NEWS RELEASE – Amnesty’s Irene Khan at Holyrood

HEAD OF AMNESTY BACKS GREENS’ CALLS FOR SCOTTISH POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL INVESTIGATIONS INTO CIA RENDITION FLIGHTS – Irene Khan addresses MSPs

The head of Amnesty International today echoed Greens’ calls for further action in Scotland on rendition flights including judicial and political investigations, and urged campaigners to examine corporate law and companies’ responsibilities as a potential tool to hold airports and airlines to account.

Irene Khan, Secretary General of Amnesty International, addressed the cross party group on human rights, chaired by Green MSP Patrick Harvie, on the issues of rendition flights and the alleged use of Scottish airports and the Human Rights Commissioner Bill. She will deliver the Roy Paterson Memorial lecture at Cairns Church, Milngavie, this evening.

Mr Harvie said, “Human rights for all in Scotland are in real need of protection. Hearing Irene Khan speak today has left me more convinced than ever that the Scottish Human Rights Commissioner should have more powers than is currently proposed, including the right to investigate alleged human rights abuses and have specified legal routes to address them. With real powers, issues such as CIA renditions flights and their alleged use of Scottish airports, could be addressed much more adequately and transparently. Instead, we have a stalemate with the police and Lord Advocate refusing to investigate and the public no doubt becoming increasingly disillusioned with the legal system.”

Questioned on the Lord Advocate’s potential conflict of interest as a member of the Executive and chief of the prosecution system, Khan said that the Scottish system was “peculiar” and that it is crucial that the two sets of responsibilities do not clash.

On rendition flights, she said, “There is a very important role for Parliament to press for . . . investigation.” Adding that without investigation, there will always be suspicion on the behalf of the Scottish public: “If there is nothing (no evidence) they will not be afraid of an investigation.”

Ms Khan said that the making the Human Rights Commissioner “as effective and as strong as possible”, was going to be critical in protecting human rights, and promoting accountability and transparency in Scotland. She also emphasised the importance of using the full remit of devolved powers for example, in pressing for services for asylum seekers and tackling human trafficking, including treating people who are trafficked as victims of crime.

ENDS

Notes:

1. For more information about Ms Khan and her visit to Scotland please contact Naomi McAuliffe on 0131 466 6200, 07766 732 197 or email naomi.mcauliffe@amnesty.org.uk. Reservations for tickets for the Roy Paterson Memorial Lecture can be made by emailing office@cairnschurch.org.uk or phoning 0141 956 4868

2. Journalists wishing to attend the parliamentary event but without a parliament pass, please contact Esther Black on 0771 761 8771 on arrival.

NEWS RELEASE – Free travel scheme

GLASGOW MSP: FREE TRAVEL WELCOME – BUT M74 TAKES SCOTLAND IN WRONG DIRECTION

The national concessionary travel scheme for over-60s was today welcomed by Green MSP Patrick Harvie who said it highlighted the importance of public transport in tackling social exclusion. However, Executive transport policy remains contradictory with ministers urging the public to use trains and buses more whilst ministerial miles soar and hundreds of millions of pounds are wasted on unnecessary major new roads such as the Glasgow M74 extension.

Glasgow MSP, Mr Harvie, said, “The scheme for free local bus travel was well-received, especially among households that are less affluent and do not own a car. This proves the potential of increasing access to public transport for ensuring that everyone – including those who are vulnerable, isolated and/or on low incomes – can travel. The extended scheme will hopefully bring further benefits.”

Greens called for similar benefits to be extended to other groups, and for access to efficient public transport to be prioritised over road building.

Mr Harvie said, “Despite the obvious benefits of this scheme, ministers remain hell-bent on ploughing huge amounts of taxpayers’ cash into unnecessary roads such as the Glasgow M74 extension, which will generate more traffic, congestion and pollution. Just a fraction of these funds could extend the concessionary scheme to cover train journeys and widen eligibility to students and young people, people on low-incomes and other vulnerable groups.

Ministerial road-miles are also on the up, and the Executive is considering abandoning its own internal targets for reducing car use. As is too often the case, what ministers say and what ministers do, doesn’t add up.”

