Tory MSP blows off key parliament vote to take part in World Cup referee  training - Daily Record

The branch supervisor of the Scottish Tories tweeted the other day.

Normally, when he does that, it’s all about the general incompetence of the SNP and Nicola Sturgeon by comparison to the brilliance of the Tories and Dominic Cummings, erm, I mean whatsisname, the blond one that looks like Donald Trump… sans tan.

Douglas Ross MP@Douglas4Moray I would have no hesitation in voting against any legislation which would allow chlorinated chicken or hormone-injected beef into this country. That’s a categorical assurance.

This time, though, it seems that he wanted to give assurance (presumably mainly to the farmers in his area), that he would not, on any account, vote for an amendment to a Bill that allowed for any diminution of standards in farming.

After all, most farmers do care about standards and good animal husbandry.

There seems little doubt that allowing standards of imports to drop would put small family farmers in tight spot. Clearly imports, produced to a lower standard, would be cheaper, and factory farms, owned by big business, wouldn’t hesitate to drop prices and standards in line with imported goods. A small farm wouldn’t be able to compete, but wouldn’t necessarily be prepared to inject their cows with hormones.

So, this tweet was a comforting intervention on Dross’s part.

Or, rather, you would have thought so had it not been that it looks like he already voted for just that.

There you go! And, although it’s shown in Hansard to be the record of his vote, he says is a lie, a mistake and and evil plot by the wicked “SNP CyberNats”.

Well, it would be, wouldn’t it?

Incidentally, the wee Tory block, we might call them “the gang of six”, also all also voted against the NHS remaining under control of the governments in the UK.

So, your NHS is plain out of luck too.

I don’t recall the rallying cry for Brexit being…”take back control and give it away again sharpish”. Do you?

While we are on the subject, just a quick look at the “gypsy”- hating MP’s record on voting on other matters:

Dross has a majority of 513 in a total vote of 48,835 (68.7%). I think it may well have been a good career move for him to bag a list seat for Edinburgh’s parliament in line with Mr Cummings’ dictat, even if we were all looking forward to Annie being in charge.

72 thoughts on “DROSS FROM D ROSS”

  1. Arrghh. I was going to do a piece that covered some of this. Linking indeed to his disastrous interview moaning about SNP cybernats.

    Ah well back to the drawing board, maybe I can salvage it… Still Great Minds!!

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Goes from bad to worse. Turns out the NFU bod named in DRoss’ interview is beeling. Accused him of “taking him out of context”.

      Not going well there.

      Also DRoss wife, a polis, has previously been told off for making unwarranted (see what I did there!) comments about Nicola Sturgeon.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Oh dear. is out of context another way of saying” through a hole in his backside”?

        And I’d be watching out for Constable (or whatever) Dross, if you were driving a car with an SNP sticker.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. the Johnny Beattie interview with the NFU Bod. Not a happy bunny.

    Right I’m away now to give you all peace.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. And now …

    he has introduced a wonder plan to “Power Up Scotland”. The M8 will be 3 lanes with a hard shoulder. Rail links within the Central Belt and to Aberdeen and Inverness will be improved.

    .. and all within the existing budget as the SNP are, apparently, unable to manage a budget.

    Do the Tories really believe that anyone will fall for this nonsense?

    Liked by 3 people

      1. Maybe make cars narrower and paint three lanes on the road instead of two? Claim it will reduce fuel consumption, thereby cementing the TartanTories’ commitments to greenery?

        They’d be better building a hyperloop, which would get you from Glasgow to Edinburgh so fast you’d have to get off at Edinburgh before you got on at Glasgow: https://youtu.be/zcikLQZI5wQ.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. LOL, Ed.

          It looks good, but I’d worry about Virgin having anything to do with it. Company from hell, in my experience. (I’ve told them by phone and by letter to disconnect my mother’s internet and television… and I don’t pay them… and still they haven’t!)

          I was just thinking though, that England will get round to putting the first sleeper down on their HS2 (that we are helping to pay for) and the rest of the world will be hyperlinking.

          Still, Rule Britannia, I say, and god save the queen.


              1. As it should have been, of course, Tris.

                If they don’t cease and desist, and I know this is a bit distasteful, but what you have to do is put any letters from them (assuming they have a return address) back in the post marked “RTS – Deceased”.

                Liked by 1 person

                1. Actually, I sent one back saying.

                  I have written to you. I have spoken to you on the phone, twice. I have told you my mother in DEAD.

