And Another Thing…

Have to totally agree Tom. This one is completely down to the SNP trying to leverage themselves onto the world stage politically.

i thought speaking to family victims in america–by web cam video conference wasnt the right thing.

what was a cost of a flight?two day meeting?

he never talked to al-megrahi by webcam but in person

Interesting though isn't it. Alex is now pointing firmly at Tony Blair. I am usually willing to believe anything discreditable about the former PM, but even I can't swallow that one.

I totally agree.

It should be made abundantly clear that the SNP Government had no knowledge of and did not agree with the Prisoner Transfer Agreement signed between Libya and the UK Government – that is the issue that is being queried.

The US Senators may have quite valid questions about whether commercial interests played any role in reaching that agreement but they would need to speak to Jack Straw and Tony Blair about that, not Kenny MacAskill.

Well, for a start, as I see it Mr Cameron “our prime minister”, should have very little to say about the decisions of a legal system over which he has no control. Or over a decision taken by a duly elected government at a time when he was the UK leader of the conservative party, a very minor party in Scotland. He should be aware too that the decision was a legal and not a governmental one. I guess like Jack letting Ronnie go, or Kenny Baker letting Ernest go.

Mr Cameron has gone to do some toadying to Mr Obama, stressing in American papers, the importance of the “special relationship” (of which I have to say most of my America friends have never heard or if they have appear to consider to be based on the premise that what is special is America says “do it”, and we…. do it).

cont…..

As for Mr Al Megrahi, I understand that the decision to release him was the one prompted by tenets of Scots law, under which we operate. The man made a request; it was considered with evidence from the prison governor (Al Megrahi got a good report. He had been a model prisoner, teaching Scots prisoners to speak English whilst he was in jail). There was evidence from the head of the Prison Medical Services, and that was supported by the reports of two oncologists. The prognosis was based on treatment available under the National Health Service of Scotland. Further there was advice from legal experts. It’s not clear to me what else Mr MacAskill could have done except been spiteful. He sure as hell didn’t do it for political gain, and it wasn’t that he wanted to strut the international stage. Once the request was made he had no choice but to deal with it.

As with all matters medical, as I’m sure you know, prognoses are a dangerous game. That’s why 3 doctors have to agree. Given the boost to his health that returning home, seeing his mother and his family gave him, and given the boost that he was afforded treatment in Lybia that he could not have expected here, he has lived longer than Scots doctors anticipated. Although contrary to your picture, I understand from the Sunday Post that he is no longer being treated for cancer, but is receiving palliative care for the pains prior to death.

If he was responsible for the Pan Am disaster, and the UK government and the American government of the time did not falsify evidence to get him convicted so that the American politicians could bask in the rays of the prison sentence he was given, whilst putting the blame firmly on the then devil incarnate in America’s ever changing list of foes, then he has been afforded a much less awful death than those whose lives he snuffed over Lockerbie. But then what are the chances of that?

cont…..

Perhaps somewhere there is the Iranian who actually did blow up the airliner as revenge for America shooting down Iran Air Flight 655 on Sunday July 3, 1988, by Navy guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes, killing all 290 passengers and crew aboard, including 66 children and one pregnant woman and Vincennes’ captain getting a medal.

Anyway, you’re right. It was nothing to do with Cameron, and although the Labour party in England backed it completely, despite wee Iain declaring that if he had been first minister it would never have happened (it would if Gordo had wanted it to), it was not their decision.

All this fuss will die down when the elections are over. None of the Senators actually gives a damn, but if it brings them a few votes… hey why not roast the Brit PM?

(The end, you'll be pleased to note.)

Everybody knows there was political pressure from above in order to protect British commercial interests.

Now remind me, who was Foreign Secretary at the time? It wasn't one of your leadership canidates, was it? If Cameron calls for a quick independent enquiry to make the Americans happy then this could get very ugly for certain Labour MPs, especially when Ed Balls starts briefing behind the scenes.

Nonny mouse – you're saying that McAskill would risk losing votes just in order to do the bidding of the UK government? I take it you've never visited Scotland?

James Matthews. There is no doubt that Tony Blair met Colonel Gadaffi in May 2007 and the UK's commercial interests in Libya were discussed. The UK Government signed a memo of understanding with the Libyan Government on 29 May 2007 which included judicial co-operation on the issue of prisoner transfer. The Scottish Government strongly objected to this.

Whether any assurances were given by UK ministers that they could arrange Mr Megrahi's transfer to Libya is a matter of conjecture. I doubt that any assurances were given as UK ministers did not have the power to do so. But maybe there were hints. The only way to find out would be to question all those who were involved in the discussions starting with Tony Blair.

