Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 10

[Composer62]

Roderick Spode said:

Sturgeon stating that she doesn't know the identities of all the alphabet sisters. She also states that the alphabet sisters don't all know each other.

How does she know that, if she doesn't know their identities?

Very good point !

[ant1973]

She is now saying she has seen the messages in question. How would she know who to speak to given that the messages are not in the public domain?

[Roderick Spode]

Jackie Baillie leading now on the WhatsApp messages.

NS - They were not my messages. If the committee gets to see the full messages, they will take a very different slant from that which has been publicised up until now. The idea that this was a plot or conspiracy is an offensive assertion. These messages were written by people who were complying with a police inquiry. I have seen or had an account of these messages, and I am satisfied that the motive was not as per Mr Salmond's assertions. I do not know if I have seen all the messages, as I do not know what all the messages entail...

Wriggle wriggle went the worm.

[wobert]

Doesn’t understand what ‘all’ is....

[ant1973]

Roderick Spode said:

Jackie Baillie leading now on the WhatsApp messages.

NS - They were not my messages. If the committee gets to see the full messages, they will take a very different slant from that which has been publicised up until now. The idea that this was a plot or conspiracy is an offensive assertion. These messages were written by people who were complying with a police inquiry. I have seen or had an account of these messages, and I am satisfied that the motive was not as per Mr Salmond's assertions. I do not know if I have seen all the messages, as I do not know what all the messages entail...

Wriggle wriggle went the worm.

It's just hilarious. Her husband was openly talking about pressurising the Police!

[csd19]

ant1973 said:

Roderick Spode said:

Jackie Baillie leading now on the WhatsApp messages.

NS - They were not my messages. If the committee gets to see the full messages, they will take a very different slant from that which has been publicised up until now. The idea that this was a plot or conspiracy is an offensive assertion. These messages were written by people who were complying with a police inquiry. I have seen or had an account of these messages, and I am satisfied that the motive was not as per Mr Salmond's assertions. I do not know if I have seen all the messages, as I do not know what all the messages entail...

Wriggle wriggle went the worm.

It's just hilarious. Her husband was openly talking about pressurising the Police!

Tell me the evidence you need and I'll get it.

FFS!

[simonbrooks]

csd19 said:

Tell me the evidence you need and I'll get it.

FFS!

More likely, "you tell me the evidence you need and I'll make sure it disappears!

[remedy]

What are the odds on her throwing the towel in over the next week? Or having her towel thrown in for her?

[paulrockliffe]

simonbrooks said:

More likely, "you tell me the evidence you need and I'll make sure it disappears!

Read an article yesterday about the escalating expenditure on shredding machines......

[dxg]

I am reminded of something:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTbgsoHDc24

[stevensdrs]

remedy said:

What are the odds on her throwing the towel in over the next week? Or having her towel thrown in for her?

Even money at the moment.

[simonbrooks]

dxg said:

I am reminded of something:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTbgsoHDc24

Sadly I think she could teach even the great Bartman a few things!

[Ridgemont]

Again, deny knowledge. Of fishing for process re sexual harassment investigation processes by gov to police. While an investigation was gaining pace on her predecessor. Nope. No idea. From little miss micro management.

What absolute ste.

[WinstonR]

ant1973 said:

Yes - to affect private rights and obligations there needs to be a legal basis. Non-retroactivity is an important legal principle. Why didn't the complainers simply complain to their employer? Why was a policy needed at all?

I think you may be confusing law and policy. AIUI the policy has no affect on private rights. The policy doesn't alter the legal position. The fact that it applies retrospectively doesn't have any legal consequence.

The complainers could make the complaint without the policy being in place. However, in order to manage the complaints process a policy can be put in place so that employees know how the complaint will be handled. This may include a position on complaints about former ministers. I don't think this is unusual or unwarranted.

To go back to a conventional employer/employee relationship, if an employee is assaulted by their boss but is, rightly or wrongly, too scared to raise this until the boss has left, should the employer do something about it or do nothing at all? At the heart of this, the policy is just trying to establish a process for dealing with complaints when the complainee has left.

[wobert]

stevensdrs said:

remedy said:

What are the odds on her throwing the towel in over the next week? Or having her towel thrown in for her?

Even money at the moment.

As someone else alluded, I suspect something will come to fore in the coming days which forces her hand....

[amusingduck]

Wow, Mitchell really spat the word 'dilemma' at Sturgeon there!

[simonbrooks]

" The Scottish government should never have been anywhere near this!"

Ouch!

[ant1973]

WinstonR said:

ant1973 said:

Yes - to affect private rights and obligations there needs to be a legal basis. Non-retroactivity is an important legal principle. Why didn't the complainers simply complain to their employer? Why was a policy needed at all?

I think you may be confusing law and policy. AIUI the policy has no affect on private rights. The policy doesn't alter the legal position. The fact that it applies retrospectively doesn't have any legal consequence.

The complainers could make the complaint without the policy being in place. However, in order to manage the complaints process a policy can be put in place so that employees know how the complaint will be handled. This may include a position on complaints about former ministers. I don't think this is unusual or unwarranted.

To go back to a conventional employer/employee relationship, if an employee is assaulted by their boss but is, rightly or wrongly, too scared to raise this until the boss has left, should the employer do something about it or do nothing at all? At the heart of this, the policy is just trying to establish a process for dealing with complaints when the complainee has left.

But that's my point - report the matter to someone other than the party responsible. Assault is assault. No policy is required.

[simonbrooks]

attacking the committee suggesting they are silencing the victims??? Wow. Just Wow! That's low even for her.

[remedy]

wobert said:

stevensdrs said:

remedy said:

What are the odds on her throwing the towel in over the next week? Or having her towel thrown in for her?

Even money at the moment.

As someone else alluded, I suspect something will come to fore in the coming days which forces her hand....

I bet even the Queen is on the edge of her seat.