Salmond v Sturgeon Round 3 — Comment along with Sturgeon

[PolkadotsAndMoonbeams]

Previous thread here.

@LexMitior

Well what could you do better - probably institute a lot of constitutional reform! But she is not the person to do that after today.

I mean she is very good politically but as someone who can’t understand the issues in this case of AS and why her actions were an issue and the conduct of the policy, I’d be seriously disclined to give her more responsibility that involved the balancing of power. On the face of her evidence, she can’t manage that.

The Scottish gov and parliament can't touch the constitution. They can make some institutional changes that would be tinkering around the edges. What you see in Scotland is the result of the Labour Party throwing together a devolution settlement with little thought to it. There have been some additional Scotland Acts giving more powers. But ultimately as Westminster must remain sovereign no political institutions must infringe on that are displayed equal power . Change under current settlement needs agreement across Scottish parliament and at UK level. I don't think the UK gov would entertain this.

Thanks Kurt 😂 I really want to find out more about MM. Had never heard of her until today.

Very few of the committee performed well today, but to pretend that the SNP shared braincell was the higher performing one is borderline hilarious.

@Amortentia of course and not sure my sarcasm was apparent. You will forgive me. The great irony that she claims she can do this for Scotland. Delicious. And a good thing I think after today.

I suppose I meant wryly that a person who sits in front of a committee like that could handle more fundamental aspects of law. I think she proved today she couldn’t! But she asks for it all the same.

@Y0uCann0tBeSer10us good summary

I would like to think that Cherry would actually restore sanity and kick out the trans-nonsense that's become core under Sturgeon. I think appealing to the young masses was her ploy to stay relevant over the coming years.

Cherry would be having none of that bollocks

She is clearly in breach of the ministerial code on several occasions. Her attempt to twist the legal advice to fit was disingenuous in the extreme and she gave me no confidence at all that she has proper control over anything. She has known for weeks, months, that this would be coming. She should have been scrutinising diaries and notes to ensure she was prepared and able to answer questions as well as possible rather than answering every second question with a memory related caveat

Did you even watch the proceedings today? I'm quite sure it was Leslie Evans at those meetings/ who lost the notes.

Yes, she forgot the 29th meeting as there was one a couple of days earlier. Hardly misleading Parliament.

She did not act unlawfully. Those taking the case forward did not act unlawfully. This was covered today.

Did you even watch the proceedings today @StarryEyeSurprise

@StarryEyeSurprise luckily I rely on more than today's session to be informed. I can understand how anyone going on the FM's word alone would be confused. Leslie Evan's destroyed notebooks from that period include meetings with the First Minister. The evidence of which is now leaking out too..." transcripts seen by The Scottish Sun raise further questions about a controversial meeting between Ms Evans and Ms Sturgeon in the days after two women first made allegations to the government about Mr Salmond in November 2017.... It comes after we told of a previously unreported meeting between Ms Evans and the First Minister on November 29, 2017 revealed in court records from the government’s doomed civil court battle with Mr Salmond. The government admitted in pleadings the pair met to “discuss development” of a new harassment procedure against former ministers.." Full story: www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/politics/6757747/nicola-sturgeon-alex-salmond-inquiry-leslie-evans/

@StatisticallyChallenged

She is clearly in breach of the ministerial code on several occasions. Her attempt to twist the legal advice to fit was disingenuous in the extreme and she gave me no confidence at all that she has proper control over anything. She has known for weeks, months, that this would be coming. She should have been scrutinising diaries and notes to ensure she was prepared and able to answer questions as well as possible rather than answering every second question with a memory related caveat

That is what you would do if nothing to hide. She did what you do if telling the truth would incriminate you. If she lies and is found lying then that is a worst offence. So you have a dodgy memory and rambling answers.

Thing is Cherry and co is but a small faction within the MPs and MSPs. I'm not convinced cutting out the rot is possible.

Yes more in the press to come I think

I use notebooks in my work, i can go through quite a few and after keeping for a while, i do destroy them. However, I also create an electronic record of anything more significant than just jotting down a number or date or whatever as an aide memoire when moving from one system to another.

If it's important stuff, I type it up and save the document, otherwise I just scan the pages and save. So something like an interview with someone I would type up, some notes for myself on things I wanted to raise in a meeting or 121, I'd just take a scan.

I always take a look through any books before I destroy them

Would someone in LEs position not assume that virtually everything was important and have notes types or scanned? I find it hard to believe that they wouldn't or surely this is incompetence?

@Dinnafashyersel

Thing is Cherry and co is but a small faction within the MPs and MSPs. I'm not convinced cutting out the rot is possible.

I'm a big fan of Cherry but I'm not sure she has leader potential. I think she's highly intelligent and committed to her beliefs but You need a particular type of personality to lead. If you want to win in politics. You need to be charismatic and bland, a tricky skill, to appeal to lots of different demographics.

My teenager says Sturgeon always acts like a very paranoid person. I think he has a point. It is probably shapes her decisions a lot. About the people she wants around her and professional choices.

@WaxOnFeckOff all civil servants are aware that any correspondence including notebooks and emails can be part of a freedom of information act request so yes they know to keep them for a certain time period.

[quote Scottishskifun]@WaxOnFeckOff all civil servants are aware that any correspondence including notebooks and emails can be part of a freedom of information act request so yes they know to keep them for a certain time period.[/quote]
Yes even more reason that they should have a proper system in place so for me, it's no accident is it?

@Truelymadlydeeplysomeonesmum that’s a very astute observation by your boy. I can totally see that.

Today reminded me of the Dominic Cummings session in the Rose Garden. Rambling on for as long as it takes, so that you - and your cronies - can say you've been fully scrutinised and move on.

I would have thought it would be doubly important to keep notebooks when you are writing about a court case. By the time she destroyed those notebooks she presumably knew that the complaints process had turned in to a judicial review, or that the JR had turned in to an parliamentary committee and so on.

She knew that the contents may be needed.

@sessell

Today reminded me of the Dominic Cummings session in the Rose Garden. Rambling on for as long as it takes, so that you - and your cronies - can say you've been fully scrutinised and move on.

Yes, it is very reminiscent of that - although he went the other way with excessive detail, I seem to recall, rather than the I can't remember schtick

@WaxOnFeckOff it's quite a convenient accident yes.

Perhaps the dog ate her homework?

I thought the convenors performance was poor. She should have directed NS to answer the questions instead of waffling and getting emotive. The process would have been over hours earlier and then she wouldn't have had to close down questioners because of time! And after being there all day another 30 minutes wouldn't have really mattered.

It is obvious that the legislation wasn't fit for purpose and wasn't scrutinised correctly before the FM signed it off.

So the independent civil service and the independent judiciary by definition are not fit for purpose. (As is the case with other legislation that has been passed) and then to hand it over to untrained people to investigate is beyond belief!!

I would have thought that mediation and arbitration would be part of legislation and legitimate ways to deal with harassment cases and if not satisfied then they would go to a higher authority. Which I think AS was asking for (not sure)

Unfortunately all I get from this is ineptitude throughout the process of policy making and law making and it would appear upholding the law. All this from people who are supposed to be the LAW MAKERS!!

I am aghast t these proceedings. It's more reminiscent of the Handforth parish council than a bona fide devolved administration.

Her attempt to twist the legal advice to fit was disingenuous in the extreme

for me what came out was how disingenuous Salmond had portrayed the legal advice, giving the impression they'd been told it was dead in the water from the start, which wasn't the case. When they actually went through it in full showing the timings it gave a fuller picture and showed they didn't 'go against legal advice'.