economic policy, defence arrangements, continued relations with the UK and membership of supranational organisations, particularly the European Union.

    Sporting interests

    Salmond is renowned for his interest in horseracing[2] and for his support of Heart of Midlothian F.C.[39] He was made a patron ofAberdeen University Shinty Club in 2011 after attending their 150th anniversary celebrations at the Sutherland Cup final. This was Salmond's first ever shinty game.[40]

    See also

    Referendum (Scotland) Bill, 2010

    Scottish independence referendum, 2014
                                                   
                                                             Scotland's location within the United Kingdom
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referendum_(Scotland)_Bill,_2010


    The Scottish Government intends to hold a referendum of the Scottish electorate on the issue of independence from the United Kingdom on Thursday 18 September 2014[1] following an agreement between the Scottish Government and HM Government.[2]The Referendum Bill, setting out the arrangements for this referendum, is likely to be put forward in 2013.[3] The question asked in the referendum will be "Should Scotland be an independent country?"[4]

    After failing to obtain support from other parties for a referendum on independence during the 2007–11 Scottish Parliament, theScottish National Party (SNP) again pledged to hold an independence referendum and won an overall majority in the 2011 Scottish election. On 10 January 2012, the Scottish Government announced that it intends to hold the referendum in the autumn of 2014. Anagreement was signed on 15 October 2012 by the Prime Minister of the United KingdomDavid Cameron, and the First Minister of ScotlandAlex Salmond, which provides a legal framework for the referendum to be held. The principal issues in the referendum are the economic strength of Scotland, defence arrangements, continued relations with the UK, and membership of supranational organisations, particularly the European Union and NATO.

    A proposal for Scottish devolution was put to a referendum in 1979, but resulted in no change, despite a narrow majority of votes cast being in favour of change.[5]A Labour backbench MP successfully inserted a clause that the number voting 'Yes' had to exceed 40% of the total electorate.[5] No further constitutional reform was proposed under the Conservative Thatcher and Major governments between 1979 and 1997. Soon after Labour returned to power in 1997, a second Scottish devolution referendum was held.[6] Clear majorities expressed support for both a devolved Scottish Parliament and that Parliament having the power to vary the basic rate of income tax.[6] The Scotland Act 1998 established the new Scottish Parliament, first elected on 6 May 1999.[7]

    2007 SNP administration [edit]


    Scottish First Minister Alex Salmondand Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon at the launch of theNational Conversation, 14 August 
    Debating chamber of the Scottish Parliament

    A commitment to hold a referendum in 2010 was part of the SNP's election manifesto when it contested the 2007 Scottish Parliament election.[8] As a result of that election, it became the largest party in the Scottish Parliament, the devolved legislative assembly first established in 1999 for dealing with unreserved matters within Scotland, and formed a minority government led by First Minister Alex Salmond.[9] The SNP administration accordingly launched a 'National Conversation' as a consultation exercise in August 2007, part of which included a draft of a referendum bill, as the Referendum (Scotland) Bill.[9][10]

    After the National Conversation was concluded, a white paper for the proposed Referendum Bill was published on 30 November 2009.[11][12] The paper detailed four possible scenarios, with the text of the Bill and Referendum to be revealed later.[11] The scenarios were: No Change, Devolution per the Calman Review, Full Devolution, and Full Independence.[11] The Scottish Government published a draft version of the bill on 25 February 2010 for public consultation.[13][14] The 84 page document was titled Scotland's Future: Draft Referendum (Scotland) Bill Consultation Paper and contained a consultation document and a draft version of the bill.[15] The consultation paper set out the proposed ballot papers, the mechanics of the proposed referendum, and how the proposed referendum was to be regulated.[15] Public responses were invited from 25 February to 30 April.[16]

    The bill outlined three proposals: the first was full devolution or 'devolution max', suggesting that the Scottish Parliament should be responsible for "all laws, taxes and duties in Scotland", with the exception of "defence and foreign affairs; financial regulation, monetary policy and the currency," which would be retained by the British government.[15] The second proposal outlined Calman type fiscal reform, gaining the additional powers and responsibilities of setting a Scottish rate of income tax that could vary by up to 10p in the pound compared to the rest of the UK, setting the rate of stamp duty land tax and "other minor taxes", and introducing new taxes in Scotland with the agreement of the UK parliament, and finally, "limited power to borrow money."[15] The third proposal was for full independence, stating that the Scottish Parliament would gain the powers to be able to convert Scotland into a country which would "have the rights and responsibilities of a normal, sovereign state".[15]

    In the third Scottish Parliament, only 50 of 129 MSPs (47 SNP, 2 from the Scottish Green Party and Margo McDonald) supported a referendum.[17][18] Due to the opposition from the other main parties, the Scottish Government eventually opted to withdraw the bill after failing to secure their support.[9][19][20]

    2011 SNP administration 

    The Scottish National Party repeated its commitment to hold an independence referendum when it published its election manifesto for the 2011 Scottish parliamentary election, in which it won an absolute majority for the first time.[21] In a television debate days before the election, First Minister Alex Salmond stated that the referendum would be held in the "second half of the parliament".[20] Salmond stated that this was because he wanted to secure more powers for the Scottish Parliament via the Scotland Bill first.[20] The SNP gained an overall majority in the election, winning 69 of the 129 seats available, thereby gaining a mandate to hold an independence referendum.[22][23]

    In January 2012, the UK government offered to legislate to provide the Scottish Parliament with the specific powers to hold a referendum, providing it was "fair, legal and decisive".[23] This would set terms of reference for the referendum, such as the question(s) asked, the electorate used and which body would organise the referendum.[24] The Scottish Government then announced that they intended to hold the referendum in the autumn of 2014.[24] Negotiations continued between the two Governments until October 2012, when an agreement was reached.[9]

    Date and eligibility 

    The Scottish Government announced on 21 March 2013 that the referendum would be held on 18 September 2014.[1] Some media reports have speculated that autumn 2014 was chosen by the Scottish Government because it was close to the 700th anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn (despite the anniversary actually occurring in June),[25][26] although these claims have been denied by Alex Salmond.[27] Other reports have suggested that autumn 2014 was chosen because Scotland will host the 2014 Commonwealth Games and the 2014 Ryder Cup around this time.[25][26][28]

    Under the terms of the 2010 Draft Bill, the following people would be entitled to vote in the referendum:[15]

    The Scottish Government is proposing to reduce the voting age for the referendum from 18 to 16, as it is SNP policy to reduce the voting age for all elections in Scotland.[15][29][30] 16 has been the age of legal capacity in Scotland since the Age of Legal Capacity (Scotland) Act 1991. Following the Edinburgh Agreementbetween the Scottish and British governments, it appeared likely that 16 and 17 year olds would be allowed to vote in the referendum.[29] Legislation to extend the franchise to 16 and 17 year olds was formally lodged by the Scottish Parliament in March 2013.[31]

    In January 2012, Labour MSP Elaine Murray led a debate arguing that the franchise should be extended to Scots living outside Scotland, including the circa 800,000 Scots living in the other parts of the UK.[32] This was opposed by the Scottish Government, who argued that it would greatly increase the complexity of the referendum and cited evidence from the United Nations Human Rights Committee that a referendum based on criteria other than residence would be queried by other nations.[32] In the House of Lords, Baroness Symons argued that the rest of the United Kingdom should be allowed to vote on Scottish independence, on the grounds that it would affect the whole country. This argument was rejected by the British government, with Lord Wallace pointing to the fact that only two of 11 referenda since 1973 had been across all of the United Kingdom.[32]

    Legality 

    Prior to the announcement of the referendum in 2014, there was debate as to whether the Scottish Parliament had the power to legislate for a referendum relating to the issue of Scottish Independence without a Section 30 Order. Under the current system of devolution, the Scottish Parliament does not have the power to unilaterally secede from the United Kingdom, because the constitution is a reserved matter for the parliament of the United Kingdom.[17] However, the Scottish Government insisted in 2010 that they could legislate for a referendum, as it would be an "advisory referendum on extending the powers of the Scottish Parliament",[16] whose result would "have no legal effect on the Union."[15]

    In the end, the Scottish Government did not hold a referendum in the 2007-11 parliamentary term. However, following the landslide election of the Scottish National Party in 2011, the Scottish Government confirmed intentions to hold a referendum in 2014, again dismissing claims that it was outwith the Scottish Parliament's legal competence. In January 2012, the UK government expressed the contrary opinion that the holding of any referendum concerning the constitution would be outside the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament.[23][33] Lord Wallace, the Advocate General for Scotland, said that private individuals could successfully challenge a referendum bill passed by the Scottish Parliament.[34]

    The UK parliament could temporarily transfer legal authority to the Scottish Parliament to prevent this, but the Scottish Government had objected to the attachment of conditions to any referendum by this process.[34] However, the two governments eventually signed the Edinburgh Agreement, which allows the temporary transfer of legal authority to be made. The agreement states that the Scottish and British governments have agreed to promote an Order in Council under Section 30 of the Scotland Act 1998 in the United Kingdom and Scottish Parliaments to allow a single-question referendum on Scottish independence to be held before the end of 2014. The Order will put it beyond doubt that the Scottish Parliament can legislate for that referendum.[2]

    Oversight 

    According to the Edinburgh Agreement, the Electoral Commission will be responsible for overseeing the referendum, with the exception of the conduct of the poll and announcement of the result, and the giving of grants. In its role of regulating the campaign and campaign spending, the Electoral Commission will report to the Scottish Parliament. The poll and count will be managed in the same way as local elections, by local returning officers and directed by a Chief Counting Officer.[35]

    Question 

    The Edinburgh Agreement states that the wording of the question will be for the Scottish Parliament to determine and will be set out in the Referendum Bill to be introduced by the Scottish Government. Under the terms of the agreement, the Scottish Government referred the proposed referendum question and any preceding statement to the Electoral Commission for review of its intelligibility.[2]

    Alex Salmond stated that his preferred question would be "Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country?".[36] This formulation was criticised by some, who believed prefacing the question with "Do you agree" was intended to garner a positive response.[36] After consultations by the Electoral Commission, the question was amended to "Should Scotland be an independent country?".[36]

    Campaign

    Campaign funding and costs

    In the original 2010 Draft Bill, the Scottish Government proposed that there would be a designated organisation campaigning for a Yes vote and a designated organisation campaigning for a No vote, both of which would be permitted to spend up to £750,000 on their campaign and be entitled to one free mailshot to every household or vote in the referendum franchise. There was to be no public funding for campaigns. Political parties were each to be allowed to spend £100,000.[15]This proposed limit on party spending was revised to £250,000 in 2012.[37]

    In 2013, the Scottish Government agreed to new campaign funding regulations proposed by the Electoral Commission. The proposals will be in effect for the 16-week regulated period preceding the poll. The proposals allow for the two designated campaign organisations to spend up to £1.5 million, and for political parties to have an individual limit determined by their performance in the 2011 Scottish election.[36]

    According to the Scottish Government's consultation paper published on 25 February 2010, the cost of holding the referendum was "likely to be around £9.5 million", mostly spent on running the poll and the count. Costs would also include the posting of one neutral information leaflet about the referendum to every Scottish household, and one free mailshot to every household or voter in the poll for the designated campaign organisations.[15] As of 2013, the projected cost of the 2014 referendum is £13.3 million.[38]

    Campaign organisations 

    The campaign in favour of Scottish independence, Yes Scotland, was launched on 25 May 2012.[39] Yes Scotland is being led by Blair Jenkins OBE, formerly the Director of Broadcasting at STV and Head of News and Current Affairs at both STV and BBC Scotland. The campaign is supported by the Scottish National Party and the Scottish Green Party.[39][40] Its launch featured a number of celebrities and urged Scots to sign a declaration of support for independence.[39] Alex Salmond stated that he hoped one million Scots would sign the declaration, and on the 30th of November 2012 he announced that 143,000 had done so already.[41]

    The campaign in favour of Scotland remaining in the United Kingdom Better Together, was launched on 25 June 2012.[42] Better Together is being led by Alastair Darling, former Chancellor of the Exchequer, and has support from the Conservative PartyLiberal Democrats and Labour Party.[42] The campaign works with the digital media company Blue State Digital.[43]

    Issues 

    Devomax 

    devomax for a more empowered Holyrood, instead of outright independence, was an option that Salmond and the SNP said could be attractive to Scots. However, it is not clear what that would involve. The BBC suggested that it could mean not having military chiefs and embassies, which would cost the Scottish government more money. Liberal Democrat Secretary of State for Scotland Michael Moore said that "devomax is really a brand without a product, a concept of more powers for Scotland without any detail about what that entails".[44] Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron added that, should the vote go against independence, additional discussions on empowering Holyrood would occur.[45] Debate in The Guardian suggested that Scottish independence could benefit England as well as Scotland,[46] while also saying that devomax should not be on the ballot as it could result in cross-voting for those who favour independence but look at devomax as a fallback option.[47]

    Monarchy 

    The SNP is in favour of retaining cultural and other ties with the UK and would apply to join the Commonwealth of Nations.[48] With regard to maintaining the British monarchy in Scotland, Salmond has said the monarchy would be retained and his close relationship with Queen Elizabeth II was seen as favourable towards maintaining ties.[49] However, the Queen was still said to "fear" for the future of Great Britain, but will accept the result of the referendum.[50] Scottish Liberal Democrat Willie Rennie also asked for clarification on the issue,[51] while Holyrood's justice committee convenor, Christine Grahame, pledged to hold a referendum on maintaining a "full-blown monarchy, an edited version or go for a republic."[52]

    The pro-independence Scottish Socialist Party favours a republic.

