Westminster caught illegally orchestrating business scare stories (source Business for Scotland)
Well, he has been highly political and controversial and not at all reticent to get involved in politics which does not directly concern the Partnership:
Likewise, Kingfisher (B&Q) boss Ian Cheshire has made remarks about raising prices. We have found out he is a leading non-exec member on the Department of Work and Pensions Board: he was also appointed directly by Prime Minister Dave Cameron alongside Marks and Spencer’s Marc Bolland (another London insider) to draft a report into cutting EU red tape:
So “Westminster insiders co-ordinated by the UK Government to back No camp scare stories” should have been the headlines but instead the Westminster friendly media ran with the scare story version of events.
There are exceptions of course.
Well done to the Sunday Herald for pointing out that Westminster is co-ordinating the big negativity push. And James Cook of the BBC for speaking up about receiving the Treasury email on the RBS scenario planning before its Board had even finished meeting to make a decision. There is further evidence that a journalist at the Sun UK was given an even earlier heads up.
Cook was interviewing Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson, who said the information had only been released to journalists who had requested clarification, Mr Cook interjected: “Just for the record, I received that email and I didn’t request it”.
How can anyone believe a word the No campaign says from now on?
Police investigation is required.
This leak broke the law and meant the media was aware of commercially sensitive information before the shareholders were informed through a proper stock exchange announcement. The share price was also affected which makes it all the more serious.
These actions are desperate, panicky and shady dealing and will no doubt be investigated by the Police and wider prosecution and regulatory authorities. We cannot have one rule for business in dealing with shareholders and another for politically motivated Treasury officials.
The resultant media coverage stated that RBS may move to London and raised the prospect of job losses. However, this scare story crumbled the very next day when Business for Scotland (amongst others) published the apology letter from RBS CEO Ross McEwan to his staff which stated emphatically: http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/rbs-ceo-tells-staff-zero-rbs-job-losses-when-scotland-votes-yes/
“This is a technical procedure regarding the location of our registered head office. It is not an intention to move operations or jobs”.
Financial Times editor confirms orchestration
If you are still in any doubt about the collusion and the lack of sincerity in these co-ordinated scare stories then don’t just listen to me, take it from Financial Times editor Lionel Barber who said on the Today Programme that business leaders had to be pressured to get involved in politics, and they were pressed by Downing street and senior civil servants as polling day drew closer and the polls tightened: Barber said “Mr Cameron and the Cabinet Secretary Sir Jeremy Heywood has been on the phone saying, ‘will you please speak up?’”
Lets be clear civil servants are obliged to be politically neutral and Sir Jeremy has clearly, according the FT editor, been breaking the rules, just as they did when releasing RBS scenario planning information to the press. This is totally unacceptable and must again be investigated.
The No Campaign has nothing to offer Scotland except a timetable for limited economic powers it can’t guarantee and won’t be used to do what independence can – create jobs. The No Campaign has no positive plan for Scotland and if all they have to offer is fear and co-ordinated negativity then they don’t understand the hard working, decent and canny people of Scotland.
The No Campaign is trying to make the people of Scotland lose sight of the social, economic, environmental, and economic opportunities of all time by exaggerating technicalities and manipulating business to speak out with nonsensical scaremongering. In truth, however, it all boils down to this simple question: who is best placed to make the decisions that the people of Scotland want to see implemented: a Scottish Parliament that is close to the people and engaged with our lives, hopes and inspirations or a distant, disinterested and dysfunctional Westminster Parliament that can’t give us a positive reason to vote No?