                  What part of DEAD do you not understand?

                  If you require this letter in another language, please let me know and enclose a stamped addressed envelope.

                  Liked by 1 person

    1. The Tories going back 40 or 50 years have promised,in just about every election,to dual the A1 all the way to Newcastle.
      They only really pay any attention to Scotland when we threaten to open our own bank account.

      Liked by 2 people

  4. Just heard Glenn Campbell’s report on the Dross issue on BBC Shortbread news. A masterpiece of selective reporting, in the careful avoidance of the central issue of Dross’s voting record on food standards.
    Mind you, made Radio Scotland sound good!
    Heads will presumably roll at the latter organisation.😉

    Liked by 1 person

  5. What has now come to light is the desperation of Westminster to get a deal with US. A stong whipped vote was exersised back in May which has resulted in Dross being offered the leadership, probably Ms Davidson’s stoat coat and a back stabbed Carlaw. People say that the farmers have been thrown under the bus. The ones I see on the tarmac are the Scottish tories, they all have rural constituencies. Scotland is now a lost cause to Westminster and with this disclosure the reverse is increasingly true.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I think Ross’s “principled” resignation was probably part of a plan to get him in there.

      They had decided that Carlaw was a catastrophe and had to be replaced. They looked along the ranks of MSPs shaking the heads in despair. Then the looked at the Scottish MPs and did the same.

      How they chose him I’m not sure. He’s no better or worse than the rest of them, maybe a little easier on the eye, which can be a vote winner.

      I feel desperately sorry for people who won’t be able to go to good butchers and buy good meat when this is over.

      And I feel sorry for decent farmers who will probably have to sell off their lands to the massive agricultural conglomerates.

      If there are any small fishermen left, I feel sorry for them too.

      The big ones… tough. You voted for this.

      Liked by 3 people

  6. Ah well, a different kind of double. Last in twice. Can’t help with James’s quiz though, even with the aid of an imminent Bulgarian sunrise. All Tories? Too obvious. Alice, rabbit hole, only unchlorinated meat you’ll soon have left? Davidson resigned to look after offspring. Alice’s brother went to Durham to look after offspring. And we must consider the Lilleys of the field and their offspring. No? I give up. Wait for Prof Ed Peerless to lead later elucidation from the Heraldic Crew.

    Liked by 3 people

      1. OK, I’ve had lots of coffee – and nicotine top-up – over the past few hours and I think I’ve cracked it. Untruthie and Lielley both belong to the Hordes of Louse and neither is related to Cummings. He doesn’t have a sister and Idox director Alice, linked to him by the Barnard Castle trip, became a Cummings by marriage, maiden name Banks. (Ah, the plural of louse is lice – A-lice? Tenuous, unlike the eponyms, but worth a shot.)

        On top of that, Untruthie used to work for the BBC, as did Lielley’s dad, but I can’t find any Beeb link to Alice. How am I doing, James?

        Liked by 2 people

    1. Niko, that article from the Tory House Magazine the Spectator is based on the GERS figures, which are crap, or even CRAP. This great video about the GERS, by Prof. Richard Murphy of City University, London, explains why: https://youtu.be/ycq1dizIug8.

      Nothing based on the GERS can be trusted, and nothing in The Spectator can be trusted either, so that’s two good reasons for not bothering to read the article you posted.

      The thing I’ve heard about DRoss that I like least, by the way, are reports that during his schooldays he was a bully – and chose girls as his victims.

      Liked by 2 people

    2. Dear old Fraser.

      I can understand people being emotionally attached to Britain.

      I know that for some the dear old queen, changing guards, the rough and tumble of the Commons, the aristocracy, old and new, the bobbies on bicycles two by two, Westminster Abbey, the Tower of Big Ben…etc, etc, are important, and I’m not knocking that (any more than Roger Millar did).

      But can a country of 5.5 million in Northern Europe, manage to compete with a country that has a low minimum wage, massive child poverty, and the worst pensions in the developed world?

      Well Ireland can and so can Norway and Denmark. Come to that countries a bit bigger and bit (and evn a lot) smaller can too.

      So you have Iceland, Sweden, Finland, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Portugal, Austria, Malta, Cyprus…

      I’m not going to spit bile at him… I’l just titter a little.

      I got as far as reading that he was referring to GERS, a system set up by the Noble and Rt Honourable Lord Lang, which he bragged in a memo to John Major (later leaked by a disgruntled civil servant), would make Scotland look a deal poorer than it is and put the natives off the idea of independence.