    Economy 

    Underlying economic strength 

    A principal issue in the referendum is whether or not Scotland would perform better economically as an independent state.[53] Opinion polling has shown that a majority of Scots would vote for independence if it could be shown that the people would be better off.[53] The Barnett formula has resulted in public spending being higher per head of population in Scotland than England.[48] Scotland also produces more taxation revenue per head of population than the UK average, mainly due to the production of North Sea oil.[54][55] The Institute for Fiscal Studies reported in November 2012 that a geographic share of North Sea oil would more than cover the higher public spending, but warned that oil prices are volatile and that it is a finite resource.[55]

    Given the uncertain nature of an Independence settlement, along with the high portion of public debt that would likely be inherited, the credit rating and borrowing rates of an independent Scotland is also an issue.[56][57] Despite these deficits, the UK had, until late February 2013, retained the highest triple A rating, resulting in it having low costs of borrowing to finance its debts.[57] Fitch, a principal credit rating agency, refused in October 2012 to offer an opinion on what rating Scotland would have.[57] The agency explained that it could not yet give an accurate view because the state of Scottish finances would largely depend on the result of negotiations between the UK and Scotland dividing its assets and liabilities.[57]

    Currency 

    Another economic issue is the currency that would be used by an independent Scotland.[48] The principal options are to retain the pound sterling, to form an independent Scottish currency, or to join the Euro.[48] The SNP's policy is to retain the pound, but joining a formal currency union with the UK could involve some form of budgetary constraints being imposed on the Scottish state.[48] The SNP have suggested that an arrangement for currency union could involve giving seats on the Bank of England's Monetary Policy Committee to representatives of the Scottish Government. However, Alistair Darling, head of the Better Together campaign, said that voters in the rest of the UK could choose not to be in a currency union with Scotland[58] and added criticism of Salmond with the mantra "everything will change but nothing will change".[43] Yes Scotland maintain, however, that a formal currency union would represent a mutually beneficial arrangement, as Scotland's exports, including North Sea oil, would boost the balance of payments and therefore strengthen the exchange rate of the pound sterling.[59]

    The Jimmy Reid Foundation produced a report in early 2013 which described the SNP's plan to retain the pound as a good "transitional" arrangement, but recommended the establishment of an independent Scottish currency to "insulate" Scotland from the UK's "economic instability". The report argued that the UK's monetary policy had "sacrificed productive economy growth for conditions that suit financial speculation" and that an independent currency could protect Scotland from "the worst of it".[60] The Scottish Green Party said that keeping the pound sterling as "a short term transitional arrangement" should not be ruled out, but the Scottish Government should "keep an open mind about moving towards an independent currency".[61] The Scottish Socialist Party favours an independent Scottish currency.[62]

    Financial sector 

    The UK Treasury issued a report on 20 May 2013 that suggested Scotland's banking systems would be too big to insure depositor compensation in the event of a bank failure and that it would be less able to guarantee the deposits. The report claimed Scottish banks would have assets worth 1,254% of gross domestic product, which is more than Cyprus and Iceland before their financial crises. It suggested that Scottish taxpayers would each have £65,000 GBP of potential liabilities during a hypothetical bailout in Scotland versus £30,000 GBP as part of the UK.[63]

    Counter to this, Andrew Hughes Hallett, Professor of Economics at St Andrews University, has pointed out that by international convention, when banks which operate in more than one country struggle, any bailout is shared in proportion to the area of activities of those banks, and therefore it's shared between several countries. In this manner, Fortis Bank and the Dexia Bank were bailed out collectively by France, Belgium, and the Netherlands. In fact the US federal reserve made emergency loans available to RBS of £285bn on this basis.[citation needed] The same principle would apply in the case of an independent Scotland; if Scotland had been independent at the time of the RBS bailout, only 10% of the bailout would have been borne by the people of Scotland. It's also been pointed out[by whom?] that an independent Scotland may have chosen to regulate their banking sector more effectively than was the case in the UK.

    Defence 

    The Royal United Services Institute suggested in October 2012 that an independent Scotland could set up a Scottish Defence Force, comparable in size and strength to those of other small European states like Denmark, Norway and Ireland, at a cost of £1.8 billion per annum, "markedly lower" than the £3.3 billion contributed by Scottish taxpayers to the UK defence budget in the 2010/11 fiscal year.[64] At their annual conference in October 2012, the SNP membership voted to drop a longstanding policy of opposing NATO membership.[65]

    The Trident nuclear missile system is based at Coulport weapons depot and naval base of Faslane in the Firth of Clyde area. The SNP objects to having nuclear weapons on Scottish territory. Alex Salmond has stated that "it is inconceivable that an independent nation of 5,250,000 people would tolerate the continued presence of weapons of mass destruction on its soil." British military leaders have claimed that there is no alternative site for the missiles.[66][67] A seminar hosted by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace stated that the Royal Navy would have to consider a range of alternatives, including disarmament.[68] British MP Ian Davidson cited a UK report[vague] that suggested that the warheads could be deactivated within days and safely removed in 24 months.[69]

    The SNP have argued that independence would allow the Scottish Government to correct a defence underspend in Scotland, pointing out that the total underspend in Scotland has been "at least £7.4 billion" between 2002 and 2012. The SNP's Angus Robertson stated that the underspend "continues to fundamentally undermine any remaining defence case for the union".[70]

    Dorcha Lee, a former influential[71] colonel in the Irish Army, argued in The Herald that Scotland could eschew forming an army based on inherited resources from the British Army and instead take an option "based on the Irish model", with: a "[self-imposed] ceiling in the region of 1,100 [Scottish Defence Force] personnel, to include a mechanised battalion and other combat service support army elements"; a navy that has the "capacity to contribute to [international peacekeeping missions]"; and an air force with "troop-carrying helicopters" and "a logistics aircraft, such as the C130 Hercules". He argued that Scotland could dedicate between 1% and 1.2% of GDP to defence spending, markedly less than the UK's 2.6% of GDP.[72]

    European Union 

    Status of an independent Scotland in the European Union [edit]

    The SNP advocates for a similar relationship between an independent Scotland and the European Union as between the UK and the EU today. This means full membership with some exemptions, such as not having to adopt the Euro. Political opponents and some commentators have questioned whether Scotland would automatically gain EU membership and would instead have to apply.[73] It was reported in The Spectator and The Independent that Spain may object to Scottish membership of the EU, amid fears of repercussion within its own Catalonia and Basque country.[74][75][76] These reports were denied by the Spanish government in January 2012.[77] The Spanish Foreign Minister José Manuel García-Margallo then changed his position in October 2012, stating that an independent Scotland would have to "join the queue" applying for EU membership.[78]

    José Manuel Barrosopresident of the European Commission, has implied that an independent Scotland would have to apply for membership and the rest of the UK would remain a member.[79] This was then contradicted by Professor Sir David Edward, a former European Court judge, who believes that Scotland and the rest of the UK would be in a comparable position.[80] The European Commission offered to provide an opinion to an existing member state on the matter, but the British government confirmed it would not seek ask this advice on the grounds that it did not want to negotiate the terms of independence ahead of the referendum.[81]

    Roland Vaubel, a member of the Advisory Council to the German Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology, published a paper in May 2013 titled The Political Economy of Secession in the European Union, which stated that Scotland would remain a member of the European Union upon independence. The paper suggested that there would need to be a negotiation between the Scottish Government and the British Goverment on "how they wished to share the rights and obligations of the predecessor state". Vaubel also stated that Barosso's comments on the status of Scotland after independence "has no basis in the European treaties".[82]

    In January 2013, Ireland's Minister of European Affairs, Lucinda Creighton, stated in an interview with BBC News that "if Scotland were to become independent, Scotland would have to apply for membership and that can be a lengthy process".[83] However, Creighton later wrote to Nicola Sturgeon to clarify that her view was "largely in line with that of the Scottish Government", and that she "certainly did not at any stage suggest that Scotland could, should or would be thrown out of the EU". Creighton went on to agree with comments from the SNP's Andrew Robertson, who said that "the EU would adopt a simplified procedure for the negotiations, not the traditional procedure followed for the accession of non-member countries" and that negotiations could be completed in the two-year period between the referendum in 2014 and the planned independence in 2016.[84] Regardless, members of the Better Together campaign have continued to cite Creighton's original comments on platforms such as Newsnight Scotland and First Minister's Questions.[85][86] Scottish Labour's Johann Lamont later accused the Scottish Government of "bombard[ing Creighton] with abuse" over her original comments.[87]

    Future status of the United Kingdom in the European Union 

    Yes Scotland accused the UK Government of hypocrisy after David Cameron confirmed he would hold a referendum on the UK's membership of the European Union should the Conservative Party win the 2015 General Election.[88][89] David Cameron was among those criticising the Scottish Government for creating "uncertainty" by scheduling a referendum so far into the future, and for failing to make guarantees about an independent Scotland's EU membership. Yes Scotland added that Cameron's proposed referendum "makes it very clear that the real threat to Scotland's place in Europe comes from an increasingly Eurosceptic Westminster" and that "one of the central pillars of the No campaign's case is now crumbling".

    In light of the performance of the Eurosceptic party Ukip in the English local elections, the Scottish Government described the party as "a useful reminder to Scots of the dangers of a No vote in the independence referendum, which could see Scotland dragged to the exit door of the EU against our will".[90]

    A Panelbase poll in May 2013 found that when asked "how would you be likely to vote in next year's Scottish independence referendum if the UK was looking likely to vote to withdraw from the EU?", 44% of respondents were likely to vote Yes, on par with 44% of respondents who were likely to vote No. 36% of respondents, however, said they were planning to vote Yes as things currently stand.[91]

    United Nations 

    British Prime Minister David Cameron has suggested an independent Scotland would be "marginalised" at the United Nations, where the UK is a permanent member of the Security Council.[92]

    Science 

    The Scottish Liberal Democrats have intimated that research funding for Scottish universities could be threatened by independence, stating that Scottish universities "could not do all of this exciting new research without the extra bonus funding that [they] receive from across the border". The SNP's Education Secretary, Michael Russell, responded by insisting Scotland's universities have a "global reputation" which would continue to attract investment after independence. He pointed out that universities in 2011 were being given £289m in research and knowledge exchange through the Scottish Funding Council, and an additional £500m from Research Councils, the European Union, charities, and businesses. This funding would not be threatened by a change in Scotland's constitutional status.[93]

    Culture

    Glasgow-born film producer Iain Smith suggested in May 2013 that independence could make Scotland "more competitive on the world stage", and better place it to "promote its talent, crafts and services internationally for the economic and cultural benefit of the country".[94]

    Sport

    There have also been suggestion that the 2014 Commonwealth Games, taking place two months before the election, in Glasgow could be used to showcase Scotland; though the SNP denied and criticised any links between the Games and the referendum, Scott Stevenson, the director of sport at Commonwealth Games Canada, related the Canadian experience with Quebecois nationalism and said:

    I'm pretty optimistic there'll be greater interest in Glasgow than some recent Games. I've asked in meetings how we can expect the political issues to play out and that politics won't be put into the Games. Athletes want to come in and compete, unencumbered by politics."

    This also came in light of the 1986 Commonwealth Games in Edinburgh, the last time Scotland hosted the Games, which was boycotted by a majority of countries due to British support for South Africa amidst a backdrop of the sporting boycott of South Africa.[95] The timing parallel with using the Games and the referendum was also made by The Guardian.[96][97]

    Similarly, during the 2012 Summer Olympics, Salmond said that this would be Scotland's last appearance as part of Great Britain at the Olympics before it competes as an independent Scotland in the 2016 Summer Olympics.[98] International Olympic Committee representative Craig Reedie suggested that Scots would have to continue to represent Great Britain in 2016, as international recognition of an independent Scotland would not be immediately conferred after the referendum.[99] He also questioned whether an independent Scotland could support its athletes to the same extent as Great Britain.[99] Former Prime Minister Gordon Brown has pointed to the medal count for Great Britain, saying that it showed the success of a union that included the two nations.[100]

    Response 

    Politicians 

    Canon Kenyon Wright, who led the Scottish Constitutional Convention campaigning for a devolved parliament, said that the terms of the election should be governed by Holyrood and not dictated by Westminster.[101]

    Plaid Cymru's Leanne Wood expressed support for the Yes Scotland campaign.[102] She also added that British history was at "a hinge point" and that Wales would follow with independence within a generation but continue to be a part of a "neighbourhood of nations."[103] She further said that England is a sister nation with which all three nations have a "common Britishness." [104]

    Mary Lockhart, chair of the Scottish Co-operative Party and long-time member of the Scottish Labour Party, wrote in The Scotsman that she would be voting for independence in 2014 from a belief that independence would "deliver the chance for socialists to help shape a Scotland which reflects the identity of its people".[105]

    Businesspeople 

    Sir Tom HunterJim McColl, and Sir Tom Farmer are among entrepreneurs and businessmen who have called for more clarity in the referendum debate in order to best make a decision.[106]

    A business-oriented campaign for Scottish independence called Business for Scotland was formally launched in May 2013 with the support of Tony Banks.[107]

    Trade unions

    The traditional association of trade unions in Scotland and the United Kingdom as a whole with the British Labour Party, which is campaigning against Scottish independence, has not, as some expected, resulted in an outright declaration of support for the Union from leading trade unions. The Scottish Trades Union Congressrefused an offer to join the Better Together campaign in 2012.[108] The STUC instead published a report called A Just Scotland, which laid out "challenges for both sides of the debate", in particular calling on Better Together to "outline a practical vision of how social and economic justice can achieved within the union".[109]

    In 2013, a branch of the Communications Workers Union covering Edinburgh, Lothians, Fife, Falkirk, and Stirling voted to back a motion describing independence as "the only way forward for workers in Scotland", and agreeing to "do all in our power to secure [a Yes] outcome".[110]

    There also exists a Labour for Independence movement made of supporters of the Scottish Labour Party, which has a historical affilition with the labour movement.

