SNP referendum donations ‘spent on office renovations’

Police investigating allegations of fraud over £600,000 ‘ring-fenced’ fund set to interview party boss and husband of the first minister

John Boothman and Jason Allardyce Sunday July 25 2021, 12.01am BST, The Sunday Times

The first minister Nicola Sturgeon and her husband Peter Murrell. He has faced calls to stand down from his role as the SNP’s chief executive
The first minister Nicola Sturgeon and her husband Peter Murrell. He has faced calls to stand down from his role as the SNP’s chief executivePA

Hundreds of thousands of pounds in donations earmarked for a Scottish independence referendum campaign may have been spent on refurbishing the SNP’s headquarters and on legal fees, it has emerged.Police are investigating allegations of fraud surrounding more than £600,000 that was raised after an appeal by the party in 2017. The controversy threatens to damage Nicola Sturgeon, the first minister, and her husband Peter Murrell, chief executive of the SNP.

Officers are expected to issue warrants shortly to obtain financial material from the SNP as they look into 19 complaints about the fighting fund that it had described as “ring-fenced”.Police are expected to interview Murrell as well as the MSP Colin Beattie, who was reinstated as party treasurer last month. They are also expected to speak to several former party officials who recently resigned over not being shown full accounts by Murrell.They include the MPs Joanna Cherry and Douglas Chapman, the party’s former treasurer, and three members of the SNP’s finance and audit committee.Yesterday the party declined to comment on suggestions that some of the donations were spent on a refurbishment of its offices near the Scottish parliament, rumoured within the SNP to have cost £385,000.Neither would it discuss allegations that the money was spent on legal costs for Murrell and his chief operating officer, Sue Ruddick, in relation to a parliamentary inquiry into the handling of harassment claims against Alex Salmond, the former SNP leader and first minister.It has also been claimed that the party met legal costs incurred by the MP Alyn Smith after he said without evidence that the Brexit party was a “money-laundering front”. The SNP declined to be drawn.The row is the latest in which Sturgeon is in danger of being embarrassed by her husband, who has led SNP HQ for 22 years. He has faced calls in the past to stand down over claims, which he denies, that he was involved in a malicious campaign to bring down Salmond.Critics say that the present arrangements put too much power over party and state in the hands of one couple, something that Salmond warned Sturgeon about when she took over in 2014.One SNP source said: “There are clearly huge issues with the way the SNP is run, including with the finances and governance of the party and headquarters. If he [Murrell] hadn’t been married to the party leader he would have been sacked long ago.”

Although the SNP pledged that the money raised from its £600,000 appeal in 2017 would be kept aside for a future referendum campaign, it has said it does not separate out restricted funds in its annual accounts and that such donations were woven through the overall income figures each year.After Chapman resigned in May, saying that he had not been given enough information to do the job, Sturgeon said that she was “not concerned” about the SNP’s finances.“Every penny” raised by the crowdfunder would be spent on a referendum campaign, she said. Internal critics have said that she attended one NEC meeting where concerns about the ring-fenced money were raised more than two years ago, but not properly addressed.

Stephen Kerr, the Scottish Conservative chief whip, accused the SNP leadership of making up contradictory explanations as it went along. “They really need to get their story straight,” he said.Leadership loyalists have dismissed the row, arguing that everything the party does is in support of delivering a second referendum and independence. The SNP said: “We will co-operate fully with the police investigation and will make no further comment.”Police are said to have announced the formal investigation into fraud allegations, despite concerns from the Crown Office

.The Sunday Times has been told that police officers were “stunned” by the position taken by the prosecution service.One source said that police officers and the Crown Office were “at loggerheads” before the force’s announcement this month that it was opening a formal investigation, having conducted initial inquiries into complaints alleging fraud.The source said: “Police told the Crown days beforehand. The Crown wanted a change of wording. They wanted a form of words that made it more of a fact-finding mission but the police had already had that and it was because documentation had not been handed over that they wanted to escalate it to an investigation.“Police were stunned that the Crown was putting them in that position. They were unhappy because if it was about anyone else in this position they would call it an investigation.” The source added that warrants were expected to obtain any material the party has not handed over.

