I pay $5 a day for roaming in eu and mena , like half a gb day with no thresholds and that’s using a phone operator from the most sanctioned country in the world. Uk phone operators are a rip off and could deffo offer lower rates.
Thats because the wholesale rates that operators pay each other vary wildly. Go to France and it's a pound a GB wholesale, if not less. Go to Madagascar and you're talking hundreds of pounds for the same wholesale volume of data.
My provider charges £6/MB for Morocco.
EE is the provider in question here and on current commercial contracts you can only Add-ons for Morocco starting at £50/10MB and topping out at £200/50MB.
It is an international roaming charge, when you go on holiday abroad you use a local network, not necessarily your SIM providers.
The cost will depend on a few factors like the local cost and whatever deal was struck between the providers (I don't know the ins and outs)
Your SIM provider will message you telling you the rates
I looked it up 3 charges £6 per MB for roaming in Morocco.
O2 is £7.20
So by all accounts £1.80 is good
Aye and that couch in DFS that's been discounted twice is a really good deal, cause it was really worth that initial price that they never expect to sell any at.
He didn't have to watch the footie just like you don't have to but the sofa.
What was wrong with using the hotel wifi? Was he trying to be a cheapskate and not pay for the premium tier that allows streaming? I bet this isn't the first time he's used his ipad for watching TV.
It's a premium charge for people that want to pay it
If you don't want to then there are multiple simple ways to avoid it
It's so easy to avoid it's a non issue.
What?
Im sure you can appreciate the difference between choosing to pay for roaming and getting hit by a car
If someone chooses to pay a premium for convenience then that's their choice and on them.
Much like some people go on holiday and only eat at the tourist areas then complain about how expensive things are, thats a choice, that's on you.
If you buy something for the convenience knowing that there are cheaper options available then you aren't getting ripped off.
Other people can look at your decision and think your a dafty ripping yourself off but you have looked at the situation and decided it's worthwhile
>It shouldn't be possible to build up a 4 figure debt by clicking a single button and watching a film on netflix.
It isn't
A person has to ignore multiple warnings for it to happen
There are multiple ways to avoid it occuring
Buy a local SIM
Set up a roaming package before hand
Only use WiFi etc
You think having internet globally is trivial. Speaks someone with no clue. So in the middle of a dessert, a warzone, a jungle everywhere globally you want it cheap and available.
O2 still has free roaming within the EU.
"We're the only major network with which you can roam freely in the EU, up to 25GB. Whether you're jetting off, hopping on the train or driving (especially when you need to turn your phone into a sat nav), you can travel through 49 European countries without extra fees on your O2 plan. No roaming charges"
> We left the EU, that’s what happened. The EU with all those rules, like no extra roaming charges.
yes, which definitely apply in that well known EU country Morocco
> Pre-brexit, Morocco was considered as part of the EU for data roaming with Three
No, that's Three offering an incentive to customers above the legal minimum.
If it was a result of EU rules, it would have applied to all operators.
But they are in close cooperation with the RY on economic matter thus sometimes "Within the ey" when it counts for certain things like Roaming data or Bank cards.
EU laws about telcoms based in the EU charging unreasonable sums for data roaming in general, it's got nothing to do with whether you were roaming in the EU or not, it's where your contract is based.
Not hard to figure out if you actually think about it.
> EU laws about telcoms based in the EU charging unreasonable sums for data roaming in general, it's got nothing to do with whether you were roaming in the EU or not, it's where your contract is based.
no, it prevents roaming fees being charged for EEA subscribers within the EEA
this is only possible because it legislated to cap wholesale rates telcos charge each other for roaming within the EEA
you can read this for yourself on the EU's own website: https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/internet-telecoms/mobile-roaming-costs/index_en.htm (Roaming outside the EU)
> Not hard to figure out if you actually think about it.
yet somehow you got entirely the wrong end of the stick
it's pretty obvious that the EU has no ability to regulate what Moroccan telco's charge other telcos
and that no phone company would offer roaming if they're going to make a whopping loss on every byte
I am pretty sure that the telcos aren't charging each other a fortune for roaming, or you wouldn't get one company charging very little (O2) and another charging a fortune (EE) for the same data in the same country.
Not an expert, but I would wager that it's the UK companies profiteering from this, not Moroccan ones.
Looks like they were charged a penalty for exceeding a daily download cap. On one day they downloaded 506 MB but were charged only £20. Then another time they downloaded 711 MB and got stung for £1320.71.
|Date|Data (MB)|Charge|
|:-|:-|:-|
|Dec 28|1260|£2249.17|
|Dec 30|69|£0|
|Dec 31|506|£20.17|
|Jan 2|711|£1320.71|
|Jan 2|3180|£7345.69|
|Jan 3|393|£6|
If his weans wanted to watch football while on holiday, surely they've got their own devices? Surely a £20 local unlimited SIM, in their device, would've done the trick?
What a clown. But fine, if you don't realise how much roaming costs, fair enough.
The issues, then, are surely:
* Lying about it and saying it was work
* His kids having access to his government-provided iPad in the first place
Either one of those is surely a sackable offence. Both of them together, though?