      Have you seen all the costs that Scottish spending includes?

      There’s Crossrail, HS2, the London sewers system, one of the largest military spends in the world, involvement in all manners of wars, the immense cost of Brexit, and sundry charges for the royal family, a parliament that is a very considerable distance up its own backside and on and on it goes.

      Many of these costs are to pay for things that will do us no good at all (and may even do us harm), and some are for the pretences that Brits like to have, that they are still important and influential in the world… what was it Cameron said, when talking about British virtues… ‘We are respected and feared all over the world’. Scots tend to be liked!

      No bile there. If we were independent, most of these things wouldn’t have to be paid for.

      … or maybe I got it wrong. Maybe Scottish people are just incredibly stupid and incompetent compared with other Europeans?

      After all, if 400,000 Icelanders can live in a modern, well regulated country to a reasonable standard of living (higher than ours), and all without the aid of Eton boys telling them what to do, why would we not be able to, unless we have been on the stupid pills?

      Liked by 3 people

  7. Some of you will be aware of Martin Keatings’ section 30 case to be heard at the CoS. The Times have got hold of the closed record of the case and it appears that SG submission was that an independence referendum is not imminent (via Mr Malky twitter). Which is just what a growing number of us were fearing. Anyway if you click through the link, you get the whole article. Now I’m not a lawyer but I had increasing foreboding of reading. What do others think?

    Liked by 2 people

      1. Imminent, within 6 hours.
        Soon, 6 to 12 hours.
        Later, after 12 hours.
        Meaning according to shipping forecast, probably doesn’t transpose to politics, pity.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. Define ” Imminent “.

        I suspect that what they meant was ‘in the current session of parliament’. Everything now rests on the wording of the SNP manifesto for next year’s election. If there is no cast iron commitment to a referendum, and a time scale, I don’t think the independence movement would stomach voting SNP.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. … but I think that there will be, Dave.

          Hopefully the worst of Covid will be over by then.

          I reckoned that it was a bit of a waste of energy to have people campaigning for indy when there was a medical crisis that was killing people going on.

          You wouldn’t have caught me on a march, or knocking on doors…not even putting stuff through doors.

          The UK government was condemned, rightly in my opinion. for sticking rigidly to Dec 31 as its leaving date, while trying to cope with Covid.
          Nicola would have been equally condemned had she pressed on with independence.

          Unpopular view maybe… I’ve got my head under the desk lest missiles come my way. (Just be careful not to hit Munguin. He’d be cross… and you wouldn’t like him cross.)

          I also think that their 7 year thing, which Ed pointed out was written into the Good Friday Agreement, may be important.

          Them: “You can’t have another one… it’s only 7 years since the last one.”

          US: “so not only can the Northern Irish get a compromise in staying in the EU, which the Scots can’t get… they also get to hold a referendum every 7 years (a generation in that definition) and Scots don’t.”

          Liked by 2 people

    1. I’m not bothered, PP, because I am absolutely certain that there will be a referendum next year. As far as I can tell, that Times article is pretty off-beam anyhow; the Scottish Government wasn’t actually being taken to court by Keatings and has now withdrawn from it completely (and voluntarily). It’s typical of England-based journalists, of course, that they fail to grasp the niceties of Scots Law.

      My money is on a referendum in September / October next year, being the seventh anniversary of the one in 2017, so none of the Usual Suspects will be able to quack “Once in a Generation” at us without us pointing to the Good Friday Agreement.

      I’m more against the Keating case than I am for it: there’s something to be said for not closing off one’s options in advance, which is what will happen if the Court of Session rules against us. I would have preferred for the question of §30 to be left up in the air, because that way the SG could legislate next year to hold the referendum regardless and it would then be up to the Westminster regime to take the SG to court to try to stop us – and denying people the right to vote on a question of national self-determination is terrible PR both domestically and internationally. On the other hand, a ruling by the CoS now that a §30 order is a necessary condition for a referendum would cut off that branch of the decision tree.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I hope you’re right Ed and I’m just a worry wart. TBF part of the submission stated that Martin wasn’t a proper person to raise the action, not being a MSP. That said the Scottish government has withdrawn but the Lord Advocate hasn’t and he’s the Chief Legal Officer for the Scottish government. Anyway I’m still not a lawyer.

        Liked by 2 people

            1. Well, I accept that you can’t necessarily get a law degree and write an article at the same time, PP… not even you…

              I will indeed check my email. 🙂 🙂


    2. It looks as if the The Times have skim read the document. What was said was that there was no impending vote for Holyrood to take, that would require CoS assistance in regard to an indy ref.
      This move of SG to distance themselves from the Keatings case may be politics at play, leaving the case clean of government. It is unseemly for the media and Westminster to “weigh in” on an individual member of the public. Although Ed’s point, made further down this thread would use the unseemly actions of Westminster to better effect, when considering an Indy ref.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. I’ve been catching up with Private Eye in my absence from here, and it seems that Dross & co also breached the EVEL principle in voting as they did (unless Scottish Tories are allowed to breach EVEL as they are self-confessed E supporters).

        In ‘The Agri Brigade’ column, the Eye’s ‘Bio-Waste Spreader writes: “…UK farmers face a chaotic and potentially ruinous switch away from the EU’s monolithic Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) to multiple farming, food standards, and environmental policies. The new policies will be devised separately by all the UK’s different national governments and regional assemblies.

        “In a belated attempt to avoid policy anarchy, the UK government has now published details of a plan for an ‘internal market’. But with farm, food, and environmental standards all ‘devolved responsibilities’, it will be difficult to impose uniform policies in any of these areas on the Scottish and Welsh governments or the Northern Ireland assembly.

        “When the Labour government granted devolution… it gave power over farming, food, and environmental standards. These seemed easy concessions at the time because no one foresaw Brexit.

        “Now, however, multiple policies are likely to develop that could cause havoc for farmers and gross distortion to British food production patterns.

        “For example, there will be nothing to stop Holyrood granting Scottish sheep and lamb producers substantial headage subsidies that
        might not be awarded to their counterparts in England, Wales, or NI. Such payments would soon give Scottish meat producers a substantial and unfair advantage. Similar variations,including animal welfare and food standards, could occur for all commodities.

        “The UK government’s proposed internal market plan, which tries to stop these problems developing, has only enraged nationalists in Scotland and Wales.”

        Should such legislation be tabled in Holyrood once Dross takes his list seat, how will he vote? For the benefit of his constituents or for the plans of his Tory masters at head office? Among many other issues, this is bound to make great Dross-watching.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Muckspreader reflects the Eye’s rather parochial, London-centric point of view, failing to take into account the fact that England is the 800-pound gorilla in the room because of the population and agricultural acreage disparity between it and the rUK … anyway, if Scotland wants to keep its food export markets in Europe, it won’t have much room for manoeuvre away from European standards, and we are going to have to choose whether we want to follow England into cutting itself off from European trade or not. If the Westminster regime tries to impose tariffs or take any other economically punitive measures against Scotland post-Brexit, that would be yet another breach of the treaties, I suppose.

          It seems to me that Muckraker assumes that Westminster can and maybe should grab back the powers devolved to us. It really is up to us Scots to decide whether we’re going to allow this: there are many things we can do to put spokes in Their wheels.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. To the contrary Ed, I think Bio-Waste Spreader (Muckraker was the previous Agri Brigade columnist) is gleefully highlighting the ‘unintended consequences’ now confronting the Brexiteers. It did not occur to them that agriculture etc are devolved matters and that Holyrood can adhere to EU standards if so wished, irrespective of whatever Westminster and Tories legislate to help (or enable) a US trade deal. If this causes havoc for English meat producers, that’s Gove’s problem as the minister responsible.

            What worries me is a raid on devolved powers. This would be a quick fix for Westminster- but at the cost of another pile of voters switching to Yes. Which brings us back to §30 and even more resistance to ‘granting’ Indyref2.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. Hm. I see what you mean, John. I still don’t know if his glee is because of the inconvenience to the regime of having to legislate to take the devolved powers away, or at the prospect of Them not being able to. I always assume near-complete ignorance about matters Scottish among the political and the chattering classes of the Great Wen. Even when they think they know something, they usually get it wrong.

              Liked by 1 person

        2. Interesting, John.

          I suspect that Dross will vote the way that Dominic tells him.

          As I understand it, the NI assembly will not have these powers as they will be obliged to follow the directives of the EU, in order that there can be a completely open border with the EU, ie Eire.

          Interestingly the Eye chose to makk Scotland out as the country that might upset their applecart… or potato cart or even lamb cart.


        3. I thought this was dealt with in the Supreme Court ruling, re the Scotland Continuity Bill.
          Supreme Court ruling stated that the Scottish Parliament had competence to pass the Continuity Bill but that section 17 was outside the competency of the Scottish Parliament.

