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

***Mibbes Aye*** · 13-06-2023 02:31 PM

Originally Posted by He's here!

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

Both are awful. PMQs is pantomime point scoring and FMQs soporific. Required viewing for political nerds only.

There is far too much weight attached to PMQs by the media but as much as anything it gives them something to fill the bandwidth or the column inches.

Sometimes you do see a deeper approach at play though. A good Opposition should use Qs to find its best attack lines, and likewise a sitting leader should find their best counters.

Starmer’s best lines come from knowing the detail about the impact of the cost of loving crisis. It creates a difference between him and Sunak and reminds observers indirectly that Sunak is incredibly wealthy and therefore can’t relate to ordinary people.

Sunak is still searching for his best counter. Talking about unfunded promises plays into a powerful narrative about Labour being profligate, but the Tories lost any credibility on the economy after the Truss Experiment. When Rishi starts using Corbyn (like BoJo did), it doesn’t land because there is a set narrative that Starmer and the party are ruthlessly getting rid of any hint of Corbynism.

Where Starmer has been most quietly effective is when he talks to those sitting behind Sunak, highlighting the fractures they already feel. So when Starmer talks about the Tories 43 tax rises or whatever, it is not because he is low-tax or that he thinks the public are low-tax, it is because he knows Fory backbencher are low-tax and highlighting it helps cause disunity amongst the Tories. And disunity is a massive vote-loser.

So, bringing it back to FMQs, there is probably a lesson for the other leaders. FMQs are meant to be about holding the First Minister of the day to account. Exploiting the divisions behind the FM would seem sensible - as the leadership election showed, the SNP has lot of differentiation in the views of the party members, and to an extent, the MSPs.

***Mibbes Aye*** · 13-06-2023 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by JimBHibees

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

Bit like Murray himself unless he wants to discuss his latest union Jack clothing choice

Oi, find your own gags! None of that cross-party consensus here

***Mibbes Aye*** · 13-06-2023 02:35 PM

Originally Posted by JimBHibees

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

Is it even broadcast?

FMQs?

It is on BBC Parliament I think, not sure if Sky News or BBC News 24 cut to it but don’t think so.

***147lothian*** · 13-06-2023 02:56 PM

Originally Posted by He's here!

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

She certainly sailed close to the wind by questioning the integrity of the verdict.

I was surprised Nicola Sturgeon wasn't arrested for misleading parliament after Alex Salmon's not guilty verdict. No matter what anyone thinks of Alex Salmond, what he was put through by Nicola Sturgeon is unforgivable, a man of his age facing jail time and she questions the jury's verdict, it shows Nicola Sturgeon's true character.

***Ozyhibby*** · 13-06-2023 03:00 PM

Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye

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

There is far too much weight attached to PMQs by the media but as much as anything it gives them something to fill the bandwidth or the column inches.

Sometimes you do see a deeper approach at play though. A good Opposition should use Qs to find its best attack lines, and likewise a sitting leader should find their best counters.

Starmer’s best lines come from knowing the detail about the impact of the cost of loving crisis. It creates a difference between him and Sunak and reminds observers indirectly that Sunak is incredibly wealthy and therefore can’t relate to ordinary people.

Sunak is still searching for his best counter. Talking about unfunded promises plays into a powerful narrative about Labour being profligate, but the Tories lost any credibility on the economy after the Truss Experiment. When Rishi starts using Corbyn (like BoJo did), it doesn’t land because there is a set narrative that Starmer and the party are ruthlessly getting rid of any hint of Corbynism.

Where Starmer has been most quietly effective is when he talks to those sitting behind Sunak, highlighting the fractures they already feel. So when Starmer talks about the Tories 43 tax rises or whatever, it is not because he is low-tax or that he thinks the public are low-tax, it is because he knows Fory backbencher are low-tax and highlighting it helps cause disunity amongst the Tories. And disunity is a massive vote-loser.

So, bringing it back to FMQs, there is probably a lesson for the other leaders. FMQs are meant to be about holding the First Minister of the day to account. Exploiting the divisions behind the FM would seem sensible - as the leadership election showed, the SNP has lot of differentiation in the views of the party members, and to an extent, the MSPs.

Starmer is a far better performer than Sarwar. Sarwar can often ask good questions but doesn’t know what to do when they are answered and heads back to scripted lines.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

***Ozyhibby*** · 13-06-2023 03:00 PM

Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye

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

FMQs?

It is on BBC Parliament I think, not sure if Sky News or BBC News 24 cut to it but don’t think so.

It’s on BBC Scotland.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

***JimBHibees*** · 13-06-2023 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye

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

FMQs?

