BIG SUNDAY READ: LIFTING THE LID ON SUSAN AITKEN'S GLASGOW ADMINISTRATION
Threatening political opponents, attempting to silence blind councillors and chairing the licensing board despite standards complaints...just another day in SNP run Glasgow
GLASGOW is vitally important to the nation, contributing cash and jobs to the national economy. The city is expected to continue to grow throughout the year expanding its economy. Naturally enough, the good governance of the nation’s largest city is critically important. It’s a pity then that I lift the lid on the shocking state of governance in Scotland’s largest city under the SNP. What follows are stories exposing mismanagement of rules, victimisation of opposition councillors, threats of violence and serious standards complaints.
Having a square go
Glasgow is Scotland’s largest city sitting at the heart of our nation’s most important metropolitan region. The Glasgow City region alone contributed 34 per cent of all Scottish jobs in 2020 alongside £46.8bn in gross value added (GVA) the same year. So, the management of the city matters, is important and has far-reaching effects across all regions of Scotland. It is a pity then that we discover the shocking diminution in ethics, standards and procedures under the SNP administration.
Lifting the lid on how the nationalists conduct themselves on the council brings us first to Councillor Graham Campbell. Cllr Campbell for those who are not familiar with him is the partner of SNP MP Anne McLaughlin, and has form being caught up in questions as to his personal conduct. He previously stood accused of aggressive behaviour during an anti-drugs event last year, and now is in the news once more.
According to Labour Councillor Frank McAveety, Cllr Campbell threatened him with physical harm during a full Council session.
When I approached a couple of elected councillors, they provided me with a little bit of the inside track on what transpired. According to one source the meeting was “appallingly chaired” by nationalist Lord Provost Maclaren; who “either hasn’t read, or can’t comprehend the standing orders.”
It seems a bit of nonsense during the course of the meeting erupted at one point, with Cllr Susan Aitken making “spurious points of order on accuracy of statements”. Cllr McAveety, reasonably enough, opted to challenge Cllr Aitken ‘a points of order with his own (as is his right). Cllr Bill Butler also did the same on a separate occasion.
The problems really started to arise during one of these exchanges, where Cllr Campbell shouted “shut up”, apparently discontented that Labour opposition politicians had the temerity to raise points of order. Given the poor personal conduct unsurprisingly at the end of the meeting, Cllr McAveety moved a point of order asking that Cllr Campbell’s conduct be considered for action.
The Provost, before Cllr McAveety had had a chance to speak, attempted to claim the meeting was over in a desperate bid to circle the wagons to protect loud-mouth Cllr Campbell. Multiple sources speaking to me make clear that at this point the full council session was most certainly not finished and hadn’t been adjourned. After officers informed the Provost of this, she was compelled to listen to Cllr McAveety’s point of order. Cllr Campbell decided he wasn’t happy that he was going to be held to account for loutish behaviour decided the best thing to do was begin issuing threats of physical violence. Cllr Campbell, in front of the entire full session of council shouted “we can sort it out outside”, the Provost said she wouldn’t consider the Point of Order, and Campbell repeated the “come on, let’s sort this out outside”
One councillor tells me “The first time he said it, I have to admit, I laughed thinking it a joke, but when he repeated it, it was obvious he was serious. Technically the meeting is still in progress as it hasn’t been adjourned, though obviously everyone has left. Easily the worst meeting of any sort I have ever seen.”
Now I don’t know about you, but this doesn’t sound like the best way to be running the beating heart of the Scottish economy. Glasgow Council is being run it seems by a rag-tag bunch of SNP politicians who can’t chair meetings, don’t comprehend standing orders and think threatening opponents with assault “outside” is all acceptable.
An elected Labour councillor told me about the unease felt as Cllr Campbell made his threats (again, he is someone previously accused of aggressive behaviour in public in the past)
“I’m in disbelief at the violent temper Cllr Campbell felt comfortable displaying at full council. Cllr Campbell should face the appropriate consequences for threatening the safety of other elected members for simply carrying out the duties of their role. There should be no place for threats of physical violence during the conducting of council business. The people of Glasgow have been badly let down by this lawless display.”
Mind you, Cllr Campbell is nothing if not shameless. This is the same Glasgow politician who insisted he isn’t paid enough despite the fact he only bothers to attend half the council meetings…
Interestingly however, the same Labour councillor tells me that the current Lord Provost Jacqueline McLaren bends rules to hamper opposition councillors, even if they’re blind…
“Standing order requests are ignored. And WORST of all, when our Cllr Mooney who is registered blind needed a bit of extra time (nothing compared to how long she [Lord Provost McClaren] gives SNP) to read a motion a couple full councils ago she cut him off despite his pointing out that his visual impairment means he needs longer. She was rude and kept saying times you through his pleas. It wasn’t till the council lawyer Elaine Galletly told her she had to give him time to finish despite being over time that she did. That is a breach of the equalities act and she was calling him after offering him all kinds of stuff to not make something of it.
During this full council too, Robert asked a question about why there were no councillors on a durability working group in the council and Cllr Kelly accused him of using disabilities as a political football. That was low. Everyone of all parties know how passionate Robert is about disabled representation.”
A sorry tale of standing orders bent, rules and procedures addled to protect an SNP Councillor with a history of aggressive conduct in public. Meanwhile attempts are made to silence politicians with disabilities in contravention of the equalities act; all to protect the nat regime in the City Chambers. Unedifying stuff.
Licensing board peccadillos
Unfortunately threats aren’t the only examples of lurid behaviour by Glasgow’s ruling SNP. Among the more eyebrow raising scandals which barely gets any coverage in our media took place just last month on the City of Glasgow Licensing Board.
The Licensing board is - supposed to be - an independent regulatory body. This is abundantly clear if we peruse Section 5 of the Licensing (Scotland) Act 2005. Despite the rather innocuous name, the Licensing Board is actually quite important. It’s primary function is to regulate premises that sell alcohol to the public. It is also required by virtue of the Gambling Act 2005 to regulate certain gambling activities within Scotland’s largest City. Further, membership of the Board can only come from elected councillors.
Sadly, following some ferreting around I have come to the conclusion there are legitimate grounds to question just how independent the Licensing Board actually is under Cllr Aitken’s SNP regime.
Last month STV reported in a brief online-only report that Councillor Margaret Morgan had been removed from her post a chair of the Licensing Board. What struck me at the time was the passing mention about “an objector to a licence application at a recent board meeting planned to make a standards complaint about Bailie Morgan”. I decided the nature of the “standards complaint” was worth digging into, since nobody else in the media seemed interested in reporting on it.
A Glasgow City Councillor has spoken with me, on the basis they would remain nameless, and filled in a few details. Apparently Cllr Morgan “has a standards complaint against her, from a constituent who had lobbied her support in an application.” It seems he also mentioned it at court and “then shared emails she’d sent” None of this folks is really any good. Here we have the chair of the licensing board for Scotland’s largest city accused of seriously unethical behaviour. I’m baffled as to why STV decided none of these details really needed to be spelt out, but I certainly think they ought to be.
Amazingly however, when a member of the Board asked that she step aside until the investigation was complete, Cllr Morgan refused. When the member subsequently moved a motion for her to be removed, the SNP delayed the vote. During the delay, it turns out Cllr Morgan was “took advice”, from none other than the SNP whip.
For those who do not know, the fact she admitted to taking advice from the SNP chief whip on the council is also clearly rules and procedure violating stuff. That she refused to do the decent thing and step aside is bad enough; but that she actively based her decision not to resign on the basis her chief whip told her to stay on represents a breath-taking failure of professional ethics.
Put simply, the simple fact Cllr Morgan took her marching orders about whether to resign or not from the Chief Whip is standards breach in of itself. She chairs a supposedly quasi judicial committee, which cannot be whipped, but Cllr Morgan it turns out didn’t bother to adhere to this rule. Mind you, this is the same Cllr who stands accused by a Standards Complaint but doesn’t think its a resigning matter so we really shouldn’t be surprised.
In the end, turns out she was only forced out of the position of Licensing Board chair following Labour, Conservative and Green Board members uniting to force her out in a 5-4 decision. The SNP have subsequently had the brass-neck to insist Bailie Morgan had taken her responsibilities “extremely seriously”. Clearly not seriously enough or she’d not be caught up in a serious standards complaint probe.