          Section 17 of the Continuity Bill stated that any ammendments to EU retained law would have to have the aproval of the Scottish Ministers.
          The Supreme Court ruled that UK parliamentary ministers are authorised to make subordinate legislation and that Section 17 would make the legal effect of subordinate legislation conditional on the consent of Scottish Ministers. This would be inconsistent with the recognition of the Scotland Act section 28 (7), that the UK parliament has unqualified legislatie power in Scotland.
          That last bit is the killer for me.
          D ross will vote how he is telt and within the law, as imposed from Westminster.

          Liked by 1 person

    3. I think they are waiting for a majority in parliament, exclusive of the Greens.

      Opinion seems to be that no matter what Dominic Cummings says, if there is a very clear majority, it will will be impossible for a government that repeatedly cited the “will of the British people” to say that the “will of the Scottish people”, demonstrated in First Past the Post and PR systems (England and Scotland parliaments), could be tossed aside as invalid.

      The only conclusion that could be reached there would be that whilst the will of the British (in fact Irish and Welsh) people’s was of paramount importance, no matter the consequences of following that will through, the will of the Scottish people could take a flying whatsit.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. At that point, opposing the freely and democratically expressed will of the Scottish people would be a naked abuse of democratic norms. What the penalty for it would be, domestically and internationally, would be interesting to discover, but the Westminster regime would be ill-advised to pursue that particular experiment.

        Liked by 1 person

    4. I donated to the crowdfunding and Mr Keatings emails with updates. This is his email with regard to the Times article
      “Update on Peoples Action on Section 30
      Dear Backers,

      I shall be brief. I am fully aware of the article in the Times today


      I have been aware of the leak for a few days having been approached for comment. There are only three things I will say.

      Firstly, I am utterly disgusted by the actions of whomever disclosed this document. I have been requesting since the beginning to have this public, however, before it calls in court the only way to do that is with the agreement of the other parties. The Advocate General, Lord Advocate and Scottish Minister’s all declined permission – so you can understand how angry I was to find out that one of them decided to just release it themselves.

      Yet again political operators act like petulant children. One rule for them, one rule for the rest of us!

      Secondly, as the comment “It is not for the pursuer to attempt to stand in the shoes of those parliamentarians” is in the public domain because of the article, let me comment on that just briefly.

      The “pursuers”, albeit it is my name on the paperwork, are stipulated in the summons in the first paragraph to be 2000 ordinary members of the electorate (now nearly 8000 people). So what this basically says is that it is not the place of the electorate to hold parliamentarians to account.

      So let me convey my sentiments in 3 word – YES IT IS! and if politicians and pundits alike don’t like that, Tough!

      That one sentence for me was what made my decision about Holyrood 2021. It is as arrogant a statement as can be made and smacks of privilege and automatic self-entitlement.

      It is not the place of parliamentarians to stand in the shoes of the ordinary electorate and tell them what they can and cannot hold parliamentarians to account for.

      On everything else, that hasn’t been said – I will simply say this – The closed record is still being re-written due to the Scottish Ministers withdrawal, any queries on the submissions of the other parties should be directed to them.
      Martin Keatings”

      Liked by 3 people

      1. Right. I’m glad you posted that for us, Tatu.

        I said something myself earlier about that question of standing, and am glad to see Mr. Keatings reacting with such passion to the Westminster regime’s appalling and insulting attitude. Good for Mr. Keatings!

        If I didn’t make it clear before when I said words to the effect that it might have been better strategy to leave the §30 question unanswered, now that the case has started I am entirely behind Mr. Keatings’ action and hope that it leads to the desired result and pray that the Court of Session does not rule against us.

        If I had any, I’d send another few quid in Mr. Keatings’ direction to help fund it.

        Liked by 2 people

    1. Don’t be such a Mother Grundy, Tris. The Doris had his IT advisor and tutor paid for with government funds, or was it London council cash? Why should the Dross be deprived of expertise that seems remarkably akin? Only problem is who’s paying. Tory funds or public purse? And if the latter, from his Westminster allowances presumably. Aw ref, wha’s mindin yer dug?

      Liked by 1 person

  8. The Aristos you say have a read of this
    Who Owns England?: How We Lost Our Green and Pleasant Land, and How to Take It Back
    Guy Shrubsole
    A remarkable piece of work and way ahead of Scotland

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.