Lord Reay 1937-2013

Clan Mackay. A distinguished parliamentarian, Mackay served in the House of Lords, held office for a short time in the Thatcher government and later sat for six years in the European Parliament. Mackay died in London on May 10 2013 aged 75 following a short illness. One of two Scottish elected hereditary peers who survived Blair’s Parliamentary reforms of 1999, Mackay’s death has triggered a rare by-election to appoint his successor in the House of Lords.

Born on July 19 1937 in Edinburgh, Mackay was the only son of Aeneas Alexander Mackay, 13th Lord Reay, and his wife Charlotte (née Younger). Mackay was educated at Eton College and Christ Church in Oxford where his sharp dress sense was first noted. He was living in Holland when his father died in 1963, inheriting the titles of Lord, Chief, Baronet of Farm (a Nova Scotia title originally bestowed on an ancestor by James VI) and the Barony of Ophemert and Zennewijnen (created in 1822 by King William I of Netherlands). With this latter title came the picturesque 16th-century manor house, Ophemert Castle in the Netherlands.

The Chief and his lady Victoria at the Gathering in 2009

Lady Elizabeth Fairbairn, Hugh’s sister and president of the Clan Mackay Society, said her brother spoke with authority on a number of subjects related to the north of Scotland – especially the Highland Clearances. Mackay attended the Clan Gathering in Edinburgh 2009, walking the Royal Mile parade in Mackay tartan, and later spoke enthusiastically at the Mackay tent of the work being done at the Clan Mackay Room at the Strathnaer Museum in Sutherland. He also spoke of his love for Edinburgh, saying: “I have always had a soft spot for Edinburgh, the place of my birth and still managing to hold its place as, in my opinion, the most beautiful city in the United Kingdom. I feel honoured to be amongst you. Clansmen, Clanswomen. I ask you to raise your glasses to Clan Mackay.”

Mackay entered the House of Lords as a cross-bencher and played a prominent role in the abolition of capital punishment in 1965, joining the Liberals soon afterwards. However, disapproving of the party’s standing as a genuinely ‘national’ party he returned to the cross-benchers before joining the Conservatives in 1971. Upon the UK’s entry to the Common Market in 1973, Mackay was one of eight peers nominated to serve in the European Parliament. After the Parliament’s first public election in 1979, he was nominated to the Council of Europe which he served in until 1986. During this time his increasingly hawkish attitude on defence issues attracted the attention of Margaret Thatcher who appointed him as a Lord-in-Waiting or junior whip. Thatcher’s successor John Major appointed Mackay as Parliamentary Under Secretary of State to the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), however he decided to leave Parliament less than a year later. He joined the Select Committee on the European Communities, also chairing its food and agriculture subcommittee, until 1999. Mackay stayed a member of the House of Lords until 2013.

During his political career Mackay’s support of environmental issues was mixed – On behalf of the Department of the Environment he had to oppose pressure for the phasing out of CFC gases, however one of his first announcements at the DTI was a package of grants for recycling. As recently as May 2012 Mackay sponsored legislation to define minimum distances between wind turbines and residential premises, however during a debate on renewable energy he dismissed wind power as a pointless gesture towards an economically crippling green ideology. Mackay was also strongly against further EU integration, gay marriage and caused controversy when he suggested that Britain recognised the Dalai Lama as a spiritual (rather than a political) leader only.

Mackay married Annabel Therese Fraser in 1964, youngest daughter of the 17th Lord of Lovat, and had two sons and daughters. They divorced in 1978, and in 1980 Mackay married Victoria Warrender, daughter of the 1st Lord of Bruntsfield, having two daughters. His elder son, Aeneas Simon Mackay – Master of Reay, born in 1965, succeeds the titles including the chieftainship of Clan Mackay. The funeral is likely to be on the 23rd of May in Lancashire with a Memorial Service in London to be held at a later date.

The post Hugh William Mackay, Chief of Clan Mackay Dies appeared first on ScotClans | Scottish Clans.

I wanted to find out a little bit about the political system in Scotland, especially when tasked with having a say in the country’s future on such a contentious issue. Feeling a little confused as to how the Scottish Parliament works alongside Westminster, I took a trip to the Scottish Parliament last week to find out more.

The Scottish Parliament is situated in the shadow of Arthur’s Seat at the bottom of the Royal Mile in Edinburgh. On the day I visited a meeting of the Parliament was being held in the debating chamber, where SNP cabinet members for the Environment and Justice were questioned by other parties about their portfolios. This included questions and debates on reducing carbon emissions in Glasgow, amendments to the crofting reform act, assisting farmers affected by the recent cold weather and whether the Government is planning to reduce the number of Police Officers in order to meet budget cuts. An interesting question was also put forward regarding safeguarding the bee population of Scotland, to which much to my delight many bee-puns were given in response, (e.g. “I knew you would sting me with that question…”). The experience was entirely different to my visit to Westminster in November – The House of Commons is about five times smaller than the Scottish debating chamber, with UK MPs decidedly more ruckus.

