SNP are lying b******s as well !

[Pretty Boy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Isn't that just how police interviews are done in Scotland? Under caution?
Are you suggesting she's been accused of a criminal offence? That would be newsworthy.

You can be interviewed under caution without being arrested. Been there done it and bought the T shirt. That interview can then end with you being arrested (or as in this case can take place after you have been arrested) or you can be released. It's not uncommon to be invited for interview under caution voluntarily without the need for arrest. You are free to leave a voluntary interview under caution, after arrest you are not free to leave until the Police say so or times up (or at all if you are charged and remanded in custody).

I'd say the fact she was arrested is evidence that she is a suspect in a criminal investigation, part of the arrest procedure is that you are made aware of the reason you are being arrested and the laws you are suspected of breaking. Without that information being disclosed you can't be arrested. The full arrest procedure and criteria for arrest is as below:

Police must:

Identify themselves as the police
Tell you that you’re being arrested
Tell you what crime they think you’ve committed
Explain why it’s necessary to arrest you
Explain to you that you’re not free to leave

[greenginger]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Raising money to fight for independence and spending it on fighting for independence is against the law?

You know it was spent on fighting for independence, you must have inside info.

I’ve no idea what it was spent on or if it was even spent .

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Circular argument, here we are again. So what's the point of auditors?

https://www.pwc.com/m1/en/services/a...-an-audit.html

[Keith_M]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Circular argument, here we are again. So what's the point of auditors?

IMHO, very little.


"EY (Ernst & Young) is now banned from carrying out audits for firms of public interest in Germany for two years following an investigation into the company’s role in the Wirecard collapse."

"German payment processor Wirecard collapsed in 2020 after announcing that there was a €1.9 billion black hole in its accounts and that it was €3.2 billion in debt.

EY served as Wirecard’s auditor and certified its books, even when investors and journalists began to raise questions over the company's stability...."

https://www.fstech.co.uk/fst/EY_Audi...rd_Scandal.php

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You can be interviewed under caution without being arrested. Been there done it and bought the T shirt. That interview can then end with you being arrested (or as in this case can take place after you have been arrested) or you can be released. It's not uncommon to be invited for interview under caution voluntarily without the need for arrest. You are free to leave a voluntary interview under caution, after arrest you are not free to leave until the Police say so or times up (or at all if you are charged and remanded in custody).

I'd say the fact she was arrested is evidence that she is a suspect in a criminal investigation, part of the arrest procedure is that you are made aware of the reason you are being arrested and the laws you are suspected of breaking. Without that information being disclosed you can't be arrested. The full arrest procedure and criteria for arrest is as below:

Police must:

Identify themselves as the police
Tell you that you’re being arrested
Tell you what crime they think you’ve committed
Explain why it’s necessary to arrest you
Explain to you that you’re not free to leave

I think being arrested helps everyone in that it allows NS’s lawyers access to specific information that the police may have and also the charges she may face? Might explain the confidence of her statement on Sunday night?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Berwickhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You can be interviewed under caution without being arrested. Been there done it and bought the T shirt. That interview can then end with you being arrested (or as in this case can take place after you have been arrested) or you can be released. It's not uncommon to be invited for interview under caution voluntarily without the need for arrest. You are free to leave a voluntary interview under caution, after arrest you are not free to leave until the Police say so or times up (or at all if you are charged and remanded in custody).

I'd say the fact she was arrested is evidence that she is a suspect in a criminal investigation, part of the arrest procedure is that you are made aware of the reason you are being arrested and the laws you are suspected of breaking. Without that information being disclosed you can't be arrested. The full arrest procedure and criteria for arrest is as below:

Police must:

Identify themselves as the police
Tell you that you’re being arrested
Tell you what crime they think you’ve committed
Explain why it’s necessary to arrest you
Explain to you that you’re not free to leave

Missed the two most important things, entitlement to legal representation and the caution without those then interview is inadmissible

[Hibrandenburg]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Tried to split up the UK? Surely that would make her an enemy of the state.

I expect some future song writer will create a lyrical song about her escaping 'over the sea to Skye'...

