The Dirty Independence Question

[eFestivals]

I have given my reasons why I am pro Indy in exhaustive detail on countless occasions.

That's not what I asked.

We're discussing the finances of indy, and your opinion towards those finances.

You've say you believe the extra money needed to make iScotland financially viable at current spending levels will appear from somewhere.

 

I'm asking where the somewhere is, what the 'how' is, and why you have such absolute confidence in that sudden appearance.

Care to address the questions?

[eFestivals]

The last poll I saw (Panelbase in January paid for by the bishop of Bath but with a scrupulously fair question) saw a small majority (45 to 42% of those with an opinion agreeing with Mr Salmond that the BBC was biased. I tend to agree myself & indeed I know a number of people who previously held the Beeb in high regard who were similarly disappointed.

I agree. The BBC is biased. Then again, it's impossible for anything not to be biased.

Which gets to mean that if balance is to be achieved, it will happen over a number of articles rather than within one.

Whether or not the beeb was biased against indy I wouldn't like to guess at, but balance is not about just equal air-time, or allowing assertions to go unchallenged.

If you care to remember, whatever else there was around the Robinson/Salmond RBS spat, there were plenty of assertions from Salmond that the banks wouldn't head south as 'Project Fear' had been suggesting, and then suddenly they all said they definitely would be. Salmond found a nice diversion to that.

 

Another of the Project Fear lies was about the volatility of the oil price. That was lies and bluster according to someone. How's that working out?

 

 

 

ON a more general point, politicians of all parties have always complained that the BBC is biased against them. Quite why you should single out Eck for criticism on this I'm not sure... Oh, wait a minute, I am sure, you miss no opportunity to attack Eck cos you hate him & the SNP with an obsessive irrationality.

yeah it's nothing about the man who works for the biased press complaining about that biased press.

Whatever the beeb's faults it makes an attempt at balance, which no other media organisation does. A world with no beeb would be a worse world.

 

Gosh 85,000 punters are about to descend on a pretty rural & the Transport Minister meets with the organisers. I think the scandal would  be if he didn't! It's far from clear what is actually being alleged here. there is no suggestion in the article that there was any wrongdoing at all. 

 

But hey, don't let that stop you - It never has before.

Yet again, you ignore the real issue and pretend it's about something else.

Special privileged access. In fact, money for access.

All a person needs to do to get free access to the SNP govt of Scotland is slip Angus Robertson's missus a few quid. That's certainly the fact for both of those meetings.

[LJS]

 

Yet again, you ignore the real issue and pretend it's about something else.

Special privileged access. In fact, money for access.

All a person needs to do to get free access to the SNP govt of Scotland is slip Angus Robertson's missus a few quid. That's certainly the fact for both of those meetings.

 

I must have missed the "cash for access" allegation. Can you help me?

 

I repeat that I fail to see the issue with the transport minister meeting with the organisers of a festival to try & avoid traffic problems. I wish he's met with the Belladrum guys last year - it might not have takne 4 hours to get a mile away from the site.

Edited August 24, 2015 by LJS

[eFestivals]

I must have missed the "cash for access" allegation. Can you help me?

cash has changed hands, and the recipient of the cash has gained the payer of the cash special access to ministers.

There's now two instances of it.

[eFestivals]

I repeat that I fail to see the issue with the transport minister meeting with the organisers of a festival to try & avoid traffic problems. I wish he's met with the Belladrum guys last year - it might not have takne 4 hours to get a mile away from the site.

There's proper channels via which any necessary discussion is able to take place.

This meeting was arranged via improper channels, as was the one with the Culture Minister.

When people are taking cash to introduce businessmen to tory politicians, you think it's OK, do you? The sort of thing that should happen in a well-run and accountable govt?

[LJS]

cash has changed hands, and the recipient of the cash has gained the payer of the cash special access to ministers.

There's now two instances of it.

 

I'm sorry if i am being stupid but where did cash change hands?

[eFestivals]

I'm sorry if i am being stupid but where did cash change hands?

the woman (I forget the name) who was employed by T in the Park.

Was she employed for the access she could gain to ministers, or was she employed for normal project management skills?

It's a fair question, and you'd be all over it if it was being done by the tories.

I'm not claiming it's definitely dodgy dealings, I'm saying it should be looked into. No one shoulod be able to buy special access to govt - and DF definitely got special access to ministers, and they got a pile of money via it too.

Edited August 24, 2015 by eFestivals

[LJS]

the woman (I forget the name) who was employed by T in the Park.

Was she employed for the access she could gain to ministers, or was she employed for normal project management skills?