Kerr said: “The police must be allowed to investigate without any potential interference which undermines their efforts to find out the truth. That would be completely inappropriate and would only raise further suspicions among the public if the Crown Office were to question what officers were doing.”Police Scotland said its enquiries are continuing. The Crown office said: “It would be inappropriate to comment on an ongoing police investigation. It has not been reported to us and we have only provided advice.”On the issue of whether Lord Advocate Dorothy Bain would recuse herself from the issue, given her appointment was on the recommendation of the SNP government, it added: “As is customary in cases involving politicians, any resulting case reported to us will be handled by the procurator fiscal and independent Crown counsel without the involvement of the law officers.”Police officers from the economic crime and financial investigation unit of the specialist crime division based at the Scottish crime campus at Gartcosh are running the investigation. They have already been in contact with current and previous SNP national executive members and party HQ seeking information, documents, minutes and correspondence relating to the financial appeal

.The Sunday Times has seen correspondence between Ian McCann, the SNP’s compliance officer, and a member from 2020 in which he appeared to confirm monies were set aside, despite claims they were woven through the accounts.He wrote: “Your other donations are in a ring-fenced fund to fight the next referendum, whenever we are in a position to call that.”Since May’s elections there have been continuing ructions within the SNP over its referendum strategy including the resignation of its independence taskforce chief Marco Biagi after only six months in post. On his departure he said it was “the worst job” he had ever had.

SNP sources suggest that membership has fallen from more than 125,000 in 2019 and that Sturgeon and Murrell’s running of the party has soured relations with some of its biggest donors, including Chris Weir and her late husband Colin, who, in 2011, won £161 million in the EuroMillions lottery.Weir, who died in December 2019, is said to have made a donation to the referendum fund but later demanded his money back — something police are said to be satisfied that the party did. (Article ends)


Two issues raised in this news report deserve more investigation.

Let me make clear from the beginning I cannot say any of the money spent came from the ring fenced fund. It might have but I have no way of knowing. I can confirm however that the draft accounts do contain an entry, totalling several hundreds of thousands of pounds spending on furnishings, fixtures and fittings during 2020. I was also told by an NEC member that the majority of the 24 staff employed are working from home at the moment.

The first thing that needs more investigation is the news that the Party appears to have spent £ 385,520 on a category in the accounts headed Furniture, fixtures and fittings. This seems to me to be a fantastic amount of money to spend on a building they DON’T OWN? The Party lease the property so it seems incredibly generous to spend this money. Dare I ask what was it spent on and was there any contribution from the actual landlords as would be normal on any renovations costs at this level? The Queen will be asking them to move into Holyrood Palace at this rate!

Further to this issue it seems to me that there are a number of questions about the accounting measures used to record this expenditure and net values in the accounts relating to the nominal values of this transaction and others relating to the real present day value of office computer equipment detailed in the accounts as having a net book value of £268,368. The combined value of the furniture, fixtures and fittings on a building the Party does not own and this computer equipment, after depreciation is listed at a net book value of £690,437. I think most business people would regard both these figures as requiring severe investigation and questioning in any takeover situation where any audit was being carried out to establish true value. I thought it might include some super sophisticated software development but software has its own separate category amounting to another £248,885 in net book value. Perhaps the Treasurer might like to clarify all this huge expenditure as I am sure many members would like to know the answers. The Conference requires to approve the accounts at Conference. I would suggest adequate time is allocated for questions. I suspect there will be a lot to explain.

The other revelation in the article was the report that the police had to fight the Crown Office to elevate their inquiries into the “ringfenced money” to a full investigation. We already know from the Salmond case that the Crown Office and the Scottish Government have not been acting independently in these matters and the relationship has led to a series of political malicious prosecutions including Salmond, Hirst and Murray. This news that they were also active in applying different criteria to this investigation to try to temper and protect the SNP from the normal application of the law only serves to confirm that Kenny MacAskill was right to call in the House of Commons last week for much clearer Division of responsibilities between the Lord Advocate, Crown Office and Scottish Government.

I am, as always

Yours for Scotland.


Unfortunately a number of pro Indy sites have turned out to be merely pro SNP sites and have blocked a number of bloggers, including myself. We have managed to frustrate these efforts to close us down through our readers sharing our articles and building our audience. In addition many have taken out free direct subscriptions. I very much appreciate this support.

Free Subscriptions

Are available on the Home and Blog pages of this website. By taking out a subscription you will receive notification of all future posts. You will be most welcome.


  1. Well……… is amongst the pigeons right enough, and not before time.
    Now…………question is, will he jump or wait till the very last gasp before he’s pushed?!?! 🤔🤷‍♀️

    Liked by 14 people

  2. Unionist, nationalist, don’t know or don’t care? It doesn’t matter. Nobody’s interests are being served by the current Scottish government except those of the clique who run it.