Ministers own Environmental Performance Annual Report published at the end of last year suggested abandoning their own target to reduce car mileage by 5% because they were unable to meet it. (1) Ministerial miles increased from 1.9 million Executive car miles in 2001 to 2.9 million in 2005.

ENDS

Notes
1. For more information see the Executive’s report at: www.scotland.gov.uk; see table 8, page 18.

NEWS RELEASE – Planning Bill

GREENS: MINISTERS KEEPING PARLIAMENT & PEOPLE IN DARK OVER PLANNING SYSTEM POWER GRAB
- Executive leaves door open to nuclear power and waste dumps in National Planning Framework

Campaigners backed by Green MSPs today appealed to parliament to secure genuine democratic rights for the public in the planning system. A LINK parliamentary petition (1) included measures to scrutinise the national planning framework (NPF), which covers many controversial developments such as major roads, and to introduce a limited community right of appeal. Greens argue that these tools are essential for a fair and effective system, and that without them ministers will be able to bulldoze through developments.

Under the Executive’s proposals, political power will trump public interest every time, despite Ministers’ rhetoric about participation and involvement. (2)

The Executive has also admitted that it is not yet able to answer key questions on the content of the framework – specifically whether it could include new nuclear power stations or nuclear waste dumps. (3)

Green MSP Patrick Harvie, member of the communities committee, said, “Meaningful public and parliamentary scrutiny for the new powers ministers want to exercise is crucial. Campaigners made it clear today that it is illogical that the level of parliamentary scrutiny on the NPF, which could include nuclear power stations, equates to that for the approval process for an extension to someone’s house! It will have profound impacts on people’s lives for 20 years, and yet there is still no robust scrutiny process either for Parliament or for the public.”

Ministers pledged to bring forward proposals for Parliamentary scrutiny of the NPF before the introduction of the bill, but then failed to do so. (4) Indeed, Executive officials claimed in committee last month that discussions with parliament authorities on scrutiny had taken place. This is in fact incorrect, and officials later apologised for the error.

A memorandum posted on the parliament website early January 2005 suggests that there will be no formal procedure – not even a negative instrument which is the lowest level of scrutiny possible – by which Parliament will be able to approve or reject the Framework, let alone amend its contents. (5)

The Executive is also opposed to giving the public a chance to engage in a scrutiny process. Other spatial strategies in the UK (such as in London and in Northern Ireland) are subjected to an Examination in Public (from five to seven weeks long) before their approval, to allow for the widest possible input. Scottish Ministers are resisting such ideas for the NPF. Again, the Executive has not brought forward any more detailed proposals. (6)

Harvie said, “The planning system is one of the most important tools available to make society fundamentally more sustainable and fair. If the Executive reforms the system without taking this opportunity, the consequences will be with us for decades. In fact, individuals are losing power because they will no longer have the right to public local inquiry at the local plan stage. It’s insulting that the Executive is eroding the very rights that should be strengthened.

“When the contents of the Bill were leaked ahead of its introduction, Malcolm Chisholm rejected the accusation that the Planning Bill represented a ‘power-grab’ by Ministers. If he is serious about that, he will need to make far more effort to keep Parliament informed of his plans, and to ensure that the reformed planning system doesn’t end up as a Ministerial plaything.”

The Executive’s failure to heed overwhelming support for the introduction of a third party right of appeal to put communities on a more even footing with developers whom at present can appeal planning decisions will further disenfranchise the public. In the Executive’s consultation on TPRA, 86% respondents were in favour of introducing it – yet ministers have decided to not include this in their bill. Greens argue that introducing TPRA – a manifesto pledge of the Liberal Democrats – in a limited form under certain conditions only, would benefit both communities and developers.

It is also likely that a form of third party right of appeal that has operated effectively in Shetland will be lost. (7)

ENDS

Contact the Green MSPs’ press office on 0131 348 6360/0771 761 8771.

Notes to editors

1. LINK, the umbrella body for environmental organisations, submitted a petition aiming to:

? establish real and effective rights for people to have their views taken into account on planning decisions and conditions, through the introduction of a limited third party right of appeal in the planning system, rather than just more opportunities to express opinions; and

? ensure that all strategic planning decisions taken by Government at the national level, including the National Planning Framework, will be open to challenge and public inquiry.

