The Scottish Politics Thread

[Biffer]

I see the Daily Mail have published the submission in full with a clear "fuck you" to the Crown Office. As someone who spent the majority of his working life in the Criminal Justice system and personally knows two of the senior Crown Office officials directly involved, I am disgusted at their behaviour in the whole matter.

Have you seen this from Alastair Bonnington

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/w ... r-BB1dWMss

Bonington has been raging against the SNP and devolution in general for years, mixing up political and legal arguments willy nilly (and has been criticised by academic colleagues for doing so). No surprise he's jumped on this particular topic as well.

[Big D]

I know none of that will go down well with the ‘SNP aaaargh’ brigade on here, but that’s where our public life has been taken by the Tories in government for the last ten years.

So where is the accountability in the leadership of the aspirational country we'd hope Scotland can be?

This "ah but the tories…." is just as tedious as "ah but the SNP" arguments.

Surely we should be striving to hold our politicians to a higher standard, especially if independent but the reality is we are hostage to the independence debate as some people will forgive any sins to achieve independence. If we become independent I'd want our politicians held to a higher standard than "aye but the fucking tories eh".

The reality is whether they do a good job or not Scotland will have/is stuck with (delete as appropriate depending on performance) an SNP government for the foreseeable future.

[westport]

I see the Daily Mail have published the submission in full with a clear "fuck you" to the Crown Office. As someone who spent the majority of his working life in the Criminal Justice system and personally knows two of the senior Crown Office officials directly involved, I am disgusted at their behaviour in the whole matter.

Have you seen this from Alastair Bonnington

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/w ... r-BB1dWMss

Bonington has been raging against the SNP and devolution in general for years, mixing up political and legal arguments willy nilly (and has been criticised by academic colleagues for doing so). No surprise he's jumped on this particular topic as well.

Play the man and ignore what he writes, as usual.

[Big D]

Have you seen this from Alastair Bonnington

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/w ... r-BB1dWMss

Bonington has been raging against the SNP and devolution in general for years, mixing up political and legal arguments willy nilly (and has been criticised by academic colleagues for doing so). No surprise he's jumped on this particular topic as well.

Play the man and ignore what he writes, as usual.

To be fair, Bonington has made it hard to ignore him due to his previous.

[Blackmac]

Nope, he wasn't some guy off the street, he was a vastly experienced man with 8 years first hand experience of being First Minister of Scotland, forty odd years in politics and had overseen the implementation of the revised ministerial code.
He was head and shoulders above anyone else as a political operator in the UK for a long time.




You might want to read it again.

Salmond was the one to suggest Lloyd get involved, not Sturgeon.

That's not true. Salmond and Aberdein have both stated that Aberdein was approached by Lloyd who claimed to have been asked by Sturgeon to act as her point of contact. At the meeting on the 29th, Lloyd subsequently brokered the meeting at Sturgeon's house. No mention of Salmond requesting Lloyds presence.

Sturgeon claims that at the meeting on 2nd of April at her home, Salmond asked that Lloyd act as an intermediary between himself and his accusers.

As to your ascertion that Salmond should somehow be responsible for ensuring the incumbent First Minister uphold her duties, that is absolute nonsense with no standing whatsoever.

Aberdein claims that no one but Sturgeon and Salmond were at the meeting on 2nd of April. Is it reasonable to assume that someone with Salmond's experience and background would notice that there were only two of them in the room and minutes were not being taken?
If this was to be a formal meeting with the FM, why not hold it at her office or even Bute House?

You just can't seem to get over the fact that Salmond had no legal or professional responsibility to do that so has no bearing. It fell entirely to Sturgeon and she failed.

I have no doubt that Salmond is a duplicitous prick and may well have been aware that Sturgeon was not conducting the meeting correctly. He probably perceived the lie of the land and thought, fine by me, I'll tuck that away for future reference.

As to Sturgeon's claim that she simply forgot the meeting of the 29th, when she was first informed of significant allegations against one of the most influential figures in her life, that is just utterly beyond belief and it is unacceptable that anyone can see that as a reasonable response.

[Blackmac]

I know none of that will go down well with the ‘SNP aaaargh’ brigade on here, but that’s where our public life has been taken by the Tories in government for the last ten years.

