View Full Version : SNP nonsense
Peevemor
16-06-2021, 05:33 AM
It won't need a 'smoking gun' to bring down the snp. It will be snp sameness, lameless and jadedness that will bring them down. The people that vote for the snp want change as in the Daniel Morgan report that shames the police freemasons and other such elitist blackballing organisations. What are the snp going to do about it?That post is all over the shop.
lapsedhibee
16-06-2021, 05:39 AM
That post is all over the shop.
Perfectly clear that the SNP will have failed if they allow corruption in The Met to continue. :agree:
Ozyhibby
16-06-2021, 05:47 AM
Perfectly clear that the SNP will have failed if they allow corruption in The Met to continue. :agree:
Sturgeon should be ashamed Cressida Dick is still in post.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hiber-nation
16-06-2021, 05:56 AM
Its sad to see not a single response from snp fandans. They don't seem to have any expectations post their wished for goal and will settle for anything it seems. Really mental considering. They don't seem to care what Scotland would be post independence and what it would look like afterwards. Crazy maybe.
'Mon Scottish Labour.
Hibrandenburg
16-06-2021, 06:18 AM
Sturgeon should be ashamed Cressida Dick is still in post.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
She knew there were icebergs out there, why did she still let the Titanic sail? Questions need to be asked.
degenerated
16-06-2021, 06:28 AM
Perfectly clear that the SNP will have failed if they allow corruption in The Met to continue. :agree:Cool, that's saved me digging out the old enigma machine. :greengrin
Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk
What question has he or anyone else on the so far non-story you brought up deflected?
The response to my PHS question said it was probably no different to PHE. I dont see how thats relevant and even if its true why should Scotland follow poor practice in England?
I applied it across the board. I have voted SNP once in ma puff, so I've very little loyalty to them.
I'll repeat- if there is any fire to the smoke surrounding contracts in Scotland, prosecute the people involved.
If I've given examples of the Tory wrongdoing it because they are in the public domain and the courts have given their decision.
If there is any evidence of the SNP doing similar, let's see it.
Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk
To the best of my recollection I have never raised or commented on anything to do with contracts awarded by the SNP and so not sure why you drew me in to your post. I havent seen anything similar about the SNP and dont like some of what the Tories have been up to.
Good question. I know the goal-posts have been moved around so much in that political working environment that they would just say something like " that post no longer exists and the post-holder has moved" or some-such bullcrap.
When Edinburgh Council went through the whole statutory repairs scandal a few years ago "post-holders" were moved around and that was given as an excuse to allow people off with fraud and thieving.
Fraud and thieving sounds about right.
(BTW the chances of anyone being charged is nil, I do realise that)
Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk
A couple of council officials got moved around to jail.
A couple of council officials got moved around to jail.But zero councillors.
Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk
To the best of my recollection I have never raised or commented on anything to do with contracts awarded by the SNP and so not sure why you drew me in to your post. I havent seen anything similar about the SNP and dont like some of what the Tories have been up to.Sorry Skol, probably cross purposes.
I've put systems in place so that lessons are learned and to ensure this type of thing never happens again.
Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk
Moulin Yarns
16-06-2021, 08:07 AM
Show us something solid then. Prove us wrong.
It was behind a paywall in the times. That's all you need to know that the SNP are at it. 😉
Moulin Yarns
16-06-2021, 08:12 AM
Simply being legally obliged to state membership of such organisations would be a monumental kick start to the genesis of outlawing unaccountable blacklisting of the 'plebs' and a big healthy kick in the baws to snobbish elitism that exists within Scottish hierarchy.
I don't get this lumping of being in a union with freemasonry!
Trade unions are there to protect workers rights. I was in unison, my wife has been in the eis and usdaw, why should that prevent us from standing for election?
Peevemor
16-06-2021, 08:15 AM
But zero councillors.
Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk
I can't remember the details, but was there any suggestion that councillors were involved in awarding the statutory repair contracts?
I can't remember the details, but was there any suggestion that councillors were involved in awarding the statutory repair contracts?I cant remember the details either but it was shown they couldn't have carried out the corruption without councillors being involved. The name Anderson springs to mind.
Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk
Moulin Yarns
16-06-2021, 08:25 AM
I cant remember the details either but it was shown they couldn't have carried out the corruption without councillors being involved. The name Anderson springs to mind.
Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk
In most cases councillors either take the advice of council officers or disagree with it. Council officers write reports with recommendations that Councillors vote on at committees.
Peevemor
16-06-2021, 08:36 AM
I cant remember the details either but it was shown they couldn't have carried out the corruption without councillors being involved. The name Anderson springs to mind.
Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk
Dave Anderson was Director of City Development - an employee as opposed to a councillor. I don't think he was accused of any active wrongdoing, but as the boss he was ultimately responsible and had to go.
WeeRussell
16-06-2021, 08:46 AM
Its sad to see not a single response from snp fandans. They don't seem to have any expectations post their wished for goal and will settle for anything it seems. Really mental considering. They don't seem to care what Scotland would be post independence and what it would look like afterwards. Crazy maybe.
I don’t know if I qualify as an SNP fandan - I am pro Scottish independence and I don’t like lying/swallowing and posting of media headlines just because people don’t like a political party..
If that’s me qualified - then I’m replying just to let you know I’m still getting my head around what you’re slavering about in your last few posts 👍
Keith_M
16-06-2021, 09:05 AM
The response to my PHS question said it was probably no different to PHE. I dont see how thats relevant and even if its true why should Scotland follow poor practice in England?
The responses to your PHE question were largely requests for actual details, none of which have been supplied (articles that none of us have access to don't really count).
I think I've already shown that I'm happy to criticise anyone, no matter what party, when there's evidence they've actually done something wrong, but we need the actual evidence, not just salacious headlines and links to unreadable articles (posted by people who even admit they haven't actually read the article).
Santa Cruz
16-06-2021, 09:36 AM
The responses to your PHE question were largely requests for actual details, none of which have been supplied (articles that none of us have access to don't really count).
I think I've already shown that I'm happy to criticise anyone, no matter what party, when there's evidence they've actually done something wrong, but we need the actual evidence, not just salacious headlines and links to unreadable articles (posted by people who even admit they haven't actually read the article).
I posted a link in response to a post by MY. Looking back on this thread I can see I misunderstood his request as he was looking for a doc with PHS' remit. It's been reported in other papers too that are accessible. I'm not posting another link, what's the point. There are some posters on here that have no interest in debate. I could post a valid criticism on here about anything that impacts me or my family and for doing that, the said posters will pop up on an entirely different thread that I post on and the only reason they are challenging my post on that thread is because I don't vote for the same Party as them. Just wanted to explain that to the vast majority of decent posters on here.
WeeRussell
16-06-2021, 09:45 AM
I posted a link in response to a post by MY. Looking back on this thread I can see I misunderstood his request as he was looking for a doc with PHS' remit. It's been reported in other papers too that are accessible. I'm not posting another link, what's the point. There are some posters on here that have no interest in debate. I could post a valid criticism on here about anything that impacts me or my family and for doing that, the said posters will pop up on an entirely different thread that I post on and the only reason they are challenging my post on that thread is because I don't vote for the same Party as them. Just wanted to explain that to the vast majority of decent posters on here.
I don't know which political party you vote for and have no interest in knowing, SC :aok: There are relatively few posters on here that I actually remember who's who from thread-to-thread and try to take things at face value... even politics!*
Definitely interested in the debate if there is one to be had. If you have accessible reports to share then please do, as long as they have actual details of evidence, as it will certainly help what is a bit of a non-starter so far on this thread.
*I'm not saying you were including me in your post by the way. Just wanted to make my position clear before replying.
Keith_M
16-06-2021, 09:46 AM
I posted a link in response to a post by MY. Looking back on this thread I can see I misunderstood his request as he was looking for a doc with PHS' remit. It's been reported in other papers too that are accessible. I'm not posting another link, what's the point. There are some posters on here that have no interest in debate. I could post a valid criticism on here about anything that impacts me or my family and for doing that, the said posters will pop up on an entirely different thread that I post on and the only reason they are challenging my post on that thread is because I don't vote for the same Party as them. Just wanted to explain that to the vast majority of decent posters on here.
Did you post the one with the PDF?
I had a look at that and wasn't sure what we were supposed to be looking for.
:dunno:
Santa Cruz
16-06-2021, 09:49 AM
Did you post the one with the PDF?
I had a look at that and wasn't sure what we were supposed to be looking for.
:dunno:
Nah the Times.
Moulin Yarns
16-06-2021, 09:56 AM
Did you post the one with the PDF?
I had a look at that and wasn't sure what we were supposed to be looking for.
:dunno:
That was me. The PHS document explains what their aims and objectives are, non of which is protecting the Scottish Government from criticism in communication from PHS which apparently is what was behind the times paywall.
Keith_M
16-06-2021, 10:07 AM
Nah the Times.
That was me. The PHS document explains what their aims and objectives are, non of which is protecting the Scottish Government from criticism in communication from PHS which apparently is what was behind the times paywall.
Thanks guys.
:aok:
I blame senility, I'm losing track here.
stantonhibby
16-06-2021, 10:17 AM
I posted a link in response to a post by MY. Looking back on this thread I can see I misunderstood his request as he was looking for a doc with PHS' remit. It's been reported in other papers too that are accessible. I'm not posting another link, what's the point. There are some posters on here that have no interest in debate. I could post a valid criticism on here about anything that impacts me or my family and for doing that, the said posters will pop up on an entirely different thread that I post on and the only reason they are challenging my post on that thread is because I don't vote for the same Party as them. Just wanted to explain that to the vast majority of decent posters on here.
If you post anything remotely critical about the SNP/SG then you will be asked for firm proof/evidence of any wrong doing. If it's about any other party then you can just copy and paste any old guff from twitter.
Peevemor
16-06-2021, 10:22 AM
If you post anything remotely critical about the SNP/SG then you will be asked for firm proof/evidence of any wrong doing. If it's about any other party then you can just copy and paste any old guff from twitter.
Why do people keep making stuff up?
The wrongdoings, lies and u-turns of the current WM government are well documented.
As for the SNP and the SG, we see a lot of unsubstantiated rumour and innuendo but not much more.
Ozyhibby
16-06-2021, 10:23 AM
If you post anything remotely critical about the SNP/SG then you will be asked for firm proof/evidence of any wrong doing. If it's about any other party then you can just copy and paste any old guff from twitter.
Or you could point to the actual legal judgements against the UK govt? You keep looking for equivalency though.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
JimBHibees
16-06-2021, 10:23 AM
I think that's doing a crock of **** a dis-service.
The SNP have to come out and publicly condemn this idiotic comment and I personally think the guy should be made to resign, as he's clearly unfit for office... and I voted SNP at the last election.
Totally agree absolutely moronic comment.
Moulin Yarns
16-06-2021, 10:31 AM
Why do people keep making stuff up?
The wrongdoings, lies and u-turns of the current WM government are well documented.
As for the SNP and the SG, we see a lot of unsubstantiated rumour and innuendo but not much more.
https://beta.isdscotland.org/find-publications-and-data/population-health/covid-19/discharges-from-nhsscotland-hospitals-to-care-homes/
A short search and I found the report which apparently is protecting the Scottish Government. If anyone can find anywhere in the report, which was compiled jointly by PHS, Glasgow University and Edinburgh University, the supposed protection of the government then I bow to your superiority.
Crunchie
16-06-2021, 10:35 AM
I posted a link in response to a post by MY. Looking back on this thread I can see I misunderstood his request as he was looking for a doc with PHS' remit. It's been reported in other papers too that are accessible. I'm not posting another link, what's the point. There are some posters on here that have no interest in debate. I could post a valid criticism on here about anything that impacts me or my family and for doing that, the said posters will pop up on an entirely different thread that I post on and the only reason they are challenging my post on that thread is because I don't vote for the same Party as them. Just wanted to explain that to the vast majority of decent posters on here.
I get what you're saying 100% :aok:
If you post anything remotely critical about the SNP/SG then you will be asked for firm proof/evidence of any wrong doing. If it's about any other party then you can just copy and paste any old guff from twitter.
Do these BBC articles count as guff from twitter?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-57413115
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56125462
Crunchie
16-06-2021, 11:12 AM
Do these BBC articles count as guff from twitter?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-57413115
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56125462
You prove his point, why are you quoting a right wing tory led BBC ?
You prove his point, why are you quoting a right wing tory led BBC ?
No, I'm disproving his point.
