|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sun 30 May 09:19
Chapman resigns as treasurer. Claims he wasn't given the full accounts...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: AdamAntsParsStripe
Date: Sun 30 May 14:39
Quote:
jake89, Sun 30 May 09:19
Chapman resigns as treasurer. Claims he wasn't given the full accounts...
He’s not the first either. I know the SNP say their accounts are independently audited which might be true but this centres around circa £600000 of ring-fenced money from members for a future independence campaign which nobody seems to know where it is in the books.
Zwei Pints Bier und ein Päckchen Chips bitte
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sun 30 May 15:51
Im starting to think that had Alba not sunk at the last election would Chapman have jumped ship? He won`t do it now of course because he probably quite fancies being the snp candidate at the next General Election.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: shrek par
Date: Sun 30 May 17:04
Think a fair few were waiting to see what way the wind was blowing
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Mon 31 May 10:31
Quote:
Tenruh, Mon 31 May 06:49
https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2021/05/30/douglas-chapman-resigns/
Only one left standing from the SNP (NSP)NEC election from last December who I voted for remains.
Roger Mullen, yes the man who won Kirkcaldy with a 10,000+ majority in 2015 to loss it in 2017.
I suspect Douglas has decided to make a move with Mr Biagi resigning his commission last week.
Well done to Wings for running with this from the beginning 👏
https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2021/05/31/one-of-the-38-speaks-out/
Roger Mullin was a good MP, he lost because Labour flung everything but the kitchen sink at it during the election campaign. We ended up with Lesley Laird who was about as much good as a chocolate teapot, followed by Neil Hanvey who is on the same level!
Roger is involved in the setting up of the Scottish Stock Exchange along with several other projects within the Scottish government.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Mon 31 May 18:17
Nicola Sturgeon`s grip on the party tightens as her opposition run up the white flag.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 1 Jun 08:53
"The support for the aggressive rant against Allison is highlighted in screenshot one"
So they have access to the messages but decided not to publish the aggressive rant or even cover what was said if it isn't in the chat (the implication is the message was in the chat..)? I smell 💩. The fact he them goes on to describe them as wokies let's me know all I need to know about him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Tue 1 Jun 10:34
Quote:
londonparsfan, Tue 1 Jun 08:53
"The support for the aggressive rant against Allison is highlighted in screenshot one"
So they have access to the messages but decided not to publish the aggressive rant or even cover what was said if it isn't in the chat (the implication is the message was in the chat..)? I smell 💩. The fact he them goes on to describe them as wokies let's me know all I need to know about him.
Aye another Indy blogger who's not telling the truth, or more to the point, because its not what you want to read you'll dismiss it outright.
Anyway what's your view on Chapman and Cherry 🍒 resigning from the NEC ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 1 Jun 12:28
No wherever I see spliced photos showing segments of anything rather than a complete chain I tend to be highly suspicious. I'm quite happy to pay attention to any blogger that can present a cohesive agreement. I tend to think that people who regurgitate catchy media phrases like woke are 🔔 ends. They can't argue their own case so they try to add a label to their opponents view just to discredit them rather than try and substantiate their own view. It's lazy but it works.
I'll try and put my own personal views on the calibre of person he might be aside and say..
The "evidence" presented that Sturgeon has agreed to an aggressive rant consists of a photo of a message allegedly from NS that says "Well said Ian". That message could be about absolutely anything. Why not publish the offending remarks? Surely they're too good to miss out if they're that bad?
It's nothing to do with what I want to read, I just don't accept cut photos of messages with commentary from someone who wants me to believe his point is "evidence" of something. I'm really not that bothered about the internal wrangling in the SNP.
If there was genuine evidence of financial impropriety that would cause me to consider whether I should be voting SNP then I'd be interested but I doubt I'm going to read anything impartial from a blogger that seems to think he's on a crusade against the apparently woke part of the SNP.
Further down he makes the claim the SNP want the story buried where the counter emails about whether the letter should have been read could be complaining that specific processes weren't followed. Again we don't know the true context of the messages because the blogger has chosen to display sections of the discussion with his own commentary rather than the entire message chain. Why?
I don't have a view on Chapman or Cherry resigning as its impossible to tell what's really happening behind the scenes. It could be there is a real issue with the financial management of the funds that should have been ring fenced which I'd view as very serious or it could be that its a group of disgruntled members stirring 💩 as there is an obvious fall out.
I'll probably wait for the police investigation to resolve the allegation of fraud against the SNP to decide whether that bit has any merit and continue not to believe stuff put on the Internet by randoms unless they are prepared to make disclosures in full that show the full context of what is being discussed.
And I'll definitely consider people that use terms like woke, fake news (is invariably now an opinion on news not whether it is true or not), gammon, hard left (mwhahahaha) as fairly unreliable sources until they prove me otherwise as the fact they felt the need to apply a label rather than simply argue their case means that I'm sceptical they can actually make a valid point.
Post Edited (Tue 01 Jun 12:29)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Tue 1 Jun 13:34
Looking forward to the SNP making a statement might be a wee while off though.
Post Edited (Tue 01 Jun 13:37)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 1 Jun 14:29
In the same token though I don't really trust them either. It's perfectly conceivable they have misused the money.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Tue 1 Jun 14:55
Quote:
londonparsfan, Tue 1 Jun 14:29
In the same token though I don't really trust them either. It's perfectly conceivable they have misused the money.
Hope not as I've given them £10 a month for the Indy2 fund since 2016 till February this year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Tue 1 Jun 16:17
I assumed truth in terms of Chapman but I don't trust Cherry. Now wondering if theres an element of mud slinging going on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 1 Jun 16:21
Misused is maybe a bad word on my part- I'm sure it's still kicking about in their coffers somewhere.
Whether or not it has been used for various things it wasn't originally intended to have been is anyone's guess. I wouldn't be surprised if the audit trail looks a bit ropey from a controls perspective.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Tue 1 Jun 17:32
The SNP said at the offset it would be
" Ringfenced " for Indy2.
Rumoured it was used to pay Alyn Smiths legal costs .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 1 Jun 17:56
And that's where my suspicion of them kicks in. Whilst I don't entirely trust the sources you're quoting and I don't accept any of blog article as evidence of wrong doing, there is a question at the bottom of it all which is: has the SNP always kept that money ring fenced as it was supposed to be? I know they should be innocent until proven guilty but it should be fairly easy to prove if the proper controls were in place and the money has been ring fenced and I'd expect them to put it to bed if they could as there's no benefit to anyone in the management system at the SNP in stringing this out . To my mind at least.
Post Edited (Tue 01 Jun 17:56)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Tue 1 Jun 18:33
Does it really matter if it is ring fenced as long as it produced when it was said it would be?
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 1 Jun 18:37
It wouldn't to me personally but I wouldn't grudge anyone that had donated under set circumstances having expected them to abide by what they said would.
From a management perspective its potentially bad Governance as well if its not been ring fenced in the way it should.
I work in compliance though so I have to be a stickler for following the rules 😂
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Malcolm Canmore
Date: Tue 1 Jun 19:28
I genuinely do not follow politics in any great detail, but I do have an interest in corporate governance. This all does seem to be bordering on outrageous. Three auditors and the National Treasurer resign claiming that they have been prevented from fulfilling their duty of oversight due to a refusal to produce financial information.
If this happened in any listed company, regulators and the media would be crawling all over it. It does not matter if there is anything amiss with the party’s finances, what matters is the apparent failure to allow the auditors and National Treasurer to fulfill their duties. It seems that these people had no alternative but to resign. How does one view whoever accepts the vacant positions?
My dog eats meat
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Tue 1 Jun 20:19
Just a question, do people think the work and costs associated with Indy ref 2 only start when it’s agreed and campaigning starts?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Tue 1 Jun 21:55
Quote:
Malcolm Canmore, Tue 1 Jun 19:28
I genuinely do not follow politics in any great detail, but I do have an interest in corporate governance. This all does seem to be bordering on outrageous. Three auditors and the National Treasurer resign claiming that they have been prevented from fulfilling their duty of oversight due to a refusal to produce financial information.
If this happened in any listed company, regulators and the media would be crawling all over it. It does not matter if there is anything amiss with the party’s finances, what matters is the apparent failure to allow the auditors and National Treasurer to fulfill their duties. It seems that these people had no alternative but to resign. How does one view whoever accepts the vacant positions?
The elected Treasurer won the election to the post 6 months ago with around 90% of the votes. The individual who was second in the election was asked by the leader to replace the resigned Treasurer on Sunday, which he accepted. He was also the previous treasurer for a period of years prior to losing the position resounding in December
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Tue 1 Jun 21:58
Quote:
DBP, Tue 1 Jun 20:19
Just a question, do people think the work and costs associated with Indy ref 2 only start when it’s agreed and campaigning starts?
