I’m not about to get into a hissing contest over political views because that is precisely what has been abused in this ongoing saga by attempting to exploit the public’s lack of awareness of how Contract Law works and implying political interference.
Once the contract is let, absolutely NOBODY can interfere between parties to the contract, it is entirely bound by Contract Law – Were any politician or beneficial owner to attempt to influence the contract in any way it would generate a punitive claim via the arbitrators of the Contract which would make eyes water financially.
If I had to stick my neck out on why McColl feels so obviously aggrieved, it would be that he banked on and promised the latter providing lucrative returns for investors and bluntly it didn’t pan out, filing for bankruptcy was his last throw of the dice and that failed also. Had McColl the slightest case it would be before the Contract’s appointed arbiter, it really could not be more simple.
Instead what McColl has attempted to retrospectively construct in the public eye is a case of being “Wronged” by an unseen third party when he COULD NOT be wronged under the mutually onerous strictures of the Contract.
Little wonder the “impartial” HMS James Cook were and are so supportive of “ferry-stories”, no embarrassingly incontinent pigeons required, they only need report what others have said, a la Nick Robinson…