Guest Blog by Auldheid
When helping write up the previous blog on the matter of the (mis) commissioning by Harper Macleod, lawyers to the then SPL and current SPFL, of the Lord Nimmo Smith’s investigation into side letters arising from EBTs issued by Rangers FC from July 1999 (https://sfmarchive.privateland.net/an-honest-game-convince-us/ ) .
I had it in mind that only the SFA had something to hide as a result of their President Campbell Ogilvie being fully aware of the history and distinction between the two illegal Rangers Employee Benefit Trust (REBT ) ebts of wee tax case fame not declared to Harper Macleod and the more widely known Murray Group Management Remuneration Trust (MGMRT) Big Tax Case ebts which were declared and on which LNS focussed after (wrongly)treating both types as regular.
The idea that I think most bought into in terms of the registration matters LNS investigated was that no one in football except players with side letters had participated in those schemes and that football authority, both SFA and SPL were unaware of them until their existence became public in Feb 2012. This is when the Sun first published a side letter and the possibility of mis-registration was raised, notably on Celtic Quick News then more widely particularly following an interview between Alex Thomson of Ch4 News and Hugh Adam an ex Rangers Director.
However when you think of the world of Scottish football where players socialise with each other and with journalists, then it does seem stretching it a bit to think that no one in football authority ever heard any gossip or had any enquiry and decided not to investigate the matter before 2012.
Well Rangers Administrators Duff and Phelps thought so and their lawyers Biggart Bailie asked Harper Mcleod in March 2012 why the SPL had not investigated a lot earlier on the basis that
- There had been entries every year since 2000 in Rangers Annual Accounts of sums of money being placed in employee benefit trusts
- HMRC had written to the SPL at some unknown point in the past to ask about the existence of side letters in players’ contracts.
The first argument on annual accounts was one made once public awareness of ebts widened but it was dismissed on the grounds that no one knew much about ebts in those early years and in any case properly administered ones, which they would have been presumed to have been, did not have side letters.
However it does seem likely that having written to MIH/Rangers in 2005 to enquire about the existence of side letters to De Boer and Flo (which MIH/Rangers denied holding even though they did) HMRC would have written to the SFA or SPL sometime after 2005 whenever they first became aware of side letters in players contracts with regards to the MGRT ebts of Big Tax Case fame..
That the SPL had been contacted two or three years previous to 2012 by HMRC was confirmed at a SPL Board meeting in March 2012 as a result of a question being asked by Celtic, who were unaware in 2012 that such an HMRC enquiry had been made in 2009 or 2010. It is possible of course that the connection to misregistration was not made then by the SPL executive asked, but had it been history could have been so different.
How that HMRC enquiry and what it contained was handled by the SPL executive perhaps explains not only why the SPL were so keen to take the lead on the investigation but why they were unaware of the different types of ebts at play, the enquiry in 2009/2010 presumably relating only to the MGMRT type.
The motivation of the SPL executive can be read into their advice to the SPL Board on 23rd February 2012 to instruct an immediate inspection and investigation of the financial records of Rangers with respect to the ebt payments under SPL Rule F1 and under Section G of the Rules on the basis that such an inspection and investigation might reveal prima facie evidence of a breach of SPL Rules independently of any Administrator decision or the outcome of the FTT.
The SPL Board were further advised that taking the lead on such grounds would also go some way to forestalling any attempt by the SFA to include any dependency on the outcome of either Rangers Administration (which they entered on 14th February) or the result of the FTT, (which came in November 2012.)
The desire and benefits of delinking what was at heart a registration enquiry from the much more serious use of tax evasion methods to pay players was obviously not lost on those giving the advice.
In fact in directing LNS in the way the SPL did (possibly unaware that tax evasion had already occurred with Flo and De Boer) it avoided focus on the real and still unresolved issue, were players paid by unfair means from 1999 from which sporting advantage would naturally accrue with no need for proof that it had. You cannot say this had not been thought through in the advice given.
It was also the SPL’ stance that matters concerning player payments had traditionally been considered to be for leagues.
The narrative emerging here is one of the two football authorities keeping from public gaze what individuals in both, if not the whole organisations corporately, knew about the history of ebts; the SFA knowing the history of both types from 1999/2000 onwards and the SPL possibly only knowing something of the MGMRT ebts and side letters from 2009/10 as a result of HMRC asking them questions.
Thus it suited the SFA that the SPL take the lead as much as it suited the SPL to do so but for different reasons. The SFA to keep the existence of the wee tax case ebts hidden from public view and LNS scrutiny and the SPL to avoid answering any “when did they know and why did they not act” questions.
Also if the SPL were indeed unaware of the two distinct types of ebts at play (and they may indeed have been), it explains why they never picked up that the earlier illegal ebts were missed/concealed from them by Rangers Administrators.
Perhaps the SPL and SFA were aware of the benefits to them of focusing only on the registration aspect. This could be presented as an administrative error (which LNS basically decided) rather than the possible illegal nature of the big tax case ebts after the FTT (and which might still arise from the UTT) which would present both with much more difficult and unwelcome consequences to manage and certainly would have changed the nature of the investigation from the outset had the full evidence been provided.
However unless the questions put to the SPFL in the previous blog are answered, we will never know who did what and why, but we at least will know that the LNS Investigation and its findings were a sham from the outset and should be set aside.
Perhaps BDO who are investigating the role and behaviour of Duff and Phelps according to the latest report on their work should be asking Duff and Phelps about the circumstances surrounding the concealment of vital evidence from the LNS Commission?
Och why not?
To the BDO partner investigating. Dated 9th June by web site e mail
“ I see that BDO are carrying out a probe into the conduct of administrators Duff & Phelps. Does that cover the failure to supply SPL with full documentation requested to investigate side letters in 2012?
See http://www.tsfm.net/an-honest-game-convince-us/ for background. Missing evidence is available. ”
PS: I did try to ascertain if HMRC did indeed write to the SPL and when, but they were unable to confirm or deny that they had. The enquiry and response follow. The question on who is responsible for HMRC policy in respect of collection of tax from football clubs was not given but probably due more to an oversight than any attempt to stop the question being answered.
Apologies to Big Pink, who has a very interesting, informative and entertaining Podcast in the spout featuring Christopher Brookmyre.
However, we thought this stuff was more pressing in the grand scheme of things. The new podcast will be published shortly.
