Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Did she declare anything for her for her grace and favour residence in Charlotte Square ? :greengrin
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Did she declare anything for her for her grace and favour residence in Charlotte Square ? :greengrin
Hold on, you have it wrong. I expressed an opinion based on the fact I don't believe a couple as high profile as the FM and the leader of the SNP and her husband who is the CEO of the SNP lent the party a huge sum of money and they never discussed it or she can't remember discussing it. You think you would recall lending over £100K to anyone or anything, never mind the party you lead. (I am still allowed to have opinions I hope) A poster said it's definitely not a lie (that she never knew anything about it) and I asked how he could know that. That's about it. Really not looking to drag this on and I am wanting to give the poor Admins a rest for a night.Quote:
Originally Posted by WeeRussell
Works for religion. You can't prove there's no god so it must be true.Quote:
Originally Posted by WeeRussell
As it is (AIUI) provided for security reasons, it's not taxable.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
But she seldom uses it , prefers her wee pad through the West.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Security not required there I take it. :greengrin
The level of 'debate' on this board in recent weeks is frankly embarrassing. We have tried to be patient, we have posted multiple warnings publicly (which are wilfully ignored within seconds), we have given warnings and infractions privately, we have closed threads and have reiterated the rules multiple times and still this utter nonsense continues.
Take this as a final warning. If this level of childish behaviour continues then posters will be removed from the board and the Holy Ground itself will be closing indefinitely.
We are stretched thin as an admin team currently. We all have a life of outside of here and yet we are dealing with multiple reported posts a day from the same handful of posters about posts by another handful of posters.
Put each other on ignore, turn the other cheek and grow up.
If she seldom uses BH, whether it's provided for security or not, there will be very little (or no) tax due on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
Security on her personal residence will be the responsibility of the SG, and not taxable on her.
I would say that the security needs of NS are considerable and growing.[emoji22]Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Is Bute House not owned by the SG, therefore nothing to do with her tax, it's an official residence of the FM.
If it's not provided for security reasons, then it is taxable. The amount will depend on the extent to which she uses it.Quote:
Originally Posted by J-C
If it is provided for security purposes, then it's not taxable.
Russell's teapot is an analogy, formulated by the philosopher Bertrand Russell, to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making empirically unfalsifiable claims, rather than shifting the burden of disproof to others. Russell specifically applied his analogy in the context of religion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibrandenburg
It got a mention on Richard Osmond’s house of games episode tonight too, albeit a repeat!Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
It was on Only Connect tonight as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by WeeRussell
Scratch that.. it was only connect I seen it on 😂👍Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
Too many quiz programmes on a Monday when still recovering from the weekend…
Pre-devolution, Bute House was the official residence of the secretary of state for Scotland. Since 1885?
Pure scunner for the anti-Nat, anti-devolutionists.
Today's front page of the English Telegraph's front story is Salmond laying into Sturgeon.
Scenes, Jeff! When was the last time the Telegraph bigged him up????
What is the prize? Really, what is the bloody prize?
Yep, a headline to influence all these hunners of Torygraph readers who were thinking about moving to Scotland and voting for the SNP.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glory Lurker
How can you mistake Richard osman for Victoria Coren Mitchell 😂Quote:
Originally Posted by WeeRussell
Piece on the BBC with some details of Nicola’s tax return.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla...itics-64537218
She pays a large chunk of her income ( £ 58,331 ) into her pension pot held by the Scottish Parliamentary Pension Scheme. Guess her expenses and hubby income cover most of her living costs.
What is puzzling is the article goes on to say her tax charge of £7,991 payable because because her pension contribution exceeded the £40,000 allowable was met by parliamentary Pension Scheme , not Nicola herself.
Is there an explanation for this or is this the biased BBC at it again.
Calls today for an enquiry, I'd be doubtfulQuote:
Originally Posted by James310
Is he worried about women’s rights?Quote:
Originally Posted by Glory Lurker
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don’t know but it was definitely either Petrie or Sturgeon’s fault.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
Eis to start targeted action
EIS
@EISUnion
The response from Scottish Government & COSLA has been, essentially, nil – & this now has forced an escalation in our action. The offer of a 9% real-terms pay cut, which is what is on the table, will never be acceptable
https://www.eis.org.uk/latest-news/targetedaction
It's in most of the papers. He was speaking at the Alba Burns Supper in Dundee, where he said Sturgeon has 'thrown away 30 years of steadily building support for independence for the sake of some self-indulgent nonsense'.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glory Lurker
The footage is shown here, the main take from which IMHO is that he doesn't look in the best of health:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...04446052732108
My point is, why is the Telegraph, in England, running it as the main story?Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
:boakQuote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk
I'd be a bit surprised if it was the main story in their English edition but the furore around the issue has been national news so I guess they will deem it worthy of the front-page, especially as this is, as far as I know, the first time Salmond has made his views known on the bill.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glory Lurker
It was main story today.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
Not a chance the basic newsworthiness of it merited that treatment. The establishment is scenting blood (rightly or wrongly) and they are chucking everything at it. They don't give a monkeys about the issue itself, it's all about attacking the SG.
Maybe they know something? Not unreasonable to suggest Sturgein may be considering her position.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glory Lurker
Not just the 'right wing' press making mileage from the Salmond intervention mind you:
Alex Salmond knows Nicola Sturgeon’s grip on power is slipping - New Statesman
There is only one pro-SNP newspaper. The Guardian have regularly criticised her so it's not a left v right thing and it's obviously not a pro-Salmomd thing. It's all about the media grasping at anything they can to turn voters against the SNP.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!