    Celebrities

    The Yes Scotland campaign was launched with endorsements from celebrities such as Sean ConneryBrian Cox also said that Scotland was under "centralised servitude" and talked of his disenchantment with Labour governments in Westminster, including that led by Gordon Brown: "The parliament at Westminster can see no further than the end of its own bridge".

    During the premiere of the Pixar movie Brave, actress Emma Thompson, who lives half the year in Scotland, warned against dividing Great Britain "in an ever-shrinking world", despite recognising relations being strained at times between Scotland and England.[111]

    Simon Neil of Scottish rock band Biffy Clyro suggested "we may as well give Scottish independence a shot" in an interview with NME in January 2013.[112] He added: "Scotland has really good oil money, we've got renewable energy, we have ways of moving forward and we're in a strong position to make it happen. [...] I don't know what we're getting from London apart from a lack of control over our own future. It doesn't mean we don't love England or Wales."

    Artists 

    National poet Liz Lochhead read a poem at the launch of Yes Scotland dealing with the English-Scottish rivalry during the 16th century. Author Harry Reid suggested a rejection of independence would depend on the ability of Labour to revive its traditional popularity in Scotland.[113]

    In an article published by Bella Caledonia, Irvine Welsh, author of Trainspotting, said Scottish independence would "promote the cultural unity that the UK state is constantly undermining", suggesting that strained political relationships between Scotland and England were causing tension and harming the two nations' ability to amicably co-exist. He pointed to the example of Scandinavia, saying that "Swedes, Norwegians and Danes remain on amicable terms; they trade, co-operate and visit each other socially any time they like", despite the lack of a single Scandinavian state.[114]

    Award-winning Scottish playwright Alan Bissett joined National Collective, an organisation campaigning for Scottish independence, in 2012 and is counted among its "Cultural Ambassadors". Bissett described National Collective as "a great place for artists to come together and talk about the benefits [...] of independence".[115]

    Opinion polling

    A graph of polls on the referendum.

    Polls have been conducted in two main formats, either asking a straight yes or no question on independence, or including some form of increased devolution as a third option. The wording of the question has also differed; some polls, attempting to track changing trends, have asked for the past few years the wording originally put forward by the SNP in 2007. TNS BMRB, for instance, continued to ask: "Should the Scottish Government negotiate a settlement with the Government of the United Kingdom so that Scotland becomes an independent state?".[116] This stands in contrast with the current wording of the question, which is: "Should Scotland be an independent country?". The first poll to use that formulation was the Angus Reid survey published on 3 February 2013.

    Professor John Curtice stated in January 2012 that polling showed support for independence at between 32% and 38% of the Scottish population, a level which is a slight decline from 2007, when the SNP first formed the Scottish Government.[117] To date there has been no poll evidence of majority support for Independence, although the share opposed to independence has declined.[117] This is has been one of the factors in allowing the SNP to win Scottish Parliament elections.[117]Opinion polling has also asked for attitudes depending on hypothetical situations, such as whether a Conservative government will be elected in the next United Kingdom general election,[118] or whether the UK looked to be heading out of the European Union.[91]

    Recent opinion polls have also shown that support for independence among voters is relatively high among those between the ages of 18 and 24 or from economically-deprived areas. Conversely, voters living in affluent areas or over the age of 55 are likely to support the Union.[119] A survey conducted by Panelbase in March 2013 found significantly more support for independence amongst male voters.[120] Some universities have conducted straw polls, with Glasgow University voting 62% No[121] and Napier University voting 70% No.[122]

    Two option polling 

    Date Polling agency Support Independence (%) Oppose Independence (%) Undecided (%) Source
    January 2012 Ipsos MORI 39 50 11 [123]
    8 February 2012 YouGov 30 54 16 [124]
    June 2012 Ipsos MORI 35 55 10 [125]
    19 August 2012 YouGov 27 60 13 [126]
    8 October 2012 TNS BMRB 28 53 19 [127]
    15 October 2012 Ipsos MORI 28 52 19 [128]
    21 October 2012 Panelbase 37 45 18 [118]
    26 October 2012 YouGov 29 55 14 [129]
    January 2013 Angus Reid 32 50 16 [130]
    14 January 2013 TNS BMRB 28 48 24 [116]
    27 January 2013 Panelbase 34 47 19 [131]
    1 February 2013 Angus Reid 32 47 20 [132]
    13 February 2013 Ipsos MORI 34 55 11 [119]
    13 March 2013 TNS BMRB 33 52 15 [133]
    24 March 2013 Panelbase 36 46 18 [120]
    8 April 2013 TNS BMRB 30 51 19 [134]
    9 May 2013 Ipsos MORI 31 59 10 [135]
    19 May 2013 Panelbase 36 44 20 [136]

    Three option polling 

    Date Polling agency Support Independence (%) Support Devomax (%) Support Status quo (%) Undecided (%) Source
    1 November 2011 TNS BMRB 28 33 29 10 [137]
    13 January 2012 ICM 26 26 33 10 [137]
    14 June 2012 Ipsos MORI 27 41 29 4 [137]
    26 October 2012 YouGov 23 41 25 11 [129]

    Potential consequences 

    Irvine Welsh suggested that Scottish independence could further what he described as "the Northern Ireland peace process". On the Bella Caledonia website, he wrote: "If we rid ourselves of the political imperialist baggage of the UK state, new possibilities emerge. For example, it would become feasible for Ireland, as an established sovereign nation, to see itself as part of a shared geographical and cultural entity. This, in turn, brings potential opportunities for the continued development of the peace process in Northern Ireland".[114]

    Opinion polls show a rise in support for stronger powers for the National Assembly for Wales if Scotland should choose to be independent.[138]

