NPR

Slick wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 1:09 pm So how long now before Mathieson remembers it wasn’t all Parliamentary business after all and resigns? End of the day?

Also a fair bit of squirming going on about the 25% of EU offshore wind potential that SG have been using consistently for years knowing it was bollocks.

Just a bunch of corrupt fuckers

The outdated EE SIM card and no warning from EE about the cost is just absolute nonsense. Surely if the SG had changed contracts then the old SIM would no longer work. In respect to him claiming he had no warnings about the cost that seems unlikely. We went to Morocco last year and as soon as we landed we were inundated with warnings from EE about the huge costs. It's basically a fact that no UK sim can be used in Morocco without huge bills. Also as you arrive through the airport there are numerous phone shops with staff out warning about the problem and offering cheap local data SIMS as it is virtually impossible to get around without accessing Google maps.
The other thing that doesn't fly is why he clearly made no attempt to access Wifi in his accommodation. We stayed in a tiny Riad and it had superb WiFi.
I reckon the arrogant prick fully expected the SH to pick up the holiday data bill but was completely caught up by the enormity of it.

I see they have a breakdown of the data usage by date. He incurred £7300 of charges on the 2nd January, coincidentally the day of the Old Firm game and he is apparently a Rangers fanatic. This could get very messy and could easily be classed as a fraudulent expenses claim or misuse of public funds.

Blackmac wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:25 pm I see they have a breakdown of the data usage by date. He incurred £7300 of charges on the 2nd January, coincidentally the day of the Old Firm game and he is apparently a Rangers fanatic. This could get very messy and could easily be classed as a fraudulent expenses claim or misuse of public funds.

£7000 to watch Rangers

Blackmac wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:25 pm I see they have a breakdown of the data usage by date. He incurred £7300 of charges on the 2nd January, coincidentally the day of the Old Firm game and he is apparently a Rangers fanatic. This could get very messy and could easily be classed as a fraudulent expenses claim or misuse of public funds.

I'm not sure what ee charge but Three charge £6 per MB for roaming in Morocco ( ) so that's about 1.2GB. Sounds about right for a football match - could be even more for high def streaming.


There is a part of me that knows I'd shit the bed if I got a 7k roaming charge and would be looking to shovel it onto expenses. And an even bigger part of me that knows I'd be busted in seconds for even trying.

Blackmac wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:25 pm I see they have a breakdown of the data usage by date. He incurred £7300 of charges on the 2nd January, coincidentally the day of the Old Firm game and he is apparently a Rangers fanatic. This could get very messy and could easily be classed as a fraudulent expenses claim or misuse of public funds.

It's each time I'm seeing a quote from Yousaf. "He made an honest mistake", "He just used the wrong SIM card".

Having a bad day at work which might be the reason this is winding me up so much.

I don't care about the SIM card Mr Yousaf, he claimed for this knowing full well he was sitting watching a football match (it would seem), and then tried to cover it all up.

I completely agree also that there would have (surely!?) been wifi that he could have used if he wasn't so flippant with tax payers money.

inactionman wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:37 pm

Blackmac wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:25 pm I see they have a breakdown of the data usage by date. He incurred £7300 of charges on the 2nd January, coincidentally the day of the Old Firm game and he is apparently a Rangers fanatic. This could get very messy and could easily be classed as a fraudulent expenses claim or misuse of public funds.

I'm not sure what ee charge but Three charge £6 per MB for roaming in Morocco ( ) so that's about 1.2GB. Sounds about right for a football match - could be even more for high def streaming.


There is a part of me that knows I'd shit the bed if I got a 7k roaming charge and would be looking to shovel it onto expenses. And an even bigger part of me that knows I'd be busted in seconds for even trying.

What strikes me is that, regardless of what Sim was in the iPad, he must have known he was using a work device and therefore public funds, but clearly underestimated the cost and thought he could slip a bill through the expenses channel. If he genuinely knew he had not incurred that bill on government work and tried to cover it up, then it is fraud and Humza is in it with him.