You do some fine work on our behalf my friend which I really appreciate, I wish only grist to your mill.
Me?
I’d waterboard Campbell Ogilvie to get the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Thanks, Auldheid, for all the effort you continue to put in and the quality and integrity of this input.
Great stuff.
Bawsman. Waterboard Ogilvie? I’d rip his arm off and hit him about the head with the soggy end to make him tell the truth!!!
Bawsman, I’ll bring the towels:-)
Another good one, Auldheid.
And quite right to make a direct enquiry of BDO. Every action that D&P took, and actions that they should have taken but did not, as Court -appointed Administrators of RFC(IA), must be diligently examined by BDO, whether these relate to the ‘football cheating ‘ ( concealment of side-letters from the Football authorities) or to the concealment of the side-letters from HMRC (for tax evasion purposes).
The truth is in there somewhere, and it will emerge.
Great work Auldheid. The truth will out someday.
Great Blog by Auldheid……keep up the good work 🙂
Re.. the Charles Green return,return.
Did he ever pay the fine the SFA gave him?
Thanks Auldheid. Thanks for making this very complicated debacle a lot more understandable over the last 2 years. It is people like yourself who will eventually bring this corrupt cabal to its knees. We must never ever forget the depth of depravity the governing bodies in Scottish Football sank to, and continue to wallow in. Thanks again.
Another reminder to us all from Auldheid of what started all this – tax evasion and the deliberate mis-registration of players to facilitate/cover up that tax evasion. Then compounded by the SFA and SPL while those entrusted by the courts (D&P) to carry out an honest and just administration of the club that carried out the tax evasion, conspired to continue the cover up. Regardless of football rivalries (hatred even), this is the saddest part of the whole Rangers Saga. That people entrusted to carry out proper football governance, and also the functions of our legal system, can ride roughshod over their responsibilities merely to meet their own ends. Society, not just football, has been dishonoured by these people, and we must never forget this, nor let those who would entreat us to ‘move on’ like some fawning lackey ever feel secure in their positions of power over our game, and it would be nice if those who would flaunt the law were made to feel uneasy too.
Thanks again to Auldheid for keeping this most important task we have to the forefront of our blog. It does, at times, seem to have been consigned to the annals of history which I hope, barring a true and honest outcome, will never be allowed to happen.
The parameters for LNS enquiry were set by Stewart Regan. He met with LNS to instruct him what he could , and by definition could not, investigate. That seems to me to be crucial . The dateline for the key events as I seem them are as follows
1 The wee tax case , involving the concealment of contracts for Flo and De Boer, is reported by the Daily Record on 10th August 2011. This puts the matter firmly in the mainstream on that date .It is inconceivable that the SFA and SPL were unaware of this and also inconcievable that they were not aware that it related to a PAYE bill , which should have put them on red alert
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/sheriff-officers-visit-ibrox-stadium-1080375
2 Nimmo Smith is appointed by the SFA and instructed personally by Regan on 21st February 2012. Six months after HMRC froze Rangers account for not paying a tax bill that was due and uncontested by Rangers
http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/17110781
3 STV report on the 7th June 2012 that the wee tax case relates to payments made to Flo and De Boer.
http://news.stv.tv/west-central/105233-rangers-administrators-claim-4m-tax-bill-increase-due-to-hmrc-penalties/
4 The LNS enquiry into Rangers commences on January 29th 2013.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/the-independent-investigation-chaired-by-lord-nimmo-1561527
Summary
By the time LNS sat it was widely known and widely reported by the BBC by STV and by the written media that Rangers had been paying £Millions to Flo & De Boer by way of an illegal tax evasion scheme.
Regan , based on the information available, decided to ignore this . He cannot claim he did not know about it. He decided to presumably continue with the parameters of the enquiry that he set out in his instruction to LNS.
So here we have the CEO of the SFA presented with uncontested evidence that Rangers not only had admitted using an illegal tax evasion scheme, he must also have been fully aware that no details of these illegal payments were presented to the authorities as part of Rangers obligations to the SFA and the SPL.
What does he do with this proof ? The answer seems that he did nothing. He did not instruct LNS to include this proof and admission of guilt by Rangers.He did not widen the enquiry to include this public and uncontested information. He therefore ,it seems ,made an arbitrary decision to allow Rangers not to be punished or even investigated for cheating.
He maintained the original brief to LNS at which point another SFA employee in the form of Sandy Bryson came riding to the rescue with his utterly bizarre and never before heard of interpretation of the rules.
It wasn’t just Celtic who were cheated by Rangers . All clubs were cheated by the deliberate deception and rule breaking. However it seems to me, and i would love to hear an explanation from the SFA that refutes this, that Regan and the SFA failed all clubs by ensuring Rangers admission of guilt and deception was outside LNS remit.
The scale of how much other clubs lost was a minimum of £40 million with the majority of that being lost by Clubs other than Celtic. The matters covered in the article and outlined in my post here are so significant that Regan could not possibly retain his position if our analysis is correct. He needs to fully explain and answer the allegations , not least to the SFA member clubs who were deprived of huge amounts .
The specifics of how much each club was deprived is contained in the link below
http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/?p=11742
Barcabhoy says:
June 16, 2014 at 10:33 pm
Really long post based on a false premise…the LNS commission was set up by SPL not SFA wasn’t it?
Remember folks, this is way above a Rangers issue.
Rangers have died (and will probably die again), that was – amazingly – simply a side issue into THE biggest scandal never told.
One day there will, I hope, be a public inquiry into this whole charade, starting with Masterton and Murray then take it from there.
What amazes me is the copious amounts of evidence, freely available, yet no journalist will step up to the plate and join the dots.
I fear for Independence if this is our media, justice, government and the ‘establishments’ instinctive basic grasp of integrity.
NO…………thanks.
Jarmo says:
June 16, 2014 at 11:16 pm
0 0 Rate This
Barcabhoy says:
June 16, 2014 at 10:33 pm
Really long post based on a false premise…the LNS commission was set up by SPL not SFA wasn’t it?
—————–
Had you bothered to read the link to the BBC story you would have seen that LNS was instructed on the Parameters of the enquiry by Regan.
While the misdemeanours of RFC/TRFC leave an extremely sour taste in the mouths of most Scottish Football Supporters, it is the totally inept/corrupt Scottish Football Authorities that should hang their heads in shame at their complete failure to carry out the governance of football in Scotland.