The Scotland Act of 1998 established the first Parliament in Scotland since 1707. This passed power from Westminster to Holyrood on a range of devolved matters including health, education, housing, justice, the environment, agriculture and the arts. However Westminster still retained powers to make laws for Scotland on certain issues. These issues generally have a UK-wide or international impact and are known as reserved matters. They include things like benefits, immigration, defence, foreign policy, employment, broadcasting, nuclear energy and the Constitution.

The Scottish Parliament is made up of 129 elected representatives, who are known as Members of Scottish Parliament (MSPs). The voting system used is a type of proportional representation known as the Additional Member System, which gives each voter two votes in an election. The first vote is the constituency vote, with the candidate winning the largest number of votes gaining the seat. The second vote is for a political party within a larger electoral area called a Scottish Parliament region. In each of the eight regions, parties are allocated seats depending on the number of votes they receive in the regional ballot, and taking into account the number of constituency seats they win in a region. Of the 129 MSPs, 73 are constituency representatives, while 56 represent the eight parliamentary regions. In the last election in 2011, the Scottish National Party won 69 seats – making it a majority government. Previous governments were a minority government or coalition.

Bills passed by the Scottish Parliament don’t have to be approved by the UK Parliament, however royal assent by The Queen must be given before they can come into force. In contrast the UK Parliament can pass laws that affect Scotland on devolved matters. By convention the UK Parliament would normally do this by seeking the consent of the Scottish Parliament through a legislative consent motion proposed by a MSP. It is possible for MSPs to become Members of the UK Parliament simultaneously (called a dual mandate), however the roles are entirely separate. There are 650 MPs in the House of Commons, 59 hailing from Scotland and representing Scotland on reserved matters.

During my afternoon in the debating chamber there was only one mention of the most hotly contested issue in Scotland at the moment – independence. The mention of this word by a SNP cabinet member made the debating chamber erupt into a fully fledged House-Of-Commons style debate, with MSPs from all parties crying out and waving papers and arms in the air when they disagreed. Scotland’s Parliament surely does have an interesting year and a half ahead if the little snippet on independence I saw is anything to go by.

The post Holyrood Perplexities – A Beginners Guide to Scottish Parliament appeared first on ScotClans | Scottish Clans.

Sovereignty in the United Kingdom is expressed as the ‘Crown in Parliament’, and that parliament is composed of a lower and upper house. The lower house, the House of Commons is a chamber of 650 members; each of whom are directly elected and represent a particular region, or constituency in the country. These Members of Parliament, or MPs, almost exclusively belong to one of the major political parties and will vote in the chamber according to the collective wish of that party.

The Houses of Parliament

Members of the upper chamber, or House of Lords are not elected, but fall into several categories: the Law Lords (lords of appeal in the supreme court upon their retirement as judges), the Lords Spiritual (senior bishops of the Church of England), Hereditary Peers (lords entitled to sit on the virtue of their inherited titles), and Life Peers (people appointed to the House as lords for the duration of their lifetimes, and who cannot pass on the title or right to their children). By far, the majority are Life Peers, and they represent a broad church of opinion and expertise: from captains of industry and scientists to seasoned politicians and cultural gurus. The Lords debate, scrutinise, and vote on legislation that has already been passed by the Commons. With less parliamentary pressure on their time, and without the threat of losing elections the lords are free to study the detail of prospective legislation in a way the lower house can’t. If they agree the Bill is sound then they pass it to Her Majesty the Queen for the Royal Ascent and it becomes law.

The Queen actually has a veto, but as all legislation going through Parliament has been initiated or approved by the Government, the monarch cannot be seen to disagree. The last time the veto was used was in 1708. The House of Lords does not have a veto. It used to, but a conflict with the Commons in 1911 saw it stripped of the privilege – by then it was seen as unconstitutional that an unelected chamber could thwart the policies and ambitions of a government elected on a manifesto of such policies. However, the Lords as part of their scrutiny can delay a bill, by sending it back to the Commons with amendments. It can do this three times before Royal Ascent will be given regardless of their objections.

As the Commons has all the real power, and its members are directly accountable to the British people, it has been the convention that the Prime Minister and the principal office holders are members of that house; although it is not uncommon to have senior ministers sitting in the Lords, due to their experience and rank within the party. The last Prime Minister to actually govern from the unelected chamber was Robert Cecil, 3^rd Marquess of Salisbury in 1902.

The office of Prime Minster, or more correctly First Lord of the Treasury, has developed over 300 years and today they wield more personal political power than most heads of government – certainly more than the US President. The reason being is that technically the PM is appointed by the Queen and as such exercises authorities and prerogatives in her name (the Crown). The monarch will chose the leader of whichever party can command a majority in the House of Commons – as this almost guarantees that the programme of legislation will progress. If a government fails to win support for its programme or its budget it has no option but to resign.

In reality, it is part of the smoke and mirrors pageantry of the system, but it evolved to be so. Parliament also sits by the Queen’s Grace and can be dissolved at her will at any time (although by law it cannot sit for more than five years before an election must be called). The Prime Minister can ‘ask’ the Queen to exercise her rights, and she will normally comply. Thus, the incumbent PM has a distinctive advantage in so far as he knows when an election will be held.