    See also 

    References

    1. a b "Scotland to hold independence poll in 2014 – Salmond". BBC. 10 January 2012. Retrieved 10 January 2012.
    2. a b c "Agreement between the United Kingdom Government and the Scottish Government on a referendum on independence for Scotland"(pdf). 15 October 2012. Retrieved May, 2013.
    3. ^ "Response to referendum consultation". Scotland.gov.uk. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
    4. ^ http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2013/01/electoral-commission-report30012013
    5. a b "The 1979 Referendums"BBC News (BBC). Retrieved 16 January 2012.
    6. a b "Scottish Referendum Live – The Results"BBC News (BBC). Retrieved 16 January 2012.
    7. ^ "Scottish Parliament Official Report – 12 May 1999". Scottish Parliament. Retrieved 2013-01-14.
    8. ^ "Manifesto 2007". Scottish National Party. 12 April 2007. pp. 8, 15. Retrieved 11 September 2009.
    9. a b c d "Timeline: Scottish independence referendum"BBC News. BBC. 15 October 2012. Retrieved 15 October 2012.
    10. ^ "Annex B Draft Referendum (Scotland) Bill"Official website, Publications > 2007 > August > Choosing Scotland's Future: A National Conversatio > Part 10Scottish Government. 13 August 2009. Archived from the original on 10 September 2009. Retrieved 10 September 2009.
    11. a b c Quinn, Joe (30 November 2009). "SNP reveals vision for independence referendum". London: The Independent. Archived from the original on 30 November 2009. Retrieved 30 November 2009.
    12. ^ "Your Scotland, Your Voice"www.scotland.gov.uk > News > News Releases > 2009 > November > YSYV. Scottish Government. 30 November 2009. Archived from the original on 30 November 2009. Retrieved 30 November 2009.
    13. ^ "Scottish independence referendum plans published". BBC News. 25 February 2010. Archived from the original on 25 February 2010. Retrieved 25 February 2010.
    14. ^ "Referendum consultation"www.scotland.gov.uk > News > News Releases > 2010 > February > referendum. Scottish Government. 25 February 2010. Archived from the original on 25 February 2010. Retrieved 25 February 2010.
    15. a b c d e f g h i j "Scotland's Future: Draft Referendum (Scotland) Bill Consultation Paper" (PDF). www.scotland.gov.uk > Publications > 2010 > February > Scotland's Future: Draft Referendum (Scotland) Bil > PDF 1. Scottish Government. 25 February 2010. Archived fromthe original on 25 February 2010. Retrieved 25 February 2010.
    16. a b "Draft Referendum (Scotland) Bill Consultation".www.scotland.gov.uk > Topics > Public Sector > Elections > Referendum Bill Consultation. Scottish Government. undated. Archived from the original on 25 February 2010. Retrieved 25 February 2010.
    17. a b Black, Andrew (3 September 2009). "Q&A: Independence referendum". BBC News. Archived from the original on 10 September 2009. Retrieved 10 September 2009.
    18. ^ MacLeod, Angus (3 September 2009). "Salmond to push ahead with referendum Bill". London: The Times. Archived from the original on 10 September 2009. Retrieved 10 September 2009.
    19. ^ "Scottish independence plan 'an election issue'"BBC News (BBC). 6 September 2010. Retrieved 17 January 2012.
    20. a b c Black, Andrew (1 May 2011). "Scottish election: Party leaders clash in BBC TV debate"BBC News (BBC). Retrieved 17 January 2012.
    21. ^ Stuart, Gavin (14 April 2011). "SNP launch 'Re-elect' manifesto with independence referendum vow"STV (STV Group). Retrieved 17 January 2012.
    22. ^ "Scottish election: SNP wins election"BBC News (BBC). 6 May 2011. Retrieved 17 January 2012.
    23. a b c Clegg, David (17 January 2012). "Advocate General says SNP's referendum plans would be 'contrary to the rule of law'"The Courier(DC Thomson). Retrieved 17 January 2012.
    24. a b Clegg, David (11 January 2012). "Independence referendum: Scotland facing constitutional chaos"The Courier (DC Thomson). Retrieved 17 January 2012.
    25. a b Severin Carrell and Nicholas Watt. "Scottish independence: Alex Salmond sets poll date – and defies London | Politics". The Guardian. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
    26. a b "Bannockburn date mooted for referendum". Herald Scotland. 2 January 2012. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
    27. ^ Carrell, Severin (11 January 2012). "Scottish independence referendum: why autumn 2014?"www.guardian.co.uk (Guardian News and Media Limited). Retrieved 12 August 2012.
    28. ^ "Scotland’s referendum: If at first you don’t succeed". The Economist. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
    29. a b "Viewpoints: Can 16- and-17-year olds be trusted with the vote?".BBC News. BBC. 14 October 2012. Retrieved 14 October 2012.
    30. ^ Macdonnell, Hamish (17 September 2011). "16-year-olds likely to get the vote on Union split"The Times Scotland (London: Times Newspapers Limited). Retrieved 18 September 2011.
    31. ^ "Scottish independence: Bill to lower voting age lodged". 2013-03-12. Retrieved 2013-04-01.
    32. a b c "Scottish independence: SNP dismisses ex-pat voting call"BBC News (BBC). 18 January 2012. Retrieved 19 January 2012.
    33. ^ Whitaker, Andrew (18 January 2012). "Scottish independence referendum: Publish legal advice or be damned, SNP warned over referendum"The Scotsman (Johnston Press). Retrieved 19 January 2012.
    34. a b "Scottish independence: Referendum vote 'needs approval'"BBC News (BBC). 20 January 2012. Retrieved 21 January 2012.
    35. ^ http://www.number10.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Agreement-final-for-signing.pdf Edinburgh Agreement
    36. a b c d Black, Andrew (30 January 2013). "Scottish independence: SNP accepts call to change referendum question"BBC Sport. BBC. Retrieved 30 January 2013.
    37. ^ Barnes, Eddie (14 October 2012). "Scottish independence: Salmond in campaign cash battle"Scotland on Sunday (Johnston Publishing). Retrieved 14 October 2012.
    38. ^ "Scottish independence: Referendum cost estimated at £13.3m". 3 April 2013. Retrieved 14 May 2013.
    39. a b c "Scottish independence: One million Scots urged to sign 'yes' declaration"BBC News (BBC). 25 May 2012. Retrieved 18 July 2012.
    40. ^ "Scottish independence: Greens join Yes Scotland campaign"BBC News (BBC). 6 October 2012. Retrieved 7 October 2012.
    41. ^ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-20539259
    42. a b "Scottish independence: Alistair Darling warns of 'no way back'".BBC News (BBC). 25 June 2012. Retrieved 18 July 2012.
    43. a b "Scottish independence: Darling ridicules Salmond's claims | Politics | guardian.co.uk". Guardian. 25 June 2012. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
    44. ^ Buchanan, Michael (20 February 2012). "BBC News – Scottish independence referendum: What is devolution max?". Bbc.co.uk. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
    45. ^ "Full transcript | David Cameron | Speech on Scottish independence | Edinburgh | 16 February 2012". New Statesman. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
    46. ^ "Let Scotland be a sovereign, mature nation and England benefits too | Neal Ascherson | Comment is free | The Observer". Guardian. 15 January 2012. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
    47. ^ "Scotland: don't include devo max in the referendum on independence | the big issue | From the Observer | The Observer". Guardian. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
    48. a b c d e "The case for Scottish independence : Diplomat Magazine". Diplomatonline.com. 12 April 2012. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
    49. ^ Walker, Tim (19 May 2011). "How the Queen will help see off Scottish independence". Telegraph. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
    50. ^ "Queen 'fears for UK over Scottish independence'". Metro.co.uk. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
    51. ^ "Scottish Independence: Queen's Role After Separation Questioned". Huffingtonpost.co.uk. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
    52. ^ Johnson, Simon (12 May 2012). "Queen 'may not remain monarch of an independent Scotland'". Telegraph. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
    53. a b Fraser, Douglas (15 October 2012). "Scottish independence: Braveheart or iPad?"BBC News. BBC. Retrieved 19 October 2012.
    54. ^ Flanders, Stephanie (9 January 2012). "Scotland: A case of give and take"BBC News. BBC. Retrieved 6 May 2013.
    55. a b Sparrow, Andrew (19 November 2012). "Scotland's post-independence prosperity linked to oil"The Guardian (Guardian Media Group). Retrieved 6 May 2013.
    56. ^ Barnes, Eddie (22 April 2013). "Scottish independence: SNP pound freedom warning"The Scotsman. Retrieved May, 2013.
    57. a b c d Fraser, Douglas (19 October 2012). "Scottish independence: credit where it's due"BBC News. BBC. Retrieved 19 October 2012.
    58. ^ Severin Carrell, Scotland correspondent. "Scottish independence: Alistair Darling challenges plans for currency union | Politics | guardian.co.uk". Guardian. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
    59. ^ "Question on Currency". 23 April 2013. Retrieved 25 April 2013.
    60. ^ "Scotland 'must have own currency after Yes vote". 16 April 2013. Retrieved 23 April 2013.
    61. ^ "Greens attack phoney war on currency". 23 April 2013. Retrieved 25 April 2013.
    62. ^ "Examining Scotland's currency options". 28 April 2013. Retrieved 12 May 2013.
    63. ^ "U.K. Treasury Says Independent Scotland Couldn’t Aid Banks". 20 
      1. May 2013. Retrieved 23 May 2013.
      2. ^ "A' the Blue Bonnets: Defending an Independent Scotland".www.rusi.orgRoyal United Services Institute. 15 October 2012. Retrieved 15 October 2012.
      3. ^ "SNP members vote to ditch the party's anti-Nato policy"BBC News. BBC. 19 October 2012. Retrieved 19 October 2012.
      4. ^ Richard Norton-Taylor. "Trident nuclear deterrent 'at risk' if Scotland votes for independence". The Guardian. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      5. ^ "What would Scottish independence mean for Trident?". New Statesman. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      6. ^ "Scottish Independence May Impact U.S. Trident Missile Program | Global Security Newswire". NTI. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      7. ^ http://www.nti.rsvp1.com/gsn/article/q-british-mp-presses-scots-how-quickly-uk-nukes-may-be-banned/?mgh=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nti.org&mgf=1
      8. ^ "UK caught "red-handed" on Scotland's underspend". 21 January 2013. Retrieved 25 April 2013.
      9. ^ "Irish expert: independent Scotland could cut military spending". 14 April 2013. Retrieved 25 April 2013.
      10. ^ "Irish lesson for independent Scottish forces". 14 April 2013. Retrieved 25 April 2013.
      11. ^ Carrell, Severin (23 October 2012). "Alex Salmond accused of misleading Scottish voters about EU legal advice"The Guardian(Guardian News and Media).
      12. ^ Brian Brady (22 January 2012). "Spain could wield veto over Scotland's EU membership". The Independent. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      13. ^ "Would Spain stop Scotland from joining the EU? » Spectator Blogs". Spectator.co.uk. 12 January 2012. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      14. ^ Mahony, Honor. "/ Political Affairs / EU in uncharted legal waters on Scottish independence". Euobserver.com. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      15. ^ Settle, Michael (25 January 2012). "Scots referendum triggers fears of Spain breakaway"The Herald (Herald & Times Group). Retrieved 31 January 2012.
      16. ^ Tremlett, Giles; Carrell, Severin (24 October 2012). "'Join the queue' for EU membership, Spain tells Alex Salmond"The Guardian (Guardian News and Media). Retrieved 24 October 2012.
      17. ^ Carrell, Severin (12 September 2012). "Barroso casts doubt on independent Scotland's EU membership rights"The Guardian (Guardian News and Media).
      18. ^ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-20757450
      19. ^ "Scottish independence: UK ministers not seeking advice on Scotland in EU"BBC News. BBC. 1 November 2012. Retrieved 1 November 2012.
      20. ^ "Adviser to German government: 'indy Scotland would still be in Europe'". 12 May 2013. Retrieved 14 May 2013.
      21. ^ "Scottish independence: Irish minister says EU application 'would take time'". BBC. 2013-01-25. Retrieved 2013-02-03.
      22. ^ "Ireland’s Minister for European Affairs". Scottish Government. 2013-01-26. Retrieved 2013-02-02.
      23. ^ "Scottish independence: Newsnight Scotland debate". BBC. 2013-01-30. Retrieved 2013-02-03.
      24. ^ "As-it-happened: First minister's questions on Thursday 31 January". BBC. 2013-01-31. Retrieved 2013-02-02.
      25. ^ "Creighton 'bombarded with abuse' over Scotland view". The Independent. 2013-02-03. Retrieved 2013-02-03.
      26. ^ "David Cameron promises in/out referendum on EU". BBC. 2013-01-23. Retrieved 2013-01-23.
      27. ^ "What do No campaign say now EU membership under threat from Westminster?". Yes Scotland. 2013-01-23. Retrieved 2013-01-23.
      28. ^ "Farage: Ukip will target SNP vote". 12 May 2013. Retrieved 14 May 2013.
      29. a b "Poll: Possible EU withdrawal could boost independence support". 19 May 2013. Retrieved 21 May 2013.
      30. ^ "Scottish Independence: Cameron Warns On UN Security Council Place". Huffingtonpost.co.uk. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      31. ^ "Scottish university research at risk from independence, claim LibDems". 27 November 2011. Retrieved 21 May 2013.
      32. ^ "Hollywood producer: Independence would boost creative industries". 19 May 2013. Retrieved 21 May 2013.
      33. ^ "Scottish independence referendum will increase interest in Glasgow 2014, it is claimed | Glasgow 2014". insidethegames.biz. 29 February 2012. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      34. ^ Severin Carrell (23 April 2012). "Scottish independence: the essential guide | Politics | guardian.co.uk". Guardian. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      35. ^ Severin Carrell (11 January 2012). "Scottish independence referendum: why autumn 2014? | Politics | guardian.co.uk". Guardian. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      36. ^ Johnson, Simon (19 July 2012). "Alex Salmond: London 2012 will be final lap for Team GB". Telegraph. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      37. a b "Independent Scotland ‘would have to compete in Team GB at 2016 Olympics’"STV (STV Group). 12 August 2012. Retrieved 12 August 2012.
      38. ^ "Who will claim the Olympics? – Opinion". Al Jazeera English. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      39. ^ [1][dead link]
      40. ^ "Plaid leader offers YES Scotland support and solidarity". English.leannewood.plaidcymru.org. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      41. ^ "BBC News – Leanne Wood: Wales will be independent in a generation". Bbc.co.uk. 29 June 2012. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      42. ^ Powell, Nick (29 June 2012). "There'll still be a Britain, says Plaid leader". Itv.com. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      43. ^ "Socialism will work better in independent Scotland". 21 April 2013. Retrieved 23 April 2013.
      44. ^ "Jim McColl joins entrepreneurs in call for independence details". 11 May 2013. Retrieved 15 May 2013.
      45. ^ "Scots entrepreneurs form pro-independence group". 14 May 2013. Retrieved 15 May 2013.
      46. ^ "Not Better Together, say unions".
      47. ^ "A Just Scotland - STUC publishes interim report on Scotland’s constitutional future". 2012-11-25. Retrieved 2013-04-03.
      48. ^ "Scottish postal workers hope to deliver Yes vote for independence". 2013-03-04. Retrieved 2013-04-03.
      49. ^ "Scottish independence: Emma Thompson attacks separation". Telegraph. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      50. ^ "Biffy Clyro's Simon Neil: 'We may as well give Scottish independence a shot'". NME. 2013-01-30. Retrieved 2013-01-30.
      51. ^ "With support from Sean Connery, Scotland launches independence campaign – World News". Worldnews.nbcnews.com. 25 May 2012. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      52. a b "Scottish independence will allow us to become more British, says Irvine Welsh". Guardian. 2013-01-10. Retrieved 2013-01-21.
      53. ^ "Cultural Ambassador: Alan Bissett". 2012-03-26. Retrieved 2013-04-01.
      54. a b "Referendum For An Independent Scotland Poll". TNS BMRB. 14 January 2013. Retrieved 14 January 2013.
      55. a b c "Q&A: Scottish independence row"BBC News (BBC). 17 January 2012. Retrieved 19 January 2012.
      56. a b "Tory win 'influences Scottish vote'"Belfast Telegraph (INM). 21 October 2012. Retrieved 21 October 2012.
      57. a b "Support for independence bounces back". 13 February 2013. Retrieved 13 February 2013.
      58. a b Allardyce, Jason (24 March 2013). "Independence referendum: he says Yes, she says No"The Sunday Times (News International). Retrieved 24 March 2013.
      59. ^ http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/scottish-independence-blog/2013/feb/22/scottish-independence-mock-referendum
      60. ^ http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/scotland/article3742505.ece
      61. ^ "Poll | Four in ten Scots back independence". Ipsos MORI. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      62. ^ "Scottish Unionists Push One Question Referendum – Global Agenda – News". Israel National News. 8 February 2012. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      63. ^ "Poll | Support for independence falls back while First Minister’s approval rating also dips". Ipsos MORI. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      64. ^ McSmith, Andy (20 August 2012). "Salmond to select timing of Scottish referendum"The Independent. Retrieved 20 August 2012.
      65. ^ Dinwoodie, Robbie (8 October 2012). "Independence blow as support for Union soars"The Herald (Herald & Times Group). Retrieved 9 October 2012.
      66. ^ "Scottish Public Attitudes & Opinion Monitor – Wave 13". IPSOS Mori. 15 October 2012. Retrieved 19 October 2012.
      67. a b Bargeton, Steve (26 October 2012). "Courier poll a blow to SNP's independence hopes"The Courier (DC Thomson). Retrieved 26 October 2012.
      68. ^ "Half of People in Scotland Would Vote to Remain in United Kingdom". ARPO. Retrieved 6 January 2013.
      69. ^ "Third of Scots back UK split". Retrieved 28 January 2013.
      70. ^ "New Question Has Little Effect on Scottish Referendum Vote". Retrieved 3 February 2013.
      71. ^ "TNS BMRB - Nuclear Weapons and Scottish Independence Poll".
      72. ^ "SNP push fails to attract support for a Yes vote".
      73. ^ "Alex Salmond in mire after independence support drops to 31 per cent".
      74. ^ "Poll: independence support would rise if voters think UK's leaving EU".
      75. a b c "UK Polling Report". UK Polling Report. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
      76. ^ Matt Withers. "Voters would say "No" to an independent Wales: poll – Wales News – News". WalesOnline. Retrieved 11 October 2012.




    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/record-view-only-winners-alex-1903695

    Record View: Only winners from Alex Salmond's tax haven plan may be foreign business owners


    AS the Republic of Ireland has showed, cutting corporation tax is no guarantee of success for a national economy, says RECORD VIEW.






    ALEX SALMOND has come in for considerable criticism – some of it from the Daily Record – for not providing enough detail on the nitty gritty of independence.

    On issues like pensions, banking, defence and mortgages, he has failed to answer basic questions about what would happen if there is a Yes vote in the referendum.

    Yesterday, the First Minister did come up with one concrete example of what he will do if Scotland breaks away from the UK – slash corporation tax by three per cent.

    In a paper on our future economy, he committed the SNP to marketing an independent Scotland as a low-cost tax haven for big international businesses.

    Salmond says the move could increase investment, boost output and create up to 27,000 jobs over the next 20 years.

