FIRST we have an English MP referring Michelle Thomson to the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner (“Thomson reported to sleaze watchdog”, The Herald, October 7) then we have a Labour MSP doing likewise (“Labour voices own call for parliament’s standards commissioner to probe Thomson deals”, The Herald, October 8).
So far as can be ascertained the complaint is that Ms Thomson indulged in some questionable practices involving house purchases and took advantage of vulnerable people. It has to be emphasised that on TV news items the person cited originally as an aggrieved victim stated clearly and explicitly that she simply wanted to get rid of her house and was content with the sale price at the time. She is only now upset since Ms Thomson appeared to have made a large profit.
It should also be noted that the alleged activities took place long before Ms Thomson became an MP and even before she was nominated as a parliamentary candidate. How then could she have broken parliamentary rules or brought the House of Commons into disrepute?
If the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner does accept this case then I suggest that many present MPs should be worried. I doubt that all 650 or so other MPs have completely unblemished business activities, either prior to their being elected or current. It would give an enterprising investigative journalist a wonderful opportunity to make a name. Investigation of the business history of all MPs would, I am sure, prove a goldmine for scandal.
If Ms Thomson has committed a crime and is brought to court then, and only then, can the matter be raised legitimately. The MP and MSP who have done so have diminished what little reputation they previously had.
John Scott Roy,
42 Galloway Avenue, Ayr.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel