Keith Roberts 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇮🇸🇱🇮🇳🇴🇨🇭

Family, Football #MTLN and the Claim of Right - it's an Indy thing; A book or three, and a tune or two.

[Keith Roberts 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇮🇸🇱🇮🇳🇴🇨🇭 @PeelhillLibrary]

@ScotAirAmb Fishnish, where we were two days ago

[David Jamieson @David_Jamieson7]

To understand how cynical this is, you need to know that thousands of people campaigned for the 'Yes' organisation who were otherwise alienated from politics.

For them, it represented the deepest engagement with democratic politics in their lives.

The SNP preyed on that.

[EuropeanPowell @EuropeanPowell]

Data centres use PFAS, "forever chemicals", in cooling systems and fire suppression. In 2024, the EPA determined there is no safe level of exposure to PFAS. Some are classified as carcinogenic by the WHO. They are linked to kidney and testicular cancers, thyroid disease, immune disruption. They do not break down. There is no specific PFAS standard in UK Water Quality Regulations. Operators are not required to register with a regulator. There is no mandatory water use reporting for data centres

[Craig Murray @CraigMurrayOrg]

Purely in terms of UK domestic law, an Indyref without London permission is of course illegal.

Sturgeon and Bain always knew the UK Supreme Court would rule that way.

They went there to get Independence blocked.

But Statehood is INTERNATIONAL LAW not domestic law.

Scottish Independence will be of course illegal in UK terms when we take it. That is a given.

We will exercise self-determination against London not with London.

[EuropeanPowell @EuropeanPowell]

Andy Burnham’s involvement in the Greater Manchester Investment Zone mirrors the broader pattern of Labour complicity in the duopoly's nationwide rollout of 12 Freeports and 74SEZs immediately after Brexit.
Like Steve Rotheram in Liverpool and Ben Houchen in Teesside, Burnham has embraced the Investment Zone model as a solution to 'economic challenges', partnering with corporations like Fujitsu to attract investment. However, this approach comes with the same risks I have highlighted for some years now: corporate hegemony, deregulation, and the erosion of local governance.
The Fujitsu partnership is particularly telling. Fujitsu’s role in the Post Office scandal, which led to the wrongful prosecution of hundreds of sub-postmasters due to faulty software, has been widely condemned. Burnham himself was vocal about the scandal, presenting evidence in 2016 of a “criminal cover-up on an industrial scale” and threatening to refer the matter to the police if the government failed to act.
The Fujitsu contracts under scrutiny, because between 1999 and 2015, over 900 sub-postmasters were prosecuted in what was subsequently named the biggest miscarriage of justice in British legal history.
Yet, just a few years later, in 2023, he signed a deal with the same company, prioritizing the Investment Zone’s economic goals over ethical concerns. This decision exemplifies the “hotbed of corruption” that I have warned about, where corporate interests are prioritized over public accountability, even by well-intentioned leaders like Burnham.
I have sent an FOI to Greater Manchester Council requesting full transparency and disclosure regarding the Greater Manchester SEZ and the status of the Fujitsu contract.
Date: 03 May 2025
To: Freedom of Information Officer
Greater Manchester Combined Authority
Tootal Buildings, Oxford Street
Manchester, M1 6EU

Dear Sir/Madam,
Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, I am writing to request information regarding the £15m contract awarded to Fujitsu for a digital inclusion pilot within the Greater Manchester Investment Zone, as referenced in public reports from January 2024.
Specifically, I request the following information:

Current Status of the Contract:
Has the £15m contract with Fujitsu for the digital inclusion pilot been fully implemented, paused, amended, or terminated as of the date of this request?
If the contract has been amended or terminated, please provide details of the changes, including reasons for the decision and dates of any actions taken.

Progress of the Digital Inclusion Pilot:
What is the current progress of the digital inclusion pilot, including any milestones achieved (e.g., number of residents trained or businesses supported)?
Are there any reports, evaluations, or performance metrics available regarding the pilot’s outcomes to date?
Decision-Making Process:
Please provide details of the competitive tendering process through which Fujitsu was awarded the contract, including the number of bidders and the criteria used for selection.
Were any concerns regarding Fujitsu’s involvement in the Post Office Horizon scandal considered during the decision-making process? If so, how were these addressed?
Correspondence and Reviews:
Copies of any correspondence (e.g., emails, letters, or meeting minutes) between the Greater Manchester Combined Authority and Fujitsu regarding the contract since January 2024, particularly relating to its status or public backlash.
Has the contract been subject to any formal review or scrutiny (e.g., by the GMCA or external bodies) in light of Fujitsu’s voluntary pause on bidding for new public sector contracts or ongoing developments in the Post Office Horizon scandal inquiry? If so, please provide details or outcomes of such reviews.
Financial Details:
How much of the £15m contract has been paid to Fujitsu to date?
Are there any clauses in the contract allowing for termination or penalties in response to external factors, such as the Horizon scandal inquiry outcomes?
If any of the requested information is exempt under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, please specify the exemption applied and provide an explanation. If certain documents cannot be provided in full, please provide redacted versions where possible.
I would prefer to receive the information in electronic format via email. Please send the response to (email) if clarification is needed.
Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, I expect a response within 20 working days. Thank you for your assistance, and I look forward to your reply.
Yours sincerely,
David Powell

