Morning:
5°c
The Government's call to Libya not to celebrate the first anniversary of the release of convicted Lockerbie bomber, Abdelbasset Ali al-Megrahi, illustrates the feebleness of ministers' position.
In truth, they have no power over how Libya treats al-Megrahi, jailed in 2001 for his role in the 1988 bombing. The Prime Minister has made clear that he believes al-Megrahi's release last year on compassionate grounds, because of terminal cancer, was a mistake. That is not cutting much ice with US senators now investigating the release.
The decision by Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill to release al-Megrahi was extraordinary.
There is scarcely a British precedent for early release on any grounds of a prisoner convicted of such serious crimes: 270 people were killed. But what the affair really illustrates is the oddness of Britain's devolution settlement, and the inability of a Scottish Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, to see how ludicrous it looks to the rest of the world.
Any decision on al-Megrahi was clearly a matter of national security, both because he was an international terrorist and because his case was of major interest to our most important ally (most of those who died were American).
For ministers to argue that it was nothing to do with them, because they had handed over power to a few toytown Scottish politicians, was incomprehensible to the Obama administration.
That Mr Brown could not see how frankly silly his excuses looked is testimony to his and the Labour Party's long and disproportionate obsession with Scottish issues.
There is little that the Government can now do about the affair, beyond Mr Cameron's sympathetic noises in Washington last month. Ministers should, however, consider whether devolved powers as they now stand risk embarrassing and weakening the UK again in future.
A new Knightsbridge?
The £50 million price of a penthouse in Vauxhall — the highest ever outside traditional high-end neighbourhoods such as Knightsbridge — highlights the area's steady rise. It also offers proof of one of London's great strengths: its ability constantly to change and adapt, with run-down areas morphing into something different and better.
Vauxhall might seem to be a less-than-plausible candidate to take the Knightsbridge mantle. But the area is already more vibrant than a decade ago, with a thriving club scene. It has some spectacular river views. Future redevelopment of the huge, semi-derelict Nine Elms area, encompassing both Battersea power station and the new US embassy site, can only increase Vauxhall's pull.
Thirty years ago, the idea that the derelict docklands of Rotherhithe would one day be fashionable riverside flats, or that the Isle of Dogs would form a new centre of gravity for the City, would have seemed sheer fantasy. But London has exactly that dynamism and capacity for reinvention. Knightsbridge in south London? Why not?
The Few
Today's Battle of Britain anniversary should give us pause to remember one of the most genuinely pivotal moments in our history. Seventy years ago today, as RAF fighter pilots turned the tide against the German air assault, Winston Churchill gave one of the most famous speeches by any British leader, intoning “Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.” Countless history books later, that judgment remains sound. As original planes fly past today, we are still in debt to those courageous airmen.
Reader views (6)
Well said, Grant Ford. In truth, the way Kenny MacAskill made his decision - following due process to the letter - demonstrates precisely why devolution was such a good idea. I strongly suspect that had this decision been made pre-devolution by the Secretary of State for Scotland, due process would have been sacrificed in favour of the 'need' to keep America happy. If that had happened, it really would have been the 'feeble' act of a 'toytown politician'. But thankfully self-government has moved us into a new era.
Quite how 'ludicrous' Gordon Brown thought this looked, or how 'silly' his excuses were, may be fascinating questions to the London Evening Standard, but they are also gloriously irrelevant. 'Toytown politicians' or not, the Scottish government's powers are very real, and London doesn't have a veto. What are you suggesting the Westminster government should have done - overturn the Scotland Act because one particular decision wasn't to their taste? Forget about 'toytown', that would have been the action of a banana republic.
Incidentally, even most Tories long ago grew up sufficiently on the subject of devolution to understand that, like it or not, stripping the Scottish Parliament of key powers is now a fantasy - the movement if anything will be in the opposite direction. I'm sure the Evening Standard will catch up with the real world one day, but just how many years is it going to take?
- James Kelly, North Lanarkshire, Scotland, 23/08/2010 02:07
Report abuse
Your description of "toytown Scottish politicians" reveals what a "toytown newspaper" this is.
It displays the arrogance that led to the devolution settlement and risks the "embarrassing and weakening of the UK again in future" of which you so patronisingly complain.
- Grant Ford, Lee, London, 21/08/2010 21:44
Report abuse
This anti-Scottish racist diatribe shames your "newspaper."
Having the cheek to refer to the elected Scottish Government as "toytown politicians" vindicates the views of those Scots who wish to dispense of this one sided union.
- Tom Robinson, Edinburgh, 21/08/2010 16:27
Report abuse
I wonder if a 100% US tarif on Scottish whiskey would get the attention of the lads in Glasgow.
- Franklyn Falls, Washington US, 21/08/2010 14:35
Report abuse
I don't see how US Democrat senators can complain about the release of a terrorist in a British prison and press for the release of terrorists in an American prison
- John Smith, London, 20/08/2010 15:41
Report abuse
'what the affair really illustrates is the oddness of Britain's devolution settlement'
Absolutely right we should have had a proper federal settlement accross the UK with a well defined structure in which this matter because of its Foreign Policy implications would have been decided at UK level .
Its the absurdity of what the last govt delivered that gives devolution a bad name -unfairly.
- Richiedaw, Chester UK, 20/08/2010 13:50
Report abuse
