Two standards better than one?

The gay marriage debate gets a lot of coverage in today's papers.
Here's a longer version of my tale from the Sunday Herald about what looks like double-standards on the part of Scottish LibDem leader Willie Rennie.

---

EXCLUSIVE

Tom Gordon

Scottish Political Editor

LIBERAL Democrat leader Willie Rennie, who has vowed to stand up to the Catholic Church in defence of gay marriage, is receiving personal support from an evangelical Christian group which is equally opposed to the idea, it has emerged.

Rennie’s Holyrood office is being assisted by the charity CARE, despite it describing the Scottish Government’s proposals for gay marriage as “deeply flawed and socially corrosive”.

The help currently includes free staff time from an intern working in Rennie’s office as part of the CARE “leadership programme”, which places Christians in “the world of policy and advocacy”.

Rennie, elected an MSP for Mid-Scotland and Fife in May on a manifesto pledge to “extend legal marriage to gay couples”, was applauded at his party’s conference last week when he attacked the Catholic Church for trying to impose its hostile views on gay marriage “on everyone else”.

It followed Philip Tartaglia, Bishop of Paisley, warning the SNP government was in danger of losing touch with Catholics - and by implication their votes - because it backs same sex marriage.

“To threaten to invoke some sort of block vote is an affront to liberal democracy and one that we must challenge,” Rennie told LibDem activists.

“Challenging an organisation with 800,000 followers may seem difficult but we are prepared to be awkward and stand up for what we believe to be right.”

Rennie’s remarks were some of the most forceful yet in the political row over gay marriage, which has been raging since SNP ministers launched a public consultation on the issue last month. 

This suggested same sex couples, who at present can only formalise a union in a secular civil partnership, should also be able to get married, either in church or a registry office.

The government said it “tends to the view that gay marriage should be introduced” for reasons of equality and support for stable relationships.

Alex Salmond, the first minister, has also said he is personally in favour of gay marriage.

However ministers stress no faith would forced to conduct a same sex service against its wishes.

The same day the consultation emerged, CARE for Scotland issued a joint press release with the Evangelical Alliance condemning the proposal.

“The Scottish Government is making a grave mistake by seeking to redefine marriage,” said Gordon Macdonald, CARE for Scotland’s spokesman.

He said marriage was a relationship between a man and a woman, not two people of the same sex, and provided the best context for raising children and contributed to social cohesion - arguments also advanced by the Catholic Church.

Despite CARE’s unambiguous opposition to gay marriage, Rennie’s spokeswoman claimed there was no inconsistency in him accepting its help.

“This is a positive programme. It reflects that many members of evangelical churches are also members and supporters of the Liberal Democrats. “People on the programme volunteer to help the Liberal Democrats across a wide range of policy areas. They do not seek to impose any personal views. Previous participants have gone on to be Liberal Democrat councillors.”

Macdonald was the LibDem candidate in Eastwood at the recent Holyrood election.

CARE (Christian Action Research and Education) has run its leadership programme since 1993. 

Billed as an “unrivalled experience in the world of policy and an opportunity to see first-hand how key arenas of influence shape our culture”, it includes voluntary placements in politics, the media or third sector over three 13-week terms.

Although a way to foster useful contacts, CARE’s website states “programme members are at no time asked to lobby on behalf of CARE.”

It has also placed young Christians with LibDem and Tory MPs, and the Labour MSP Dave Stewart.

Footnote: After the Sunday Herald approached Rennie's office, the intern in question altered his profile on Twitter to remove a previous reference to his CARE placement. Presumably because it wasn't embarrassing or contradictory in the least.

Cool, calm, collected

As Paul Hutcheon and I report in today's Sunday Herald, the Scottish Conservative leadership contest has descended into acrimony and chaos, with three of the four candidates calling for an independent inquiry into alleged 'party bias' in favour of Ruth Davidson.

As an aside, here's the response we received from Davidson's camp when we asked for reaction to the inquiry.

----------------

Sent: 15 October 2011 16:24

To: Paul Hutcheon
Subject: statement from John Lamont

Paul

In response to your queries, here is the statement from John Lamont:

John Lamont MSP, campaign manager for Ruth Davidson, said: ‘The latest attempt to try to smear Ruth Davidson and her campaign with unsubstantiated, false and potentially defamatory accusations is both astonishing and deeply depressing.

No one should be in any doubt that this is a deliberate, vicious and, frankly, desperate attempt to discredit Ruth in the eyes of our members and the general public.

Further, it underlines the hugely disappointing fact that some people are prepared to embarrass the party in a shocking display of naked self-interest.

The accusations that there has been institutional bias by officials within the party towards Ruth and her campaign are utterly false. Those now pressing for an investigation have produced no evidence to support their accusations.

However, not content to let the matter rest, certain journalists have been briefed about private, internal party business in a further, desperate attempt to smear Ruth and her campaign team. 

Certain elements of the media, for their part, appear to be adopting the old tabloid technique of repeating a canard often enough that it eventually takes on the impression of truth.

Despite the growing number and frequency of personal attacks on Ruth, she has been determined not to be brought down to this level and has sought throughout to fight this election on the vitally important issues that currently face the party and our members.

She firmly believes that she is the right person to lead our party through the undoubtedly challenging times ahead as a new face and a new voice that can ensure the generational change we must embrace.

For the sake of the party, we would appeal to all to withdraw these unsubstantiated accusations, to desist from any further attempts to smear Ruth and to get back to engaging with our members on the issues that really matter to them.

Given the clearly unfair and vexatious nature of the campaign being mounted against Ruth by the Sunday Herald and its sister paper The Herald – a campaign driven and fuelled by political opponents – we have decided to bring this matter to the attention of the Press Complaints Commission since we are no longer prepared to put up with this unfair, unjustified and unnecessary distraction.’

Labour pains worsen

The saga over Labour's candidate selection for Glasgow City Council takes a new twist today with the intervention of outspoken MP Ian Davidson.

Here's a slightly longer version of the story in The Herald.

EXCLUSIVE

Tom Gordon

A SENIOR Labour MP has condemned his party’s clear-out of ‘dead wood’ councillors in Glasgow as a rigged purge which could boost the SNP.

Ian Davidson, the chair of the Scottish Affairs Select Committee at Westminster, said he was “appalled” at the way hard-working councillors had been treated in the city.

He suggested some had been rejected because of internal machinations, rather than merit, saying “other agendas” were at work, with “selective leaking” used to undermine people.

Almost half of Labour’s 47 councillors in Glasgow face deselection after a ruthless vetting process last month designed to weed out poor performers and introduce new talent to the City Chambers.

The party insists the changes are needed to improve the candidates on offer to voters in next May’s elections, when Labour could lose control of Glasgow to the SNP.

However, many of the deselected claim the vetting was unfair, legally unsound and biased.

All those who failed vetting will have appeals heard by senior party members next weekend.

Mr Davidson, MP for Glasgow South West, will appear in support at the appeals of two local councillors, Tommy Morrison and Stephen Dornan.

He told the Herald: “I’m appalled at what has happened with the vetting of sitting councillors. “Labour faces a very difficult election in Glasgow in May given that the SNP was well ahead in the Scottish Government elections, and I don’t believe that the answer should have been to form a circular firing squad.

“I don’t believe that Labour can purge its way into power, and I think there’s obviously other agendas operating when good, hard-working and conscientious local councillors are being dumped from the panel [of would-be candidates].

“There should not be top-down, centrally imposed control in this way, with favourites being allowed through and others being rejected.”

Mr Davidson is considering whether to stand for the deputy leadership of the party in Scotland.

At the moment, the frontrunner is Anas Sarwar, although MSPs Lewis Macdonald and Elaine Murray have also put their hats in the ring.

“I’m told that the deputy leadership is all carved up, but I see that as more of a challenge than anything else,” he said.

“It is simply bad practice to have an important election like this carved up before any ordinary members or trade union members have an opportunity to express an opinion.”

Cllr Graeme Hendry, the SNP whip on the council, said Mr Davidson’s comments showed “a clear breakdown of trust” within Glasgow Labour.

“The chaos reflects the lack of local leadership. “Labour say their recent review will bring the party together, well good luck with that.”

Anas Sarwar said: “The selection process needs to take its course. Whatever happens we need to have a strong group of candidates.”

Asked if the deputy Labour leadership had been “carved up”, he added: “Absolutely not.”

A Scottish Labour spokesman said: “Being a labour councillor is not a job for life, and party members in Glasgow - who select the candidates to field - want change. Those people who do not get selected have the right of appeal but no-one should underestimate our determination to field the best possible set of candidates.”

ENDS