NEWS RELEASE – award for the Greens!

GREEN MSP MEDIA RELEASE

Embargoed for 0001hrs 28th November 2003

GREENS PICK UP TOP AWARD FOR ELECTION PERFORMANCE

In the prestigious Herald Politician of the Year Awards held this evening in Edinburgh the entire Green Party won the award for ?election performance of the year?. The Greens had the biggest gain of all the political parties in this year?s Scottish Parliament elections.

The Scottish Green Party emerged from the 2003 election as the fifth largest party in the Scottish parliament and confirmed its status as a major voice in Scottish politics, leaping from one to seven MSPs, out of a total of 129 and returned MSPs in six of Scotland’s eight regions.

The 132,000 green votes was a 57% increase from the previous election.

The Greens success is part of a steady stream of successes for Greens across Europe. The German Greens in 2002, secured an increased vote and strengthened their place in the governing coalition. And, closer to home, the Irish Greens in the same year, jumping from two TDs in the Dail to six.

Robin Harper MSP said, ?I am overjoyed that after a quarter century of campaigning, the Scottish Green Party has gained recognition in winning this award. Most of all, thanks to all our voters. And a huge thank you to our members and to our election campaign team who worked tirelessly. On behalf of the Scottish Green Party, I am delighted that we have received this well-merited and much appreciated recognition.?
?Our role as the green conscience of the parliament is important but equally we will be pressing ahead with efforts to change the law, for example on GM liability and to provide decent warm homes for all Scots – and we are bringing a fresh voice to Scottish politics that seeks to build consensus and deepen political engagement with the people in our fledgling new democracy.?
?We will forge ahead with the urgent task of greening Scotland. We will look to build new and stronger alliances with campaigning and community groups so that Scotland’s record as a dirty, wasteful capital of Europe will be put behind us.?

For further information contact the Green MSP Press Office on 0790 99 33 074

NEWS RELEASE – ID Cards

GREEN MSP MEDIA RELEASE

For immediate use 27th November 2003

GREENS CALL ON EXECUTIVE TO REJECT WESTMINSTER ID CARD PLAN

Green MSP Patrick Harvie, speaker on Justice, today called on the First Minister to confirm that Scottish citizens will not be compelled to carry ID cards and will never have difficulty in accessing public services without them, following the Queens speech commitment to introduce the scheme.

Jack McConnell?s previous comments on ID cards were described as a fudge, and that his adherence to the position that compulsory ID cards will not cover access to devolved services such as hospitals, is a tacit admission that Scots will have to carry ID cards to access UK-centred services. The Greens say that this means ID cards will happen in Scotland and that the Executive will not oppose their introduction.

Following the Queen’s Speech yesterday, in which plans to introduce ID cards with the longer-term potential to be made compulsory were announced, Patrick Harvie said, ?Compulsory ID cards are an infringement of civil liberties, will be impossible to police, will waste taxpayers money and the unproven technology will cause more problems than they solve. The scheme smacks of a government clutching at straws in an attempt to sound innovative, but in reality this is a measure which should have been left behind with mid-twentieth century Britain. The Scottish Executive should assert the right of Scots to live their lives without being required to justify their existence, and the First Minister must stop fudging on this issue.?

The ID Card proposals contained in the Queens speech will affect everyone in the UK, and two aspects:
? Ministers having the power to make the scheme compulsory;
? Ministers having the power to change the scheme to withdraw public services from people who do not produce a card

This is in clear conflict with the First Minster’s comments against the requirement to carry a card.

At First Minister?s Questions on November 13th the First Minister said: ?The position of the Executive and the partnership has consistently been that we would be opposed to the use of compulsory identity cards for services that come under our devolved responsibilities in Scotland. That remains our position and not only have we agreed and properly implemented that position, but the Home Secretary and the United Kingdom Cabinet have accepted it in full. It forms an integral part of the UK Cabinet’s scheme, as it has no intention whatever of using its card for devolved services.?

Patrick Harvie added, ?McConnell?s fudge here is that he is trying to hide behind ?devolved services? as somehow to mean that no-one will be forced to have an ID card in Scotland. He should stand up to Blunkett and say that Scots don?t want a compulsory scheme for any form of service. The reality is that no matter what Jack wants or says, Westminster rules on this and it appears that the Scottish Executive is going to simply roll over and let it all happen.?