As to knowing he would be busted, yes, we likely would, but this lot have reached a level of arrogance and untouchability that I doubt they think like that anymore.

robmatic wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:32 pm

Blackmac wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:25 pm I see they have a breakdown of the data usage by date. He incurred £7300 of charges on the 2nd January, coincidentally the day of the Old Firm game and he is apparently a Rangers fanatic. This could get very messy and could easily be classed as a fraudulent expenses claim or misuse of public funds.

£7000 to watch Rangers

You'd have to pay me that much, at least.

He should be paying this out of his own pocket.

Tichtheid wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 6:11 pm

robmatic wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:32 pm

Blackmac wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:25 pm I see they have a breakdown of the data usage by date. He incurred £7300 of charges on the 2nd January, coincidentally the day of the Old Firm game and he is apparently a Rangers fanatic. This could get very messy and could easily be classed as a fraudulent expenses claim or misuse of public funds.

£7000 to watch Rangers

You'd have to pay me that much, at least.

He should be paying this out of his own pocket.

The minute he claimed it that shouldn't have been an option. Now it's an admission of guilt

Blackmac wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 6:37 pm

Tichtheid wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 6:11 pm

robmatic wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:32 pm

£7000 to watch Rangers

You'd have to pay me that much, at least.

He should be paying this out of his own pocket.

The minute he claimed it that shouldn't have been an option. Now it's an admission of guilt

That's really only if you have him as a political opponent.

I think everyone should be able to make good a mistake.

Tichtheid wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 6:49 pm

Blackmac wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 6:37 pm

Tichtheid wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 6:11 pm



You'd have to pay me that much, at least.

He should be paying this out of his own pocket.

The minute he claimed it that shouldn't have been an option. Now it's an admission of guilt

That's really only if you have him as a political opponent.

I think everyone should be able to make good a mistake.

But even after he’s said he will pay it he’s claiming it was a Parliamentary expense and he was only using it for work. If that proves to be untrue, which is looking likely, he doesn’t get a second chance to make good a mistake?

This is from a year ago, that’s a long time to decide to do the decent thing.

Anyway, their massive mistake was to bring Parliament into it and attempt to undermine their impartiality. It’s not going to end well

Slick wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 6:55 pm

Tichtheid wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 6:49 pm

Blackmac wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 6:37 pm

The minute he claimed it that shouldn't have been an option. Now it's an admission of guilt

That's really only if you have him as a political opponent.

I think everyone should be able to make good a mistake.

But even after he’s said he will pay it he’s claiming it was a Parliamentary expense and he was only using it for work. If that proves to be untrue, which is looking likely, he doesn’t get a second chance to make good a mistake?

This is from a year ago, that’s a long time to decide to do the decent thing.

Anyway, their massive mistake was to bring Parliament into it and attempt to undermine their impartiality. It’s not going to end well

I've just asked my wife who has a near thirty year career in HR, subject to due and proper process, what happened sounds like a sackable offence under gross misconduct.

Having said that it's highly politicised, the SNP opponents will be baying for blood and SNP heels will be digging in deep, so it's not as clear cut as it would be in business.

Tichtheid wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 7:31 pm

Slick wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 6:55 pm

Tichtheid wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 6:49 pm



That's really only if you have him as a political opponent.

I think everyone should be able to make good a mistake.

But even after he’s said he will pay it he’s claiming it was a Parliamentary expense and he was only using it for work. If that proves to be untrue, which is looking likely, he doesn’t get a second chance to make good a mistake?

This is from a year ago, that’s a long time to decide to do the decent thing.

Anyway, their massive mistake was to bring Parliament into it and attempt to undermine their impartiality. It’s not going to end well

I've just asked my wife who has a near thirty year career in HR, subject to due and proper process, what happened sounds like a sackable offence under gross misconduct.

Having said that it's highly politicised, the SNP opponents will be baying for blood and SNP heels will be digging in deep, so it's not as clear cut as it would be in business.

If they have been misleading Parliament it is much more clear cut than in business.

I think if this was a year ago it may have just slipped by relatively unnoticed. But after years of intransigence and constant politicking by SG and SNP on similar matters in other parties this constant drip feed of bad behaviour is, imo, justifiably being hammered home. They are as rotten as the rest.

Slick wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 7:43 pm
If they have been misleading Parliament it is much more clear cut than in business.