It's a fair question, and you'd be all over it if it was being done by the tories.

I'm not claiming it's definitely dodgy dealings, I'm saying it should be looked into. No one shoulod be able to buy special access to govt - and DF definitely got special access to ministers, and they got a pile of money via it too.

 

Oh right , so not really "cash has changed hands, and the recipient of the cash has gained the payer of the cash special access to ministers."  at all . Yet another wild claim from you which turns out to be mere speculation.

[LJS]

 

I'm not claiming it's definitely dodgy dealings 

 

Of course you're not

 

 

This meeting was arranged via improper channels, 

 

 

 

cash has changed hands, and the recipient of the cash has gained the payer of the cash special access to ministers.

 

[eFestivals]

Oh right , so not really "cash has changed hands, and the recipient of the cash has gained the payer of the cash special access to ministers."  at all . Yet another wild claim from you which turns out to be mere speculation.

here's some facts for you:

1. cash changed hands.

2. the recipient of the cash has gained the payer of the cash special access to ministers

FFS.

[eFestivals]

Of course you're not

another fact for you:-

- two meetings with ministers were arranged by non-normal channels.

The facts suggest that something dodgy might have happened.

You know, pay a party member a few tens of thousands, get much more than that back as a freebie from the govt. Everyone wins ... except Scotland's poor.

You know, those poor you say you want to see looked after in preference to money being wasted by corrupt politicians.

 

Even an SNP ex-leader thought the first instance to be revealed looked corrupt, but apparently to think the same as that SNP bigwig is to be saying 'SNP baaaaad'.

 

When really, from you, it's just baaaa baaaa baaaa.

 

Sheep.

FFS.

Edited August 25, 2015 by eFestivals

[LJS]

here's some facts for you:

1. cash changed hands.

2. the recipient of the cash has gained the payer of the cash special access to ministers

FFS.

How has "cash changed hands"?

Are you referring to her pay?

If so why not say so? Is it perhaps because "cash has changed hands' sounds more dodgy?

[eFestivals]

How has "cash changed hands"?

Are you referring to her pay?

If so why not say so? Is it perhaps because "cash has changed hands' sounds more dodgy?

 

I'm referring to her pay, yes.

 

Money is money, and if she's being paid primarily because of her govt contacts, that's undoubtedly corrupt.

 

Think about it. DF might have said to her "we'll give you a £50k bonus if you can get us £150k of govt money". Everyone wins, except the taxpayer.

 

Is she someone with a festival background to make her ideal for managing festival projects? No she's not, at least not obviously.

 

She's someone with a background in politics, and she's someone whose political background has been used to get special political access.

 

There are CLEARLY good grounds for suspicions. Whether those suspicions are the facts is another thing - but we only get to find out by looking into it.

 

And not by giving a free pass. A free pass is a guarantee of future corruption.

Edited August 25, 2015 by eFestivals

[LJS]

I'm referring to her pay, yes.

Money is money, and if she's being paid primarily because of her govt contacts, that's undoubtedly corrupt.

Think about it. DF might have said to her "we'll give you a £50k bonus if you can get us £150k of govt money". Everyone wins, except the taxpayer.

Is she someone with a festival background to make her ideal for managing festival projects? No she's not, at least not obviously.

She's someone with a background in politics, and she's someone whose political background has been used to get special political access.

There are CLEARLY good grounds for suspicions. Whether those suspicions are the facts is another thing - but we only get to find out by looking into it.

And not by giving a free pass. A free pass is a guarantee of future corruption.

So the answer, in short, is yes, you used the phrase "cash has changed hands' deliberately because it sounds a bit dodgy.

Not that you're saying anything dodgy happened.

Aye right!

[eFestivals]

So the answer, in short, is yes, you used the phrase "cash has changed hands' deliberately because it sounds a bit dodgy.

Not that you're saying anything dodgy happened.

Aye right!

 

When something dodgy happens cash is likely to have changed hands. Cash has changed hands.

 

Businesses have to account for their spends. Inventing a false role to account for that spend is the sort of thing dodgy fuckers do so they're not also breaking further laws (the more you break the more chance there is of being caught out).

 

FFS. There's absolutely nothing you won't excuse.

 

In just this week you've excused the lauding of a fascist and now you're saying that nothing the SNP do should be scrutinised and held to account unless the crime is proven before the investigation has taken place.

 

It's moron land.

 

There are clear grounds for suspicion that something dodgy might have gone on. Even the ex-leader of the SNP thinks so.

 

It's not SNP baaaad, it's SNP baaa baaa baaa - SHEEP.

Edited August 25, 2015 by eFestivals

[Stash]

How has "cash changed hands"?