For more information contact the Green MSP Press Office on 0131 348 6376

Letter to press – Sewel motions

With reference to the Queen?s Speech it is important to recognise how the use of politically-motivated ?Sewel? motions are being used to circumvent democracy in Scotland. It is vital for the authority of the Scottish Parliament that we challenge the Executive’s ability to send controversial issues to Westminster, avoiding scrutiny and amendment by MSPs.
Today I lodged a motion in the Parliament in response to the Queen?s Speech which seeks to address this. This is not just an issue which relates to Civil Partnerships, but to the ongoing relationship between the two parts of our devolved government – Executive and Legislature. If the Executive – or indeed their Labour colleagues in Westminster – do not accept changes to this mechanism they will be undermining their own devolution project and perpetuating a democratic deficit.
If the Executive (irrespective of which parties are running it) can remove Parliament’s right to scrutinise legislation on devolved issues, then Parliament needs a defence mechanism, by which it can regain that scrutiny. My motion describes such a defence, and I have asked colleagues of all parties to endorse it. By doing so, MSPs will be asserting their authority as elected representatives. If they do not, we risk seeing that authority gradually eroded over the years, just as Westminster’s has been.
The UK Government has committed itself to legislating on Civil Partnerships for same-sex couples. Although this is less than we wanted, and excludes mixed-sex couples, it is a huge step forward. The Scottish Parliament should have been able to debate this itself however, passing legislation here in Scotland, and ensuring full scrutiny of the legislation. This is Parliament’s role. This is what devolution was for.

Sincerely,
Patrick Harvie

NEWS RELEASE – Civil Partnership (again)

GREEN MSP MEDIA RELEASE

For immediate use Wednesday 26th November 2003

‘POLITICAL SEWELS’ ARE A DEMOCRATIC DEFICIT FOR SCOTLAND

Green MSP Patrick Harvie today called for an end to the Executive’s power to send controversial issues to Westminster without scrutiny and amendment in the Scottish Parliament. Harvie argues that Scottish Parliament must assert its authority to end a democratic deficit, and improve the reputation of the Parliament amongst the Scottish people.

Harvie lodged a motion in the parliament today on the use of the Sewel motion in response to the Queen?s speech. (1) Harvie is particularly concerned over the fate of Civil Partnerships legislation announced in Westminster by the Queen. The Executive intends to pass the responsibility for this to Westminster rather than supporting a separate Scottish Bill for which Patrick Harvie argued.

Harvie said, “This is not just an issue which relates to Civil Partnerships, but to the ongoing relationship between the two parts of our devolved government – Executive and Legislature. If the Executive – or indeed their Labour colleagues in Westminster – do not accept this mechanism they will be undermining their own devolution project.?

?If the Executive can remove our right to scrutinise legislation in devolved issues, then Parliament needs a defence mechanism, by which it can regain that scrutiny over important issues. The motion I am lodging today outlines how this mechanism will work.?

?The UK Government today committed itself to legislating on Civil Partnerships for same-sex couples. Although this is less than we wanted, and omits covering opposite sex couples, it is a huge step forward. The Scottish Parliament should have been able to debate this itself, passing legislation here in Scotland, and ensuring full scrutiny of the legislation. This is Parliament’s role. This is what devolution was for.?

?Scottish politicians should have been able to debate, for example, whether mixed-sex couples should have had the same access to Civil Partnership that same-sex couples will have: the inclusive model, rather than the segregated model which Westminster proposes.?

Notes to editors

Motion text:

Short Title: Use of Sewel Motions

S2M-00665 Patrick Harvie (Glasgow) (Green): That the Parliament

- notes the Scottish Executive?s use of the convention known as the Sewel motion; recognises that there are occasional circumstances where the use of Sewel motions is an appropriate legislative route; believes that such motions should not be used for specifically political reasons and that an action of this nature would undermine the authority of the Parliament; further believes that it is possible for a process to be developed by which the Scottish Parliament can fully scrutinise a bill that is in passage at Westminster, and considers that this process would require a committee of the Scottish Parliament to consider the UK bill with sufficient time to take evidence and report, the Scottish Parliament to debate the committee?s report and agree recommendations for amendments to the parts of the bill which relate to Scotland, such recommendations to be submitted to the UK Parliament with sufficient time for their incorporation into the bill and for a second Sewel motion to be considered by the Scottish Parliament to approve this bill as amended, before the bill is approved by the UK Parliament.

