Spending our money for their ends... again..

The SNP doesn't seem at all shy at spending our money for their party political advantage. In an earlier post I pointed out that the so-called National Conversation is really an SNP campaign masquerading as a public consultation and paid for by the Scottish taxpayer not, as it should be, the SNP. And the re-branding of the Scottish Executive as the Scottish "Government" which, although it has no legal force, cost us (not the SNP) £100,000. And the Homecoming advert, cost £200,000, but no plans to show it abroad to attract any "homecomers", just a bit of subliminal SNP advertising, to be shown in Scotland.

Now Alex Salmond is to be investigated by Parliament for claiming legal expenses incurred by the SNP agianst his personal Parliamentary expenses.

http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.2519747.0.Probe_into_Salmonds_use_of_expenses_in_bid_to_impeach_Blair.php

On the face of it, asking for a QC's opinion in the hope that you might get some ammunition to attack your political opponents looks like something you pay for yourself. If you get the opinion you want, you can then think about getting the taxpayer to fund court or criminal actions. But if you get an opinion you don't want, too bad. The risk has not paid off, you've wasted your money. And that's the point: it should be the SNP's money at risk, not the public's.

It seems Alex Salmond thinks differently. So are we to assume that, in an independent Scotland, political parties could go on fishing expeditions in a shoal of legal opinion, hoping to net something that would discredit their opponents. If you find it, so good. If not, never mind, the Scottish taxpayer will foot the bill. Not exactly the type of moral climate I would like to see. Nor anyone else, I would suggest.