The Dirty Independence Question

[eFestivals]

On 3/22/2021 at 7:16 PM, LJS said:

no idea - why are you changing the subject?

hadn't seen that. Why are you changing the subject?

Apparently scotch will find indy.not if people won't buy it.

[eFestivals]

39 minutes ago, LJS said:

Really? You would be amazed at how many people have no idea who he is.

 

 

Sos Scots don't feel humiliated by having their leader Lie to them via parliament.

[mcshed]

9 hours ago, LJS said:

For as near as a neutral view, here is what Andy Wightman - the independent (ex-green) member of the committee has to say.

He is in no way uncritical of the government and various officials.

https://andywightman.scot/committee-on-the-scottish-government-handling-of-harassment-complaints

Which given there is such a clear and catastrophic failure of government and specifically John Swinney acting to frustrate the committee investigating these failures it seems absolutely flabbergasting that nobody seems fit to resign. 

Nicola may have been genuinely trying to clear up a mess not of her creation but it turned into a disaster on her watch including her now terrible memory, for this she should resign.

John Swinney is responsible for impeding the investigation and should resign and if not should be fired.

Whilst I'm talking about impeding the investigation what in earth is the crown office playing at? What in the following passage of Salmond's evidence needed to be redacted to protect complainents:

"30. The First Minister told Parliament (see Official Report of 8th,10th & 17th January 2019) that she first learned of the complaints against me when I visited her home on 2nd April 2018. That is untrue and is a breach of the Ministerial Code.

The evidence from Mr Aberdein that he personally discussed the existence of the complaints, and summarised the substance of the complaints, with the First Minister in a pre arranged meeting in Parliament on 29th March 2018 arranged for that specific purpose cannot be reconciled with the position of the First Minister to Parliament. The fact that Mr Aberdein learned of these complaints in early March 2018 from the Chief of Staff to the First Minister who thereafter arranged for the meeting between Mr Aberdein and the First Minister on 29th March to discuss them, is supported by his sharing that information contemporaneously with myself, Kevin Pringle and Duncan Hamilton, Advocate."

Why is the Crown Office trying to scrub serious and legitimate accusations against the First Minister from the record?

[kaosmark2]

18 hours ago, LJS said:

Interesting question. Unfortunately the committee set up to get the answer to that question decided that it would be far better to go after Sturgeon than actually try and get to the bottom of what happened. They wasted their time trying to prove that Sturgeon had broken the ministerial code. Unfortunately, they were too stupid to realise that there was an independent enquiry into that which had more credibility than the tawdry harassment committee. It didn't help when the Tories made it crystal clear that they had found Sturgeon guilty before listening to any evidence.

Whilst bleating endlessly about Sturgeon breaking the ministerial code, they broke the msp code right left and centre by commenting on the committee's work publicly and then leaking it's findings.

So, there are lots of people culpable, but the important point should be to learn the lessons and ensure a similar thing doesn't happen again.

Sadly the political posturing, mainly of the Tories, has made that less likely.

So instead of the politician's answer where you deflect and talk about committees and other people's opinions...

Who do you, personally, think should be held culpable?

[pink_triangle]

I think it's important to note that because an investigation is called "independent" it doesn't mean that the person investigating is completely neutral. They are also often appointed by people with their own interests.

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, kaosmark2 said:

So instead of the politician's answer where you deflect and talk about committees and other people's opinions...

Who do you, personally, think should be held culpable?

If it was tory ministers doing the same LJS would be front of the queue calling them to resign.

[LJS]

1 hour ago, pink_triangle said:

I think it's important to note that because an investigation is called "independent" it doesn't mean that the person investigating is completely neutral. They are also often appointed by people with their own interests.

he was appointed by Alec Salmond 🙂

[LJS]

2 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

So instead of the politician's answer where you deflect and talk about committees and other people's opinions...

Who do you, personally, think should be held culpable?

 

1 hour ago, pink_triangle said:

If it was tory ministers doing the same LJS would be front of the queue calling them to resign.

I take it you mean who should be sacrificed. I think there are a couple of senior civil servants in the frame & John Swinney hasn't covered himself in glory. Do some or all of them need to resign? I don't know. 

Of more importance is that we ensure similar mistakes are not made again.

As an aside, I also think Ruth Davidson and Douglas Ross should be considering their positions as their conduct has been disgraceful throughout.

 

[kaosmark2]

3 minutes ago, LJS said:

 

I take it you mean who should be sacrificed. I think there are a couple of senior civil servants in the frame & John Swinney hasn't covered himself in glory. Do some or all of them need to resign? I don't know. 

Of more importance is that we ensure similar mistakes are not made again.

As an aside, I also think Ruth Davidson and Douglas Ross should be considering their positions as their conduct has been disgraceful throughout.

 

No, i want to know who you blame for this being handled badly. I don't want to hear how tories have similar scandals, or the nuances of appointments. 

I want to hear you say "this person made errors, and should be considered responsible for the scandal". I'm not asking for you to comment on likely outcomes, just names of people who dealt with the Salmond allegations badly within the SNP. 

"sacrificed" suggests there's been no wrongdoing and that any resignation or allocation of responsibility should only be for the sake of PR. I strongly disagree with that, and i don't believe you truly think that's right either. 

[eFestivals]

6 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

No, i want to know who you blame for this being handled badly. I don't want to hear how tories have similar scandals, or the nuances of appointments. 

I want to hear you say "this person made errors, and should be considered responsible for the scandal". I'm not asking for you to comment on likely outcomes, just names of people who dealt with the Salmond allegations badly within the SNP. 

"sacrificed" suggests there's been no wrongdoing and that any resignation or allocation of responsibility should only be for the sake of PR. I strongly disagree with that, and i don't believe you truly think that's right either. 