    It will also delight Brian Souter, the millionaire Stagecoach owner, who, despite high-profile support for independence, has so far been absent from the list of donors to the Yes campaign.

    But what would the impact be on ordinary Scots? The immediate effect of a corporation tax cut could well be less money flowing into the exchequer. That would mean less cash for welfare payments, pensions and public services.

    Last week, former Prime Minister Gordon Brown warned of the disastrous consequences that could arise from an independent Scotland slashing the tax.

    If Scotland made a cut, he pointed out, the rest of the UK would have to do the same to stay competitive. The only people guaranteed to win from the resulting race to the bottom are business owners.

    To see the potential pitfalls of being a tax haven for international conglomerates, Salmond need only glance over the sea to the Republic of Ireland.

    Its international reputation has been badly tarnished by the way it has allowed companies like Google and Apple to avoid tax elsewhere by basing themselves there.

    And have these practices helped the country’s workers? Not in the slightest.

    Recent figures show 300,000 people have emigrated from Ireland in the last four years as the economy tanked.

    That doesn’t like a great model to build a new Scotland on.

    Back in the frame

    BLUNDERING surgeon Colin Mainds may face a fresh investigation.

    Following coverage by this newspaper, the General Medical Council have received a new complaint involving Mainds.

    Some of his patients were left crippled and in permanent pain. But the authorities decided he should not be struck off.

    The GMC have another chance to look at Mainds’s fitness to practise. We hope the authorities get it right this time.

    On track to be mum

    CONGRATULATIONS to pregnant athletics star Lee McConnell.

    It turns out she was a month gone when she won the Scottish indoor 200m title.

    Lee thinks she’ll be back in action for the 2014 Commonwealth Games.

    What brilliant news all round.






                                                                   Behind Closed Doors - The Power and Infuence and Secret Societies
    #

     

     
    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/privy-council-appointment-hon-lord-hodge
     
    Press release:

    Privy Council appointment: Hon Lord Hodge
    Organisation:
    Prime Minister's Office, 10 Downing Street

    Published:
    11 April 2013
    Hon Lord Hodge appointed to Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council.
    Appointments to the Privy Council
    The Queen has been pleased to approve the appointment of the Hon Lord Hodge to Her Majesty’s Most Honourable Privy Council following
    his appointment as Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom.

    Supreme Court of the United Kingdon and where the Law Lords of  The Privy Council sit - the highest courts on the United kingdom

    http://www.middletemple.org.uk/members/masters-of-the-bench/directory/3259/?showall=true&page=1
    Midle Temple
    Masters of the Bench
    PATRICK STEWART HODGE
    Full Title: The Hon Lord Hodge
    Category: Honorary Bencher
    Bench Call Date:08.02.2012

    Call Date
    Bio:
    Lord Hodge is a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom.  A Senator of the College of Justice since 2005, Lord Hodge studied at Corpus Christi College, Cambridge and the University of Edinburgh.  He was admitted to the Faculty of Advocates in 1983, and took Silk in 1996.  His practice was mainly in commercial law, judicial review and property law.  He served as a part-time Commissioner on the Scottish Law Commission from 1997–2003, and from 2000 to 2005 was a Judge of the Courts of Appeal of Jersey and Guernsey, and Procurator to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland.  He sits in the Court of Session and High Court of Justiciary, but has with particular responsibility as the senior commercial judge in the Court of Session. 

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/privy-council-appointment-hon-lord-hodge
     



                                                                   Behind Closed Doors - The Power and Infuence and Secret Societies
    #

     

     
    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/privy-council-appointment-hon-lord-hodge
     
    Press release:
    Privy Council appointment: Hon Lord Hodge
    Organisation:
    Prime Minister's Office, 10 Downing Street

    Published:
    11 April 2013
    Hon Lord Hodge appointed to Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council.
    Appointments to the Privy Council
    The Queen has been pleased to approve the appointment of the Hon Lord Hodge to Her Majesty’s Most Honourable Privy Council following
    his appointment as Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom.

    Supreme Court of the United Kingdon and where the Law Lords of  The Privy Council sit - the highest courts on the United kingdom

    http://www.middletemple.org.uk/members/masters-of-the-bench/directory/3259/?showall=true&page=1
    Midle Temple
    Masters of the Bench
    PATRICK STEWART HODGE
    Full Title: The Hon Lord Hodge
    Category: Honorary Bencher
    Bench Call Date:08.02.2012

    Call Date
    Bio:
    Lord Hodge is a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom.  A Senator of the College of Justice since 2005, Lord Hodge studied at Corpus Christi College, Cambridge and the University of Edinburgh.  He was admitted to the Faculty of Advocates in 1983, and took Silk in 1996.  His practice was mainly in commercial law, judicial review and property law.  He served as a part-time Commissioner on the Scottish Law Commission from 1997–2003, and from 2000 to 2005 was a Judge of the Courts of Appeal of Jersey and Guernsey, and Procurator to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland.  He sits in the Court of Session and High Court of Justiciary, but has with particular responsibility as the senior commercial judge in the Court of Session. 

    Press release:
    Privy Council appointment: Hon Lord Hodge
    Organisation:
    Prime Minister's Office, 10 Downing Street


    Published:
    11 April 2013
    Hon Lord Hodge appointed to Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council.
    Appointments to the Privy Council
    The Queen has been pleased to approve the appointment of the Hon Lord Hodge to Her Majesty’s Most Honourable Privy Council following
    his appointment as Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom.

    http://www.middletemple.org.uk/members/masters-of-the-bench/directory/3259/?showall=true&page=1
    Midle Temple
    Masters of the Bench
    PATRICK STEWART HODGE
    Full Title: The Hon Lord Hodge
    Category: Honorary Bencher
    Bench Call Date:08.02.2012

    Call Date
    Bio:
    Lord Hodge is a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom.  A Senator of the College of Justice since 2005, Lord Hodge studied at Corpus Christi College, Cambridge and the University of Edinburgh.  He was admitted to the Faculty of Advocates in 1983, and took Silk in 1996.  His practice was mainly in commercial law, judicial review and property law.  He served as a part-time Commissioner on the Scottish Law Commission from 1997–2003, and from 2000 to 2005 was a Judge of the Courts of Appeal of Jersey and Guernsey, and Procurator to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland.  He sits in the Court of Session and High Court of Justiciary, but has with particular responsibility as the senior commercial judge in the Court of Session. 
    http://www.ibrox.eveningtimes.co.uk/mobile/news/home-news/scottish-court-system-is-anti-english.15868800
    ‘Scottish court system is anti-English’
    Published on 20 November 2011

    Lucy Adams
    ONE of Britain's most senior judges has spoken out against the "corrosive anti-English sentiment" in Scotland's courts, describing it as an obstacle to legal progress.

     

    We hope you've enjoyed reading your sample of 5 articles on heraldscotland.com and want to read more
    To view the full text of articles please sign-in to access more articles on HeraldScotland.
    Registration gives you access to 5 more articles, a total of 10 articles every 4 weeks.
    Related articles
    UK Supreme Court powers ‘must be cut for Scots cases’ Political News Thu 15 Sep 2011
    The Justice Secretary’s Supreme Court funding threat is unconstitutional Letters Thu 2 Jun 2011
    The attacks made on Supreme Court smack of crude populism Letters Wed 1 Jun 2011
    MacAskill threat to end Supreme Court funding Crime & Courts Wed 1 Jun 2011
    http://www.ibrox.eveningtimes.co.uk/mobile/politics/political-news/uk-supreme-court-powers-must-be-cut-for-scots-cases.15093923
    UK Supreme Court powers ‘must be cut for Scots cases’
    Published on 15 September 2011
    Robbie Dinwoodie
    THE powers of the UK Supreme Court should be restricted when dealing with Scottish cases, according to the expert group chaired by Lord McCluskey.

     

    We hope you've enjoyed reading your sample of 5 articles on heraldscotland.com and want to read more
    To view the full text of articles please sign-in to access more articles on HeraldScotland.
    Registration gives you access to 5 more articles, a total of 10 articles every 4 weeks.
    Related articles
    MacAskill threat to end Supreme Court funding Crime & Courts Wed 1 Jun 2011
    The Justice Secretary’s Supreme Court funding threat is unconstitutional Letters Thu 2 Jun 2011
    The attacks made on Supreme Court smack of crude populism Letters Wed 1 Jun 2011
    It’s right to be proud of Scots law but justice must come first Letters Sat 28 May 2011
    http://www.ibrox.eveningtimes.co.uk/mobile/news/crime-courts/macaskill-threat-to-end-supreme-court-funding.13900094
    MacAskill threat to end Supreme Court funding
    Published on 1 June 2011

    David Leask
    KENNY MacAskill wants to cancel Scottish funding for the UK Supreme Court.
    The Justice Secretary has ordered civil servants to investigate whether the Scottish Government can pull the financial plug on Britain’s most senior justices over what he sees as the threat they pose to centuries-old Scots Law.

     

    We hope you've enjoyed reading your sample of 5 articles on heraldscotland.com and want to read more
    To view the full text of articles please sign-in to access more articles on HeraldScotland.
    Registration gives you access to 5 more articles, a total of 10 articles every 4 weeks.
    Related articles
    It’s right to be proud of Scots law but justice must come first Letters Sat 28 May 2011
    The attacks made on Supreme Court smack of crude populism Letters Wed 1 Jun 2011
    Fraser is freed by the rings that jailed him Home News Thu 26 May 2011
     
    UK's most senior female judge calls for more diversity at the top
    Lady Hale says UK is 'out of step with rest of world' and positive discrimination may be needed to redress the gender imbalance
    Owen Bowcott, legal affairs correspondent
    The Guardian, Thursday 21 February 2013 19.22 GMT
     
    Lady Hale was recently voted fourth most powerful woman in Britain by BBC Radio 4's Woman's Hour. Photograph: Martin Godwin for the Guardian
     
    Positive discrimination may be needed to redress the gender imbalance among senior judges, the only woman in Britain's highest court has proposed.
    The supreme court justice Lady Hale warned that the UK is "out of step with the rest of the world" in terms of judicial diversity.
    In her lecture on equality in the judiciary on Thursday, Hale said: "We take it for granted, at least for the high court and court of appeal, that the candidate's area of professional expertise can be taken into account.
    "In the supreme court, that expressly includes the need for expertise in the law and practice in Scotland and Northern Ireland. There would be nothing to stop our seeking a diversity of professional and other backgrounds. The difficulty lies in taking the protected characteristics into account.
    "Our equality laws depend upon the proposition that race and sex are not relevant qualifications, or disqualifications, for any job save in very exceptional circumstances.
    "It may be a genuine occupational qualification to choose a black Othello or a female Desdemona, but could it be thought a genuine occupational qualification to bring a minority perspective to the business of judging in the higher courts?
    "So do we need to revive the argument for some special provision, akin to that in Northern Ireland, to enable the appointing commissions to take racial or gender balance into account when making their appointments? Would that really be such a bad thing? I think not."
    Delivering the Kuttan Menon memorial lecture, Hale agreed with many of the conclusions reached on improving judicial diversity by another supreme court justice, Lord Sumption, last year.
    But she continued: "Where I respectfully disagree (as we judges say) with Lord Sumption is in his belief that we will not make quicker progress (if it would be progress) without some measure of positive discrimination, which he thinks would be a bad thing."
    Across Europe, the average gender balance among judges is 52% men and 48% women. Hale pointed out that "at 23%, England and Wales is fourth from the bottom, followed only by Azerbaijan, Scotland and Armenia".
    The higher up the court system, the more male-dominated the bench becomes, she added. Only 15.5% of high court judges are women and 4.5% are from an ethnic background; only 10.5% on the court of appeal are women and there are none with an ethnic background.
    "In the supreme court [where there are normally 12 justices], there is still only me and the only ethnic minorities we have are the Scots and the Irish," Hale said.
    By comparison, three of the nine judges on the US supreme court are women. In New Zealand's supreme court, it is two women out of five judges. In the high court of Australia, she said, three out of seven judges are women.
    "I, too, used to be sceptical about the argument that women judges were bound to make a difference but I have come to agree with those great women judges who think that sometimes, on occasions, we may do so," Hale said.
     
