TTIP 2016

Thank you for getting in touch with your concerns about TTIP and CETA - the trade deals currently being negotiated by the European Union with the USA and Canada.

Personally, I first blogged about TTIP in 2014 (http://martinveart.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/ttip-and-isds-one-good-one-bad.html) and identified the potential difficultly of the negotiations, that is how to overcome ISDS - Investor State Dispute Settlement mechanism.  It is this mechanism that has led to concerns, as voiced by organisations such as 38 Degrees and the potential future of public organisations such as the NHS.  The ISDS mechanism struck me then as a particular threat to national and EU sovereignty and I came out strongly against it.

I returned to the topic for Westminster elections in 2015 where I outlined the then Liberal Democrat position (rather uncritical of TTIP and ISDS) and where it differed from my own position. http://martinveart.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/campaign-letters-1-ttip.html   In this blog I restated my opposition to ISDS while stating the benefits of TTIP, especially for our small and medium-sized businesses across the UK and EU.  It is recognised that TTIP would be worth the many billions to all trading nations: the equivalent of an extra €500 for every adult and child in the EU on this side of the Atlantic alone; the equivalent an extra £1billion each year for Scotland.   This is not something to be dismissed lightly.

Since last year, I am very pleased to say that the Liberal Democrats position has changed and has come more into line with my own.  As I predicted, this debate has been led by Europe.

Last September France and Germany suggested an alternative to ISDS in the form of a semi-public investment court system (ICS).   Liberal Democrat MEP Catherine Bearder, with other Liberal  members of the European Parliament, has voted strongly in favour making sure there are no special courts for corporations and in ensuring any dispute mechanism is accountable.  Like you, liberals want to see a system of dispute resolution that is accountable to the public, transparent and ensures the State's 'right to regulate' takes priority over an investor's 'right to invest'.

The European Union has recently issued a clear guarantee that Member States' rights to provide the public services they see fit will be enshrined in TTIP and CETA – this is to prevent any challenge by corporate interests.  This is a welcome clarification and will provide the safeguards that we are all looking for.

I have to say that since then there has been further developments of great interest.  On the 19th of April, the UN Human Rights Council's independent expert, Alfred de Zayas, questioned the whole necessity of having either an ISDS or ICS system, claiming that neither system was compatible with national sovereignty or human rights.

Speaking in front of the Council of Europe's legal affairs and human rights committee, de Zayas said  “Existing investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms should be phased out and no new investment treaty should contain any provision for privatised or semi-privatised dispute settlement.”

The reason de Zayas gives is that while ISDS mechanisms are necessary in bi-lateral trade agreements in order to ensure that trading partners with less-than-adequate national legal systems do not arbitrarily change laws to target individual companies, both the US and the EU are governed by the rule of law.  It is therefore unnecessary for any form of ISDS system to be part of TTIP.

I have reflected upon de Zayas' position and found that it is consistent with my own view that any form of ISDS or ICS is unnecessary to make TTIP work as a trading agreement.

It is too early to gauge the effect of de Zayas' intervention into the ongoing process.  Recent rounds of the TTIP trade negotiations are stumbling over European companies ability to win US procurement contracts.  In terms of public tendering and procurement from the private sector, America has a "buy US" policy for federal contracts, while demanding equality for US companies operating in the EU.

It is important to recognise that both TTIP and CETA could bring significant benefits to businesses and families across Scotland by allowing a greater trade of goods and services within a wider marketplace with reduced barriers.  Indeed, these deals are estimated to be worth tens of billions of pounds to our economy and could support hundreds of thousands of new jobs across the country.  That’s potentially great news for the many people in our community who are looking for work and for our local businesses that want to grow and expand and is a prize that is worth fighting for, but only if we can also protect our public services and ensure accountability.

At the moment we should be clear that these are just negotiations and a final agreement has not yet been reached let alone published.  If an agreement is reached it will still have to be approved by the United States Government, the European Commission, the European Parliament and each of the twenty eight European Union Member States’ Parliaments.

I am clear that, when we get the chance to look at and consider the final agreement, the Scottish Liberal Democrats will not support anything that threatens our public services, gives power away to corporations or would jeopardise the free and public nature of the NHS and other public services we all rely on.  As one in the party that has been more critical than most, if elected I will ensure that this remains the case.

Having outlined my position, please would you support me with your vote in the upcoming election?   In doing so you can be sure that you would be electing a person who has an informed, strong and independently-minded view on the entire TTIP process.

Amnesty Pledge #SP2016

Last year I wrote a letter affirming my support for the global work that Amnesty performs and I am happy to have the opportunity to reaffirm my position and support today.