Unless yo can point out any inaccuracies.
Crunchie
16-06-2021, 11:23 AM
No, I'm disproving his point.
Unless yo can point out any inaccuracies.
You surely cannot believe an article from the right wing tory run BBC
Peevemor
16-06-2021, 11:30 AM
You surely cannot believe an article from the right wing tory run BBC
You can when even they have to admit that their Tory paymasters have been proven to be in the wrong.
You surely cannot believe an article from the right wing tory run BBC
Crunchie. You surely don't have a clue about anyone's critical faculties. Including your own, if you have any. Which I doubt.
You can when even they have to admit that their Tory paymasters have been proven to be in the wrong.Which is exactly my point. The opposite of "any old guff from twitter".
Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk
ronaldo7
16-06-2021, 01:27 PM
I posted a link in response to a post by MY. Looking back on this thread I can see I misunderstood his request as he was looking for a doc with PHS' remit. It's been reported in other papers too that are accessible. I'm not posting another link, what's the point. There are some posters on here that have no interest in debate. I could post a valid criticism on here about anything that impacts me or my family and for doing that, the said posters will pop up on an entirely different thread that I post on and the only reason they are challenging my post on that thread is because I don't vote for the same Party as them. Just wanted to explain that to the vast majority of decent posters on here.
Reported here.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/watchdogs-remit-is-to-shield-snp-ministers-0wgpxsn5d
The bit of that article that's free to view doesn't justify the headline. Is there more that does? :dunno:
I can't see that full "report". Do you have the actual remit?
With all due respect, this is a crock of crap. You were asked if you had any other information on the remit of the PHS, and also about the link you posted which was behind a paywall. You didn't respond.
If you want debate, why not answer the questions, if you can't answer them, that's fair enough and I'm sure the posters will let it lie. It's got nothing to do with which party you vote for, more about the lack of information you gave in response.
Trying to frame this as decent posters v the rest does you no good whatsoever.
Moulin Yarns
16-06-2021, 01:55 PM
Can someone advise how to put a poster on private. Thanks.
To be fair to you both, after asking for the evidence there was a void. I then went and found the actual report that the times headlines were making up their story about and found no evidence to see where the headline came from.
If people post links that are not available to others at least a cut and paste would be useful. That's what I saw from the scotsman on the story.
Even stranger, the BBC aren't reporting it so it must be false 😉
Moulin Yarns
16-06-2021, 02:01 PM
To be fair to you both, after asking for the evidence there was a void. I then went and found the actual report that the times headlines were making up their story about and found no evidence to see where the headline came from.
If people post links that are not available to others at least a cut and paste would be useful. That's what I saw from the scotsman on the story.
Even stranger, the BBC aren't reporting it so it must be false 😉
I meant to say as well, we have all posted and because the conversation goes at such a pace, by the time we get back to it we have missed a few pages and don't have the time to look back.
Santa Cruz
16-06-2021, 02:04 PM
To be fair to you both, after asking for the evidence there was a void. I then went and found the actual report that the times headlines were making up their story about and found no evidence to see where the headline came from.
If people post links that are not available to others at least a cut and paste would be useful. That's what I saw from the scotsman on the story.
Even stranger, the BBC aren't reporting it so it must be false 😉
Aww MY, I misunderstood what you were asking for. I don't subscribe to The Times, I can't cut and paste. It has been reported in other accessible articles. I didn't mean to blank LH, sometimes there are other priorities in my day. I can only apologise to you and LH if I came across as posting and bolting.
lapsedhibee
16-06-2021, 02:07 PM
Aww MY, I misunderstood what you were asking for. I don't subscribe to The Times, I can't cut and paste. It has been reported in other accessible articles. I didn't mean to blank LH, sometimes there are other priorities in my day. I can only apologise to you and LH if I came across as posting and bolting.
How very dare you!
ronaldo7
16-06-2021, 02:10 PM
I meant to say as well, we have all posted and because the conversation goes at such a pace, by the time we get back to it we have missed a few pages and don't have the time to look back.
Fully understand that. It's something we've all done, however when we do come back we need to be up to speed, and not make things up, or is that what it's all about these days.:greengrin
Crunchie
16-06-2021, 05:46 PM
With all due respect, this is a crock of crap. You were asked if you had any other information on the remit of the PHS, and also about the link you posted which was behind a paywall. You didn't respond.
If you want debate, why not answer the questions, if you can't answer them, that's fair enough and I'm sure the posters will let it lie. It's got nothing to do with which party you vote for, more about the lack of information you gave in response.
Trying to frame this as decent posters v the rest does you no good whatsoever.
I've seen Santa have a decent debate not so long ago and was worn down by the usual suspects, it can be very tiresome when you're fighting your corner against several posters.
Peevemor
16-06-2021, 06:22 PM
I've seen Santa have a decent debate not so long ago and was worn down by the usual suspects, it can be very tiresome when you're fighting your corner against several posters.Awww diddums!
The thread is about having a pop at the SNP.
If you eventually ever post something of any gravity then you might shut us up.
Keep going off half-cock and we'll keep slapping you down.
It's not hard to understand.
Santa Cruz
16-06-2021, 06:43 PM
Awww diddums!
The thread is about having a pop at the SNP.
If you eventually ever post something of any gravity then you might shut us up.
Keep going off half-cock and we'll keep slapping you down.
It's not hard to understand.
It's no exactly the way forward with debating points though?
He's here!
16-06-2021, 06:44 PM
I think that's doing a crock of **** a dis-service.
The SNP have to come out and publicly condemn this idiotic comment and I personally think the guy should be made to resign, as he's clearly unfit for office... and I voted SNP at the last election.
No punches pulled here:
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/does-this-snp-politician-think-buses-are-racist-
Peevemor
16-06-2021, 06:50 PM
It's no exactly the way forward with debating points though?I like good debate, but the SNP haters have yet to post anything worthy of one.
Peevemor
16-06-2021, 06:54 PM
No punches pulled here:
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/does-this-snp-politician-think-buses-are-racist-He's already been slated by all sides for talking guff.
Funny that the Spectator saw fit to pick it up... [emoji848]
He's here!
16-06-2021, 07:10 PM
He's already been slated by all sides for talking guff.
Funny that the Spectator saw fit to pick it up... [emoji848]
They've got Blackford down to a T (or is it a tee?) :wink:
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/pmqs-the-snp-take-on-free-trade
Jones28
16-06-2021, 07:17 PM
No punches pulled here:
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/does-this-snp-politician-think-buses-are-racist-
The Spectator picking up on it shouldn’t be a surprise in the slightest. I’m surprised it took them this long.
lapsedhibee
16-06-2021, 07:17 PM
They've got Blackford down to a T (or is it a tee?) :wink:
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/pmqs-the-snp-take-on-free-trade
Not read the whole of that article but at the beginning it appears to suggest that Johnson got the better of Starmer by triumphantly announcing that the document waved was about the Kappa variant rather than the Delta variant. I saw PMQs and Johnson quickly corrected 'Kappa' to 'Gamma'. He ****** up while showing off his classical education. So not really that triumphant. (Not worth signing up to view the rest of the article as The Spectator just relentlessly pumps out drivel.)
Crunchie
16-06-2021, 09:43 PM
I like good debate, but the SNP haters have yet to post anything worthy of one.
Conceited much?
Peevemor
16-06-2021, 09:48 PM
Conceited much?Just saying it how I see it.
He's here!
22-06-2021, 06:39 AM
SQA to be scrapped:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57563960
Having sat on this report until after the election (with Swinney moved out of the firing line) the SNP have had the time to tinker around the edges and present this as strong, constructive action. Doesn't seem to be fooling the media though.
Hiber-nation
22-06-2021, 06:55 AM
SQA to be scrapped:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57563960
Having sat on this report until after the election (with Swinney moved out of the firing line) the SNP have had the time to tinker around the edges and present this as strong, constructive action. Doesn't seem to be fooling the media though.
And when does the media ever have a good thing to say about the SNP?
It's long overdue though, I know from first hand experience that parts of the SQA are a complete shambles, you really have to be there to see the scale of it.
Ozyhibby
22-06-2021, 07:04 AM
SQA to be scrapped:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57563960
Having sat on this report until after the election (with Swinney moved out of the firing line) the SNP have had the time to tinker around the edges and present this as strong, constructive action. Doesn't seem to be fooling the media though.
Was it the SNP who sat on the report or was it the reports authors who asked for it not to be published?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
ronaldo7
22-06-2021, 07:27 AM
SQA to be scrapped:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57563960
Having sat on this report until after the election (with Swinney moved out of the firing line) the SNP have had the time to tinker around the edges and present this as strong, constructive action. Doesn't seem to be fooling the media though.
Who was it in the SNP who sat on the report?
Just to save you looking, the report was never to be published prior to the Election. The report was never "sat on". It is the OECD themselves who determine when the report is issued.
Here's an article prior to the election covering as much. The bit I like in the article is this "We won't lie to the public for political gain though. Its sad that others have stooped to that level." :wink:
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19161139.oecd-education-report-conservatives-lib-dems-fire/
JeMeSouviens
22-06-2021, 12:09 PM
I've seen Santa have a decent debate not so long ago and was worn down by the usual suspects, it can be very tiresome when you're fighting your corner against several posters.
Nae chance! Santa would sleigh anyone on here. :na na:
G B Young
22-06-2021, 01:48 PM
And when does the media ever have a good thing to say about the SNP?
It's long overdue though, I know from first hand experience that parts of the SQA are a complete shambles, you really have to be there to see the scale of it.
:agree:
He's here!
22-06-2021, 04:50 PM
Who was it in the SNP who sat on the report?
Just to save you looking, the report was never to be published prior to the Election. The report was never "sat on". It is the OECD themselves who determine when the report is issued.
Here's an article prior to the election covering as much. The bit I like in the article is this "We won't lie to the public for political gain though. Its sad that others have stooped to that level." :wink:
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19161139.oecd-education-report-conservatives-lib-dems-fire/
That's not the case. It was originally expected to be published in February:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-56081250
That's not the case. It was originally expected to be published in February:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-56081250
I think you need to direct your ire at the OECD.
CropleyWasGod
22-06-2021, 05:33 PM
That's not the case. It was originally expected to be published in February:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-56081250
In April last year, it was announced that it would be delayed until June this year.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-52470610.amp
ronaldo7
22-06-2021, 05:49 PM
That's not the case. It was originally expected to be published in February:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-56081250
Semantics.
It's the oecd who decide.
Still waiting on you telling me who sat on the report, or can you not just accept you were wrong.
Ozyhibby
22-06-2021, 06:07 PM
Semantics.
It's the oecd who decide.
Still waiting on you telling me who sat on the report, or can you not just accept you were wrong.
Wrong or deliberately misleading?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
weecounty hibby
22-06-2021, 06:07 PM
Can't be bothered looking for it but the OECD themselves said it was they who define when and where the report is published not the SG and they decided not to publish before the election
CropleyWasGod
22-06-2021, 06:12 PM
Can't be bothered looking for it but the OECD themselves said it was they who define when and where the report is published not the SG and they decided not to publish before the election
As I mentioned above, they decided in April last year to publish it now. The election was never a factor; it was delayed from February because of the pandemic.
SNP Ministers had an initial draft for comment before the election, but it was to be published afterwards.
Had the report been positive I am pretty certain the content would have been leaked
weecounty hibby
22-06-2021, 06:47 PM
SNP Ministers had an initial draft for comment before the election, but it was to be published afterwards.
Had the report been positive I am pretty certain the content would have been leaked
What about if I say I'm pretty certain it wouldnt. That would be based on the same absolutely nothing that your basing your argument on.
What about if I say I'm pretty certain it wouldnt. That would be based on the same absolutely nothing that your basing your argument on.
I am basing my view on the honesty and transparency I see from the SNP. Likely you are also. Opinions...
Hiber-nation
22-06-2021, 09:41 PM
I see G B Young's been launched. Hopefully nothing to do with his last post which was agreeing with a post of mine!
Santa Cruz
22-06-2021, 09:49 PM
I see G B Young's been launched. Hopefully nothing to do with his last post which was agreeing with a post of mine!
I don't understand, why would he be launched for agreeing with out posting a single word?
Hiber-nation
22-06-2021, 09:54 PM
I don't understand, why would he be launched for agreeing with out posting a single word?