    How many other police matters have the Crown office quietly deflected?
    We know that Margaret Ferrier still hasn’t been prosecuted, we know that the Lord Advocate stated clearly that it is ok to fail to comply with a search warrant, depending on “the motivation”. That explains why nobody in the Scottish government was prosecuted for doing just that.

    Scotland can’t move forward until the Sturgeon cabal are removed from office.
    Many Scottish nationalists believe that she can be persuaded to change or that independence can be achieved despite her.
    They are kidding themselves on.

    In the eyes of the public independence and Sturgeon are synonymous.
    Keep her and independence will never happen.
    Remove her and the cause will be set back years – but it will be set back to a place it can move forwards from.

    Liked by 22 people

  3. Dear Auntie Agony Iain, I had £30K in my account and put in another £20K for my daugher’s wedding fund. However, I have just spent £45K on a new Merc. My daughter gets marrried next week. Any suggestions as to how I deal with this? My wife says that she is “not concerned” but I don’t think that she understands the shit I am in.

    Liked by 9 people

    1. At least Angus Skye you didn’t spend the money on lesbian relationship with foreign nationals or super injunctions. or money to pay your partners fees.

      You just bought a nice Merc.

      Liked by 5 people

  4. A malodourous odour emanating from a malodorous bunch.

    I know that many left the SNP over the last couple of years , I would dearly like to know the membership number now.

    Liked by 16 people

  5. Why has murrell not been suspended ? And thrown under a bus ? Like all the others. A considerable number of whom were completely innocent.
    And no hatchet job in the daily redcoat – says it all really.

    The truth is slowly coming out. Those who conspired to eliminate Alex Salmond must be wondering how long they’ll have to spend in jail. Obviously not long enough.

    Scottish Justice is not served by allowing the Salmond accusers to remain anonymous.

    Police Scotland – When are you going to arrest the person responsible for perverting the course of justice and leaking the Salmond lies to the daily redcoat ? Every day you delay makes Scotland trust you less. You really don’t have any goodwill left – do your job.

    And finally it appears the new lord advocate is just as corrupt as the old lord advocate.

    Liked by 16 people

  6. ” Remove her and the cause will be set back years – but it will be set back to a place it can move forwards from.” Well , kinda yes and no situation Marty . It would undoubtedly be an immense relief to see the back of the corrupt-beyond-redemption Sturell Gang but if dafty she/her is allowed to anoint her successor it would likely be more of the same political cowardice/stupidity/deception regarding Independence and full-frontal assault on Civil Liberties and Women’s Rights via GRA and HCB the current * Leadership * are intent on inflicting on the country

    Liked by 20 people

    1. Aye but if everything – EVERYTHING – comes oot in the wash, many of her clique & sycophants will end up in the same pile of permanently stained laundry and hopefully the NEC can be won back again by people who actually want to run the country and party properly

      Having said that, who is still in the SNP that you would recommend for the top jobs? My concern (and one of the many reasons I left) is that no MPs or MSPs (ABMcN apart) seem willing to put their head above the parapet and criticise anything the Glorious Leader does. People tell me that’s because they are scared they’ll lose their positions etc, but in that case what was the point of electing them? To say nothing is to concur.

      I am now firmly convinced that Alex Salmond wanted ALBA members to vote SNP1 to prove The Ironing Lady didn’t want independence and not to gain a supermajority, and as usual he was right

      Liked by 11 people

      1. Indeed MM , the pity is that Alex appears to have underestimated the sheer narcissistic vindictiveness of NS . His desire to put * all that * behind him and resist damaging the electoral chances of the only ( putative ) Indy Party – the Greens being lukewarm at best and in reality more interested in furthering their lunatic agenda – whilst admirable was , with hindsight , a tactical miscalculation . One neither he nor anyone who followed his advice will ever make again

        Liked by 8 people

  7. To me I don’t know whats worst, the money has spent to refurbish the SNP headquarters or they don’t know how they spent the money.

    Fraud by deception, Sturgeon stood on that podium more than once stating Scotland was going to have a referendum 2018-2019 and then she told us we wouldn’t be taken out of the EU against our will which was a further indication that during the last term of the Holyrood parliament that a referendum was going to be held. She even stated the gold standard was Scotland’s only route to being Independent.

