Salmond v Sturgeon round 4. What next?

[Cismyfatarse]

New thread.

@daisyfraser sorry if you missed my point which was that NS is perfectly intelligent and educated for the role shes in. She's a highly capable person. You were suggesting she wasn't, I was suggesting she was.

Incidentally the too wee, too poor, too stupid 'trope' actually does exist. Too poor is pretty much the reason always given against independence.

Playing the man. From the woman going on about how a woman with a career of 30 years can't possibly be qualified enough.

Good one.

Iran based Facebook accounts being deleted including some pretending to be SNP supporters - discovered when they posted a Tory meme :o

"Too wee.." etc was invented by the SNP.

Just own it, it's been successful!

I'll take your word for it @OldRailer but the fact remains that 'too poor' seems to be at the forefront of most unionists' minds.

I'm sure everyone here has spotted these tactics.

I'm 🪨 on that. Anything else just derails & feeds into it. Best to just ignore.

And as a general comment, I'm discussing the committee enquiry into the government's handling of the complaints received about Salmond etc. I'm not interested in whataboutery or personal comments. There's enough to be discussed on the committee work & the evidence published alone to fill up several threads so there's little point in engaging in the Pom Pom waving nonsense.

And now, back to 🪨

Scotland joined the union because they were too poor.

England gave Scotland money to pay off its debts - kind of similar to now, Scottish government always begging for more money. its never enough!

Scotland got access to a bigger market and Glasgow grew to become the second city of the British empire.

I'm a history graduate so very interested in looking back and considering what Scotland gained from the union and what Scotland would lose with independence.

NS is perfectly intelligent and educated for the role shes in. She's a highly capable person.

Agree she's extremely capable which makes her whole schtick about not remembering and mismanaging matters in a fluster highly doubtful. I am somewhat surprised she is SO bad at "misleading", which even she now admits, and not getting caught though.

So, I presume the committee can now discuss the further items released and press for the rest? Do we think they will recall anyone? How long until they need to report?

Of course la sturgeon going on about the 8 hours of questioning would be reluctant to add to that. Although if either side had stopped rambling on and on, it could have been done in half the time. Also, it wasn't 8 hours really though was it? She had lunch and other breaks and it wasn't exactly a waterboarding session.

Do we think they will recall anyone?

They probably should but won't have the time I suspect. There's probably plenty in Evans' evidence that could be picked apart from her sessions based on now having the legal advice to hand. But realistically we'd be here til the summer having to revisit hers and all other government star's evidence to drill down on the whole thing.

What is like to see is a recommendation for a judge led enquiry, with the power to compel witnesses & evidence to get around all the obstruction & obfuscation that's gone on. What is more likely to happen is split verdict outcome because of the partisan way the committee is set up & the partisan agendas at play. ACH is obsessed with Sturgeon's marital set up & the 'water cooler' rumours about Salmond - none of them really the nub of what the committee is supposed to be looking at. MF is half interested in the key details but drawn to performative political gestures at times. AW has occasionally dug down on some details but inexplicably incurious on other points. JB of all of them seems the most engaged and forensic in her enquiries. MM has at times been ok but her waffle at the end of sturgeon's session was just bizarre. The SNP members have collectively served to run down the clock & soft ball questions for key witnesses.

I'm honestly not expecting much from their report, so 🤞 my pessimism is way off.

I guess we also have the other inquiry which should also not be too long. I've not heard too much about hat one but presumably they've had similar issues as regards getting the information.

The legal details are fascinating and shocking in equal measure.
Thank you to the all posters who are explaining this so clearly.

Sorry if I’ve missed this, but with so many documents finally being released post Salmond and Sturgeon giving evidence to the committee, can they be recalled ?
Do they work with what they’ve got now?
Wait for more?

I cannot fathom how some of the key players are still in post.
Accountability. Transparency. Integrity.
All lacking.

What also strikes me, is the role of ego in this.
It’s staggering how some people in power seem to forget their duty to the electorate.
That, and an incomprehensible amount of sheer incompetence.

I can’t comment on Sturgeon’s legal background but it does strike me that she could do with brushing up on her Jurisprudence again.

Sorry, cross posted.

Time is their big problem and will seriously limit their recall options

There is a problem when there is too much power in too few hands. We need to clear up this shit show and get some sort of power sharing government elected where the main parties need to work together properly. Would a 3 way split with input from the smaller groups work? Need at least 2 sides to vote together.

I know they can effectively do that in terms of voting against something as it stands, but I think there needs to be more cross party buy in at an earlier point and robust debate or consensus after.

@StatisticallyChallenged

Time is their big problem and will seriously limit their recall options

Need a neutral to gather in questions that basically have a yes or no answer and call them all back for a 2 hour shift where the neutral asks key points. e.g. Is x the truth?

I know that wouldn't work in practical terms but would be good to get a few straight answers.

There is no point being under oath and then just getting flim flam which can probably never be used in terms of contempt of court as it's all too woolly and can mean anything or be twisted to fit any narrative.

I think that sort of coalition can work. The problem still remains on topics where they are all equally lobbied/captured on key areas.

The GRA/HCB I don't think would materially change, as there's very little between them (publicly at least) on supposedly being 100% in the thrall of the lobby groups.

There's a lot rotten in what we have now, but I'm stumped on how to change things for the better if I'm honest.

Lobbying & lobbyists have a disproportionate amount of influence & access to the levers of power. That's something I've certainly woken up to in the past few years.

This is good from Jess Phillips. https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/snp-alex-salmond-inquiry-nicola-sturgeon-b1813369.html?utmcontent=Echobox&utmmmedium=Social&utmsource=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR1Eyu7qehrE2wNLI-0V-p8YxFXGAIczcmmmaJvheSdf0sh3UzjcCmIu06Q#Echobox=1615050394

@TheShadowyFeminist

I think that sort of coalition can work. The problem still remains on topics where they are all equally lobbied/captured on key areas.

The GRA/HCB I don't think would materially change, as there's very little between them (publicly at least) on supposedly being 100% in the thrall of the lobby groups.

There's a lot rotten in what we have now, but I'm stumped on how to change things for the better if I'm honest.

Lobbying & lobbyists have a disproportionate amount of influence & access to the levers of power. That's something I've certainly woken up to in the past few years.

Maybe they can link in the microchips we are getting embedded during the covid vaccinations to allow us all to vote on key issues! :o

I am joking just in case I get banded a covidiot by certain parties.

That's a decent piece. Albeit even Jess Phillips can't escape the accusation of political opportunism by commenting on proceedings. But this bit, I do agree with:

"They should all be ashamed, if not at the moral failings but the total lack of professionalism. But they aren’t, instead they look seemingly hubristic."

When watching the FMQs the other day, and seeing how aggressively defensive sturgeon was, in how she avoided answering any Qs directly & turned responses into attacks on opponents, this 'hubris' plays out repeatedly & no one has the decency to demonstrate genuine self reflection & accountability.

@Graffitiqueen

This is good from Jess Phillips. [[https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/snp-alex-salmond-inquiry-nicola-sturgeon-b1813369.html?utm]]content=Echobox&utmmmedium=Social&utmsource=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR1Eyu7qehrE2wNLI-0V-p8YxFXGAIczcmmmaJvheSdf0sh3UzjcCmIu06Q#Echobox=1615050394

Very true and good well written. Thank you for posting that.

Fantastic article.
I wish/ hope this cuts through to the electorate.

yes, agree that's a good article.