Council Meeting 26/11/16

I have witnessed lots of poor behaviour at council meetings but Thursday past topped the lot. Item 15 on the agenda was the report from the Standards Commissioners about the complaint made against me by the senior officers, Sneddon, Loudon (now CEO with Cosla), Hendry and Milne.

I had asked Mr Sneddon to have some input to any covering paper to the Standards report due to the biased manner in which the council, and Cosla, focussed solely on the 1 finding against me, ignoring the 14 findings in my favour. He didn’t agree to this but there was no covering paper on Thursday. Instead, Mr Sneddon read out a fairly lengthy prepared statement with which I may well have issues. However, I can’t comment because I have yet to receive a copy of that statement. I wrote to him yesterday asking if I could see it, for comment, prior to it going out. We’ll see if he agrees to this.

Anyway, when I did get a chance to speak after Mr Sneddon’s statement, I departed almost completely from what I had intended to say. I made little reference to the background and context to the complaint in order to see if a softer approach might get the more decent members of the administration to sit on their hands and not vote on the motion submitted by Cllr Mulvaney. The motion and the SNP amendment are at the link below. In the event, there was no decency shown and the administation voted as a block, as they always do.

There’s no point in giving you a blow by blow account of what was said but you’ll get a flavour of the vitriolic mince from what one councillor said. He said that in me saying the case was a victory, he suggested that if someone was tried for 4 murders and found not guilty of 3 of these, that person was still a murderer. Indeed, indeed.

The National has a good piece on what happened in today’s edition which you can read at this link:

The successful motion from Mulvany and the defeated amendment from the SNP Group are at this link: motion-and-amendment

My last point today is to make it clear that this was a major victory for democracy but the councillors in the administration of Argyll & Bute clearly don’t see it that way, the poor souls. Here is the advert I placed in the Dunoon Observer this week which won’t make me popular with some of these folks.




  1. I am just replying to this now because since I first read this I have been unable to take breaks between laughing and crying. Especially the “murder”gate comments from a councillor of the administration.
    Can I just run over the logic of this in my own very small brain?
    If you were tried for murder and not found guilty of the murder, in fact no murder had actually happened at all, and something else had happened that no one had complained about, that would still make you a murderer? Ehhh??
    I have to bow to Mister Councillor’s much greater wisdom on such matters as justice, the rule of law, free speech and murder. Can he elaborate on this wisdom he was sharing, perhaps I missing something?
    Could it be, as Councillor Breslin has suggested, that this comment comes under the definition of “mince”.
    Fortunately, for this Councillor, the Standards Commission (thanks to the challenge by his colleague Councillor Breslin) will uphold the right of all councillors to speak “mince” freely and have no restrictions on their right to freely distribute absolute “mince”.

    Good grief it really is time these Councillors of the so called administration took a reality check on what officers are actually wasting time on, right under their noses.

    Vote them all out in May.

  2. “You’ll get a flavour of the vitriolic mince from what one councillor said. He said that in me saying the case was a victory, he suggested that if someone was tried for 4 murders and found not guilty of 3 of these, that person was still a murderer.”

    Hmmm! It’s an analogy Jim, but not as we know it, and certainly not one that has any credible relevance. Spartacus says as much.

    If the said Councillor wishes to pursue that line then might I suggest he view it as – Michael was charged with 4 murders, using a gun. (The 15 original charges and the second 15 charges.)
    After a very lengthy and very expensive investigation into the charges, the jury returned a guilty verdict – that Michael had been in possession of an illegal sharp stick!
    So no murder; no gun; no maligning of officers; no credible case!
    It certainly wasn’t murder; unless you mean the Councillor’s hopeless analogy.
    I couldn’t possibly comment on it being “mince”, at least you can swallow mince.

  3. Yes, Mr McCabe, your absolutely right, mince is far too tasty for this.
    Also, I heard it wasn’t a sharp stick, it was a Keyboard (apparently he is a “keyboard warrior”). The pen is mightier then the sword after all.
    Unless the sharpened stick was a pencil?
    Or perhaps Councillor Breslin threw the keyboard at an officer…?…so many unanswered questions…

    Mr Sneddon’s statement will no doubt reveal all. Can’t wait till the next instalment.

  4. Please take a moment to compare Michaels ‘s professionalism and willingness to discuss and defend his position, even when wrongfully and mercilessly attacked as he has been over the past years unlike the complainers who have been unprofessional, cowardly, and crass, as documented in this most recent unqualified release “murder is murder” how ridiculous. Meantime at Bluesky`s Kilmory, the band plays on.

Leave a comment