So where is the accountability in the leadership of the aspirational country we'd hope Scotland can be?

This "ah but the tories…." is just as tedious as "ah but the SNP" arguments.

Surely we should be striving to hold our politicians to a higher standard, especially if independent but the reality is we are hostage to the independence debate as some people will forgive any sins to achieve independence. If we become independent I'd want our politicians held to a higher standard than "aye but the fucking tories eh".

The reality is whether they do a good job or not Scotland will have/is stuck with (delete as appropriate depending on performance) an SNP government for the foreseeable future.

It's an argument I get sick off, and yes all the early promises about the Scottish Parliament holding itself up to a higher moral code has disintegrated. Sturgeon is now approaching the same position as Trump in that she could shoot someone on the Royal Mile and many Independence supporters would still back her. The SNP is entirely her party.

[Tichtheid]

You just can't seem to get over the fact that Salmond had no legal or professional responsibility to do that so has no bearing. It fell entirely to Sturgeon and she failed.

Sturgeon has consistently claimed that this was not a meeting in her capacity as First Minister - the only situation where minutes would be mandatory.

I'll ask you again to keep the personal out of this. I'm no shrinking violet, but things can escalate quickly.

I have no doubt that Salmond is a duplicitous prick and may well have been aware that Sturgeon was not conducting the meeting correctly. He probably perceived the lie of the land and thought, fine by me, I'll tuck that away for future reference.

As to Sturgeon's claim that she simply forgot the meeting of the 29th, when she was first informed of significant allegations against one of the most influential figures in her life, that is just utterly beyond belief and it is unacceptable that anyone can see that as a reasonable response.

I think Salmond's defence team think they can get Sturgeon on the meeting, but it comes down to he said she said, unless there is a record of it being a formal meeting with the FM.

I've yet to see what material difference it makes whether or not Sturgeon first heard about the allegations on the 29th of March or the 2nd of April, it looks to me like Aberdein told her on the 29th that Salmond was facing serious allegations, and that Salmond told her the full story on the 2nd.

This could be more tricky for her due to her saying she first heard about it on the 2nd, her opponents will go at this like a dog on a bone

[Biffer]

I know none of that will go down well with the ‘SNP aaaargh’ brigade on here, but that’s where our public life has been taken by the Tories in government for the last ten years.

So where is the accountability in the leadership of the aspirational country we'd hope Scotland can be?

This "ah but the tories…." is just as tedious as "ah but the SNP" arguments.

Surely we should be striving to hold our politicians to a higher standard, especially if independent but the reality is we are hostage to the independence debate as some people will forgive any sins to achieve independence. If we become independent I'd want our politicians held to a higher standard than "aye but the fucking tories eh".

The reality is whether they do a good job or not Scotland will have/is stuck with (delete as appropriate depending on performance) an SNP government for the foreseeable future.

It's an argument I get sick off, and yes all the early promises about the Scottish Parliament holding itself up to a higher moral code has disintegrated. Sturgeon is now approaching the same position as Trump in that she could shoot someone on the Royal Mile and many Independence supporters would still back her. The SNP is entirely her party.

As I've said elsewhere, 'better than the Tories' is all they need to be. The only comparison that will count until independence is comparison with England. Whether anyone likes that or not is irrelevant. What you or anyone else thinks 'should' be the case doesn't matter. I'm not putting that out as a defence of anyone, it's just the reality - people can foam against that all they like, their froth doesn't matter.

As with TH, I'm no SNP devotee, but I accept the reality of the situation. They're key on the route to independence. Means to an end that will radically change, split or disappear completely after independence. And they won't be the only party that will do that either.

[Paddington Bear]

As to Sturgeon's claim that she simply forgot the meeting of the 29th, when she was first informed of significant allegations against one of the most influential figures in her life, that is just utterly beyond belief and it is unacceptable that anyone can see that as a reasonable response.

This is the crux of it for me - it simply isn't credible to forget the moment you became aware that someone personally or professionally close to you revealed they were being accused of sexual assault. If she'd forgotten technical details in a meeting or something, sure. Something goes wrong that has her signature on, we all know leaders sign things they haven't read. This? Total bollocks.

