Jump to content

Lord Pityme

Kibble/SMiSA Partnership Proposal (Merged)

Recommended Posts

The fella on the end, when introduced by George Adam, labour got a mention.

 

At 1:07 or thereabouts, he says SMISA will have more say with 51% than they would under the current deal.

 

Not sure how that could be, was he using Diane Abbotts abacus?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2 Kibble guys, Jim Gillespie & Mark McMillan. Is this the same Mark McMillan who works for Kibble mentioned in these 2 articles?

If so, does that make the content of these 2 articles newsworthy given the current climate?

https://paisleyindependent.wordpress.com/2013/06/07/labour-refuse-to-answer-kibble-questions/

Quote

Labour Refuse to Answer Kibble Questions

Posted on June 7, 2013 by KennyMac

“This issue will not go away, no matter how many times Labour try to close down the debate or refuse to answer questions” said Councillor Kenny MacLaren (SNP – Paisley North West).

Renfrewshire SNP Council Group called a Special Council Meeting of Renfrewshire Council to discuss the issue of the funding deal which saw the current Labour leader of Renfrewshire Council actively back the council handing over £25,000 to his employers – the Kibble organisation based in Paisley.  However, the council leader, Councillor Mark McMillan, declared a non-financial interest and moved Labour’s amendment.  Despite being in the best position to answer all the questions, Cllr McMillan refused as did his Labour colleagues.

The Standards Commission is currently investigating Cllr McMillan’s actions in this decision.

The concerns of the SNP – over and above the involvement of the Labour leader, Cllr Mark McMillan – centre on the details of the project where Kibble trainees are meant to be employed to clean up Paisley High Street, despite the Council Director responsible for such work admitting she knew nothing about the project.  Concerns were also raised that the council is breaking its own procurement guidance relating to external suppliers by the trainees only being paid the National Minimum Wage and not the Scottish Living Wage [1] – which the Labour administration has publicly claimed it wants to do.  Kibble, in a reply to Derek Mackay MSP, admitted that they would employ 16-24 year olds on the project, paying the minimum wage.  Yet this could be as low as £3.72 – less than half the Scottish Living Wage!

Councillor Kenny MacLaren added:

“Labour has tried desperately to cover up this decision by refusing debate and failing to answer questions at both the Economy and Jobs policy board and full council and now at a special meeting called by the SNP.  The SNP group will continue to use every method we have to raise this issue until we receive answers to our questions.

“Labour seem to believe that they can hand out funds to their current leader’s employer without apparently going through the normal procurement procedures and without any level of scrutiny.  They are turning Renfrewshire into a dictatorship where even the most simple questions are denied.

 

“There is definitely something suspicious about this, and serious concerns that the council is handing over a contract worth £25,000 without producing the most basic of information.
Notes:

[1]The National Minimum Wage ranges from £2.68 for apprentices, £3.72 for under 18s, £5.03 for 18-20 year olds and the full rage at £6.31.
The Scottish Living Wage is currently £7.45

https://paisleyindependent.wordpress.com/2013/05/08/labour-leader-reported-for-conflict-of-interests/

Quote

Labour leader reported for Conflict of Interests

Posted on May 8, 2013 by KennyMac

Councillor Mark McMillan, the current leader of the Labour administration of Renfrewshire Council, has been reported to the Standards Commission for a clear breach of the councillors code of conduct. 

Councillor McMillan not only failed to declare an interest in a debate on his employer receiving a council contract, but he actually took part in the debate – declaring that, “I am happy to support this project”.

The SNP group in Renfrewshire Council were concerned about a project which came before the Economy and Jobs policy board.  This project involved using the Kibble social enterprise to clean up areas of Paisley High Street.  However there was no information on what they were meant to do, what training was involved for trainees taking part in the project and even how much trainees were to be paid.  This is in contrast to the Labour leader’s oft stated remarks that he would use procurement rules to ensure everyone working for companies employed by the council would receive the living wage.

When questioned about a number of issues relating to this project, the meeting became heated and Cllr Mark McMillan made his comment, “I am happy to support this project”.  At no stage before, during or after the debate did Councillor McMillan declare an interest in the issue despite him being employed as a public policy advisor for the Kibble – the same organisation he was happy to hand over £25,000 to for cleaning up the High Street.  The convener then closed the meeting, ruling out an SNP amendment as incompetent – even though there had been about twenty minutes discussion on the issues it raised.

At the following full council meeting on 25th April the SNP group put forward a motion on the issue, hoping to get some of the answers that the administration refused to give at the policy board.  However, the Labour Provost struck off the motion and hurriedly closed down the meeting.  However, at the beginning of this meeting Cllr McMillan did declare a non-financial interest in the issue.  It seems he realised that he had broken the rules at the last meeting.

Councillor Kenny MacLaren (SNP – Paisley North West) and member of the Economy and Jobs board stated:

 

“What is the role of the Council Leader in awarding this contract to his employer?  At the policy board meeting one council officer stated that it was Kibble who approached the council seeking funding for the project – who advised them to do this, their public policy advisor?”

Red Herrings? I hope so, especially if this gets voted through.
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Stegman said:

I love the smell of humble pie on a Friday night. Dickson delete your account ya roaster you’ve made an arse of yourself.....not for the first time I hear.

No need to single out Dickson, there's been plenty asking questions and concerned about this proposal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found the video highly entertaining.
Apparently we are just like Barcelona and UNICEF... although pretty sure UNICEF didn't take a 27.5% shareholding away from Barcelona fans. Lol
That old chestnut in the shroud waving dept Reg Brearley was resurrected for the umpteenth time.
And here's the bit that surely they get the irony of...
Both Dundee clubs were mentioned, and how their fans must be apprehensive having American owners... eh..?
I wonder how many Utd fans are apprehensive about winning promotion in the next few weeks?
And over the road at the Dee, they are building a new stadium, and they actually opted to ditch fan ownership and flog their shareholding...!
To top that the biggest irony was visited again reminding us that only "Fan Ownership" can stop an outside body coming in and running the show, then they introduced the Kibble team who explained, as a "Outside Body" exactly how they would come in and run the show..!
Comedy f**king gold..
It's like sheep, voting for a wolf as mayor, even though they know he'll eat them... at least he's up front about ripping their entrails oot!
The Kibble guys as mentioned showed up well, but, just like Scott, Smisa etc gave absolutely NO detail of how much would be invested, when and how much new revenue would come to Smfc.
Just how much use their HR team etc will be to the Skelton staff at Smfc remains to be seen.
I'd be nervous as a club employee of the hiring & firing being subbed out to a group who want to get their clients into jobs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The 2 Kibble guys, Jim Gillespie & Mark McMillan. Is this the same Mark McMillan who works for Kibble mentioned in these 2 articles?
If so, does that make the content of these 2 articles newsworthy given the current climate?
https://paisleyindependent.wordpress.com/2013/06/07/labour-refuse-to-answer-kibble-questions/

Labour Refuse to Answer Kibble Questions

Posted on June 7, 2013 by KennyMac “This issue will not go away, no matter how many times Labour try to close down the debate or refuse to answer questions” said Councillor Kenny MacLaren (SNP – Paisley North West).
Renfrewshire SNP Council Group called a Special Council Meeting of Renfrewshire Council to discuss the issue of the funding deal which saw the current Labour leader of Renfrewshire Council actively back the council handing over £25,000 to his employers – the Kibble organisation based in Paisley.  However, the council leader, Councillor Mark McMillan, declared a non-financial interest and moved Labour’s amendment.  Despite being in the best position to answer all the questions, Cllr McMillan refused as did his Labour colleagues.
The Standards Commission is currently investigating Cllr McMillan’s actions in this decision.
The concerns of the SNP – over and above the involvement of the Labour leader, Cllr Mark McMillan – centre on the details of the project where Kibble trainees are meant to be employed to clean up Paisley High Street, despite the Council Director responsible for such work admitting she knew nothing about the project.  Concerns were also raised that the council is breaking its own procurement guidance relating to external suppliers by the trainees only being paid the National Minimum Wage and not the Scottish Living Wage [1] – which the Labour administration has publicly claimed it wants to do.  Kibble, in a reply to Derek Mackay MSP, admitted that they would employ 16-24 year olds on the project, paying the minimum wage.  Yet this could be as low as £3.72 – less than half the Scottish Living Wage!
Councillor Kenny MacLaren added:
“Labour has tried desperately to cover up this decision by refusing debate and failing to answer questions at both the Economy and Jobs policy board and full council and now at a special meeting called by the SNP.  The SNP group will continue to use every method we have to raise this issue until we receive answers to our questions.
“Labour seem to believe that they can hand out funds to their current leader’s employer without apparently going through the normal procurement procedures and without any level of scrutiny.  They are turning Renfrewshire into a dictatorship where even the most simple questions are denied.

