Looking from the outside in

[D'Artagnan 173]

Many of us will be familiar with the saying â??you can't see the woods for the treesâ?. The fundamental truth of these few words of wisdom were underlined to me in a recent phone conversation I had with an old friend Rik. Rik is not a Rangers fan, nor a football fan for that matter, he's one of those strange chaps who prefer the game played with an egg shaped ball where the forward pass is not only frowned upon, it is in fact illegal.

 

Rik and I were marines together, we fought, drank, womanised, yomped, billeted together for many years, our shared Ulster Scots heritage solidifying a friendship through common and shared culture, despite our differences of opinion between a round and egg shaped ball. It is a friendship we have maintained throughout the years, which culminates in a New Years Day phone call.

 

As ever during this years phone call he asked me about my beloved Rangers. (Rik's current job in the oil industry sees him spend many months of the year in far flung corners of our planet, which often leaves him less than well informed regarding UK events)

 

As I related the years events to him in the best chronological order I could, I could hear the disbelief in his voice. Substantiated by my constant need for re-assurance â??No honestly this is what happenedâ?. The more the story unfolded however, the more incredible and far fetched it sounded, even to me, who lived through and experienced each heart wrenching moment of it.

 

This topic of conversation finished with a question from Rik.. â??How did they get away with it ?â?

It was not a rhetorical question, just one I was unable to furnish an answer to. But it really set me thinking. Have we been so embroiled with concern over our club that we have allowed those who wilfully and maliciously conspired against us to get away with it ? Are we really missing the obvious, have we failed to see the woods for the trees ?

 

Football governing bodies usurping the fundamental right of innocence until proven guilty. Of blackmailing our club. Of manipulating and intimidating those outside our club to accept a solution which ran contrary to any sense of natural justice ? There is a whole symphony of SFL chairmen singing in harmony from a hymn sheet and the song they are singing is that they were lied to, bullied, threatened and intimidated by those in charge of our game. Where else would such allegations go without investigation or action ? Why are the people accused of such appalling behaviour still in post ? Does this country condone and sanction such conduct ? Those at the centre of such allegations still represent our football governing bodies.

 

And what of HMRC and their tsunami style leaks to the Rangers Tax Case Blog ? Why didn't they report such criminality to the Police who are far better qualified to investigate such matters, after their own internal investigations proved fruitless ? Why did it require Sir David Murray's lawyers to write to Crown Office asking that the leaks were treated as criminal and worthy of investigation. It is public knowledge that HMRC have been subject of scathing criticism for their failure to recuperate monies allegedly due. Did it suit the under pressure HMRC to have an outlet such as RTC, whose sole motivation was to misuse the information they had received by criminal means, to convince everyone of Rangers guilt ? If HMRC have failed to take all reasonable steps to stop the leaks which had such a damaging affect on the saleability of our club, will they be liable to all us shareholders who lost out when liquidation followed as a consequence ?

 

And of course BBC Scotland. Lambasted for their conduct by some of their own most respected journalists and broadcasters. Producers of a documentary which went a long way to cementing public opinion of our apparent â??guiltâ?. A publicly funded broadcasting organisation which spent months on journalistic research rightfully calling into question both the integrity and credibility of Craig Whyte, and yet suddenly they afford him the credibility of an exclusive interview. Co-incidence that the man who has caused so much damage to our club was given such a platform as we embarked on a share issue flotation ? But even then that was not enough for this organisation. Because that exclusive platform they gave him was leaked to an internet blogger in the Republic of Ireland. Did they perhaps think that a man who has been labelled as â??tarred with the sectarian brushâ? ...â?a tactical bigotâ? and various other labels confirming his status as â??Rangers Haterâ? could do more damage with his particular brand of anti-Rangers poison than their documentary could ? HMRC leaks to RTC â?? exact same modus operandi.

 

I now have an answer to Rik's question â??How did they get away with it ?â?

 

The answer is they haven't.

 

Accordingly over the next few days I will be writing to a number of individuals in various government posts demanding answers â?? I will post the e-mails on all Rangers sites. Please feel free to copy verbatim if your time is of the essence, use appropriate phrases from my original, or use your own style and terminology ( I'm not a professional letter writer so there is every chance your own will be better than mine) but I would implore you all to write, To demand answers, explanations.