[Blackmac]

You just can't seem to get over the fact that Salmond had no legal or professional responsibility to do that so has no bearing. It fell entirely to Sturgeon and she failed.

Sturgeon has consistently claimed that this was not a meeting in her capacity as First Minister - the only situation where minutes would be mandatory.

I'll ask you again to keep the personal out of this. I'm no shrinking violet, but things can escalate quickly.

I have no doubt that Salmond is a duplicitous prick and may well have been aware that Sturgeon was not conducting the meeting correctly. He probably perceived the lie of the land and thought, fine by me, I'll tuck that away for future reference.

As to Sturgeon's claim that she simply forgot the meeting of the 29th, when she was first informed of significant allegations against one of the most influential figures in her life, that is just utterly beyond belief and it is unacceptable that anyone can see that as a reasonable response.

I think Salmond's defence team think they can get Sturgeon on the meeting, but it comes down to he said she said, unless there is a record of it being a formal meeting with the FM.

I've yet to see what material difference it makes whether or not Sturgeon first heard about the allegations on the 29th of March or the 2nd of April, it looks to me like Aberdein told her on the 29th that Salmond was facing serious allegations, and that Salmond told her the full story on the 2nd.

This could be more tricky for her due to her saying she first heard about it on the 2nd, her opponents will go at this like a dog on a bone

Sorry there is nothing in my response that is in any way a personal attack, purely a response to your comments. I think we are perfectly capable of having a debate without the PR nonsense.

Of course there is an issue as to when Sturgeon first heard about the allegations. That is one of the key points. If you don't accept her nonsense about forgetting the meeting on the 29th then there is a strong inference that she lied. That is completely unacceptable.

[Big D]

As I've said elsewhere, 'better than the Tories' is all they need to be. The only comparison that will count until independence is comparison with England. Whether anyone likes that or not is irrelevant. What you or anyone else thinks 'should' be the case doesn't matter. I'm not putting that out as a defence of anyone, it's just the reality - people can foam against that all they like, their froth doesn't matter.

As with TH, I'm no SNP devotee, but I accept the reality of the situation. They're key on the route to independence. Means to an end that will radically change, split or disappear completely after independence. And they won't be the only party that will do that either.

That isn't the reality though is it. People don't hold them to account now, why would they after any referendum? Especially those so entrenched in their views? Failure to hold politicians to account based on the hope that independence may come in the next decade is setting up for failure should the no vote win again. Showing they can run the country well and be accountable would actually help sway people to their side.

After any split in the UK, Westminster will still be blamed just as they are now.

[Biffer]

As I've said elsewhere, 'better than the Tories' is all they need to be. The only comparison that will count until independence is comparison with England. Whether anyone likes that or not is irrelevant. What you or anyone else thinks 'should' be the case doesn't matter. I'm not putting that out as a defence of anyone, it's just the reality - people can foam against that all they like, their froth doesn't matter.

As with TH, I'm no SNP devotee, but I accept the reality of the situation. They're key on the route to independence. Means to an end that will radically change, split or disappear completely after independence. And they won't be the only party that will do that either.

That isn't the reality though is it. People don't hold them to account now, why would they after any referendum? Especially those so entrenched in their views? Failure to hold politicians to account based on the hope that independence may come in the next decade is setting up for failure should the no vote win again. Showing they can run the country well and be accountable would actually help sway people to their side.

After any split in the UK, Westminster will still be blamed just as they are now.

Sorry, maybe I wasn't clear - they won't fall apart because they're held accountable for something, they'll fall apart because there's such a disparate set of political views and aims within the party.

[Blackmac]

We have to add the Crown Office's latest highly dubious actions to the Rangers Administration inquiry. How the Lord Advocate can stand in parliament and admit the investigation was entirely malicious on the part of his department and no one is sacked, or prosecuted, or he doesn't resign is astonishing.

[Lobby]

[tc27]

Salmond speaking for four hours tomorrow..

[Jasonstry]

Salmond speaking for four hours tomorrow..

In theory he is answering questions rather than speaking but, in practice, you may well have the right of it. I am sort of looking forward to it in an odd sort of way. Whatever the rights or wrongs, it needs sorting.