 

“There is definitely something suspicious about this, and serious concerns that the council is handing over a contract worth £25,000 without producing the most basic of information.
Notes:
[1]The National Minimum Wage ranges from £2.68 for apprentices, £3.72 for under 18s, £5.03 for 18-20 year olds and the full rage at £6.31.
The Scottish Living Wage is currently £7.45
https://paisleyindependent.wordpress.com/2013/05/08/labour-leader-reported-for-conflict-of-interests/

Labour leader reported for Conflict of Interests

Posted on May 8, 2013 by KennyMac Councillor Mark McMillan, the current leader of the Labour administration of Renfrewshire Council, has been reported to the Standards Commission for a clear breach of the councillors code of conduct. 
Councillor McMillan not only failed to declare an interest in a debate on his employer receiving a council contract, but he actually took part in the debate – declaring that, “I am happy to support this project”.
The SNP group in Renfrewshire Council were concerned about a project which came before the Economy and Jobs policy board.  This project involved using the Kibble social enterprise to clean up areas of Paisley High Street.  However there was no information on what they were meant to do, what training was involved for trainees taking part in the project and even how much trainees were to be paid.  This is in contrast to the Labour leader’s oft stated remarks that he would use procurement rules to ensure everyone working for companies employed by the council would receive the living wage.
When questioned about a number of issues relating to this project, the meeting became heated and Cllr Mark McMillan made his comment, “I am happy to support this project”.  At no stage before, during or after the debate did Councillor McMillan declare an interest in the issue despite him being employed as a public policy advisor for the Kibble – the same organisation he was happy to hand over £25,000 to for cleaning up the High Street.  The convener then closed the meeting, ruling out an SNP amendment as incompetent – even though there had been about twenty minutes discussion on the issues it raised.
At the following full council meeting on 25th April the SNP group put forward a motion on the issue, hoping to get some of the answers that the administration refused to give at the policy board.  However, the Labour Provost struck off the motion and hurriedly closed down the meeting.  However, at the beginning of this meeting Cllr McMillan did declare a non-financial interest in the issue.  It seems he realised that he had broken the rules at the last meeting.
Councillor Kenny MacLaren (SNP – Paisley North West) and member of the Economy and Jobs board stated:

 

“What is the role of the Council Leader in awarding this contract to his employer?  At the policy board meeting one council officer stated that it was Kibble who approached the council seeking funding for the project – who advised them to do this, their public policy advisor?”
Red Herrings? I hope so, especially if this gets voted through.
 
 
What's that Carpenter's song... "we've only just begun"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely the financial benefit is the cash that was going to that contractor now stays in the club. Kibble benefit as they require these contracts to keep their placement opportunities for their young people. It appeared to me to be clearly explained at the meeting.

I also have no issue with a stakeholder taking over a contract. I'm still waiting on some kind of real evidence of the financial benefit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Through choice. I can't grasp that non members are suddenly realising that they will have no say in how smisa plan to take over the majority shareholding. It was always going to be this way.

The vast majority of St. Mirren fans aren't smisa members, never mind who actually vote on these issues.




Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, faraway saint said:

Were you there?

If so, did you ask a question? 

The big money question......................did you have a "semi" being close to your hero? 

I had planned to but something came up and couldn’t make it. 
 

Sorry state when these are the kind of comments just for supporting your football teams chairman eh? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Dickson said:

I'd still be looking for more information Bazil. I don't buy their reason for buying the shares. They could have partnered without the outlay for 27% of the shares. I can understand why Gordon Scott wanted to sell to them though. He goes from being stuck with 8% of the clubs shares - all completely worthless - to now being able to offload all but 0.05% and from what was said it seems that Kibble have left him with that token percentage as a souvenir to stick on his wall. Scott makes more money from being able to sell off more shares at the same price. 