While the US President and his cohorts were eventually brought to justice for the “Watergate Scandal”, our Scottish Football Authority administrators are still employed and walk the streets as free men, for their part in the biggest Sporting Scandal and cover up that has ever occurred within Scotland.
Every Scottish Football Supporter must continue to ensure that this fiasco is never forgotten, until all the perpetrators of this miscarriage of justice have been dealt with appropriately.
This may take months/ years, but until this has been achieved the future of Scottish Football and the game we all love, will never progress as we deserve.
Barcabhoy says:
June 16, 2014 at 11:22 pm
I was pretty bored of the paranoia right enough, but I’ll let you into a secret…the LNS SFA enquiry you reference was a different enquiry from the LNS SPL side letters one.
I see our pet squirrel has reappeared with yet another new name
Barcabhoy says:
June 16, 2014 at 11:39 pm
I’m guessing you’re referring to me as a pet squirrel? No clue what you’re on about, but you really should review and retract you’re ridiculously paranoid post based on a foundation of incorrect information.
You have collated two different investigations into one and made assumptions on that basis.
Review your own post based on the clue I gave you…the LNS SFA enquiry you reference was a different enquiry from the LNS SPL side letters one.
p.s. no need to call people names just because they have pointed out a serious flaw in your argument.
Well done Auldheid great blog..
The TSFM and other social media sites (RTC at the forefront) always give me hope that the truth will prevail. I say hope as IMO the level of cheating and the level of trying to conceal it is off the radar. We are not a one team country, are we? because that seems to be the train of thought from our SFA, safe the Govan club at all costs. Barcabhoy has provided a link of the losses to all clubs as a result of this Ibrox club. I am a supporter of my team and from 1999 to 2012 I have been at 95% of all league/cup games concerning my club, so financially I and my sons have suffered to watch a unfair/corrupt sport. The money loss I can handle but knowing that I may have been deprived of celebrating games,trophies with my sons and as a result of one club gaining an unfair financial advantage is sickening. Memories are part of our football history and we talk about victories as if they were yesterday. History is everything to all fans, and to think all fans of all other clubs outwith Ibrox may have deprived of some celebrations due to one club again is stomach turning. Our clubs lost money we lost the joy of maybe winning more games and possibly trophies. This is bad enough but to know that the football authorities may have known of such underhand goings on, or to remember the fans of the Ibrox club celebrating over these years, to know the same fans and the same authorities have no remorse and to this day are trying to claim it is the same team/club with the same (tainted ) history is beyond words.
If the truth does prevail concerning this club and it comes to be that they did have an illegal financial advantage then this will give me some conciliation, but I will still have a bitter taste in my mouth concerning the approach to a club that is held up as the fabric of our society by certain people and authorities.
Jarmo
You are completely missing the point .which is what squirrels do.
The fact that Rangers had admitted to tax evasion was known before LNS convened. The fact that they hid side letters from the SFA and SPL was known before LNS convened.
These matters relate to the wee tax case and were widely reported before LNS convened. The parameters of the report were set out in such a way that admitted guilt and deception was not allowed to be judged.
Rangers admitted they were guilty and the Scottish Football authorities decided not to investigate even though other Scottish clubs were cheated out of significant amounts of European and SPL prize money
Auldheid
On this, The `SFA` as we currently know it – lost moral oversight, lost etiquette, lost guidance, – lost principles of fair play, and thus lost the right or authority to impartially govern the game in Scotland as guardians.
The SPL – a commercial organisation – elected to prioritise their view of commercial interest – dressed it up under a judicial review – but crafted ToRs to get the result they wanted. They`re now exposed as putting financial interest above all else – hardly sporting and pretty clear this is not lost on sponsors brand association. They`ve tried re-branding from SPL to SPFL to bury this mess – but at first test they can`t find a sponsor for the Challenge Cup.
And it doesn’t stop there
It moves on to FFP and FPPs – Collectively, they don’t even know who mystery investors are
Or even care
Great stuff Auldheid.
We can only hope that eventually the dam will crack and Regan,etc will be held answerable for their actions.
Thanks also to Barcabhoy for his swift follow up,listing facts,links etc.Eventually the dam will burst.
What gets me is that,in these times when almost everyone has a knowledge of social media and the resources available to anyone,not to mention the viral effect allowing potentially thousands of people to know,within minutes,what’s happening.
LNS,Pinsent Masons,Hodges enquiry into D&P(whatever happened to that)?.
5 way agreements,police investigations etc.
20 years ago a wee bit would have appeared in a paper then vanished,never to be talked about again.No longer.Thanks to the bampots(Thanks to Hugh Keevins.Naming us this is probably your only major contribution to the current debate!).
The contribution of guys like Auldheid should not be underestimated.
What’s sad though,is that we’re all doing this just to ensure that when we go to a game,everything is above board,the game is played under the rules and win or lose,at least everything was adhered to under the rules and every team is treated fairly.
Unfortunately,in Scotland,the body charged with administering these rules have been shown by Auldheid and others,to be unfit for purpose.
From RM … edited for language …
Daily rhebel reporting fat boy Dingwall has reported Easdale to police and stock exchange on grounds of insider trading, what the fecks next? When will this sh*te ever stop sick n tired a ar*eholes like him dragging our club through gutter along way the board wish they’d all flip off!!
Please be true
Barcabhoy says:
June 16, 2014 at 11:51 pm
Still no idea what you’re on about with you’re squirrel nonsense, the point I’m not missing is that a debate cannot be had if posters do not address their own misconceptions when they are pointed out. It is not possible to form a logical argument when the entire thesis is based on a false premise.
To what you have just posted, my answer is: so what? – as you can not review and reconsider your own earlier incorrect post then why should anyone bother with any post you make which is stating opinion as fact?
For example Ecoboy’s posts deals in researched fact and more power to his elbow. So perhaps before posting an opinion, one should actually check the facts that form that opinion aren’t just faulty memory.
Anyway, good night sleep tight, wake up in a better mood tomorrow.
Barcabhoy
Jarmo
It is not possible using what is available in the public sphere to be able to link Regan directly with knowledge of the true nature of the ebts used for Flo and De Boer.
Any link has to be through Campbell Ogilvie who instigated the scheme that was later adjudged as illegal that paid Flo and De Boer and who performed a number of roles at Rangers during the period when they switched from the illegal DOS ebts to the ones currently being contested by HMRC at the UTT.