For more information contact the Green MSP Press Office on 0131 348 6376

NEWS RELEASE – Glasgow Crossrail

GREEN MSP MEDIA RELEASE

For immediate release 25th November 2003

GREENS WELCOME LATE DEPARTURE OF GLASGOW CROSSRAIL

Greens today welcomed the announcement by the Scottish Executive to fund a £500,000 feasibility study into the Glasgow Crossrail proposal, but say that the funding and urgency with which it is being progressed is in stark contrast to the proposed plans and public spend on the M74 extension.

Patrick Harvie, Green MSP for Glasgow, who has vigorously opposed the new M74 project said, ?Crossrail can deliver benefits right across the region quickly and within budget, so why has the Executive been backing the M74 motorway project instead all these years? If Crossrail had been pursued with the same enthusiasm from the first day of devolution, it would be half built by now.?

?The Executive should commit to building Crossrail, and if it then can’t afford to pay for the M74 project, so much the better. Hundreds of millions of taxpayers’ pounds are being spent on transport infrastructure here – let’s spend it on the projects which benefit all people, by giving them an alternative to the car. If we don’t, we’ll see the projected 40% increase in Glasgow’s road traffic levels rising even higher. No amount of small scale funding of studies will hide the major funds set aside for unsustainable and unjustified road projects that point in the opposite direction from Executive rhetoric.?

For further information contact the Green MSP Press Office on 0131 348 6376.

NEWS RELEASE – Executive Boycott of Parliament

GREEN MSP MEDIA RELEASE

For immediate use Thursday 20th November 2003

GREENS DEPLORE MINISTERIAL BOYCOTT OF WORLD PEACE DEBATE

Following a debate this morning in the Scottish Parliament regarding world peace and war in Iraq, Green MSP Patrick Harvie lodged a motion in the Parliament deploring the decision by the Scottish Executive to boycott the debate. No Ministers were present.

An earlier motion by Green MSP Chris Ballance, calling for the Parliament to deplore the visit of George W. Bush to the UK has received widespread support from across all the political parties (except the Conservatives).

Mr Harvie, MSP for Glasgow said, “It is a pity that Ministers refused to take part in the debate and it is inevitable that people will view this boycott with dismay. Parliament is there to hold government to account on behalf of the people, and it should be expected to hear and debate the views of those in office. It is a shame that Ministers have ‘no view’ and given the importance of the issue, absentee governance is not good enough.”

Notes to editors

S2M-00637 Patrick Harvie (Glasgow) (Green): That the Parliament deplores the decision by the Scottish Executive to boycott the debate on world peace and considers that Executive ministers should take part in every Parliamentary debate.

S2M-571 Chris Ballance: Visit of George W Bush?That the Parliament deplores the visit of George W Bush to the United Kingdom and supports peaceful mass protests in Edinburgh and Glasgow on 19 November 2003 against his visit.

Supported by: Ms Rosemary Byrne, Frances Curran, Colin Fox, Carolyn Leckie, Eleanor Scott, Robin Harper, Mark Ballard, Mr Mark Ruskell, Shiona Baird, Mr Rob Gibson, Christine Grahame, Tommy Sheridan, Linda Fabiani, Bill Butler, Mike Pringle, Mr Adam Ingram, Ms Sandra White*, Patrick Harvie*

NEWS RELEASE – Sexual Health Strategy

GREEN MSP MEDIA RELEASE

For immediate release Wednesday 12th November 2003

SEXUAL HEALTH STRATEGY WELCOMED BY GREENS

Green MSP Patrick Harvie, who co-convenes the Scottish Parliament?s Cross Party Group on Sexual Health, today welcomed the Executive?s publication of a sexual health strategy for Scotland.

Patrick Harvie, Green MSP for Glasgow, said, ?The existence of a sexual health strategy is welcome and long overdue, and Susan Deacon is owed credit for initiating it. The Scottish Executive will do well to bring it into operation but it is vital to recognise however, that sexual health is not just the absence of disease or dysfunction – it covers physical, mental, emotional and social well-being.?

Harvie argued that as important as it is to have a strategic approach to improve Scotland?s sexual health, it is also vital that new initiatives should be adequately resourced to address the needs of all. Harvie argues that the strategy must commit to a holistic understanding of sexual health, according to the World Health Organisation’s definition and points to three key aspects that public policy must address:

Information
People must have accurate and relevant information about sexual health, STIs, fertility, etc. This also means having access to reliable sources of information.

Motivation
If people are to make healthy choices, they must be motivated to do so – they must be able to value themselves and their own lives sufficiently, and they must have the possibility of happy and healthy lives.