    One thing is certain Sturgeon is a barefaced lair and doesn’t have a problem with doing it. Another problem for the SNP is I was happy to give money for referendum, like so many other people, but not anymore, who would give money now? I gave money willingly, but what I know now is that the SNP didn’t have a referendum during the last parliament and they are not going to have a referendum during this parliament, so why did the SNP start two Independence funds knowing the money wasn’t going to ever going to be used for a referendum. A referendum is the last thing on Sturgeon’s or the SG minds, so no I won’t be given any further money to the SNP knowing what I know about the party and how its run. I know the Labour party took the public for fools and their votes for granted but in my opinion the SNP have well and truly overtaken the Labour party in this regard.

    Let’s look at what Surgeon has achieved since 2014, (1) she has taken a political party from well-respected to a fraudulent entity, (2) tried to get an innocent man jailed, (3) tried to get the yes movement to disband, and lastly and most importantly has given away Scotland’s best chance of becoming independent.

    Just look at the journey Scotland has taken since Sturgeon took over as leader of the SNP and the SG and its not how I imagined or hoped Scotland would be as an independent country even to the point that my wife who’s from Yorkshire and wants Scotland to be Independent now states she would rather live within the UK than live under Sturgeon’s rule in a Independent Scotland.

    The route of all the problems within the SG with the like’s transgender own identification, women’s rights, hate crime and our right to be a nation again (I don’t how many times I’ve heard Mike Russell go on about the UK being democracy deniers when it’s the SNP & SG who are the democracy deniers) is Sturgen. We have been given her six mandates and she has chosen to ignore every one, then only before an election bang on the about the constitutional question knowing that we’ll vote for them and also knowing that under Sturgeon leadership she’ll never honour the mandate given or hold a referendum. Here is where Scotland problems lies with the leader of the SNP and the SG Nicola Sturgeon, remove this thorn from the SNP and SG and only then will our nation move on. Keep her in place and Scotland and its people are doomed to being tied the UK for decades to come.

    Three things I dislike about a person 1 a lair 2 thief and 3 a person with a closed mind. If Sturgeon was removed or left I could only see the benefits for Scotland if she remains what’s up in front no one knows but we could have a guess, we should be protesting outside the Scottish parliament to get rid of her and her Husband these two in charge are a remedy for disaster and its one that could be avoided if we remove both these people.

    Liked by 13 people

    1. Well said 100%, but for me it’s not just Sturgeon and Murrell that need to go. It’s the whole bally lot of them. They are all as bad as each other. What about the msp’s that sit in Holyrood and take our money, but what are they giving us in return. Well the answer to that is sweet F all. They sit back, they either worship at the cult, and deride every sane person who realises that all this GRA nonsense for what it is. I mean really a hate crime because they can’t deny a provable biological fact. REALLY, what they hell kind of country are they trying to reduce us too. One I don’t recognise or wish to live in. What about the rest of the msp’s, sitting there like wee coorin timorous beastie.s feart to open they’re mouths in case the fall foul of the all powerful clique. It angers me, but more than that, it totally disgusts me.

      Iain is correct in his analysis of the accounts and the very serious questions that need to be asked and answered. I’d also like to know what the sam hill the accountants have been up to when signing off the accounts.

      When the SNP were trying to raise the “ring fenced fund” for another referendum, I considered giving them some cash. But, there were wee alarm bells ringing in the back of this auld heid. There was something bothering me about it all, and I reckon that I was slowly beginning to come to the notion that all was not as it should be under this administration. So I kept my money in ma pooch as they say, and, boy, am I glad that I did.

      Surely since they have started refunding folk who asked for the return of the cash that had been donated, they have admitted to some wrongdoing. Oh well, as Alex Fergusson used to say, “It’s squeeky bum time”, for some anyway.

      Liked by 19 people

      1. There are nothing wrong with the accounts as they are a true reflection of the parties finances so the accountants cannot be blamed. The blame must lie firmly with the various MSP and other senior figures which have misrepresented what happened to the money. Even Nicola Sturgeon whilst saying that the accounts are audited whilst totally true is a deflection.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. Excellent comments, Carol. As a teacher I can assure a’body here that there is widespread concern within schools at the SG’s attempt to deny biological facts as to what a woman is. It is not just written in the stars but in the schools that Scottish government runs in the shape of their Biology textbooks. Are they going to withdraw them in favour of all this transgender nonsense?

        Liked by 4 people

  8. Sorry about the mistake here is what I meant to write.

    Three things I dislike about a person 1 a lair 2 thief and 3 a person with a closed mind. If Sturgeon was removed, I could only see the benefits for Scotland if she remains what’s up in front no one knows but we could have a guess, we should be protesting outside the Scottish parliament to get rid of her and her Husband these two in charge are a remedy for disaster and its one that could be avoided if we remove both these people.