Regan did state somewhere (and I’ll find it later) that the LNS Commission was not investigating irregular payments because if it had been then that was a breach of a more serious nature than not revealing side letters.
This suggests that Regan was not informed on the ebts of the wee tax case although the President of the SFA knew the full history of ebt usage at Rangers from 1999.
It would seem that in the corridors of Hampden there is a form of Omerta, either that or they are staffed by the three monkeys that see, speak nor hear no evil.
Then there is Andrew Dickson on the SFA Licensing Committee, an administrator at Rangers for longer than Ogilvie and the guy who nearly swallowed the draft e mail Regan sent him to explain how the SFA granted (but no mention of monitoring responsibilities) the UEFA licence in March 2011.
This does not mean Regan knew the true nature of the two types of ebts but he would be acting on how he was advised.
The question is who advised Regan, what advice was he given when he said LNS was not looking at irregular ebts and who gave it to him?
That the SFA had questions to answer was always the case. The second blog suggests that for different reasons the SPL had their own reasons to steer LNS away from irregular payments.
I think one reason why the did so is as stated: to prevent the investigation being dependent on the FTT, which would have meant treating the issue potentially as a matter more serious than miss – registration.
I also have the suspicion that if the FTT had found for HMRC or indeed the UTT does, that the LNS Investigation as it was commissioned, would not be revisited on a sort of double jeopardy basis.
Given that all the evidence points to the LNS Commission being “got at”, if nothing else it will have been so undermined by now that if HMRC win their appeal to the UTT, it will be impossible to justify not reopening the case and setting LNS aside.
That should be the situation anyway, but a UTT victory for HMRC will make the scale of tax evasion so large and the failure of SFA/SPL process to stop it so glaring, that taxpayers never mind football fans will demand corrective action.
AllyJambo 9.56
A splendid summary of what this is all about. Thank you.
The key failure of LNS commission which has never been adequately explained is the change to the starting date that was to be used in the investigations.
The originally established start date was 1st July 1998 (the start of the SPL)
http://spfl.co.uk/news/article/spl-statement-2012-03-05/
What Regan had to say on ebts and illegality.
Stewart Regan, the Scottish Football Association chief executive, said he had no reason to believe that the governing body’s president, Campbell Ogilvie, had anything to hide over Rangers’ use of Employee Benefit Trusts (EBTs).
The SFA has faced calls to suspend or even dismiss Ogilvie because he was general secretary of Rangers for part of the period in which the club paid players via EBTs. An investigation is being carried out by the SPL into allegations that those payments were not disclosed to either the SFA or SPL, contrary to football rules. Rangers could be stripped of titles if widespread wrongdoing is found. A long-running dispute over tax underpayments via EBTs is also at the heart of “the big tax case” which could yet land Rangers with up to £75m in further liabilities.
Ogilvie has admitted receiving £95,000 via his own Rangers EBT, a tax avoidance vehicle which is not illegal, but he denied being involved in drafting or administering the players’ contracts or alleged “side letters” recording that players would be paid by them.
Regan publicly backed his president yesterday and insisted that Ogilvie had been open and transparent about EBTs throughout.
“The president has actually declared what his involvement was so far as player contracts was concerned, as far as player administration was concerned,” said Regan. “And we have got very clear feedback that the president was not involved in any letter or correspondence with regards to player EBTs.
“We are all aware of businesses being run where you have one owner and operator running the club and a number of directors sitting below. The way this process has been managed, a lot of this correspondence was done much higher up the chain [at Rangers] than Campbell Ogilvie.
“He has been fully up front with the SFA board in terms of his involvement. We are satisfied at the moment that this is not an issue for the board to act on.”
Regan, aware of the grave implications if Ogilvie was found to be more deeply involved in EBTs than he had publicly admitted, said the SFA asked him to disclose everything about his role at Rangers.
“That is why we have asked Campbell, at the outset, to disclose the facts. That is why Campbell himself asked to be removed from any decision making and any meeting involving Rangers FC. Since February 14 [the day Rangers went into administration] he has had no involvement at all in any board meetings, any decisions or any meetings with the club.
“Let’s not forget that EBTs are not illegal. They are illegal if they are used knowingly in an incorrect manner. I am satisfied that Campbell has discharged his duty of care. He has done everything we could have asked of him and, so far as his integrity is concerned, he is a man with many years as a highly respected administrator across the game of football in Scotland.”
Meanwhile the chief executive, speaking after yesterday’s SFA annual meeting, stressed there would be “no deal” done with Rangers’ prospective new owner Charles Green about the scale of the club’s punishment for bringing the game into disrepute.
“As I said, there will be ‘no deal’. This is an independent process and as far as the SFA are concerned, the independent process has to continue.”
http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/sport/football/sfa-chief-executive-backs-ogilvie-over-use-of-ebts.17808277
Easy Jambo
The governing factor was the date of the first side letter that D&P did supply which was 23 November 2000
What was not supplied was the side letter to De Boer dated 30th Aug 2000 and the HMRC correspondence of 23 Feb 2011 that would have told Harper MacLeod that the ebts of 30 August and 23 Nov 2000 were considered by HMRC to either be deliberate or fraudulent tax evasion.
When Harper MacLeod specified what they wanted delivered to them ALL correspondence held relating to ebts was asked for in March 2012.
BB – that `Jamro` stuff is PR mince – but you knew that already 😉
Who was it who first mentioned Armageddon…..Regan
Who was it who mentioned a fear of civil disorder if Rangers weren’t saved ………Regan
My information is that Regan was the driving force behind minimising punishments for Rangers. I spoke to a very senior figure in Scottish football before I posted my piece earlier yesterday. He said to me , i can’t guarantee you that Regan set the parameters directly, but he was very insistent that title stripping would cause a rift that would never be healed.That wasn’t his job to influence the investigation. There was clear unequivocal evidence that Rangers cheated the tax authorities and the football environment in Scotland because of their actions in the wee tax case, admitted and uncontested. Then the dates were changed so that this period was dropped from the investigation. That is a scandal. What happened at LNS enquiry in my view is also a scandal.
The motivation was to avoid serious punishment for Rangers and the inevitable forced resignation of Ogilvie and the public exposure of Murray as a cheat. LNS didn’t come up with this out of thin air. His hands were tied because of the parameters of the enquiry. Who was in a position to influence those parameters, and who wanted to avoid Armageddon and Civil Disorder ?