Must have done something else naughty. We shall never know!
cabbageandribs1875
22-06-2021, 10:24 PM
oh i'm sure he'll be back
look out for a G B News joining
JeMeSouviens
22-06-2021, 10:30 PM
I see G B Young's been launched. Hopefully nothing to do with his last post which was agreeing with a post of mine!
That’s a pity. We’re running low on sensible Unionists.
Ozyhibby
23-06-2021, 08:29 AM
That’s a pity. We’re running low on sensible Unionists.
It’s a country wide problem.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Moulin Yarns
23-06-2021, 11:30 AM
I see G B Young's been launched. Hopefully nothing to do with his last post which was agreeing with a post of mine!
I also see the North stand guy has also been mutually consented. Seems to be a trend 😉
Hiber-nation
23-06-2021, 11:46 AM
I also see the North stand guy has also been mutually consented. Seems to be a trend 😉
I'm sure he's Mon Scottish Labour.
Moulin Yarns
23-06-2021, 11:56 AM
I'm sure he's Mon Scottish Labour.
I thought that was one of the guys that was 'here' 😉
I am still here but might choose not to remain :-(
Stairway 2 7
23-06-2021, 01:19 PM
I vote snp but wouldn't be interested in an echo chamber. Different opinions are needed always
Just Alf
23-06-2021, 01:22 PM
I am still here but might choose not to remain :-(
I don't always agree with you but I don't think you're trolling like others seem/d to enjoy doing.
I don't always agree with you but I don't think you're trolling like others seem/d to enjoy doing.
I dont want to troll or come across in that way. I do want to debate and scrutinise much of what is being proposed in relation to Independence. Largely because (and this is no surprise) I dont believe its in Scotland's best interests.
I accept others take a different view and that is their right, but I do find it frustrating that anything and everything is defended to the hilt even when there is clearly something that should be challenged.
Just Alf
23-06-2021, 01:48 PM
I dont want to troll or come across in that way. I do want to debate and scrutinise much of what is being proposed in relation to Independence. Largely because (and this is no surprise) I dont believe its in Scotland's best interests.
I accept others take a different view and that is their right, but I do find it frustrating that anything and everything is defended to the hilt even when there is clearly something that should be challenged.
:aok:
degenerated
23-06-2021, 02:05 PM
I dont want to troll or come across in that way. I do want to debate and scrutinise much of what is being proposed in relation to Independence. Largely because (and this is no surprise) I dont believe its in Scotland's best interests.
I accept others take a different view and that is their right, but I do find it frustrating that anything and everything is defended to the hilt even when there is clearly something that should be challenged.Just because you see nats under the bed doesn't mean the rest of us need to agree with you.
Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk
Just because you see nats under the bed doesn't mean the rest of us need to agree with you.
Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk
We partly agree on something although its the gnats in my bedroom that are more of a worry
WeeRussell
23-06-2021, 03:54 PM
I dont want to troll or come across in that way. I do want to debate and scrutinise much of what is being proposed in relation to Independence. Largely because (and this is no surprise) I dont believe its in Scotland's best interests.
I accept others take a different view and that is their right, but I do find it frustrating that anything and everything is defended to the hilt even when there is clearly something that should be challenged.
I don't think you're trolling either, Skol. But I would say your apparent position as someone willing to listen to the argument for independence (albeit from the other side) has become very difficult not to mistake for someone continuously looking to stick the boot into the SNP.
I welcome anyone's challenge to ANY political party on here, particularly as there are far better informed posters than me (including numerous that share my general political beliefs) and I like to see the comments on both sides.. but there does seem to be a recent theme of a few 'anti-SNP' posters claiming dirt on the SNP, without any evidence or without having even read their alleged evidence, and then being corrected/countered and subsequently going in a huff and claiming you can't challenge or have a debate on here.... and then repeat with another claim.
Again. I definitely don't think you're a troll... there's plenty of them kicking around without any false accusations :wink:
I don't think you're trolling either, Skol. But I would say your apparent position as someone willing to listen to the argument for independence (albeit from the other side) has become very difficult not to mistake for someone continuously looking to stick the boot into the SNP.
I welcome anyone's challenge to ANY political party on here, particularly as there are far better informed posters than me (including numerous that share my general political beliefs) and I like to see the comments on both sides.. but there does seem to be a recent theme of a few 'anti-SNP' posters claiming dirt on the SNP, without any evidence or without having even read their alleged evidence, and then being corrected/countered and subsequently going in a huff and claiming you can't challenge or have a debate on here.... and then repeat with another claim.
Again. I definitely don't think you're a troll... there's plenty of them kicking around without any false accusations :wink:
Thats a fair comment but I guess what I am seeking is some acceptance that the SNP are not the white knights people would like them to be.
Rather than try to belittle me and deflect any bad news to say look at the awful tories, I would like to have a discussion about what I see as the flaws in the Independence argument.
wookie70
23-06-2021, 07:17 PM
Thats a fair comment but I guess what I am seeking is some acceptance that the SNP are not the white knights people would like them to be.
Rather than try to belittle me and deflect any bad news to say look at the awful tories, I would like to have a discussion about what I see as the flaws in the Independence argument.
The SNP can do things badly but still not cause flaws in the Independence argument. I get more pro Indi as days and weeks pass with the appalling and worsening UK government, I don't though like the SNP that much. Indy and the SNP are two different things imo
cabbageandribs1875
23-06-2021, 07:22 PM
:hilarious
https://scontent.fman1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/205564094_4223442191027190_991567748265008172_n.jp g?_nc_cat=111&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=825194&_nc_ohc=ReFPT2xiSiYAX9EDH0D&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-1.fna&oh=45920d7fc1dd363f94bb93767b00b565&oe=60D931BE
Thats a fair comment but I guess what I am seeking is some acceptance that the SNP are not the white knights people would like them to be.
You said to me a few days ago that I thought the SNP "were whiter than white". I don't, it would be impossible for any political party to be. However the instance you were talking about didn't hold any water. Show proof and people will agree with you, no doubt.
Radium
23-06-2021, 07:56 PM
SNP Ministers had an initial draft for comment before the election, but it was to be published afterwards.
Had the report been positive I am pretty certain the content would have been leaked
If it was received within 6 weeks of the election it would have been a breach of Purdah rules to release it (I think). Something that the majority of Scottish politicians and parties would still respect.
A slightly mute point because the June publication seems to have been well trailed.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The SNP can do things badly but still not cause flaws in the Independence argument. I get more pro Indi as days and weeks pass with the appalling and worsening UK government, I don't though like the SNP that much. Indy and the SNP are two different things imo
This is what I struggle with. If you don’t much like the snp why do you trust them on independence?
Granted I don’t trust the tories either. And labour have proven themselves to be completely out of touch.
I realise that means I have limited options.
Peevemor
23-06-2021, 08:09 PM
This is what I struggle with. If you don’t much like the snp why do you trust them on independence?
Granted I don’t trust the tories either. And labour have proven themselves to be completely out of touch.
I realise that means I have limited options.Hopefully the SNP will be successful enough to eventually bring about their own demise. I doubt they'd remain a major power in the long term if independence is achieved.
Hopefully the SNP will be successful enough to eventually bring about their own demise. I doubt they'd remain a major power in the long term if independence is achieved.
So who would be the party in power? One of the others or sone new entity
wookie70
23-06-2021, 08:38 PM
This is what I struggle with. If you don’t much like the snp why do you trust them on independence?
Granted I don’t trust the tories either. And labour have proven themselves to be completely out of touch.
I realise that means I have limited options.
I said I don't like them not that I don't trust them. They are nowhere near progressive enough for my political tastes. They are however the only vehicle for Independence so I have decided they will get my vote(first one at least) until we get Independence or another party is a better vehicle for achieving it. The Tories are moving further to the right with every Goose step and the fact that the Scottish people are far more progressive than their regressive and ever increasingly more xenophobic neighbours is the main reason I want Independence. We are a completely different people to the English in terms of values imo and need to make our own way
Peevemor
23-06-2021, 08:40 PM
So who would be the party in power? One of the others or sone new entity
I wouldn't be surprised I the SNP won the election to form the 1st government, but imploded rapidly thereafter.
In terms of Labour & the Tories, they'd effectively be new entities if severed from their existing London head offices.
I said I don't like them not that I don't trust them. They are nowhere near progressive enough for my political tastes. They are however the only vehicle for Independence so I have decided they will get my vote(first one at least) until we get Independence or another party is a better vehicle for achieving it. The Tories are moving further to the right with every Goose step and the fact that the Scottish people are far more progressive than their regressive and ever increasingly more xenophobic neighbours is the main reason I want Independence. We are a completely different people to the English in terms of values imo and need to make our own way
I despair at the average English voter. I really don’t know what they think about.
I do have a similar feeling about the average Scottish voter. I get the emotional argument but despite all of the issues of the U.K. I still think it would be negative for Scotland overall.
You said to me a few days ago that I thought the SNP "were whiter than white". I don't, it would be impossible for any political party to be. However the instance you were talking about didn't hold any water. Show proof and people will agree with you, no doubt.
For me I believe the SNP genuinely do think their policies are the best for the people of Scotland. It might not always turn out to be such a great idea/policy but at least they're trying.
The torys are out to line their pockets. If lurching to the right gets them into power that's what they'll do.
Labour are in disarray and I'm not sure they are sure where they want to be.
I despair at the average English voter. I really don’t know what they think about.
I do have a similar feeling about the average Scottish voter. I get the emotional argument but despite all of the issues of the U.K. I still think it would be negative for Scotland overall.
Emotion has no part in it for me. Not a patriot and don't get it as political stance. The danger of being attached to a country which has gone ever more right wing since the start of the century, with the trend accelerating ever more made my mind up. The way the Tories have divided England and set people at each other's throats is a disgrace and a recipe for real disaster.
Feel for all the decent English people of which there are plenty but a chance to get away Eton's hegemony changed my mind. That isn't emotion, it's practical and the only way Scottish people are ever going to regain some proper control over the direction of this country rather than being rag-dolled around in the south's culture war.
lapsedhibee
23-06-2021, 09:09 PM
Emotion has no part in it for me. Not a patriot and don't get it as political stance. The danger of being attached to a country which has gone ever more right wing since the start of the century, with the trend accelerating ever more made my mind up. The way the Tories have divided England and set people at each other's throats is a disgrace and a recipe for real disaster.
Feel for all the decent English people of which there are plenty but a chance to get away Eton's hegemony changed my mind. That isn't emotion, it's practical and the only way Scottish people are ever going to regain some proper control over the direction of this country rather than being rag-dolled around in the south's culture war.
:agree:
Moulin Yarns
23-06-2021, 09:10 PM
In terms of Labour & the Tories, they'd effectively be new entities if severed from their existing London head offices.
The tories and Labour are already headless, they don't need to have it severed 🤣
Bostonhibby
23-06-2021, 09:20 PM
Emotion has no part in it for me. Not a patriot and don't get it as political stance. The danger of being attached to a country which has gone ever more right wing since the start of the century, with the trend accelerating ever more made my mind up. The way the Tories have divided England and set people at each other's throats is a disgrace and a recipe for real disaster.
Feel for all the decent English people of which there are plenty but a chance to get away Eton's hegemony changed my mind. That isn't emotion, it's practical and the only way Scottish people are ever going to regain some proper control over the direction of this country rather than being rag-dolled around in the south's culture war.
A very decent summary of where England has been shifted to for the moment. The ruling elite and their chums have played a blinder, in the short term at least, by drumming up support from areas that they never used to get it or from those who never seemed to care before.
Populism is the key to it and there is nothing Bozo won't say or do in pursuit of it, only to U turn or deny he ever said it thereafter.
Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk
JimBHibees
23-06-2021, 09:44 PM
Emotion has no part in it for me. Not a patriot and don't get it as political stance. The danger of being attached to a country which has gone ever more right wing since the start of the century, with the trend accelerating ever more made my mind up. The way the Tories have divided England and set people at each other's throats is a disgrace and a recipe for real disaster.
Feel for all the decent English people of which there are plenty but a chance to get away Eton's hegemony changed my mind. That isn't emotion, it's practical and the only way Scottish people are ever going to regain some proper control over the direction of this country rather than being rag-dolled around in the south's culture war.
Spot on
wookie70
23-06-2021, 09:50 PM
I despair at the average English voter. I really don’t know what they think about.
I do have a similar feeling about the average Scottish voter. I get the emotional argument but despite all of the issues of the U.K. I still think it would be negative for Scotland overall. In what way would it be negative
Crunchie
24-06-2021, 06:01 AM
In what way would it be negative
In many ways, not least financial. Let's start with the problem we'll have paying pay for the huge wage bill that awaits in Local Government.
