Improper use of public cash, you say?
Since Johnson, all of the UK’s PM’s have been also ‘Minister for the Union’ without the title being democratically confirmed at any level. Do they then have staff to support that function? If so, at what cost to the public?
In 2021, we could read:
Boris Johnson’s four-person union unit, dedicated to averting Scottish independence, had become used to operating quietly behind the scenes. That is until what one MP termed a “Whitehall psychodrama” exploded and propelled the team into the headlines.https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/feb/28/the-union-unit-inside-the-no-10-team-tasked-with-keeping-uk-together
Four staff? Was this in the manifesto for the public in 2019?
At what cost? Three to four times that of the Scottish Minister for Independence?
5 thoughts on “Is it ‘proper’ then to use public cash for a Minister for the Union?”
The UK government is a disgrace austerity robbing the public purse breaking international and domestic laws peroging parliament utter disgrace
Scotland 🏴 needs to be independent ASAP
I have emailed DRoss regarding this still no reply did not expect one just shows the hypocrisy of him and Tory pals,I also see that Bowie does not want refugees in his backyard.
Surely all Governments are elected on their manifestos? If that’s correct then they subsequently use public money to achieve the goals set out for the people who voted for them. No different here in Scotland. And, after all, imitiation is the sincerest form of flattery so we’re simply following the lead set by the Conservative and Unionist Party.
Should the Tories succeed in having this appointment overturned,it will openly demonstrate that they are in charge of Holyrood and not our democratically elected parliament.
Seems to me that in Westminster the PM governs for England but in Holyrood we hear NS and HY both say they govern for all of Scotland