     
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2013/feb/27/judicial-appointments-new-boys-supreme-court
     
    Judicial appointments: new boys at the supreme court
    Who's in and who's out of the top tier of the judiciary? Joshua Rozenberg's money is on Lady Hale for deputy president
    - Joshua Rozenberg -guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 27 February 2013
     
     
    Lord Justice Hughes is likely to be the only member of the supreme court with an interest in bellringing Photograph: Alamy
     
    The three new members of the supreme court "represent a talented trio of judges", its president, Lord Neuberger, said after their names were announced. But, at that level of the judiciary, the other leading candidates are also highly talented. So who's in and who's out? First, the new boys.
    Lord Justice Hughes, 64, is currently vice-president of the criminal division of the court of appeal. While he was still a high court judge, Sir Anthony Hughes was moved from the family division to the Queen's bench division, giving him experience of criminal trials. In 2008, I tipped him for lord chief justice. Two months ago, though, I reported that he was not interested in the job and backed him for the supreme court instead.
    Hughes will bring much needed criminal expertise to a court that has traditionally lacked experience in this area of work. He is also likely to be the only member of the court with an interest in bellringing.
    The appointment of Lord Justice Toulson, 66, was less expected, though I reported his name nearly two weeks ago. Like Lord Sumption, who joined the supreme court last year, Sir Roger Toulson served for five years on the Judicial Appointments Commission — not to be confused with the one-off commission that chose the three new supreme court justices. Toulson also chaired the Law Commission, the law reform body.
    And Toulson is a supporter of the Marriage Foundation, a campaign launched last year by a high court judge with the aim of "fewer relationships breaking down and more people forming healthy stable relationships".
    Although Toulson served in the Queen's bench division, he will replace Lord Walker, a distinguished chancery specialist. The supreme court is now looking a bit threadbare on the chancery side and it may struggle if it has to deal with an old-fashioned family trusts dispute. But such cases are probably quite rare these days and Neuberger was a chancery judge himself.
    When these vacancies were announced, it was thought that — barring accidents — they would be the last until 2018. However, Toulson will have to leave the court in September 2016, when he reaches the age of 70. This is the mandatory retirement age for all judges first appointed to the bench after 31 March 1995.
    Lord Hodge will succeed Lord Hope in October as one of the two Scottish judges in the supreme court. When I tipped him earlier this month, I pointed out that Patrick Hodge, 59, sits in the outer house of the court of session, Scotland's highest civil court. Though true, this gave the impression Hodge was at the equivalent level of an English high court judge rather than an appeal judge. A reader helpfully pointed out that Hodge has heard criminal appeals at the highest level. He also has a much broader level of judicial experience than his English colleagues.
    And who's out? A quick glance at the court of appeal list shows who they must be. Lord Justice Laws, though 67, can sit until he is 75. A charming, erudite man and a former classical scholar, he has been a staunch friend of mine since his days as Treasury devil — the government's jobbing barrister — in the 1980s. He is regarded as perhaps too original a thinker for the highest court in the land.
    Lord Justice Rix, 68, could also have sat until 75. A highly regarded commercial specialist, Sir Bernard Rix may well see his future as an arbitrator, where his skills would be much in demand.
    After then comes Lady Justice Arden, 66. This must have been Dame Mary Arden's last chance for promotion to the supreme court. It would have made a lovely story if she had been appointed. The government — and Lady Hale — would have welcomed the promotion of a woman. Another of the supreme court judges, Lord Mance, would have welcomed the appointment of his wife. And Chancery lawyers would have welcomed the appointment of one of their own. But it was not to be.
    Finally, Hope's retirement in the summer leaves a vacancy for a new deputy president. "Expressions of interest will be invited from the existing justices," the court has announced. But there are really only two candidates left with sufficient seniority, Hale and Mance. My money's on Hale.
     
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2013/feb/15/supreme-court-denies-government-pressure
     
    Supreme court denies government pressure to select a woman
    Senior legal figures believe promotion of three male judges to highest court delayed because ministers want a woman to fill one of the vacancies
     
    The supreme court. Lady Hale is currently the only woman on the 12-person court. Photograph: Graham Turner for the Guardian
     
    Supreme court denies government pressure to select a woman
    Senior legal figures believe promotion of three male judges to highest court delayed because ministers want a woman to fill one of the vacancies

    Joshua Rozenberg
    guardian.co.uk, Friday 15 February 2013 12.42 GMT
    Jump to comments (50)
     
    The supreme court. Lady Hale is currently the only woman on the 12-person court. Photograph: Graham Turner for the Guardian
    The UK supreme court has denied rumours that it has come under pressure from the government to select a woman for appointment to one of three current vacancies.
    An appointments commission is thought to have chosen Sir Anthony Hughes, Sir Roger Toulson and Patrick Hodge for the three posts.
    Lord Justice Hughes, 64, and Lord Justice Toulson, 66, sit in the court of appeal of England and Wales. The Hon Lord Hodge, 59, sits in the outer house of the court of session, Scotland's highest civil court.
    The commission's recommendation has gone to ministers and an announcement appears to have been delayed. This has prompted widespread speculation among senior legal figures that ministers have asked the selection panel to think again.
    But a spokesman for the supreme court told the Guardian: "It is completely untrue to suggest that there is an unexpected delay due to ongoing dialogue with the Ministry of Justice about those being recommended for appointment."
    Lady Hale is currently the only woman on the 12-person court. Asked about judicial diversity on Wednesday, Lord Neuberger, president of the supreme court, told members of the House of Lords constitution committee that recruitment to the judiciary was mainly from the bar, which was "very white, public-school, upper middle-class male". He suggested encouraging individual women to seek promotion and supported the idea of appointing academic lawyers and part-time judges at all levels.
    Lord Hope, the court's deputy president, agreed and pointed out that seven of the 34 most senior judges in Scotland were women.
    The lord chancellor, Chris Grayling, has powers under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 to insist that a supreme court selection commission reconsiders its selection of a candidate. But he does not have an ultimate veto.
    If three male candidates are appointed to the supreme court in the coming weeks, it's seen as even more likely than before that Dame Heather Hallett will become chief justice of England and Wales when Lord Judge retires at the end of September.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2013/feb/21/lady-hale-speech-judicial-diversity
     
    http://www.thelawyer.com/news-and-analysis/practice-areas/litigation/bar-news-and-analysis/three-judges-appointed-to-supreme-court-bench/3001747.article
     
     
    Three judges appointed to Supreme Court bench
    26 February 2013 | By Katy Dowell
    The Queen has approved the latest appointment to the Supreme Court bench with Lord Justices Toulson and Hughes and Lord Hodge being promoted.
    The court started its search for three new justices in October, with Supreme Court Justices Lord Dyson becoming Master of the Rolls (MR) earlier this year, Lord Walker retiring in March and Lord Hope, the Scottish representative, retiring in June (16 October 2012). Lord Hodge will succeed Lord Hope as the Scottish representative. Hodge is an IP judge and sits in the Lands Valuation Appeal Court and a commercial judge. He was admitted to Scotland’s Faculty of Advocates in 1983 and took silk in 1996. Lord Justice Hughes first joined the High Court bench in 1997 sitting in the family division, having taken silk in 1990. He served as presiding judge on the Midland Circuit from 2000 to 2003 and transferred to the Queen’s Bench Division (QBD) in 2004. He is currently vice-president of the criminal division. Lord Justice Toulson was called to the bar in 1969 and took silk in 1986. He was appointed to the QBD in 1996 before being appointed to the Court of Appeal in in 2007. He has also served on the Judicial Appointments Commission for England and Wales. The court was under pressure to diversify the bench, which currently has just one woman, Lady Hale, on its 12-strong judicial panel. According to reports, the application pack included this statement: “The selection commission is anxious to attract applications from the widest field, and in making recommendations will bear in mind the nature of the court and the way it is likely to develop over the next few years.” As no further departures are expected until 2018 it was seen as an opportunity to embrace inclusivity. In 2009 then Lord Chancellor Jack Straw commissioned Baroness Neuberger to look into the issues surrounding judicial diversity. She concluded a year later that: “Judges drawn from a wide range of backgrounds and life experiences will bring varying perspectives to bear on critical legal issues. A judiciary which is visibly more reflective of society will enhance public confidence.” Delivering the Kutton Menon Memorial Lecture earlier this month, Lady Hale said her fellow Supreme Court Justices “mostly fit the stereotypical pattern of boys’ boarding school, Oxbridge college and the Inns of Court”. The country’s most senior female judge argued that a degree of positive discrimination was needed when appointing justices. She said: “I too used to be sceptical about the argument that women judges were bound to make a difference, but I have come to agree with those great women judges who think that sometimes, on occasions, we may do so […]. “A different perspective can indeed make a difference, not only on so-called ‘women’s issues’, but on the whole range of legal issues which may come before the courts. Different voices add variety and depth to all decision making. Women judges may think that some of the results are only common sense – which just shows how gendered a concept like common sense can be.”
    The three new members of the supreme court "represent a talented trio of judges", its president, Lord Neuberger, said after their names were announced. But, at that level of the judiciary, the other leading candidates are also highly talented. So who's in and who's out? First, the new boys. Lord Justice Hughes, 64, is currently vice-president of the criminal division of the court of appeal. While he was still a high court judge, Sir Anthony Hughes was moved from the family division to the Queen's bench division, giving him experience of criminal trials. In 2008, I tipped him for lord chief justice. Two months ago, though, I reported that he was not interested in the job and backed him for the supreme court instead. Hughes will bring much needed criminal expertise to a court that has traditionally lacked experience in this area of work. He is also likely to be the only member of the court with an interest in bellringing. The appointment of Lord Justice Toulson, 66, was less expected, though I reported his name nearly two weeks ago. Like Lord Sumption, who joined the supreme court last year, Sir Roger Toulson served for five years on the Judicial Appointments Commission — not to be confused with the one-off commission that chose the three new supreme court justices. Toulson also chaired the Law Commission, the law reform body. And Toulson is a supporter of the Marriage Foundation, a campaign launched last year by a high court judge with the aim of "fewer relationships breaking down and more people forming healthy stable relationships". Although Toulson served in the Queen's bench division, he will replace Lord Walker, a distinguished chancery specialist. The supreme court is now looking a bit threadbare on the chancery side and it may struggle if it has to deal with an old-fashioned family trusts dispute. But such cases are probably quite rare these days and Neuberger was a chancery judge himself. When these vacancies were announced, it was thought that — barring accidents — they would be the last until 2018. However, Toulson will have to leave the court in September 2016, when he reaches the age of 70. This is the mandatory retirement age for all judges first appointed to the bench after 31 March 1995.
    Lord Hodge will succeed Lord Hope in October as one of the two Scottish judges in the supreme court.
    When I tipped him earlier this month, I pointed out that Patrick Hodge, 59, sits in the outer house of the court of session, Scotland's highest civil court. Though true, this gave the impression Hodge was at the equivalent level of an English high court judge rather than an appeal judge. A reader helpfully pointed out that Hodge has heard criminal appeals at the highest level. He also has a much broader level of judicial experience than his English colleagues.
    And who's out? A quick glance at the court of appeal list shows who they must be. Lord Justice Laws, though 67, can sit until he is 75. A charming, erudite man and a former classical scholar, he has been a staunch friend of mine since his days as Treasury devil — the government's jobbing barrister — in the 1980s. He is regarded as perhaps too original a thinker for the highest court in the land. Lord Justice Rix, 68, could also have sat until 75. A highly regarded commercial specialist, Sir Bernard Rix may well see his future as an arbitrator, where his skills would be much in demand. After then comes Lady Justice Arden, 66. This must have been Dame Mary Arden's last chance for promotion to the supreme court. It would have made a lovely story if she had been appointed. The government — and Lady Hale — would have welcomed the promotion of a woman. Another of the supreme court judges, Lord Mance, would have welcomed the appointment of his wife. And Chancery lawyers would have welcomed the appointment of one of their own. But it was not to be. Finally, Hope's retirement in the summer leaves a vacancy for a new deputy president. "Expressions of interest will be invited from the existing justices," the court has announced. But there are really only two candidates left with sufficient seniority, Hale and Mance. My money's on Hale.
    Comments
    GregCallus - 27 February 2013 1:46pm  So by December 2018, the UKSC will have lost to mandatory retirement Lords Toulson (2016), (all in 2018) Neuberger, Mance, Clarke and Sumption, the latter 3 within the space of 7 months (May-Dec 2018). That's the Supreme Court's QBD experience in a nutshell (and with it, experience of English commercial, administrative, and criminal judging). Everyone left will be Chancery/Family Division or from Scotland/NI. Will this be the catalyst for exempting the Supreme Court from the mandatory retirement age?
    Nepthsolem - 27 February 2013 3:36pm  Possibly. Or possibly we could see more appointments straight from the Bar by necessity, if we haven't by then seen a 'shuffling up' of potential candidates to the CA in order to fill the gaps.
    angela92 - 27 February 2013 11:46pm @GregCallus - Even worst is that most of current judges both from the Court of Appeal and the High Court are born during late the 40s and during the 50s with very few of them at the High Court during the early 60s. By 2018 most of them will have retired, so there should be some very early action to find new judges that are young enough to replace them and have many years ahead of them so that they could be promoted up to the Supreme Court.
    If the mandatory retirement age is not raised to 75 again, in the future, we'll either be seeing changes at the Supreme Court bench every 2-3 years (which I am not entirely sure will be a positive progress), or they'll have to find lawyers that are eager to leave their well-paid jobs at the Bar and at law firms at 45 and enchanted enough by the Bench so that they will be happy to work more and earn considerably less.
    To me that seems a rather difficult task since not many lawyers see the Bench as appealing as they did before the CRA 2005 changes.
    angela92 - 28 February 2013 12:06am  @Nepthsolem - Most of the judges in the QBD are in their 60s or late 50s already.
    Even the most junior ones!  http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/about-the-judiciary/judges-magistrates-and-tribunal-judges/list-of-members-of-the-judiciary/senior-judiciary-list
    That means that they will be retiring at the same time as most of the judges of the Court of Appeal because they've been appointed judges after the mandatory retirement age was lowered. There is simply NO pool that may be used to get candidates from the High Court for promotion to the Court of Appeal because the CA judges and the largest portion of the HC are of the same age! Not only should the mandatory retirement age be raised again, but the judiciary should be made as appealing as it was before the application process was introduced. Invited by the Lord Chancellor to join the judiciary was an honour that has now been ruined by an application process.
     