    Liked by 6 people

  9. Perhaps someone can explain this to me.
    According to Sturgeon the money was never ring-fenced so ALL money they spend which puts them with a balance of under £600,000 is from the Independence Referendum money. Isn’t that why the Times can claim it was spent on office furnishing.
    The SNP claims that all money they spend is for the ultimate goal of Indepedence. Renovations are going to be hard to put in that category; perhaps legally they can claim that because Independence is their reason for being then everything they do is OK. The pubic are just not going to swallow that perverse logic. It would mean that even if they campaign for the union it is OK because they have a goal to achieve independence in the next life. They have been listening to to much Queer Theory where definitions have no meaning. Scary times.

    Liked by 11 people

    1. PS i am absolutely hopeless with money, hence the request for explanation.
      I should say that it seems obvious to me that the fraud is the use of the word ‘ring-fenced’. It was obtained under false pretences.

      Liked by 7 people

      1. This was also in the back of my mind but this person has reminded me
        The ‘ring-fenced’ money was spent way before the refurbishing.

        Can’t get my head around this wastage of money when funds were tight. The old question is it incompetence or sabotage?

        Liked by 6 people

    2. What it was spent on is anyone’s guess. A previous blogger suggested it was used to repay 500k circa loan to the Weirs as the last few donations from them had been loans rather than gifts. Either way the cash in the bank should have been in excess of 600k at the last accounts but was only 90k circa which shows they have spent more than they took in. Hopefully this will all lead to the books being opened up and a look at exactly how much senior figures in the party are paid, how much is spent on finance costs and lastly how much has been spent on legal costs not relating to the normal running of a political party.

      Liked by 6 people

      1. But since it wasn’t ring-fenced the words ‘what it was spent on’ have no meaning do they?
        If this was cash (didn’t Sturgeon use the words cash-flow basis) and i put my weeks wages in a pot where i have been putting all my wages for this year and i live in a commune of 10 where everyone has been doing the same. Then i take out of the pot £10,000 on a camera there is no way of knowing where the cash came from because it was pooled not ‘ring-fenced’.
        The only way we know that the donated money was spent (because it wasn’t ring-fenced) is that they have less than £600,000 in the pot. All money spent therefore becomes from the donated money, that is why i think The Times could get away with their article.
        But like i say i have no knowledge of accounting, only counting beans.

        Liked by 4 people

  10. Poor Scotland. The one point in the history of this rotten union when conditions were ideal for achieving independence, and we find that we seem to have the most corrupt bunch of people possible in charge of our government, or so it would appear.

    They better have very convincing answers to all the questions hanging over them.

    Liked by 13 people

  11. I used to manage a budget for the Scottish Government, including at one point a £10m project budget. Had I managed it in the way the SNP has managed theirs, or not had complete transparency over every single penny, including processes to ensure I spent the budget wisely and to the best advantage and on what it was intended for. Well, I would have been in deep trouble.
    Even if the ring-fenced funds were somehow woven through the various internal SNP budgets then those funds would still need to be identified separately within the different budget areas. How the £600k was broken down and woven through would need to be planned and decided and minuted for the record. Different work areas would need to bid for their share of the funds. All of this would be recorded in a proper organisation.
    If the SNP budgets and processes have been audited then show us the audit reports.
    Na, they are at it, no doubt about it, otherwise they would simply show us the record of what was done and that would be the end of it.

    Liked by 17 people

  12. It is normal for a tenant to pay for their own leasehold improvements. However, it is also normal for the landlord to chip in for costs that enhance the value of the building. So if it is leasehold improvements, the actual cost will be higher. It’s impossible to tell how much higher without a note in the accounts. If I were doing financial statements for a client (all are ten employees or less) I would probably disclose, but it does depend on the amount. Even without a landlord contribution it is a lot of money. Why is it necessary?

    On the other hand, it might be furniture etc, where one would not expect the landlord to chip in. If so, the SNP have been spending a lot of money on that in recent years, which seems rather profligate. The thick end of 20,000 quid per employee is a lot.

    The various financial statements are only part of the picture. The rest of this jigsaw will be in the notes to the accounts and I look forward to their release.

    Liked by 12 people

  13. I wonder how much more evidence of bad practice those who are still within the SNP need.

    Likewise anyone hoping that the Murrels are going to be kicked out in one fell swoop are being naive. What plays best for the Britnat establishment, what damages the Indy movement most is the drip, drip, drip effect.

