SLAP, SIC et all public property musical chairs.

[Ghostrider]

This is worrying, if true. Especially the use of the term 'sale'.....

 

http://www.shetnews.co.uk/news/16798-sic-seeks-to-buy-slap-from-trust

 

The SIC is public property, the SCT and by extension SLAP are public property. The SIC created the SCT - that makes the 'sale' of assets back to the SIC by SCT/SLAP highly distateful.

 

Then there's the lingering talk from a year ago that the SIC are planning 'transferring' the incinerator to SHEAP, who are the SCT by another name.

 

Not to mention the Shi..Whitehoose fiasco.

 

Seems like the SIC are doing all the paying and giving, losing assets and ending up with the turkey.

Edited August 13, 2018 by Ghostrider

[MuckleJoannie]

When the SIC controlled the SCT SLAP put up buildings that the SIC wanted but couldn't finance. I guess this is a means to take back control.

[Davie P]

I came across this list of properties that SLAP owns - https://www.shetlandcharitabletrust.co.uk/assets/files/SLAP%20-%20background.pdf

 

The list is a little out of date, but it's a healthy portfolio

[Guest PJS1979]

I never understood the point of SLAP , it must be a money pit

[Davie P]

I expect the opposite is true. According to the Shetland News article Ghostrider linked to in the original post, SLAP earns £2 to £3 million annually http://www.shetnews.co.uk/news/16798-sic-seeks-to-buy-slap-from-trust
 
 

With a portfolio valued at between £20 and £23 million, SLAP earns between £2 and £3 million annually through leases to commercial companies and the local authority.

There will be many financial and regulatory benefits to a charity (SCT) having a commercial trading arm (SLAP).

Edited August 14, 2018 by Davie P

[George.]

.

Edited August 14, 2018 by George.

[Ghostrider]

Leaving aside the purely financial arguments, the problem with this, if there is one, lies with the principle of a 'sale' of SLAP to the SIC.

 

If that 'sale' price is simply something like paying the necessary legal costs to effect the ownership transfer plus the nomimal £1 'price' of the 'asset', then fine, no real issue. However if the sale involves the SIC paying the SCT more than that, its a whole other ball game, which basically boils down to us paying twice for the same thing.

 

The SIC represents and acts on behalf of the collective that is Shetland and Shetlanders, they also hold in trust assets on behalf of and/or in relation to their work on behalf of that collective.

 

Follow the money. The SIC in their above capacity entered in to an agreement with the oilys that saw money being paid to them on behalf of Shetland and Shetlanders, They decided to set up a dedicated fund to hold and adminster that money, that was the SCT, who in turn created SLAP. Ergo, SLAP and its assets are already ours, and always have been.

 

Had this transfer, if it goes ahead, taken place say 10 or more years ago, any money changing hands would have been relativey unconcerning, as with SIC Councillor domination on the SCT board of trustees, it would effectively been moving a few pound from one pocket of the public purse to another.

 

Things however are very different now since the SIC decided that if they could not control the SCT, that the 'sensible' way forward was to put it in the hands of a self-replicating, un-accountable, un-representative mafia. While SCT, and by extension SLAP assets may still tachnically, on paper at least belong to Shetland and Shetlanders, that's simply an illusion these days, as we have no control over them, nor over the people with control over them. They can do what they like with and to them, and there's zilch we can do to prevent them.

 

Any money that goes out of the SIC pubic purse for SLAP goes straight in to the SCT one, for those people to (mis)use as they see fit..... That in itself would be bad enough, but most galling is the fact that when the SIC created the current SCT constitution, the fact that in doing so they were in effect relinquishing any and all influence and control over assets held by SLAP that they themselves relied upon, should have been staring them straight in the face.

 

The Councillor trustees back then had the power to transfer the SLAP assets they had interest in out of SLAP and SCT control before they signed the SCT over to the new order, they for whatever reason, chose not to. So in effect they are now expecting us to be okay with them throwing away more of our money to the SCT, just to get back in to SIC control what we've always owned and still do own, but they were to stupid to protect our investment in.

[Ghostrider]

I expect the opposite is true. According to the Shetland News article Ghostrider linked to in the original post, SLAP earns £2 to £3 million annually http://www.shetnews.co.uk/news/16798-sic-seeks-to-buy-slap-from-trust

 

 

With a portfolio valued at between £20 and £23 million, SLAP earns between £2 and £3 million annually through leases to commercial companies and the local authority.

There will be many financial and regulatory benefits to a charity (SCT) having a commercial trading arm (SLAP).

 

£265,000 of the income that generates that profit comes from SIC rent of the Whitehouse, how much for the two Colleges....similar amounts wouldn't seem unreasonable if the Whitehouse is a benchmark. In that scenario SLAP's profit could instantly decrease as much as 30% if the SIC takes ownership..... Then there's the dual elephants in the room of, I am led to believe, the SIC not supposed to operate a 'commercial business' under EU rules, and the fact that never in their history have they managed to show they understand commercial enterprise let alone are capable of running one.

 

Also, where does the HNP shed debacle come in to all this? Did the sale by SLAP to that two bit chancer from south go through, or is it still hanging in the air uncompleted seeing as the idea of a hostel seems to have but all died a death, and the SIC are going to inherit the fall out on that to deal with.

Edited August 14, 2018 by Ghostrider

[tooney1]

Will be interesting to see how this plays out.

 

Money made using public money should still be public money, but I don't think the SCT sees it like that. This so-called commercial entity could quite easily be valued and sold...

[George.]

 

Will be interesting to see how this plays out.

 

Money made using public money should still be public money, but I don't think the SCT sees it like that. This so-called commercial entity could quite easily be valued and sold...

 

What are you suggesting could be wrong with the S. C. T. selling it?

[tooney1]

What are you suggesting could be wrong with the S. C. T. selling it?

 

SLAP was made using public money. All acquisitions and rent are the result of using public money. It's essentially an investment portfolio that belongs to the public (in my view) so can't really be sold back to the public. But this is what awaits to be seen since it was separated off into a commercial entity.

[George.]

 

What are you suggesting could be wrong with the S. C. T. selling it?

 

SLAP was made using public money. All acquisitions and rent are the result of using public money. It's essentially an investment portfolio that belongs to the public (in my view) so can't really be sold back to the public. But this is what awaits to be seen since it was separated off into a commercial entity.

 

The Charitable Trust is designed to do it's best to help and assist the people around here. To do a good bit of that, SLAP was created by S. C. T, owned in full by the S. C. T. I would like to think that if it is profitable for the Trust to sell it on, they will. It would probably provide them with more money, to use appropriately.

Edited August 15, 2018 by George.

[admin]

Shetland News - SIC buys SLAP portfolio in 'landmark deal'

 

Shetland Times - SIC acquires Slap in £17.5 million deal

[tooney1]

17.5 mil now in the hands of the unelected and removed from council reserves. The monster they created bought back, with a healthy private sector portfolio added and more conflicts of interest (those who set the rent collect the rates...). The whitehouse debacle/lost rent also disappears into an opaque mist...

 

Time to buy the MRI scanner now that playing landlord badly is over. That would benefit the people of Shetland, and in my eyes at least, is exactly the type of thing the fund should be used for.

[Frances144]

It all seems very “odd” to me.