Meanwhile at Wuppertal in Germany, the Sharia Police from the local migrant community have been attempting to prevent the late night booze and bonk culture only to be arrested by the regular police.
It makes me yearn for a force of Sharia persuaders here at weekends when our County police in the name of commerce and modern culture let it all hang out.
But will in New Scotland the SNP, with its centralised police and local government systems as well as open borders welcome the intervention of similar Sharia law enforcers on the streets of Glasgow and Greenock?
Or will they oppose and stop an attempt to ensure sobriety and decency on the streets on Saturday nights at levels that the most strict of Presbyterian ministers would approve?
With the debate now locked in to who offers the biggest and best benefits, who will leave more money in your pocket to spend on essential cultural purposes, such as betting on Sky TV and who will ensure that nobody will ever go short or earn or be given less than the average income?
According to "Private eye" this week, the Russians have taken a major role in Norway's North Atlantic Drilling. Doubtless the Russian navy will be anxious to protect their investments and police the relevant waters in the absence of any other navies. Matters like this are off the agenda.
Relating to the Sharia question above, the immigration question is one that has been avoided at all costs. But the single Scots UKIP man has suddenly decided to have a go. In a noisy intervention in the quiet and limited debate, he claims that open borders means that Scotland will be not for the Scots but in time, perhaps a short one, will be for others.
So when the SNP refer to a closer attachment to Scandinavian nations it may not be the shared Viking heritage, or the return of the fishing industry or such but more the proportion of recent migrants in the capital cities of Copenhagen, Oslo and Stockholm.
Little is known about these demographic changes because the view is that this is not something to be discussed and any difficulties are purely temporary and can be dealt with by more public spending and conceding legal authority to the incomers.
These are long term matters on the whole, so there is no need to worry. But there are some short term ones again absent from discussion. One is the period of transition and the costs attached to it. The various attempts at this seem to be making it up as you go along.
The SNP use the back of a small envelope, but the Unionists prefer the larger one. As a veteran of reorganisations of the past as well as having interests in complexity and uncertainty, again predictions are very risky.
In general though what happens is usually worse than expected because of known human frailties and the impossibility of knowing the future in detail.
My view is that the big one is missing. This, yes an obsession, is the heavy costs and difficulties of dealing with all the relevant computer and software issues and requirements and the staffing implications.
Not just Westminster but many others have made huge expensive mistakes and have been taken for a ride. Too many have fallen off in the process.
In the case of the government in the UK the consequences have been major failures in services and systems, SNATS writ large; situation normal all total shambles.
If so then not even the Sharia police could sort it out.