In business he'd be gone by now.

I don't think that is the case in politics anymore, it's all about riding it out and seeing how to divert attention elsewhere now. If there is a groundswell against the SNP with the Scottish media hammering them on this, then he'll be walking the plank tomorrow morning. It may come to that of course, but I'm not going to hold my breath on it.

Blackmac wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:25 pm I see they have a breakdown of the data usage by date. He incurred £7300 of charges on the 2nd January, coincidentally the day of the Old Firm game and he is apparently a Rangers fanatic. This could get very messy and could easily be classed as a fraudulent expenses claim or misuse of public funds.

I thought it was well known he was a Celtic fan like his boss. Not that it matters. 2k spent on the 28th too, another day of football.

Tichtheid wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 6:49 pm

Blackmac wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 6:37 pm

Tichtheid wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 6:11 pm



You'd have to pay me that much, at least.

He should be paying this out of his own pocket.

The minute he claimed it that shouldn't have been an option. Now it's an admission of guilt

That's really only if you have him as a political opponent.

I think everyone should be able to make good a mistake.

I think everyone could understand the honest mistake but the minute he knew it was more than that he should have put his hands up and taken the derry. The fact he didn't, tried to claim it as legitimate parliament expenses and then tried to cover it up is what he needs sacked for. As your wife rightly says, undoubtedly gross misconduct and possibly criminal.

Big D wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 8:17 pm

Blackmac wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:25 pm I see they have a breakdown of the data usage by date. He incurred £7300 of charges on the 2nd January, coincidentally the day of the Old Firm game and he is apparently a Rangers fanatic. This could get very messy and could easily be classed as a fraudulent expenses claim or misuse of public funds.

The 2k spent on the day of the Hibs Celtic match suggest a different common denominator. Not that it matters.

I believe I might have misheard the affiliation. Twitter suggesting he is a Celtic fan.

Blackmac wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 8:20 pm

Big D wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 8:17 pm

Blackmac wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:25 pm I see they have a breakdown of the data usage by date. He incurred £7300 of charges on the 2nd January, coincidentally the day of the Old Firm game and he is apparently a Rangers fanatic. This could get very messy and could easily be classed as a fraudulent expenses claim or misuse of public funds.

The 2k spent on the day of the Hibs Celtic match suggest a different common denominator. Not that it matters.

I believe I might have misheard the affiliation. Twitter suggesting he is a Celtic fan.

Doesn't matter what team to be fair. But 9k of watching football, probably on an illegal stream or using an VPN to circumnavigate restrictions on a government device isn't a good look.

Matheson will resign.

Yousaf will claim he was given assurances that the expenses were valid etc etc.

Blackmac wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 8:19 pm

Tichtheid wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 6:49 pm

Blackmac wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 6:37 pm

The minute he claimed it that shouldn't have been an option. Now it's an admission of guilt

That's really only if you have him as a political opponent.

I think everyone should be able to make good a mistake.

I think everyone could understand the honest mistake but the minute he knew it was more than that he should have put his hands up and taken the derry. The fact he didn't, tried to claim it as legitimate parliament expenses and then tried to cover it up is what he needs sacked for. As your wife rightly says, undoubtedly gross misconduct and possibly criminal.

From STV

Police Scotland confirmed they received a complaint about Michael Matheson amid a row over an £11,000 roaming charge bill on an iPad.

After confirming they received a complaint regarding the situation, Police Scotland confirmed that no further action would be taken after assessing the incident.

A Police Scotland spokesperson said: “A complaint which had been received has been assessed and no further action will be taken by Police Scotland at this time.”

Tichtheid wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 8:54 pm

Blackmac wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 8:19 pm

Tichtheid wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 6:49 pm



That's really only if you have him as a political opponent.

I think everyone should be able to make good a mistake.

I think everyone could understand the honest mistake but the minute he knew it was more than that he should have put his hands up and taken the derry. The fact he didn't, tried to claim it as legitimate parliament expenses and then tried to cover it up is what he needs sacked for. As your wife rightly says, undoubtedly gross misconduct and possibly criminal.

From STV

Police Scotland confirmed they received a complaint about Michael Matheson amid a row over an £11,000 roaming charge bill on an iPad.

