Guest Bob Mahelp Posted March 1, 2021 Share Posted March 1, 2021 6 minutes ago, Donathan said: Greens saying they’ll get rid of Swinney if the evidence is not released I hope they do. It would do us all a favour. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diegomarahenry Posted March 1, 2021 Share Posted March 1, 2021 6 minutes ago, Donathan said: Greens saying they’ll get rid of Swinney if the evidence is not released You’d expect the Torys and Labour to do it just out of shithousery but the Greens....that’s got to be a kick in the cobblers 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alta-pete Posted March 1, 2021 Share Posted March 1, 2021 9 minutes ago, Donathan said: Greens saying they’ll get rid of Swinney if the evidence is not released And how are they proposing they'll achieve that please? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donathan Posted March 1, 2021 Share Posted March 1, 2021 Just now, alta-pete said: And how are they proposing they'll achieve that please? Vote of no confidence 1 minute ago, diegomarahenry said: You’d expect the Torys and Labour to do it just out of shithousery but the Greens....that’s got to be a kick in the cobblers The unionist parties are already proposing a vote of no confidence in the deputy first mister/education secretary, however they need the Greens to back it to have majority support in the Scottish Parliament. Greens are saying they will back it if the evidence is not released. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coprolite Posted March 1, 2021 Share Posted March 1, 2021 https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/scotland-is-now-a-failed-state-and-holyroods-inquiry-shows-the-first-minister-is-the-cause-brian-monteith-3149762?amp Is this right? I haven't been following this closely and hadn't realised that Scotland was even a state, never mind a failed one. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted March 1, 2021 Share Posted March 1, 2021 15 hours ago, DeeTillEhDeh said: I actually thought Salmond was rather measured on Friday - he had opportunities to throw Sturgeon under the bus but did not. As for not showing the evidence - we could go round in circles on this - preserving the anonymity of the complainants and at the same time allowing evidence to be presented was always going to be difficult - but even more so with the political games going on - the behaviour of some who seem to be making judgements on Twitter before all the evidence has been presented is just a disgrace. Ultimately this shows that having politicians make judgements about other politicians is really unworkable - an independent inquiry without the politicians being involved might have made some headway. Now we are in a he said she said position - and I doubt very much the full truth will emerge and even less so with the twisting of the testimony we have seen. The MSM have been appalling - the way Salmond's testimony was reported bore no relation to the actualite. He did not call on Sturgeon to resign as Sarah Smith claimed nor did he state, as the Heil front page said, that Scotland was not ready for independence. There is no suggestion that the Scottish government is not releasing their legal advice to protect the anominity of anyone. The argument put forward is that this will lead to council being unwilling in future to provide advice knowning that it could be put into the public domain. This may be true but you surely question any professional that will only give advice on the basis that it will never be challenged. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeTillEhDeh Posted March 1, 2021 Share Posted March 1, 2021 There is no suggestion that the Scottish government is not releasing their legal advice to protect the anominity of anyone. The argument put forward is that this will lead to council being unwilling in future to provide advice knowning that it could be put into the public domain. This may be true but you surely question any professional that will only give advice on the basis that it will never be challenged.I think we are talking about 2 different types of evidence here - I was really talking about the redacted evidence from Salmond not the legal advice.As for the legal advice - I am not a lawyer so really don't know what the legalities of it all are - I would be interested to know from someone who is better qualified than myself.Is it standard to have non-disclosure or not? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeTillEhDeh Posted March 1, 2021 Share Posted March 1, 2021 Looks like the legal advice is going to be published with the usual provisos of redaction. I assume the advice names individuals or could lead to their identification? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacDonald Jardine Posted March 1, 2021 Share Posted March 1, 2021 I think we are talking about 2 different types of evidence here - I was really talking about the redacted evidence from Salmond not the legal advice.As for the legal advice - I am not a lawyer so really don't know what the legalities of it all are - I would be interested to know from someone who is better qualified than myself.Is it standard to have non-disclosure or not? Yes it is. Legal advice should be an honest analysis of the position, which won't necessarily be the position adopted by the person receiving the advice. It's slightly different though in this instance. The government is acting on behalf of the parliament and ultimately the people. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chapelhall chap Posted March 1, 2021 Share Posted March 1, 2021 1 hour ago, coprolite said: https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/scotland-is-now-a-failed-state-and-holyroods-inquiry-shows-the-first-minister-is-the-cause-brian-monteith-3149762?amp Is this right? I haven't been following this closely and hadn't realised that Scotland was even a state, never mind a failed one. It's another sign of the poor language used by guys like Monteith (like the one party state nonsense)- usually a State is defined as one with sovereign powers/authority and clearly a devolved Parliament cannot be a State. What is funny is that his definition of the features of a failed State led me to conclude that it was the U.K that fitted his definition. I know that we should play the ball rather than the man but he was not an active elected politician from around 2005 till resurfacing from France as a Brexit MEP for all of a few months. It's all about earning some money and a desperate attempt to keep his name in the ether. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted March 1, 2021 Share Posted March 1, 2021 Salmond inquiry: Why media's treatment of scandal shows 'double standards' https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19127266.salmond-inquiry-alastair-campbell-says-scandal-shows-double-standards/ -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted March 1, 2021 Share Posted March 1, 2021 1 hour ago, DeeTillEhDeh said: I think we are talking about 2 different types of evidence here - I was really talking about the redacted evidence from Salmond not the legal advice. As for the legal advice - I am not a lawyer so really don't know what the legalities of it all are - I would be interested to know from someone who is better qualified than myself. Is it standard to have non-disclosure or not? Legal privilege is a thing in Scotland. As has been pointed out by a subsequent poster the difference in this case is that the recipient of the advice is not a person or body but is the Scottish Government, a transient entity that ultimately represents the people. There should be no legal privilege in regards to governments receiving legal advice. Since comparisons with Westminster are common on here - the UK government published it's legal advice on Brexit after a commons motion. The Scottish Government have twice ignored Parliament. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted March 1, 2021 Share Posted March 1, 2021 1 minute ago, strichener said: the UK government published it's legal advice on Brexit after a commons motion. The Scottish Government have twice ignored Parliament. That's an exception, not the rule. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted March 1, 2021 Share Posted March 1, 2021 Just now, Baxter Parp said: That's an exception, not the rule. No, that is a comparison. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted March 1, 2021 Share Posted March 1, 2021 Just now, strichener said: No, that is a comparison. The rule is that legal advice isn't revealed, if it helps. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted March 1, 2021 Share Posted March 1, 2021 7 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said: The rule is that legal advice isn't revealed, if it helps. So if the legal advice doesn't help, it's revealed. Good to know. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted March 1, 2021 Share Posted March 1, 2021 Just now, Jacksgranda said: So if the legal advice doesn't help, it's revealed. Good to know. I feel you're wilfully misinterpreting my post. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted March 1, 2021 Share Posted March 1, 2021 (edited) Well, you're wilfully misinterpreting Strichener's... Edited March 1, 2021 by Jacksgranda 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diamonds are Forever Posted March 1, 2021 Share Posted March 1, 2021 19 hours ago, diegomarahenry said: It looks like the Sturgeonites are blaming Salmond for trying to take down the SNP because of his ego Salmond is trying to take down those who tried to jail him and failed. Salmond turned up and said a lot of things he said he can prove but the government wont let him show the evidence. He must know that the SG could call his bluff at any moment and allow the evidence to be shown, so is he likely to lie? The government wont show the evidence If this was a Russian opposition leader, this would have been condemned by every news outlet and government based on the conspiracy that the Scottish government has hidden evidence and is trying to silence or jail an enemy of the ruling party. The Scottish government must know this looks bad but the most damaging thing about this is that more people backing Sturgeon aren't asking for clarity and transparency. To think that a ruling party could try and remove a private citizen from society and when they lose, bar him from proving the fact it happened is frightening. People need to know this was not the case. If the committee win their fight to see the evidence and it is damming, Sturgeon has to go. If she turns up and does damage limitation, throws a couple of names under the bus, maybe she can survive. If she releases the evidence and it proves Salmond has been economical with the truth, then Salmond has been just stirring shit and she will continue. Absolutely. I despair reading through cringeworthy comments on here and elsewhere online which resemble a desperate 'move along, nothing to see here' attitude. This is not just going to go away, and the longer it drags out the more infighting there will be and the more damaging it will be for all involved in the independence movement. These people seem to think that just because they want independence enough for none of this to matter them that everyone else will see it that way too. This is clearly not the case, the Scottish Government have to show that they are taking this seriously to that crucial amount of voters on the fence, so far they have come across as the complete opposite. The biggest supporters of independence should be the ones demanding answers here more than anyone, instead they seem to think if they tell enough people there's nothing to see here that it will all just go away - which coincidentally was the tactic tried by the Scottish Government, and we can see how well that plan is going. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeartsOfficialMoaner Posted March 1, 2021 Share Posted March 1, 2021 2 minutes ago, Diamonds are Forever said: Absolutely. I despair reading through cringeworthy comments on here and elsewhere online which resemble a desperate 'move along, nothing to see here' attitude. This is not just going to go away, and the longer it drags out the more infighting there will be and the more damaging it will be for all involved in the independence movement. These people seem to think that just because they want independence enough for none of this to matter them that everyone else will see it that way too. This is clearly not the case, the Scottish Government have to show that they are taking this seriously to that crucial amount of voters on the fence, so far they have come across as the complete opposite. The biggest supporters of independence should be the ones demanding answers here more than anyone, instead they seem to think if they tell enough people there's nothing to see here that it will all just go away - which coincidentally was the tactic tried by the Scottish Government, and we can see how well that plan is going. Like Salmond? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.