Iain Crichton
The reason that this issue has not featured on the blog for some time is that I have been constrained in what I could say for professional reasons - which means I can't even clarify what that means.
There was never an attempt to gag me by the Council, although I was certainly discouraged from pursuing the matter with various spurious excuses.
I believe the current Councillors have been advised not to comment at present, but they certainly shouldn't be gagged permanently.
Hopefully the truth will all come out, and it will be clear to everyone just what happened.
There was never an attempt to gag me by the Council, although I was certainly discouraged from pursuing the matter with various spurious excuses.
I believe the current Councillors have been advised not to comment at present, but they certainly shouldn't be gagged permanently.
Hopefully the truth will all come out, and it will be clear to everyone just what happened.
11 comments:
The only problem is that by the time it all comes out, it is too late for Mr Chrichton, who has had to suffer the heartbreak of watching the company which he had created and developed over 30 years be declared bankrupt.
The Chief Executives role in this disgracefull episode should be investigated given that he was a council lawyer at the time of the awarding of the disputed contract.
A final point, a company which has survived and prospered for 30 years
does not go bankrupt after a period when the Island has experienced a boom within the building trade over the previous 5 years and I am sure that Chrichton's benefited from that boom as have many other local contractors.
where are all the papers and reporters to make a story about this sad case, the men at the top are pulling the strings again who are the strong councillors that are going to stand up and be counted or are they going to hide behind the C-E again????
As if it isn't already crystal clear what happened, Angus.
Didn't there used to be a website called "Not working together"?
Bear in mind it was HM Custom and Excise that came looking for their money (our money) which was legally due to be paid.
Also bear in mind that had Iain Chrichton not had to pay tens of thousands of pounds pursuing justice after being shafted by the council he would have had the money to pay revenue & customs.
In the end the council hierachy got what they had hoped would have
happened years ago.
Anyone who has any sense can see that Mr Crichton never won the case against the council. They never paid out but appealed against the decision.
Mr Crichton was very silly to delay payment to the Revenue for tax on profits that he presumably made from other contracts.
Both parties are at fault here. We know that the council is bordering on corrupt and that whatever decision they want is the one that gets past, regardless of whether financially it is right or wrong for the islands.
Either way, Mr Crichton has had enough time to arrange his affairs to make sure that he does not personally lose the roof over his head and from what I hear, most of the staff have secured employment.
I think that the most important thing here is that the council should be investigated for their continuing anti competitive practices with regard to tenders because they continue to favour their preferred suppliers.
I think a very close look at all Comhairle tenders and the "successful" bidders wouldn't go amiss. The Comhairle have an unwritten list of preferred firms and will ensure that these make the grade regardless of quality and financial affordability.
What about the idea of truly independent assessment panel comprising of external non-council people to decide on the choice of successful bidders for major contracts. It can always be argued that when a council department is also bidding for a major contract, if the decision is being taken by the council, then there is always a conflict of interest surely. Just think of recent events.
If By recent events you mean the other fiasco of the Point Bus Service where it has been tendered twice and the council were not the cheapest, yet they do not award the contract, opting for another round of tenders. I suspect that this time round they will be the cheapest seeing as how they know the amount that their competitor was tendering.
But then again they would not use that information, as they carry out their tendering procedures above board and would not seek to gain advantage over a private company!!!! WHAT DO YOU THINK ???
9.34
you assume that the tax due was on 'profits'?
If you ever go into business for yourself,and employ others, you will discover that the tax on profit is easy to pay- its the monthly Pay As You Earn thats the killer- ten employees- thats about six grand a month to find, every month, no latitude from the taxman, regardless of whether or not your customers have paid you. Have a look at your own paypacket next month, if you get one- the taxes you have deducted are but a fraction of what the employer pays the HMR&C. Small business is being crucified by this government, never mind the CNES putting the boot in as well.
Post a Comment