After confirming they received a complaint regarding the situation, Police Scotland confirmed that no further action would be taken after assessing the incident.

A Police Scotland spokesperson said: “A complaint which had been received has been assessed and no further action will be taken by Police Scotland at this time.”

The complaint would no doubt have been made by a random individual just trying to stir the shit. Fraud allegations need to be supported by the person or entity who has suffered the loss. Until the complaint is made by someone with the authority to make it, there won't be an investigation.
If on the other hand a credible complaint is made then what has happened here certainly falls under the definition of fraud.

Blackmac wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 9:11 pm

Tichtheid wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 8:54 pm

Blackmac wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 8:19 pm

I think everyone could understand the honest mistake but the minute he knew it was more than that he should have put his hands up and taken the derry. The fact he didn't, tried to claim it as legitimate parliament expenses and then tried to cover it up is what he needs sacked for. As your wife rightly says, undoubtedly gross misconduct and possibly criminal.

From STV

Police Scotland confirmed they received a complaint about Michael Matheson amid a row over an £11,000 roaming charge bill on an iPad.

After confirming they received a complaint regarding the situation, Police Scotland confirmed that no further action would be taken after assessing the incident.

A Police Scotland spokesperson said: “A complaint which had been received has been assessed and no further action will be taken by Police Scotland at this time.”

The complaint would no doubt have been made by a random individual just trying to stir the shit. Fraud allegations need to be supported by the person or entity who has suffered the loss. Until the complaint is made by someone with the authority to make it, there won't be an investigation.
If on the other hand a credible complaint is made then what has happened here certainly falls under the definition of fraud.

I seem to recall there were a couple of convictions when the expenses scandal at Westminster was exposed, that ran into hundreds of thousands of pounds and second homes and all sorts. This is a lot of money but still relatively small potatoes.

I imagine any court case being brought will depend on political will from one source or another.

Tichtheid wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 9:26 pm

Blackmac wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 9:11 pm

Tichtheid wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 8:54 pm


From STV

The complaint would no doubt have been made by a random individual just trying to stir the shit. Fraud allegations need to be supported by the person or entity who has suffered the loss. Until the complaint is made by someone with the authority to make it, there won't be an investigation.
If on the other hand a credible complaint is made then what has happened here certainly falls under the definition of fraud.

I seem to recall there were a couple of convictions when the expenses scandal at Westminster was exposed, that ran into hundreds of thousands of pounds and second homes and all sorts. This is a lot of money but still relatively small potatoes.

I imagine any court case being brought will depend on political will from one source or another.

I really can't imagine any scenario where a complaint is made.

Jesus, Matheson is like every crook I have ever dealt with. You slowly get to the truth little by little. "My sons watched the football but not me"
And claiming that he only found out this a week ago and unable to explain how his kids had unsupervised access to a government device without his knowledge. How the hell he thinks this is even close to an acceptable explanation is beyond me. It's not even funny now, these scumbags have zero integrity.

Blackmac wrote: Thu Nov 16, 2023 2:30 pm Jesus, Matheson is like every crook I have ever dealt with. You slowly get to the truth little by little. "My sons watched the football but not me"
And claiming that he only found out this a week ago and unable to explain how his kids had unsupervised access to a government device without his knowledge. How the hell he thinks this is even close to an acceptable explanation is beyond me. It's not even funny now, these scumbags have zero integrity.

fucking hell.

All this after, presumably, promising the First Minister everything was cool. He has to go, and quickly.

Slick wrote: Thu Nov 16, 2023 3:05 pm

Blackmac wrote: Thu Nov 16, 2023 2:30 pm Jesus, Matheson is like every crook I have ever dealt with. You slowly get to the truth little by little. "My sons watched the football but not me"
And claiming that he only found out this a week ago and unable to explain how his kids had unsupervised access to a government device without his knowledge. How the hell he thinks this is even close to an acceptable explanation is beyond me. It's not even funny now, these scumbags have zero integrity.

fucking hell.

All this after, presumably, promising the First Minister everything was cool. He has to go, and quickly.

He is certainly out of the running for the father of the year award as well, although he does appear to have allowed his lads to gain some solid computer hacking expertise.