The offering to SMISA members has changed significantly though and I do think this should have been done through an EGM and with a requirement for a 66% majority. 

Seem to again get hung up on GLS, that’s fine I suppose. I would say the money he’s making from the additional share selling would probably be considerably less than what he could have made if he didn’t practically gift the money for BTB in 2016. Personally think it’s very hard to be critical of the man give. What he’s done with his own money for our club. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, cockles1987 said:

Wish I could get my hero to slightly exaggerate the size of my semi in the earshot of a few females. emoji54.png

Better to get someone to exaggerate the size of your tiny brain 😂

have you attempted to arrange fights with anyone in this thread or threatened to put them in hospital yet? 😂
 

you scary hardman 😂😂😂

#thickasfuck

#keyboardgangsta

Edited by Hiram Abiff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If its a good deal, why can smisa not buy the shares, have a vote and sell some to kibble and the money would then go into St mirren. Smisa are seemingly ahead of target with extra money in the bank. Smisa balance would decrease St mirren would increase. Would fit with the aims of smisa IMO. 

 

ETA not even sure if that makes any sense actually 😂

Edited by slapsalmon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest TPAFKATS



Surely the financial benefit is the cash that was going to that contractor now stays in the club. Kibble benefit as they require these contracts to keep their placement opportunities for their young people. It appeared to me to be clearly explained at the meeting.


We've been given 1 example that amounts to 500 quid a week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this deal is the bees knees and all 3 parties involved are hugging and kissing,  why doesn't SMISA sell the 27% to the KIbble from their stake holding they have now ? and carry on as normal,  we would have the cash according to SMISA to buy Gordon's shares in 2023 they said,  3 years earlier than planned,

Come 2023 we would have 300k+ in the piggy bank staying with the club,  That's a nice little wedge that's walking out the door, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If this deal is the bees knees and all 3 parties involved are hugging and kissing,  why doesn't SMISA sell the 27% to the KIbble from their stake holding they have now ? and carry on as normal,  we would have the cash according to SMISA to buy Gordon's shares in 2023 they said,  3 years earlier than planned,
Come 2023 we would have 300k+ in the piggy bank staying with the club,  That's a nice little wedge that's walking out the door, 


So SMISA should reduce their shareholding to 2% or so? How would that work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It would work because SMISA have made a legally binding deal,  We would have our 51% by 2023,  As long as SMISA sticks to the deal and doesn't do any more deals in secret of course  

 

 

They are buying Gordon’s remaining 22% or so. Which in your scenario would only take them to 24%.

 

Edited for maths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, slapsalmon said:

If its a good deal, why can smisa not buy the shares, have a vote and sell some to kibble and the money would then go into St mirren. Smisa are seemingly ahead of target with extra money in the bank. Smisa balance would decrease St mirren would increase. Would fit with the aims of smisa IMO. 

 

ETA not even sure if that makes any sense actually 😂

Were kinda thinking on same lines here roughly 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, lovestlegend said:

 


Ok I see. But SMISA would lose any influence in that time if they only held 2%. No directors on the board. No 3-way sharing of power in the interim phase.

 

Would be all part of the deal buddie,  Trust is the name of the game here,   SMISA influence would stay the same why would it need to change its is our club or at least it will be

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If this deal is the bees knees and all 3 parties involved are hugging and kissing,  why doesn't SMISA sell the 27% to the KIbble from their stake holding they have now ? and carry on as normal,  we would have the cash according to SMISA to buy Gordon's shares in 2023 they said,  3 years earlier than planned,

Come 2023 we would have 300k+ in the piggy bank staying with the club,  That's a nice little wedge that's walking out the door, 

Is it not the case that however you shape the deal, all money paid for GLS shareholding goes to GLS and not the club.

GLS currently selling 42% to SMISA no later than 2026 but could be done  by 2023 but no cash reserve

New deal GLS selling now 50% (keeping 0.05% for old times sake) split between Kibble and SMISA where SMSIA also has money left over in bank (Start of rainy day fund).

 

 

Nothing to stop Kibble buying GLS extra 8% now though with current deal unchanged

Allowing GLS to shed all his shares as now seems to be his desire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...