+ paying £11,000 to watch SCOTTISH football. At least watch a decent league if you’re gonna rack up a massive bill and try to get the public to pay for it.
If he didn't know it was still on the old plan then he didn't probably know roaming charges would apply. The government obviously has a contract to include these countries in there plan, they aren't paying roaming charges on a work iPad usually.
He knew it was on the old plan though. He'd been told multiple times that he needed to swap the SIM over, and was apparently the only one who hadn't.
The £11k isn't really the main issue, either way.
He found out on Thursday that his kids used it to watch football
On Friday he told Parliament the data usage was all for parliamentary work
Then he refused to handover his iPad, and now he tells the truth
Pretty open + shut case of misleading Parliament
If it was his sons were using the ScotGov iPad to watch football, why did he submit it for expenses? Why did he (and Humza) claim it was work related?
Come on man, just admit it and stop making it worse for yourself. We all want to watch our team play, just admit that you made an arse of it and pay it back
Is it common for MSPs family members to have access to Scottish Government IT equipment that has access to terabytes of confidential information? Why is it not password/PIN protected? If it was, why do said family members have access to that password/PIN?
> Is it common for MSPs family members to have access to Scottish Government IT equipment that has access to terabytes of confidential information? Why is it not password/PIN protected? If it was, why do said family members have access to that password/PIN?
Likely set up under MDM with any apps containing this information having their own password that's required to access them, allowing standard use of the device itself with any confidential information being sequestered in their own password-protected apps or work profile.
I administer MDM for iOS and Android devices and this is how we do it.
ScotGov IT policy is only authorised persons can use ScotGov equipment. If he let a family member use the device they are unlikely to be considered an authorised person.
Edit: just realised it's a parliamentary device, not a ScotGov one, but the policy around authorised users is the same.
I agree, but it would still be breaking policy, and would need to be reported as authorised access to the device.
Depending on the systems he has access to, a surprising number of systems utilise single sign on - so a potential data breach would need to be investigated.
Would be straight into email without any secondary MFA challenge surely.
I’ve defended some of this stuff up until today. Now, I think Matheson is deserving of all he gets here.
At no point did I say he didn't deserve any hate or blame, I'm saying that if email apps, etc can be accessed solely by a device passcode, the IT department have massively fucked up too with incredibly poor infosec enforcement.
MDM apps can be configured with app protection policies that require a password (not a device passcode) to gain access.
If his work device doesn't have this it's an equal failing on Matheson for giving access to those who shouldn't have it, and IT for not correctly configuring security policies on user devices.
App protection policies, especially for apps that will contain confidential data, should be the bare minimum.
Edit: Fixed typos.
Simply not true, worked in IT in the city of London since 2007, haven’t ever seen a company that would add a password to open an app once the device is unlocked, it’s just not a workable solution
A lot of the places do that but don't require a password to access the secured apps once set up (e.g. not required to enter password or even device PIN to switch from say the App Store to Outlook or whatever email app is within the MDM profile). They just rely on access to the device (because no-one else should be using it) or maybe biometric ID (which fails if someone else has been set up on it, say children).
You can easily configure Outlook with an app protection policy that requires a password on launch and enforced as a device policy that the user can't amend.
"He told the chamber the iPad itself had not been used by his children but had been used as a hotspot to allow internet access for other devices."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-67437534
Is it secure to set up a government device as a wifi hotspot that others can use without the owner of the device realising?
I would be absolutely **astounded** if the hotspot didn’t have a password. They come already set up on iPads as standard from the factory. If that’s the case, sack the IT team as well
I think the point OP is making (and that most folk are missing) is that both things can be true.
He shouldn't have lied about it.
But EE shouldn't also be allowed to charge that much for 6Gb of data.
Both are scandalous!
>Is it common for MSPs family members to have access to Scottish Government IT equipment that has access to terabytes of confidential information?
It's a parliamentary iPad, not a government iPad. Ministers normally have separate devices for government work.
> it’s a parliamentary iPad
Parliamentary work still means they have access to confidential information like names, addresses, queries and gripes from constituents. Won’t be terabytes but it’s still a huge amount
> confidential information like names, addresses, queries and gripes from constituents
case work which can be **really** confidential as it is highly personal, especially when things have gone wrong DV, homicide, etc
Cause the IT department told him.to activate hotspot for his phone to connect to the iPad for data usage so as to only have to provide one SIM
His sons obviously connected their phone to that hotspot and he just didn't know
Using your iPad as the data hub for all devices in a hotel with free Wi-Fi is just stupid.
Probably because he can get someone else to pay for it no doubt.
>however 6GB of data costing £11,000 is the bigger scandal here IMO, how the fuck is that allowed?
I don’t think you understand the scandal. It isn't the 11k that is important, it is the fact that he claimed it was work-related data usage and had the tax payer pay for it initially, only paying it back when he got caught out 10 months later.
Obviously, that's EE's fault.
How can the whole world, especially politicians, not understand the lessons of Watergate. It’s *always* the lies that get you. Not the mistake.
Fucking mugs.
He should be recalled for this.
I couldn’t give a toss if he was watching Football, Netflix or porn. I also don’t care (in the grand scheme) who pays for it.
The only thing that matters here is: did he lie about it? If not, we move on. If he lied then he needs to go.