Blackmac wrote: Thu Nov 16, 2023 3:10 pm

Slick wrote: Thu Nov 16, 2023 3:05 pm

Blackmac wrote: Thu Nov 16, 2023 2:30 pm Jesus, Matheson is like every crook I have ever dealt with. You slowly get to the truth little by little. "My sons watched the football but not me"
And claiming that he only found out this a week ago and unable to explain how his kids had unsupervised access to a government device without his knowledge. How the hell he thinks this is even close to an acceptable explanation is beyond me. It's not even funny now, these scumbags have zero integrity.

fucking hell.

All this after, presumably, promising the First Minister everything was cool. He has to go, and quickly.

He is certainly out of the running for the father of the year award as well, although he does appear to have allowed his lads to gain some solid computer hacking expertise.

I've just watched it, absolutely awful. How much of a scumbag do you have to be to drag your kids into something so public to save your job because of your lies. It almost defies belief.

Blackmac wrote: Thu Nov 16, 2023 2:30 pm Jesus, Matheson is like every crook I have ever dealt with. You slowly get to the truth little by little. "My sons watched the football but not me"
And claiming that he only found out this a week ago and unable to explain how his kids had unsupervised access to a government device without his knowledge. How the hell he thinks this is even close to an acceptable explanation is beyond me. It's not even funny now, these scumbags have zero integrity.

Like many politicians sadly, zero credibility.

Blackmac wrote: Thu Nov 16, 2023 2:30 pm Jesus, Matheson is like every crook I have ever dealt with. You slowly get to the truth little by little. "My sons watched the football but not me"
And claiming that he only found out this a week ago and unable to explain how his kids had unsupervised access to a government device without his knowledge. How the hell he thinks this is even close to an acceptable explanation is beyond me. It's not even funny now, these scumbags have zero integrity.

If his sons had access to it without his knowledge he's in gross breach of the security guidelines around electronic devices and should be sacked for that alone.

Biffer wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2023 8:24 am

Blackmac wrote: Thu Nov 16, 2023 2:30 pm Jesus, Matheson is like every crook I have ever dealt with. You slowly get to the truth little by little. "My sons watched the football but not me"
And claiming that he only found out this a week ago and unable to explain how his kids had unsupervised access to a government device without his knowledge. How the hell he thinks this is even close to an acceptable explanation is beyond me. It's not even funny now, these scumbags have zero integrity.

If his sons had access to it without his knowledge he's in gross breach of the security guidelines around electronic devices and should be sacked for that alone.

That seems to be the obvious problem that everyone but him and Humza appear to be seeing. It's really worrying that they came up with this excuse and not one of them thought about the fact they were providing more questions than answers.

Also the suggestion that he was hit with an £11000 bill and blithely assumed it was a legitimate cost without doing the slightest bit of questioning of either the phone company or his family goes entirely against every aspect of human nature.

It's also worrying that there is so little oversight in the SG that the civil servants did nothing to question the bill.

Blackmac wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2023 9:22 am

It's also worrying that there is so little oversight in the SG that the civil servants did nothing to question the bill.

Oh, I'm sure some civil servant did question it & was told to "....just pay his expenses!" MPs everywhere these days think they're gods.

Biffer wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2023 8:24 am

Blackmac wrote: Thu Nov 16, 2023 2:30 pm Jesus, Matheson is like every crook I have ever dealt with. You slowly get to the truth little by little. "My sons watched the football but not me"
And claiming that he only found out this a week ago and unable to explain how his kids had unsupervised access to a government device without his knowledge. How the hell he thinks this is even close to an acceptable explanation is beyond me. It's not even funny now, these scumbags have zero integrity.

If his sons had access to it without his knowledge he's in gross breach of the security guidelines around electronic devices and should be sacked for that alone.

It depends wha's on it and what it's allowed to be used for. But in advance yes, it looks like a clear case of you will be fired for gross professional misconduct, don't go back to the office your personal items will be sent to you.