[Keith Roberts 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇮🇸🇱🇮🇳🇴🇨🇭 @PeelhillLibrary]

@meljomur or completely thick

[ScotNews @indyscotnews]

Why were these two people from England fast-tracked into the Scottish Parliament? Were there really no suitable Scottish candidates?

And has anyone from the erstwhile ‘environmental party’ so much as mentioned the 600MW AI data centre planned for Auchtertool? @scottishgreens

[Luke Warm Dave @DaveLukewarm]

Inspired by Nicola Sturgeon's tearful account of a trip to Shetland jeweller as told to Laura Kuenssberg.

Johannes Vermeer's - 'The Girl with the Reset Earrings'

[Keith Roberts 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇮🇸🇱🇮🇳🇴🇨🇭 @PeelhillLibrary]

@aliceoutthere1 You must have been drookit yesterday

[Keith Roberts 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇮🇸🇱🇮🇳🇴🇨🇭 @PeelhillLibrary]

crex-crex; crex-crex - any down your way @CarlBovisNature

[Keith Roberts 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇮🇸🇱🇮🇳🇴🇨🇭 @PeelhillLibrary]

@DaveLukewarm nah

[Wings Over Scotland @WingsScotland]

Clearly out of his depth, Swinney is in serious trouble | https://t.co/ljhRnukD4h https://t.co/NiWBbpYDLo

[Gerry @GerryKeogh_]

Non-SNP members and supporters did not donate to a ring-fenced referendum fund so that their money could quietly slide into the SNP’s general coffers as “part of the resources available” to the party.

They gave it with a clear, explicit understanding: this was ring-fenced for one purpose a future independence referendum campaign.

It was not a general top-up for party running costs, salaries, legal bills, or day-to-day politics.

That distinction was not a vague suggestion; it was the entire basis on which many ordinary people reached into their pockets.

And now that money is gone.
Not “reallocated.” Not “spent in good faith.” Simply gone despite the explicit terms on which it was raised.

That is not creative accounting or a technical breach. It is a fundamental breach of trust with thousands of donors who believed they were funding a democratic campaign, not subsidising a political party’s general operations.

The SNP took money given in good faith under a specific, restricted purpose and treated it as a flexible slush fund. When the referendum never materialised and the money disappeared, the public and donors were left with neither the campaign nor the cash.

That demands answers, not euphemisms.

[Luke Warm Dave @DaveLukewarm]

Now that Nicola Sturgeon has announced she would be fleeing to England once she secures her 'Passport to Pimlico', I was reminded of some of those other classic Ealing Studios comedies from my childhood.

[Keith Roberts 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇮🇸🇱🇮🇳🇴🇨🇭 @PeelhillLibrary]

@scottishbeach Haven't been there since oh... Yesterday!

[Mark Hirst @Documark]

Over the past 10 days Swinney has spun a line that he has been "brought in" to sort out internal SNP governance as if he is some external, independent player.

He has been central to all of the dysfunction and cover-ups over decades, not just the Salmond related saga.

[Wings Over Scotland @WingsScotland]

If you’re in a hurry, this screenshot is Branchform in a nutshell. In 2021 the police already KNEW the fundraisers were fraudulent and the money had been spent. They knew nothing about Murrell. Two separate crimes, but only one has been dealt with. https://t.co/xSi1Dqe2hF

[Keith Roberts 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇮🇸🇱🇮🇳🇴🇨🇭 @PeelhillLibrary]

@shonad7674 Oh, who signed those accounts?

[Keith Roberts 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇮🇸🇱🇮🇳🇴🇨🇭 @PeelhillLibrary]

@CaledoniaLad @WingsScotland @MimiAugello Good plan, I've a few on the top shelf waiting on that special occasion

[Keith Roberts 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇮🇸🇱🇮🇳🇴🇨🇭 @PeelhillLibrary]

@WingsScotland Oh I'm sure half the population has just joined up and donate daily...