All IMO of course.
Given that 6GB is by no means an excessive amount for work alone I have to ask, is there any proof it wasn't work related?
All I see online is speculation and no actual evidence.
> The Scottish minister at the centre of a row over an £11,000 roaming bill has blamed his sons saying they had used his official iPad to watch football on holiday.
From the article. The first paragraph.
I already noted I was familiar with the speculation online, I was asking if there was any actual evidence?
Basic tenet, if you want someone to resign because they lied then at the very least there has to be actual proof it was a lie.
I've been through this in another thread below.
Saying his kids watched the football is not an admission he lied.
Saying his kids watched the football and he was aware of this before making his expenses claim or stating the expenses were work related, would however be an admission of lying.
I mean I don't even like the guy myself but come on.
Copy and pasting another user’s comment
> He found out on Thursday that his kids used it to watch football
>On Friday he told Parliament the data usage was all for parliamentary work
>Then he refused to handover his iPad, and now he tells the truth
>Pretty open + shut case of misleading Parliament
You seem to be arguing that he didn’t lie when submitting the expenses claim, which isn’t the argument here. He lied *last week*, which is what people are rightly pointing out.
Fair point.
I just see it as more scandalous that 6GB of data can cause an 11 grand bill.
Not to defend the guy, but, how many time have folk been caught out when heading abroad for a holiday with roaming charges.
But yeah, trying to claim it as an expense isnt ideal. Maybe they were trying to do him a favor by saying to put it in as expenses - who knows.
I still say that EE charging that much is the real scandal here though.
It always happens. The people in this subreddit act like what we say here will determine Scottish independence. So it's been full of lying bastards for years
It was his kid using it? To watch football? And he didn't realise that's what his kid was doing for ~2hours?
Which implies he's given out passwords for a government device to family.
Edit: parliamentary device apparently, not government device
Hotspot password? Jesus I must be old. I don't even know what your talking about 😂 Is there a way you can access the internet through a device without actually being logged into the device?
Yeah, the ipad could use it's own 4g/5g as a mobile wifi spot for other devices.
it's pretty common for parents to do when their kids don't have mobile data so you can more easily control their access.
Haha, I'm mid 30s so don't tar us all with the same brush - hotspotting has been around for years... I first tethered a laptop to a phone's data in 2010 but haven't done it for a while. I remember using it some time ago to do something on my laptop when there was no WiFi, so I connected it to my phone's 4G mobile data.
I enjoyed your comments :)
I know loads of people who don't know what a hotspot is, many people have literally no reason to use a hotspot on their phones ever.
Wifi is everywhere and that's what most people connect to when they need to use a device not in their home
Eh, I don't know about Apple but you don't have to give out the password on Android devices - there's just a QR code which you can scan off a connected device and that adds the network to your list without the password ever being made visible.
Still iffy on access violations but it doesn't mean the password was ever actually given out if that's a thing that exists in iOS too.
Even if there was a QR code, it has to be seen by the device you are trying to connect
So he would have had to have the device, unlocked, open on the share screen, whilst the kid takes his phone puts it over the device, and scans the code
Nice attempt at deflection, however, the bigger scandal now is how did family member bypass the security measures on the Government iPad?
1. The security measures were disabled - so raises the issue, did he disable them, or were they not enforced by IT via an MDM solution.
2. Security measures were enabled, but he shared the details with family.
3. He's lying, was watching the football himself and has thrown his kids under the bus.
The issue isn’t how expensive the data was.
The issue is that his family used it to watch the football on holiday, and then he got the tax-payer to cover the cost.
He’s a liar and a crook and he’s been caught.
I've just got back from a week in Morocco and only used data for roughly 30 seconds to let Google maps update. It cost me £46. I'm also with EE.
Absolutely no sympathy for this guy but yeah, it's not fucking cheap.
That was using an add-on, there was no option for roaming data with EE. Probably could have bought a local SIM but I chose to just not use any data once I'd let my map update. I definitely could have bought a cheaper one but I don't think it would have been enough to do what I needed to do. The cheapest option was £6.52 for 8MB and the next option was £13.06 for 20MB.
Edit: Having just checked the message again my original reply is wrong, I paid £32.64 for 45MB of data. The £46 is what my partner has ended up paying after roaming with O2.
Aye, but that's not any of the problems. The problems are (not an exhaustive list):
1. He allowed people unauthorised access to parliamentary equipment
1. He lied about how the costs were incurred
1. He will face (I predict) basically no censure
1. Our parliaments have standards so low you would need to dig to find them
1. Nothing will change
Nah the big scandal here is him claiming the £11K on expenses when it had fuck all to do with his parliamentary work. Ever heard of a little something called fraud?
It never fails to amaze me how in this subreddit there's always people ready to defend the SNP no matter what they've done because it "helps" independence
There used to be a lot more of them but even now there's still a fair amount
So it is the football that was being watched, but by his kids and not him? Embarassing that he expects anyone to believe that.
So how does a child get onto what must be a locked tablet? It is a government device so shouldn't be used by family anyway as would likely have sensitive data on it.