The SFA promised us a new era when Regan was appointed.
His predecessor as CEO of the SFA was totally unfit to hold that position. He wasn’t qualified from a business perspective, he was a serial go buster. He wasn’t qualified as a unifying figure either. Gordon Smith was an individual who made a number of injudicious comments and was merely the latest in a long line of senior figures who were more than happy to do Rangers bidding.
The fact we had George Peat, Campbell Ogilvie, Lex Gold, Gordon Smith , Hugh Dallas , David Longmuir and Jim Ballantyne all hold the most senior positions in Scottish Football , all at the same time , is one reason why Murray was never called to account. These were all guys who were either dyed in the wool Rangers men or had a very soft spot for them.
Scottish football can’t have its decision makers dominated by one club……any club. Which is why Regan needed to prove he would first and foremost do what was right, what was totally neutral without fear or favour.
He had a huge chance to prove the days of the SFA dancing to Rangers tune were a thing of the past. He has failed. He pushed for Rangers to remain in the SPL even after the CVA refusal resulted in liquidation. He then pushed for at worst Division 1. He tried to intimidate using highly inflammatory language like Armageddon and Civil unrest. He set the worst possible example. He effectively claimed Scottish Football coukd not prosper unless it put one club on a pedestal and said , cheating’s ok for them, the rest of you just have to suck it up.
He needs to go. Ogilvie needs to go. We need an untainted, unbiased leadership at the SFA. We also need someone who will stand up to wrongdoing no matter who the miscreant is. We need someone who will communicate regularly with the Scottish Football public, who won’t scaremonger or try to distract away from the issues.
In short Mr Regan , Mr Ogilvie and Mr Broadfoot , we don’t need any of you.
Barcabhoy says:
June 17, 2014 at 7:07 am
==============================
Just how clean a game could we have were the media genuinely prepared to challenge what has happened before their very eyes? We can’t blame them for what has actually happened but they could have made sure those responsible were held to account. I always imagine what if you swapped England for Scotland and Rangers for Man Utd. How would the English media have dealt with such a scandal compared to the media in Scotland? My personal view is the English equivalents of Regan, Doncaster and Ogilvie would have walked two years ago, and the media would have kept up the pressure until they did. What does the silence of our media tell you, and worse still their actual sound endorsement of Ogilvie?
Barcabhoy at 7:07am.
Spot on.
Barcabhoy says:
June 17, 2014 at 7:07 am
In short Mr Regan , Mr Ogilvie and Mr Broadfoot , we don’t need any of you.
————————————————————————————————————————-
It looks like Vincent Lunny may not be needed Either if Paul Larkin’s tweet to SFA this morning is accurate ?
First time post but long time lurker from RTC days. Ive never commented before as the quality of posts on here is so good that I feel I cant add much to the debate but guys like Auldheid , Ally Jambo ,John Clark, barca bhoy etc etc keep a lot of us on the ball by simplifying things for us not so smart guys !! Thank You. After reading Auldheids latest it really makes my blood boil that the guilty culprits are still all in place , Its obvious that they are hoping that eventually it will all be swept under the carpet and we will move on . I personally cant move on, I nearly bought a Celtic season ticket but cant bring myself to do it as I feel genuinely cheated for all those years I have paid into football matches. This isnt about Rangers anymore , unfortunately for them their refusal to move into the 21st century has, killed/ is killing them. This is about the removal of the cabal at the SFA. Until this is achieved I and I suspect a lot of others will continue to watch the game we love on the box or just give up all together. I fear my club Celtic would be happy for it to be forgotten about , could be wrong in this but with the resources Celtic have at their disposal I feel if they had the stomach for it , they could have challenged the SFA far more forcibly than they have to date ……..Im not convinced they are playing a long game here . If it is going to happen I fear it will once again be the smaller clubs who initiate it . I cant quite get my head round why when the club chairman have the power to bring Regan , Ogilvie etc to account there is silence , surely for the better of the game as a whole we need new people in with cast iron rules and regulations that must be followed rather than wishy washy “rules” that can be interpreted to suit the agenda of the day. Please Please with all you clever guys on this blog and Club chairmen with b@@@s get us out of this position and just give us our game back
barca
the culpability of Messers Regan, Doncaster and Ogilvy is not in doubt. However, without the active complicity of their respective boards, they would have been whistling in the wind. That complicity is no longer in doubt, given that the three Aunt Sallys were well rewarded for their performance.
Scottish Football needs a complete clear out at the top, only then will we have a chance at a clean game.
It is all very well pinning the blame on various individuals, but where do the clubs stand in this? These individuals are employees, appointed by the clubs and kept there by the clubs. The pay rises, bonuses, and in Ogilvie’s case the extension of his term in office, would all seem to indicate that the clubs are more than satisfied with the work that has been done.
It is for the clubs to sort out the SFA. They have all been fully aware for two years now, at least, of Regan’s strenuous efforts to keep a “Rangers” in the top flight, or as close to it as possible. They have known about Ogilvie’s EBT for longer. And just to be clear, to be in receipt of an uncleared “loan” from a member club makes Ogilvie unfit for office no matter what else can be laid at his door. Yet Regan and Ogilvie are still there, on enhanced terms.
You would think that the clubs would be held responsible for what has been done by their employees, but not a bit of it. The relevant questions simply aren’t asked. I sometimes think that the main function of the likes of Regan and Ogilvie is to act as convenient “Aunt Sallies”, while the clubs hide behind them. Or is that too cynical?
neepheid says:
June 17, 2014 at 9:46 am
Neepheid, not cynical in the least. it is simply an acknowledgement of the ugly truth at the heart of this mess. the SFA and the leagues have been, and are being, run in the fashion they are, because that is the way the top clubs want it.
easyJambo says:
June 17, 2014 at 12:59 am
I think in light of all the allegations made here and elsewhere the change of start date for the investigation is very significant, even more so that no explanation was given for this change. As ever, if there’s nothing to hide why not give full details and justification?
The following extract from your post has given me cause for further thought on what RFC were doing. It may well be that there was more at play than just the mis-registration as the rules seem to impose an on-going requirement, not just at the point of registration:
“SPL rules D9.3 and D1.13 impose a prohibition on players receiving payments for playing football or participating in an activity connected with football except where such payments are made in accordance with a form of contract approved by the SPL and require that all such contracts are submitted to the SPL within 14 days of being entered into.”