...or at least they would if the Ferries aren't cancelled.

Rubbish, she'll be depicted Boudica like riding a camper van with razor sharp blades on the wheels, ransacking Camulodunum on route to Westminster in her struggle for justice and independence.

[Pretty Boy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think being arrested helps everyone in that it allows NS’s lawyers access to specific information that the police may have and also the charges she may face? Might explain the confidence of her statement on Sunday night?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yep I don't think saying NS is a suspect is all that controversial. Plenty people who find themselves as suspects are entirely innocent.

As I said above I have been interviewed under caution and whilst I was scoobied as to why I had been invited in as soon as I was there it was clear I was a suspect (though never formalised through arrest) so I didn't speak until I had a lawyer. In the end it was all fairly swiftly resolved but I'm glad I had a professional there with me.

[Mibbes Aye]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Giving money to the SNP to fight a new Independence campaign is just like giving money to the SNP.

Their whole Raison d'être is to achieve Independence for Scotland.

J

If they are forming a government their whole raison d’etre should be to govern, first and foremost. That’s what we, as taxpayers, pay them for.

But that explains why Humza scrapped having a minister for social security and created a minister for independence.

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You know it was spent on fighting for independence, you must have inside info.

That's what the SNP do?

[degenerated]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If I remember correctly, the person who first raised the suggestion that money raised by the SNP for independence campaign was neither a member of the SNP or had donated to the fund. It's like he had an agenda against the SNP. He probably posts on here.

Sean Clerkin although I think wings over bath did all the spade work. It coincided with his volte face on the SNP after that time he got lifted and his computers seized.

[weecounty hibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Sean Clerkin although I think wings over bath did all the spade work. It coincided with his volte face on the SNP after that time he got lifted and his computers seized.

Yip, those fine upstanding folks with no axe to grind. Sean ****ing Clerkin, a nut job of the highest order. A racist ******** thrown out if most sane indy groups. And the rev Stu. Say no more!!

[Hibrandenburg]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If they are forming a government their whole raison d’etre should be to govern, first and foremost. That’s what we, as taxpayers, pay them for.

But that explains why Humza scrapped having a minister for social security and created a minister for independence.

Does the electorate trump the taxpayer? They were voted in on an independence ticket. Most people, certainly SNP supporters think they're doing a decent job of governing.

[degenerated]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yip, those fine upstanding folks with no axe to grind. Sean ****ing Clerkin, a nut job of the highest order. A racist ******** thrown out if most sane indy groups. And the rev Stu. Say no more!!

Sean Clerkin, the go to man for Glenn Campbell when the media want a photo op on nationalist nutters. Like that time with Jim Murphy, never seen anything so staged.

[Just Alf]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If they are forming a government their whole raison d’etre should be to govern, first and foremost. That’s what we, as taxpayers, pay them for.

But that explains why Humza scrapped having a minister for social security and created a minister for independence.

Of all the discussions going on in here today that is a good point, whilst indy was clearly on the manifesto and the SNP were voted in on that manifesto, indy IS part of "day job" but surely a Social Security portfolio is equal, if not more important as a "day job".


Going back.to.the circular argument though

The SNP have employed folks to create various papers (gone a bit quiet recently mind) all linked to a future campaign, so arguablycorrectlyspent?, I don't remember seeing anything stating the funds would be stuck in an account and only used to print leaflets, tv advertising or other expenses etc in the run up to an actual vote?

[Bristolhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If they are forming a government their whole raison d’etre should be to govern, first and foremost. That’s what we, as taxpayers, pay them for.

But that explains why Humza scrapped having a minister for social security and created a minister for independence.

But without the drive for Independence they wouldn’t be in existence. You can argue what you like about what takes precedence “Governing” or achieving the aim the party was set up for. But that’s for the electorate to decide. And so far and for the last 12 years the Scottish electorate have delivered a pro Independence majority.

Point is, if that’s “all they’ve got” then it’s flimsy at best.

I’m sure we’ll find out. Police do all sorts of investigations that come to nothing. It’s literally their job.

J

[Mibbes Aye]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

But without the drive for Independence they wouldn’t be in existence. You can argue what you like about what takes precedence “Governing” or achieving the aim the party was set up for. But that’s for the electorate to decide. And so far and for the last 12 years the Scottish electorate have delivered a pro Independence majority.

J

Their desire for independence doesn’t exist in a vacuum though. If they were elected to achieve independence they have failed miserably at it. And if they claim to be running the country, they have done a mediocre job at best.

Either way they are tired and failing. The drive for independence would be stronger if it engaged those in other political parties who supported it. But tying it to the SNP is failing the electorate and the taxpayer.

[Mibbes Aye]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

But without the drive for Independence they wouldn’t be in existence. You can argue what you like about what takes precedence “Governing” or achieving the aim the party was set up for. But that’s for the electorate to decide. And so far and for the last 12 years the Scottish electorate have delivered a pro Independence majority.

Point is, if that’s “all they’ve got” then it’s flimsy at best.

I’m sure we’ll find out. Police do all sorts of investigations that come to nothing. It’s literally their job.

J

Whats flimsy is doing a poor job at governing, but saying hey, you elected us to achieve independence. So we will just focus on that.

That’s a cop-out.

[Pretty Boy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Their desire for independence doesn’t exist in a vacuum though. If they were elected to achieve independence they have failed miserably at it. And if they claim to be running the country, they have done a mediocre job at best.

Either way they are tired and failing. The drive for independence would be stronger if it engaged those in other political parties who supported it. But tying it to the SNP is failing the electorate and the taxpayer.

I find the whole SNP/independence thing a bit of a catch 22.

In reality it is true they are the only show in town when it comes to independence but only because the majority of those who support independence have made that the case. There are many people, including on here, who openly admit they will continue to vote SNP regardless of performance until independence is achieved.

Of course supporters will argue independence is bigger than the SNP both as a concept and as a movement but for now it is inextricably tied to the electoral performance of the SNP and the voting behaviours of people on both sides of the debate reflects that. The broad church yes movement that existed in 2014 and the preceding years seems a long time ago now.

The issue is that link between SNP and independence means a vote for anyone other than the SNP would be twisted by some as a vote against independence in the same way any vote for the SNP is viewed as tacit approval of both independence and their record in government. It's why I didn't vote in the last Holyrood election, Scottish politics is gridlocked on a single issue and I didn't want my vote interpreted by either side as something it wasn't.

[Bristolhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Whats flimsy is doing a poor job at governing, but saying hey, you elected us to achieve independence. So we will just focus on that.

That’s a cop-out.

It’s what people keep voting for. Take it up with them.

J

[Skol]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That's what the SNP do?

I think the point you are overlooking is that the fundraiser said the money was being raised for and would be ringfenced to spend on indyref2.

Indyref2 has not happened and is not planned to happen, key all but £97k of the money going by the last accounts remained.

Is it criminal, I have said for a long time I don’t believe it is. Is it honest and transparent. Definitely not.

By all means keep going on defending this, but really the best thing here is for sturgeon, murrell etc to just be honest on the money spent spent and it’s case closed.

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Is it criminal, I have said for a long time I don’t believe it is. Is it honest and transparent. Definitely not.

By all means keep going on defending this, but really the best thing here is for sturgeon, murrell etc to just be honest on the money spent spent and it’s case closed.

The use to which the money was put was clearly explained in the SNP accounts. I know it sometimes seems that I bang on about accounts too much, but they are the official record of what the SNP has spent it's money on, and there is a very clear note in the 2021 accounts about this money. You may not agree with what the SNP did, but let's not talk about honesty and transparency - it's there for all to see.

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Their desire for independence doesn’t exist in a vacuum though. If they were elected to achieve independence they have failed miserably at it. And if they claim to be running the country, they have done a mediocre job at best.

Either way they are tired and failing. The drive for independence would be stronger if it engaged those in other political parties who supported it. But tying it to the SNP is failing the electorate and the taxpayer.

In your opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I find the whole SNP/independence thing a bit of a catch 22.

In reality it is true they are the only show in town when it comes to independence but only because the majority of those who support independence have made that the case. There are many people, including on here, who openly admit they will continue to vote SNP regardless of performance until independence is achieved.