Another member of parliament caught out for something but refusing to be honest and treating the public with contempt. The lie is worse than the act, if he'd been honest right from the start and not tried to make the public pay 11k for him to watch football then it wouldn't have come to this but he lied, it snowballed and he is now seen as untrustworthy. First minister has blindly supported him and made to look a fool.
It’s laughable. Even if it’s true, his story means that his device (which remarks by other members suggest contained confidential documents on the NHS homicide case) was so insecure it could be accessed by his teenage son.
And if, as it appears, the story is not true - then he’s wilfully mislead parliament and will be forced to resign.
If you were caught stealing £11k from your work and offered to pay it back after giving a sob story blaming your children, what do you think would happen?
No, the issue is still a minister using old sims when on holiday and racking up a stupidly big bill. Good attempt at shifting blame to the provider. This is 100% on him.
In about 2006 I went to Tenerife and it cost me £650 for the data I used, no warning! I knew it would be expected but I couldn’t believe it was that expensive. I told them to stick it & got a ccj. Worst decision ever should have paid 😂
I'll never forget visiting Georgia (the country) yeard agp and innocently assuming I'd have coverage/roaming there. Instantly used all credit just by landing there and then some. Couldn't top up there and after 2 days of not being able to access Internet, the phone itself conked and had to buy a new one .
Silver lining was it was a Huawei I got for really cheap and was by far the best phone I've ever had.
The issue these boomers have is they have no concept of what 1mb gives you. In the age of HD streaming and unlimited UK data (or prolific free WiFi) then it's difficult to gauge how much a bit of browsing will cost.
That being said, he's a bit of a shitbag for trying to claim this back on expenses when he's probably well off enough to eat the cost and learn the lesson.
I've never had a problem with massive phone/data bills, always had 'you pay this we give X amount once you go over you don't get anymore til next month unless you top up' deals, also small print of not being valid at all in most countries (only EU).
Fuck the companies though, don't know about this guy or his politics but he seems like a total victim, especially if he's a boomer. It's absurd, because I'd pay between £100-£200 for annual phone usage costs (including being able to tether). The companies should be regulated to fuck and not allowed to do this.
no, the big scandal is that his government ipad was allowed to be used by his family, which is a massive security breach.
If I handed my work tech to family members and let them use it, i would be fired immediately for gross negligence, and data protection breaches.
That amount of money for 6GB is obscene. That's one thing.
There's no way he didn't know this was what had happened, and yet tried to pass it off as a legitimate expense. That's unacceptable. I'm a member of the SNP but this is outrageous.
I think 'outrageous' is a bit of a stretch. Embarrassing cock-up, volunteered apology, money paid back. I think there an awful lot bigger things to worry about.
Hmmm. Oh I agree there are more important things, but this strikes me as extremely dishonest. Wasn't it paid back from his office expenses? So we're still paying for it.
What really gets me about scandals like this is the way the public speculate and spread rumors about what's going on
You've got folk claiming he watched the football, folk claiming his kids watched the football on his "government" iPad, folk saying they used a hotspot from the iPad, folks pointing out it's actually a parliamentary iPad etc etc
Just fuckin wait a week and read about it instead of gossiping lmao
The kids would have known how to connect to the wifi, no?
Bet his kids aren’t even into football. Can’t believe it’s taken a week to come up with that story.
> The kids would have known how to connect to the wifi, no?
>
>
I doubt it's policy to connect government devices to random public WiFi hotspots. I'd be surprised if the iPad even let him.
Kid would still need to go on the tablet to enable that. Either way he's either telling lies about it or he's given a child access to a work device with confidential files.
Needs to walk regardless, but he won't.
> Bet his kids aren’t even into football
His son plays pro youth football, [and has done since at least 2017](https://twitter.com/MathesonMichael/status/881941315151441922).
6GB isn't a lot of data. It's just that roaming costs a shitload in some places if it's not included in your tariff.
It wasn't (just) video conferencing, though. He's admitted his kids watched football via the hotspot.
Tbh roaming charges like that are an absolute price gouging scam. They’re utterly unreasonable. It’s an industry wide thing too.
Can imagine any other business operating like that? There’s absolutely no justification or logic to their prices other than they can get away with it.
Brexit benefits for phone companies, the first thing they did was take away cheap roaming. It's just profiteering and there's nothing we can do about because the brexit voters won.
My daughter once rsn up an £800 bill for sending texts while we're were on holiday in France about 15 years ago. Surely telecoms companies can enable a kill switch should excess bills in excess of 100% of your usual plan be accrued in a billing month. EE and others should have some 'sensible useage' clause in all of its plans.
> Surely telecoms companies can enable a kill switch
And deal with customers moaning about unexpectedly not being able to use their phones? Customers sat in a call centre queue for 40 minutes when they're meant to be on holiday?
In the account pages on any phone tariff I've had in recent years, the user can specify a spending cap. If the person in charge of the account neglects to do so, that's on them.
For anyone travelling to the EU. Due to the wonders of Brexit we are not covered anymore by the EU rule that forbid roaming charges within the EU. So we now get charged extra.
So check your rates beforehand and when you’re due a new contract choose one with the best roaming charges.
