Podcasts about scotland act

Donald Trump was sworn in as the 47th US president on Monday. We look at the inauguration, Trump's raft of immediate Executive Orders and the worldwide implications of what his presidency heralds.Those potential effects are having to be factored into the UK government's economic strategies and diplomatic actions. Meanwhile apparent splits are appearing in Scottish Labour which were writ large in the "painting by numbers" interview with Kirsty McNeill Labour Parliamentary Under- Secretary of State for Scotland on the BBC's Sunday Morning Show.The Scottish government is currently arguing that measures such as creating a wealth tax and setting up a National Energy Company are snookered by The Scotland Act. Are there bold, innovative ways  to circumvent it and why is the SNP leadership so committed to playing by the UK's rules?Axel Rudabukana has pleaded guilty to the Southport murders. Yvette Cooper has promised an inquiry into why so many warning signs were missed by so many agencies. However big questions still remain over the Labour governments clampdown on the release of information on Rudakubana which may have squashed the anti immigrant, anti Muslim internet rumours which fuelled the subsequent riots.Lesley reacts to the first episode of An t-Eilean (The Island) – the UK's first ever high-end Gaelic drama series.Lesley has also launched the first of her YouTube films on Iceland and its green energy/heating revolution Hot Springs Town check it out herehttps://lesleyriddoch.com/filmsThere's also chat about music. Bob Dylan and Sibelius. Not so strange cultural bedfellows. ★ Support this podcast ★

Twenty-five years after the Scotland Act established the devolved Scottish government and parliament, the future of devolution and Scotland's place in the Union remain contentious issues. The SNP continues to advocate for Scottish independence. Meanwhile, the UK government has pursued a strategy of ‘muscular unionism'. Scottish Labour has called for a new approach, based on greater cooperation between UK and Scottish governments, and for stronger local government within Scotland. So what does Scotland's constitutional future hold? The Institute for Government was delighted to welcome Anas Sarwar MSP, Leader of the Scottish Labour Party. How can Scottish devolution be strengthened? What might a future Labour government at Westminster mean for relations with Holyrood? And what is Sarwar's vision for Scotland's place in a reformed Union? To discuss these questions and more, Anas Sarwar was in conversation with Dr Hannah White, Director of the Institute for Government, followed by Q&A with the live and online audience.

Twenty-five years after the Scotland Act established the devolved Scottish government and parliament, the future of devolution and Scotland's place in the union remain contentious issues. The SNP continues to advocate for Scottish independence. Meanwhile, the UK government has pursued a strategy of ‘muscular unionism'. Scottish Labour has called for a new approach, based on greater cooperation between UK and Scottish governments, and for stronger local government within Scotland. So what does Scotland's constitutional future hold? The Institute for Government was delighted to welcome Anas Sarwar MSP, Leader of the Scottish Labour Party. How can Scottish devolution be strengthened? What might a future Labour government at Westminster mean for relations with Holyrood? And what is Sarwar's vision for Scotland's place in a reformed union? To discuss these questions and more, Anas Sarwar was in conversation with Dr Hannah White, Director of the Institute for Government, followed by Q&A with the live and online audience. Follow us on X (formerly known as Twitter) @ifgevents and join the conversation using #IfGSarwar.

Episode 66 of Lets Talk features Chief Executive of the Scottish Association of Landlords, John Blackwood, and Head of Policy and Campaigns of Propertymark, Timothy Douglas, discussing the Cost of Living (Tenant Protection) (Scotland) Act 2022 which introduced a rent freeze in social and private rented housing and a moratorium on evictions. They also explain the recent changes to the Act that will come into force from April, as well as the petition that they have lodged to the Court of Session in Edinburgh in response to this legislation.

This week we discuss the stramash over the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Act 2022, the UK government's blocking of it with a section 35 order and related issues.