It seems to me that rules D9.3 and D1.13 would suggest that each time a player receives an un-registered/contracted payment the rules are being broken. LNS seemed to concentrate on the point of registration, but this would appear to me to be a breach each time a player received payment, which would, in this case, amount to hundreds of breaches of the rules.
I may be throwing up a red herring here, but I think this could rightly be seen as multiple illegal (in football terms if not actually under the law) payments, and probably even more serious than the deliberate mis-registration. The summary of these rules, put forward by the SPL (or SFA?), doesn’t say that it is a breach of the rules at the time of registration of the contract, it says that making payments outside of the registered contract is the breach of the rules or prohibited. So could it be that LNS adjudicated on the wrong breach? Could that present an opportunity/demand for the matter to be re-visited with a totally new charge – of multiple illegal/prohibited payments?
Grant Russell @STVGrant 7m
The Scottish FA’s compliance officer Vincent Lunny is quitting to pursue a career as an advocate. http://bit.ly/UHyM38
Sigh.
Bravo Auldheid. I’ve only been through it once. Sort of thing I need to read a few times. The piece has already provoked some excellent comments.
@Enough is Enough
I’m reading that the DR has pulled the Easdale/Dingwall story, but The Mail has it:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2659450/Rangers-shareholder-makes-complaint-Stock-Exchange-Ibrox-investor-Sandy-Easdale.html
scapaflow says:
June 17, 2014 at 9:55 am
Neepheid, not cynical in the least. it is simply an acknowledgement of the ugly truth at the heart of this mess. the SFA and the leagues have been, and are being, run in the fashion they are, because that is the way the top clubs want it.
————————————–
I would argue that it is not just the top clubs, it is ALL clubs.
Madbhoy24941 says:
June 17, 2014 at 11:24 am
I would argue that it is not just the top clubs, it is ALL clubs.
==================
The unopposed re-election of Ogilvie proves that beyond any doubt. I have not seen or heard a single word of criticism from ANY of our 42 senior clubs regarding that particular piece of jiggery-pokery. I can only conclude, therefore, that they are all totally on board with it.
Neepheid
No one who had four years in an official SFA capacity wanted to stand. Poison chalice.
That’s from Turnbull Hutton, so whilst you might argue the issue should have been forced let’s not forget we ken a lot more about CO’S ebt knowledge now than we did a year ago.
It’s more apathy and lack of leadership than deviousness imo.
Chapeau Auldheid! We have to remember how the facts LNS were asked to investigate are viewed by the supporters of one new club as merely “alleged book-keeping indiscretions” © Bill McMurdo (Merlin) 2012
Scapaflow
Not all top clubs. It is a matter of considerable frustration for one top club at least that when there is a serious issue to be debated at some committee levels the overriding factor is when lunch will be served.
There are 42 clubs. Not all are run in a professional manner in business terms.
The more that are then the more likely a more professional approach will be taken at these meetings.
A culture change is necessary and that might happen by stealth as more and more clubs not only own the idea of running their club on a sustainable professional basis but reject any club who fails to fall in line with that culture.
Where are all the squirrels today ?
No Charles pitching or denying his new consortium – not a word – most uncharacteristic
No Sandy denying shares impropriety or threatening legal action
No signings – just players not joining The Rangers who were never going to join the The Rangers
No share option announcement
No SFA compliance officer – did the re-emergence of Green scare him off.
No PMG tweets of high level meetings
There must be something big going on !
Barca @ 7.07.
Eloquent, precise and effective. This should be pinned to Regans back as he leaves office, just behind the clowns all mentioned above.
Nothing less will suffice. Remove these idiots and never shall we have to put up with their incompetence ever again.
Do you have to be totally useless to secure a job with the SPFA or is it just football in general. EUFA and FIFA also spring to mind. Not only useless but totally corrupt.
R.E – Vincent Lunny
I presume it’s because he’s finally finished that report into TRFC fans behaviour in Berwick? Kudos to him for doing such a thorough job that it’s taken him 18 months to complete…..
Donegaltim says:
June 17, 2014 at 12:15 pm
Do you have to be totally useless to secure a job with the SPFA or is it just football in general. EUFA and FIFA also spring to mind. Not only useless but totally corrupt.
=============================================
You just have to be a good reliable, clubbable; chap who knows how to behave, knows how to play the game, knows his place and knows who to scrape to. None of those vulgar “principled” types who go blabbing and causing all kinds of difficulty, spoiling a good thing for those of us who deserve to lead and govern.
Do you think any of them a brighter, harder working or more diligent than the majority of contributors here ? No, they just believe they are and those they need to believe they are, do believe they are.
All it takes is for those who need to believe, to stop believing and the game is up – but that isn’t going to happen. This is no democracy. The great and the good are generally appointed and sustained by lesser “great and good” who hold them in awe and aspire to replace them one day. It’s a long, long way from here to either democracy or consumer power.
So the leaders of each FA serve the needs of the clubs and vice versa. You get the FA the clubs want and deserve. Likewise the FAs get the UEFA and FIFA they want and deserve.
In Scotland, the downfall of Rangers has disrupted the SFAs equilibrium slightly and exposed the self serving disregard for the hoi polloi’s quaint thoughts of sporting integrity, fairness and sound governance – all most inconvenient.
You won’t shame these guys off the gravy train – you need to dynamite the next bridge to derail the whole train – in the form of powerful outside agencies that will take no sh*t and are not the least bit interested in clubbable – hence my comments yesterday about the EU Trade Commission. Stop writing to the SFA and UEFA, and FIFA – start writing to Karel De Gucht – EU Tarde Commissioner – http://ec.europa.eu/trade/trade-policy-and-you/contacts/
==========================
We may know more now about CO’s knowledge of the EBT scheme and its operation within RFC, but we, and all the clubs, knew all there was to know about CO’s personal EBT at the time of the 2013 AGM. It is my view (apparently not widely shared) that an individual who has an outstanding “loan” of £95k (or any amount, for that matter) provided at the behest of one member of a sporting organisation, should, by that simple fact, be disqualified from holding office within that organisation. Because the member who arranged the loan has that individual “in its pocket”. Fatally and utterly compromised, regardless of how the duties of the office were performed.