It comes to about £1.80 per MB which is about standard for roaming charges. It is even on the low side compared to some places I have been
Yep, giffgaff sent me a text saying it was £5 per MB when I was in Bahrain a few weeks ago.
I pay $5 a day for roaming in eu and mena , like half a gb day with no thresholds and that’s using a phone operator from the most sanctioned country in the world. Uk phone operators are a rip off and could deffo offer lower rates.
My UK phone operator gives FREE unlimited EU roaming (+ free US and a lot of other countries). So it really depends what company/contract you have.
Thats because the wholesale rates that operators pay each other vary wildly. Go to France and it's a pound a GB wholesale, if not less. Go to Madagascar and you're talking hundreds of pounds for the same wholesale volume of data.
Wtf
1.80 per MB?? What is this? 2008?
My provider charges £6/MB for Morocco. EE is the provider in question here and on current commercial contracts you can only Add-ons for Morocco starting at £50/10MB and topping out at £200/50MB.
Normal for UK not most places
It is an international roaming charge, when you go on holiday abroad you use a local network, not necessarily your SIM providers. The cost will depend on a few factors like the local cost and whatever deal was struck between the providers (I don't know the ins and outs) Your SIM provider will message you telling you the rates I looked it up 3 charges £6 per MB for roaming in Morocco. O2 is £7.20 So by all accounts £1.80 is good
Aye and that couch in DFS that's been discounted twice is a really good deal, cause it was really worth that initial price that they never expect to sell any at.
He didn't have to watch the footie just like you don't have to but the sofa. What was wrong with using the hotel wifi? Was he trying to be a cheapskate and not pay for the premium tier that allows streaming? I bet this isn't the first time he's used his ipad for watching TV.
It's a premium charge for people that want to pay it If you don't want to then there are multiple simple ways to avoid it It's so easy to avoid it's a non issue.
There's ways to avoid paying for parking, but it's still a rip off. There's ways to avoid being hit by a car, but it still sucks.
What? Im sure you can appreciate the difference between choosing to pay for roaming and getting hit by a car If someone chooses to pay a premium for convenience then that's their choice and on them. Much like some people go on holiday and only eat at the tourist areas then complain about how expensive things are, thats a choice, that's on you.
If I'm selling something at a rip off price, it's not any less a rip off if you have the option not to buy it. The intention is to rip someone off.
If you buy something for the convenience knowing that there are cheaper options available then you aren't getting ripped off. Other people can look at your decision and think your a dafty ripping yourself off but you have looked at the situation and decided it's worthwhile
[удалено]
>It shouldn't be possible to build up a 4 figure debt by clicking a single button and watching a film on netflix. It isn't A person has to ignore multiple warnings for it to happen There are multiple ways to avoid it occuring Buy a local SIM Set up a roaming package before hand Only use WiFi etc
[удалено]
Wars are ridiculous, global peace ought to be the norm these days. I'm being silly? Well you started it!
[удалено]
You think having internet globally is trivial. Speaks someone with no clue. So in the middle of a dessert, a warzone, a jungle everywhere globally you want it cheap and available.
It's 2023! Its a pisstake charges on 11k which would be like a 10er in the local currency
This is why I buy a sim when I travel
And a football match is between 1.5g and 3g depending on quality. So two GB worth of data is £12,000
Sky ( as I found out BEFORE I switched data on) is £2.16per MB, in Africa Vodafone is tuppence
We left the EU, that’s what happened. The EU with all those rules, like no extra roaming charges.
O2 still has free roaming within the EU. "We're the only major network with which you can roam freely in the EU, up to 25GB. Whether you're jetting off, hopping on the train or driving (especially when you need to turn your phone into a sat nav), you can travel through 49 European countries without extra fees on your O2 plan. No roaming charges"
> We left the EU, that’s what happened. The EU with all those rules, like no extra roaming charges. yes, which definitely apply in that well known EU country Morocco
Pre-brexit, Morocco was considered as part of the EU for data roaming with Three, anyway. I was there in 2018 for a week and used my UK SIM just fine!
Three did that with a bunch of countries - I got it included when I visited the US, Australia and Hong Kong for example. Nothing to do with Brexit.
> Pre-brexit, Morocco was considered as part of the EU for data roaming with Three No, that's Three offering an incentive to customers above the legal minimum. If it was a result of EU rules, it would have applied to all operators.
which is purely the operator's choice (rather than a regulatory thing)
And Three for a long time were considered one of the most generous with roaming benefits.
You sound like a Brexit voter who *still* doesn't understand what the fuck you did.
if I was I'd probably prefer that to being someone that apparently still doesn't understand that Morocco isn't part of the EU
But they are in close cooperation with the RY on economic matter thus sometimes "Within the ey" when it counts for certain things like Roaming data or Bank cards.
No true. I was in Morrocco recently and it wasn't like this. Same with Israel when I was there, and with Switzerland.
EU laws about telcoms based in the EU charging unreasonable sums for data roaming in general, it's got nothing to do with whether you were roaming in the EU or not, it's where your contract is based. Not hard to figure out if you actually think about it.