    Nepthsolem - 28 February 2013 4:57pm  @angela92 - Looking down that list, there are some luminous names there with 15 years or more yet to run. Janet Smith, Rabinder Singh, Andrew Popplewell and Mark Turner (who has only just got there) stand out by age as well as ability. In the case of Mark Turner of course, that ability, as seering and hefty as it is, has thus far only been measured in a galactic career at the Bar. There are others too; I certainly wouldn't like to give the impression of having just made four predictions. The only prediction I will make is that if by 2018 there is a QBD shaped hole at the SC, there is unlikely to be a need to 'do a Sumption', rather than look to the courts below.
    DrDennisJBaker - 03 March 2013 12:31pm  @GregCallus - Technically mandatory retirement ages have been abolished, because they are a form of age discrimination. It is not clear why agism would be allowed in these posts. In the United States there a Circuit Judges still serving in the Federal Courts who were appointed by John Kennedy and Richard Nixon.
    angela92 - 27 February 2013 11:26pm  Since there is no officially published list of the candidates, why should we assume that the "unlucky" ones were Laws, Rix and Arden? Yes, they are three of the very senior and bright minds of the Court of Appeal, but why should these three people be "framed" as the losers?
    Anyone from the Court of Appeal could have applied! Until three weeks ago, no one had ever mentioned Toulson as a possible candidate (in comparison to Hughes) and yet he's one of the new Justices.
    JoshuaRozenberg - 28 February 2013 4:52pm  @angela92 - Because they are just about the only candidates young enough to have been appointed this time but too old to be appointed next time. I exclude Hallett LJ, of course, because her ambitions are thought to lie elsewhere. I do not know, of course, whether any of these three applied. But it seems reasonable to suppose that they would have taken the promotion if it had been offered
    legalbiz - 28 February 2013 8:46pm  The really interesting thing (and what I'm contacting the SC about), is whether Arden LJ's appointment would have caused a conflict of interest between herself and Lord Mance?
    angela92 - 28 February 2013 9:44pm  @legalbiz - I assume he would be excluded from consultation discussions regarding her appointment in particular, exactly because there would be a conflict of interest. It's such a shame though if the SINGLE reason she was not appointed is that it would create problems when deciding the formation of the Bench in future hearings, since as spouses it would be impossible to have them sit on the same case. In any case, I wish we knew more about the selection-making process. It is quite difficult to understand why a particular candidate is chosen and the others ones are turned when all of them have almost the same qualifications.
    JoshuaRozenberg -01 March 2013 7:36am  @legalbiz - Can't see a problem myself. He wasn't a member of the appointments commission and they could have sat in different constitutions of the Supreme Court.
    theacademic - 01 March 2013 1:06pm  @angela92 - I am 99% sure that she did apply and was rejected on merit. I have heard many people with SC/JAC connections allude to the "Arden problem", the problem not being her gender but simply that she does not write very insightful judgments and would not be spoke of as a candidate at all if she were a man. (But it was thought that her gender and connections might nonetheless have given her chances). These people whom I refer to are all very supportive of Brenda Hale, by the way. It is just that Mary Arden is not in Brenda Hale's league, and there lies the (important!) difference. For the avoidance of doubt, it is of course no disgrace to be thought to be not up to Supreme Court level .... many good judges find their niche in the CA and that is where they stay. Anyway, Joshua, let's have the LCJ gossip now ...
    chrish - 02 March 2013 2:15pm  Until the supreme court judges have to have their appointments Confirmed by the houses of parliament as they do in the US by the senate, they will remain an unelected, undemocratic and unrepresentative body which is increasingly usurping parliamentary powers through the activist interpretation of the HRA. I know that there are those who may argue that judges must be impartial but the extreme politicisation of the judiciary is already evident from their own carefully worded statements.  Justice Blake's comment that little Weight should be given to Mrs May's Immigration rules compared to previous laws passed by the Labour government is clear evidence of this. He could have said that statutes Or primary legislation takes precedence over secondary legislation or rules put in place by the Home Office. But he decided to politicise it instead.
    JoshuaRozenberg -02 March 2013 4:29pm  @chrish - But Blake J allowed May's appeal in the case she cited, even though it was so badly prepared that her own presenting officer sought an adjournment of her appeal.
    truebluetah - 03 March 2013 12:17pm  @chrish - Until the supreme court judges have to have their appointments Confirmed by the houses of parliament as they do in the US by the senate, they will remain an unelected, undemocratic and unrepresentative body...Surely they'd still be unelected and unrepresentative? I'm not sure that they'd be any more democratic either. And it seems odd to look to the US as an example of how to depoliticse the judiciary. Their judiciary is about as politicised as any in the world.
    JoshuaRozenberg - 02 March 2013 4:30pm  That last post should have been in reply to @theacademic.
    DrDennisJBaker - 03 March 2013 12:21pm  No one could complain about these three appointments. They are all eminently qualified. From a criminal lawyer's perspective, I am delighted to see these three appointed—not that many criminal law cases make it up to the Supreme Court: although a few more might now.  Sir Roger Toulson is very capable in a number of areas including criminal law. I have his work on complicity in mind as I write: his judgments, work at the Law Commission and his recent essay published in “The Sanctity of Life and the Criminal Law: The Legacy of Glanville Williams” (Cambridge University Press, Feb. 2013) all manifest an interest and expertise in criminal law, among the many other areas where he is adept. Similarly, Lord Justice Hughes and Lord Hodge.  Excellent choices, even if we do have to wait for a future time to see more female appointments.
    theacademic - 04 March 2013 10:49am  @DrDennisJBaker - Don't be afraid to plug your book, Dennis ...! I agree about Toulson though. You could have added his judgment in the Nicklinson case last August (the "locked-in syndrome" case) which I thought was spot-on. I don't think the new appointments will mean that more criminal cases will actually go to the SC, though
    Daxyl2 - 04 March 2013 1:43am  @Daxyl2 - I am a law student and I have asked one of my lecturers about this - I thought it was well established that this would be part of the settlement. Thanks for posting this, really interesting. Do you know when it will be heard?
    http://www.stars.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/home-news/lord-hodge-in-supreme-court-move.20342531
    Lord Hodge in Supreme Court move
    Wednesday 27 February 2013
    Lord Hodge is to take the place of Lord Hope on the bench at the Supreme Court.
    Lord Hodge is to take the place of Lord Hope on the bench at the Supreme Court.
    Custom byline text:  He will become one of two Scottish justices who serve at the Supreme Court with his appointment made by the Queen, the Prime Minister and the Lord Chancellor, following advice from an independent panel. Lord Hope is to retire on June 27, with his successor to take over at the start of the new legal year in October.
    Contextual targeting label:
    Local government
    Lord Hodge was appointed a Senator of the College of Justice in 2005, and sits in both the Court of Session and High Court of Justiciary. Lord Hodge said: "I am honoured to have the opportunity to serve as a member of the Supreme Court. I look forward to working with my colleagues from the three jurisdictions of the United Kingdom."
    http://www.ibrox.eveningtimes.co.uk/mobile/news/home-news/lord-hodge-in-supreme-court-move.20342531?_=5f573b82f1da8677c86d695538c530d136b6c489
    Hearald Scotland
    Lord Hodge in Supreme Court move
    Published on 27 February 2013
    Lord Hodge is to take the place of Lord Hope on the bench at the Supreme Court.
    He will become one of two Scottish justices who serve at the Supreme Court with his appointment made by the Queen, the Prime Minister and the Lord Chancellor, following advice from an independent panel.
    Lord Hope is to retire on June 27, with his successor to take over at the start of the new legal year in October.
    Lord Hodge was appointed a Senator of the College of Justice in 2005, and sits in both the Court of Session and High Court of Justiciary.
    Lord Hodge said: "I am honoured to have the opportunity to serve as a member of the Supreme Court. I look forward to working with my colleagues from the three jurisdictions of the United Kingdom."
    Related articles
    ‘This is an unprecedented attack by a judge on the Scottish Government and Parliament’ Crime & Courts Sun 20 Nov 2011
    Legal battle climbdown by ministers Crime & Courts Tue 3 Apr 2012
    http://www.ibrox.eveningtimes.co.uk/mobile/news/crime-courts/this-is-an-unprecedented-attack-by-a-judge-on-the-scottish-government-and-parliament.15868885
    ‘This is an unprecedented attack by a judge on the Scottish Government and Parliament’
    Published on 20 November 2011
    By PAUL McBride QC
    While I have the greatest respect for Lord Hope, I cannot accept for a moment that there is a corrosive anti-English sentiment in Scotland's courts.
    Alex Salmond was vilified last year for suggesting that Scotland’s Appeal Court would be undermined by the Supreme Court in England, if the English court heard cases that had been refused leave to appeal in Scotland. That currently remains the position.
    In England, Wales and Northern Ireland, if their highest courts refuse leave to appeal, or refuse certification for cases to go to the Supreme Court, that is the end of the matter. One wonders why their judges’ decisions in these juristictions are treated with respect, and why the same respect is not given to ours.
    It was in the light of this controversy that Lord McCluskey headed up an independent group that recommended there should be certification by the Scottish courts before a case could go to the Supreme Court in London.
    Lord Hope has given no justification as to why that would be inappropriate. Indeed, his speech will be seen by many as an unprecedented political attack by a judge on the Scottish Goverment and indeed the Scottish Parliament for raising this issue at all.
    I do not accept that there is any obstacle to progress by allowing the certification process to occur in Scotland. Lord Hope’s attack on Lord McCluskey is not an appropriate use of language by the deputy president of the Supreme Court.
    In my view Kenny MacAskill, the Justice Secretary, is correct in his analysis that the High Court of Justiciary is our apex court of criminal law and should have the same responsibilities and rights as equivalent courts in the rest of the UK.
    Although Lord Hope indicates that Scottish judges take the lead in cases that come before them from Scotland, the fact is they are always in a minority.
    I gave evidence on this issue along with Lord McCluskey. There is no suggestion at all of any anti-English feeling, but simply real concern that our courts in Scotland were being treated differently.
    I expect Lord Hope to respect the decision of the Scottish Parliament. And I hope that when Alex Salmond is asked to comment he can do so without being attacked.
    Related articles
    Why Scotland should have its own court of final appeal Letters Wed 8 Jun 2011
    Salmond in the dock for Supreme Court ‘insults’ Leading lawyer attacks Salmond Crime & Courts Mon 11 Jul 2011
    The attacks made on Supreme Court smack of crude populism Letters Wed 1 Jun 2011
    QC attacks Salmond for ‘prejudicing’ Fraser retrial Home News Thu 30 Jun 2011
    http://www.ibrox.eveningtimes.co.uk/mobile/comment/letters/why-scotland-should-have-its-own-court-of-final-appeal.13976339
    Why Scotland should have its own court of final appeal
    Published on 8 June 2011
    It would be a pity if the debate about the role of the Supreme Court, formerly the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords, were confined to criminal law (Herald Letters).
    In 1707, article XIX of the Treaty of Union was intended to prevent any appeal from the Scottish Courts being heard in England. Because of the drafting of the article, in fact and in breach of the spirit of the Treaty, appeals in civil law were soon taken to the House of Lords. Decisions which bound the Scottish courts were often reached by a court which knew nothing of Scots law and in which there were no Scottish judges. The result was to damage the consistency of Scots legal principles by injecting elements from an alien system.
    In recent years care has been taken to ensure that Scottish appeals are normally heard by a bench in which Scottish lawyers have been in a majority. But the arrangements are not ideal: judges participate in the process, albeit as a minority element, who have no training or experience in the legal system which is being applied. Conversely, it is not ideal from an English point of view that Scottish judges, occasionally a majority of Scottish judges, decide English cases in the supreme appellate court. In criminal law, on the other hand, the purity of the Scots legal system was preserved. The House of Lords did not hear appeals from Scotland. The present issue arises from the fact that the Supreme Court is now charged with the duty of hearing criminal appeals when the point involved relates to human rights matters. It has become clear that human rights jurisprudence is developing to bring forward many cases in this category. On the one hand it is undesirable that the Treaty of Union should not further be breached in this way. On the other hand, it has been demonstrated that human rights decisions in the Scottish criminal courts must be capable of rectification (see the Cadder and Fraser appeals) and should be rectified more speedily and cost-effectively than they can be in Strasbourg. The solution is to establish a final appeal court in Scotland, composed of Scottish judges, to adjudicate on civil appeals from the Court of Session and on human rights matters in criminal appeals from the Court of Criminal Appeal (with an ultimate appeal to Strasbourg). The role of the Supreme Court in London should be confined to English, Welsh and Northern Irish cases.
    Walter Reid,- Beauly, Bridge of Weir.
    Following the decisions of the UK Supreme Court in the Fraser case and the Cadder case, Alex Salmond protests strongly that the court should have no place in the Scottish legal system. I would like clarified whether he and those of a similar view consider the verdicts of that court in these cases to be unjust, and on what grounds?
    Alan Fitzpatrick,- 10 Solomon’s View, Dunlop.
    Given the tenor of his remarks and threats to cut the funding of the Supreme Court, it seems that Kenny McAskill wants Scotland to be independent, but not its judges or its system of justice.
    Alex Gallagher, 12 Phillips Avenue, Largs.
    http://www.ibrox.eveningtimes.co.uk/mobile/news/crime-courts/salmond-in-the-dock-for-supreme-court-insults-leading-lawyer-attacks-salmond.14325205
    Salmond in the dock for Supreme Court ‘insults’ Leading lawyer attacks Salmond
    Published on 11 July 2011
    Susan Swarbrick
    A LEADING lawyer has accused Alex Salmond of misrepresenting the Supreme Court's role in Scottish affairs as she expressed concerns at a growing "culture of resistance" to the European Convention on Human Rights.
    Maggie Scott, QC, has called for reforms on how civil liberties are dealt with by the Scottish criminal courts, describing the practice as “insular”.
    Her comments come on the back of the political storm that erupted after Elgin businessman Nat Fraser, for whom Ms Scott is lead defence counsel, had his appeal against his 2004 murder conviction upheld by the Supreme Court in London.
    Judges there ruled his trial was unfair under the European Convention on Human Rights and referred it back to the Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh, which last month formally overturned the conviction and granted a retrial.
    Politicians said the UK Supreme Court should have no role in Scottish criminal law and Mr Salmond described it as an “aggressive” intervention, saying it could give the London court power to “throw open cell doors if it so wishes”.
    However, Ms Scott said: “I think it is a misrepresentation. That is one of the big problems with the statements.
    “I don’t believe the Supreme Court interferes with Scots criminal law. It is not aggressive. If you read the judgments you can see how careful it is in respecting Scottish jurisdiction.
    “The Supreme Court only deals with human rights issues. It doesn’t get involved in Scottish criminal law in terms of our rules of evidence or definition of crimes.
    “We are certainly far behind in the implementation of human rights. I am quite worried, in terms of the recent debate, by the kinds of insults that are being hurled about by Scottish ministers. There is a culture developing which is quite anti-European Convention on Human Rights and anti-civil liberties.”
    Last month Ms Scott told the Appeal Court in Edinburgh that the Scottish Government’s concerns about the “interfering” role of the UK Supreme Court had been prejudicial to Fraser, 52, who is accused of the murder of his wife, Arlene, in 1998.
    She said the Lord Advocate, Scotland’s senior prosecutor, had not taken “adequate steps” to prevent prejudicial publicity.
    With respect to appeal cases, Ms Scott told The Herald she would prefer to see things remedied in Scotland, but the current climate left little alternative.
    “The problem is they are not being implemented properly by the Scottish courts, so we are having to go to London,” she said. “There has been a failure by the Scottish courts, in particular the appeal court, to engage in human rights implementation into Scots law.”
    Mr Salmond has set up a review to look at the roles of the High Court of Judiciary in Edinburgh and the UK Supreme Court.
    The group’s first report claimed Scotland faced more intrusive jurisdiction from the Supreme Court than the rest of the UK.
    But Ms Scott said: “The Supreme Court will help us harmonise with other countries. Even if we were independent I would want to see some sort of arrangement where we could maintain that kind of unity.”
    A Scottish Government spokesman said: “Ministers strongly support human rights and believe the people of Scotland should have an effective way of enforcing their rights under the European Convention.
    “We accept the jurisdiction of the European Court, but as a matter of practicality and access to justice, enforcing these rights should be done primarily through the Scottish Courts. However, recent cases have demonstrated an unexpected and potentially damaging role for the UK Supreme Court in such cases.
    “Scottish cases can be considered by the UK Supreme Court whether or not they are considered to raise a point of public importance, a system that the report by the independent review group described as ‘seriously flawed’.
    “This is why Scotland’s courts must be given parity with those in other parts of the UK when it comes to certification of appeals to the UK Supreme Court.”
    Face-to-face with Maggie Scott: Page 10
    Related articles
    QC attacks Salmond for ‘prejudicing’ Fraser retrial Home News Thu 30 Jun 2011
    It’s right to be proud of Scots law but justice must come first Letters Sat 28 May 2011
    More to Supreme Court row than mere posturing Columnists Thu 2 Jun 2011
    The courts, the chaos and the constitution Herald View Sun 29 May 2011
    http://www.ibrox.eveningtimes.co.uk/mobile/comment/letters/the-attacks-made-on-supreme-court-smack-of-crude-populism.13896840
    The attacks made on Supreme Court smack of crude populism
    Published on 1 June 2011
    I VOTED for the SNP in the Holyrood elections because they were slightly more mature and less opportunistic than the alternatives.
    Recent attacks on the Supreme Court by Alex Salmond and Kenny MacAskill are consequently very disappointing. As both these politicians know perfectly well, the leading judgments of the Supreme Court in Scottish cases are almost invariably given by the two Scottish judges and the other judges simply fall into line behind them.
    The recent decisions of the Supreme Court in the Cadder and Fraser cases were not imposed by English judges whose only knowledge of Scots law was acquired during brief visits to the Edinburgh Festival (“MacAskill in new attack on Supreme Court rulings”, The Herald, May 31), but were, in practice, made by Lords Hope and Rodger, both of whom have previously held office as Scotland’s most senior judge. The SNP appears to be claiming that the European Court of Human Rights will be more sympathetic to Scots Law, yet it does not contain one Scottish judge and is unlikely to do so in the near future because the UK spot will almost certainly continue to be occupied by an English lawyer. There is a genuine debate to be had about the role of the Supreme Court in Scottish criminal cases but it is ill-served by the crude populism adopted by senior SNP politicians. They are in danger of descending to the level of their political rivals.
    Peter Duff, -Professor of Criminal Justice,School of Law, Aberdeen University, Taylor Building, Aberdeen.
    Correspondents on the subject of the UK Supreme Court involving itself in Scots criminal appeals appear unmindful of the prior history and political context of appeals from the Scottish courts. Originally “protestation for remeid of law” in civil cases was allowed to the Scottish Parliament in exceptional cases.  Limited right of appeal to the parliament was reasserted in the Claim of right of 1689. Although the Union agreements of 1707 did not deal with possible appeals to a UK Parliament the House of Lords accepted a civil appeal in the first session of Parliament after the Union, but thereafter refused to hear criminal appeals on the grounds that the Scots Parliament had not ever heard these. This was the position until the recent intervention of the UK Supreme Court. None of this is satisfactory. In the 19th century the Lords claimed extensive civil authority to which it was not entitled. Scots law suffered as a result. This unfortunate situation was not remedied by sending one or two Scottish judges to London, because they were still in a minority. The distinguished Scots jurist Professor Sir Thomas Smith once wrote: “Paradoxically, some of the Scottish lawyers in the House of Lords have at times been responsible for the subversion of valuable principles of their national system.” He suggested this gave the two Scots judges in London too much power over their colleagues in Scotland and too little power in relation to the judges in London who were trained in a different legal tradition. He further suggested it might be more appropriate to give the Court of Session the appellate power to convene the whole court to decide matters of extreme importance. By inference, human rights issues could qualify. The First Minister is right to object to the incursions by the Supreme Court, first because the integrity of Scots law is being undermined yet again and, secondly, because this situation has in part been brought about by the Scotland Act setting up a Scottish Parliament that is manifestly not sovereign. Both these deficiencies need to be remedied. Equality of legal jurisdictions requires equality of parliaments.
    Randolph Murray- Wester Camghouran, Rannoch, Perthshire.
    The responses of the First Minister and now the Cabinet Secretary for Justice to the decision of the Supreme Court in the Nat Fraser case are the first real constitutional shots in anger in the lead-up to an independence referendum. If this is to be the standard of debate we have to look forward to in the next few years we are in for a worrying time.
    There is nothing particularly new about criminal cases from Scotland going before a court south of the Border. They have been going there ever since devolution, only to begin with they went to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, as much a court as the Supreme Court. The lead judges for Scottish cases in the Supreme Court are the Scottish members. For some years those judges have been Lord Hope and Lord Rodger, two of the most distinguished Scottish judges there have ever been. The implication that somehow their involvement is watering down the distinctive nature of the Scottish criminal justice system is ridiculous.
    Comments suggesting that the Supreme Court justices from England, Wales and Northern Ireland are ignorant of Scots Law, could, if valid, be made equally about the Scottish justices’ knowledge of the relevant domestic law when they sit in appeals from England, Wales, Northern Ireland or the Commonwealth countries which have their final appeals heard in London. They could be made even more powerfully when referring to the judges of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, to which apparently the Scottish Government is willing to submit. In fact the supra-national make-up of the Supreme Court is one of the features which give authority and respect to its decisions within and beyond the UK. The Supreme Court offers the Government the opportunity to appeal against High Court decisions ruling against the Crown on human rights issues in criminal matters. There would be no such appeal available to the Strasbourg court. It only permits victims of human rights abuses to appeal.
    I am afraid the SNP attack on the Supreme Court demonstrates the sort of chauvinistic nationalism which seeks to defend any institution on the grounds that it is ours and therefore automatically above criticism. We should also not be afraid to accept that our justice system can draw from the experience of others and improve our laws and procedures. Scottish judges have consistently punched above their weight, both in London and in Europe, showing that what is good about Scots Law can have much wider influence, but we do not have a monopoly in right answers. When we look at some of the judicial decisions made in the name of criminal justice by Scottish courts in the last 20 years, that ought to be an easy lesson to accept.
    Tom Marshall, - 8 Manse Street, Aberdour.
    Your report regarding the forthcoming “gathering” of the Scottish cabinet to discuss “remedying” the referral of Scottish criminal cases to the Supreme Court on human rights grounds reflects a clear indication that the nationalist politicians increasingly resemble a huffy coterie quaking in the throes of a tartan tantrum.  Their insular and provincial mindset was offended by the Supreme Court’s decision in the Fraser appeal and their emotional wellbeing was consequently destabilised by an acute fit of bagpipe pique. This minor handicap relieved them of the need to consider the merits of the Supreme Court’s role regarding the enhancement of justice and that serious omission may have been aided and abetted by an eager consumption of Brigadoon broth – a notorious starter, universally recognised as a potent remedy for rational thinking. A spokesman for Kenny MacAskill stated: “Scotland’s distinct legal system, including our criminal law, has served our country well for centuries, ensuring justice for victims while also protecting the rights of those accused of a crime’. The ghosts of Paddy Meehan and Oscar Slater would not challenge the distinct nature of Scotland’s legal system but they might query the contention that the system “protects the rights of the accused. The Cadder and Fraser appeals suggest that it is Scotland’s distinct legal system that needs remedied and that the distinct nature of the system is reflected in its failings rather than its merits – hence the need for external scrutiny by the Supreme Court.
    Thomas Crooks,- 81 Dundas Street, Edinburgh.
    http://www.ibrox.eveningtimes.co.uk/mobile/news/home-news/qc-attacks-salmond-for-prejudicing-fraser-retrial.14228993
    QC attacks Salmond for ‘prejudicing’ Fraser retrial
    Published on 30 June 2011
    Martin Williams
    A LEADING lawyer has accused Alex Salmond and his ministers of destroying the prospects of a fair trial for Elgin businessman Nat Fraser.