[Jasonstry]

Article from Andrew Neil
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/arti ... ublic.html

[Biffer]

Article from Andrew Neil
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/arti ... ublic.html

An article by Andrew Neil in the Daily Mail.

Hold me back.

[Tattie]

Article from Andrew Neil
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/arti ... ublic.html

An article by Andrew Neil in the Daily Mail.

Hold me back.

That’s it, after reading that I’ve decided to change my political views and voting intentions. Tories and the union all the way for me from now on.

[Jock42]

How do you post tweets?

At the bottom right of the tweet is the share sign > copy link > paste directly into post.

From a smartphone anyway.

[Blackmac]

We have to add the Crown Office's latest highly dubious actions to the Rangers Administration inquiry. How the Lord Advocate can stand in parliament and admit the investigation was entirely malicious on the part of his department and no one is sacked, or prosecuted, or he doesn't resign is astonishing.

I see the compensation bill for this currently stands at £28 million and after all those involved are finished it is estimated that the final bill will be in excess of £100 million. This is mind blowing. Any police officer pursuing a malicious investigation would be jailed, however the Crown Office perceive themselves above the law.

The Lord Advocate has also claimed that he knew nothing about the demand to redact Salmond's submission. It beggars belief.

[Caley_Red]

We have to add the Crown Office's latest highly dubious actions to the Rangers Administration inquiry. How the Lord Advocate can stand in parliament and admit the investigation was entirely malicious on the part of his department and no one is sacked, or prosecuted, or he doesn't resign is astonishing.

I see the compensation bill for this currently stands at £28 million and after all those involved are finished it is estimated that the final bill will be in excess of £100 million. This is mind blowing. Any police officer pursuing a malicious investigation would be jailed, however the Crown Office perceive themselves above the law.

The Lord Advocate has also claimed that he knew nothing about the demand to redact Salmond's submission. It beggars belief.

Still no resignations on this? Is there even an inquiry with decent powers looking into it?

The coverage this is getting over here is reflecting really badly on us as a nation; makes us look like like some club Med nation or Boliviarian outpost, not the look for a wealthy Western democracy.

[Woddy]

As to Sturgeon's claim that she simply forgot the meeting of the 29th, when she was first informed of significant allegations against one of the most influential figures in her life, that is just utterly beyond belief and it is unacceptable that anyone can see that as a reasonable response.

This is the crux of it for me - it simply isn't credible to forget the moment you became aware that someone personally or professionally close to you revealed they were being accused of sexual assault. If she'd forgotten technical details in a meeting or something, sure. Something goes wrong that has her signature on, we all know leaders sign things they haven't read. This? Total bollocks.

Also whether when you are FM you can turn that responsibility off when discussing something important with a close associate that might affect organs of party, government and state.

[PlanetGlyndwr]

I once watched the movie momento while extremely drunk.... I am much more confused now trying to figure out what is going on with this inquiry.

I have no idea what the sides involved or the current situation is.

The only think I can tell is that it's an absolute mess

[tc27]

Not able to watch but opinion seems to be the MSP's asking questions are not doing very well.

[Tichtheid]

Not able to watch but opinion seems to be the MSP's asking questions are not doing very well.

For decades Salmond has been just about the best politician in the British Isles under questioning from people who do it for a living, he used to bat Paxman, Humphries et al back without them really ever landing a blow.

He's not going to get stung today.

[Slick]

Not able to watch but opinion seems to be the MSP's asking questions are not doing very well.

[tc27]

Not able to watch but opinion seems to be the MSP's asking questions are not doing very well.

For decades Salmond has been just about the best politician in the British Isles under questioning from people who do it for a living, he used to bat Paxman, Humphries et al back without them really ever landing a blow.

He's not going to get stung today.

Would agree - easy to forget that despite Sturgeons popularity he was really the one who established the SNP's current dominance of Scottish politics

And today he's saying this

"The move to independence, which I have sought all my political life ... must be accompanied by institutions whose leadership is strong and robust and capable of protecting each and every citizen from arbitrary authority"

Extraordinary.