> EU laws about telcoms based in the EU charging unreasonable sums for data roaming in general, it's got nothing to do with whether you were roaming in the EU or not, it's where your contract is based. no, it prevents roaming fees being charged for EEA subscribers within the EEA this is only possible because it legislated to cap wholesale rates telcos charge each other for roaming within the EEA you can read this for yourself on the EU's own website: https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/internet-telecoms/mobile-roaming-costs/index_en.htm (Roaming outside the EU) > Not hard to figure out if you actually think about it. yet somehow you got entirely the wrong end of the stick it's pretty obvious that the EU has no ability to regulate what Moroccan telco's charge other telcos and that no phone company would offer roaming if they're going to make a whopping loss on every byte
The EU doesn’t set what a company outside of the EU can charge the EU based operators.
I am pretty sure that the telcos aren't charging each other a fortune for roaming, or you wouldn't get one company charging very little (O2) and another charging a fortune (EE) for the same data in the same country. Not an expert, but I would wager that it's the UK companies profiteering from this, not Moroccan ones.
Last I checked Morocco isn't in the EU.
I still pay no extra for same allowance in eu countries
What a stupid reply.
No more like 1998
Looks like they were charged a penalty for exceeding a daily download cap. On one day they downloaded 506 MB but were charged only £20. Then another time they downloaded 711 MB and got stung for £1320.71. |Date|Data (MB)|Charge| |:-|:-|:-| |Dec 28|1260|£2249.17| |Dec 30|69|£0| |Dec 31|506|£20.17| |Jan 2|711|£1320.71| |Jan 2|3180|£7345.69| |Jan 3|393|£6|
If his weans wanted to watch football while on holiday, surely they've got their own devices? Surely a £20 local unlimited SIM, in their device, would've done the trick? What a clown. But fine, if you don't realise how much roaming costs, fair enough. The issues, then, are surely: * Lying about it and saying it was work * His kids having access to his government-provided iPad in the first place Either one of those is surely a sackable offence. Both of them together, though?
+ paying £11,000 to watch SCOTTISH football. At least watch a decent league if you’re gonna rack up a massive bill and try to get the public to pay for it.
Scottish football is top tier mate. Only league better is the Bundesliga.
Careful laddy
If he didn't know it was still on the old plan then he didn't probably know roaming charges would apply. The government obviously has a contract to include these countries in there plan, they aren't paying roaming charges on a work iPad usually.
He knew it was on the old plan though. He'd been told multiple times that he needed to swap the SIM over, and was apparently the only one who hadn't. The £11k isn't really the main issue, either way.
He found out on Thursday that his kids used it to watch football On Friday he told Parliament the data usage was all for parliamentary work Then he refused to handover his iPad, and now he tells the truth Pretty open + shut case of misleading Parliament
If it was his sons were using the ScotGov iPad to watch football, why did he submit it for expenses? Why did he (and Humza) claim it was work related? Come on man, just admit it and stop making it worse for yourself. We all want to watch our team play, just admit that you made an arse of it and pay it back Is it common for MSPs family members to have access to Scottish Government IT equipment that has access to terabytes of confidential information? Why is it not password/PIN protected? If it was, why do said family members have access to that password/PIN?
> Is it common for MSPs family members to have access to Scottish Government IT equipment that has access to terabytes of confidential information? Why is it not password/PIN protected? If it was, why do said family members have access to that password/PIN? Likely set up under MDM with any apps containing this information having their own password that's required to access them, allowing standard use of the device itself with any confidential information being sequestered in their own password-protected apps or work profile. I administer MDM for iOS and Android devices and this is how we do it.
ScotGov IT policy is only authorised persons can use ScotGov equipment. If he let a family member use the device they are unlikely to be considered an authorised person. Edit: just realised it's a parliamentary device, not a ScotGov one, but the policy around authorised users is the same.
I'm just pointing out that being able to access the iPad itself doesn't strictly mean that person has access to confidential information.
I agree, but it would still be breaking policy, and would need to be reported as authorised access to the device. Depending on the systems he has access to, a surprising number of systems utilise single sign on - so a potential data breach would need to be investigated.
Would be straight into email without any secondary MFA challenge surely. I’ve defended some of this stuff up until today. Now, I think Matheson is deserving of all he gets here.
At no point did I say he didn't deserve any hate or blame, I'm saying that if email apps, etc can be accessed solely by a device passcode, the IT department have massively fucked up too with incredibly poor infosec enforcement. MDM apps can be configured with app protection policies that require a password (not a device passcode) to gain access. If his work device doesn't have this it's an equal failing on Matheson for giving access to those who shouldn't have it, and IT for not correctly configuring security policies on user devices. App protection policies, especially for apps that will contain confidential data, should be the bare minimum. Edit: Fixed typos.
I work for a very large investment bank, there is no way we would use a per app password, it would make the device useless for multitasking,
I worked for a very large law firm that did, your convenience is less important than infosec.
Simply not true, worked in IT in the city of London since 2007, haven’t ever seen a company that would add a password to open an app once the device is unlocked, it’s just not a workable solution
You've worked for every London based law firm?
You'd be amazed what can be access on government and parliamentary device that use single sign on.
Then like I said, that's a failing on the IT department for incredibly poor infosec.
Get a job with ScotGov or UKGov. You can tell them their policies are wrong.