Peevemor
24-06-2021, 06:13 AM
In many ways, not least financial. Let's start with the problem we'll have paying pay for the huge wage bill that awaits in Local Government.
Is it proportionally huge compared to the rest of the UK?
The Modfather
24-06-2021, 06:24 AM
In many ways, not least financial. Let's start with the problem we'll have paying pay for the huge wage bill that awaits in Local Government.
It’s a valid question, but is it anymore valid than the 2 trillion the UK is currently in debt? Is there a plan for the debt that comes with the status quo?
Ozyhibby
24-06-2021, 06:33 AM
https://news.stv.tv/scotland/alcoholics-consumed-less-cheap-drink-following-minimum-pricing?top&&__twitter_impression=true
Seems this SNP policy has been a success.[emoji106]
Shame we are not able to increase the tax on alcohol so we might reduce it elsewhere. That’s something only an independent country could do.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
He's here!
24-06-2021, 06:41 AM
Semantics.
It's the oecd who decide.
Still waiting on you telling me who sat on the report, or can you not just accept you were wrong.
I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest it was in the SNP's best interests for the report to remain in the in-tray until after the election. Holyrood also passed a motion back in February calling for the SQA and Education Scotland to be reformed, agreeing they were not fit for purpose. The SNP were alone in supporting it. Even a couple of weeks ago the new education secretary was saying she had full confidence in the SQA and Education Scotland, backed by Sturgeon the same day. Yet now we have confirmation that the SQA is to be scrapped.
As the BBC analysis states 'This looks like swift action from the Scottish government, but it's worth pointing out they have seen versions of this report and will have known about its findings for many weeks.'
ronaldo7
24-06-2021, 07:58 AM
I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest it was in the SNP's best interests for the report to remain in the in-tray until after the election. Holyrood also passed a motion back in February calling for the SQA and Education Scotland to be reformed, agreeing they were not fit for purpose. The SNP were alone in supporting it. Even a couple of weeks ago the new education secretary was saying she had full confidence in the SQA and Education Scotland, backed by Sturgeon the same day. Yet now we have confirmation that the SQA is to be scrapped.
As the BBC analysis states 'This looks like swift action from the Scottish government, but it's worth pointing out they have seen versions of this report and will have known about its findings for many weeks.'
And still you try and deflect.
Who was it that "sat on the report", as you told us all.
Was it the education secretary?
Was it Nicola who needed to sit higher on her chair?
Or did the OECD specifically tell the SG it should not be in the public domain until they said so?
And still you try and deflect.
Who was it that "sat on the report", as you told us all.
Was it the education secretary?
Was it Nicola who needed to sit higher on her chair?
Or did the OECD specifically tell the SG it should not be in the public domain until they said so?Straight questions.
Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk
CropleyWasGod
24-06-2021, 08:09 AM
I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest it was in the SNP's best interests for the report to remain in the in-tray until after the election. Holyrood also passed a motion back in February calling for the SQA and Education Scotland to be reformed, agreeing they were not fit for purpose. The SNP were alone in supporting it. Even a couple of weeks ago the new education secretary was saying she had full confidence in the SQA and Education Scotland, backed by Sturgeon the same day. Yet now we have confirmation that the SQA is to be scrapped.
As the BBC analysis states 'This looks like swift action from the Scottish government, but it's worth pointing out they have seen versions of this report and will have known about its findings for many weeks.'
Did you miss the bit where it was decided by the OECD last April to delay the publication of the report from February until June?
CapitalGreen
24-06-2021, 10:17 AM
Did you miss the bit where it was decided by the OECD last April to delay the publication of the report from February until June?
John doesn’t miss anything, he just chooses to ignore it.
Did you miss the bit where it was decided by the OECD last April to delay the publication of the report from February until June?
I will hold my hand up and say I missed that bit initially, but accept that there is nothing to see here in terms of the timing of the report being issued.
CropleyWasGod
24-06-2021, 11:53 AM
I will hold my hand up and say I missed that bit initially, but accept that there is nothing to see here in terms of the timing of the report being issued.
👍
ronaldo7
24-06-2021, 12:46 PM
I will hold my hand up and say I missed that bit initially, but accept that there is nothing to see here in terms of the timing of the report being issued.
I think you accepted this on another thread, after I posted up a link indicating it was the OECD decision.
I'm surprised some folk haven't caught up with news from last year. 😂
He's here!
24-06-2021, 01:23 PM
And still you try and deflect.
Who was it that "sat on the report", as you told us all.
Was it the education secretary?
Was it Nicola who needed to sit higher on her chair?
Or did the OECD specifically tell the SG it should not be in the public domain until they said so?
I'm hardly a lone voice calling into question the reasons for the delay.
Meanwhile, here's another deflection :wink:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-57593257
He's here!
24-06-2021, 01:25 PM
The inevitable complications of the SNP getting embroiled with Harvie and co have started to rise to the surface:
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/green-members-urge-party-not-to-deal-with-transphobic-snp-3284120
Ozyhibby
24-06-2021, 01:28 PM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-57593257.amp
Legitimate criticism is there to be had of the SNP record with education. What appears to be missing is Douglas Ross’s vision of the way forward?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
CropleyWasGod
24-06-2021, 01:43 PM
I'm hardly a lone voice calling into question the reasons for the delay.
Meanwhile, here's another deflection :wink:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-57593257
The delay was due to the pandemic. Nothing to do with the election. Those voices can't read 😉
Moulin Yarns
24-06-2021, 01:45 PM
The inevitable complications of the SNP getting embroiled with Harvie and co have started to rise to the surface:
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/green-members-urge-party-not-to-deal-with-transphobic-snp-3284120
I'm sure you can tell me, but what are the complications?
Snp and Greens have been in talks, that's all so far, no formal or informal agreement yet been made.
Members of the Greens urge caution because of perception of homophobic and transphobic opinion in the SNP.
If there are proven to be those views within the SNP then the green party, quite rightly, have reasons to be careful as to getting into an agreement with the SNP.
Do you agree that the SNP are transphobic and/or homophobic?
Do you think that the Greens should not be worried?
I'm hardly a lone voice calling into question the reasons for the delay.
Meanwhile, here's another deflection :wink:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-57593257...and hardly alone in ignoring the answers given or the perfectly reasonable questions asked back.
Have you ever considered a career in politics?
Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk
ronaldo7
24-06-2021, 01:51 PM
I'm hardly a lone voice calling into question the reasons for the delay.
Meanwhile, here's another deflection :wink:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-57593257
You do seem to be on here. If this is the level of debate in the Labour party these days, where you can't even bring yourself to answer simple questions, it's no wonder they've started to lose their deposits in elections.
weecounty hibby
24-06-2021, 03:21 PM
You do seem to be on here. If this is the level of debate in the Labour party these days, where you can't even bring yourself to answer simple questions, it's no wonder they've started to lose their deposits in elections.
Gone from shouting about 'mon Scottish Labout to being a cheerleader for Douglas Ross. Labour in miniature I would suggest. Ross has a point about education, we should always strive to do better. But as usual with the Tories its all shouty and no proposals of what they would do to make it better.
CapitalGreen
24-06-2021, 03:23 PM
Gone from shouting about 'mon Scottish Labout to being a cheerleader for Douglas Ross. Labour in miniature I would suggest. Ross has a point about education, we should always strive to do better. But as usual with the Tories its all shouty and no proposals of what they would do to make it better.
Different poster, this is the former johnbc70/James310
https://www.hibs.net/member.php?35542-James310
Bostonhibby
24-06-2021, 03:29 PM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-57593257.amp
Legitimate criticism is there to be had of the SNP record with education. What appears to be missing is Douglas Ross’s vision of the way forward?
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkDouglas is just waiting for his leader to tell him whether he is Douglas or Murray today then he'll be right back to forming a vision, just as soon as Bozo tells him what a vision is.
Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk
weecounty hibby
24-06-2021, 03:30 PM
Different poster, this is the former johnbc70/James310
https://www.hibs.net/member.php?35542-James310
Apologies to all. Can't keep up with folk changing names etc.
Bostonhibby
24-06-2021, 03:31 PM
Apologies to all. Can't keep up with folk changing names etc.I am Murray Ross, or Spartacus [emoji6][emoji16]
Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk
Keith_M
24-06-2021, 05:16 PM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-57593257.amp
Legitimate criticism is there to be had of the SNP record with education. What appears to be missing is Douglas Ross’s vision of the way forward?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My guess would be...
Privatisation of all schools and the contracts for the running of said schools to be given to Tory party Donors and Friends.
He's here!
24-06-2021, 10:10 PM
My guess would be...
Privatisation of all schools and the contracts for the running of said schools to be given to Tory party Donors and Friends.
No guesswork required. It's all laid out on pages 27-31 of their recent manifesto:
https://www.scottishconservatives.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Digital-Manifesto-Final.pdf
'Show us your policies' seems to a popular refrain from SNP supporters on here when dismissing out of hand any criticism of the Scottish government that an opposition party comes up with. The irony being that the only 'policy' many SNP voters care about is independence. Anything beyond that often appears to be little more than background noise.
Is this the manifesto that promised free school breakfasts and lunches?
Teresa May played a similar card for English schools with a familiar outcome.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/conservatives-manifesto-general-election-2017-free-school-breakfasts-lunch-a7861836.html%3famp
Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk
He's here!
24-06-2021, 10:45 PM
You do seem to be on here. If this is the level of debate in the Labour party these days, where you can't even bring yourself to answer simple questions, it's no wonder they've started to lose their deposits in elections.
There were as many simple questions asked of the Scottish government by both opposition parties and those within education regarding the need to delay the report's release in the article I linked to, but you brushed these off as 'semantics'. The implication was that it suited the government very well to accommodate that delay (some of the accusations were considerably stronger) and I think I'm allowed to align myself with that view. I get that you take exception to that being equated to sitting on the report but I'm only offering an opinion, which as far as I can see is what most posters are doing on here when it comes to political issues (unless any are party to the inner workings of the Scottish government).
As for deflection, incidentally, there's no greater exponent of that than the First Minister. Witness her attempt to deflect the ongoing spat with Burnham (during which, unless he's lying, she privately acknowledged she was wrong not to inform him of the impending restrictions) into an attack on the Labour leadership. Masterful stuff.
wookie70
24-06-2021, 10:51 PM
No guesswork required. It's all laid out on pages 27-31 of their recent manifesto:
https://www.scottishconservatives.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Digital-Manifesto-Final.pdf
'Show us your policies' seems to a popular refrain from SNP supporters on here when dismissing out of hand any criticism of the Scottish government that an opposition party comes up with. The irony being that the only 'policy' many SNP voters care about is independence. Anything beyond that often appears to be little more than background noise.
I certainly wouldn't trust the Tories on the condition of school buildings
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/989912/Condition_of_School_Buildings_Survey_CDC1_-_key_findings_report.pdf
scottish_sleepy
25-06-2021, 07:47 AM
So the tories are going to pull £550 million out of the air for 3300 new teachers and in thier words a new multi-year commitment to allocate £1 billion of
attainment funding directly to all schools over the course of the next Parliament, based on the level of deprivation amongst their pupils. If the SNP came out with numbers like that they'd be slaughtered by the media. Ah look at the old SNP spending money they don't have etc
I think you accepted this on another thread, after I posted up a link indicating it was the OECD decision.
I'm surprised some folk haven't caught up with news from last year. 😂
Although the timing of the report is a non issue there are still many areas of concern about the report and the way the information was used by ministers who knew what was contained
ronaldo7
25-06-2021, 08:52 AM
Although the timing of the report is a non issue there are still many areas of concern about the report and the way the information was used by ministers who knew what was contained
Of course their are areas of concern. Nobody sat on the report though, which is what, John/James/Joanne said happened.
ronaldo7
25-06-2021, 08:52 AM
There were as many simple questions asked of the Scottish government by both opposition parties and those within education regarding the need to delay the report's release in the article I linked to, but you brushed these off as 'semantics'. The implication was that it suited the government very well to accommodate that delay (some of the accusations were considerably stronger) and I think I'm allowed to align myself with that view. I get that you take exception to that being equated to sitting on the report but I'm only offering an opinion, which as far as I can see is what most posters are doing on here when it comes to political issues (unless any are party to the inner workings of the Scottish government).