In the latest episode of the Agenda, Juliet Samuels interviews Dr Michael Foran, lecturer in Law at the University of Glasgow and Senior Fellow at Policy Exchange on the controversial Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill. Dr Foran explores some of the most pressing themes in his recent Policy Exchange report, which is available to read here. https://policyexchange.org.uk/publication/the-scottish-gender-recognition-reform-bill/ This report demonstrates that the Scottish National Party's (SNP) Gender Recognition Reform Bill, which aims to change the law regulating legal sex change for those born or resident in Scotland, will fundamentally alter the law relating to equal opportunities across the United Kingdom. The report argues that the United Kingdom Government can – and should – make a section 35 order under the Scotland Act 1998 to block Royal assent for the Bill, which would prevent it from becoming law.

In this episode of ScotLand Matters, our Policy Adviser (Rural Property) Anna Gardiner sits down to speak with Clare Dunlop, Senior Associate Lawyer and Solicitor at Brodies LLP. This episode covers questions around the Cost of Living (Tenant Protection) (Scotland) Act which was introduced by the Scottish Government last year. Expect to hear answers to questions, including: Does the Cost of Living (Tenant Protection) Act mean that a landlord wouldn't be able to get a property back until the end of these special measures? What should a landlord do if their tenant is struggling to pay their rent? Should landlords get on and get their rent review notices sorted out for March? and much more. This episode was originally recorded on Wednesday 14 December 2022, with additional recordings taking place on Monday 16 January 2023 (following a statement from Patrick Harvie MSP, Minister for Zero Carbon Buildings, Active Travel and Tenants' Rights on Thursday 12 January 2023) and Monday 23 January (following our joint-petition to the Court of Session in Edinburgh seeking a Judicial Review of the Scottish Government's rent control and eviction ban legislation). ScotLand Matters is the official podcast of Scottish Land & Estates, hosted by Carmen McPherson and produced by Calum Henderson. Visit the Brodies LLP website - www.brodies.com Find out more about Scottish Land & Estates - www.scottishlandandestates.co.uk View our schedule of events - www.scottishlandandestates.co.uk/events Read the latest edition of LandBusiness Magazine - www.scottishlandandestates.co.uk/resources/land-business-magazine Find out what a Scottish Land & Estates Membership can do for you -  www.scottishlandandestates.co.uk/membership

The UK Government's decision to block gender reforms in Scotland does not have “an iota of good faith”, Nicola Sturgeon has said. Scottish Secretary Alister Jack said on Monday that the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill would be blocked using – for the first time – Section 35 of the Scotland Act. The decision has sparked concern over its impact on devolution and further intensified the debate on trans rights that raged for most of 2022 in the Scottish Parliament ahead of the Bill being passed by MSPs in December. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/talktv/support

What is a Section 35 order, and why has it sparked a row about devolution and democracy? The UK Government has triggered Section 35 of The Scotland Act to formally block the Scottish Government's Gender Recognition Reform legislation from reaching royal assent. As First Minister Nicola Sturgeon says the row will "inevitably" end up in court, Professor Nicola McEwen from the Centre on Constitutional Change joins the team to discuss the ramifications of this action on the constitutional debate. Why is the veto of Scottish laws by the UK Government so controversial, why are some worried about the future of Westminster powers over Scottish legislation, and what happens next?

