Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Leanne1812

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Except, as it turns out.... He wasn't the only one lying.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nicola-sturgeon-did-want-david-cameron-to-win-the-general-election-report-concludes-10271382.html

So Sturgeon did want a Tory government, and lied about it.

Should she now resign?

He accurately recorded what he thought he heard, not what he heard.....

Can it possibly be any more vague?

No one ruling out lost in translation either.

Pathetic!

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/scotland-office-memorandum-leak-cabinet-office-inquiry-statement

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

I'm less sure of this than when I first of Carmichael's admission. Initially, from the second hand reports I had the impression that he not only leaked the email but that he had acttually made it up and hence the accusations of lying.

Perhaps someone can clear that up, but my understanding at the moment is that he only leaked the report.

I'm not generally a fan of whistle blowers and this is not an exception; anyone who leaks a document is guilty of betraying a confidence and that's a non-no for me. Maybe in cases of true public interest (real need to know) perhaps but I am not so sure that is the case here. So I think that whistle blowers should face the consequences of their action. It is serious, but on the level of extreme spin, not a capital offence.

If it is shown that he falsified the email then I do think he is unfit for election, but that has yet to be proven.

What he did, however, is par for much of our political life nowadays and if lying (where I refer to his lie of denying he had allowed the leak) pails into insignificance compared with much more serious lies that all politicians foist on us from time to time.

Sturgeon is no exception to the cult of political lying and before she calls on others to consider their positions she should look at herself, as should others.

So as things stand, I think that Carmichael should remain in his post.

If Carmichael is forced to resign as a result of this business then I suggest he is followed in his example by all SMPs, WMPs and UK MPs.

He should go. He stated himself that he knew the memo contents weren't accurate. He also said had he still been Secretary of State for Scotland he would've had to resign the post. But as an MP he wouldn't have to do so.

He deliberately leaked this memo, during the purdah period in the run up to a General Election, in order to try and change the course of the outcome. It took over every single news channel and newspaper for a full three or four days afterwards. It should also be noted that he only held on to his own constituency by the skin of his teeth. His majority reduced from 10,000 to 800. He most probably wouldn't have won his seat had the results of this inquiry been known before the election concluded.

He lied about knowing anything about this several times also, on national tv. I think David Mundell should also be looked at in terms of his involvement also. He was No2 at the Scottish Office at the time of this leak.



This is also an interesting take re Phil Woolas and other precedents.

http://lallandspeatworrier.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/is-carmichael-vulnerable-to-election.html

elantan

I did wonder about Fluffy myself tbh

zagubov

Shakethedisease wrote: »

He should go. He stated himself that he knew the memo contents weren't accurate. He also said had he still been Secretary of State for Scotland he would've had to resign the post. But as an MP he wouldn't have to do so.

He deliberately leaked this memo, during the purdah period in the run up to a General Election, in order to try and change the course of the outcome. It took over every single news channel and newspaper for a full three or four days afterwards. It should also be noted that he only held on to his own constituency by the skin of his teeth. His majority reduced from 10,000 to 800. He most probably wouldn't have won his seat had the results of this inquiry been known before the election concluded.

He lied about knowing anything about this several times also, on national tv. I think David Mundell should also be looked at in terms of his involvement also. He was No2 at the Scottish Office at the time of this leak.



This is also an interesting take re Phil Woolas and other precedents.

http://lallandspeatworrier.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/is-carmichael-vulnerable-to-election.html

Given that he wrote this a few years back, he should get his coat
http://www.shetlandtimes.co.uk/2010/11/12/letter-from-westminster-49#.VWBURGPnIC8.twitter

skintmacflint

SNP should be more concerned about the bad press they've been receiving all week on the poor education standards and results on literacy and numeracy under their watch. As well as the higher debt burden placed on students from disadvantaged backgrounds due to reduction in grants.

Time they devoted their energies on what they're responsible for.

Generali

skintmacflint wrote: »

SNP should be more concerned about the bad press they've been receiving all week on the poor education standards and results on literacy and numeracy under their watch. As well as the higher debt burden placed on students from disadvantaged backgrounds due to reduction in grants.

Time they devoted their energies on what they're responsible for.

I suspect that part of the problem is that they thought they were going to London to Govern but the reality is that they can do little more than sit on select committees and help with constituency problems. All important stuff but it's not exactly writing budgets and passing laws.

.string.

I note that Carmichael does not actually say in his letter that he had thought the contents of the email were not accurate before he sanctioned its release. Without clarification from him I take his words to mean that he accepts the explanations given following its publication.

As for resigning, should Natalie McGarry, who is reported to have used Twitter to disown the oath of allegiance she had just taken in the House of Commons, also resign?

I think she should; she was lying to the HoC was she not?

Edit: the same latter remark for Richard Burgon for his "Oath of Convenience". He should also quit. His only saving grace was that he did it openly, but he should still quit (IMHO).

Shakethedisease

skintmacflint wrote: »

SNP should be more concerned about the bad press they've been receiving all week on the poor education standards and results on literacy and numeracy under their watch. As well as the higher debt burden placed on students from disadvantaged backgrounds due to reduction in grants.

Time they devoted their energies on what they're responsible for.

The Scottish elections on devolved matters are in May skint.. get with the program sometime. Westminster MP's have no involvement or votes in devolved matters such as education. Am sure the electorate will give their opinion on how well or not they feel the SNP (and their MSP's ) have done next May.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

I suspect that part of the problem is that they thought they were going to London to Govern but the reality is that they can do little more than sit on select committees and help with constituency problems. All important stuff but it's not exactly writing budgets and passing laws.

Yes because that Tory majority is just so vast isn't it... It'll only take a few back bench rebellions to put Cameron's gas at a peep. And Labour are a complete messy disaster at the moment. So I wouldn't get too carried away just yet.

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

I note that Carmichael does not actually say in his letter that he had thought the contents of the email were not accurate before he sanctioned its release. Without clarification from him I take his words to mean that he accepts the explanations given following its publication.

The leak was bad enough. He said himself it was a resigning matter for the SoS for Scotland. No, what's really riling everyone is the cover-up afterwards. The fact that he flat out stated that the first he'd heard of it was 'when a journalist called him'.. then he sat back and allowed an expensive enquiry to take place while knowing all along the source of the leak was himself.

I think he'll tough it out, and won't go easily. But if he doesn't, then Lib Dem MSP's will pay the price next May. Lib Dems are already paying the price over 'trust issues' like tuition fees. This will be an albatross round his neck for the next 5 years if he stays. People don't readily accept or trust proven liars in office. Also, and it's widely accepted in most circles, is that Carmichael is just the fall guy. Labour had video's and a complete set of pre-arranged tweets ready to go about 10 mins after the story broke. And David Mundell was No 2 in the Scottish Office. He knew what was going on also.

Nicola performed just a little too well in that first election debate I think.

As for resigning, should Natalie McGarry, who is reported to have used Twitter to disown the oath of allegiance she had just taken in the House of Commons, also resign?

I think she should; she was lying to the HoC was she not?

Edit: the same latter remark for Richard Burgon for his "Oath of Convenience". He should also quit. His only saving grace was that he did it openly, but he should still quit (IMHO).

Sheer whataboutery. So you don't think Carmichael should quit over this.. a holder of an office of state, openly smearing the First Minister of Scotland, then lying about it for weeks. But you think the above two should ? ( and for what it's worth I've heard nothing much about McGarry and the oath, and I follow her on Twitter )..

Double standards much ?