As for deflection, incidentally, there's no greater exponent of that than the First Minister. Witness her attempt to deflect the ongoing spat with Burnham (during which, unless he's lying, she privately acknowledged she was wrong not to inform him of the impending restrictions) into an attack on the Labour leadership. Masterful stuff.
So many words, when you could have just said, sorry, I got it wrong. 😂
Moulin Yarns
25-06-2021, 08:57 AM
So many words, when you could have just said, sorry, I got it wrong. 😂
Aye, but he still hasn't explained the complications of the SNP getting embroiled with the Greens. 🙄
Keith_M
25-06-2021, 09:13 AM
No guesswork required. It's all laid out on pages 27-31 of their recent manifesto:
https://www.scottishconservatives.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Digital-Manifesto-Final.pdf
'Show us your policies' seems to a popular refrain from SNP supporters on here when dismissing out of hand any criticism of the Scottish government that an opposition party comes up with. The irony being that the only 'policy' many SNP voters care about is independence. Anything beyond that often appears to be little more than background noise.
Your Sarcasm Detector seems to be malfunctioning.
James310
25-06-2021, 09:23 AM
Of course their are areas of concern. Nobody sat on the report though, which is what, John/James/Joanne said happened.
Lol, not me guv.
ronaldo7
25-06-2021, 09:25 AM
Lol, not me guv.
😆 I've seen you lurking for months. I knew I'd flush you out. 😂
James310
25-06-2021, 09:27 AM
😆 I've seen you lurking for months. I knew I'd flush you out. 😂
You did, but come on....since when was I a Labour voter! Disappointed in you.
ronaldo7
25-06-2021, 09:31 AM
You did, but come on....since when was I a Labour voter! Disappointed in you.
Aye, sorry about that, can't tell the difference these days. 😂
CapitalGreen
25-06-2021, 10:08 AM
You did, but come on....since when was I a Labour voter! Disappointed in you.
Neither is your alter-ego ‘He’s Here!’, John.
James310
25-06-2021, 10:13 AM
Neither is your alter-ego ‘He’s Here!’, John.
I am glad I still live in your head despite hardly posting in the last 12 months, but it really isn't me. I wish I could say I could recall some of your previous postings in the same way you can about mine, but unfortunately not. But crack on.
Now, back on topic please.
Pretty Boy
25-06-2021, 10:26 AM
Can we please stop speculating about people using different usernames.
If it is happening then there is a pretty high chance that the admins already know about it and we will deal with it as we see fit and as per the rules of the site.
Dragging a poster who has nothing to do with the current conversation into an argument for no apparent reason beyond a misplaced hunch isn't on. If it doesn't stop then we'll be left with no choice but to deal with it.
Santa Cruz
25-06-2021, 10:39 AM
Posters who accuse others of actively lurking, when they do the very same on numerous threads. Posters flushing out alleged alter egos by posting some sort of proof in their mind, erm that's actively trolling. Posters getting called trolls and huffy when they've clearly explained their position and apologised for any misunderstandings. This is the strangest thread should be renamed echo chamber.
Future17
25-06-2021, 10:42 AM
Posters who accuse others of actively lurking, when they do the very same on numerous threads. Posters flushing out alleged alter egos by posting some sort of proof in their mind, erm that's actively trolling. Posters getting called trolls and huffy when they've clearly explained their position and apologised for any misunderstandings. This is the strangest thread should be renamed echo chamber.
....renamed echo chamber.
Moulin Yarns
25-06-2021, 10:53 AM
....renamed echo chamber.
Renamed echo chamber
Peevemor
25-06-2021, 11:02 AM
....renamed echo chamber.
... chamber.
Santa Cruz
25-06-2021, 11:11 AM
....renamed echo chamber.
Yeah, basically look at how many posters who don't post anymore, that's what it will become. Peevmore - "we'll just keep slapping you down" R7 - people must keep fully up to speed when checking old posts, what is he my Line Manager, I'll post when I want thanks, acts like some sort of SNP thread posting sheriff. It's just bizarre. Last post of the day for me. Family commitments.
Peevemor
25-06-2021, 11:14 AM
Yeah, basically look at how many posters who don't post anymore, that's what it will become. Peevmore - "we'll just keep slapping you down" R7 - people must keep fully up to speed when checking old posts, what is he my Line Manager, I'll post when I want thanks, acts like some sort of SNP thread posting sheriff. It's just bizarre. Last post of the day for me. Family commitments.
Oi! Santa Claus - if you're going to moan about me at least spell my user name correctly.
Anyway - look at the thread title. It's only 2 words so even you should be able to understand the purpose of the thread and why "slapping down" is totally in order.
Future17
25-06-2021, 11:45 AM
Yeah, basically look at how many posters who don't post anymore, that's what it will become. Peevmore - "we'll just keep slapping you down" R7 - people must keep fully up to speed when checking old posts, what is he my Line Manager, I'll post when I want thanks, acts like some sort of SNP thread posting sheriff. It's just bizarre. Last post of the day for me. Family commitments.
I understand where you're coming from and agree to a certain extent.
I think the crux of the "echo chamber" point is that there are posters on both sides of the "SNP divide" (for wont of a more accurate phrase) whose posts are of poor quality (in the context of anyone looking for open, intelligent debate). However, as this section of the site is predominantly pro-independence, the law of averages means there are some pro-SNP posters whose posts are of a higher quality, where there's a lower number of such anti-SNP posters.
It's a vicious cycle in a way as well as:
- the lower quality posters tend to drown out the higher quality ones, even if purely due to quantity of posts, which makes them harder to simply ignore.
- the type of anti-SNP poster who is prepared to post regularly is usually the type drawn in by the lower quality comments and usually makes lower quality contributions themselves.
- those lower quality anti-SNP comments attract responses from both lower quality and higher quality pro-SNP posters, which makes it look like a bit of a pile on.
It can be a hard thing to do to ignore comments which you feel aren't worth your consideration, particularly when they've been made in response to something you've posted, or have been made deliberately to try and bait you. I feel I get more out of this site when I take a breath and select who I want to engage with.
Obviously, what's low or high quality is entirely subjective.
Betty Boop
25-06-2021, 12:58 PM
Yeah, basically look at how many posters who don't post anymore, that's what it will become. Peevmore - "we'll just keep slapping you down" R7 - people must keep fully up to speed when checking old posts, what is he my Line Manager, I'll post when I want thanks, acts like some sort of SNP thread posting sheriff. It's just bizarre. Last post of the day for me. Family commitments.
:top marks
Peevemor
25-06-2021, 01:05 PM
:top marks
Why don't you post a valid point then?
Surely if the criticism of the SNP being posted is justified then it can be backed up in a decent debate?
marinello59
25-06-2021, 01:13 PM
Can we please just get back to debating any issues here.
Thanks. :thumbsup:
Hibrandenburg
25-06-2021, 01:39 PM
Why don't you post a valid point then?
Surely if the criticism of the SNP being posted is justified then it can be backed up in a decent debate?
It would be great if some of the Tories on here could occasionally visit the "Tories are still lying *******s" thread and debate the merits of accusations made against the British government like SNP supporters do on this thread. Is it because there is no defending the Tories complete cluster**** attempts at running the country?
ronaldo7
25-06-2021, 02:02 PM
Can we please just get back to debating any issues here.
Thanks. :thumbsup:
I'm off to do the ironing. 👍
It would be great if some of the Tories on here could occasionally visit the "Tories are still lying *******s" thread and debate the merits of accusations made against the British government like SNP supporters do on this thread. Is it because there is no defending the Tories complete cluster**** attempts at running the country?
Usual assumption that anyone who objects to independence is a Tory.
Moulin Yarns
25-06-2021, 03:11 PM
Usual assumption that anyone who objects to independence is a Tory.
Mon Scottish Labour supporters are welcome to comment as well. Especially those that voted tory in May 😉
Keith_M
25-06-2021, 03:21 PM
Usual assumption that anyone who objects to independence is a Tory.
I thought Labour and Tory votes were interchangeable, as long as it means beating the SNP?
Scottish Tory leader endorses tactical voting for Labour to stop the SNP (https://inews.co.uk/news/scotland/scottish-election-2021-tory-leader-tactical-voting-labour-snp-polls-947592)
Scottish Labour leader faces backlash after urging Scots to vote TORY to keep Sturgeon out (https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/807559/Kezia-Dugdale-Nicola-Sturgeon-SNP-Scottish-independence-poll-Ruth-Davidson)
:dunno:
degenerated
25-06-2021, 06:53 PM
Predictable repliesPredictable reply
Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk
Hibrandenburg
25-06-2021, 07:57 PM
Usual assumption that anyone who objects to independence is a Tory.
Not on my part, but if you feel the cap fits then feel free to add to that thread.
wookie70
25-06-2021, 08:07 PM
... chamber.
... chamber
Keith_M
25-06-2021, 08:12 PM
Just to prove to Skol (and others) that I'm capable of seeing wrong no matter the political party...
I see that pr1ck* James Dornan, has made a private (non) apology for his idiotic remarks about the attacks on Lothian buses, where he basically accused them of sectarianism.
https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/19398735.snp-msp-james-dornan-apologises-false-anti-catholic-claims/?action=success#comments-feedback-anchor
He has the cheek to make out that his words were mis-represented
:rolleyes:
* I think that's the best word for him
Santa Cruz
25-06-2021, 08:22 PM
Oi! Santa Claus - if you're going to moan about me at least spell my user name correctly.
Anyway - look at the thread title. It's only 2 words so even you should be able to understand the purpose of the thread and why "slapping down" is totally in order.
Oi?? Are you aware how condescending you come across in literally every thread, you thrive on moaning. Everyone's entitled to an opinion, nobody's correct all the time, if I disagree object, don't refer to slapping posters down, you come across as having some deluded belief your opinion is superior, which it's not, it's just your opinion.
marinello59
25-06-2021, 08:27 PM
If we aren’t going to move beyond petty bickering and taking potshots at each other we will just close the thread. A final request for you all to play nice on this one. Thanks.
Peevemor
25-06-2021, 08:41 PM
Oi?? Are you aware how condescending you come across in literally every thread, you thrive on moaning. Everyone's entitled to an opinion, nobody's correct all the time, if I disagree object, don't refer to slapping posters down, you come across as having some deluded belief your opinion is superior, which it's not, it's just your opinion.
The "Oi! Santa Claus" was a wee attempt at humour. Obviously it was too subtle for you.
And I think you should check out the meaning of the word "literally" before using it to wrongly accuse me of stuff.
This thread exists to have a pop at the SNP. As an SNP supporter I'll continue to try to verbally "slap down" the accusations, mostly false, that are posted. I make no apology for that. If that's not permitted then this thread has no place on a discussion board.
I have no delusions of superiority, but the level of anti-SNP argument being offered has been mostly very poor. That's not my doing.
And please, before anyone else jumps in with comments about me being argumentative, please note that I'm the one being personally "attacked".
Peevemor
25-06-2021, 08:42 PM
If we aren’t going to move beyond petty bickering and taking potshots at each other we will just close the thread. A final request for you all to play nice on this one. Thanks. I just seen this post. Sorry, but there are things that I shouldn't have to accept.
Santa Cruz
25-06-2021, 08:45 PM
If we aren’t going to move beyond petty bickering and taking potshots at each other we will just close the thread. A final request for you all to play nice on this one. Thanks.
Apologies. Request noted. I felt I had the right to respond. I will leave it there.
marinello59
25-06-2021, 08:46 PM
I just seen this post. Sorry, but there are things that I shouldn't have to accept.
Then please report any posts you feel have crossed a line and let admin deal with it.
Peevemor
25-06-2021, 08:47 PM
Then please report any posts you feel have crossed a line and let admin deal with it.Do you not have better things to do than dealing with daft verbal handbags?
cabbageandribs1875
25-06-2021, 08:48 PM
It would be great if some of the Tories on here could occasionally visit the "Tories are still lying *******s" thread and debate the merits of accusations made against the British government like SNP supporters do on this thread. Is it because there is no defending the Tories complete cluster**** attempts at running the country?
and the amazing thing is only three Labour voters actually give the tories grief as well, the others are quick to jump on "Sturgeon" though but make absolutely no comments whatsoever on the most crooked corrupt Westminster government EVER, they call the blonde leader by his cuddly Boris name but the best first minister this country has had lives and breathes for this country yet they show nothing but disrespect for her, i notice they stick to the coronavirus/eck salmond/snp bad thread though....Tory lites :agree:
marinello59
25-06-2021, 08:48 PM
Do you not have better things to do than dealing with daft verbal handbags?