The General Confederation of Labour (CGT), a national French trade union, has announced that they will cut off the electricity supply going to lawmakers and billionaires, before the nationwide protests on Thursday, January 19. “I suggest they also go see the nice properties, the nice castles of billionaires,” said Philippe Martinez, leader of the CGT, France's second-largest trade union, as cited by Reuters. Healthcare workers in Madrid staged a major protest on Sunday, January 15. Tens of thousands of people marched to the center of the Spanish capital stating that the conservating regional government is destroying the public healthcare system. People dressed in white coats walked the streets of Madrid banging drums and chanting “Cutting public health is criminal”. Rishi Sunak insisted today that he was protecting women and children by blocking Scottish gender reform legislation from becoming law.The Prime Minister was accused by the SNP of 'seeking to stoke a culture war' against 'marginalised' trans people over his decision to veto the bill passed by Holyrood.The Government is to use Section 35 of the Scotland Act to prevent the Gender Recognition Reform Act - which would allow teens to legally alter their gender from the age of 16 - from gaining royal assent The Iberdrola construction project is the Saint-Brieuc offshore wind farm. The company has completed the first campaign of the works with the installation of 65 per cent of the piles and 40 per cent of the offshore wind platforms of the plant. These elements have been manufactured at Windar's facilities in Aviles and Navantia's in Fene, respectively.In total, 124 piles have already been installed, which will anchor the substation and 40 of the 62 wind turbines of the wind farm to the seabed. A shocking report has revealed the widening gulf of inequality in Britain as the richest 1% are now wealthier than over two-thirds of the rest of the population combined.Billionaire entrepreneurs such as the Hinduja family (net worth £28billion), Sir James Dyson (£23bn) and Sir Jim Ratcliffe (£10bn) are among the 685,000 richest people whose total worth exceeds the combined wealth of 48million Britons. ..........Both the number and wealth of billionaires doubled over the last decade, leading to calls from charities and think-tanks for increased taxation.At the same time, at least 1.7billion workers now live in countries where inflation is outpacing wages, and more than 820 million people - roughly one in ten in the world - do not have enough food. A Just Stop Oil activist who moaned to a judge that climbing a gantry over the M25 had 'completely ruined his life' has today been spared jail.Alfred Beswick, 26, of Hackney, east London, helped bring Britain's busiest motorway to a standstill on November 8 as part of a series of climate change protests that caused mayhem around London. Sainsbury's has decided to axe a controversial advert after it sparked a huge backlash online over claims it was appearing to ignore women's safety. The supermarket had released an advert for a £24 wrap dress, that showed a woman wearing the outfit, reading 'For walks in the parks or strolls after dark'. Parents of law student, 26, who died of meningitis after four remote doctor appointments in three weeks say they hope this week's inquest will provide answers and raise awareness of need to be seen face-to-face A wanted man has commented on his own police appeal on Facebook, as he thanked officers for saying he had an 'athletic build'. Michael Smith, 37, from Chandler's Ford in Hampshire, is wanted by police on recall to prison, after going missing on Saturday. Police described him as white, 6ft tall, and of an athletic build. He remains missing. Vanessa Feltz today accused the BBC of 'ageism' as it was claimed Ken Bruce turned down a contract and quit Radio 2 because of the 'seemingly ever-younger DJs' bosses brought in and its 'edgier' playlist. The star broadcaster is leaving t

Scotland's Social Justice Secretary has condemned the “increasing draconian” UK Government after it confirmed legislation to reform the gender recognition process north of the border will be blocked. Scottish Secretary Alister Jack has announced he will make a Section 35 order – a never before utilised section of the 1998 Scotland Act – to prevent the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill from gaining royal assent. Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has branded the move a “full-frontal attack on our democratically-elected Scottish Parliament and its ability to make its own decisions on devolved matters”. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/talktv/support

Rishi Sunak could be set for a major clash with the Scottish Government, with multiple reports suggesting that he will move to block Scotland's gender recognition law this week. To do so would likely prove controversial and would mean triggering Section 35 of the Scotland Act, becoming the first Prime Minister to use the legal power to block a bill passed in Holyrood. Wales could follow Scotland and introduce a law making it easier to legally change one's gender. But women's rights activist Kellie-Jay Keen explains why she does not want more men in women's spaces. #talktv #talkradio --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/talktv/support