Are you referring to her pay?

If so why not say so? Is it perhaps because "cash has changed hands' sounds more dodgy?

 

From what I've read of this situation, it doesn't sound as though normal protocol has been followed. 

 

DF Concerts employed a PR consultant (Jennifer Dempsie) on a short term contract as a "project manager" to help with the site relocation

• Jennifer Dempsie is a prospective SNP MSP candidate, former advisor to Salmond when he was FM, a former SNP party HQ employee and current partner of SNP Westminster lead MP Angus Robertson, 

Dempsie brokered at least 2 meetings with Scottish Government ministers, which resulted in a grant of £150,000 being awared to DF Concerts

• The meeting between DF boss Geoff Ellis and Culture Secretary took place on 28th May, with the grant being paid on July 2nd - a very quick turnaround
• Normally cultural grants such as this are managed by Creative Scotland who are responsible for distributing funding from both the Scottish Government & the National Lottery

 

There certainly seems to be a suggestion of impropriety here, given the available information. Essentially a company with multi million pound annual revenue employed a political insider on a very short term contract ostensibly to gain access to senior government figures.  

 

The suggestion seems to be being made by SNPrs that this kind of access is normal and should be expected for a festival organisation the size of T in the Park. If that is the case, why did they feel the need to pay for someone like Dempsie to actually gain them access and what are Creative Scotland doing so "wrong" that they needed to be bypassed in this way? 

[eFestivals]

nicely put Stash.

There's plenty of grounds for suspicion of something dodgy.

Govts should be held to account, no matter which party is in govt.

If govt is not held to account, it's open season for fraud.

Even the ex-leader of the SNP thinks it looks suspicious.

Meanwhile all snippers give it a free pass, because they're disciples and not thinkers.

Edited August 25, 2015 by eFestivals

[LJS]

nicely put Stash.

There's plenty of grounds for suspicion of something dodgy.

Govts should be held to account, no matter which party is in govt.

If govt is not held to account, it's open season for fraud.

Even the ex-leader of the SNP thinks it looks suspicious.

Meanwhile all snippers give it a free pass, because they're disciples and not thinkers.

 

Funny though, the BBC seems to have lost interest. Might that be because there isn't really a story here?

[eFestivals]

Funny though, the BBC seems to have lost interest. Might that be because there isn't really a story here?

 

Yeah, and Greville Janner must be innocent because the press went quiet on  that for over 20 years.

 

Meanwhile you were previously saying there was no story because they'd reported nothing of it. Then they reported something of it and you went quiet and wouldn't talk about it. Now the beeb are quiet again you're back to claiming that proves there's no story.

 

Are you biased very much, LJS?  Or is your problem a problem with thinking for yourself?

 

FFS.

[eFestivals]

And there's been no BBC press on the Dunblane killer for years and years, so there's very definitely not an establishment paedo ring amongst the Scottish - the tories, and Labour, both hated - establishment.

 

The lack of any mainstream news story proves it!

 

[russycarps]

Another hammer blow to snp credibility today as maersk announces it will shut down operations at 3 north sea oilfields from 2016.

More evidence oil prices will stay at these low prices for the long term.

Are any of the raving nationalists ready to accept the truth that low prices are here to stay yet?

Edited August 27, 2015 by russycarps

[eFestivals]

and now, a 3rd case of special access to ministers, this time for access to the Scottish Finance Minister, one of the few truth speakers of the SNP ("the SNP are not a progressive party").

DF concerts paid cash, and DF concerts got special access.

All above board, of course. Everyone in Scotland gets three private meetings with ministers after asking their mate to arrange it.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/homenews/13628535.John_Swinney_drawn_into_T_in_the_Park_cronyism_row/?ref=rss

[russycarps]

and now, a 3rd case of special access to ministers, this time for access to the Scottish Finance Minister, one of the few truth speakers of the SNP ("the SNP are not a progressive party").

DF concerts paid cash, and DF concerts got special access.

All above board, of course. Everyone in Scotland gets three private meetings with ministers after asking their mate to arrange it.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/homenews/13628535.John_Swinney_drawn_into_T_in_the_Park_cronyism_row/?ref=rss

 

 

b-b-but it's not on the BBC homepage so it doesnt matter!

[eFestivals]

b-b-but it's not on the BBC homepage so it doesnt matter!

 

and over in the General News discussion, LJS bangs on about how it's disgusting that the poor aren't being put first in line for govt money.

[gary1979666]

Apparently the SNP are asking the BBC for more Scotland specific output, such as a new channel and radio station.  At a time when the Beeb is looking for areas to cut!