Yes. Hence my request.
Keith_M
25-06-2021, 08:49 PM
This place can be pretty childish at times.
Moulin Yarns
25-06-2021, 09:08 PM
Just to prove to Skol (and others) that I'm capable of seeing wrong no matter the political party...
I see that pr1ck* James Dornan, has made a private (non) apology for his idiotic remarks about the attacks on Lothian buses, where he basically accused them of sectarianism.
https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/19398735.snp-msp-james-dornan-apologises-false-anti-catholic-claims/?action=success#comments-feedback-anchor
He has the cheek to make out that his words were mis-represented
:rolleyes:
* I think that's the best word for him
Was he not also the one who was shouting loudest about the supposed sectarian singing in the Rangers video which has been proven to be false?
I have decided to stay away from these threads now.
Moulin Yarns
25-06-2021, 09:12 PM
I have decided to stay away from these threads now.
https://youtu.be/On0IImHTTNY
Keith_M
26-06-2021, 09:15 AM
Was he not also the one who was shouting loudest about the supposed sectarian singing in the Rangers video which has been proven to be false?
It wouldn't surprise me, as the guy wants to see sectarianism everywhere.
He's here!
26-06-2021, 09:40 AM
The Scottish government will be relieved the Hancock circus has rolled into town (has he resigned yet?!) or I'd suggest this alarming and upsetting public health blunder would be commanding greater attention:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57609034
Of course, with the announcement (conveniently?) only being made on the afternoon Holyrood went into recess (despite the error being flagged up to the government in March) there will be less scope for parliamentary scrutiny. Sure, a ****-up on this scale takes time to investigate but I'd agree with those opposition MSPs questioning the timing of the announcement. Oh, and I should state right away that this is only my opinion, lest certain posters start asking me for hard evidence of an SNP cover-up :wink:
Ozyhibby
26-06-2021, 09:41 AM
It wouldn't surprise me, as the guy wants to see sectarianism everywhere.
If he holds any kind of ministerial job he should lose it and he should be deselected at the next election.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
weecounty hibby
26-06-2021, 09:54 AM
The Scottish government will be relieved the Hancock circus has rolled into town (has he resigned yet?!) or I'd suggest this alarming and upsetting public health blunder would be commanding greater attention:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57609034
Of course, with the announcement (conveniently?) only being made on the afternoon Holyrood went into recess (despite the error being flagged up to the government in March) there will be less scope for parliamentary scrutiny. Sure, a ****-up on this scale takes time to investigate but I'd agree with those opposition MSPs questioning the timing of the announcement. Oh, and I should state right away that this is only my opinion, lest certain posters start asking me for hard evidence of an SNP cover-up :wink:
So this was mostly pre 1997 but some further women post 1997 are impacted also? The SG got the report about this in March? Just isn't very clear from the BBC link there. So are they saying that the SNP government are to blame for pre 97 and post 97 mistakes? Or is it that they are saying that the SG should have released these figures earlier as soon as the report came in? I'm really not clear on who is being accused if what here. It is indeed a tragedy for anyone if they have had health issues or died due to errors but I'm not seeing how this is today's SGs fault. This is something that has been going on since before there was even a Scottish Parliament and also during Labour's time in office. As I say I am 100% not belittling the issue and it is tragic but it would seem that the ones making political capital out of it are Annie Wells and Cole-Hamilton.
ronaldo7
26-06-2021, 10:02 AM
If he holds any kind of ministerial job he should lose it and he should be deselected at the next election.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
He was meant to be standing down after the last parliamentary term but changed his mind. Not the sharpest tool in the box.
Moulin Yarns
26-06-2021, 10:04 AM
The Scottish government will be relieved the Hancock circus has rolled into town (has he resigned yet?!) or I'd suggest this alarming and upsetting public health blunder would be commanding greater attention:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57609034
Of course, with the announcement (conveniently?) only being made on the afternoon Holyrood went into recess (despite the error being flagged up to the government in March) there will be less scope for parliamentary scrutiny. Sure, a ****-up on this scale takes time to investigate but I'd agree with those opposition MSPs questioning the timing of the announcement. Oh, and I should state right away that this is only my opinion, lest certain posters start asking me for hard evidence of an SNP cover-up :wink:
Right. Let me explain that something that dates back to at least 1997 can't be blamed on the SNP because they were not in government then.
Right, let me explain that the failure of the cervical screening process is not political.
Right, when will you answer the questions I asked you on Thursday?
Oh look, you've done your usual trick of posting something that is a bash the SNP (in your head) then immediately run away.
Peevemor
26-06-2021, 10:07 AM
So this was mostly pre 1997 but some further women post 1997 are impacted also? The SG got the report about this in March? Just isn't very clear from the BBC link there. So are they saying that the SNP government are to blame for pre 97 and post 97 mistakes? Or is it that they are saying that the SG should have released these figures earlier as soon as the report came in? I'm really not clear on who is being accused if what here. It is indeed a tragedy for anyone if they have had health issues or died due to errors but I'm not seeing how this is today's SGs fault. This is something that has been going on since before there was even a Scottish Parliament and also during Labour's time in office. As I say I am 100% not belittling the issue and it is tragic but it would seem that the ones making political capital out of it are Annie Wells and Cole-Hamilton.It's disappointing but not surprising that some will look to gain political capital from this. Instead of wasting time on finger pointing everyone should concentrate on the most important issue, ie. the women concerned.
He's here!
26-06-2021, 11:11 AM
Right. Let me explain that something that dates back to at least 1997 can't be blamed on the SNP because they were not in government then.
Right, let me explain that the failure of the cervical screening process is not political.
Right, when will you answer the questions I asked you on Thursday?
Oh look, you've done your usual trick of posting something that is a bash the SNP (in your head) then immediately run away.
The issue appears political according to Labour and the Lib Dems:
(Scottish Labour health spokeswoman Jackie Baillie) "It is astounding to learn that throughout this Nicola Sturgeon was aware of this scandal and did not say a word.
"It is hard to see this as anything other than playing politics with people's health."
And Liberal Democrat health spokesman Alex Cole-Hamilton claimed the error had been "deliberately hidden from the public" until after last month's Scottish Parliament election.
He added: "It is a cynical abuse of power to only disclose this serious adverse event months later and on the afternoon when parliament breaks up for the summer."
Re the question you refer to, I must have missed it. I'm not on here every day, but I'll have a look back to see what it was.
lapsedhibee
26-06-2021, 11:18 AM
The Scottish government will be relieved the Hancock circus has rolled into town (has he resigned yet?!) or I'd suggest this alarming and upsetting public health blunder would be commanding greater attention:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57609034
Of course, with the announcement (conveniently?) only being made on the afternoon Holyrood went into recess (despite the error being flagged up to the government in March) there will be less scope for parliamentary scrutiny. Sure, a ****-up on this scale takes time to investigate but I'd agree with those opposition MSPs questioning the timing of the announcement. Oh, and I should state right away that this is only my opinion, lest certain posters start asking me for hard evidence of an SNP cover-up :wink:
Oh FFS another smoking gun that Sturgeon was sitting on.
Moulin Yarns
26-06-2021, 12:11 PM
The issue appears political according to Labour and the Lib Dems:
(Scottish Labour health spokeswoman Jackie Baillie) "It is astounding to learn that throughout this Nicola Sturgeon was aware of this scandal and did not say a word.
"It is hard to see this as anything other than playing politics with people's health."
And Liberal Democrat health spokesman Alex Cole-Hamilton claimed the error had been "deliberately hidden from the public" until after last month's Scottish Parliament election.
He added: "It is a cynical abuse of power to only disclose this serious adverse event months later and on the afternoon when parliament breaks up for the summer."
Re the question you refer to, I must have missed it. I'm not on here every day, but I'll have a look back to see what it was.
OK all that proves is that the Scottish branch of the Labour Party, the Liberal Democrats and tories are all politicising the tragic circumstances and it is not the SNP.
Ozyhibby
26-06-2021, 12:44 PM
Are the SNP being accused of covering up something bad that happened under the Tories more than 20 years ago? Why would they do that?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Peevemor
26-06-2021, 12:48 PM
Are the SNP being accused of covering up something bad that happened under the Tories more than 20 years ago? Why would they do that?
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkThey're being accused of not putting everything right in the couple of months since they've had the dossier (and during a global health crisis).
Seems fair enough!
WeeRussell
26-06-2021, 01:50 PM
The Scottish government will be relieved the Hancock circus has rolled into town (has he resigned yet?!) or I'd suggest this alarming and upsetting public health blunder would be commanding greater attention:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57609034
Of course, with the announcement (conveniently?) only being made on the afternoon Holyrood went into recess (despite the error being flagged up to the government in March) there will be less scope for parliamentary scrutiny. Sure, a ****-up on this scale takes time to investigate but I'd agree with those opposition MSPs questioning the timing of the announcement. Oh, and I should state right away that this is only my opinion, lest certain posters start asking me for hard evidence of an SNP cover-up :wink:
Dear lord, you seem even more relentless and boring with a hangover 😣
The issue appears political according to Labour and the Lib Dems:
(Scottish Labour health spokeswoman Jackie Baillie) "It is astounding to learn that throughout this Nicola Sturgeon was aware of this scandal and did not say a word.
"It is hard to see this as anything other than playing politics with people's health."
And Liberal Democrat health spokesman Alex Cole-Hamilton claimed the error had been "deliberately hidden from the public" until after last month's Scottish Parliament election.
He added: "It is a cynical abuse of power to only disclose this serious adverse event months later and on the afternoon when parliament breaks up for the summer."
Re the question you refer to, I must have missed it. I'm not on here every day, but I'll have a look back to see what it was.
You're hysterical.
wookie70
26-06-2021, 03:17 PM
Surely it would depend on whether every woman concerned had been contacted. If they had and the Health Boards had put right what went wrong then there wasn't a rush and the pandemic would take prominence. However, if making it public would have made sure women could be alerted quickly and get any treatment needed then it should have been publicised quickly. I read it yesterday and I am sure there was a post 1997 element too but not sure how long after. My gut says there is nothing in it and the SNP have done the right thing in not dragging previous administrations through the political mud on such a sensitive, important and personal nature.
He's here!
26-06-2021, 03:46 PM
I'm sure you can tell me, but what are the complications?
Snp and Greens have been in talks, that's all so far, no formal or informal agreement yet been made.
Members of the Greens urge caution because of perception of homophobic and transphobic opinion in the SNP.
If there are proven to be those views within the SNP then the green party, quite rightly, have reasons to be careful as to getting into an agreement with the SNP.
Do you agree that the SNP are transphobic and/or homophobic?
Do you think that the Greens should not be worried?
Are these the unanswered questions you were referring to earlier?
If so then no, I don't imagine the SNP are any more transphobic than any other party but as the party in government I think they take more flak for it. Those members of the party being accused of transphobia (most prominently Joanna Cherry) are, in my view, being demonised by a relatively small (yet high profile) body who refuse to respect the views of those who regard biology as having a part to play in women's rights. Harvie indulges this kind of nonsense and I'd say it should be the SNP voicing concern about a coalition with his party than the other way around.
I'm off to check out the Wales match so apologies in advance if you want to throw some more questions at me and I don't respond immediately :wink:
cabbageandribs1875
26-06-2021, 05:46 PM
Glasgow MP moved to safe house after death threat - BBC News (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57614736?fbclid=IwAR36_-HnNmi7PJK2_smiC3-lBWA3MK7EbR558F8YlyOg9cH7WAzSu8kOAPI)
A Glasgow MP who moved herself to a safe house after a death threat wants women in public life to have more protection.
Carol Monaghan feared for her and her family's lives when online abuse turned into the detailed threat.
Earlier this month Jonathan Bell, 35, admitted his behaviour caused her "fear or alarm".
put the vile coward behind bars :agree:
and elsewhere..
Jo Cox’s sister, Labour candidate Kim Leadbeater, heckled and chased on campaign trail | The Independent (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/kim-leadbeater-jo-cox-sister-labour-b1873065.html)
no doubt stirred up by that little PoS Galloway and his begging muslims for their votes
JimBHibees
27-06-2021, 08:16 PM
Glasgow MP moved to safe house after death threat - BBC News (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57614736?fbclid=IwAR36_-HnNmi7PJK2_smiC3-lBWA3MK7EbR558F8YlyOg9cH7WAzSu8kOAPI)
A Glasgow MP who moved herself to a safe house after a death threat wants women in public life to have more protection.