Sadly for the Green Councillor in question for his brave decision to insist upon standards and ethics, he was punished. My singing source tells me that Green Cllr Dan Hutchison was admonished by his group for daring to vote to oust conflict ridden Cllr Morgan. It seems there are strong grounds to suspect that placing Cllr Morgan in charge of Licensing was part of the SNP-Green “partnership agreement”. Naturally enough, this wouldn’t be written down as obviously they’d all be in jail. Nevertheless my source tells me he “strongly suspects, but can’t prove” that an unspoken element of the SNP-Green deal involved handing off the ‘independent’ licensing board to SNP-stooge Cllr Morgan.
But according to the whispers from my source, there is yet more drama to be reported relating to our City’s beleaguered Licensing Board. Apparently, in what was described to me as a “fun fact” SNP big-cheese Cllr Susan Aitken had originally promised the leadership of the Board to someone else last term.
It seems that Cllr Aitken had promised the leadership of this independent Licensing Board to one Cllr Stephen Dornan as part of some backroom deal to keep her leadership ticking over. The problem for Cllr Aitken arrived when the Board apparently voted to surprise everyone, and insisted on putting a Labour Councillor in charge.
Now, at this point I should say numerous Glasgow Councillors have told me over the years that Cllr Aitken has a reputation as something of a bully. This description of her personal leadership style seems to fit with what happened to the Board after it voted in a Labour councillor to lead it last term. I have been made aware that Cllr Aitken’s SNP regime attempted to remove the allowance from the chair of the licensing board, and the licensing board alone at full council.
Who needs probity or standards and ethics in public life? Not the SNP here in Glasgow, that’s for sure. Guess nobody should defy Cllr Susan Aitken…at least if you know what’s good for you.
The worst FOI response in history
Given the strange events on the Licensing Board the next news story from SNP-run Glasgow really shouldn’t come as a surprise at all. But it seems Cllr Aitken’s administration has won the accolade of providing the worst Freedom of Information (FOI) response in the entire history of Scotland.
The story here begins innocently enough when Scottish Labour MSP Alex Rowley tasked the council to simply say how many people have been assessed by social care and are waiting for a social care package of any kind. Respectable enquiry from an elected politician in relation to something clearly in the interest of constituents. So what’s the problem?
Well, it seems Cllr Aitken’s SNP-run Glasgow doesn’t take too kindly to FOIs. Unbelievably, the council’s FOI team wrote back saying would not comply with Mr Rowley’s request. But not on the grounds they don’t have the information requested. Oh no, they told Mr Rowley that in their opinion it would cost the authority around a quarter of a million pounds to check the records.
At this point I should draw my readers attention to the fact that this sort of information is something other local authorities have had no trouble handing out. It seems revealing how many people have been assessed and are waiting for social care packages is too expensive for Cllr Aitken’s Glasgow operation.
“Complying with the request would therefore take a minimum estimated 16,439 of hours of an officer’s time. The costs in this case have been calculated as follows: Staff time: £15 x 16,439 = £246,585. Total cost = £246,585.”
Alex Rowley explains his disbelief at receiving this answer, telling The Scotsman
“This is bad enough, but to then make the ludicrous suggestion that it would cost half a million pounds to find out makes the council and the FOI legislation a laughing stock. This must be one of the worst Freedom of Information responses in history of the Act.”
When approached I asked the City Council’s spokesperson why Glasgow Council can’t provide this data but other cities across the Kingdom of Scotland can I was told it was all because we probably had more service users.
Apparently we’re expected to believe Edinburgh can tell us how many people are assessed and are waiting for social care but Cllr Aitken’s outfit in Glasgow can’t. All because we probably have more service users, so that means it’ll cost quarter of a million quid to check a database.
So none of you get to know the answer to the FOI. You want transparency and openness in SNP Glasgow? Aren’t you wishing for the moon…move along now.
Having a hoot…
All of that could cause some mild instances of hopelessness, and wishing to alleviate my readers of such feelings there is just enough space left to have a laugh.
Here is a video of our very own Susan Aitken insisting the bridge she’s standing on isn’t actually a rusty mess…it’s just designed to look like a rusty mess
I wonder if the SNP’s new bridge was designed to colour-coordinate with our non-floating ferries? At least the bridge doesn’t need us to paint on pretend windows…small mercies.
My work is entirely reader-supported. To receive new posts and support my work, please consider becoming a free or paid subscriber
Alternatively why not make a one-off donation? All support is appreciated