Of course supporters will argue independence is bigger than the SNP both as a concept and as a movement but for now it is inextricably tied to the electoral performance of the SNP and the voting behaviours of people on both sides of the debate reflects that. The broad church yes movement that existed in 2014 and the preceding years seems a long time ago now.

The issue is that link between SNP and independence means a vote for anyone other than the SNP would be twisted by some as a vote against independence in the same way any vote for the SNP is viewed as tacit approval of both independence and their record in government. It's why I didn't vote in the last Holyrood election, Scottish politics is gridlocked on a single issue and I didn't want my vote interpreted by either side as something it wasn't.

Yes, and it is a shame for that.

Looking back we had the Campaign for a Scottish Assembly, which sort of evolved into the Constitutional Convention and they were pluralist, far less binary and divisive and as a consequence drew in people of all political persuasions and none.

I’m a rationalist and a pragmatist. I don’t think the current set-up works and I have an instinctive distrust of the “othering” process that often accompanies nationalism (plus I don’t think the models proposed so far would work).

Show me something that chimes with my values and looks like it would work and it will get my vote, whether it comes wrapped in red, yellow,’blue or any other colour. I’m a Labour Party supporter and member but that’s not hardwired into me, they just generally have been closest to my outlook.

[Mibbes Aye]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Of all the discussions going on in here today that is a good point, whilst indy was clearly on the manifesto and the SNP were voted in on that manifesto, indy IS part of "day job" but surely a Social Security portfolio is equal, if not more important as a "day job".


Going back.to.the circular argument though

The SNP have employed folks to create various papers (gone a bit quiet recently mind) all linked to a future campaign, so arguablycorrectlyspent?, I don't remember seeing anything stating the funds would be stuck in an account and only used to print leaflets, tv advertising or other expenses etc in the run up to an actual vote?

Thanks for the first part. I couldn’t believe it is just me who thinks it is terrible decision-making and abysmal optics to stop having a minister for social security and replace them with q minister for ‘independence’.

Re your second point it is also worth noting that a team of civil servants were drawn together to work on the independence campaign. That is our money again.

[He's here!]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Their desire for independence doesn’t exist in a vacuum though. If they were elected to achieve independence they have failed miserably at it. And if they claim to be running the country, they have done a mediocre job at best.

Either way they are tired and failing. The drive for independence would be stronger if it engaged those in other political parties who supported it. But tying it to the SNP is failing the electorate and the taxpayer.

Sturgeon's legacy is, in truth, exceedingly thin.

I guess maintaining the 100% record of former SNP First Ministers to be arrested is at least something to remember her by

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Sturgeon's legacy is, in truth, exceedingly thin.

I guess maintaining the 100% record of former SNP First Ministers to be arrested is at least something to remember her by

And it will be 100% not guilty as well. I’m sure Yousaf will be next.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[He's here!]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

And it will be 100% not guilty as well. I’m sure Yousaf will be next.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Salmond must be quietly regarding all this as a bit of karma.

[WhileTheChief..]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Their desire for independence doesn’t exist in a vacuum though. If they were elected to achieve independence they have failed miserably at it. And if they claim to be running the country, they have done a mediocre job at best.

Either way they are tired and failing. The drive for independence would be stronger if it engaged those in other political parties who supported it. But tying it to the SNP is failing the electorate and the taxpayer.

They will ever do any more than this. They need to be able to say "we need Indy for xxx to be better".

If our economy, NHS, education system etc were running above par under the SNP, the public would then rightly ask why do we need Indy.

It's why they are so dangerous in government. The better they do at governing, the less likely the country will vote for Indy.

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

They will ever do any more than this. They need to be able to say "we need Indy for xxx to be better".

If our economy, NHS, education system etc were running above par under the SNP, the public would then rightly ask why do we need Indy.

It's why they are so dangerous in government. The better they do at governing, the less likely the country will vote for Indy.

That makes no sense. The fact is the SNP have had to manage 13 years of Tory austerity and they have done so while providing the best govt in the UK.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk