Factcheck: Sturgeon spent far less than most on spin doctors

From the ever pungent Tom Gordon today:

£2 million eh, to be the actual political leader of a country?

Alister Jack with only a fraction of the functions and responsibilities, spent £1.5 million in just two years.

In 2015, David Cameron spent £10 million.

During the pandemic, the UK Government spent £300 million.

In wee NZ, Labour spent $300 million on spin doctors.

Tom Gordon needs an adviser? Yup!


7 thoughts on “Factcheck: Sturgeon spent far less than most on spin doctors

  1. Ah, but, the ones you mentioned are unionists and the money is being spent on the RIGHT (in the political sense) things, such as providing daily copy for Gordon and his fellow hacks to cut and paste and then attach their by lines.

    Liked by 4 people

  2. Labour claim £2m spads cost is ”morally indefensible ” .
    This from the party who gave us the PFI Ponzi scheme which has siphoned countless hundreds of millions from the Public Purse – and is still impoverishing Scottish Councils .
    Taking criticism from them is like accepting lessons in frugality from King Charles- Not My King !

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Labour Lib Dem Conservative spend hundreds of millions on the House of Lords an unelected bunch of mostly foreigners who are paid to bolster the Westmibster mirage of democratic decision making.
    How’s that for misspending public money.
    2million ? in a year ? Wouldn’t last a week down there .

    Liked by 2 people

  4. ‘Accused the government of burying bad news over a bank holiday weekend’, which government do they mean? If they are attempting to claim that the SNP have any way of ‘burying bad news’ (that’s not even ‘bad news’ anyway), it’s utterly laughable/ Well it would be if it wasn’t so serious because there are still too many gullibles who believe BritNat states’ lies about the SNP and about Scotland.
    When the English government were drawing up devolution on their terms only, in the sytle and manner which suited them, they were very cunning in making sure that broadcasting powers were kept well and truly controlled by England’s ‘government’.

    It’s a far cry from democracy when the gov/cabal running the country next door and their dodgy pals abroad, have control over your own country’s actual media.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Of course – regardless of what the quoted Lib Dem spokesperson in Herald article might claim – special advisors are engaged in matters mostly, and usually quite different from, ‘spinning’. According to the Institute for Government commenting on SpADs in Westminster (probably the same pertains in Holyrood):

    ‘What do special advisers do?
    ‘The Special Adviser Code lists the kinds of activities SpAds will undertake for ministers:
    * give assistance on any aspect of departmental business, and give advice (including expert advice as a specialist in a particular field)
    * undertake long-term policy thinking and contribute to policy planning within the department
    * write speeches and undertake related research, including adding party political content to material prepared by permanent civil servants
    * liaise with the party, briefing party representatives and parliamentarians on issues of government policy
    * represent the views of their minister to the media (including a party viewpoint), where they have been authorised by the minister to do so
    * liaise with outside interest groups (including those with a political allegiance).’

    Source: https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/special-advisers

    Arguably, ambitious governments – governments with onerous, diverse legislative agendas – probably need more SpADs!

    Noting that the Herald article includes a quote from a Lib Dem spokesperson, this from Labour List on 24 February 2013 is shared here for fun:

    ‘A Freedom of Information request by the Labour Peer George Foulkes has revealed that Nick Clegg has 15 Special Advisers costing a total of £1 million each year. Only 5 out of these 15 SPADs appear to advise Clegg on his policy responsibilities (which since constitutional reform has hit the buffers, already seems like a few too many). The other 10 seem to be tasked with keeping a watchful, distrustful eye on the Tory administration – including 4 stalking the corridors of Downing Street.’

    In closing, anyone else feel that Mr Tom Gordon’s efforts as a journalist when expended on matters such as this seems like a waste of a professional life? He and his newspaper could be so much better!

    Liked by 1 person

  6. I would echo Stewart’s point, SPADS are deployed in a variety of roles.

    No matter how many of that corps are involved in “spin”, I gently suggest they are outnumbered by Tom Gordon and colleagues in Scotland’s media, before taking account of the Holyrood opposition efforts, SiU, etc., etc..

    As to Labour’s accusation of being “morally indefensible”, the hypocrisy is deafening.


  7. I note that the extract given from Mr Gordon’s article includes some context and perspective: it includes reference to SpADs used by government in Westminster.

    The BBC News website now also has an article on the subject of Scottish Government SpADs. It’s lengthy, detailed and heavily weighted towards giving voice to ‘scandalised’ opposition politicians.

    The Tory, Labour and Lib Dem hypocrisy is self evident.

    However, my main point here is that – unlike even the Herald – the BBC Scotland opts NOT to provide any context or perspective whatsoever!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.