I've read all about this case and it seems pretty clear to me that there was never enough evidence to convict the guy in the first place. Why was your government (in fact David Miliband himself) using dirty tricks to delay the appeal? Perhaps if you hadn't done that, we might be looking for the real culprit now instead of having this pointless discussion about what exactly is the "correct" way to send him back to his own country. After all, he *was* going to go back one way or the other. Aren't you glad this heat isn't on you

Having said all that, I'm not sure what exactly *was* in it for the SNP. They've taken nothing but flak for a decision that has dug both the UK and US administrations out of a seriously big hole. I fail to see their pay off. Could it be they really just played the issue with a straight bat?

Maybe that's why I don't understand it. I haven't seen this type of honest politics for a while.

Sadly, I've never had the pleasure of visiting Scotland. My limited understanding comes from reading the internet and watching TV shows like Question Time.

I got the impression that McAskill made the deision partly based making it look like Scotland were a national government rather than a regional administration. It was more about the fact that he made the decision than what the decision was.

Someone somewhere got it wrong, because he is still alive and didn't die within 3 months like they told us. However, thats not the interesting bit for me.

I know Labour applied some political pressure on Scotland on the basis of 'wider British interestests'. I'm just wondering if that pressure came from the Justice department or the Foreign Office or both.

The question is could this have some effect on the Labour leadership race if Cameron decides to open the can of worms? All it would take would be the unearthing of some embarasing inter governmental memo's at the wrong time to change a few votes and change thre result.

Probably a long shot conspiracy theory, but worth watching how things develop with Cameron and Obama.

And Labour devolved power to Scotland that allowed the SNP to be elected, did you not Tom. If the cap fits……

Seems to me we have more to worry about than the political fallout, perhaps we should be taking a look at the state of the NHS in Scotland if the Libyans have it better than us.

The way I remember it, Kenny McAskill seemed to want to demonstrate some kind of specious moral superiority over Westminster. Hence his Mahatma Ghandi impersonation when justifying his decision to send Al-Megrahi back to Libya, in the face of protests from the Labour government.

This of course led to the grotesque sight of the Saltire being waved in triumph at Tripoli Airport on Al-Megrahi’s return, which you mentioned in your blog at the time,Tom.

Now we have this humdinger of an American conspiracy theory, that it was all an elaborate deception to curry favour with the Libyans, and it’s all about the oil. It must be a terrible shock for Kenny that what he thought was straightforward altruism could be interpreted in that way. Like Andy C says:
Could it be they really just played the issue with a straight bat? Maybe that’s why I don’t understand it. I haven’t seen this type of honest politics for a while.

It’s the culture of cynicism about politics and politicians. In the US, they have developed a whole alternative dystopian universe of conspiracy theories, where all politicians are evil crooks, and often mixed up in the occult as well (really). They are generally *suspicious of the Brits as well, so easily believe that we’d be underhand in this way.

* Apart from David Icke, of course, who is worshipped as a demi-god by American conspiracy theorists.

Cameron did,

But still not properly understood by the journalists/population this side of the atlantic who find it incomprehensible that the Scottish government is a higher authority than the UK government.

I happen to like living in a country that shows compassion to prisoners especially those who are diagnosed with terminal cancer

How many doctors did they go to before they found one who'd give them the answer they needed?

"And another thing"; Let's have a public enquiry, but let it be concerned with the state of health care in Scotland. I don't care why Mick Megrahi was released, it's done now, over, he isn't coming back. I'm more concerned by the apparent fact that in Scotland, he only had three months to live; but, under the care of health specialists in fourth world Libya, he's in rude health…

Listened to Today this morning with Alec Salmond, and the other bits from Cameron about "releasing more of the relevant documents".

I do hope that your politicing stance will actually be proved correct, as I'm sure that an overwhelming opposition from Westminster would have at least prevented this decision. As I understand, Mr Miliband, former foreign sec, is to be quoted in hansard backing the SNP Scottish Government stance.

Colin it's pretty simple. Prisons are prisons. They are not hospitals. That is why dying prisoners are routinely released. The only medical opinion which was considered by Kenny MacAskill came from the Scottish Prison Service,

The Scottish Prison Service Director of Health and Care, the Prison Governor and the Parole Board unanimously recommended that Megrahi should be released due to the state of his health. Kenny MacAskill accepted that recommendation and authorised the release.

The position of opponents of that decision like Tom Harris is presumably that he should have made an exception in Megrahi's case due to the severity of the crime. However, even if MacAskill had refused compassionate release, Megrahi could not have remained in prison. He would have had to be transferred to a hospital or hospice or some other medical facility.. Possibly the NHS could then have extended his life by the same period that Libyan doctors did (althoyugh I doubt it) But it would have been at a significant cost not only in monetary terms but also in terms of tying up police resources to guard him, plus the inconvenience to other patients and to staff. Seems simpler to send him home.

Indy@

Please explain to me: Just how many “Dying” prisoners get a personal visit from the Scottish justice minister? What would trigger such an event?

If Megrahi had to be transferred to a hospital, he should have been sent to Broadmoor. After all, we’ve just learned that Peter Sutcliffe will die behind bars, no matter what. There was no need to make an exception of him, as it turns out, releasing mass murderers on compassionate grounds, in Scotland, or indeed the UK, is very rare. However, the bizarrely coincidental release of Ronnie Biggs by Jack Straw, probably helped politically, as it had the effect of conditioning some of the public to the idea of releasing monsters, supposedly on their deathbeds, (he too, stubbornly refuses to die)…

I get the impression of a bunch of no mark, fourth rate chancers, who’re basically part of a glorified parish council, who just couldn’t pass up the chance to grandstand it on the international stage.

Talk about a weapon of mass self destruction…

Colin as far as I am aware no dying prisoners have received a visit from the Justice Secretary in relation to an application for compassionate release. And neither did Megrahi.

Kenny MacAskill visited Megrahi in relation to the application made by the Libyan Government under the terms of the prisoner transfer agreement reached between Tony Blair and Colonel Gadaffi. The notes of that meeting can be read on the Scottish Government website here : http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/925/00859...

You say that if Megrahi had to be transferred to another prison he should have been sent to Broadmoor. Why? Broadmoor is a psychiatric hospital. It does not have facilities to treat someone in the terminal stages of cancer any more than Greenock Prison does.
And you cannot say that Peter Sutcliffe will die behind bars does. He may – but it is far more likely that he will die in hospital, as Myra Hindley did. And if he has a terminal illness he will be released when his disease reaches the stage that it can no longer be treated in prison because that is what happens – in England as well as in Scotland.

I tried replying earlier but it doesn’t seem to have been published – apologies for duplication if it has been. To answer your points.
1) Kenny MacAskill visited Al Megrahi in relation to the application made by the Libyan Govt under the terms of the agreement between Tony Blair and Col Gadaffi.
2) Broadmoor is a psychiatric hospital not a medical hospital. It does not have the facilities to treat someone in the terminal stages of cancer.
3) Peter Sutcliffe may die behind bars but it is more likely he will die in hospital, as Myra Hindley did. There are only so many times I can say that prisons are prisons. They are not hospitals. The concept of compassionate release was not invented to deal specifically with the case of Megrahi. It serves a function and if you object you should campaign to change the law, either so that prisons have better medical facilities or that prisoners get no medical treatment.

Living as I do in Greenock, you could say I was at the centre of the action for this one;
Kenny made a decision I am DAMNED proud of. He chose to exercise compassion on a man convicted of horriffic atrocities because our prisons are not equipped to deal with such a situation, our hospitals are unsuitable places to keep such a prisoner long-term, and more importantly than that, someone who is dying in prison, 4000 miles from their own country, who was convicted on extremely shaky evidence, with an appeal due they’re likely to win but unlikely to survive till and who refused to admit guilt even though it would have resulted in his release is deserving of the same compassion our justice system treats ALL prisoners, regardless of their crimes.
The law is reason, free from passion.
Keeping Megrahi in some secured-hospice, or somehow upgrading greenock prison’s palliative care facilities in order to keep him in prison, purely because of the nature of his crimes, would be giving in to passion.

I know for fact a lot of Labour types agree with me on this; it was right to let him go, and the silence from No. 10 at the time suggests they were more than happy to let Kenny do the “dirty” deed whilst maintaining the ability to mildly criticise the situation (in fact, they didn’t even criticise the decision, just the manner in which Kenny made it!) in order to further diplomatic relations with the US Govt. and score a few cheap points on the SNP.
Whilst I’m not of that faith, it surprises me that you Tom, a committed Christian, would be so far from the concepts of turning the other cheek, and giving mercy…

Surely the point is that it was the democratically elected assesmbly that made the decision. They have the responsibility.

I hope that you will give David Cameron credit for taking a statesmanlike approach and turning down the opportunity to conduct a witch hunt of his political opponents. OK , he said that he personally thought (like a few hundred million other people) that Al-Megrahi should have died in jail, but he declined to set up an enquiry into McAskill’s choosing to release him (all decisions to set up an enquiry invite the press to speculate that there is wrongdoing to be uncovered) or to accuse the Labour government of involvement in an oil-for-politics deal.
@ tris Please can you distinguish between statements of fact, jokes, and far-fetched speculation in order to avoid confusing people, unless you are planning to understudy for David Duchovny? When I last checked the crime rate in those areas that spoke Gaelic to the exclusion of English was negligible so the likelihood of any Scots prisoners in a lowland jail being unable to speak English was vanishingly small.

John77.

Clearly you have never been to Greenock.