glen

Just in case the Paisley Express is not available in the newspaper shops of Arbroath.😄

Kibble Education and Care Centre is currently the subject of a near three-year probe by the Scottish charity regulator. by Edel Kenealy Daily Record / PDE 14th Jan. One of Scotland’s biggest charities has been given an undisclosed sum in Scottish Government funding despite being investigated over financial decisions. Kibble Education and Care Centre is currently the subject of a near three-year probe by the Scottish charity regulator. OSCR opened an inquiry into the Paisley-based charity after a previous application for Scottish Government funding was found to contain substantive inaccuracies. It has since been extended to include an examination of financial decision-making after Kibble confirmed it was paying the legal fees of two employees who had launched a private defamation case against former St Mirren FC director Alan Wardrop. The case failed in June last year and the pursuers, Kibble directors Jim Gillespie and Mark MacMillan, were ordered to pay 80 per cent of Mr Wardrop’s legal fees. Kibble, which was never named as a claimant in the court papers, again agreed to pay these costs. It means the charity, which provides residential care for vulnerable children, is liable for an estimated £400,000. The OSCR probe into the charity remains live. A spokesperson told the Express: “We are continuing to make inquiries into Kibble Education and Care Centre. This process remains ongoing, and in line with our standard policies, it would not be appropriate for us to comment further at this time.” It has emerged the Scottish Government has committed to providing funds for the 12-bed expansion at Kibble’s Goudie Street campus before the investigation is concluded. The move has outraged Paisley councillor Kenny MacLaren. The SNP representative for Paisley Northwest said: “The Scottish Government definitely should not be handing any money over, or agreeing to fund anything, until this OSCR investigation has concluded. I have a number of concerns about Kibble, not least the recent decision to use charitable funds to pay for a private defamation case. “I have raised this with the CEO of Renfrewshire Council and my fears that councils are paying for services [for young people] and that money is being used for these legal fees. I am the chair of a charity, Shopmobility Renfrewshire, and there is no way I would sign off on something like that and can’t understand why they would either.” Kibble is currently seeking planning permission to build three connected units within its current campus. Each unit comprises of four secure bedrooms, staff facilities, a living and dining room, a separate secure kitchen, an accessible bathroom, breakout spaces, a visitor room and secure external courtyard. If approved, the development would see the number of children in secure accommodation on the site increase from 18 to 30. The Scottish Government failed to answer any questions about its funding of the project; the previously failed funding application which contained a number of false claims and dubbed “concerning” by Lord Clarke in the defamation case; and the £400,000 of charitable funds Kibble spent on that matter. Failing to explain why Kibble is a suitable candidate for Scottish Government funding, a spokesperson said: “OSCR has confirmed it has an ongoing inquiry into Kibble and therefore it would not be appropriate to comment at this time.” A spokesperson for Kibble said it was “excited” to be expanding its secure estate, and welcomed its “partnership with the Scottish Government and other stakeholders”. Pointing to a recent positive inspection of its Safe Centre, the spokesperson said: “This track record of excellence and specialised, individual care is central to our future plans for provision of much-needed modern facilities for some of the country’s most vulnerable young people. “The court action Cllr MacLaren refers to arose after a series of untrue claims were made against two senior Kibble employees. Action had to be taken to correct the record and bring an end to the damage caused to the organisation as well as its people. The court agreed that the claims were false and defamatory.” Judge Lord Clark, however, dismissed the claim and stated Mr Wardrop’s comments were in the public interest and honestly held based on the evidence he had at the time, and the repeated failure of both men to provide information repeatedly requested by Mr Wardrop and members of the St Mirren FC Charitable Foundation. Mr Gillespie confirmed on Monday he was stepping down as chief executive of Kibble to take on the role of CEO at Rangers Football Club. The departure from Kibble means he also relinquishes his role as vice-chairman at Saints.

There is a fuller and far more sensible and informed debate currently on Stewart's Facebook page. Given all his numerous previous posts I cannot agree with faraway saint - about anything. https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100008414192982

This seems a bit harsh. Are we not supposed to be encouraging supporters to attend games ? Is this what fan owned really means ? I am ashamed to be a part owner of this club.

Seems Animal was spot on about the strips 10 days ago - and many other things. 😄😇.

As it is Sunday Jeremiah 5:21 ‘Hear now this, O foolish people, and without understanding; which have eyes, and see not; which have ears, and hear not’. 👂

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/st-mirren-chief-conspiracy-rangers-29389142

This a letter from the same John Needham who in December 2021 was hit with a £6,000 fine by the Scottish Football Association for making "discriminatory or offensive" comments by the SFA compliance officer. He later apologised after the match Writing on Twitter, he said: "On Friday 22 October a number of Tweets I created in the past referring to Rangers fans were highlighted on Twitter. As a club chairman I have extra responsibility for the conduct and example I show. These posts are completely inappropriate and do not reflect my character or beliefs as a person and I very much regret them. I apologise unreservedly to the directors and fans of Rangers and to everyone at St Mirren. I am acutely aware of my responsibilities. This won't happen again." But on the 6th March 2023 he 'liked' a social media post claiming that Andrew Dallas was operating VAR from an 'Orange Lodge' during our match against Celtic. If anyone should be banned from the stadium it should be him. Regardless of this current PR mess, it is time for this man and his Old Firm supporting Kibble associates to go. They presided over a loss of over £1.5 million on a turnover of £4 million last year. We cannot afford them much longer

From today's (Friday) "rag paper" . PS. The Herald was founded in 1783. It is the longest running national newspaper in the world. https://www.heraldscotland.com/business_hq/23516895.ex-st-mirren-director-gets-stadium-ban-secret-charity-project-row/

I assume it will be OK then if I misrepresent you without your knowledge to your bank, maybe your employer in order to get a on-line loan ? Please give me your full personal details so I can fill in the form. Don't worry it's only at an early speculative stage.😃

Please explain this part of the Glasgow Herald article :- "Applications for public funds to support the project described it as "the St Mirren Masterplan" with an "innovative partnership" with "St Mirren Football Club’s Charitable Foundation cited as one of the three partners with Kibble and the council. But the foundation has sent a letter to Kibble saying that they had no knowledge of the project when the application for funds was sought in June "much less that its name would be associated with any submission for government funding". It said it only found out through a third party in October, after a second stage bid was being made. It decided not to "interject itself" from the process as there was "insufficient time" to make an assessment. It has called for a "full explanation surrounding the application process" and why there were "material misstatements and representations in support of Scottish Government funding". It said: "We are deeply concerned that this unilateral action on the part of Kibble was submitted without our knowledge and associates the Foundation with statements and representations of fact that we do not recognise."