 

It's time for this support to take the offensive, to be pro-active rather than be reactive, and to let the world know that those Rangers haters who operate in the shadows have had their 5 minutes of fame.

 

It's time my fellow bears to fight back.

[aweebluesoandso 290]

I'm glad i wasn't an Argentinian in the Falklands Dar't, your tenacity and fortitude is a credit to the Royal Marine Commandos.

[D'Artagnan 173]

david@davidgauke.com

 

Dear Mr Gauke,

 

I write to you in your capacity as Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury and thus having a ministerial responsibility for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs. (HMRC)

 

The purpose of this e-mail is to seek clarification. I was formerly a shareholder in the company which controlled the business side of Rangers FC, the aforesaid company falling into liquidation last year to be replaced by a new company under the chairmanship of Mr Charles Green.

 

The original company, as you may be aware, had been offered for sale by the then controlling owner, Sir David Murray. However despite confirmation that there were several parties interested, an ongoing HMRC investigation into Sir David Murray's use of Employee Benefit Trusts (EBT's) had cast something of a shadow over the business. During this time an internet blog known simply as the Rangers Tax Case Blog appeared on the internet. The identity of those responsible for this blog, remains unknown.

 

The aforesaid blog ran for several months, and during this time revealed a number of sensational and exclusive revelations regarding Rangers use of EBT's. So much so, that the few journalists who viewed some of the documents stated categorically that they were sourced from within HMRC themselves. Such was the quality of the information obtained by this blog, it became the recipient of the Orwell Award for 2012. The consequence of these leaks, and the eschewed manner in which they were presented by the bloggers made the sale of the company in which I had a shareholding, impossible. The club was acquired by a Mr Craig Whyte, in a dubious series of events, the circumstances of which are now under investigation by Strathclyde Police, on the instructions of Crown Office.

 

Following the decision of a First Tier Tax tribunal finding in favour of Rangers FC at the end of last year, solicitors acting on behalf of Sir David Murray, wrote to Crown Office. In a statement, Professor Watson of Levy & McRae said:

 

"Sir David regards such information as private and confidential and the publication of such information as unlawful. He has asked that this matter is investigated and that anyone found guilty of breaching the law is the subject of prosecution."

 

I had assumed up to that point that HMRC had taken all reasonable steps to prevent the repetition of leaks and to identify those responsible within the organisation, given the damaging nature and their misuse by the Rangers Tax Case Blog. However this action by Sir David Murray's lawyers suggests otherwise.

 

The actions by an employee (s) of HMRC in leaking the information as aforesaid, constitutes a breach of criminal law. I understand every employee of HMRC is a signatory to The Official Secrets Act, notwithstanding the agency's own code of conduct.

 

The Police, of course, are the primary agency for the investigation of crime in Scotland, I understand they alone have the power to search homes, search telephone records, mount surveillance operations, have the technology, equipment and expertise to forensically examine computer systems and e-mails, as well as the capability for both fingerprint and DNA examination.

 

Can you confirm for me that following such leaks HMRC reported such criminality to the Police for appropriate investigation. ?

 

Yours Sincerely

[craig 5,199]

Only minor edit I would have D'Art is that Charles Green is Chief Executive, not Chairman.

 

Good letter though and one I will plagiarise if you dont mind.

[D'Artagnan 173]

Only minor edit I would have D'Art is that Charles Green is Chief Executive, not Chairman.

 

Good letter though and one I will plagiarise if you dont mind.

 

Feel free.... ."whats shared with a friend is no loss"

[D'Artagnan 173]

LETTER 2

 

maria.miller.mp@parliament.uk

 

 

Dear Ms Miller,

 

I write to you in your capacity as Minister for Media and Culture, having taken particular note of your letter to Lord Patten at the BBC Trust, dated 23.10.2012 in which you commented :-

 

â??In all our conversations we have talked about the paramount importance of full public trust in the BBCâ??s inquiries and agreed that it is essential that licence fee payers can be assured that they are being conducted thoroughly and with the full cooperation of the BBC, in line with the Trustâ??s duty to â??ensure that the BBC observes high standards of openness and transparencyâ?.

 

I wish to bring to your attention a set of circumstances at BBC Scotland which does little to engender public trust in the BBC, nor does it suggest that BBC managers are operating to a high standard of openness and transparency.

