What was Michael Matheson actually doing ?

[Lex]

Yeah in the great pantheon of SNP sleaze and corruption this is pretty small beans.  
The SNP front bench has always been chock full of a mixture of morons and criminals, sometimes politicians who are both at the same time.
Matheson is just a moron, he’s not a criminal.  I hope he keeps his job. 

[Molotov]

8 minutes ago, Lex said:

Yeah in the great pantheon of SNP sleaze and corruption this is pretty small beans.  
The SNP front bench has always been chock full of a mixture of morons and criminals, sometimes politicians who are both at the same time.
Matheson is just a moron, he’s not a criminal.  I hope he keeps his job. 

Criminals? What did I miss?

[TheScarf]

19 minutes ago, alta-pete said:

I cannot recall one post on this particular topic framed as SNPBaaad. It is entirely about his incompetence, arrogance and mendacity.

You’ve been on this particular hobby horse for two days now and you’re still wrong. 

Yeah, not a single Unionist on here has jumped on this story due to what party he’s a member of.

[TheScarf]

14 minutes ago, Lex said:

Yeah in the great pantheon of SNP sleaze and corruption this is pretty small beans.  
The SNP front bench has always been chock full of a mixture of morons and criminals, sometimes politicians who are both at the same time.
Matheson is just a moron, he’s not a criminal.  I hope he keeps his job. 

Agreed. Losing his job over this would be fucking mental. Folk suggesting it need to give their heads a wobble.

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

17 hours ago, Wile E Coyote said:

A quick google shows if you commit £11,000 benefit fraud you get community service or a suspended prison sentence.

This is also fraud and should be treated no differently

 

Cant prove there was a mens rea. His version and apparently the official account of this is that he didnt know his sons were streaming football on the ipad and they only told him this last week. Now, whether you believe that or not, i personally think as a former teenager myself, that its actually kinda possible the kids did do that. Was it daft, aye, should he maybe have got this sorted before, yes, was he reckless in not getting the sim changed, yes. Could easily have put the bill down to push notifications/roaming and not really thought about data breakdowns, billings and roaming are incredibly complex through business accounts. I dont think this is some kind of complex conspiracy, I think hes made a complete James Hunt of himself, should he have shown better judgement and should he resign, imo, yes. 

[Left Back]

33 minutes ago, TheScarf said:

Agreed. Losing his job over this would be fucking mental. Folk suggesting it need to give their heads a wobble.

I’ll ask you again.  What’s an acceptable amount of grift/incompetence/fraud/cover up/lying for a politician in any party?  At what threshold should there be consequences?

For the avoidance of doubt I think many in the UK gov should be in jail for what they have been up to in recent years.  Feel free to call me a yoon or a tory or whatever else you want to falsely accuse me of when you have no idea of my political position.

Expecting reasonable and ethical behaviour of all politicians doesn’t mean I support one side or the other. 

As I’ve said before if I’d done what he’s done at a bare minimum I would lose my job for a multitude of reasons.  I’d expect this to be the case with most employers.

If he’d fessed up straight away that he’d allowed his kids to use it as a hotspot and paid it back with the assurance he would be more careful in the future that would be reasonable.   Even if he truly did not know what happened it’s his device and therefore his responsibility what happens to it.  Expecting the taxpayer to pay for it is wrong.  He could have taken responsibility and kept his kids out of it back when all this first came out.

Insisting only he used it for parliamentary business for months (when it was impossible for anyone to reasonably believe that to be the case) makes him a lying deceitful c**t and he has to pay the consequences for that.

 

[LongTimeLurker]

On 18/11/2023 at 13:47, Lex said:

...Matheson is just a moron, he’s not a criminal.  I hope he keeps his job. 

Should have been obvious he was local councillor material at best when he tried to ban the hokey cokey at football games for sectarian reasons. Only a matter of time before someone that dense is going to wind up embarrassing a political party, but instead of kicking him out into the long grass in career progression terms, the SNP kept him in their Holyrood cabinet.

[Molotov]

9 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:

Should have been obvious he was local councillor material at best when he tried to ban the hokey cokey at football games for sectarian reasons.

Holy fcuk. Was that him?  

[Todd_is_God]

On 18/11/2023 at 12:03, TheScarf said:

Agreed. Losing his job over this would be fucking mental. Folk suggesting it need to give their heads a wobble.

I dunno if it's that ridiculous.

Not sure what it's like at your work but if I ran up an expenses bill of £11k I'd fully expect to be asked to justify why I'd far exceeded the amount listed in the expenses policy (and MSPs do have one for mobile roaming charges -it's £200), and also why I'd not made any attempt to gain authorisation first if I felt it was absolutely unavoidable.

If I couldn't, or it was discovered I had been either extremely careless or less than honest about it, I would fully expect to be shown the door.

Edited November 19, 2023 by Todd_is_God

[Michael W]

2 hours ago, Todd_is_God said:

I dunno if it's that ridiculous.

