Readers’ Letters: Scots have a

Whilst he is entirely correct in his assertion that there has been a forensic five-year criminal investigation into the theft of the £400,000 by the SNP’s previous chief executive, however, the police had quite rightly no remit to consider the disturbing lack of governance over the party of government’s financial affairs.

It is equally as important to forensically investigate the lack of governance, as that is what enabled Peter Murrell to plunder the finances for many years.

The questions asked by both some of those within the SNP, and also non related independence followers, followed the publication of the SNP’s 2019 accounts.

These showed only £95,000 in cash and Net Assets (basically Net Worth) of less than £300K, despite some £400,000 of cash donations raised after 2016 which were supposed to be ringfenced for the next independence referendum.

This was, or should have been, a red flag for the Treasurer (Colin Beattie) when he signed off the accounts it certainly was for those asking the questions) as it clearly showed most of the cash raised had been used for something.

Swinney said the criminality was “sophisticated” but basically it amounted to Murrell falsifying invoices and transferring money into his own account as I understand it.

A simple question to Murrell "where is the donation cash” should have been enough as whatever invoices he falsified I doubt they would survive scrutiny.

Why didn’t Sturgeon (she who was over everything else) not ask simple questions, or indeed John Swinney? It grew even worse when the recently appointed replacement Treasurer (Douglas Chapman) swiftly resigned citing lack of transparency in the accounting function. Swinney when asked about this said: “I have no idea why Douglas Chapman resigned.” A more disingenuous statement would be hard to find.

Now, remember this lot want to run an independent Scotland.

A full independent inquiry into a complete lack of governance is required, trying to conflate this with the criminal investigation has to be seen through for what it is, the latest attempt by those at the top of the SNP to avoid scrutiny.

George Godsman, Perth

Self interest

Nicola Sturgeon demonstrates by her comments concerning her husband’s behaviour that yet again she is entirely driven by self interest and shows little sympathy for her supporters who in effect have been robbed.

However, it is somewhat ironic that she says definitively “when a man does something wrong, the first thing they will do is, is look for the woman to blame”.

She further adds that women should “stop carrying the can for the actions of men”.

Would it therefore be unreasonable for a good journalist to perhaps respond by asking her for the man or woman definition she refers to but we must assume she means a man with a penis and a woman without such.

The irony is that she simply could not provide any such definition when she attempted to foist her disastrous Gender Recognition Bill on the men and women of Scotland.

Richard Allison, Edinburgh

‘No’ advantage

In his letter “Leave it alone” (letters May 28) Brian Barbour claims that: “It has already been established that a biased question gives an automatic advantage to Yes as it is much easier emotionally to say Yes than it is to say No.” To paraphrase Mandy Rice-Davies, “AI would say that, wouldn’t it.”

If Yes has an advantage, I have to wonder how it actually lost in 2014.

The “No Thanks” campaign managed successfully to weaponise that question format to their own advantage and will, no doubt, work to do the same again.

When folk are “not sure”, or put themselves in the “haven’t made my mind up” category, their default position is to stick with the status quo. That means that a “No” vote to change already has its own advantage; whereas a “Yes” vote can be (and was) portrayed as risky – further advantaging the “No” option.

To further suggest that Leave/Remain retains any measure of neutrality, after being associated with the discredited Brexit campaign, beggars belief.

In order to see whether, or by how much, opinion might have changed we need to retain the original question: “Should Scotland be an independent country, Yes or No?”

Ian Waugh, Dumfries

Murrell morass

John Swinney attempts to close down questions around Peter Murrell’s embezzlement of SNP funds by three claims: The SNP was the victim of crime; Mr Murrell has been found guilty of criminal activity and he is the sole cause of the situation; Under Swinney’s leadership, party governance is now effective.

He fails to address why governance failed over the 12 years of Mr Murrell’s crime and whether those responsible, while not guilty of criminal acts, failed in their duty.

Some of the information in the public domain suggests the root cause.

The scale of Murrell’s embezzlement stepped up from thousands of pounds a year to tens of thousands of pounds after his wife became party leader and First Minister in late 2014.

Then there is the party’s reaction to the resignation in 2021 of three of the members of the SNP Finance and Audit Committee and Douglas Chapman as treasurer.

It did not result in their concerns being addressed, rather the party did not want questions asked with Nicola Sturgeon telling the party’s National Executive Committee to “be very careful about suggestions that there are problems with the party’s finances”.

That does not mean that Nicola Sturgeon was involved in a cover up. She may indeed, as she claims, not have known of Murrell’s activities. But, under her leadership, there was a systemic failure.

The evidence suggests that she and her husband, the dominant force in the party, did not take kindly to criticism and an organisational culture developed where they were above scrutiny. Consequently individuals and the party organisation collectively decided it was best for them to turn a blind eye to any potential irregularities.

I am reminded of the words that John Dalberg-Acton wrote in 1887; “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

George Rennie, Inverness

SNP smugness

Alistair Carmichael (Scotsman May 29t) is correct in pointing out how the SNP portrays itself as slightly above other parties in terms of morality, and are not above playing the grievance card as well (wicked Westminster always doing Scotland down).

Their performance in government, coupled to the Murrell fiasco, shows just how human they are, that is flawed, just like the rest of us.

William Ballantine, Bo’ness, West Lothian

Lost generation

It’s surely the biggest scandal of successive governments over recent decades that more than one million young people are now not in education, employment or training (Neets) and are being left behind by society.

Labour claimed before the general election that it had a plan to help people into work yet we are told employers are crying out for workers in social care, hospitality and nursing, for example, and still having to rely heavily from overseas.

As former Labour minister Alan Milburn states it’s shameful that government spends 25 times more on benefits for young people as it does to help them into work.

Changes need to happen urgently with cooperation across governments and with business leaders.

In his report Milburn states that an estimated £125 billion a year is wasted on paying for Neets to remain idle.

This is the equivalent of twice the defence budget which itself is the subject of debate given the government has no plan yet to meet its 3.5 percent of GDP target by 2035.

One in six young people are set to be part of the lost generation of Neets, alienated and without hope. While this is a huge financial drain, the much bigger issue is societal with mental and physical health consequences.

It’s the equivalent of not fixing the roof leading to problems that cause terminal decay.

If any issue needs to be prioritised it’s this.

Neil Anderson, Edinburgh