 

On the 16th November, 2012 I wrote to the BBC to complain about an apparent Breach Of Trust within BBC Scotland. The subject and nature of my complaint was as follows :-

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

I write to you regarding an apparent Breach of Trust involving an employee (unknown) at BBC Scotland.

On the 17th October 2012, BBC Scotland announced an â??exclusiveâ? interview with the former chairman of Rangers FC, Craig Whyte.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-19975957

 

Refers.

 

However prior to this interviews release details of the interview had already been published on an internet bloggerâ??s website and BBC Scotland had lost â??exclusivityâ? with regard to this interview.

 

http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/hurricane-craigie-set-to-hit-ibrox/#more-3237

 

As you can see Mr Macgiollabhainâ??s blog appeared the day before BBC Scotland published their â??exclusiveâ?.

 

The only possible explanation for this is that someone at BBC Scotland leaked the details of this interview to Mr Macgiollabhain thus gazumping BBC Scotlandâ??s scoop.

 

Please could you investigate this matter and advise me if the person responsible has been identified and what steps BBC Scotland have taken to ensure licence payers money is not used in the future for some internet bloggerâ??s benefit, and the exclusivity of BBC Scotland journalism is protected in the future.

This complaint was allocated a unique reference no. CAS-1795300-0JMSKS and I received an interim notification from the BBC that the matter was under investigation and would take them longer than their normal quality of service commitment for correspondence.

 

On the 27th December, 2012, I received the following communication from the BBC with regard to my complaint :-

 

Thank you for your e-mail addressed to the BBC Trust, who have forwarded it to BBC Scotland for response.

 

Your comments were passed to the Head of Sport, who has asked that I forward his response as follows:

"Thank you for your comments.

 

BBC Scotland takes issues of security and confidentiality in relation to editorial material very seriously and we have spoken to staff to remind them of their responsibilities in this area."

 

Thank you, once again, for taking the time to contact us.

 

Details of the BBC complaints process are available online at http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/handle.shtml

Kind Regards

 

Patrick McManus

 

BBC Complaints

 

It is my opinion that such a serious breach of trust warranted a far more robust response than merely a reminder to staff. The lack of any type of internal investigation or attempt to identify the culprit means the opportunity exists for further breaches of trust. All correspondence from the BBC with regard to this matter was sent from automated accounts and thus I am unable to respond to their communication.

 

It is particularly disappointing that BBC Scotland management display a complete lack of willingness to protect the journalistic integrity of their own staff and a complete lack of accountability to the BBC licence payer who could be forgiven for thinking their licence money is being used to resource and benefit an internet blogger in the Republic of Ireland.

 

I look forward to your comments.

 

Your sincerely

Edited January 4, 2013 by D'Artagnan

[Frankie 8,182]

Great work as always mate!

[Scott7 5,238]

Excellent stuff, Mr. D'. I like your plan of attack.

 

As many of us as possible must have a go at this but copying and pasting will devalue the effort. Nor is it any use to resort to the messageboard nonsense of celtic/lawwell conspiracy.

 

I intend to contact HMRC to express concern that a taxpayer's personal details may not be kept secure having regard to the apparent leak of information in a recent high profile First Tier Tribunal case, to express concern that a citizen's obligation to disclose is not being matched by the Revenue's obligation of confidentiality and to ask what they're going to do about the Feenyunns in HMRC who leaked all the stuff.

 

I'll maybe tone that last part down a bit.

[D'Artagnan 173]

Excellent stuff, Mr. D'. I like your plan of attack.

 

As many of us as possible must have a go at this but copying and pasting will devalue the effort. Nor is it any use to resort to the messageboard nonsense of celtic/lawwell conspiracy.

 

I intend to contact HMRC to express concern that a taxpayer's personal details may not be kept secure having regard to the apparent leak of information in a recent high profile First Tier Tribunal case, to express concern that a citizen's obligation to disclose is not being matched by the Revenue's obligation of confidentiality and to ask what they're going to do about the Feenyunns in HMRC who leaked all the stuff.

 

I'll maybe tone that last part down a bit.

 

I agree Scott - it would be of greater worth if anyone writing used my material (or their own) as a basis rather than a copy & paste

[craig 5,199]

Agreed, copy and paste will dilute the effect