Sunday, October 29, 2006
ScotFibs won’t reveal share of crook’s £2.4m
Did you get that? A "crook's" £2.4 million.
Big hat tip to Paul Hutcheon for splashing this story and showing them up for the evasive, mendacious deceivers they are:
Having had a quick board meeting with others at FibDem Towers we wondered how Paul could take this forward. There is of course the £2.4 million question. Perhaps Paul would like to get some clarity on which of Waldorf or Statler was telling the facts and if any of this money found it's way into producing literature to fight an "entirely fraudulent campaign based on a wholly bogus prospectus" in Dunfermline?
Then he might like to look into the seats they won in 2005. Old Porridge has been told by other board members that you couldn't get into your house at times for the amount of high quality FibDem newsletters delivered by those well known Liberal Democrat volunteers - the Royal Mail.
Where did they get the dosh to pay for so much postage outside the period when expenses have to be declared? And if it was Mr Brown's filthy lucre do the Labour party have grounds for calling a re-run?
We wish Paul well in his endeavours and are sure he will find lots more to tell Sunday Herald readers about the deceits the Fibs play on his readers.
Big hat tip to Paul Hutcheon for splashing this story and showing them up for the evasive, mendacious deceivers they are:
Scots LibDems won’t reveal their share of crook’s £2.4m
By Paul Hutcheon
THE Scottish Liberal Democrats are refusing to say how much of their 2005 general election campaign was funded by a businessman jailed for perjury.
Party bosses are declining to put a figure on the amount sent to Scotland as part of the £2.4 million donation provided by a company owned by criminal Michael Brown.
The controversial donation to the UK LibDems may have to be handed back, after the high court described Brown’s firm as “fraudulent” in a breach of contract ruling this month.
Forced repayment would be a disaster for the party in Scotland, blowing a hole in their Holyrood election plans.
Having had a quick board meeting with others at FibDem Towers we wondered how Paul could take this forward. There is of course the £2.4 million question. Perhaps Paul would like to get some clarity on which of Waldorf or Statler was telling the facts and if any of this money found it's way into producing literature to fight an "entirely fraudulent campaign based on a wholly bogus prospectus" in Dunfermline?
Then he might like to look into the seats they won in 2005. Old Porridge has been told by other board members that you couldn't get into your house at times for the amount of high quality FibDem newsletters delivered by those well known Liberal Democrat volunteers - the Royal Mail.
Where did they get the dosh to pay for so much postage outside the period when expenses have to be declared? And if it was Mr Brown's filthy lucre do the Labour party have grounds for calling a re-run?
We wish Paul well in his endeavours and are sure he will find lots more to tell Sunday Herald readers about the deceits the Fibs play on his readers.
Pat too wondered how the Fibs were paying for all these deliveries to voters
Comments:
<< Home
Given what the money was spent on - a poster campaign - you could probably divide by the number of constituencies in Great Britain to get a reasonable estimate.
Technically, none of it was spent in Scotland; one big cheque was handed to the poster company who then used whatever sites they had available.
Technically, none of it was spent in Scotland; one big cheque was handed to the poster company who then used whatever sites they had available.
# posted by 
: 5:58 PM
: 5:58 PM
Seeing that everyone agrees from the Times, Iain Dalie, Guido etc has been stating that this money was entirely spent during the General Election, your claim that any of it was left over in January for Dunfermline and East Fife may be taken as libelous. Wonder if any Libdems are up for a £2.4 libel suit.
# posted by : 8:24 PM
: 8:24 PM
Wil-lie Rennie knows where to find us.
Although I imagine if he mistakenly called the constituency Dunfermline and East Fife the case might flounder...
Although I imagine if he mistakenly called the constituency Dunfermline and East Fife the case might flounder...
Anonymous @ 8:24 PM.
Try as I might I can't find a claim never mind one that would be libelous, unless the Liberal Democrats are now admitting the money was dodgy in which case why are they still hanging on to it?
All I see are reported established facts and questions surrounding Campbell's and Cable's variant comments on when the money was actually spent.
Perhaps you could elucidate.
Post a Comment
Try as I might I can't find a claim never mind one that would be libelous, unless the Liberal Democrats are now admitting the money was dodgy in which case why are they still hanging on to it?
All I see are reported established facts and questions surrounding Campbell's and Cable's variant comments on when the money was actually spent.
Perhaps you could elucidate.
# posted by : 1:41 PM
: 1:41 PM << Home