Perhaps Turnbull Hutton, and everyone else within Scottish football thinks it’s acceptable. Well, my mind isn’t going to change, because it is for me totally immoral and utterly corrupt, and absolutely unacceptable. And I don’t care if I’m the one and only person in Scotland who thinks so.
forgot to say – Auldheid – chapeau !
I think therein’s the problem though neepheid. The clubs jointly appear to have taken the pragmatic, one might even say realistic view that the ‘loan’ wasn’t a problem in so far as it clearly wasn’t a loan, it was a salary that he’d earned in a previous job which then shouldn’t have affected his ability to do the present job. (respect to Auldheid for again highlighting why the knowledge he’d attained in that previous job could even have been used constructively to mutual effect, but instead was used in a destructive ‘nothing to see here’ manner instead, for reasons as yet unexplained).
Where that plan comes unstuck is simply this. You can’t admit guilt to something as and when it suits for a specific purpose and then virtually in the same breath say they were innocent (LNS), kind of guilty but call the charge something else (eg. book keeping error) or again accept that they were guilty, but because they WERE loans actually they weren’t taxable after all.
You cannot be kind of guilty. Before Jarmo et al wish to pitch in – Yes, that’s right, I’m quite happy to accept there might have been an innocent in all of this. But show me the evidence to confirm it, don’t just keep shouting at me “We’re innocent so we are, cos we are, just cos”
Someone, somewhere needed to publicly fall on a sword for this. It is either a gross perversion of justice (in the case of the authorities) gross guilt (RFC in the wtc – btc pending) or gross negligence. Whichever way you slice it, it was gross! And someone had to fall on one of those swords for it!
Direct quote from LNS below re the enquiry in Rangers EBT and dual contracts. The first line says it all. The parameters of the remit were everything. They pre-determined the outcome.
You could have an investigation into Lance Armstrong, however if the parameters of the remit decided only to look at 1992-96 then you would conclude he gained no sporting advantage and should not lose any titles. Especially if a helpful official came along and said, anyone could have taken performance enhancing drugs so there was no sporting advantage gained, and anyway we didn’t know about it at the time, so nothing we can do now,
LNS statement
““We must of course operate within the terms of our remit, and apply any rules which are applicable, but in reaching our final determination of the Issues, and in making any incidental decisions, we shall exercise our own judgement, on the basis of the evidence which is adduced, in accordance with the principles of natural justice, and unfettered by the influence of the Board or of anyone else.”
When the remit is set by guys who want a specific outcome, and evidence provided by that same body of people, then it’s job done. The LNS enquiry was a sham from the outcome. Given what he and his colleagues had to work with, LNS could come to no other conclusion. Which is exactly what the SFA wanted
Can’t resist pointing out the irony Barca, that the only one who comes out of this with any balls, is Heidi Poon!
Smugas says:
June 17, 2014 at 1:53 pm
——————
Maybe Jarmo is too busy today putting out press releases about Vincent Lunny 🙂
StevieBC says:
June 16, 2014 at 5:53 pm
16 0 i
Rate This
the taxman cometh says:
June 16, 2014 at 5:01 pm
what’s the chances of this leading anywhere
…
A LEADING Rangers fan has reported Ibrox investor Sandy Easdale to the financial authorities over alleged insider dealing…
========================================
It might lead to a drey…for another squirrel ?
Insider dealing is a notoriously difficult and expensive charge to prove.
In the great scheme of things, as we are dealing with a piddling little company, it’s going nowhere.
It’s either a deliberate/agreed squirrel – or Dingwall could be taking a significant, personal risk, IMO.
______________________________________________________________
Phil Mac mentioned this on his site – is there not a supreme irony here, in that the Easdales are the only ones in this whole pantomime (apart from the chap who’s name escapes me) to have put in THEIR OWN MONEY to the club. And this is what they get, while Dodgy Dave in SA makes a vague half-promise that he might help to get investment from somebody else if another somebody else will put some money in first; is lauded as a messiah? No wonder they are in trouble.
If Ogilvie sincerely believes that he isn’t compromised because his loan isn’t a loan at all, but simply salary from a previous job, then I assume that he has sent in a cheque to HMRC for £50k tax plus getting on for 10 years interest? Let’s call it a nice round £95k? I’m guessing not, but I might be wrong.
Barcabhoy says:
June 17, 2014 at 1:54 pm
5 0 i
Rate This
Direct quote from LNS below re the enquiry in Rangers EBT and dual contracts. The first line says it all. The parameters of the remit were everything. They pre-determined the outcome.
You could have an investigation into Lance Armstrong, however if the parameters of the remit decided only to look at 1992-96 then you would conclude he gained no sporting advantage and should not lose any titles. Especially if a helpful official came along and said, anyone could have taken performance enhancing drugs so there was no sporting advantage gained, and anyway we didn’t know about it at the time, so nothing we can do now,
______________________________
The most galling thing is it created the illusion of a fair legal process and therefore you have bears all over the country who believe and/or want to believe this farce, crowing about having been exonarated, and not only exonerated but as a logical consequence they have been unfairly harassed and victimised by the rest of Scottish football – you can imagine Lance Armstrong railing against his unfair victimisation today whilst everyone knows what he was up to post 1996 and how bizarre that would be, well we have it in Scottish football – hence the poisonous atmosphere that permeates much of the game today. A direct result of the SFA’s mismanagement and lack of integrity and basic morality
I can only think of 2 ways this might improve in the forseeable future and it certainly doesn’t seem enough change to have the desired result IMO.
1. The recent move to bring an additional senior club representative onto the Professional Board, along with the move reduce the “time served” requirement that was previously stipulated.
2. The introduction of a Pyramid might over time allow poorly run clubs to drop out of the pyramid and therefore off the relevant committees. This assumes of course that clubs uninterested in proper governance will likely be poorly run themselves. New clubs being promoted might be expected to be well run and take a professional attitude to both their club and governance of the game. eg. Spartans
2. particularly feels like a very long wait!
Matty two points –
1. If Spartans are so professional how did the manage to get kicked out of the Scottish Cup?
Seriously,
Your point 2 assumes that clubs in Tiers 3 and 4 are more likely to be poorly run and governed and that they somehow have responsibility for the mess Scottish football’s administrators have gotten themselves into in recent years. Tell that to fans of Rangers, Dundee, Hearts, Dunfermline and Gretna who were all either top league teams or went bust in their efforts to get there. Lower league teams have little influence and even less power. The SPL Board was desperate to avoid losing one its two big TV draws and did everything it could to keep the club in liquidation in the tent. The SPL Board’s membership in 2012-13 was:
Duncan Fraser (Aberdeen)
Michael Johnston (Kilmarnock).