I certainly don't think that. But if the accounts don't show any costs towards the indy2 campaign you would assume no work has commenced.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Fri 4 Jun 19:16
Does it really matter if it is ring fenced as long as it produced when it was said it would be?
I’m sure history is littered with examples of monies being “borrowed” with the unfulfilled intention of having them repaid. It’s one reason company pension funds tend to be set up under trust. (Mind you, that didn’t stop Robert Maxwell).
If the money is ring-fenced, it should be easy to point it out. But this hasn’t happened. I notice John Swinney gave a “non-denial” denial to allegations that the Police were investigating. There are more red flags here than you’d see at Anfield. (Or Annfield, if you like).
I wonder if the SNP’s Stalinist prohibition of criticism by its elected representatives is a factor here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 4 Jun 20:21
I`m not sure what all the fuss is about. As NS said the accounts are independently audited and submitted to the Electoral Commission.
It would obviously be better to attract donations from wealthy backers `with no strings attached`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Sat 5 Jun 13:52
That seemed like another non-denial denial from NS. And what does she mean when she says the accounts are "managed on a cash flow basis"?
Anyone can look at the 2019 accounts. Where is the ring-fenced money? If people like tenruh were donating for a specific purpose, aren`t they entitled to see that money applied to that specific purpose? Are they just saying "£600k came in, it went into a big fund, then it was spent on a variety of things including campaigning"?
How restricted is the role of the auditor? Are they saying no laws were broken? Are they saying no-one was misled?
Meanwhile, there appear to be questions over the 2020 accounts. I imagine that qualified accountants have resigned rather than face professional misconduct charges. This is very dodgy.
I assume Colin Beattie is the new (and old) treasurer?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sat 5 Jun 14:27
I`ve no idea what accounting standards apply to the accounts of political parties and, judging from the questions you are asking, I suspect you don`t either. Auditors will be checking the accounts comply with these standards and with the law, where applicable, and conducting their audit in accordance with auditing standards. If they think it`s appropriate they`ll qualify their report.
There are so many experts on these forums it`s frightening. Their knowledge knows no bounds whether it`s football, epidemiology, public health, economics or financial standards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sat 5 Jun 17:41
MT what is this `non denail denial`? You made that remark abkitnSwinnney and when I looked up what he said he stated "to my knowledge there is no police investigation". Seems quite unequivocal that he knows of no police investigation.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sat 5 Jun 17:49
Michael Gove`s the master of the `non-denial denial`. When asked if Johnson made the remark that he`d rather see `bodies piling up` than call a lockdown, he said he was in the Cabinet room and did not hear the PM making the remark in question, ignoring the fact that no one claimed the comment was made in that room.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: shrek par
Date: Sat 5 Jun 20:14
As a party member and knowing what transpired locally, its no surprise there is ambiguity regarding the national accounts. Too many over promoted people in high office for my liking. Add in the clandestine civil war going on, and it reeks of clusterfuck
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Sat 5 Jun 22:13
Wee eck – there is must be an infinite list of matters in which I claim no expertise, not just the ones you mentioned. But I am keen to improve my understanding, by asking questions of the experts on dotnet.
You are of course correct that I don’t know what accounting standards apply to the preparation of financial statements for political parties. At a guess I would say the just the normal one (FRS102?) with additional requirements set by the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 and by the Electoral Commission. Can I assume that those who are saying “there’s nothing to see here” are familiar with the appropriate standards and legislation?
If, for example, donations came in and were spent on a big party, would that be against the law? Or against accounting standards? Maybe it be OK if there were evidence of the donations and receipts for the champagne? Perhaps it would be OK if the party were classified as “a campaign event”. Or if membership subscriptions went on the champagne, and donations went on producing leaflets. Perhaps LuxPar could provide some insight?
Essentially what I am suggesting is that it is possible that accounting standards are sufficiently permissive that one may not be able to infer terribly much from an unqualified audit. (But if £600,000 had been donated for an Indy Ref 2 fighting fund it must surely be reasonable to ask why there is no obvious ring-fenced fund with assets to that value.)
TOWK – a “non-denial denial” is something that may look like a denial, but isn’t one. So if John Swinney says “to my knowledge there is no police investigation” he is not denying that there is a police investigation or that there is anything to be investigated – he is merely saying that he is not aware of one. I believe the phrase was popularised by the film “All the Presidents’ Men” which is based on the events surrounding the Washington Post’s investigation of the Watergate scandal. I would recommend this if you haven’t seen it. Quite chilling, although it ends a little prematurely IMO.
As for Gove – I suspect he pretends not to know lots of stuff when he actually does, whereas with Boris it is the other way round. I’m not sure if that makes him more dangerous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sat 5 Jun 23:26
The whole point of accounting standards is to achieve some transparency, reliability, consistency and comparability in financial statements. It would defeat their objective if they were `sufficiently permissive that one may not be able to infer terribly much from an unqualified audit`. But you carry on, speculating and making inferences based on no expert knowledge at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Malcolm Canmore
Date: Wed 16 Jun 22:25
Quote:
wee eck, Sat 05 Jun 23:26
The whole point of accounting standards is to achieve some transparency, reliability, consistency and comparability in financial statements. It would defeat their objective if they were `sufficiently permissive that one may not be able to infer terribly much from an unqualified audit`. But you carry on, speculating and making inferences based on no expert knowledge at all.
Three members of the party’s own Finance and Audit Committee resigned, saying that they could not fulfil their roles as a result of being denied access to financial records. THAT is the real issue. It cannot possibly be right that the Finance and Audit Committee do not have free access to all, and any, financial information.
Then, the National Treasurer resigned over “lack of information”. Again, how can the National Treasurer be expected to function without unfettered access.
The published accounts and the statutory audit may not address the “ring fenced” money as the law does not require specific disclosure. You can bet your last penny, however, that the statutory auditors will be on red alert with so many resignations from the finance function and with those worrying concerns given as the reasons.
Every member of the party should be concerned
My dog eats meat
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Wed 16 Jun 23:02
I`m not a party member and have no idea how its financial structure works and what the remits of the various office-bearers are. As I said above I also don`t know what specific accounting standards apply to political parties` accounts. I do know though that charities which receive monies for a specific purpose, by donations or grants say, are required to show them as part of `restricted funds` on their balance sheets. This does not mean that such funds have to be kept in separate bank accounts although some charities may choose to do so for internal management purposes. That may also be the case for political parties. The important point is that the funds should be available when they require to be spent on the specific purpose for which they were intended. That may be what Nicola Sturgeon meant when she said the accounts are `managed on a cash flow basis`.
Don`t political parties have to submit their annual accounts to the Electoral Commission? If they can`t get any firm to audit them they`d be answerable to them surely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sat 19 Jun 20:43
Quote:
sadindiefreak, Sat 19 Jun 19:10
Quote:
Tenruh, Sat 19 Jun 10:02
https://thinkscotland.org/2021/06/is-the-snps-cash-flow-management-a-cover-for-false-accounting/
A bit more analysis of the SNP finances
Sharing stuff written by unionists now. Do you actually think this will help bring about independence?
You Alba supporters are absolute clowns, there is little chance of independence with you lot undermining it.
What's wrong, to near the truth for you to digest, everyone else's fault but the SNPs.
Now playing the blame game ha ha ha
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Sat 19 Jun 21:38
Tenruh is there not a danger you’ll start to p!sh on your own chips now, no?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sat 19 Jun 21:48
Quote:
DBP, Sat 19 Jun 21:38
Tenruh is there not a danger you’ll start to p!sh on your own chips now, no?
NO
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Malcolm Canmore
Date: Sun 20 Jun 14:47
Quote:
Tenruh, Sat 19 Jun 22:00
https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-weekend-cartoon/
Get all your piggy banks cracked open the SNP are after your money
So, if Wings Over Scotland is to be believed, the money given to support indyref2 was not ringfenced. It has been spent on other party matters (but, of course, everything the party does is aimed at independence - so that’s OK). Future cash flowing into the party will be spent on indyref2. So, it’s all sorted. The party received £x for indyref2, spent it on something else, but will generate £x in future and spend that money on indyref2.
Why could that “cashflow accounting” not have been explained to those who resigned?
Oh, and if I give £1 in future for indyref2 then, when it’s spent on indyref2 does it reduce the balance of unspent “ringfenced” money?