     

    We hope you've enjoyed reading your sample of 5 articles on heraldscotland.com and want to read more
    To view the full text of articles please sign-in to access more articles on HeraldScotland.
    Registration gives you access to 5 more articles, a total of 10 articles every 4 weeks.
    Related articles
    SNP review into Supreme Court rulings Political News Wed 1 Jun 2011
    It’s right to be proud of Scots law but justice must come first Letters Sat 28 May 2011
    Supreme Court has enhanced Scots law not detracted from it Letters Fri 27 May 2011
    Justice system in the dock as Nat Fraser wins appeal Home News Thu 26 May 2011
    http://www.ibrox.eveningtimes.co.uk/mobile/politics/political-news/snp-review-into-supreme-court-rulings.13899985
    SNP review into Supreme Court rulings
    Published on 1 June 2011

    Brian Currie
    THE Scottish Government is to set up an expert group to examine Scotland's relationship with the UK Supreme Court as the fall-out continues from the Nat Fraser and Cadder cases.

     

    We hope you've enjoyed reading your sample of 5 articles on heraldscotland.com and want to read more
    To view the full text of articles please sign-in to access more articles on HeraldScotland.
    Registration gives you access to 5 more articles, a total of 10 articles every 4 weeks.
    Related articles
    It’s right to be proud of Scots law but justice must come first Letters Sat 28 May 2011
    The attacks made on Supreme Court smack of crude populism Letters Wed 1 Jun 2011
    http://www.ibrox.eveningtimes.co.uk/mobile/comment/letters/it-s-right-to-be-proud-of-scots-law-but-justice-must-come-first.13849085
    It’s right to be proud of Scots law but justice must come first
    Published on 28 May 2011
    As a graduate in law I have always been proud of the independence (and superiority?) of Scots Law, based as it is on Roman Law.