It is on BBC Parliament I think, not sure if Sky News or BBC News 24 cut to it but don’t think so.

Yes Fmqs think it should be on terrestrial TV.

***JimBHibees*** · 13-06-2023 03:21 PM

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

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

It’s on BBC Scotland.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ok cheers

***JimBHibees*** · 13-06-2023 03:24 PM

Originally Posted by 147lothian

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

I was surprised Nicola Sturgeon wasn't arrested for misleading parliament after Alex Salmon's not guilty verdict. No matter what anyone thinks of Alex Salmond, what he was put through by Nicola Sturgeon is unforgivable, a man of his age facing jail time and she questions the jury's verdict, it shows Nicola Sturgeon's true character.

He was facing very serious allegations she would have been crucified if he hadn't been reported

***weecounty hibby*** · 13-06-2023 03:31 PM

Originally Posted by 147lothian

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

I was surprised Nicola Sturgeon wasn't arrested for misleading parliament after Alex Salmon's not guilty verdict. No matter what anyone thinks of Alex Salmond, what he was put through by Nicola Sturgeon is unforgivable, a man of his age facing jail time and she questions the jury's verdict, it shows Nicola Sturgeon's true character.

So are you saying that when he approached her asking for it to be swept under the carpet she should have e done that? Serious allegations of a sexual nature were made and you think that she done him over by reporting it? And it was ok due to his age? Interesting moral compass you have there

***CropleyWasGod*** · 13-06-2023 03:46 PM

Originally Posted by 147lothian

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

I was surprised Nicola Sturgeon wasn't arrested for misleading parliament after Alex Salmon's not guilty verdict. No matter what anyone thinks of Alex Salmond, what he was put through by Nicola Sturgeon is unforgivable, a man of his age facing jail time and she questions the jury's verdict, it shows Nicola Sturgeon's true character.

Politicians may be duplicitous, but I'm pretty sure that's not a crime yet.

**Pretty Boy** · 13-06-2023 03:47 PM

Originally Posted by weecounty hibby

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

So are you saying that when he approached her asking for it to be swept under the carpet she should have e done that? Serious allegations of a sexual nature were made and you think that she done him over by reporting it? And it was ok due to his age? Interesting moral compass you have there

I have to say I'm a bit confused at that as well.

He was 62/63 when the allegations came to light and he went to trial, was still working then and continues to work now. He was hardly verging on mentally incapable due to advanced age. I'm not sure there should be an upper age limit for investigating any crimes, but especially those against the person and of a violent and/or sexual nature. It's almost always in the public interest to prosecute in such cases and justice should be allowed to take it's course.

I thought NS was evasive, if not downright dishonest, when it came to the timeline of events and I still don't believe she 'couldn't recall' when she was first made aware of the allegations but ultimately refusing to bury them was the right thing to do and she should be commended for that.

**He's here!** · 13-06-2023 03:58 PM

Originally Posted by JimBHibees

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

He was facing very serious allegations she would have been crucified if he hadn't been reported

That's not what he means. He's referring to Sturgeon being accused of breaching the ministerial code by allegedly questioning the integrity of the jury (the majority of whom were women). At one of her Covid briefings (at which she would regularly claim she wasn't there to discuss politics...unless it suited her) she said something along the lines that Salmond may have been cleared of criminality but that didn't mean what his accusers claimed hadn't happened. Whatever your personal opinion (and she and Salmond clearly despise each other) it's dangerous talk in the extreme to imply someone is still in the wrong despite being cleared by a jury.

**He's here!** · 13-06-2023 04:05 PM

Originally Posted by Pretty Boy

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

I have to say I'm a bit confused at that as well.

He was 62/63 when the allegations came to light and he went to trial, was still working then and continues to work now. He was hardly verging on mentally incapable due to advanced age. I'm not sure there should be an upper age limit for investigating any crimes, but especially those against the person and of a violent and/or sexual nature. It's almost always in the public interest to prosecute in such cases and justice should be allowed to take it's course.

I thought NS was evasive, if not downright dishonest, when it came to the timeline of events and I still don't believe she 'couldn't recall' when she was first made aware of the allegations but ultimately refusing to bury them was the right thing to do and she should be commended for that.

She's good at that sort of stuff.

January 22nd: I've still got plenty fuel in the tank and I'm nowhere near stepping down.

February 15th: I'm resigning (and it's got nothing to do with the impending ****storm I know is coming down the line, nothing at all. Nope, I'm just tired).

***grunt*** · 13-06-2023 04:11 PM

Originally Posted by He's here!

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

... she said something along the lines that Salmond may have been cleared of criminality but that didn't mean what his accusers claimed hadn't happened.

Seems a perfectly reasonable thing to say.

**He's here!** · 13-06-2023 04:39 PM

Originally Posted by grunt

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

Seems a perfectly reasonable thing to say.

Not when someone has been found innocent of all charges in the eyes of the law. Maintaining confidence in the judicial system and the rule of law is something you'd expect a First Minister to respect. From what I recall, it went no further than a complaint against her but it struck me as an irresponsible thing to say and probably betrayed her frustration at the monumental ****-up they'd made of the civil service disciplinary inquiry which really hung Salmond's accusers out to dry.

***grunt*** · 13-06-2023 04:44 PM

Originally Posted by He's here!

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

Not when someone has been found innocent of all charges in the eyes of the law. Maintaining confidence in the judicial system and the rule of law is something you'd expect a First Minister to respect. From what I recall, it went no further than a complaint against her but it struck me as an irresponsible thing to say and probably betrayed her frustration at the monumental ****-up they'd made of the civil service disciplinary inquiry which really hung Salmond's accusers out to dry.

Still true though, eh?

***Kato*** · 13-06-2023 05:06 PM

Originally Posted by grunt

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

Still true though, eh?

A time when everyone's taxes were going towards paying for a war which was fought to save the toffs place in the world, while the toffs paid zero taxes.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

***grunt*** · 13-06-2023 05:18 PM

This has been obvious for some time, but good to see it getting an airing in the media:

https://t.co/wyLST4ABbg

The total cost of the police probe into the SNP’s finances is MORE than the 'missing' amount under investigation

Still, what price integrity, eh?

**Pretty Boy** · 13-06-2023 05:27 PM

Originally Posted by grunt

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

This has been obvious for some time, but good to see it getting an airing in the media:

https://t.co/wyLST4ABbg

Still, what price integrity, eh?

I don't really get why that's relevant.

If someone mugged my daughter and stole £20 from her I'd still want the proper justice process to be followed regardless of whether the cost was greater than the sum stolen.

For a variety of reasons criminal investigations are expensive but it's surely in the interests of all parties that they are seen through to a conclusion. If Police Scotland walked away because it was 'costing too much' it provides all kinds of ammunition for those who want to scream cover up.

***Mibbes Aye*** · 13-06-2023 05:32 PM

Originally Posted by grunt

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

This has been obvious for some time, but good to see it getting an airing in the media:

https://t.co/wyLST4ABbg

Still, what price integrity, eh?

If we are to keep our democracy, there must be one commandment - thou shalt not ration justice

***Ozyhibby*** · 13-06-2023 05:36 PM

Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye

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

If we are to keep our democracy, there must be one commandment - thou shalt not ration justice

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**He's here!** · 13-06-2023 05:38 PM

Originally Posted by grunt

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

Still true though, eh?

Is it? He's an innocent man (much as I can't stand him).

**Since90+2** · 13-06-2023 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by grunt

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

This has been obvious for some time, but good to see it getting an airing in the media:

https://t.co/wyLST4ABbg

Still, what price integrity, eh?

That's completely irrelevant.

It's pretty obvious why, as PB has said.

**He's here!** · 13-06-2023 05:49 PM

Originally Posted by Pretty Boy

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

I don't really get why that's relevant.

If someone mugged my daughter and stole £20 from her I'd still want the proper justice process to be followed regardless of whether the cost was greater than the sum stolen.

For a variety of reasons criminal investigations are expensive but it's surely in the interests of all parties that they are seen through to a conclusion. If Police Scotland walked away because it was 'costing too much' it provides all kinds of ammunition for those who want to scream cover up.

The only reason this has been raised is because Saint Nicola's halo has been tarnished.

I note Keith Brown organised for flowers to be sent to her today as 'a mark of sympathy for everything she's been through'. Utterly bizarre.

Wonder if the card shops have a 'Sorry to hear you've been arrested' range in the sympathy section.

***Mibbes Aye*** · 13-06-2023 06:00 PM

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

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

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What's funny about that?

***Ozyhibby*** · 13-06-2023 06:37 PM

Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye

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

What's funny about that?

It’s a nice sentiment but in the modern UK political scene, that’s all it is.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

***grunt*** · 13-06-2023 06:41 PM

It was worth posting just to watch all the pompous replies on here!

"The price of justice cannot be measured in pounds, shillings and pence".

The same people who post about the cost of living crisis and how there's never enough money for the NHS. Always find money to go after the SNP though, eh?