My dog eats meat
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bedworth par
Date: Tue 22 Jun 01:57
Stop squabbling! Get independence through SNP then vote for whichever party you wish. Back to divide and rule. Live in England and frankly most people down here are at best dismissive of Scotland, think it`s reliant on English bailouts. No way"they" can run a country. It makes me so angry that people in Scotland wouldn`t vote for independence because they might be a few hundred pounds a year worse off! 2 or 3 pounds a week to take control of your own affairs? Get a grip!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Tue 22 Jun 08:30
Completely agree with the above post… and we’ll more than likely be a few hundred pounds a year worse off if we stay anyway
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: pacifist
Date: Mon 23 Aug 17:20
The UK is in a financial mess with huge debts. Who trusts the tories to try to redeem that debt with fairness? No-one can look after Scotland better than the people who stay in Scotland.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Mon 23 Aug 18:27
Bedworth nails it for me
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 27 Aug 13:03
I see the SNP`s accounts for the year ended 31 December 2020 were published yesterday with an unqualified report by the external auditors. They also revealed that Peter Murrell`s salary was just under £80.000 pa.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 27 Aug 16:42
`So the auditors are providing themselves with a “get out of jail card”. Now I wonder why these statements are appearing in the accounts this time round. I think I, and I suspect most readers know that answer. In the current circumstances who can blame them?`
If you read the Herald article in full it explains that the inclusion of the statement about fraud is to comply with a new international standard which didn`t apply in 2019. It`s got nothing to do with the SNP`s accounts in particular.
That sort of stuff just reinforces my view that these bloggers are very selective in their comments and make no attempt at objectivity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sadindiefreak
Date: Fri 27 Aug 16:57
Quote:
wee eck, Fri 27 Aug 13:03
I see the SNP`s accounts for the year ended 31 December 2020 were published yesterday with an unqualified report by the external auditors. They also revealed that Peter Murrell`s salary was just under £80.000 pa.
There is also over £1m in the bank as well, so no missing 600k as the swivel eyed Alba crowd claim.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Fri 27 Aug 17:49
Quote:
sadindiefreak, Fri 27 Aug 16:57
Quote:
wee eck, Fri 27 Aug 13:03
I see the SNP`s accounts for the year ended 31 December 2020 were published yesterday with an unqualified report by the external auditors. They also revealed that Peter Murrell`s salary was just under £80.000 pa.
There is also over £1m in the bank as well, so no missing 600k as the swivel eyed Alba crowd claim.
Oh dear you do hate your fellow indy supporters , SIF indeed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 27 Aug 17:59
Why the hate between Alba and SNP? They both want the same. The only difference I see is that Alba seem almost unelectable.
I'm disappointed not to see more of an independence push but Alba don't appear to have a plan either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 27 Aug 18:11
I think it says in the accounts that there is £260,565 in the bank. The £1m surplus included assets that the SNP have purchased.
The statement in the accounts says that all funds that have been donated with a specific requirement are earmarked for future spending which goes back to my point earlier about using ring fenced vs earmarked as they have very different connotations.
The £600k isn't in the account at the moment but if the donations were earmarked to be spent when required then the only requirement is to fulfil the obligation when it arises.
If the donor was told the money was going to be ring fenced then it should be segregated and only be spent on the specific things the donor requested.
I doubt every donation falls into the 2nd bucket there but the way the SNP have used ring fenced and earmarked could potentially cause them a problem.
There's an argument that if enough donor's could evidence they were donating the money with the specific expectation that the money would be ring fenced and not earmarked and the values of those donations exceeded the cash at the bank any time over the last few years, then it could be argued the SNP haven't met their obligations to the donor and ring fenced the money properly.
The police would then have to make a determination as to whether any of the claims the SNP acted fraudulently had any merit.
I'd be surprised if that scenario arises but even if they haven't acted fraudulently the optics aren't great. If future donations are being used to cover the existing donations then it starts to look like a bit of a ponzi scheme and they're going to have to make up the short fall at some point as those future donations may well have similar use conditions specified by the donor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Fri 27 Aug 18:13
Quote:
jake89, Fri 27 Aug 17:59
Why the hate between Alba and SNP? They both want the same. The only difference I see is that Alba seem almost unelectable.
I'm disappointed not to see more of an independence push but Alba don't appear to have a plan either.
Don't disagree with your comments Jake. I think having Salmond as the leader of Alba going forward isn't smart but both Alba and the SNP are lead by egotistical individuals who are both either viewed as sugar or s...e
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sadindiefreak
Date: Fri 27 Aug 18:25
Quote:
jake89, Fri 27 Aug 17:59
Why the hate between Alba and SNP? They both want the same. The only difference I see is that Alba seem almost unelectable.
I'm disappointed not to see more of an independence push but Alba don't appear to have a plan either.
My main issue with Alba is their Transphobic bigotry.
It's absolutely right to have questions around the reform of the GRA but they want to remove rights that trans people already have.
I want Independence to make Scotland a more equal and fair country.
Alba are quite prepared to lie and spread misinformation about what is proposed. Often using tropes that were previously directed at gay people to deny them their rights.
My daughter has a group of 14 friends who 13 of supported Independence before Alba turned up.
Because of their rhetoric around GRA reform only 3 of them would definitely still vote for Independence. We absolutely need that generation on board or we will lose.
Secretary of Alba Chris McEleny would like to see abortion banned but yet paints himself as a champion of womens rights.
I'm simply not prepared to let a bunch of bigots sabotage something I had dreamed of my whole life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Fri 27 Aug 19:20
Quote:
sadindiefreak, Fri 27 Aug 18:25
Quote:
jake89, Fri 27 Aug 17:59
Why the hate between Alba and SNP? They both want the same. The only difference I see is that Alba seem almost unelectable.
I'm disappointed not to see more of an independence push but Alba don't appear to have a plan either.
My main issue with Alba is their Transphobic bigotry.
It's absolutely right to have questions around the reform of the GRA but they want to remove rights that trans people already have.
I want Independence to make Scotland a more equal and fair country.
Alba are quite prepared to lie and spread misinformation about what is proposed. Often using tropes that were previously directed at gay people to deny them their rights.
My daughter has a group of 14 friends who 13 of supported Independence before Alba turned up.
Because of their rhetoric around GRA reform only 3 of them would definitely still vote for Independence. We absolutely need that generation on board or we will lose.
Secretary of Alba Chris McEleny would like to see abortion banned but yet paints himself as a champion of womens rights.
I'm simply not prepared to let a bunch of bigots sabotage something I had dreamed of my whole life.
That reads like a load of manufactured tosh tbh..blame blame blame...suppose the kids had no issues with Derek Mackay or the abuse Joanna Cherry experienced with no comment from the FM
Post Edited (Fri 27 Aug 19:27)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 27 Aug 19:39
"That reads like a load of manufactured tosh tbh..blame blame blame"
To be honest you could make the same argument about a lot of the links you post. Some of them are even trying to claim the SNP don't want independence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Fri 27 Aug 20:10
Quote:
londonparsfan, Fri 27 Aug 19:39
"That reads like a load of manufactured tosh tbh..blame blame blame"
To be honest you could make the same argument about a lot of the links you post. Some of them are even trying to claim the SNP don't want independence.
Here's a few reasons why people claim that
The SNP have had 7 mandates for Indy2 and have not actioned any of them.
No work has been done since 2014 to address the issues from that campaign which cost independence
Stating that the only route to Independence is the gold standard s30, really?
Brexit...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 27 Aug 20:31
So there's a difference of opinion on how to get there. Doesn't justify the claim that the SNP don't want independence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Fri 27 Aug 20:50
Quote:
londonparsfan, Fri 27 Aug 20:31
So there's a difference of opinion on how to get there. Doesn't justify the claim that the SNP don't want independence.
7 mandates , no work done on driving Independence etc that's enough for some to claim the SNP would be just as happy with devolution rather than Independence.
Let's face it MSP and MPs are raking it in and what actually are they doing ?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 27 Aug 21:14
I`m pretty sure there`s lots of work going on in the background, It would play into the unionists` hands if the SNP openly campaigned for independence while Covid is still an issue.
Whose idea was it to agree to Westminster having to grant permission for another referendum anyway?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Fri 27 Aug 22:01
Quote:
wee eck, Fri 27 Aug 21:14
I`m pretty sure there`s lots of work going on in the background, It would play into the unionists` hands if the SNP openly campaigned for independence while Covid is still an issue.
Whose idea was it to agree to Westminster having to grant permission for another referendum anyway?
I can assure you no work has been carried out by the SNP towards Independence since 2014. Independence was never mentioned once over a 5 year period at the NEC after the lost referendum.
Campaigning should never stop for independence especially after the EU referendum, the SNP should have pulled their MPs from Westminster and started campaigning for independence then rather than fighting for the UK to remain in the EU.
Nicola Sturgeon stated that only when Westminster grant the gold standard s30 would the SNP campaign for independence I think that was January last year. Hence why it won't be forthcoming unless Westminster is confident on winning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 27 Aug 22:04
Quote:
Tenruh, Fri 27 Aug 20:50
Quote:
londonparsfan, Fri 27 Aug 20:31
So there's a difference of opinion on how to get there. Doesn't justify the claim that the SNP don't want independence.
7 mandates , no work done on driving Independence etc that's enough for some to claim the SNP would be just as happy with devolution rather than Independence.
Let's face it MSP and MPs are raking it in and what actually are they doing ?
.
They're obviously running the country. Not very well in a lot of cases but they're not sat doing nothing (although the country would possibly be better off if a few of them did do nothing!).
I don't get this seven mandates stuff as well (well I do its another concocted narrative to rail against similar to SNP not wanting Independence and being more concerned about gender rights). How on earth were the SNP meant to press for Independence again so quickly after losing the 2014 vote? Even the polling at the time had the most popular timescale for another referendum at 10 years.
The other thing that a lot of Independence supporters seem to be blind to is that the most important thing to voters was the economy and we've currently got one of the worst deficits we've ever had. Kicking off another referendum with that as a backdrop is an open goal for Unionists.
It's all well and good pointing to previous surpluses when you're preaching to the converted but you've got to convince people who are in the middle ground that the economy is going to be ok otherwise its another vote down the pan. Sturgeon isn't daft and knows this and has used Covid as a convenient reason to delay seriously discussing another referendum. It's now in their manifesto and if they can host another referendum it'll be in line with the optimal 10 year gap and the Greens can support them in Parliament.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sat 28 Aug 05:52
Quote:
londonparsfan, Sat 28 Aug 02:00
Sorry I missed this: "I can assure you no work has been carried out by the SNP towards Independence since 2014".
I'm pretty sure this would qualify as work towards Independence:
https://www.gov.scot/publications/draft-independence-referendum-bill/documents/
Quite literally the legal framework has been drafted for another Referendum.
Check the date on that document, 6 weeks before the Scottish Parliament elections, part of the process to get elected , they know that stuff won't work going forward as they are now going to have to be more accountable.
When I say nothing has been done, literally nothing has been done to advance independence since 2014 . All the issues that failed the YES campaign remain, currency, pensions etc.
Should we be following the same course as the last time s30 Referendum let's face it if it didn't work the last time what do you think
the result will be the next time ?
Post Edited (Sat 28 Aug 06:14)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sat 28 Aug 07:11
It's not nothing though..
They're also formalising the super majority with the Greens and have a shared policy commitment to have a Referendum in this Parliament term.
I agree there's no point in repeating the mistakes from last time but you also wouldn't start proposing policies too far in advance for some things as you might well want to change your mind. I reckon the earliest you would want to start with some things would be around 2 years before the Referendum.
Working on the assumption that Sturgeon is the same as most politicians and would like to retain her position of power I'd be surprised if she did anything that reduced her chances of winning as another failed Referendum would come with either a resignation or a leadership challenge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Sat 28 Aug 13:13
Nicola Sturgeon would be reckless to fight a referendum she might lose, so I agree she has to prepare the groundwork. But so far as I am aware this is not being done in terms of the two issues mentioned which were issues last time round: currency and pensions. I accept that it might be a hostage to fortune to make commitments in the short term, but the arguments should be taking place now. What progress in terms of convincing the Scottish people on these matters has taken place since 2014?
As for The Greens, their support for Scottish Independence is worth little. If the Westminster Government made an offer to turn Scotland into a re-wilded medieval paradise complete with Lords, Barons and Serfs then most of the Greens would be cheerfully queueing up at the local well with their buckets.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 31 Aug 19:07
Apologies Sammer, I read your response and completely forgot to reply! I think the plans for pensions are on their way to being formalised. They've had some provisional proposals that would pitch pensions for an Indy Scotland at around the 66% of earnings marker I believe and now they're conducting a feasibility study as to whether its realistic.
The pensions argument is a bit more simple than the currency discussion IMO. At the risk of glossing over the complexities of pensions; for the majority of people it will come down to: is it better or worse for my pension in an Indy Scotland. For the vast majority that will be a binary choice and if the SNP go for their current proposal it would be an uplift for the majority in Scotland which would be a vote winner for those who could potentially be swayed by an argument on pensions.
The currency question is much more difficult. Some polling says that proposing to use the Euro would put some people off voting for Independence irrespective of the pros and cons of using the Euro.
Creating a Scottish currency has administrative challenges (which would be overcome but may not be plain sailing) but more importantly if the currency strengthens against other currencies there will be specific sectors that win and lose and conversely if the value depreicated then the winners and lovers would almost reverse. There are so many variables in relation to currency that whilst you're absolutely right to say its crucial, I think the SNP are deliberately sitting on the fence to gauge the following a bit closer to when a potential referendum may take place: opinion polls, economic factors, political factors, research on what would actually work best for Scotland and then put out a policy on currency a bit further down the line. Its a bit like the league around Christmas, a decent early run won't win you the league but a bad spell could be catastrophic to your ambitions. No point kicking off those discussions when there is more to lose than win potentially. Imo at least!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Tue 31 Aug 22:40
Cheers LPF,
The pension provision sounds like it would win support but it won`t prove much use if it`s given the `Corbyn treatment` by MSM. The SNP have to be on the front foot with this issue and ready for the flak which will inevitably come their way. Do we have the quality of speakers to make a forceful case to convince the electorate?
I appreciate your football analogy as regards the currency, so I`ll chuck one back myself. A currency in football terms equates to your credibility as a football club. Do you have the confidence of parents whose children are good enough to turn professional, of good quality players looking for a move, of coaches who see your club as a chance to show what they can do? And most important of all I suppose, do you have the confidence of your support base? Now the details can fluctuate as we have seen at DAC the last few weeks, but a well run club will generally command confidence over a period of time. Maybe the SNP has managed to do this since having control over Scottish finances for the past 15 years. I hope the international banking system thinks so too.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sat 4 Sep 07:15
@sammer I don't doubt you're right that there will be negative press but the only real line of attack will be: its too good to be true and how will it be funded. The uplift to the OECD average would be quite significant for most people.
There's a decent article on the proposals here of you haven't already seen them:
https://pensionersforindependence.scot/2019/10/14/snp-conference-state-pension-motion-passed-by-acclaim/
On the currency front I get your point and to be fair there was a plan in the Growth Report to use Sterling while they create an independent currency but I've never been entirely sure that's the option they'd push for. They certainly haven't been looking to put it front and center and IMO that's because any currency plan can be attacked from all angles.
@tenruh there's quite a lot wrong with that article but this bit is an absolute stoater:
"None of the policy issues, that hampered us in 2014 have been addressed. Where is our National Investment Bank that was going to be readied to become post independence our Central Bank?"
I actually had to read that twice as I'm not quite sure how you can miss the creation of a bank especially one that's already invested £200m in Scotland.
https://www.thebank.scot/
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/SC677431
I'd pointed out previously that a lot of the websites were essentially folk moaning that they weren't getting Indy as quickly as they would like but they're now actively making stuff up. I'm also not sure the plan was to turn that Bank into a Central Bank in an Indy Scotland. Whilst he's missing the creation of the Bank he does have a moan about the SNP delivering gender equality and hate crime Bills. Maybe if he spent less time moaning about those he might be able to follow what's going on (oh the irony!).
In terms of the Referendum Bill he states:
"We were told it would be ready before Parliament rose in April 2021 for the Holyrood Election. We now know that all work on the Bill was stopped by Nicola Sturgeon in March 2021. Another pledge broken, the independence can once again kicked down the street."
Wheres the Bill has been drafted:
https://www.gov.scot/publications/draft-independence-referendum-bill/
The commitment by the SG was for the publication of a draft Referendum Bill so why is he claiming its not been done? The use of the Bill is anytime over the next period of Parliament and the coalition between the SNP and Greens means its more than likely going to pass without change or certainly not any significant change. Surely he should know this? If he disagrees with that policy it's fine but why is he lying about what was promised and what has been delivered. The Bank and the Bill are both at the respective points they were proposed to be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sat 4 Sep 10:19
Quote:
londonparsfan, Sat 4 Sep 07:15
@sammer I don't doubt you're right that there will be negative press but the only real line of attack will be: its too good to be true and how will it be funded. The uplift to the OECD average would be quite significant for most people.
There's a decent article on the proposals here of you haven't already seen them:
https://pensionersforindependence.scot/2019/10/14/snp-conference-state-pension-motion-passed-by-acclaim/
On the currency front I get your point and to be fair there was a plan in the Growth Report to use Sterling while they create an independent currency but I've never been entirely sure that's the option they'd push for. They certainly haven't been looking to put it front and center and IMO that's because any currency plan can be attacked from all angles.
@tenruh there's quite a lot wrong with that article but this bit is an absolute stoater:
"None of the policy issues, that hampered us in 2014 have been addressed. Where is our National Investment Bank that was going to be readied to become post independence our Central Bank?"
I actually had to read that twice as I'm not quite sure how you can miss the creation of a bank especially one that's already invested £200m in Scotland.
https://www.thebank.scot/
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/SC677431
I'd pointed out previously that a lot of the websites were essentially folk moaning that they weren't getting Indy as quickly as they would like but they're now actively making stuff up. I'm also not sure the plan was to turn that Bank into a Central Bank in an Indy Scotland. Whilst he's missing the creation of the Bank he does have a moan about the SNP delivering gender equality and hate crime Bills. Maybe if he spent less time moaning about those he might be able to follow what's going on (oh the irony!).
In terms of the Referendum Bill he states:
"We were told it would be ready before Parliament rose in April 2021 for the Holyrood Election. We now know that all work on the Bill was stopped by Nicola Sturgeon in March 2021. Another pledge broken, the independence can once again kicked down the street."
Wheres the Bill has been drafted:
https://www.gov.scot/publications/draft-independence-referendum-bill/
The commitment by the SG was for the publication of a draft Referendum Bill so why is he claiming its not been done? The use of the Bill is anytime over the next period of Parliament and the coalition between the SNP and Greens means its more than likely going to pass without change or certainly not any significant change. Surely he should know this? If he disagrees with that policy it's fine but why is he lying about what was promised and what has been delivered. The Bank and the Bill are both at the respective points they were proposed to be at.
I think he accepts the referendum bill is still ongoing.
The famous Draft Referendum Bill is still going through the due process at Holyrood. This is the same Bill, that Nicola Sturgeon keeps promising but never delivering. Nicola has promised this so many times I think only her most devoted souls actually believe it even exists, and of course, the Editor and headline writers, at The National.
Regarding the Bank I suspect he's will aware of it and is referring to its development a bit like the Energy Company the SNP promised we'd have by the end of the last Parliament.
Post Edited (Sat 04 Sep 10:35)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sat 4 Sep 10:27
Deleted double post
Post Edited (Sat 04 Sep 10:29)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sat 4 Sep 14:48
I really don't think he does:
"Nicola has promised this so many times I think only her most devoted souls actually believe it even exists, and of course, the Editor and headline writers, at The National"
It's literally been drafted and doesn't really need to be passed until they're ready to kick off another Referendum.
On the bank point there's literally nothing in what he's written that indicates he thinks its in place. If it is in relation to its development then why didn't he say that and what realistically is he expecting the bank to do? Its mission is to make investment in the Scottish economy and they have invested £200m already.
The entire article is terrible.
You can literally go through it paragraph by paragraph and pick out the glaring flaws:
"An amendment to a resolution at the SNP Conference to debate using 2026 Holyrood as a Plebiscite Independence Election has been blocked by the conference committee. For the fourth year in a row, the Conference has been prevented from even discussing an independence Plan B."
"We know that Angus Brendan and Chris McEleny tried for several years to get a Plan B debated at Conference. Each and every time they tried, it was blocked by the conference committee. We also know that Chris was shouted down and booed at SNP Conference because he was wanting the party to hold a debate on Independence. If as a member and voter that wasn’t a clue to you then there really is no hope for you!
Here are some uncomfortable realities for those that believe the almost weekly National headline regarding an imminent referendum is credible. There has been absolutely zero preparations made to hold an Independence referendum in the foreseeable future. I think Angus Brendan and this amendment being blocked should be enough to tell everybody the SNP is not planning any movement on Independence anytime soon."
Why does he call the Brendan amendment a "Plan B" and not what it really is: UDI. The fact the SNP has blocked the amendment tells you nothing about Independence other than they aren't led by complete rockets. UDI is a complete shambles of an idea and its obvious the SNP shouldn't be discussing it. Virtually nobody wants UDI and it wouldn't be recognised internationally but it doesn't stop these space cadets from thinking they've got the right to enforce their view on an entire country because its what they want.
The guys even goes on to admit it:
"I should say here and now, I never want us to hold a referendum. I can almost guarantee we would lose it"
If the Tories treated the UK like that this forum would be in meltdown but we're expected by some to unite with these guys because we both want Independence. It's essentially the Scottish equivalent of the UKIP fringe of the Brexit movement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sat 4 Sep 15:31
That's some rant to be having about another individuals thoughts on our leading Independence party and their lack of success in driving Independence forward.
You seem to be very knowledgeable re all things SNP and remind me of a fellow poster who recently had a pop at an individual you've just had a go at yourself..coincidence .
Anyway do have a look at the link below and in particular the comments by Shocked at 09.55 2nd paragraph.
https://wingsoverscotland.com/as-it-is-and-when-it-was/
Post Edited (Sat 04 Sep 15:52)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Sat 4 Sep 15:36
Ripped apart haha
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sat 4 Sep 16:08
I'm not very knowledgeable about the SNP at all but the article is that badly written its really not difficult to take it apart. It's filled with lies or misrepresentations.
And yeah I will have a rant at people pushing for UDI in exactly the same way I would have a pop at people that say there shouldn't ever be another Referendum as its different cheeks of the same backside. I hate it when folk try and inflict their point of view on other people. If we can't convince enough people to vote for Independence then we don't deserve to have Independence. The solution is not to arbitrarily decide we should be Independent and ignore the will of the majority of the people.
I've genuinely got no idea who the other poster is on here that you're referencing but there's little support for UDI so I'm not surprised folk have been having a pop.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sat 4 Sep 17:33
Well the only way you'll get the s30 option is if the tories feel they have a cast iron guarantee of winning. Let's face it there's no chance of independence if its down to the MSM the tories and money to fund a campaign.
What's the other options ? Cause let's face it do the same as the last time will get the same result.
Post Edited (Sat 04 Sep 17:36)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sat 4 Sep 18:04
I do agree with you that the Conservatives are most likely to agree to a S30 order when the timing suits them the best which is obviously going to be when they believe they have the best chance of winning.
I don't think they can swerve another Referendum forever though. The SNP will have to be clever in how they go about it which is why I'm not desperate to see them rush into things. I'd rather they got the Referendum agreed to before they finalised their position on a few key areas as it will hopefully give them a platform to build on. If they had rock solid plans on everything I think the Conservatives would be less likely to grant the S30 and I don't think there would ever be a big enough Yes majority that declaring UDI would ever be viable especially if we want it to be recognised globally.
I might be talking out of my hoop as I have nothing to back this up but in essence I think we might have to slip back in the polls again and then regain the momentum once the Referendum is agreed to. The key will be to make sure we don't start from too far off the pace and that the policy areas that didn't get enough acceptance last time are better constructed and argued next time round.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sat 4 Sep 18:35
So is the s30 the only legal option?
As far as I'm concerned if a country wants to be independent the country cannot ask permission from their oppressors to gain it. They surely have to first ask for the s30 to start the process but if refused they have to have a back up plan .Any idea what that would legally be ? Or are we going to be dictated to by the other member of the union.
You better believe if England wanted independence from Scotland it would have it by Xmas
Post Edited (Sun 05 Sep 09:43)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Malcolm Canmore
Date: Tue 7 Sep 19:17
The notes in the accounts relating to the Referendum Appeal do have an air of specious nonsense about them. I give you £100 “to buy your kids some new shoes”. You go out and spend £100 on Buckfast but tell me not to worry because you have earmarked £100 and one day in the future you will get round to spending £100 on kids’ shoes and everything is sorted.
My dog eats meat
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 18 Aug 16:37
`The National` is reporting that the Electoral Commission has published the SNP`s accounts for the year ended 31 December 2021. They show that at that date a total of £740,822 had been raised `through the independence-related appeals`. Expenditure of £253,335 had been set against this income and the remaining balance of £487,487 had been `earmarked for independence-related campaigning`. The income and expenditure figures are cumulative and £51,760 of the expenditure figure had been spent in 2020 and £201,575 in 2021. A spokesman was quoted as saying that funds had been spent on extensive research into public attitudes to independence and producing campaign materials such as one million pro-independence newspapers delivered to households across the country.
Does this answer all these allegations of misappropriation of funds raised for independence campaigning? I wonder if any unionist media outlets have reported this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Thu 18 Aug 21:08
I think questions remain, wee eck.
From memory, the original allegations were that money, which had been donated in the belief that it was to be ring-fenced for spending in a second independence referendum campaign, had actually been spent in advance of any second referendum being called.
At the same time there were a number of resignations from various committees associated with the production of the accounts.
Various excuses were advanced at the time – the monies were earmarked not ring-fenced, they were used as part of overall campaigning, they were “woven through the accounts”, the accounts had not been qualified so everything must be tickety-boo, and so on. It looks like the excuses have been firmed up, and there was no ring-fencing after all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 18 Aug 21:50
If the Electoral Commission accepted the accounts I would imagine they were in order.
I don`t think `ring-fenced` is an accounting term but `earmarked` is.
Post Edited (Thu 18 Aug 23:17)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Fri 19 Aug 06:51
[Url]https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-mess-were-in/[\url]
Interesting article regarding some of the characters. Membership and finances of our national party.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBA
Date: Fri 19 Aug 13:06
Quote:
Tenruh, Fri 19 Aug 06:51
https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-mess-were-in/
Interesting article regarding some of the characters. Membership and finances of our national party.
The fountain of knowledge Wings Over Scotland. I`ll pass.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Fri 19 Aug 17:25
Quote:
DBA, Fri 19 Aug 13:06
Quote:
Tenruh, Fri 19 Aug 06:51
https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-mess-were-in/
Interesting article regarding some of the characters. Membership and finances of our national party.
The fountain of knowledge Wings Over Scotland. I`ll pass.
Of course your going to pass, you only want to read happy stories with happy endings.
Post Edited (Fri 19 Aug 19:08)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Sat 20 Aug 01:31
Wings is a glorified pihs posting site. Absolute Sun tier source
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sat 20 Aug 06:58
Quote:
Andrew283, Sat 20 Aug 01:31
Wings is a glorified pihs posting site. Absolute Sun tier source
Have a read at the article and come back and give me examples where he has backed up his comments/observations with misinformation.
Typical comment on this forum. Would appreciate if you could point out the inaccuracies /misinformation in the article.
Post Edited (Sat 20 Aug 07:10)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sadindiefreak
Date: Sat 20 Aug 10:43
Quote:
Tenruh, Sat 20 Aug 06:58
Quote:
Andrew283, Sat 20 Aug 01:31
Wings is a glorified pihs posting site. Absolute Sun tier source
Have a read at the article and come back and give me examples where he has backed up his comments/observations with misinformation.
Typical comment on this forum. Would appreciate if you could point out the inaccuracies /misinformation in the article.
WTAF are you posting here. This thread is about SNP finances.
The link you posted has a brief mention of finances at the end but otherwise is a totally bigoted uninformed attack on Trans people.
The vast majority of people in Scotland support the Gender Reform Act.
What bigots like Wings and the Alba party want is to strip away rights that Trans people already have.
You clowns are going to lose us Indyref2.
The main reason people want independence is that they want us to have a fairer more equal society.
If undecided folk see the bigotry spewing from supposed Independence supporters on an issue that the majority support they are certainly going to be put off the idea of Independence as it looks like nothing will change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sat 20 Aug 11:58
Quote:
sadindiefreak, Sat 20 Aug 10:43
Quote:
Tenruh, Sat 20 Aug 06:58
Quote:
Andrew283, Sat 20 Aug 01:31
Wings is a glorified pihs posting site. Absolute Sun tier source
Have a read at the article and come back and give me examples where he has backed up his comments/observations with misinformation.
Typical comment on this forum. Would appreciate if you could point out the inaccuracies /misinformation in the article.
WTAF are you posting here. This thread is about SNP finances.
The link you posted has a brief mention of finances at the end but otherwise is a totally bigoted uninformed attack on Trans people.
The vast majority of people in Scotland support the Gender Reform Act.
What bigots like Wings and the Alba party want is to strip away rights that Trans people already have.
You clowns are going to lose us Indyref2.
The main reason people want independence is that they want us to have a fairer more equal society.
If undecided folk see the bigotry spewing from supposed Independence supporters on an issue that the majority support they are certainly going to be put off the idea of Independence as it looks like nothing will change.
And there lies the problem its the NuSNP way or the high way.
Has it never occurred to you that when a party has been corrupted by State Interference what your left with is a divided movement .
Why would 9 individuals closely allied to the leader of the SNP tell a pack of lies in court to get a fellow independence supporter jailed?
How did that come about , Why Indeed .
The SNP are the route cause of the split , they are the clowns not the grassroots.
https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2022/08/15/alex-salmond-asks-why/
Post Edited (Sat 20 Aug 12:04)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sadindiefreak
Date: Sat 20 Aug 12:17
Quote:
Tenruh, Sat 20 Aug 11:58
Quote:
sadindiefreak, Sat 20 Aug 10:43
Quote:
Tenruh, Sat 20 Aug 06:58
Quote:
Andrew283, Sat 20 Aug 01:31
Wings is a glorified pihs posting site. Absolute Sun tier source
Have a read at the article and come back and give me examples where he has backed up his comments/observations with misinformation.
Typical comment on this forum. Would appreciate if you could point out the inaccuracies /misinformation in the article.
WTAF are you posting here. This thread is about SNP finances.
The link you posted has a brief mention of finances at the end but otherwise is a totally bigoted uninformed attack on Trans people.
The vast majority of people in Scotland support the Gender Reform Act.
What bigots like Wings and the Alba party want is to strip away rights that Trans people already have.
You clowns are going to lose us Indyref2.
The main reason people want independence is that they want us to have a fairer more equal society.
If undecided folk see the bigotry spewing from supposed Independence supporters on an issue that the majority support they are certainly going to be put off the idea of Independence as it looks like nothing will change.
And there lies the problem its the NuSNP way or the high way.
Has it never occurred to you that when a party has been corrupted by State Interference what your left with is a divided movement .
Why would 9 individuals closely allied to the leader of the SNP tell a pack of lies in court to get a fellow independence supporter jailed?
How did that come about , Why Indeed .
The SNP are the route cause of the split , they are the clowns not the grassroots.
https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2022/08/15/alex-salmond-asks-why/
They didn`t tell a pack of lies though.
Salmond lawyer stated he was "a creep but not a criminal"
He for 100% was inappropriate with those women. To an extent that if I acted like that in my workplace I would be sacked.
Was it worthy of prosecution? Perhaps not but neither the government or the women made that decision it was the CPS.
It really hurts as he was a hero of mine but Alex Salmond abused his position to sexually harass these women. It was decided by a jury it wasn`t bad enough for a criminal conviction but I certainly wouldn`t leave my daughter alone with the creep.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sat 20 Aug 13:38
Quote:
sadindiefreak, Sat 20 Aug 12:17
Quote:
Tenruh, Sat 20 Aug 11:58
Quote:
sadindiefreak, Sat 20 Aug 10:43
Quote:
Tenruh, Sat 20 Aug 06:58
Quote:
Andrew283, Sat 20 Aug 01:31
Wings is a glorified pihs posting site. Absolute Sun tier source
Have a read at the article and come back and give me examples where he has backed up his comments/observations with misinformation.
Typical comment on this forum. Would appreciate if you could point out the inaccuracies /misinformation in the article.
WTAF are you posting here. This thread is about SNP finances.
The link you posted has a brief mention of finances at the end but otherwise is a totally bigoted uninformed attack on Trans people.
The vast majority of people in Scotland support the Gender Reform Act.
What bigots like Wings and the Alba party want is to strip away rights that Trans people already have.
You clowns are going to lose us Indyref2.
The main reason people want independence is that they want us to have a fairer more equal society.
If undecided folk see the bigotry spewing from supposed Independence supporters on an issue that the majority support they are certainly going to be put off the idea of Independence as it looks like nothing will change.
And there lies the problem its the NuSNP way or the high way.
Has it never occurred to you that when a party has been corrupted by State Interference what your left with is a divided movement .
Why would 9 individuals closely allied to the leader of the SNP tell a pack of lies in court to get a fellow independence supporter jailed?
How did that come about , Why Indeed .
The SNP are the route cause of the split , they are the clowns not the grassroots.
https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2022/08/15/alex-salmond-asks-why/
They didn`t tell a pack of lies though.
Salmond lawyer stated he was "a creep but not a criminal"
He for 100% was inappropriate with those women. To an extent that if I acted like that in my workplace I would be sacked.
Was it worthy of prosecution? Perhaps not but neither the government or the women made that decision it was the CPS.
It really hurts as he was a hero of mine but Alex Salmond abused his position to sexually harass these women. It was decided by a jury it wasn`t bad enough for a criminal conviction but I certainly wouldn`t leave my daughter alone with the creep.
Well that`s certainly a statement.
And you actually think it`s everyone else`s fault for the failure of Indy2 other than the nuSNP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBA
Date: Sat 20 Aug 14:48
What`s the nuSNP patter? It`s honking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sat 20 Aug 19:43
Quote:
Tenruh, Sat 20 Aug 11:58
Quote:
sadindiefreak, Sat 20 Aug 10:43
Quote:
Tenruh, Sat 20 Aug 06:58
Quote:
Andrew283, Sat 20 Aug 01:31
Wings is a glorified pihs posting site. Absolute Sun tier source
Have a read at the article and come back and give me examples where he has backed up his comments/observations with misinformation.
Typical comment on this forum. Would appreciate if you could point out the inaccuracies /misinformation in the article.
WTAF are you posting here. This thread is about SNP finances.
The link you posted has a brief mention of finances at the end but otherwise is a totally bigoted uninformed attack on Trans people.
The vast majority of people in Scotland support the Gender Reform Act.
What bigots like Wings and the Alba party want is to strip away rights that Trans people already have.
You clowns are going to lose us Indyref2.
The main reason people want independence is that they want us to have a fairer more equal society.
If undecided folk see the bigotry spewing from supposed Independence supporters on an issue that the majority support they are certainly going to be put off the idea of Independence as it looks like nothing will change.
And there lies the problem its the NuSNP way or the high way.
Has it never occurred to you that when a party has been corrupted by State Interference what your left with is a divided movement .
Why would 9 individuals closely allied to the leader of the SNP tell a pack of lies in court to get a fellow independence supporter jailed?
How did that come about , Why Indeed .
The SNP are the route cause of the split , they are the clowns not the grassroots.
https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2022/08/15/alex-salmond-asks-why/
There isn`t really much of a split. You can see that from the election results - Alba got spanked senseless at both the National and Local elections and even Salmond bottled standing (or possibly had the sense not to stand). If the grass roots really had split the election results would be different. A few blogs aimed at the Scottish equivalent of UKIP doesn`t really change that. It`s embarrassing seeing those morons attached to the independence movement but you can`t really help that. Those websites are an echo chamber of a relatively small number of people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sat 20 Aug 21:03
Quote:
londonparsfan, Sat 20 Aug 19:43
Quote:
Tenruh, Sat 20 Aug 11:58
Quote:
sadindiefreak, Sat 20 Aug 10:43
Quote:
Tenruh, Sat 20 Aug 06:58
Quote:
Andrew283, Sat 20 Aug 01:31
Wings is a glorified pihs posting site. Absolute Sun tier source
Have a read at the article and come back and give me examples where he has backed up his comments/observations with misinformation.
Typical comment on this forum. Would appreciate if you could point out the inaccuracies /misinformation in the article.
WTAF are you posting here. This thread is about SNP finances.
The link you posted has a brief mention of finances at the end but otherwise is a totally bigoted uninformed attack on Trans people.
The vast majority of people in Scotland support the Gender Reform Act.
What bigots like Wings and the Alba party want is to strip away rights that Trans people already have.
You clowns are going to lose us Indyref2.
The main reason people want independence is that they want us to have a fairer more equal society.
If undecided folk see the bigotry spewing from supposed Independence supporters on an issue that the majority support they are certainly going to be put off the idea of Independence as it looks like nothing will change.
And there lies the problem its the NuSNP way or the high way.
Has it never occurred to you that when a party has been corrupted by State Interference what your left with is a divided movement .
Why would 9 individuals closely allied to the leader of the SNP tell a pack of lies in court to get a fellow independence supporter jailed?
How did that come about , Why Indeed .
The SNP are the route cause of the split , they are the clowns not the grassroots.
https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2022/08/15/alex-salmond-asks-why/
There isn`t really much of a split. You can see that from the election results - Alba got spanked senseless at both the National and Local elections and even Salmond bottled standing (or possibly had the sense not to stand). If the grass roots really had split the election results would be different. A few blogs aimed at the Scottish equivalent of UKIP doesn`t really change that. It`s embarrassing seeing those morons attached to the independence movement but you can`t really help that. Those websites are an echo chamber of a relatively small number of people.
Your comments are absolutely correct, Alba will never replace the NuSNP but they can put pressure on them to waken up and forget their inflated salaries and fight to break us free of the situation we are presently in.
P.s. most of the morons you refer to are ex SNP members who see the corruption which has taken place.
Post Edited (Sat 20 Aug 21:05)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sat 20 Aug 23:50
Seeking genuinely clarity - who/what is "NuSNP"?
I`d expect the SNP have dodgy dealings or "creative accounting" in the same way all these parties will. They`re all shady. Voting is really based on who is the least bad rather than the best. That`s if you`re allowed an opinion. Most will vote for whoever the media tells them to. They`re not stupid people. All it took to get rid of Ed Milliband, who was and is a fantastic politician, was a photo of him awkwardly eating a bacon sandwich. They made him out to be a gawky weirdo when he`s really a solid politician of pretty high intellect. Instead we get morons like Johnson and, in the near future, Truss!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sun 21 Aug 01:04
Quote:
jake89, Sat 20 Aug 23:50
Seeking genuinely clarity - who/what is "NuSNP"?
I`d expect the SNP have dodgy dealings or "creative accounting" in the same way all these parties will. They`re all shady. Voting is really based on who is the least bad rather than the best. That`s if you`re allowed an opinion. Most will vote for whoever the media tells them to. They`re not stupid people. All it took to get rid of Ed Milliband, who was and is a fantastic politician, was a photo of him awkwardly eating a bacon sandwich. They made him out to be a gawky weirdo when he`s really a solid politician of pretty high intellect. Instead we get Johnson and, in the near future, Truss!
The SNP NEC prior to 2014 had been run by elect members.
Since Sturgeons time the NEC has been taken over by her installing unelected fringe groups and close allies . Thus removing the power from the members.
NuSturgeonNastyParty
Post Edited (Sun 21 Aug 07:01)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sun 21 Aug 12:13
Quote:
Tenruh, Sat 20 Aug 21:03
Quote:
londonparsfan, Sat 20 Aug 19:43
Quote:
Tenruh, Sat 20 Aug 11:58
Quote:
sadindiefreak, Sat 20 Aug 10:43
Quote:
Tenruh, Sat 20 Aug 06:58
Quote:
Andrew283, Sat 20 Aug 01:31
Wings is a glorified pihs posting site. Absolute Sun tier source
Have a read at the article and come back and give me examples where he has backed up his comments/observations with misinformation.
Typical comment on this forum. Would appreciate if you could point out the inaccuracies /misinformation in the article.
WTAF are you posting here. This thread is about SNP finances.
The link you posted has a brief mention of finances at the end but otherwise is a totally bigoted uninformed attack on Trans people.
The vast majority of people in Scotland support the Gender Reform Act.
What bigots like Wings and the Alba party want is to strip away rights that Trans people already have.
You clowns are going to lose us Indyref2.
The main reason people want independence is that they want us to have a fairer more equal society.
If undecided folk see the bigotry spewing from supposed Independence supporters on an issue that the majority support they are certainly going to be put off the idea of Independence as it looks like nothing will change.
And there lies the problem its the NuSNP way or the high way.
Has it never occurred to you that when a party has been corrupted by State Interference what your left with is a divided movement .
Why would 9 individuals closely allied to the leader of the SNP tell a pack of lies in court to get a fellow independence supporter jailed?
How did that come about , Why Indeed .
The SNP are the route cause of the split , they are the clowns not the grassroots.
https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2022/08/15/alex-salmond-asks-why/
There isn`t really much of a split. You can see that from the election results - Alba got spanked senseless at both the National and Local elections and even Salmond bottled standing (or possibly had the sense not to stand). If the grass roots really had split the election results would be different. A few blogs aimed at the Scottish equivalent of UKIP doesn`t really change that. It`s embarrassing seeing those morons attached to the independence movement but you can`t really help that. Those websites are an echo chamber of a relatively small number of people.
Your comments are absolutely correct, Alba will never replace the NuSNP but they can put pressure on them to waken up and forget their inflated salaries and fight to break us free of the situation we are presently in.
P.s. most of the morons you refer to are ex SNP members who see the corruption which has taken place.
For the most part they`re not doing that they`re banging on about Trans people. Stu Campbell is about having a melt down on Wings and it`s cringy to say the least. Still can`t quite believe he`s the guy that brought so much enjoyment to people`s lives.
The ex SNP members are mostly out of the party as they were the Neverendum types that would rather see the SNP rush into declaring another Referendum or even worse try and declare UDI or were forever banging on about Trans people or were allies of Salmond`s. They hold very little sway with the majority of people for those reasons but have a die hard band of followers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: red-star-par
Date: Sun 21 Aug 16:29
I did once vote ALBA as I thought it was a good way of getting some more pro-independence representation, but the more I find out about them, the more I realise they are actually harming the independence cause. It wouldn`t surprise me if they have been infiltrated by MI5 to try and split the vote, they have certainly not helped so far. I`ll stick to the Greens for my second vote in future
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sun 21 Aug 19:50
Got to agree, just as the yoons have got together and taken over a few of the Council’s in the recent elections your now going to see them repeating the process in forthcoming elections.
It`s up to the SNP to counter it with their own strategy to outwit the competition, with the Greens intending to stand candidates in all constituences it looks like interesting times ahead.
Obviously Alba won`t be able to compete for any seats.
Post Edited (Sun 21 Aug 19:50)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Wed 24 Aug 15:31
If the Electoral Commission accepted the accounts I would imagine they were in order.
I don`t think `ring-fenced` is an accounting term but `earmarked` is.
TBH, the Electoral Commission probably just checked they were signed and dated in the right places, and not overdue, put a copy (after redaction) on their website, then filed them.
Have you a source for your latter comment, wee eck? Maybe if accountants don’t know the term “ring-fencing” we can ignore what they have to say on the matter.
Nevertheless, it’s clear that much of the money raised has been spent. The accounts say “we will ensure that an amount equivalent to the sums raised from these appeals will go directly to our work to secure a referendum and win independence”
I imagine some of these donations were made in the belief that they would be held separately and specifically spent during a second referendum campaign and not on every day matters, or even campaigning. Sounds like they have gone into reverse gear a bit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Wed 24 Aug 16:24
What`s the basis of your knowledge of the modus operandi of the Electoral Commission?
I was a practising CA for over 40 years and never came across `ring-fenced funds` as a defined term but do recall `ear-marked funds` and `restricted funds`. Anything `ring-fenced` would fall into these categories.
As I said, £740,822 had been raised by 31/12/21 and £487,487 was unspent at that date. I think that`s about 66%. Are you suggesting that`s suspicious?
You question the authority of my opinions yet you use words like `probably` and `I imagine`.
Like a lot of SNP `scandals` this seems to be a storm in a teacup. Why have the MSM gone quiet on it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Wed 24 Aug 16:35
Quote:
McCaig`s Tower, Wed 24 Aug 15:31
If the Electoral Commission accepted the accounts I would imagine they were in order.
I don`t think `ring-fenced` is an accounting term but `earmarked` is.
TBH, the Electoral Commission probably just checked they were signed and dated in the right places, and not overdue, put a copy (after redaction) on their website, then filed them.
Have you a source for your latter comment, wee eck? Maybe if accountants don’t know the term “ring-fencing” we can ignore what they have to say on the matter.
Nevertheless, it’s clear that much of the money raised has been spent. The accounts say “we will ensure that an amount equivalent to the sums raised from these appeals will go directly to our work to secure a referendum and win independence”
I imagine some of these donations were made in the belief that they would be held separately and specifically spent during a second referendum campaign and not on every day matters, or even campaigning. Sounds like they have gone into reverse gear a bit.
The funds raised should have been ringfenced as it wasn`t just SNP members who contributed. Therefore any monies spent should be accounted for.
It`s Taking Police Scotland a fair while to report back their findings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Thu 25 Aug 13:28
Quote:
wee eck, Wed 24 Aug 16:24
What`s the basis of your knowledge of the modus operandi of the Electoral Commission?
I was a practising CA for over 40 years and never came across `ring-fenced funds` as a defined term but do recall `ear-marked funds` and `restricted funds`. Anything `ring-fenced` would fall into these categories.
As I said, £740,822 had been raised by 31/12/21 and £487,487 was unspent at that date. I think that`s about 66%. Are you suggesting that`s suspicious?
You question the authority of my opinions yet you use words like `probably` and `I imagine`.
Like a lot of SNP `scandals` this seems to be a storm in a teacup. Why have the MSM gone quiet on it?
The SNP `scandals` are also generally drops in the water compared to the corruption down south. I`d be delighted to ditch them for a true left wing party once we get Indy though
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Thu 25 Aug 14:00
“once we get Indy though”
As much chance as me winning Strictly partnering Claudia Winkleperson…
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Thu 25 Aug 14:30
Quote:
Parboiled, Thu 25 Aug 14:00
“once we get Indy though”
As much chance as me winning Strictly partnering Claudia Winkleperson…
Fine collection of straws you have there
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 25 Aug 17:16
The press will decide Scotland`s fate. Already saying "Nicola Sturgeon" or "The SNP" when they mean "The Scottish Government".
The SNP are a shambles but I`d point Scottish Labour and the Conservative and Unionist party towards the glass houses they live in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Fri 26 Aug 15:18
Wee eck
I’ve no knowledge of the modus operandi of the Electoral Commission – I’m just speculating since they don’t look seem very proactive. (Please feel free to share any personal experience). I do remember the SFA sleeping on the job when Rangers were filing accounts showing all sorts of problems, but that is another story.
I wasn’t aware that you were a CA wee eck This is excellent! Presumably you have valuable expertise that can shed light on the matter.
How are the donations accounted for? Is it as simple as they come in as “Income” under donations, are spent under “Expenditure” and are held as assets in the interim?
As stated, the issue is that it was expected that c £600k had been raised, and that this money would be, if not held separately in a different fund, separately identifiable, probably in a bank account (possibly accruing interest) and that this money would remain untouched until such time as there were a 2nd independence referendum, at which point the money would be released for campaigning. However, it appears 34% of it has been spent.
As to why the MSM is covering the story in the way it is, again I’d have to speculate, (but then this is a football forum), I’d imagine that a) they did cover it b) there’s not much new (the Police investigation is still ongoing) and c) they’re either on holiday or busy covering other stories.
As to things being worse in England, I’ve always found this seeming tolerance to things that should be completely unacceptable a bit bizarre. It’s like Hearts fans being happy to finish second bottom as long as Hibs are relegated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 26 Aug 15:57
The accounts, which have been independently audited, are available on the Electoral Commission`s website. There are about 49 pages and I have neither the time nor the inclination to trawl through them to answer your questions but here is an extract regarding the basis of preparation :-
`The Scottish National Party is not incorporated in law and thus not bound by the Companies Act 2006. The Party is a Political Party and is required to prepare financial statements in accordance with the Political Parties, Elections and Referendum Act 2000 (‘PPERA’). The address of the
registered office of the Party is Gordon Lamb House, 3 Jackson`s Entry, Edinburgh, EH8 8PJ.
The financial statements have been prepared in accordance with applicable accounting standards including Financial Reporting Standard 102 the Financial Reporting Standard Applicable in the UK and Republic of Ireland (FRS 102). The financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis under the historical cost convention. The financial statements are in accordance with the guidance issued by the Electoral Commission. The disclosure requirements of section 1A of FRS 102 have been applied other than where additional disclosure is required by the guidance issued by the Electoral Commission or is required to show a true and fair view.`
That suggests to me that the EC is quite proactive regarding the production of acceptable accounts. I`m afraid that`s all the help I`m prepared to give. Any additional work would incur a fee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: dafc
Date: Tue 30 Aug 00:28
SNP only last year awarded a £43m contract to a private rubbish collection firmto collect her rubbish, taxpayers money £43m to collect rubbish and she is talking about councils lowest earners and no more money left.
I wonder who In the SNP has connections with this private business? Must be too good for her to get it done privately rather than use same
Resources as everyone else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Tue 30 Aug 11:54
Quote:
dafc, Tue 30 Aug 00:28
SNP only last year awarded a £43m contract to a private rubbish collection firmto collect her rubbish, taxpayers money £43m to collect rubbish and she is talking about councils lowest earners and no more money left.
I wonder who In the SNP has connections with this private business? Must be too good for her to get it done privately rather than use same
Resources as everyone else.
Go do tell me the story of Michelle Mone and the £200m please.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Tue 30 Aug 22:42
Quote:
dafc, Tue 30 Aug 00:28
SNP only last year awarded a £43m contract to a private rubbish collection firmto collect her rubbish, taxpayers money £43m to collect rubbish and she is talking about councils lowest earners and no more money left.
I wonder who In the SNP has connections with this private business? Must be too good for her to get it done privately rather than use same
Resources as everyone else.
I`m sure there`s a reason not to use the Edinburgh Council trade waste service. The main one probably being that there isn`t one 🤦♂️
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Wed 31 Aug 06:31
Is it confy waste being collected as well? That’s normally done privately anyway
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Wed 31 Aug 07:33
Quote:
DBP, Wed 31 Aug 06:31
Is it confy waste being collected as well? That’s normally done privately anyway
Contact the Head of Fictional Services and they will confirm that they can offer that service for the princely sum of two (glass) bottles of Irn Bru and a 12 pack of mixed doughnuts from Krispy Kreme.
|
|
|
|
|
|