[Tichtheid]

This is a situation where anything less than resignation and complete humiliation for Sturgeon is going to be called a foul, a stitch up, by her opponents and the opponents of independence.

[tc27]

This is a situation where anything less than resignation and complete humiliation for Sturgeon is going to be called a foul, a stitch up, by her opponents and the opponents of independence.

That remains to be seen but the fact is Sturgeon is on record calling for resignations for breaching the ministerial code and indeed McLeish had to resign for this offence.

[Tichtheid]

This is a situation where anything less than resignation and complete humiliation for Sturgeon is going to be called a foul, a stitch up, by her opponents and the opponents of independence.

That remains to be seen but the fact is Sturgeon is on record calling for resignations for breaching the ministerial code and indeed McLeish had to resign for this offence.

If, in a few weeks, Sturgeon is found not to have broken the code, will that be the end of it?

[Jasonstry]

Not able to watch but opinion seems to be the MSP's asking questions are not doing very well.

I have been watching (they are on their first break now) and, as someone with a background in law, IMHO Salmond really is very good. He is calm, reasoned and reasonable and has planned responses to predictable questions so he can pick out relevant documents in a matter of seconds. I suppose you don't get to lead a country unless you are pretty good at your job and I get the impression that he is better at his than most of the other people there. There were clear attempts to set traps but Salmond was well aware of them. My respect for the man has increased.

[tc27]

Not able to watch but opinion seems to be the MSP's asking questions are not doing very well.

I have been watching (they are on their first break now) and, as someone with a background in law, IMHO Salmond really is very good. He is calm, reasoned and reasonable and has planned responses to predictable questions so he can pick out relevant documents in a matter of seconds. I suppose you don't get to lead a country unless you are pretty good at your job and I get the impression that he is better at his than most of the other people there. There were clear attempts to set traps but Salmond was well aware of them. My respect for the man has increased.

Question is can he land a killer blow on Sturgeon and her inner circle? That's who he is there to get.

If, in a few weeks, Sturgeon is found not to have broken the code, will that be the end of it?

Who knows...I don't think the anti Sturgeon faction within the SNP will disappear and they now control the parties NEC. But if she wins a majority you would assume they will struggle to achieve anything.

[Biffer]

This isn't going to be resolved to the satisfaction of anyone. Basically it's going to boil down to he said she said, and it's become so incredibly politicised that it's a complete fucking mess. Sturgeon won't resign, as she'll be able to turn it immediately to the result of the election and validation by the electorate. Salmond won't be happy unless everyone is shouting from the rooftops about how wonderful he is, that he's as pure as the driven snow and has never done anything wrong in his life. The opposition parties won't be happy unless Sturgeon resigns and the SNP implodes, which isn't going to happen.

[Paddington Bear]

Sturgeon is clearly lying but there's no proof so the endgame of this is political more than anything else.

[tc27]

Full disclosure as a 'unionist' (or someone who doesn't want one of his national identities to be pulled apart by nationalism - if that's the label then fine) whilst Sturgeon being forced out by Salmond's sense of grevience would be a politically brilliant result I don't think its remotely possible unless he has a smoking gun he can pull out of the bag.

On the other hand this saga will continue to strip off the "worthy respectability" that IMO has being falsely built up around what's a rather still rather ugly nationalism built on wilfully constructed antagonism towards those living on other parts of this Island. It might do the same outside Scotland so British liberals can stop giving the SNP a pass because its a tool to bash an awful UK government (because its short sighted and destructive).

Anyway that's my view - I am not pretending to be objective and of course the SNP continue to dominate polling so I am also in a minority (even if I voted in Scotland).

[PlanetGlyndwr]

[Insane_Homer]

Funny how BBC news is all over this like white on rice, yet have still to report on the health secretary's PPE high court ruling loss

[tc27]

Funny how BBC news is all over this like white on rice, yet have to still to report on the health secretary's PPE high court ruling.

Its almost like they are different matters worthy of different streams of coverage and one right now is having live and potentially dramatic evidence presented by a former political leader.....

[westport]

Funny how BBC news is all over this like white on rice, yet have still to report on the health secretary's PPE high court ruling loss

You mean apart from this one

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56125462