The Gender Recognition Reform Bill was passed by an overwhelming majority of the Scottish Parliament. Secretary of State for Scotland, Alister Jack, has decided for the first time in 25 years to invoke Section 35 of the Scotland Act to stymie its implementation.We examine the background to the legislation and wonder if he has unwittingly succeeded in uniting Yessers, who disagree over this issue and soft Nos, in opposition to the undermining of the Parliament.Sir Keir Starmer seems to have thrown Scottish Labour under the bus over GRR by criticising some of its measures. This despite Anas Sarwar whipping his MSPs to vote for it. How will Scottish Labour voters and party react to another piece of Starmer political opportunism?The SNP Special Conference will have two options presented to it on using a future election, either Westminster or Holyrood, as a de facto referendum. Both depend on gaining a majority of votes for the SNP and any other parties with whom they've reached a pre-election agreement. How will Alba respond?Lesley stresses the need for the SNP to step up to the plate with a compelling narrative on the shape of a future independent Scotland and a serious strategy for securing that majority of votes.All this plus praise for Colin McKay of STV for his Rishi Sunak interview, Suella Braverman and the Home Office's attempts to remove a video showing a confrontation with a Holocaust survivor, more Alister Jack, this time on Brexit, and Lesley's new book.  ★ Support this podcast ★

La semana pasada Nicola Sturgeon, primera ministra de Escocia, anunció la celebración de un referéndum de independencia para el 19 de octubre de 2023, es decir, nueve años después de que se celebrase el último, que se saldó con una sonora derrota para los independentistas. Desde entonces han cambiado unas cuantas cosas en Escocia. En 2014 el Reino Unido formaba parte de la Unión Europea, el primer ministro era David Cameron y en Escocia mandaba Alex Salmond. Nada de eso tenemos hoy. El Reino Unido lleva ya año y medio fuera de la UE, de David Cameron apenas se acuerda nadie y Salmond cayó en desgracia tras el referéndum de independencia y su lugar lo ocupó Nicola Sturgeon. En 2014 el referéndum se pactó con el Gobierno británico y, por lo tanto, era legal y vinculante. Un 55% de los escoceses votaron en contra de la independencia ya que traía de la mano algunas desventajas como la salida inmediata de la Unión Europea. Los unionistas, de hecho, emplearon mucho este argumento a su favor. Menos de dos años después los escoceses tuvieron que volver a las urnas, pero esta vez para salir de la Unión Europea, cosa a la que se negaron por amplia mayoría. Desde entonces, Sturgeon, primera ministra escocesa desde hace ocho años, está comprometida a repetir el referéndum de 2014 ya que las circunstancias han cambiado sustancialmente. Sturgeon quiso primero celebrar el referéndum en 2018, luego en 2021, pero ni Theresa May ni Boris Johnson quisieron hablar del tema. Mientras en Londres no se acepte la propuesta escocesa no habrá nada que hacer, al menos nada vinculante. A falta de una constitución, la unión de Escocia con el resto del país se sostiene sobre la denominada Scotland Act de 1998. Esta ley estipula que la unión de Inglaterra y Escocia de 1707 es un asunto reservado únicamente al parlamento de Westminster. Con esta ley no se puede celebrar ningún referéndum sin su consentimiento expreso. Sturgeon tendrá, por lo tanto, que pasar por encima de la Scotland Act si quiere satisfacer a las bases de su partido, que presionan desde hace años para que se vuelva a celebrar el referéndum. Sturgeon se ha resistido hasta ahora porque conoce la ley, la misma ley que la legitima como primera ministra de Escocia, y es consciente de que ese referéndum no tendría validez legal alguna y que, en caso de perderlo, le supondría a título personal un gran coste político. Para sortear la cuestión su Gobierno solicitó un dictamen al Tribunal Supremo para que determinase si el referéndum está dentro de las competencias del parlamento escocés. El Tribunal observó que la Scotland Act no deja lugar a muchas interpretaciones y señaló la primacía de Westminster. Sturgeon ha decidido entonces atajar y convocar un referéndum meramente consultivo aprovechando la crisis de credibilidad que atraviesa Boris Johnson. La apuesta podría salirle carísima, pero no le queda otra opción si quiere seguir siendo la líder indiscutible del nacionalismo escocés. En La ContraRéplica: - Adoctrinamiento en la escuela - Inmigración - España en la OTAN · “La ContraHistoria de España. Auge, caída y vuelta a empezar de un país en 28 episodios”… https://amzn.to/3kXcZ6i · “Lutero, Calvino y Trento, la Reforma que no fue”… https://amzn.to/3shKOlK · “La ContraHistoria del comunismo”… https://amzn.to/39QP2KE Apoya La Contra en: · Patreon... https://www.patreon.com/diazvillanueva · iVoox... https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-contracronica_sq_f1267769_1.html · Paypal... https://www.paypal.me/diazvillanueva Sígueme en: · Web... https://diazvillanueva.com · Twitter... https://twitter.com/diazvillanueva · Facebook... https://www.facebook.com/fernandodiazvillanueva1/ · Instagram... https://www.instagram.com/diazvillanueva · Linkedin… https://www.linkedin.com/in/fernando-d%C3%ADaz-villanueva-7303865/ · Flickr... https://www.flickr.com/photos/147276463@N05/?/ · Pinterest... https://www.pinterest.com/fernandodiazvillanueva Encuentra mis libros en: · Amazon... https://www.amazon.es/Fernando-Diaz-Villanueva/e/B00J2ASBXM #FernandoDiazVillanueva #Escocia #referendum Escucha el episodio completo en la app de iVoox, o descubre todo el catálogo de iVoox Originals