Eric Riley (Celtic)
Stephen Thompson (Dundee United)
Chief Executive Neil Doncaster
Chairman Ralph Topping
Last time I saw this much woolly thinking I was in an outback shearing shed – http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/opinion/spiers-on-sport-will-rangers-ever-be-released-from-acrimony-and-suspicion.1403014787
mcfc says:
June 17, 2014 at 3:58 pm
MCFC,
As you say, as woolly as a woolly thing. It’s written as though he said to himself, I’m going to write a hard hitting article on The Rangers mess, then forgot that and just did a half-hearted effort, laying no blame at anyone’s door, and for every bit of doubt he cast he followed it up with a counter balance ie King is a tax cheat… but he does have loadsa money! He even hands out morals to some of the bears who now cite Easdale’s tax fraud conviction as a reason for him not to be involved while completely ignoring the fact that they were happy to accept him in the first place when Green was the all singing, all dancing, sugar daddy, only changing their minds once the decline in the new club’s fortunes became ever more evident, even to the bears. Again, a star of the SMSM, fails to lift the standard of Scottish sports journalism.
Could be just a coincidence, but within a 3 weeks time period we have the head of women’s football and the compliance officer choosing to leave the SFA.
And interestingly, both have chosen to walk away from football altogether: to rugby and to the law respectively.
Indeed Blu!
On point 1, I could suggest an “honest mistake”.
On point 2, I heartily agree with you that the top clubs you list must take a great deal of scathing criticism. And my point was aimed more as a suggestion that given time, potentially some clubs might drop out of the system who are not really interested in the governance so much. It wasn’t intended as a bold statement this would be the case! Or in fact any suggestion that small clubs are likely to be worse run than the bigger ones (we know they are not).
So I suppose what I’m hinting at but not saying is, I currently don’t have much hope at all of the situation improving and more professionalism coming to the fore at the SFA. By what mechanism?
Allyjambo says:
June 17, 2014 at 4:22 pm
As you say, as woolly as a woolly thing. It’s written as though he said to himself, I’m going to write a hard hitting article on The Rangers mess . . . .
====================
… then remembered all the nice lunches he’d had with the people he’d offend so decided he’d rather have more nice lunches in future . . . .
mcfc says:
June 17, 2014 at 4:32 pm
Did you realise the connection between woolly things :slamb: and succulent lamb :slamb:
AJ
Is it foreplay?
Sorry.
Auldheid says:
June 17, 2014 at 12:03 pm
I actually believe that to be the case, but….
We are back to the silence = complicity argument. I’m afraid, that if a club has a public silence – private whinging strategy then:
At best you look complicit
and
At worst downright duplicitous
mcfc says:
June 17, 2014 at 3:58 pm
Last time I saw this much woolly thinking I was in an outback shearing shed – http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/opinion/spiers-on-sport-will-rangers-ever-be-released-from-acrimony-and-suspicion.1403014787
====================================
Graham Spiers has said many times he wants ‘Rangers at the very top of Scottish football as soon as possible’. When asked he never explains if that simply means winning everything more often than Celtic and many times more than the rest put together. In other words, the way it was before, using other peoples money. To be fair he certainly doesn’t seem keen on Dave King entering the fray, but how else does he envisage his dreams of Rangers once again dominating for years to become reality?
============================================
Auldheid,
If I may borrow a part of your quote:
“That is why we have asked Campbell, at the outset, to disclose the facts. That is why Campbell himself asked to be removed from any decision making and any meeting involving Rangers FC. Since February 14 [the day Rangers went into administration] he has had no involvement at all in any board meetings, any decisions or any meetings with the club.”
It really ought to be impossible to hold the position as president of the SFA if you find it necessary to absent yourself from meetings and decisions which affect any member club, particularly if there are serious implications for the way in which the game is run.
I get the idea that most football administrators didn’t stumble into their positions without any previous support of or even employment with a particular club.
I even get the idea that on some relatively small scale issues, a dispute between two clubs over a player or a venue or some remark made in the press it might be the right thing to do to simply declare an interest and step aside. Leaving those accepted as being impartial to sort it out.
Given the extraordinary nature of Rangers wholehearted engagement with tax avoidance schemes, the resultant administration and whisper it, liquidation. The current SFA president (a recipient of an EBT himself) is stretching an idea which most would consider laudable to breaking point.
When Armageddon was on the menu the president of the SFA was in the interests of integrity otherwise engaged.
Perhaps in the last couple of years some issues have emerged in Scottish football which fundamentally challenge the way in which the game is governed. Issues which do not relate to events emanating from Ibrox.
If there are I have to hold my hand up and say that I missed them.
Perhaps there is only one issue or one collection of issues, all rooted in a single source, one which for reasons most admirable the current SFA president remains silent and distant.
It’s been said before and I endorse the view that Mr Ogilvie might not be best suited to the position he holds. Actually in absenting himself from the most significant challenge to football governance in Scotland he seems to agree.
What an odd state of affairs.
More from Phil on the subject of “onerous contracts”
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/questions-to-sevco-press-office-about-onerous-contracts/
With respect to Robert Campbell Ogilvie he is described by some as an honourable man. A dignified and honourable man would have resigned at the first hint of impropriety. I couldn’t, and wouldn’t, shake his hand no matter the occasion whether social or business. I’d be hard pressed to haud my tongue.
Interesting snippet on KDS a few minutes ago.
Looks like PZJ the twit who the Rangers fans believe has inside info on the Land Deals has been caught lying about a meeting which he had claimed took place in Glasgow between the club, council and the EU Commissioner for Competition. Few lads are ripping in to him by the looks of it having exposed the lie.
Not sure if it’s newsworthy as the PZJ loon is full of shampoo but there you have it
Giovanni says:
June 17, 2014 at 8:11 pm
An honourable SFA board would have sent the men grey scarves to demand his resignation.
An honourable SFA board would not indulge in pish about lack of eligible alternatives. Instead, they would have said, “look there is a problem with the rulebook, we need to fix that, then select a new president”