Not sure what it's like at your work but if I ran up an expenses bill of £11k I'd fully expect to be asked to justify why I'd far exceeded the amount listed in the expenses policy (and MSPs do have one for mobile roaming charges -it's £200), and also why I'd not made any attempt to gain authorisation first if I felt it was absolutely unavoidable.

If I couldn't, or it was discovered I had been either extremely careless or less than honest about it, I would fully expect to be shown the door.

Yep, an £11k roaming bill would be grounds for investigation in any case. Were I to tell them that it was work related, they would still be very angry with me and I am not exactly sure what the outcome would be if I'm honest. I posted earlier in the thread about a large bill someone on had run up at a previous employer, which was fine in the end because approval had been given (the approving manager made an error, but the employee asking the question was clear). 

If they then found out that it wasn't work-related and that I'd actually watched a football match instead, I'd be sacked. I'd have been dishonest and I'd been in breach of the reasonable use policy. I'd also be laughed at if I to claim it wisnae me. 

Now, If I fessed up and told the truth, I would also be in serious trouble and would probably have to pay the bill. However, I might manage to avoid being sacked. This is also not a great outcome as I'd be a fair bit down on my salary for some amount of time, but it's preferable to being sacked for dishonesty, which will severely hinder future employment prospects. Another thing politicians don't seem to have to worry about...

Matheson lied when he was asked to explain the bill, continued to lie about it and lied to the public. Politicians should also he held to higher standards than people working for private sector employers - he should be shown the door. 

 

Edited November 19, 2023 by Michael W

[Hard Graft]

Will be interesting to see if he is the main subject at FMQ's today. Useless must be feeling the pressure and is losing what little credibility he had by backing him.

[Left Back]

4 hours ago, Hard Graft said:

Will be interesting to see if he is the main subject at FMQ's today. Useless must be feeling the pressure and is losing what little credibility he had by backing him.

Catching up on FMQ's at the moment.  Matheson was the main subject of questions from both the Tory's and Labour.

[Crazy Days]

Nothing to see here now move along. 

Then we discover that Robison cannot say, when asked this morning, whether MSP's lie or not.  All she had to say was "As far as I am concerned we tell the truth".

Useless is really floundering with his answers.

[KingRocketman II]

"Useless"

[Billy Jean King]

3 hours ago, Crazy Days said:

Nothing to see here now move along. 

Then we discover that Robison cannot say, when asked this morning, whether MSP's lie or not.  All she had to say was "As far as I am concerned we tell the truth".

Useless is really floundering with his answers.

It was an open goal today for the opposition parties and they really didn't make a good fist of it. A f**k up like this should be a gift for semi competent operators but those in opposition are as poor as those on the other side of the chamber unfortunately. Will be up to the standards committee to force the issue.

[orfc]

LOL

"Michael Matheson accepted free Celtic tickets despite having 'no interest in club"

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/michael-matheson-accepted-free-celtic-31529406

 

Was he hoping to scalp them on for a few quid then?

[Billy Jean King]

21 hours ago, orfc said:

LOL

"Michael Matheson accepted free Celtic tickets despite having 'no interest in club"

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/michael-matheson-accepted-free-celtic-31529406

 

Was he hoping to scalp them on for a few quid then?

That's a slightly misleading headline. M(S)P and members of the judiciary are frequently invited to "view the policing / security" arrangements at major events such as sport or concerts. They are accompanied by police officials and yes it does get them access to the event itself but it's by no means "free tickets" as you or I would know them. I'm surprised that's even news worthy as this has been going on for years.

Edited November 27, 2023 by Billy Jean King

[alta-pete]

4 hours ago, Billy Jean King said:

That's a slightly misleading headline. M(S)P and members of the judiciary are frequently invited to "view the policing / security" arrangements at major events such as sport or concerts. They are accompanied by police officials and yes it does get them access to the event itself but it's by no means "free tickets" as you or I would know them. I'm surprised that's even news worthy as this has been going on for years.

Has Matheson ever viewed such arrangements at Ibrox? Pittodrie? Tannadice? Pick anywhere you want beyond Parkhead of Firhill if you like…

[Suspect Device]

1 hour ago, alta-pete said:

Has Matheson ever viewed such arrangements at Ibrox? Pittodrie? Tannadice? Pick anywhere you want beyond Parkhead of Firhill if you like…

It was at Hampden.  You need to read the article. The headline is a bit misleading.

[lichtgilphead]

1 hour ago, alta-pete said:

Has Matheson ever viewed such arrangements at Ibrox? Pittodrie? Tannadice? Pick anywhere you want beyond Parkhead of Firhill if you like…

As far as I'm aware, Matheson has never accepted hospitality at Parkhead or Firhill. 

All 3 matches referenced in the Daily Record report (in 2012, 2016 & 2017) were at Hampden.

Inreresting Fact - The Rangers only appeared in 1 Hampden final during that period, memorably losing to Hibs