The highlight of this episode is a visit to the Scottish Parliament, Holyrood.  But first, the colourful story of who ruled Scotland over the centuries, the Scottish kings, the ongoing tussles with England, the Act of Union and subsequent rebellions and finally the Scotland Act of 1998 which led to the founding of the new parliament where a speaker could proudly announce that 'the Scottish Parliament, which adjourned on the 25th March 1707, is reconvened.'    Recommended read Scotland's Democracy Trail by Stuart McHardy and Donald Smith  Useful links https://www.parliament.scot   https://www.parliament.scot/visit/virtual-tour https://edinburgh.org City Breaks: all the history and culture you'd research for yourself if you had the time! Check our website to find more episodes from our Edinburgh series or to browse our back catalogue of other cities which are well worth visiting: https://www.citybreakspodcast.co.uk We love to receive your comments and suggestions!  You can e mail us at citybreaks@citybreakspodcast.co.uk And if you like what you hear, please do post comments or a review wherever you downloaded this episode.  That would be very much appreciated!   

In this episode I speak with Malcolm Combe, senior lecturer at the University of Strathclyde in Scotland. More information on Malcolm can be found here: https://www.strath.ac.uk/staff/combemalcolmmr/ Malcolm and I speak about his research into wrongful-termination of tenancy orders under the 2016 act, but also discuss the wider issues of tenancy protection and property law in Scotland and beyond. In our conversation we try to explore legal characterization of tenancies, as well as their after effects in relation to receiving wrong-termination orders and compensation as well as in relation to returning deposits. The article our conversation is based on is Combe and Robson, “A review of the first wrongful-termination orders made under the Private Housing (Tenancies) (Scotland) Act 2016: do they sufficiently protect those misled into giving up a tenancy?” 2021 Jur. Rev. 88. A link to the article van be found at: https://pureportal.strath.ac.uk/en/publications/a-review-of-the-first-wrongful-termination-orders-made-under-the- During our conversation we make mention, inter alia, of the books by Michael Heller and James Salzman, Mine!: How the Hidden Rules of Ownership Control our Lives (https://www.amazon.com/Mine-Hidden-Rules-Ownership-Control/dp/0385544723), Simon Winchester, Land. How the Hunger for Ownership Shaped the Modern World (https://www.amazon.com/Mine-Hidden-Rules-Ownership-Control/dp/0385544723).

Towards the end of 2020, Scotland became the first place to offer menstrual products for free in public places. Anney and Samantha discuss how it happened and what it means. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://news.iheart.com/podcast-advertisers

On 13 December 2018, the Supreme Court delivered its judgment on the 'Scottish Continuity Bill' (https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2018-0080.html). This Bill was enacted by the Scottish Parliament in order to provide its own version of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, providing for the continued application of EU law in Scotland from exit day onwards. The legislation was enacted against the backdrop of Scotland’s refusal to agree to a legislative consent motion for the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill 2018, which then came into force without Scotland’s consent in breach of the Sewel convention. It also marked the first time that Scottish legislation had been challenged at the pre-legislative stage, using the provisions of section 33 of the Scotland Act 1998. In this video produced by the Cambridge Centre for Public Law, Professor Mark Elliott, Professor Alison Young, and Dr Paul Daly each discuss the constitutional implications of the case, chaired by Dr Shona Wilson Stark. The talk should be of interest for undergraduate students in Constitutional law, Administrative law and European Union law, in addition to postgraduate students working in these areas. For more information, see the CPL website at: http://www.cpl.law.cam.ac.uk

On 13 December 2018, the Supreme Court delivered its judgment on the 'Scottish Continuity Bill' (https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2018-0080.html). This Bill was enacted by the Scottish Parliament in order to provide its own version of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, providing for the continued application of EU law in Scotland from exit day onwards. The legislation was enacted against the backdrop of Scotland’s refusal to agree to a legislative consent motion for the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill 2018, which then came into force without Scotland’s consent in breach of the Sewel convention. It also marked the first time that Scottish legislation had been challenged at the pre-legislative stage, using the provisions of section 33 of the Scotland Act 1998. In this video produced by the Cambridge Centre for Public Law, Professor Mark Elliott, Professor Alison Young, and Dr Paul Daly each discuss the constitutional implications of the case, chaired by Dr Shona Wilson Stark. The talk should be of interest for undergraduate students in Constitutional law, Administrative law and European Union law, in addition to postgraduate students working in these areas. For more information, see the CPL website at: http://www.cpl.law.cam.ac.uk

On 13 December 2018, the Supreme Court delivered its judgment on the 'Scottish Continuity Bill' (https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2018-0080.html). This Bill was enacted by the Scottish Parliament in order to provide its own version of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, providing for the continued application of EU law in Scotland from exit day onwards. The legislation was enacted against the backdrop of Scotland’s refusal to agree to a legislative consent motion for the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill 2018, which then came into force without Scotland’s consent in breach of the Sewel convention. It also marked the first time that Scottish legislation had been challenged at the pre-legislative stage, using the provisions of section 33 of the Scotland Act 1998. In this video produced by the Cambridge Centre for Public Law, Professor Mark Elliott, Professor Alison Young, and Dr Paul Daly each discuss the constitutional implications of the case, chaired by Dr Shona Wilson Stark. The talk should be of interest for undergraduate students in Constitutional law, Administrative law and European Union law, in addition to postgraduate students working in these areas. For more information, see the CPL website at: http://www.cpl.law.cam.ac.uk

On 13 December 2018, the Supreme Court delivered its judgment on the 'Scottish Continuity Bill' (https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2018-0080.html). This Bill was enacted by the Scottish Parliament in order to provide its own version of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, providing for the continued application of EU law in Scotland from exit day onwards. The legislation was enacted against the backdrop of Scotland’s refusal to agree to a legislative consent motion for the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill 2018, which then came into force without Scotland’s consent in breach of the Sewel convention. It also marked the first time that Scottish legislation had been challenged at the pre-legislative stage, using the provisions of section 33 of the Scotland Act 1998. In this video produced by the Cambridge Centre for Public Law, Professor Mark Elliott, Professor Alison Young, and Dr Paul Daly each discuss the constitutional implications of the case, chaired by Dr Shona Wilson Stark. The talk should be of interest for undergraduate students in Constitutional law, Administrative law and European Union law, in addition to postgraduate students working in these areas. For more information, see the CPL website at: http://www.cpl.law.cam.ac.uk This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