Carol Monaghan feared for her and her family's lives when online abuse turned into the detailed threat.
Earlier this month Jonathan Bell, 35, admitted his behaviour caused her "fear or alarm".
put the vile coward behind bars :agree:
and elsewhere..
Jo Cox’s sister, Labour candidate Kim Leadbeater, heckled and chased on campaign trail | The Independent (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/kim-leadbeater-jo-cox-sister-labour-b1873065.html)
no doubt stirred up by that little PoS Galloway and his begging muslims for their votes
Absolutely shameful Jo Cox sister getting harassed. Disgusting. Galloway and his extreme ilk really are very dangerous
He's here!
27-06-2021, 10:39 PM
Absolutely shameful Jo Cox sister getting harassed. Disgusting. Galloway and his extreme ilk really are very dangerous
Do we know Galloway had a hand in this? He's maverick for sure but would he really endorse such behaviour?
Re the by-election, I appreciate the sentiment behind Cox's sister standing but Labour must harbour concerns that she lacks any sort of political experience. In fact, I think I'm right in saying she only joined the party a few weeks ago. It's no secret that there are those within the Labour camp who would not be unhappy to see the party suffer another humiliating by-election defeat if it hastened the departure of Starmer so it can't have been easy for her on the campaign trail.
The Tory hopes might take a knock from the Hancock fallout, thus opening a window for Galloway who will command a good chunk of the Muslim vote, though perhaps not as much as he hopes to cause an upset.
Future17
28-06-2021, 07:26 AM
So this was mostly pre 1997 but some further women post 1997 are impacted also? The SG got the report about this in March? Just isn't very clear from the BBC link there. So are they saying that the SNP government are to blame for pre 97 and post 97 mistakes? Or is it that they are saying that the SG should have released these figures earlier as soon as the report came in? I'm really not clear on who is being accused if what here. It is indeed a tragedy for anyone if they have had health issues or died due to errors but I'm not seeing how this is today's SGs fault. This is something that has been going on since before there was even a Scottish Parliament and also during Labour's time in office. As I say I am 100% not belittling the issue and it is tragic but it would seem that the ones making political capital out of it are Annie Wells and Cole-Hamilton.
Right. Let me explain that something that dates back to at least 1997 can't be blamed on the SNP because they were not in government then.
Right, let me explain that the failure of the cervical screening process is not political.
Right, when will you answer the questions I asked you on Thursday?
Oh look, you've done your usual trick of posting something that is a bash the SNP (in your head) then immediately run away.
It's disappointing but not surprising that some will look to gain political capital from this. Instead of wasting time on finger pointing everyone should concentrate on the most important issue, ie. the women concerned.
Are the SNP being accused of covering up something bad that happened under the Tories more than 20 years ago? Why would they do that?
They're being accused of not putting everything right in the couple of months since they've had the dossier (and during a global health crisis).
Seems fair enough!
I think the suggestion is that it's a failure of the current Scottish Government that it's taken approximately three months to identify and write to people who may have been affected.
Moulin Yarns
28-06-2021, 07:49 AM
I think the suggestion is that it's a failure of the current Scottish Government that it's taken approximately three months to identify and write to people who may have been affected.
Who in the Scottish Government was doing this?
I imagine nobody, but it's more likely to be health boards?
Future17
28-06-2021, 08:17 AM
Who in the Scottish Government was doing this?
I imagine nobody, but it's more likely to be health boards?
Based on the info which we've been provided with, the SG was made aware of the matter in March. From that time, the SG would have had Oversight of the NHS Scotland response - probably Elinor Mitchell directly, reporting to Jeane Freeman initially and then Humza Yousaf.
Based on the info which we've been provided with, the SG was made aware of the matter in March. From that time, the SG would have had Oversight of the NHS Scotland response - probably Elinor Mitchell directly, reporting to Jeane Freeman initially and then Humza Yousaf.
The NHS tracking down 200,000 women in 3 months, whilst also dealing with a pandemic is no mean feat I'd imagine.
Just Alf
28-06-2021, 08:32 AM
The NHS tracking down 200,000 women in 3 months, whilst also dealing with a pandemic is no mean feat I'd imagine.
and validating the original data as well
Future17
28-06-2021, 08:34 AM
The NHS tracking down 200,000 women in 3 months, whilst also dealing with a pandemic is no mean feat I'd imagine.
I'd agree.
Moulin Yarns
28-06-2021, 08:34 AM
and validating the original data as well
And blaming the government for the tardiness 😉
Crunchie
28-06-2021, 10:04 AM
I have decided to stay away from these threads now.
I hope you change your mind :aok:
ronaldo7
06-07-2021, 11:33 AM
https://www.gcu.ac.uk/theuniversity/universitynews/2021-paramedicstudentstoget10000bursary/
SNP getting on with the day job. :aok:
Glasgow Caledonian University, which runs Scotland’s leading full-time undergraduate degree course in paramedic science, welcomed the Scottish Government’s announcement to award students a £10,000 annual bursary.
Health Secretary Humza Yousaf revealed today (July 1) that hundreds of paramedic students will benefit from the new scheme being introduced in September this year.
The University’s School of Health and Life Sciences Acting Dean Professor Anita Simmers said: “We are delighted that the education of our future paramedic workforce has been recognised in line with other non-medical professions.
“Our paramedics are leaders in emergency medicine and have been at the forefront throughout the pandemic. They are integral to our vision for a sustainable and innovative healthcare delivery.”
She also paid tribute to the tenacity of students who have been fighting for the same bursary as nursing students for months through their “incredibly positive” Pay Student Paramedics campaign.
Ninety-five students on the BSc Paramedic Science programme at Glasgow Caledonian University joined the COVID-19 NHS emergency response last April.
An estimated 668 students will be eligible for the Paramedic, Nursing and Midwifery Student Bursary (PNMSB) for courses starting this September. The number of eligible students is expected to rise to almost 900 next year.
Scottish-domiciled paramedic students who have already applied for undergraduate student funding do not need to re-apply. The Student Awards Agency Scotland (SAAS) will automatically reassign students to the new funding package.
Mr Yousaf said: "The introduction of this bursary for our paramedic students fulfils this Government's pledge to bolster support for this crucial service.
"Paramedics have been a driving force in maintaining NHS services throughout the COVID-19 pandemic and I am determined to ensure we attract and support the next generation of these vital workers.
"Scottish student paramedics, studying in Scotland, will be able to apply for a bursary of £10,000 a year, compared with the £5,000 bursary announced last year by the UK Government in England. These Scottish paramedic students can also apply for other associated additional allowances.
“Scottish paramedic students studying in the rest of the UK will continue to receive the current undergraduate funding package of tuition fee loan, income-assessed living cost loans and bursary, as well as other additional grants they may be entitled to.
"Our allied health professionals are the third largest part of our NHS workforce and this announcement underlines our determination to remobilise the service as we emerge safely from the pandemic lockdown."
Pauline Howie, Chief Executive of the Scottish Ambulance Service, said: “This is fantastic news for current and prospective students across the country. They are an important part of our workforce and this announcement will be a real boost which will help encourage the paramedics of the future.
"Our staff do an amazing job each day and this additional financial support is welcome.
“Student paramedics have been in paid employment in a variety of roles during the pandemic and we are continuing to recruit additional staff across a variety of roles to help further improve services for patients.”
Future17
09-07-2021, 08:30 AM
I get the feeling the SNP need to get a grip on James Dornan before he becomes a liability.
Keith_M
09-07-2021, 10:14 AM
I get the feeling the SNP need to get a grip on James Dornan before he becomes a liability.
I think it's already a bit late for that.
Not to put too fine a point on it, the guy's an idiot.
He's here!
10-07-2021, 09:15 AM
I think it's already a bit late for that.
Not to put too fine a point on it, the guy's an idiot.
The way that bampot's going he'll fall foul of his own government's hate crime bill. Comes across as a vile individual. Or maybe, as you say, just an eejit.
Smartie
10-07-2021, 09:53 AM
The way that bampot's going he'll fall foul of his own government's hate crime bill. Comes across as a vile individual. Or maybe, as you say, just an eejit.
He's an absolute cretin who is, in my opinion, now harming the causes he claims to support.
He's an absolute cretin who is, in my opinion, now harming the causes he claims to support.
It surprises me how poor all the parties vetting procedures seem to be and this is now affecting the SNP since they've become more popular in recent years with shed loads more seats and therfore candidates.
I doubt there's a week goes by in the UK where there isn't a local or national controversy because some elected representative has been a twat ... or worse.
He's here!
12-07-2021, 12:05 PM
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/072B/production/_119353810_herald.png
I don't have a Herald subscription to post a link but they seem to have been doing a bit of digging around their headline story for a while now. The sort of allegations Westminster gets slaughtered for.
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/072B/production/_119353810_herald.png
I don't have a Herald subscription to post a link but they seem to have been doing a bit of digging around their headline story for a while now. The sort of allegations Westminster gets slaughtered for.
If only you knew what the article said.
Peevemor
12-07-2021, 12:16 PM
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/072B/production/_119353810_herald.png
I don't have a Herald subscription to post a link but they seem to have been doing a bit of digging around their headline story for a while now. The sort of allegations Westminster gets slaughtered for.
"Hundreds of meetings between Scottish ministers and multinationals, wealthy individuals and other influential organisations were left off the lobbying register in 2020 due to loopholes in legislation"
Loopholes in legislation? So within the rules then?
Why doesn't the headline read "SNP GOVERNMENT DON'T BREAK ANY RULES"?
Santa Cruz
12-07-2021, 12:49 PM
"Hundreds of meetings between Scottish ministers and multinationals, wealthy individuals and other influential organisations were left off the lobbying register in 2020 due to loopholes in legislation"
Loopholes in legislation? So within the rules then?
Why doesn't the headline read "SNP GOVERNMENT DON'T BREAK ANY RULES"?
That's like saying tax avoidance is acceptable as opposed to tax evasion is not, no?
Looking to gain from loopholes in any legislation is a morally questionable practice. Why doesn't it say "SNP exploit loopholes in legislation not fit for purpose and in urgent need of reform"?
Just want to add I can't read the article, just responding to the summary you have posted.
Future17
12-07-2021, 12:58 PM
That's like saying tax avoidance is acceptable as opposed to tax evasion is not, no?
Looking to gain from loopholes in any legislation is a morally questionable practice. Why doesn't it say "SNP exploit loopholes in legislation not fit for purpose and in urgent need of reform"?
Just want to add I can't read the article, just responding to the summary you have posted.
Is the term "loophole" not quite subjective though? Loophole suggests an unintended lack of coverage in legislation, which hasn't been established here. It could just be the legislation isn't intended to cover whatever it is that's being alleged.
Peevemor
12-07-2021, 12:59 PM
That's like saying tax avoidance is acceptable as opposed to tax evasion is not, no?
Looking to gain from loopholes in any legislation is a morally questionable practice. Why doesn't it say "SNP exploit loopholes in legislation not fit for purpose and in urgent need of reform"?
Just want to add I can't read the article, just responding to the summary you have posted.
I can't read it either, but the first line is a bit of a giveaway. If the government aren't required by the rules to register certain meetings then so be it. Lobbying is just a slightly more open form of how governments have been run since they existed - pressure from the powerful and back scratching. I don't like it but it's a fact of life.
Anyway, I'm not rolling in dosh by any means, but I'll avoid tax when I can - as long as it won't come back to bite me on the bum further down the line, ie. that it's legal.
JeMeSouviens
12-07-2021, 01:01 PM
That's like saying tax avoidance is acceptable as opposed to tax evasion is not, no?
Looking to gain from loopholes in any legislation is a morally questionable practice. Why doesn't it say "SNP exploit loopholes in legislation not fit for purpose and in urgent need of reform"?
Just want to add I can't read the article, just responding to the summary you have posted.
Had a quick squint at the article. The gist is face to face meetings are covered by the rules and recorded. Telephone calls aren't. Obv in covid times there have been a lot more remote meetings.
It probably just boils down to civil servants applying the rules as they're written. Heaven forfend.
Santa Cruz
12-07-2021, 01:04 PM
Is the term "loophole" not quite subjective though? Loophole suggests an unintended lack of coverage in legislation, which hasn't been established here. It could just be the legislation isn't intended to cover whatever it is that's being alleged.
