"
Lizzie Rynne (@CityCycling)
14/03/2014 22:54
@CyclingEdin heres my lift piccie:
http://pic.twitter.com/9uBTJJ7tEc
"
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » General Edinburgh
"Jim Orr quits SNP over ‘internal spats’ "
(70 posts)-
Posted 10 years ago #
-
"
All change at Transport & Environment ...
15 Mar 2014 15:56Was sorry to see my SNP coalition-colleague, Jim Orr, resign the whip a couple of weeks ago ... at a personal level, I wish him all the best for the future.
It does, of course, mean there's been a vacancy for the post of "Vice-Convener of the Transport and the Environment Committee", and this week's Full Council Meeting confirmed that Adam McVey will be taking on the job. I look forward to working with Adam over the coming months.
And by one of those strange coincidences-of-fate, who did I jog past on the canal yesterday ... the last-but-one, Transport and Environment Committee Convener: Gordon Mackenzie (on his bike!).
Despite our political differences, I really do think Gordon deserves enormous credit for spearheading the initial "5% of transport revenue and capital" commitment, to be spent on cycling in Edinburgh ... and our own second budget, passed just last month, saw that rise to 7% (see paragraph 1.5).
As a daily cyclist, I can see it making a real difference across the city ... I know there's a long way to go, but just imagine city-cycling without that commitment?
"
Text with links at -
http://andrewburns.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/all-change-at-transport-environment.html
Posted 10 years ago # -
The hearing panel noted that Mr Cardownie had sued for defamation and as a result Mr Orr had paid damages and issued an unqualified apology for the blogpost.
Hadn't heard this until now, too.
Posted 6 years ago # -
IIRC in a defamation case you are presumed guilty unless you can prove what you said to be true - something that is presumably pretty difficult given the nature of the corruption / dodgy dealings that were referred to?
Posted 6 years ago # -
I hope someone copied Jim Orr's blog before he took it down
(I presume it has been taken down...)
Posted 6 years ago # -
"IIRC in a defamation case you are presumed guilty unless you can prove what you said to be true - "
I have no dog in this fight, but if you are planning to defame someone, it seems reasonable to me that you should, at least on balance, have some evidence that would support your assertion.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Andy Wightman, who does have a 'dog' (or rather wildcat...) in this fiught suggests that Scotland's defamation laws are in need of 'modernization''. (as do other capaigners) http://www.andywightman.com/archives/4524
Posted 6 years ago # -
Nothing wrong with modernization, but the point remains that if you assert something on any platform and don't have some demonstrable evidence to support it then you are open to a defamation case. This is the issue of 'truth' that was my point. I have read the links to the Scottish Law Commission and Scottish PEN (most of which I agree with) in Andy Wightman's Blog and nowhere do they suggest a freedom to say things which are not true. Freedom of expression is not freedom to say anything.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Not suggesting someone should be able to lie with impunity, but we all know that libel and defamation laws are written in different ways in different jurisdictions.
Posted 6 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
