The Sunday Herald names the footballer who cannot be named

So, this week has been the week of super injunctions, gagging orders and accusations.

The Sunday Herald, or as it is known on some of its competitors websites, the newspaper that cannot be named, has taken the plunge and named he who cannot be named.

The Sunday Herald’s front page;

“Everyone knows that this is the footballer accused of using the courts to keep allegations of a sexual affair secret. But we weren’t supposed to tell you that…,”

Due to the increased traffic to the Sunday Herald’s website, it’s down, although the Guardian reports that the article and photo have not been published online.

Was this a stunt to get more readers, or a move to show the lawyers that there are ways round the law, especially when injunctions are only applied for in one country, therefore exempting other countries.

Let us see what this week brings.

The Press Complaints Commission versus the Daily Telegraph

I had meant to blog about this when the PCC announced the ruling, but I was recovering from the election.

I am very pleased that the PCC have ruled against the Daily Telegraph, for two reasons.

The Daily Telegraph articles quoted a number of private comments made by senior Liberal Democrat MPs in their constituency surgeries which had been secretly recorded by the newspaper's journalists posing as constituents.

The MPs featured included the Business Secretary, Vince Cable, in addition to Under Secretary of State for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, Ed Davey, Minister for Work and Pensions, Steve Webb, Scottish Secretary, Michael Moore, Under Secretary of State for Transport, Norman Baker, Under Secretary of State to the Department for Communities and Local Government, Andrew Stunell, Parliamentary Secretary (Deputy Leader) to the Office of the Leader of the Commons, David Heath and Health Minister, Paul Burstow.

A pity the PCC spelt Andrew Stunell's name incorrectly.

I have worked directly for one of these, worked closely with four and worked with the other three.  In fact one was at my wedding earlier this year.

I therefore reserve the right to be biased against the Daily Telegraph.
I have read the ruling, a number of times and the most interesting paragraph is this one;

The newspaper denied that it had undertaken a ‘fishing expedition'; rather, it had acted upon specific information it had received from parliamentarians and members of the public. In private meetings at the Conservative party conference in 2010, the editor had been informed by Conservative ministers including a Cabinet minister (themselves informed by local party activists) that the public and private views of some Liberal Democrat ministers were increasingly at odds, particularly on the issue of Coalition policies which had been backed publicly. Similar concerns had also been expressed separately to senior reporters and the issue was raised with several MPs in the course of various engagements. A consistent theme began to emerge of growing Liberal Democrat private dissatisfaction. The newspaper said that the Conservative ministers were understandably reluctant to go on the record, or provide information or contacts in Liberal Democrat constituencies to back up their concerns.

The specific line within the paragraph above that caught my eye was this one;

In private meetings at the Conservative party conference in 2010, the editor had been informed by Conservative ministers including a Cabinet minister (themselves informed by local party activists) that the public and private views of some Liberal Democrat ministers were increasingly at odds, particularly on the issue of Coalition policies which had been backed publicly.

Wow, the editor must have been really shocked?

Come on DT, when Labour were in power they had Ministers and MPs expressing views against their own Government - did the Daily Telegraph think it was appropriate to go and pretend to be constituents and secretly film or record them?

No, because in other news the Pope is Catholic and bears crap in woods.

So, what is different?

The difference is that the media are not used to coalition government - unlike the Scottish media - and therefore don't know how to deal with it.  The only way they have come up with so far is to to attack, and find things to attack, sometimes like this story, on things that don't interest the public and breaking the rules to get the story.

Interestingly the ruling also states;

The newspaper had said that it had acted on information from various sources, who had been unwilling to go on the record.

I assume that includes the Conservative Ministers and Cabinet Minister?  Strange that.

Is it because they are jealous they didn't get more senior roles within the Government because Cameron went into coalition rather than going it alone in a minority government?

The second reason I am pleased that the ruling went against the Daily Telegraph was because knowing how hard MPs work and how important their constituency surgeries are, it is utterly appalling that the journalists wasted time pretending to be constituents.
 
This, as well as being sneaky and dishonest has deprived a real constituent with real problems from seeing their MP and potentially getting help.
 
When I worked for Vince Cable, he held his weekly advice surgery every Friday from 5pm to 7pm.  Joan and I often would be still in the office with Vince until 8pm, sometimes even later working through the people and trying to help.
 
I have to be honest, it is a bloody good job I didn't work for Vince when the sneaky journalists met him, because I would have been furious.  We put a lot of effort into helping constituents, so depriving a real person of time with their MP to explain a real life problem is nothing short of pathetic.
 
The Daily Telegraph were out of order on this occasion, they didn't generate news, and they have gone down in my estimation.  You can read the ruling here.