? For more information see
epetitions.scottish.parliament.uk

2. For more on right of appeal and the Framework, see the briefing at
www.scottishgreens.org.uk

3. Written questions S2W-22610 and S2W-22611 have been met with holding responses from the Communities Minister Malcolm Chisholm.

4. S2W-18373 – Lodged 9 August
2005
To ask the Scottish Executive how the second National
Planning Framework will be subject to Parliamentary scrutiny before it is published and what opportunity there will be for the Parliament to amend it.

Answered by Malcolm Chisholm (1 September 2005):
Scottish ministers are committed to ensuring that Parliament has the opportunity to contribute to the development of the second National Planning Framework.
We will bring forward proposals for parliamentary involvement in the process before the introduction of the Planning Bill.

5. For Memorandum on Delegated Powers, see
www.scottish.parliament.uk

6. S2W-18374 – Lodged 9 August
2005
To ask the Scottish Executive what mechanisms it will put in
place to allow opportunities for the public to formally object to or challenge the content of the second National Planning Framework.

Answered by Malcolm Chisholm (1 September 2005):
Scottish ministers are keen to encourage people to engage positively with the National
Planning Framework. The public will have the opportunity to make
representations on a consultative draft of the second National Planning Framework.

7. www.scottishgreens.org.uk

Scotland and the world

Last week Parliament debated the Scottish Executive?s International Strategy. An international strategy is what we have instead of a full foreign policy, and MSPs from the Labour, LibDem and Conservative benches are forever telling us how satisfactory it is that we don?t need to have one of those, our concerns being so ably represented by UK Ministers.

I took the opportunity to welcome the fact that the Executive has come this far though. Devolution should be about more than introspection, and it is a step in the right direction if we start looking beyond our own borders and thinking about our relationship with the world. The contents of the document however are dominated by narrow self-interest.

There are two basic concepts to it – promoting a positive image of Scotland overseas, and promoting Scottish devolved policy interests.

The latter of these is all about negotiations between the regions of Europe, and our other neighbours, whether on fishing, recruiting talented graduates (from nice stable wealthy countries of course), or working across borders to combat organised crime. Though I might want to see a different approach to some of the issues (such as not deporting fresh talent because it comes from an unsafe, impoverished country) there is nothing the Executive is doing on this priority that is in itself wildly offensive.

It?s the first priority of the strategy ? promoting a positive image of Scotland ? that I find more difficult. It is based on the notion that a country?s image in the eyes of the international community can be defined by a marketing slogan. This is so much hype.

When was the last time you gained a perception of a foreign country you?ve never been to? Was is when the US administration started releasing its carefully worded denials on the issue of extraordinary rendition flights? So deliberately ambiguous were they that many people are more sure now that there?s something going on than ever before. Or was it when Russia was blamed by Georgia for ?gas sabotage? during a brutally cold winder? Or when rescuers pulled another survivor from the rubble of a collapsed building in Nairobi, after so many hours of fruitless searching?

It is by our actions that the world comes to know us. By our actions in the past, the world has formed an impression of Scotland. If we want to change that impression, to build on it, it must be by our actions that we achieve this, not by some cheap marketing slogan.

?The best small country in the world? say the posters at the airports, and the First Minister keeps trotting out the same tired expression. Did America ever need to tell you it was ?the best big country in the world?? How absurd.

The only use for these marketing techniques is in the promotion of tourism, and the large majority of our tourism comes from within the UK. In fact it?s only the government?s obsession with subsidies for the aviation industry that really threatens the future of that internal tourism, getting holidaymakers off the trains and the roads, and onto the world?s most polluting form of transport simply because it?s insanely cheap.

In dealing with other ?regional legislatures? in Europe, I hope that Scottish Ministers come to realise that many of them have foreign policies of their own, and take actions for themselves, on fair trade, on promoting peace, on international development. They take it for granted that we do too.

When we gain the confidence to take on those roles, we can begin acting for ourselves again on the world stage, and the world will again come to know us for what we do, not for how we market ourselves.