In 1963 the incumbent PM, Harold MacMillan, was gravely ill – indeed he thought he was close to death (in fact he’d live for another 23 years); so, he decided he would resign from the position. The problem was that the Conservative party at the time had no mechanism to appoint a new leader. Instead, party grandees, Churchill included, would ‘advise’ the Queen who to call as the new PM. Two main candidates emerged – Rab Butler, the Deputy Prime Minister; or Alec Douglas-Home, Earl of Home, who was Foreign Secretary. Butler was popular with the party, but most senior ministers refused to serve under him, Lord Home was the elder statesman, but an unelected and hereditary member of the House of Lords. The Queen came to visit MacMillan on what he presumed was his deathbed, and he advised she call upon Home to form a government – advice she didn’t have to take legally. However, she accepted the choice of the party bigwigs and unprecedented wheels were set in motion.

While his father held the title of earl, Alec Douglas-Home was able to sit in the Commons as an elected MP; and served as the Scottish Unionist (Conservative) member for Lanark from 1931 to 1945, and then again from 1950 to 51. He rose quickly through the ranks gaining ministerial experience under Chamberlin and Churchill. In 1951 his father died and he succeeded to the Scottish title: Earl of Home. He continued to serve both Anthony Eden and Harold MacMillan in various senior cabinet positions, until that fateful day when Buckingham Palace came calling.

Sir Alec Douglas-Home, Prime Minster

Lord Home then went to the Palace where the Queen gave him 24 hours to decide whether he could form a government; which he determined he could. Douglas-Home felt it was impracticable for a Prime Minister to govern from the Lords, and so using a new piece of legislation, the 1963 Peerages Act, he disclaimed and surrendered his titles. He had been made a Knight of the Thistle, which didn’t affect the constitution, and thus became ‘Sir Alec Douglas-Home’. As a commoner he was now free to seek election to the House of Commons. However, there were no available seats, and no elections on the immediate horizon. Britain therefore experienced a very unusual situation – a Prime Minister who sat in neither House of Parliament.

The safest Conservative seat in the UK was Kinross and West Perthshire, and the incumbent MP resigned, forcing a by-election for the constituency and Douglas-Home won by a massive landslide. He was now free to enter the Commons and govern. His tenure was short however. In the 1964 General Election the Tories lost to the Labour Party led by Harold Wilson. Sir Alec remained the leader of the opposition until July of 1965, during which time he revised the rules governing the election of the Conservative leader. Never again would the monarch have to choose, nor was it ever likely that a member of the Lords would be appointed. He was replaced by Edward Heath, who won the party ballot.

Douglas-Home remained an MP until 1974, during which time Edward Heath returned him to the post of Foreign Secretary. Upon his retirement he was bestowed with a Life Peerage and returned once again to the Lords as Baron Home of the Hirsel. He died at the age of 92 in 1995. He was succeeded by his son, the 15^th Earl of Home; one of the remaining hereditary peers in the Lords today.

It is a constitutional anomaly that is unlikely now ever to be repeated, but it goes to show first the convention, anachronism and tradition of our system on one hand, and the flexibility to deal with such crisis when they arise on the other. The Strange Case of Sir Alec Douglas-Home serves to remind us of how incredible our democracy really is.

The post The Curious Case of Lord Home appeared first on ScotClans | Scottish Clans.

Alex Salmond’s Christmas Card

Alex Salmond’s annual Christmas card has been criticised by members of the opposition parties because of its inclusion of the St. Andrew’s Cross.

Both David McLetchie, Scottish Conservative chief whip, and Mike Rumbles, chief whip for the Scottish Liberal Democrats have spoken out on what they view as the First Minister taking advantage of the Christmas period to once again highlight his nationalistic views and his desire for independence.

Mike Rumbles said, “I’m sure people would be more impressed if the first minister had thought about the message of Christmas rather than spent time picking out the most nationalistic Christmas card he could find.

“Everybody knows that the SNP are only interested in independence – the first minister doesn’t need to stick it on his Christmas cards too.”

However, Mr. Salmond described his choice of card, entitled ‘A New Journey’ by Scottish artist Gerard Burns, as “an enchanting and evocative image by a talented artist”, addding “The proceeds from the sale of the canvas will be shared equally between four extremely worthwhile charities, CLIC Sargent, Glasgow the Caring City, J-A-C-K Foundation and Mary’s Meals.”

A spokesman for the SNP leader said, “Messrs McLetchie and Rumbles should lighten up and get with the Christmas spirit. They are obviously badly in need of a festive break.

“The Saltire is for all of Scotland, and the artist has presented it in his own style. They also seem to have entirely forgotten that Andrew was Jesus’s first apostle.”

Scottish Labour Leader, Iain Gray’s Christmas card design.

Scottish Labour leader, Iain Gray has also recently released his Christmas card. It depicts a snowy, winter scene outside the Scottish Parliament, and it was designed by 11 year old P7 pupil Emma Caughey from Longniddry Primary School in Gray’s East Lothian constituency.

The post Alex Salmond’s Christmas Card Too ‘Political’ appeared first on ScotClans | Scottish Clans.