Unless someone wants to confirm you're allowed share such devices I don't know what's being waited for, and if you can share someone else needs firing because if he hasn't breached protocols the protocols are for shit

Obviously not politics per se, but did any of our more senior members see this when it was aired?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-66889553

The battle for Scottish independence has taken a violent turn after paramilitary "soldiers" of the Scottish Liberation Army (SLA) took over the town of Fort William.

Troops from English regiments of the British army are massing north of Glasgow to turn back an expected assault on the nation's largest city.

The prime minister is meeting his cabinet in London.

And the leadership of the SNP, the party which recently narrowly missed out on winning a majority in the Westminster parliament, has yet to condemn the actions in the Highlands.

This is not real life. It was what BBC Scotland programme makers imagined could happen back in 1973, in one of the most controversial episodes in the corporation's 100-year history north of the border.

The drama series they created has never been shown since

I had no idea Douglas Hurd was a novelist. A man of many talents.

inactionman wrote: Fri Dec 01, 2023 10:14 am Obviously not politics per se, but did any of our more senior members see this when it was aired?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-66889553

The battle for Scottish independence has taken a violent turn after paramilitary "soldiers" of the Scottish Liberation Army (SLA) took over the town of Fort William.

Troops from English regiments of the British army are massing north of Glasgow to turn back an expected assault on the nation's largest city.

The prime minister is meeting his cabinet in London.

And the leadership of the SNP, the party which recently narrowly missed out on winning a majority in the Westminster parliament, has yet to condemn the actions in the Highlands.

This is not real life. It was what BBC Scotland programme makers imagined could happen back in 1973, in one of the most controversial episodes in the corporation's 100-year history north of the border.

The drama series they created has never been shown since

I had no idea Douglas Hurd was a novelist. A man of many talents.

I was way too young at the time so I don't remember it, but that's an interesting read, thanks.

I'd certainly watch it if they ever aired it again.

Saw that article but I was only 2 so didn’t see it. Be really interested to see it.

Guy I knew was sgt in Flying Squad (cannot remember the name of the Scottish equivalent he was in). Nicolas Fairburn and Hurd got all their reports and hence how the made the book.
So a very large degree of truth in it.

Blimey, come home from 3 days without the news to #humzasbinshaggin and Michael Matheson's unlicensed and apparently unprofitable over 11 years, holiday home. WTAF

Blackmac wrote: Mon Dec 04, 2023 10:02 am Blimey, come home from 3 days without the news to #humzasbinshaggin and Michael Matheson's unlicensed and apparently unprofitable over 11 years, holiday home. WTAF

I thought it was well known he had a bit on the side in Motherwell?

Big D wrote: Mon Dec 04, 2023 12:39 pm

Blackmac wrote: Mon Dec 04, 2023 10:02 am Blimey, come home from 3 days without the news to #humzasbinshaggin and Michael Matheson's unlicensed and apparently unprofitable over 11 years, holiday home. WTAF

I thought it was well known he had a bit on the side in Motherwell?

Twitter seems to think she is in Westminster.

Blackmac wrote: Mon Dec 04, 2023 10:02 am Blimey, come home from 3 days without the news to #humzasbinshaggin and Michael Matheson's unlicensed and apparently unprofitable over 11 years, holiday home. WTAF

Were the kids letting it out without his knowledge?

Blackmac wrote: Mon Dec 04, 2023 10:02 am Blimey, come home from 3 days without the news to #humzasbinshaggin and Michael Matheson's unlicensed and apparently unprofitable over 11 years, holiday home. WTAF

It did not need to be licensed. It was only this year that the licensing legislation came in, and many, many people struggled to meet the deadlines. It cost us nearly £3,000 to get licensed yet about the only actual change we made was putting up a few more 'fire exit' signs. A huge problem was that the people who had to provide the various certificates were overwhelmed by the demand which made it impossible for owners to make the dates.

Like him, we only have a temporary license as it was such an admin mess by the SNP and local govt that even people like us that started the process months ahead of the deadline only just managed to meet it, only to find it would take several more months to process. There will not be many holiday let owners compliant with the legislation.

We are more than 15 years into owning one holiday let and are only now about to exhaust the carried forward losses and start paying tax. We have made a significant capital profit, but we are still in a genuine overall revenue loss.

This is genuine bollocks ignoring the reality to score political points.