Thread by @MartinJKeatings

I am fully aware of the article in the times. I have been aware of the leak for a few days having been approached for comment. There are only three things I will say. Firstly, I am utterly disgusted by the actions of whomever disclosed this document. I have been requesting...

..since the beginning to have this public, however, before it calls in court the only way to do that is with the agreement of the other parties. The Advocate General, Lord Advocate and Scottish Minister all declined permission - so you can understand how pissed...

...I was to see it in print.

Yet again political operators act like petulant children. One rule for them, one rule for the rest of us!

Secondly, as the comment “It is not for the pursuer to attempt to stand in the shoes of those parliamentarians.” is in the public domain because of the article, let me comment on that just briefly.

The "pursuers", albeit it is my name on the paperwork, are stipulated in the summons in the first paragraph to be 2000 ordinary members of the electorate (now nearly 8000 people). So what this basically says is that it is not the place of the electorate to hold...

...parliamentarians to account.

So let me convey my sentiments in 3 word - YES IT IS! and if politicians and pundits alike don't like that, Tough!

That one sentence for me was what made my decision about Holyrood 2021. It is as arrogant a statement as can be made and smacks of privilege and automatic self-entitlement.

It is not the place of parliamentarians to stand in the shoes of the ordinary electorate and tell them what they can and cannot hold parliamentarians to account for.

On everything else, that hasn't been said - I will simply say this - The closed record is still being re-written due to the Scottish Ministers withdrawal, any queries on the submissions of the other parties should be directed to them.