On 13 December 2018, the Supreme Court delivered its judgment on the 'Scottish Continuity Bill' (https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2018-0080.html). This Bill was enacted by the Scottish Parliament in order to provide its own version of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, providing for the continued application of EU law in Scotland from exit day onwards. The legislation was enacted against the backdrop of Scotland’s refusal to agree to a legislative consent motion for the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill 2018, which then came into force without Scotland’s consent in breach of the Sewel convention. It also marked the first time that Scottish legislation had been challenged at the pre-legislative stage, using the provisions of section 33 of the Scotland Act 1998. In this video produced by the Cambridge Centre for Public Law, Professor Mark Elliott, Professor Alison Young, and Dr Paul Daly each discuss the constitutional implications of the case, chaired by Dr Shona Wilson Stark. The talk should be of interest for undergraduate students in Constitutional law, Administrative law and European Union law, in addition to postgraduate students working in these areas. For more information, see the CPL website at: http://www.cpl.law.cam.ac.uk This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

On 13 December 2018, the Supreme Court delivered its judgment on the 'Scottish Continuity Bill' (https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2018-0080.html). This Bill was enacted by the Scottish Parliament in order to provide its own version of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, providing for the continued application of EU law in Scotland from exit day onwards. The legislation was enacted against the backdrop of Scotland’s refusal to agree to a legislative consent motion for the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill 2018, which then came into force without Scotland’s consent in breach of the Sewel convention. It also marked the first time that Scottish legislation had been challenged at the pre-legislative stage, using the provisions of section 33 of the Scotland Act 1998. In this video produced by the Cambridge Centre for Public Law, Professor Mark Elliott, Professor Alison Young, and Dr Paul Daly each discuss the constitutional implications of the case, chaired by Dr Shona Wilson Stark. The talk should be of interest for undergraduate students in Constitutional law, Administrative law and European Union law, in addition to postgraduate students working in these areas. For more information, see the CPL website at: http://www.cpl.law.cam.ac.uk

Alcohol Alert, July 2017: Five years after Scotland legislated for Minimum Unit Pricing (MUP), judges at the UK Supreme Court in London have just concluded their latest deliberations over whether the legislation is incompatible with European Union law and therefore unlawful under the Scotland Act 1998. It has twice been ruled legal in Scottish courts during that period. So why hasn’t MUP been implemented yet? We met with Dr Peter Rice to help us chart the history of one of the most hotly contested pieces of legislation in the UK in recent years. By subscribing to our enewsletter, you can receive alcohol-related stories and media directly to your inbox; please visit our website www.ias.org.uk and click on "Alcohol Alert" to read the latest Issue: www.ias.org.uk/What-we-do/Alcohol-Alert.aspx

Never mind the bollocks, here come the Supreme Court judges. Whatever your views on the Scottish constitution, you at least know now that our shiny devolved parliament may not amount to a large hill of beans when it comes to decision-making. The Supreme Court's decision to force the UK Government to put the triggering of Brexit negotiations with the European Union before Parliament was welcomed by many. But it was accompanied by a decision that the devolved legislatures of Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales did not have to be consulted in any formal way. Although the decision was no shock to Scottish legal observers, it undermines the promises made in the Smith Commission report that provided the basis of the most recent Scotland Act which awarded more powers to Holyrood. Then, politicians assumed that the "Sewel Convention", by which the Scottish Parliament be consulted on issues concerning any changes to devolved matters, had been enshrined in law. The Supreme Court effectively ruled this week that this did not pertain to Brexit, effectively leaving all power in such matters to Westminster. What does this all mean, and should we be alarmed by it? Podcast host Derek Bateman turned to Andrew Tickell, political blogger and law lecturer, to find out more. They were joined by journalist and film-maker Maurice Smith as they chewed over all this and the week's other political events in Scotland, London and Washington.