I actively campaigned against the United Kingdom's intervention in Syria and had I been an MP would have spoke and voted against David Cameron's token campaign which, in my view, has more to do with arms sales than any constructive move to bring peace.

Since I have spent now twenty years travelling the world's continents, I know what a nation without human rights looks like.  In Kazakhstan one could not discuss the president unless to praise him.  The same in Baku.  In Equatorial Guinea, I was in the capital Malabo when the entire population were summoned to the football stadium to hear the president's speech.  One had to be in the hospital in order to be exempted.  In Russia a few years back, I was there when the Duma passed the law that made it a criminal offence to accuse state officials of corruption, owing to the distress it brought upon individuals so accused and their families.  In Israel, I was waiting for a technician to to flown to the rig in order to fix the air conditioning.  He was refused permission to travel by the young security staff at Haifa airport, owing to him being an Israeli Arab.  In Qatar, I attended a health and safety seminar: only to hear that on the construction sites for the 2020 World Cup, an average of ten workers a week are dying owing to the lax standards there.

I really could go on at length: believe me.  It is one thing to voice support, quite another to know why it is so vitally important to do so.

So when I hold up this sign, I know exactly what it means and why I am doing it.

I hope you will through your voting support both me and the Scottish Liberal Democrats in the upcoming elections.

Kind regards,


Martin Veart
Edinburgh Northern and Leith
Scottish Liberal Democrats

Five Questions. My Replies

What ideas do you think are necessary to improve the care of the elderly in Scotland? How do you think home care can be improved?

As you know, Scotland, in common with the rest of the UK and many northern countries, is facing the task of looking after an increasingly ageing population.   It is widely recognised that the former system of keeping people in hospital for long periods are simply unsustainable.   That is why there are ongoing movement of community care for the elderly, so minimalising time in hospital.  This is not all about cost-cutting.  It is widely recognised that the longer a person, especially the very old, stay in hospital, the less independent they become.  It came to a surprise to me that people can forget the simplest things like how to make a cup of tea.  People have to be retrained and while not actually ill, would have to be kept in hospital until social care was able to provide care.

In principle, the move to integrate health and social care is a necessary one.  There has been several trials of Hospital at Home across Scotland (recently in Fife for example), which looked at how to deliver medical services to people at home.  The task is a complicated one, involving consultants, GPs, nursing and pharmacy services, as well as social care.  With careful planning and support, it shows that it can be done.  One of the top aims is to avoid unplanned hospital admission via the A&E service.  This is the most expensive way for any person to be admitted to hospital.

I am very concerned however how the Hospital at Home scheme and the integration of health and social care is being handled in Edinburgh.  Beds that would normally been available in the winter were not opened this year.  GP services are not seeing the necessary support and ward staff are being transferred to the Hospital at Home without being replaced during the transition period.  Staff who question managers are asked if they are unable to cope (with the implication that jobs are to be cut) and there is no consultation between top managers and people working on the frontline.  In short, the whole operation looks more to me like cuts rather than a sincere effort to improve services.  If current practice leads to more A&E admissions to the Royal Infirmary, then instead of achieving best practice, we will have the worst of both worlds.

As the issue is being devolved to Scotland  - Are you in favour of retaining ,  or restricting further, or liberalising the abortion laws?

This answer will be shorter!  I fully support a woman's right to have full control over her own fertility and also support the education necessary for any woman to make her own informed choice on the matter.  I am content with the current laws but if I am told that they need to be made more liberal, I will be sympathetic.  I will certainly not back any move to restrict a woman's right to choose.

Are you in favour of assisted suicide?

Personally no but I can be persuaded if the necessary legal safeguards are in place.  Scottish Liberal Democrats considered this question at our party conference last year where the majority of the party voted in favour to allow assisted suicide. https://www.commonspace.scot/articles/790/scottish-liberal-democrats-back-assisted-suicide-proposals 

What I would wish to avoid was what occurred in the Netherlands in the 1990s where the law on assisted suicide were sometimes abused without any legal consequences.  

As a liberal, I understand that my own ethic and religious choices should not dictate the choice of others.  My concern is not with the individual cases where there is absolute clarity on part of the patient who is terminally ill what their choice is.  I would seek to protect other from abuses of any system.

What priority would you place on funding hospices and other palliative care?

According to news reports, palliative care is one thing that the UK is doing well. http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/oct/06/uk-tops-end-of-life-care-index  

While I would want to uphold our position on the global tables and, seriously, would want to address areas where we can improve services and would be concerned to hear about falling standards; as I outlined above there are more pressing areas of the NHS that need greater attention.  

What are your views on helping immigration to Scotland from countries such as Syria etc. ?

First of all, I would seek to halt the UK's military involvement in Syria.  Not that I could do that as an MSP but had I been in the Westminster Parliament last Autumn, I would have voted against UK involvement.

As for refugees coming here, yes, I would be welcoming.  I have worked in the Levant and it is a beautiful part of the world.  No person would seek to leave it if they could choose to stay.

I would also seek resources so not only could they establish a decent live in their new homeland, but also understand the new culture in which they find themselves.  When I lived in Norway in the late 1990s, the Norwegian government funded language and cultural education classes for all new immigrants into the nation.  While it may be the Rolls Royce of systems, why should we not aspire to be the best?

For further policies from the Scottish Liberal Democrats, you can read our manifesto here: http://www.scotlibdems.org.uk/manifesto 

Cancer Research UK: Scotland vs. Cancer.

Thank you for your email, requesting that I join the fight against cancer in Scotland.

Naturally I am only too pleased to have this opportunity to show my support publicly in the fight against cancer and will happily sign the pledge.

I note that you express pleasure at recent Scottish Government's comments on the topic.  May I council caution on this, for often the SNP's actions do not follow their warm words.  Our GPs are at the forefront of the fight against cancer but spending on the services they provide has been cut to 7.4% of the health budget - compared to 11% in England.  This has led to increased stress on GP services and in some parts of the country (Grampian a recent example), there is difficulty in recruiting general practitioners to fill existing vacancies.

This situation is compounded by the fact ministers have chosen not to pass on the spending boosts they have received from the UK Government’s additional spending on health. The independent Audit Scotland recently confirmed that health spending in Scotland has decreased in real terms since 2008/09, meaning the Scottish Government has diverted money that should have been invested in the NHS in Scotland. 

 

Scottish Liberal Democrats have regularly highlighted that GPs aren’t getting the support that they need from the Scottish Government.  This is making it harder for GPs to play their vital role in identifying the early signs of cancer. 

I am pleased to say that Liberal Democrats have also had success in blocking direct cuts to cancer treatment here in Edinburgh.  Several years ago, there was a plan to merge the pharmacy services at the Western General.  The actual number of pharmacists would have remained the same but the  preparations of most drugs are performed by pharmacy technicians; it was here that cuts would have been made.  Preparing cancer drugs for an individual patient is an extremely skilled exercise, for even the slightest error in the dosage can end up killing the patient faster than the cancer itself.  Merger of the services would have led to increased risks to patients.  I alerted party leader Willie Rennie to this and he wrote to the health minister on the topic, resulting in the Western General's cancer pharmacy remaining open.

In my reply to you, I have outlined how Liberal Democrats are genuinely working hard to support Scotland's NHS and the fight against cancer.    If you want us to keep on doing so, we will need your support.  Please give both your votes to the Scottish Liberal Democrats in this election.

Multiple Sclerosis (MS) Scotland 2016

Thank you for your email and for drawing my attention to the MS Society Scotland manifesto for May’s elections.

As you rightly pointed out, MS is an unpredictable condition that affects people differently. As is the  case with other conditions, and in fact the entire range of health and social care services, Scottish  Liberal Democrats believe that care must be planned and delivered in a person-centred way.

Support for community resources is something that we have long advocated for; my colleague Jim  Hume MSP has repeatedly challenged the Scottish Government on this at Parliament. This is a topic that has continuously come up during debates about the integration of health and social care ahead of the new system going live on 1 April 2016.

I assure you that Scottish Liberal Democrats take the provision of health and social care very  seriously. We believe that those best placed to shape community services are the experts – professionals on the frontline and service users. We want to see this approach developed further with services for people living with MS.

Having fought for the devolution of more powers to the Scottish Parliament, including control over  some welfare powers, Scottish Liberal Democrats are now working to ensure that their use is  underpinned by respect for the dignity of individuals. These powers must also be exercised in a way that is suited to the needs of people in Scotland and have the confidence of claimants and those who support them.

Liberal Democrats in Edinburgh have grave concerns however about the ongoing merger between health and social care in the city.  It seems that hospital beds are being cut prematurely before community care has been put into place and that frontline staff are not being listened to by management.  Sufferers of MS have in common with many other health users the need for top class community care and we fear that this will not be delivered.
We have nothing in principle against the delivery of care on a Hospital At Home basis but here in Edinburgh it very much looks like the merger of services are being used simply by the SNP administration to introduce more cuts.  The Scottish Government, while claiming record spending on the health service, have systematically spent less on health as a percentage of total national budget than the Westminster Government has for England.

I am pleased to be able to support the calls of the MS Society Scotland manifesto and I will work to ensure this is implemented should I be elected. With your support, we can improve access to more and better services for people living with MS in Scotland.

Thus I will ask you to support Liberal Democrats with both votes in the May elections.  Our complete manifesto may be read here: https://issuu.com/gregfoster5/docs/manifestov11?e=17904016/34905851

Fox Hunting - Scottish Parliament Campaign 2016

Thank you for your recent email regarding fox hunting.

You mention history in your letter.  The practice of hunting is indeed an ancient one.  The landowner was expected to know every inch of the holding which was in his trust: every stream, vale, hill and thicket.  He would have been responsible for the military defence of the area and along with his retinue: hunting with hounds was a very effective method of knowing every nook and cranny of the land.  The lives of the area's inhabitants would sometimes rely up both the local geographic knowledge and the retinue's level of fitness gained during the hunt.

The nobility no longer ride to war on horseback nor are they responsible for our defence in times of war.  Hunting with hounds has become an tradition; an anachronism in our modern age.

Today, we need to ensure the right balance is being struck between animal welfare and the need for sustainable countryside management.

As you may be aware, the Scottish Government has asked Lord Bonomy to review this legislation to ensure that it is providing the right protection for foxes and other wild mammals, while at the same time allowing land managers to conduct effective and humane control where necessary. For more information, please see: http://news.scotland.gov.uk/News/Fox-hunting-laws-20d4.aspx.

If I am elected to serve my community, you can be assured that I will look very closely at any
proposals that Lord Bonomy presents to the next Scottish Government.

I am aware that in relation to the incident you have highlighted Police Scotland has charged two men under Section 1(1) of The Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002.  It would be, however, inappropriate for me to comment on this specific case.

The Liberal Democrat manifesto is currently being developed and will be published ahead of the
elections on 5 May. You will be able to find a copy in due course on our website at
www.scotlibdems.org.uk. The manifesto will set out our plans for the protection of the environment
and our wildlife and I hope that you will take a moment to look at our ideas.

To widen the scope of the issue, I cannot help but reflect that Scotland's ecological balance is out of kilter.  There are few natural predators left to control fox numbers in the countryside.  Historically, apex predators such as bear and wolf were hunted to extinction on this island.  Eagles nearly fell over the edge too.  If we in this nation wish to see a return of Scotland's woodlands and the fox in it's natural ecological niche, perhaps it is a question that we should consider.

I hope that you find my response helpful in setting out my position. Thank you again for contacting me and please do not hesitate to contact me if you believe I can be of further assistance.

Yours faithfully,


Martin Veart
Edinburgh Northern and Leith
Scottish Liberal Democrats.

Will You Do More for Scotland's Animals - my reply

Thank you for your recent email on animal welfare.

The Scottish Liberal Democrats are strong supporters of animal welfare and will continue to protect wildlife, pets and farm animals in the next parliament.

My colleagues at Westminster were able to make significant progress on improving animal welfare during the last government. Many of these achievements affect the whole of the UK, including the ending of housing hens in battery cages and tackling the smuggling and illegal trade of wildlife through the Border Force.  Recently I have visited livestock farms in the Pentland Hills and seen best practice at work.  I know that animals can be both treated well and see farmers with a fair deal.

Wildlife crime remains a significant problem and I am pleased that, as part of the last UK government, Liberal Democrats made the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) one of its wildlife crime priorities. However, further action is needed to ensure that penalties and properly applied and prosecutions, where necessary, are carried out.

From 6 April, it will become a legal requirement for dog owners to microchip and register their pets.  I welcome this move and hope it will help promote more responsible dog ownership here in Scotland.  Although microchipping will help, personally I would like to see the further clampdown on the practice of unlicensed breeders (puppy farms) and the illegal smuggling of puppies from the Republic of Ireland.  Sadly this importation appears still to be an ongoing practice for puppy farmers here in Scotland.

As well as protecting animals, we need to ensure that their environment is safe too. I’m proud that here in Scotland, we have already passed legislation aimed at enhancing biodiversity. However, the powers of the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004 and the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 need to be used across government bodies to really deliver this goal.  One of my professional skill-sets is being a certified marine mammal observer.  I am particularly keen to strengthen and extend Scotland's existing system of Marine Protected Areas.  During our time in government as part of the Scottish Executive, Liberal Democrats played a full role in consultations over the establishment of Marine National Parks for Scotland.

I am happy to support More for Scotland’s Animals’ and look forward to working towards this if I am successfully elected.  I will therefore ask for your support  in the upcoming elections.  I am keen to work in cooperation with members of other parties in order to deliver better protection for Scotland's animals and environment.

Yours sincerely,


Martin Veart
Edinburgh Northern and Leith
Scottish Liberal Democrats.