    I’d like to see Alba step forward and fill the void. Like to see it, hear it, feel it, unavoidably so. Meanwhile they’ve booked a hall in September.

    Schools go back in August, Covid numbers are rising… expect an emergency lockdown in September to bring it back under control, and a lift in November in time for COP26.

    I do hope Alba have a plan B – hold the conference in the nearby park, ask folk to bring brollies, chairs and food. Hire a marquee for the big speeches.

    Liked by 9 people

    1. Daisy, I suppose it depends on whether Alba leadership is taking primarily a long-term view or a short-term one. One might argue that we need to build credibility before we can attempt any “grand gestures.” In other words, work patiently towards the local elections next year. With good candidates, there is more chance of success there than there was at Holyrood, as it turned out. Of course, this approach is likely to leave independence off the table for, maybe, a couple of decades and that is not a pleasant thought for some of us.

      The short-term view would see us making a nuisance of ourselves on the streets, perhaps at the expense of council seats. That may be a price worth paying, but it is also higher risk. We saw in May that rather too many people wish to play it safe. Not every vote the SNP got came from a party member. That’s a lot of people that need to be persuaded.

      By the way, did I miss an Alba update e-mail and video from last week?

      Liked by 5 people

  14. Big Pete’ll be tugging his eyebrows out wondering who the “ungrateful acolyte” was that leaked the furnishings farrago to the Times of London.

    Whether that particular rag has merely broken-ranks momentarily with the “Keep Niki where she is for the moment” approach, or whether we’re witnessing the beginnings of her thoroughgoing denouncement by slices not slivers
    remains to be seen.

    “Slices” and “slivers” should be understood metaphorically. No need then, to send the politzei up to Schloss Erich.

    Liked by 9 people

  15. “Police told the Crown days beforehand. The Crown wanted a change of wording. They wanted a form of words that made it more of a fact-finding mission but the police had already had that and it was because documentation had not been handed over that they wanted to escalate it to an investigation”

    Ahh, I see what was happening here – the Crown knew that it really was an investigation but in true SNP policy stylee they wanted it to self-identify as a fact-finding mission

    And no-one would have been able to say “But…….but……the law says it’s an investigation !!” because, well, Humza put it in the Hate Crime Act (when he was self identifying as a Justice Minister)

    Ah kin see how it aw comes the gither noo

    Liked by 8 people

  16. Give us the money for a referendum.

    It’s ringfenced, it’s woven into the accounts, it’s on call, every penny spent is for independence – oh shucks, guess what it’s been spent we don’t separate it out.

    OK lets try again.

    The money was hypothecated for a referendum, we did spend it , but every penny of it spent on independence. So what was it spent on then. Ahem, a new office, legal fees for Peter, legal fees for Alyn Smyth together with the cost of the damages award that had to be paid to Nigel Farage for Smyth’s defamation of him. Ah shucks should’ve realized. – every penny spent on independence.

    And what do you know of these goings on Ms Sturgeon as head of the party and husband to the party CEO. Nothing no doubt, diddly squat, I mean everything was in order wasn’t it – well you told us so.

    Jeepers the smell in the Murrell household must be full of spent nappies full of bullshit. But it is no place for some rude allegory. This is the leader of a country, a party and her husband that we are talking about. We’ve seen them perform in the Salmond enquiry and the stench was unbearable. And its unbearable now.

    A fantasmagorical fairy story it will have no doubt have to be spun. But will Plod buy it. Or is it the time that Plod was instructed to give Sturgeon and her man a wallop of the shit stick. Police Scotland are rotten to the core and this time they might just be under instruction to actually expose Sturgeon. And it appears that they have good reason too.

    Poor wee Sturgeon. She ran with establishment to destroy Salmond et al and now that establishment may be turning on her.

    And any personal life scandal – will that emerge ?

    Liked by 6 people

    1. As I understand it, the super injunction only applies to Scotland and there is no reason why a newspaper in Ireland, for example, couldn’t run with it.

      Liked by 2 people

  17. Thanks for these recent posts which seem to suggest that things may be beginning to shift in the fortunes of the present SNP government. That is certainly a hopeful sign so lets hope the trend continues.
    You have certainly been busy, Iain, while theoretically being on hoiday, so I hope you are getting the rest and relaxation you deserve as well.
    I am struggling to keep up with what you’ve revealed about the Hirst business and SNP finance questions, and am still digesting Alf Baird’s latest offering. However, as I have now acquired a copy of Frantz Fanon’s The Wretched of the Earth, I suspect that will keep me occupied for some time.

    Liked by 8 people

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: