The SNP have historically been swift to suspend any party members when there’s any hint of inappropriate conduct, never mind even a whiff of illegality. It’s been that way since 2015, with the axe falling on elected members as well as candidates in target seats and critical elections, and ordinary activists.
Not even a by-your-leave, let alone an explanation, is afforded – just suspension with immediate effect. And that’s all well and good, some might say. No hint of impropriety should attach to the party and making a virtue of acting swiftly can be both necessary and appropriate.
So why then no action against the Chief Executive?
The Electoral Commission appears to have missed yet another deadline for publishing the SNP’s 2019 accounts (we’re waiting on them to return our phone call), so we’ve got a moment to talk about something else relating to the party’s finances.
[EDIT 12.56pm: the Commission now “hopes” to have the accounts published “in the next three weeks” along with those of the other main Westminster parties.]
The Scottish press covered itself in as much disgrace over the publication of the will of lottery winner Colin Weir after his tragic death last year as it had done during his life. Pretty much every paper in the country ran lurid headlines about how he’d “blown” or “burned” (translation: spent) half of his £80m share of the 2011 jackpot in nine years.
Weirdly, the Scottish Sun and the Daily Mail stood out for (mainly) respectful coverage focused on the fact that Colin Weir had in fact used most of the money on good causes and generous support for friends, family and strangers.
(Also, both of the Weirs were fairly old and already in quite poor health when they won the money, so why wouldn’t they spend it? You famously can’t take it with you.)
But the Mail was almost unique in the fact that its headline mentioned something that seemed to stand out as the most obviously newsworthy aspect of the will.
Senator Claire Chandler is a Liberal Party member of the Australian Parliament. Some recent experiences she’s had send a very serious warning about the likely outcomes of the Scottish Government’s wildly unpopular new Hate Crime Bill. She’s graciously allowed us to publish this column she wrote on the subject.
Early this month I received a letter from Tasmania’s Anti-Discrimination Commissioner directing me to attend a compulsory “conciliation” conference with somebody offended by my comments about the need to protect women’s sport and women’s toilets and changerooms. You can watch them here:
Ironically, the complaint against me was about an opinion article I wrote about free speech. You can read it here and make up your own mind whether bureaucrats at the Anti-Discrimination Commission should be able to censor any Australian citizens for this kind of public policy discussion.
Following up this morning’s article, we’ve been trawling through the Publications/FOI section of the Scottish Government website to see which other articles might be being hidden from its search function. We found quite a few, and you’re never going to guess what the common factor in all of them is.
We’ve given you a wee clue with that picture, though.
As a right-of-centre English conservative, there are Scottish National Party concepts I haven’t so far been able to comprehend. Perhaps it’s because I don’t follow Nicola Sturgeon and Ian Blackford. Should I keep an eye on what The Scotsman is saying?
SNP leaders talk in the same sentence of a “free” and “independent” Scotland having a future as a member of the EU. My grasp of those words is not theirs. Distinguished lawyers – be they Remainers, Leavers or Don’t-Care-Just-Pay-My-Billsers – all agree that a series of European Court of Justice decisions have established the unqualified supremacy of European Union laws – disguised as “Regulations and Directives” – over the national laws of EU states.
Last night on social media a few people raised a semi-interested eyebrow at Scotland On Sunday’s front page, and wondered if the suspiciously unattributed lead story might be something balanced and worthwhile, or if it’d be by Dani Garavelli again.
Whichever side you’re on, it’s simply observably true that the Scottish Government is doing everything in its power to obstruct, delay and derail the Parliamentary inquiry into its ruinously botched investigation of false allegations against Alex Salmond.
Any investigative journalist attempting to get to the bottom of the subject and find out what really happened is met with a wall of secrecy and misinformation while trying to navigate their way through the publicly-available information, and just to give you some idea of what it’s like, we’d like to offer you one tiny but typical example.
Readers may recall that this site is engaged in an ongoing attempt to clarify why the Scottish justice system is choosing to selectively only pursue those supportive of Alex Salmond for contempt of court with regard to his trial, while conspicuously turning a blind eye to those in the media who have committed exactly the same crime but are hostile to Mr Salmond and therefore apparently immune from prosecution.
During that investigation we received a reply from Police Scotland last month stating that contempt of court is in fact not a criminal offence in Scots law (although you can be tried and imprisoned for it), and so is nothing to do with them, and that they only act in relation to contempt when instructed by the courts or the Crown Office.
So naturally we asked them if they had been so instructed.
Forgive us for not joining in the pointless and unusually muted hoopla about the latest indyref anniversary (which for the first time we can recall, nobody has bothered to mark by commissioning an opinion poll).
We’re still thinking about the SNP’s treatment of the man who was chiefly responsible for securing the only independence referendum Scotland has ever had.
And of its utter abysmal failure for more than half a decade to come up with anything even remotely approaching a credible plan to get a second one.
Our previous offer remains open: we’ll take any bet of any size from anyone against the proposition “Boris Johnson will never grant Nicola Sturgeon a Section 30 order in the absence of some sort of court judgement legally compelling him to”.
We’ve had no takers yet from the Sturgeon faithful. We don’t expect any.
Every day that passes from now until the current SNP leadership is removed is another one wasted to add to the 2,191 that have been wasted from 19 September 2014 until today, achieving nothing. Until that tally ends we have nothing to celebrate.
Over the last year or so, this site’s commentary on matters surrounding the attempted imprisonment of Alex Salmond over false allegations of sexual abuse has attracted a considerable amount of ire from a section of the readership, demanding “proof” of the involvement of the current First Minister.
Such proof has been impossible to provide for legal reasons. But it’s always been the case that the truth could only be suppressed for so long, and events in recent days have brought the first chinks of light through the wall of smoke and mirrors the Scottish Government has been attempting to surround the matter with.
So in our very lightest and softest shoes, let’s tiptoe through what is both a labyrinth and a minefield and see if we can make some of it a little easier to understand.
“Settling up, not settling down” was the rhetoric, as Westminster reconvened and the new SNP group headed south. Fine words and said no doubt sincerely. But it’s been said by every SNP generation that’s gone there, though none possessed the authority or faced the threats to Scottish democracy as now.
But what has happened since? As ever fine speeches given and incisive questioning of Ministers made, but to what effect?
The first major debate was the Fisheries Bill. A sore point in Scotland where a Tory government sold out our fishing industry and entire communities along with it decades ago, when negotiating EEC entry terms. Now, two generations on, as another Tory administration seeks to implement Brexit, that industry and those communities face betrayal yet again.
Young Lochinvar on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “AI Dun @ 7.04 And why does that statement seem to sit so very very comfortably with you, site pearl…” Jul 28, 01:26
Graf Midgehunter on The Nobodies: “You will never need an excuse to show a photo of Monica Bellucci..! And anyway, it’ll help cleanse the site…” Jul 28, 00:30
Oneliner on The Nobodies: “I think that his brother adopted the same attitude to VAT” Jul 28, 00:27
Ex President Xiden on The Nobodies: “I remember Sarwar when asked to comment on his hypocrisy of fronting a party advocating the abolishment of private education…” Jul 27, 23:06
Young Lochinvar on The Nobodies: “Well said Dan.” Jul 27, 22:32
willie on The Nobodies: “The X link is to a parody of the US police detective Lieutenant Columbo investigating Nicola Sturgeon. Peppered with real…” Jul 27, 21:47
Spartan 117 on The Nobodies: ““Scottish” Labour are irrelevant and will remain so forever more.” Jul 27, 21:24
100%Yes on The Nobodies: “Its a pity when the Redcoats went to their country’s they didn’t have an option. Lets all turn a blind…” Jul 27, 20:24
Hatey McHateface on The Nobodies: “Calm down. It’s just DEI. It won’t personally affect you. Be much more concerned by the DEI appointments in your…” Jul 27, 20:20
Hatey McHateface on The Nobodies: “Somebody defo told somebody to piss off.” Jul 27, 20:16
Mark Beggan on The Nobodies: “Monica Bellucci was at my door again last night with a red rose. I told her to piss off.” Jul 27, 20:06
Hatey McHateface on The Nobodies: “I think any politician who could fix period poverty will find running the country a dawdle by comparison. Of course,…” Jul 27, 20:03
diabloandco on The Nobodies: “Well put!!” Jul 27, 19:56
Owen Mullions on The Nobodies: “It’s just an AI video of Sturgeon being investigated by Columbo. Quite funny but sadly not happening in the real…” Jul 27, 19:49
Chas on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “My social status is just fine Sam however I can readily understand why yours is on the floor. As to…” Jul 27, 19:31
Aidan on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “Most of that list (primarily elderly academics) will be long-since retired by the time there is any chance of Scotland…” Jul 27, 19:04
100%Yes on The Nobodies: “Willie, I don’t have a X account so whats the breaking news?” Jul 27, 18:41
DaveL on The Nobodies: “Strangely enough I was trying to think of that Labour guy’s name the other day, I was pretty sure it…” Jul 27, 18:29
Effijy on The Nobodies: “I think this is the 19th Change of leadership for London’s North Accounting Office, sometimes referred to as Scotland not…” Jul 27, 18:27
Dan on The Nobodies: “Who really cares about the mainstream “Scottish” political parties pissing about in the poundshop devolved Parliament, they just seem to…” Jul 27, 18:27
Joan Savage on The Nobodies: “Excellent comment” Jul 27, 18:19
Northcode on The Nobodies: ““Number 10 North” is a slogan, not a shift in power. A new office in Manchester doesn’t rebalance the constitution……” Jul 27, 18:10
Craig on The Nobodies: “Great picture, made reading the article much more interesting. ?” Jul 27, 18:10
willie on The Nobodies: “It’ll not be the House of Lords that Nicola Sturgeon will be going to with US detective Columbo on the…” Jul 27, 18:06
Nicky T Naquetti on The Nobodies: “If the SNP actually wanted independence, instead of simply keeping their jobs for the next 4 or 5 years -…” Jul 27, 18:06
sam on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “Mair shite from Chas who, like me, has a deep seated need to feel a rise in social status. Here’s…” Jul 27, 18:04
100%Yes on The Nobodies: “Theirs a lot in the SNP who are envious that they haven’t been selected to go into the house of…” Jul 27, 17:40
Andrea on The Nobodies: “I said this before, but I think it is worth repeating, who would want to be in the SP? OK,…” Jul 27, 17:24
Chas on Ain’t it funny how things change?: “Mair shite from the supposedly learned professor. Can I ask, for the umpteenth time, when we are free for the…” Jul 27, 16:44