Aye possibly, hard to know when you're reading a summary, but I would suggest such types of legislation should be water tight to avoid any potential for exploitation or unfounded allegations.
Santa Cruz
12-07-2021, 01:17 PM
I can't read it either, but the first line is a bit of a giveaway. If the government aren't required by the rules to register certain meetings then so be it. Lobbying is just a slightly more open form of how governments have been run since they existed - pressure from the powerful and back scratching. I don't like it but it's a fact of life.
Anyway, I'm not rolling in dosh by any means, but I'll avoid tax when I can - as long as it won't come back to bite me on the bum further down the line, ie. that it's legal.
It doesn't have to be a fact of life if the legislation was reformed to include far more scrutiny, transparency and accountability.
Each to their own at least your honest about it. Your average joe gets their salary through payroll systems, tax avoidance is not an option for the majority of the working poor, of which there are far too many in this country.
weecounty hibby
12-07-2021, 02:01 PM
It doesn't have to be a fact of life if the legislation was reformed to include far more scrutiny, transparency and accountability.
Each to their own at least your honest about it. Your average joe gets their salary through payroll systems, tax avoidance is not an option for the majority of the working poor, of which there are far too many in this country.
Ever paid cash in hand for work being done to your car, garden, house etc? Tax avoidance, simple as that. What gets me more is the multinationals that pay virtually nothing in tax, or the rich who can afford to pay their tax lawyers a fortune to help them avoid paying a bigger fortune in tax. Various governments would rather hammer your ordinary man in the street rather than go after the big corporations. And the difference in numbers is huge, more money to be made from those corporations than us plebs
Santa Cruz
12-07-2021, 02:48 PM
Ever paid cash in hand for work being done to your car, garden, house etc? Tax avoidance, simple as that. What gets me more is the multinationals that pay virtually nothing in tax, or the rich who can afford to pay their tax lawyers a fortune to help them avoid paying a bigger fortune in tax. Various governments would rather hammer your ordinary man in the street rather than go after the big corporations. And the difference in numbers is huge, more money to be made from those corporations than us plebs
Wouldn't disagree with any of that, Gov's should be going after the big corps, they should also be leading by example imo.
ronaldo7
12-07-2021, 02:55 PM
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/072B/production/_119353810_herald.png
I don't have a Herald subscription to post a link but they seem to have been doing a bit of digging around their headline story for a while now. The sort of allegations Westminster gets slaughtered for.
I'd say the Scottish government are the most scrutinised of all UK governments. If only the unionists would hold their own to account more often we'd get on a lot better.
degenerated
12-07-2021, 04:25 PM
If only you knew what the article said.That doesn't usually stop him. :greengrin
Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk
Moulin Yarns
13-07-2021, 11:31 AM
🚨 Breaking 🚨
Police have launched an investigation 'in relation to donations that were made to the Scottish National Party'
https://t.co/Z9Em3j4tHX
Some people will be ecstatic 😉
Peevemor
13-07-2021, 11:46 AM
🚨 Breaking 🚨
Police have launched an investigation 'in relation to donations that were made to the Scottish National Party'
https://t.co/Z9Em3j4tHX
Some people will be ecstatic 😉
Why do i get the feeling that this will be another waste of time and resources. :rolleyes:
Future17
13-07-2021, 12:47 PM
Why do i get the feeling that this will be another waste of time and resources. :rolleyes:
If nothing else, those who donated and are concerned might get a straight answer to their questions.
xyz23jc
13-07-2021, 07:57 PM
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/072B/production/_119353810_herald.png
I don't have a Herald subscription to post a link but they seem to have been doing a bit of digging around their headline story for a while now. The sort of allegations Westminster gets slaughtered for.
Search and ye shall find....The usual suspects#! :wink:
Don't ya just love our positive Scottish media, anyone would think they almost have an agenda... Meanwhile about the United kingdom.... Barely a cheep! Relentless#! :greengrin
He's here!
14-07-2021, 08:46 AM
If nothing else, those who donated and are concerned might get a straight answer to their questions.
That's seems to be what's at the heart of this, the lack of a straight answer from the SNP other than to state that the 'ring-fenced' 600k is in some unspecified way 'woven through' the accounts. If it's true that the funds raised were not to be spent on party business and used only for a future independence campaign then why the difficulty in explaining why the money is nowhere to be seen in accounts which showed the party's net assets to be less than half that amount?
He's here!
14-07-2021, 08:51 AM
He's an absolute cretin who is, in my opinion, now harming the causes he claims to support.
I see the SNP have now apologised to Rees-Mogg for Dornan's comments.
Rees-Mogg himself doesn't seem unduly offended mind you:
"I think this SNP MSP is entitled to discuss the likely prospects of my immortal soul. It's quite interesting that you're getting a discussion of hell in public life, I think a theologically interesting concept and I’m glad he takes such an orthodox Catholic view of the reality of hell, that is encouraging. But I think of course he is entitled to say that. That is perfectly fair. I am a public figure. I’ve gone into this business – nobody forced me to become a Member of Parliament. I did it of my own volition and people are free to say things about the prospects of my soul, are they not? I think that's completely reasonable."
Peevemor
14-07-2021, 08:51 AM
That's seems to be what's at the heart of this, the lack of a straight answer from the SNP other than to state that the 'ring-fenced' 600k is in some unspecified way 'woven through' the accounts. If it's true that the funds raised were not to be spent on party business and used only for a future independence campaign then why the difficulty in explaining why the money is nowhere to be seen in accounts which showed the party's net assets to be less than half that amount?It's already been explained on here how that can happen. I don't know why the SNP haters are so concerned.
It's already been explained on here how that can happen. I don't know why the SNP haters are so concerned.An explanation is no good to Unionists. Ignoring any given and carrying on chucking mud is the point here.
Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk
Future17
14-07-2021, 09:18 AM
I see the SNP have now apologised to Rees-Mogg for Dornan's comments.
Rees-Mogg himself doesn't seem unduly offended mind you:
"I think this SNP MSP is entitled to discuss the likely prospects of my immortal soul. It's quite interesting that you're getting a discussion of hell in public life, I think a theologically interesting concept and I’m glad he takes such an orthodox Catholic view of the reality of hell, that is encouraging. But I think of course he is entitled to say that. That is perfectly fair. I am a public figure. I’ve gone into this business – nobody forced me to become a Member of Parliament. I did it of my own volition and people are free to say things about the prospects of my soul, are they not? I think that's completely reasonable."
Which is more proof that what was said was objectively inappropriate in the circumstances.
It's already been explained on here how that can happen. I don't know why the SNP haters are so concerned.
People on here have offered an explanation, or explanations to be more accurate. For starters, the people who have offered those explanations have no idea if that's what happened, as the SNP hasn't given straight answers to the questions asked of it. Also, none of the explanations offered on here address the fact the some people who donated feel they've been misled.
I think it's unhelpful to talk about "SNP haters" in this context, not least because it just reads like deflection. If the answer is as offered by any of the posters on here, why has the SNP not explained it to those who donated and are concerned?
Future17
14-07-2021, 09:21 AM
An explanation is no good to Unionists. Ignoring any given and carrying on chucking mud is the point here.
Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk
I'm fairly sure none of the people who donated are Unionists and I'm not.
On the contrary, it's because the people affected support independence that this is so important.
Ozyhibby
14-07-2021, 09:23 AM
Which is more proof that what was said was objectively inappropriate in the circumstances.
People on here have offered an explanation, or explanations to be more accurate. For starters, the people who have offered those explanations have no idea if that's what happened, as the SNP hasn't given straight answers to the questions asked of it. Also, none of the explanations offered on here address the fact the some people who donated feel they've been misled.
I think it's unhelpful to talk about "SNP haters" in this context, not least because it just reads like deflection. If the answer is as offered by any of the posters on here, why has the SNP not explained it to those who donated and are concerned?
They have, multiple times now.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Future17
14-07-2021, 09:28 AM
They have, multiple times now.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They haven't. There's been various assurances given about future spending and vague references to past spending, but no explanation of why the available evidence shows the information given to donors was either false or misleading.
Ozyhibby
14-07-2021, 09:33 AM
They haven't. There's been various assurances given about future spending and vague references to past spending, but no explanation of why the available evidence shows the information given to donors was either false or misleading.
They were given £600k to spend on the Indy campaign. They will spend many times that amount on the Indy campaign.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Future17
14-07-2021, 09:39 AM
They were given £600k to spend on the Indy campaign. They will spend many times that amount on the Indy campaign.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't think that's in dispute...but where will the money they spend on such a campaign come from? Because it won't cone from the money already donated by those who were told their donations would be spent on such a campaign.
Ozyhibby
14-07-2021, 09:40 AM
I see the SNP have now apologised to Rees-Mogg for Dornan's comments.
Rees-Mogg himself doesn't seem unduly offended mind you:
"I think this SNP MSP is entitled to discuss the likely prospects of my immortal soul. It's quite interesting that you're getting a discussion of hell in public life, I think a theologically interesting concept and I’m glad he takes such an orthodox Catholic view of the reality of hell, that is encouraging. But I think of course he is entitled to say that. That is perfectly fair. I am a public figure. I’ve gone into this business – nobody forced me to become a Member of Parliament. I did it of my own volition and people are free to say things about the prospects of my soul, are they not? I think that's completely reasonable."
Dornan is a dick, I don’t think many on here will defend him but keeping Rees-Mogg in play is a smart move tactically. So long as he thinks and his Tory chums think that he is the man to stick it up the Scots then that can only be good for the Indy campaign. We need to keep him as engaged as possible in Scottish politics.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Peevemor
14-07-2021, 10:27 AM
I don't think that's in dispute...but where will the money they spend on such a campaign come from? Because it won't cone from the money already donated by those who were told their donations would be spent on such a campaign.Effectively it will, as has been explained time and time again.
Future17
14-07-2021, 10:51 AM
Effectively it will, as has been explained time and time again.
Which, in the way it has been explained, means some people who donated feel they were misled. I think it requires a pro-SNP blindness not to acknowledge that.
Peevemor
14-07-2021, 11:07 AM
Which, in the way it has been explained, means some people who donated feel they were misled. I think it requires a pro-SNP blindness not to acknowledge that.Not at all. I think it needs an anti-SNP bloody mindedness to reach for the blinkers and continue to cry foul.
CropleyWasGod
14-07-2021, 12:28 PM
There are 2 issues here for me.
The first is the police involvement. That could only be down to alleged theft or fraud. Such theft wouldn't have occurred in the pre 2020 period, as the auditors would have picked it up. It could only have occurred in the last 18 months, and none of us have any knowledge of that.
The second is the alleged spending of apparently ring-fenced funds. Having seen the accounts in question, I'm far from convinced that these have been dealt with appropriately
Spending ring-fenced funds on other activities is not illegal, and shouldn't interest the law, but it's ****house behaviour and doesn't look good.
Peevemor
14-07-2021, 01:09 PM
There are 2 issues here for me.
The first is the police involvement. That could only be down to alleged theft or fraud. Such theft wouldn't have occurred in the pre 2020 period, as the auditors would have picked it up. It could only have occurred in the last 18 months, and none of us have any knowledge of that.
The second is the alleged spending of apparently ring-fenced funds. Having seen the accounts in question, I'm far from convinced that these have been dealt with appropriately
Spending ring-fenced funds on other activities is not illegal, and shouldn't interest the law, but it's ****house behaviour and doesn't look good.
They haven't spent them though.
Future17
14-07-2021, 02:47 PM
Not at all. I think it needs an anti-SNP bloody mindedness to reach for the blinkers and continue to cry foul.
This makes no sense and you must know it. Why would people who have donated to the SNP show "anti-SNP bloody mindedness"?
They haven't spent them though.
Where are they then?
He's here!
14-07-2021, 02:54 PM
It's already been explained on here how that can happen. I don't know why the SNP haters are so concerned.
I either missed that or have forgotten it. If you've got time (ie to save me scrolling back through the pages!) can you remind me what the explanation was? I'm unclear where the ring-fenced money has ended up. If it's been spent then how is it ring-fenced? Or is ring-fenced just one of those throwaway phrases those who donated to the fund shouldn't really take literally?
Peevemor
14-07-2021, 03:01 PM
Read the thread and the various quotes - I really can't be bothered going over it again.
I'm confident that the SNP haven't done anything dogy with the donations. If a few unionists or Salmond fans wan't to kick up a fuss over nothing then so be it. I'm more worried about the waste of time & resources than anything else.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.