Calling all Edinburgh animal lovers - help find Leda

If you see a Dobermann in Edinburgh, it may well be Leda.

Local artist, Dylan Lisle had his Dobermann puppy Leda stolen on Tuesday evening.

There is a possibility that Leda is in the Newhaven/Granton area.  Please call Leith police station or Dylan Lisle on 07914 817947 if you see ANYONE with a Dobermann. A dog like this does not simply vanish.


You can read more details on Dylan Lisle's website HERE.

Willie Rennie MSP takes the reins of the Scottish Liberal Democrats

I'm delighted that Willie Rennie decided to take the plunge and go for the leadership of the Scottish Party.

As nominations closed at midday today, Willie Rennie was the only candidate for the leadership, so no all member ballot was required this time, unlike 2008.

Willie Rennie chose the Fife coastal village of North Queensferry where, in the shadow of the Forth Bridges, he announced to the media that he had been confirmed as the new leader of the Scottish Liberal Democrats.

Willie replaces Tavish Scott, who resigned 10 days ago in the wake of devastating Scottish Parliament election results.

Despite the three leaders of the Scottish Liberal Democrats, Scottish Labour and the Scottish Conservatives all resigning following the elections results twelve days ago, it is the Scottish Lib Dems who announce their new leader first.


Following the leadership announcement, Willie Rennie said:

"I will be working with my colleagues in the Scottish Parliament to stand up to the SNP bulldozer.


"We will not sit on our hands in the face of an SNP majority - we will be that Liberal voice standing up for the values that Scotland holds dear."

I am delighted to be working closely with Willie Rennie and relish the challenges that we will face over the coming years.

What do Sunderland FC and Edinburgh Zoo have in common?

Interim Chief Executive Hugh Roberts, that's what.

Edinburgh Zoo has recently been mired in controversy and now Hugh Roberts has been appointed to sort it out and bring some stability back to the zoo.

There has been no-one in the Chief Executive role since November 2010 when David Windmill retired.

Then, all within the last two months, two senior staff, Gary Wilson (Chief Operating Officer) and Iain Valentine (Director of animals, conservation and education) have been suspended while inquiries into anonymous allegations were carried out.

Gary Wilson is now due to return to work after "There was no disciplinary case to answer".

A third senior member of staff, Anthony McReavy (Director of development) was sacked and Max Gaunt (honorary treasurer) resigned.

Just last week over 500 members attended an emergency meeting and recorded a vote of no confidence in Donald Emslie, the Chairman of The Royal Zoological Society of Scotland.

However, last week he refused to step down ignoring the wishes of Zoo Members - I would have attended if I could have got back from London in time.

Mr Emslie finally caved into public pressure and resigned on Monday.

The Board has also appointed an interim Chief Executive, Hugh Roberts, who starts work tomorrow.

His previous roles include Hugh’s previous positions include Chief Executive of Sunderland Football Club PLC and Managing Director of UK brewer Adnams PLC.  He has also held the post of interim Managing Director and other senior directorial roles with the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH), Chadwick House Group Limited and Women’s Royal Voluntary Service (WRVS).

Hugh Robert’s most recent role was with the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH).

Recently the zoo has wasted valuable resources in members mailings - two for the emergency meeting, one for the AGM and then the members magazine, advertising 13 events at the zoo and wildlife park.

Unfortunately 7 had already passed by the time the magazine reached us, leaving just 6.

This isn't the first time this has happened and it needs to stop.

Surely the AGM mailing could have been included in the magazine?

Let us hope Hugh Roberts is going to bring stability and some common sense to Edinburgh Zoo, it is certainly needed after a period of arrogance and uncertainty.

Kill the gays Bill off the table for now

Earlier this week I blogged Less than 72 hours to stop the Ugandan “Kill The Gays” Bill after religious extremists presented a petition to the Speaker of the Ugandan Parliament, Edward Ssekandi.

The original bill was shelved in March. Claiming 2 million signatures, the petition demanded continued passage of the bill. Using the riots currently roiling Uganda as a distraction, supporters of the bill tried to pass it before the legislature expired on May 18, 2011.

Bishop Christopher Senyonjo, Frank Mugisha, and other activists deliver
your 500,000 petitions to the Parliament (Credit: James Akena)

However, the LGBT community mobilised against it, over 500,000 around the world signed the petition to stop Uganda's Anti-Homosexuality bill.

The international outcry was heard and the Ugandan Parliament has adjourned for this session.  In fact the parliament was closed early in the face of an unprecedented global outcry, abandoning the Bill for now - but the fight isn't over yet.

We must ensure that when the parliament returns that this bill is opposed once more and removed forever.