Services
If people are to be able to make healthy sexual choices, access to services is vital. This will mean different things to people at different times in life, but unless services exist and are accessible some choices will be closed off to people.

Harvie added, ?These three factors of information, motivation and services will be achieved in different ways, but must be provided for all people – young and old, rich and poor, urban and rural, of all genders and sexualities, on their own terms.?

For further information contact the Green MSP Press Office on 0131 348 6376 or 0790 99 33 074

Speech from Transport debate

Patrick Harvie (Glasgow) (Green):

Sustainable transport campaigners in Scotland have grown sadly accustomed to continual disappointment at the Executive’s apparent double-think over sustainability and transport, as in many other policy areas. The minister’s recognition that the Scottish Executive has been too focused on roads is a welcome admission of failure on sustainability, but it comes a bit late following the £1 billion spend on road building.

But yes… perhaps the minister will now embrace sustainability, and the economic, social justice and environmental factors that it defines, by not trying to treble Scotland’s air traffic, which expands at the rate that it does only because of access to tax-free fuel. Never mind the principle that the polluter pays?here, the polluter gets a tax break.

Brian Adam (Aberdeen North) (SNP):

Will the member dissociate himself and his colleagues from the comment that was made by one of the Greens in the London Assembly that there should be a minimum £150 air charge?

Patrick Harvie:

I have not had the opportunity to discuss that with my colleagues in London, but I would welcome that chance.

In recognising the fact that the cost of private car use has held steady overall, in real terms, for the past 30 years, while public transport ? on which most households in Glasgow rely ? has got steadily more expensive, the Executive could make a further commitment to sustainability. That trend must be reversed. Also, the Executive must refuse to accept the suggestion that car use and civil aviation must grow and grow. Those are the two fastest-growing sources of CO2 emissions in the country, and the Executive’s ambition to create a 40 per cent increase in road traffic in Glasgow will mean disaster for Glaswegians and the rest of the planet’s inhabitants.

I will be glad to welcome a new commitment, if it is to come, to embracing sustainability in the Executive’s transport policy ? even if the ministers will not look at me while I am speaking. The Scottish Executive could demonstrate that commitment by showing the same urgency in expanding concessionary and free travel schemes that it shows in relation to proposals for putting electronic tags on children; by reversing the trend of providing cheap road and air travel; by investing not only in big-budget mega-projects, but ? as Pauline McNeill said ? in bus services, as our European neighbours do; and by prioritising and funding urban planning and design policies that will make our towns and cities safe and pleasant environments in which to walk and cycle.

Even Brian Adam suggested that the Executive has much to boast about concerning its development of cycling routes. However, rather than giving glowing praise for a limited number of specific routes, I ask the Executive to focus on the daily concerns that cyclists cope with on our roads throughout the country. I want the Executive to tackle congestion, lane priorities, dedicated signalling and other measures as a matter of course, not just on a limited number of routes. Until we see that new, sustainable approach, I will still have to reply to letters and e-mails from disgruntled cycle commuters who are trying to get into Glasgow city centre in a nightmarish winter rush hour ? or at any other time ? and taking their lives in their hands. Although there have been some signs of progress, there is still a feeling in Scottish Executive documents that cycling is a pastime ? a hobbyist’s weekend excursion that takes place at least a train ride from the city.

Other commitments that we could see from the Executive include a social justice audit of all transport funding and the Executive throwing its weight more fully and comprehensively behind Glasgow’s crossrail scheme and projects like it. Most important ? I have mentioned this before in the chamber and members will be bored of it, but I will not stop mentioning it ? the Executive should swallow its pride and accept the fact that the £500 million M74 northern extension project is a scandalous policy to pursue. It is in direct conflict with the interests of Glasgow’s southsiders; it is defended by arbitrary job creation statistics; it will increase road traffic and pollution; and it will degrade the environment locally and globally. It must be scrapped.

Iain Smith’s call for the Greens to be more constructive in this transport debate can elicit only one response ? it depends on what is being constructed. If the Liberal Democrats want to feel more comfortable in their green threads, they should join me in opposing that appalling urban motorway project.

Many members have talked about integration, regulation, strategic planning and investment. All those measures are important, but, to be frank, I do not care whether the Scottish Executive delivers them under the present arrangements or through a new agency; I care about putting sustainability at the heart of transport policy. If the Executive is willing to do that, it will receive my enthusiastic support, but I will not hold my breath.