Sturgeon lied and spunked Scottish budget up the wall attempting to defend the indefensible to avoid looking like she fucked up but she did fuck up.

[pink_triangle]

47 minutes ago, LJS said:

he was appointed by Alec Salmond 🙂

My understanding is appointed by Salmond and reappointed by Sturgeon, however I was talking about independent enquiries in general. Just because someone has "independent" in their job description doesn't mean they really are. People naturally have their own preconceptions, loyalties and no doubt some have an eye on the future.

[pink_triangle]

23 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Sturgeon lied and spunked Scottish budget up the wall attempting to defend the indefensible to avoid looking like she fucked up but she did fuck up.

My view is that if Sturgeon knew tax payers money was to be spent ignoring legal advice, that is grounds for resignation itself.

[kaosmark2]

39 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Sturgeon lied and spunked Scottish budget up the wall attempting to defend the indefensible to avoid looking like she fucked up but she did fuck up.

Well this is my understanding of it, but LJS has been arguing "Sturgeon hasn't done much wrong", so I'm trying to get an answer out of him of who in the SNP has.

[LJS]

2 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

My understanding is appointed by Salmond and reappointed by Sturgeon, however I was talking about independent enquiries in general. Just because someone has "independent" in their job description doesn't mean they really are. People naturally have their own preconceptions, 

Yeah, that's pretty clear

[LJS]

2 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

No, i want to know who you blame for this being handled badly.

I've answered your question.

2 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

I don't want to hear how tories have similar scandals,

Frankly, I don't really care what you want to hear.

2 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

or the nuances of appointments. 

I want to hear you say "this person made errors, and should be considered responsible for the scandal". I'm not asking for you to comment on likely outcomes, just names of people who dealt with the Salmond allegations badly within the SNP. 

I have done that. I haven't named civil servants but clearly there are questions over Leslie Evans' position.

2 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

"sacrificed" suggests there's been no wrongdoing and that any resignation or allocation of responsibility should only be for the sake of PR. I strongly disagree with that, and i don't believe you truly think that's right either. 

Not really quite sure what political world you live in. The reasons you give for political resignations are exactly how it works in the real world, except in Westminster (sorry I know I'm not allowed to mention that) where resignation is no longer a thing.

I don't care who resigns or who stays. I care that the lessons are learnt and the same mistakes aren't made again. 

And the mistakes are nothing to do with whether a meeting took place on a  Thursday or the next Tuesday, or whether the government pursued a flawed legal case a little longer than was justified. The mistakes that matter are to do with the way allegations of misconduct are handled including how victims are treated.

The Scottish government have committed to making changes, a fact which has almost been lost in the demented witch hunt of Sturgeon. 

I like her. I rate her as a leader. 

You guys don't. 

C'est la vie.

[LJS]

2 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

My view is that if Sturgeon knew tax payers money was to be spent ignoring legal advice, that is grounds for resignation itself.

I know I'm not allowed to mention Westminster. But how many court cases has the UK government lost in the past few years? In how many of these have they disclosed their legal advice?

The Scottish government is being judged to standards easy higher than the UK government. 

You don't seem bothered by that.

[eFestivals]

Just now, LJS said:

I know I'm not allowed to mention Westminster. But how many court cases has the UK government lost in the past few years? In how many of these have they disclosed their legal advice?

The Scottish government is being judged to standards easy higher than the UK government. 

You don't seem bothered by that.

I'm less bothered by a localcouncil fuckup than a Westminster fuck up.

[pink_triangle]

10 minutes ago, LJS said:

 

And the mistakes are nothing to do with whether a meeting took place on a  Thursday or the next Tuesday, or whether the government pursued a flawed legal case a little longer than was justified. The mistakes that matter are to do with the way allegations of misconduct are handled including how victims are treated.

 

I am sorry but wasting taxpayers money does matter. Note if the SNP are happy to foot the bill for the money they wasted I am happy to let them off here.

[pink_triangle]

9 minutes ago, LJS said:

I know I'm not allowed to mention Westminster. But how many court cases has the UK government lost in the past few years? In how many of these have they disclosed their legal advice?

The Scottish government is being judged to standards easy higher than the UK government. 

You don't seem bothered by that.

Again you seem to want to use the torys as the bar to judge the SNP, I want to aim higher. A few years ago you definitely seemed to set the bar higher yourself.

[Comfy Bean]

On 3/22/2021 at 9:55 PM, Comfy Bean said:

We’re lucky to have Harvie. As I’ve said before but not in a while, he was my man of the match during the Indy campaign.

While all this has been going on, his Party got the snp budget tweaked which may well lead to the nurses getting a better increase 👍

 

4% now confirmed for NHS staff in Scotland on top of the £500. Backdated to December.

Poison Dwarf getting on with the day job. 

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, Comfy Bean said:

4% now confirmed for NHS staff in Scotland on top of the £500. Backdated to December.

Poison Dwarf getting on with the day job. 

What's happening with all of the other extmrta unexpected biillions.

[LJS]

11 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

What's happening with all of the other extmrta unexpected biillions.

They are in Nicola's Cayman Islands account.

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, LJS said:

They are in Nicola's Cayman Islands account.

It's not being used for anything left wing in the Scotland that you claim to be distinctly different.

[Comfy Bean]

24 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

It's not being used for anything left wing in the Scotland that you claim to be distinctly different.

Elections up here coming soon Neil. Maybe the Tories will score a big majority or maybe we’ll see something distinctly different.  Time will tell.

[eFestivals]

Just now, Comfy Bean said:

Elections up here coming soon Neil. Maybe the Tories will score a big majority or maybe we’ll see something distinctly different.  Time will tell.

Vo.tes fo.r a party that mirror the worst  of Spaffer.