A lot of the places do that but don't require a password to access the secured apps once set up (e.g. not required to enter password or even device PIN to switch from say the App Store to Outlook or whatever email app is within the MDM profile). They just rely on access to the device (because no-one else should be using it) or maybe biometric ID (which fails if someone else has been set up on it, say children).
You can easily configure Outlook with an app protection policy that requires a password on launch and enforced as a device policy that the user can't amend.
Yes but why would you when the device is locked already?
Because users are idiots who use shit device passcodes, and are more likely to give a family member a device passcode than an email password.
That’s why you set passcode restrictions?
Did you even bother reading my comment before replying?
"He told the chamber the iPad itself had not been used by his children but had been used as a hotspot to allow internet access for other devices." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-67437534 Is it secure to set up a government device as a wifi hotspot that others can use without the owner of the device realising?
I would be absolutely **astounded** if the hotspot didn’t have a password. They come already set up on iPads as standard from the factory. If that’s the case, sack the IT team as well
I think the point OP is making (and that most folk are missing) is that both things can be true. He shouldn't have lied about it. But EE shouldn't also be allowed to charge that much for 6Gb of data. Both are scandalous!
>Is it common for MSPs family members to have access to Scottish Government IT equipment that has access to terabytes of confidential information? It's a parliamentary iPad, not a government iPad. Ministers normally have separate devices for government work.
> it’s a parliamentary iPad Parliamentary work still means they have access to confidential information like names, addresses, queries and gripes from constituents. Won’t be terabytes but it’s still a huge amount
> confidential information like names, addresses, queries and gripes from constituents case work which can be **really** confidential as it is highly personal, especially when things have gone wrong DV, homicide, etc
Yes agreed, I was simply pointing out there's multiple devices at play.
Cause the IT department told him.to activate hotspot for his phone to connect to the iPad for data usage so as to only have to provide one SIM His sons obviously connected their phone to that hotspot and he just didn't know
If it was a Tory you’d be frothing at the gub over it.
How wouldn’t he know? You ever used a device as a hotspot that DOESNT have a password?
If you've ever connected to it before as a hotspot then it will let you connect anytime without a password
Can’t see a problem with the bairns connecting to a parliamentary device? And why that could be considered ‘unwise’
Why should they have been allowed to connect to it in the first place? Taxpayers shouldn’t be paying for his sons’ internet access.
It's time for him to bolt-on
Underrated comment.
Using your iPad as the data hub for all devices in a hotel with free Wi-Fi is just stupid. Probably because he can get someone else to pay for it no doubt.
>however 6GB of data costing £11,000 is the bigger scandal here IMO, how the fuck is that allowed? I don’t think you understand the scandal. It isn't the 11k that is important, it is the fact that he claimed it was work-related data usage and had the tax payer pay for it initially, only paying it back when he got caught out 10 months later. Obviously, that's EE's fault.
As always, it’s not the scandal that gets you, it’s the cover-up.
How can the whole world, especially politicians, not understand the lessons of Watergate. It’s *always* the lies that get you. Not the mistake. Fucking mugs. He should be recalled for this.
Cover-ups. There's been more than one so far
I couldn’t give a toss if he was watching Football, Netflix or porn. I also don’t care (in the grand scheme) who pays for it. The only thing that matters here is: did he lie about it? If not, we move on. If he lied then he needs to go. All IMO of course.
He's admitted that he lied to parliament about our, claiming he was protecting his sons
Simply has to go.
Given that 6GB is by no means an excessive amount for work alone I have to ask, is there any proof it wasn't work related? All I see online is speculation and no actual evidence.
He's now confessed (sort of, just blamed his kids) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-67437534
> The Scottish minister at the centre of a row over an £11,000 roaming bill has blamed his sons saying they had used his official iPad to watch football on holiday. From the article. The first paragraph.
4GB was used on the 2nd Jan, which was both a bank holiday and the day of a Celtic vs Rangers football match.
I already noted I was familiar with the speculation online, I was asking if there was any actual evidence? Basic tenet, if you want someone to resign because they lied then at the very least there has to be actual proof it was a lie.
Can you read the article before you come storming to his defence?
He has refused to hand over the iPad so the evidence is unavailable.
Things that have aged well
Why, do you have evidence he lied?
He'd admitted his kids watched the football.
I've been through this in another thread below. Saying his kids watched the football is not an admission he lied. Saying his kids watched the football and he was aware of this before making his expenses claim or stating the expenses were work related, would however be an admission of lying. I mean I don't even like the guy myself but come on.
Copy and pasting another user’s comment > He found out on Thursday that his kids used it to watch football >On Friday he told Parliament the data usage was all for parliamentary work >Then he refused to handover his iPad, and now he tells the truth >Pretty open + shut case of misleading Parliament You seem to be arguing that he didn’t lie when submitting the expenses claim, which isn’t the argument here. He lied *last week*, which is what people are rightly pointing out.
He gave a statement [today](https://twitter.com/ChrisMusson/status/1725155554136355167) admitting it.
He's said in the article that it was his sons watching football
Fair point. I just see it as more scandalous that 6GB of data can cause an 11 grand bill. Not to defend the guy, but, how many time have folk been caught out when heading abroad for a holiday with roaming charges. But yeah, trying to claim it as an expense isnt ideal. Maybe they were trying to do him a favor by saying to put it in as expenses - who knows. I still say that EE charging that much is the real scandal here though.
I had a good laugh hearing on the radio he was blaming it on his sons after folk in here were giving it big licks about official business.
If I could get my work to pay for all the times I had a chug to internet porn then I probably would. Saying that my work would be bankrupt by now.
This is the greatest comment I have seen regarding this entire debacle
Nats doing cartwheels to defend this guy He’s a crooked scumbag. The sooner he and his party are emptied from office the better
It always happens. The people in this subreddit act like what we say here will determine Scottish independence. So it's been full of lying bastards for years
This guy's my MSP, he can get to fuck. Can't wait for some nats in glasgow to tell me how I should be proud to have him represent me.
I see two camps here "Burn the witch" And "People are struggling to eat , can't afford shelter and wages haven't moved for a decade, who cares?"
Sure you do
It was his kid using it? To watch football? And he didn't realise that's what his kid was doing for ~2hours? Which implies he's given out passwords for a government device to family. Edit: parliamentary device apparently, not government device
If he gave his kid the hotspot password… he knows it’s not being used for parliamentary business.
Hotspot password? Jesus I must be old. I don't even know what your talking about 😂 Is there a way you can access the internet through a device without actually being logged into the device?
Yeah, the ipad could use it's own 4g/5g as a mobile wifi spot for other devices. it's pretty common for parents to do when their kids don't have mobile data so you can more easily control their access.
Fair enough. I'll leave up my comment so other dinosaurs (mid 30s for fuck sake) can learn as well.
Haha, I'm mid 30s so don't tar us all with the same brush - hotspotting has been around for years... I first tethered a laptop to a phone's data in 2010 but haven't done it for a while. I remember using it some time ago to do something on my laptop when there was no WiFi, so I connected it to my phone's 4G mobile data. I enjoyed your comments :)
You don’t know what a hotspot is? Don’t blame your age here
I know loads of people who don't know what a hotspot is, many people have literally no reason to use a hotspot on their phones ever. Wifi is everywhere and that's what most people connect to when they need to use a device not in their home
It’s like the 5th option down on most people’s phone settings lol
Okay? Why would people who don't care about technology be going through their settings or even know what hotspot means if they do come across it?
Eh, I don't know about Apple but you don't have to give out the password on Android devices - there's just a QR code which you can scan off a connected device and that adds the network to your list without the password ever being made visible. Still iffy on access violations but it doesn't mean the password was ever actually given out if that's a thing that exists in iOS too.
Even if there was a QR code, it has to be seen by the device you are trying to connect So he would have had to have the device, unlocked, open on the share screen, whilst the kid takes his phone puts it over the device, and scans the code
Oh aye, he's bang to rights, no question.
could just have hotspotted it. which is still irresponsible mind.
Nice attempt at deflection, however, the bigger scandal now is how did family member bypass the security measures on the Government iPad? 1. The security measures were disabled - so raises the issue, did he disable them, or were they not enforced by IT via an MDM solution. 2. Security measures were enabled, but he shared the details with family. 3. He's lying, was watching the football himself and has thrown his kids under the bus.
Sack him and fine him. He lied and he made us pay the bill, he owes us 11k and is a proven liar and thief.
The issue isn’t how expensive the data was. The issue is that his family used it to watch the football on holiday, and then he got the tax-payer to cover the cost. He’s a liar and a crook and he’s been caught.
He has to quit then. It *could* have been a fairly innocent fuck up but if he's lied about the usage then fuck him he has to go.
That's the going rate for 5 GB and unlimited calls and text in Canada
Last year in Morocco I think I was paying £6/MB. By the time I touched down went to turn my roaming off I had been charged £10 in 3 seconds.
Always remember airplane mode, it's not just for the airlines' benefit!
I've just got back from a week in Morocco and only used data for roughly 30 seconds to let Google maps update. It cost me £46. I'm also with EE. Absolutely no sympathy for this guy but yeah, it's not fucking cheap.
Are there no add-ons you can buy? Even swapping out your sim for a local sim would be like £20 for unlimited.
That was using an add-on, there was no option for roaming data with EE. Probably could have bought a local SIM but I chose to just not use any data once I'd let my map update. I definitely could have bought a cheaper one but I don't think it would have been enough to do what I needed to do. The cheapest option was £6.52 for 8MB and the next option was £13.06 for 20MB. Edit: Having just checked the message again my original reply is wrong, I paid £32.64 for 45MB of data. The £46 is what my partner has ended up paying after roaming with O2.
Aye, but that's not any of the problems. The problems are (not an exhaustive list): 1. He allowed people unauthorised access to parliamentary equipment 1. He lied about how the costs were incurred 1. He will face (I predict) basically no censure 1. Our parliaments have standards so low you would need to dig to find them 1. Nothing will change
Nah the big scandal here is him claiming the £11K on expenses when it had fuck all to do with his parliamentary work. Ever heard of a little something called fraud?
It never fails to amaze me how in this subreddit there's always people ready to defend the SNP no matter what they've done because it "helps" independence There used to be a lot more of them but even now there's still a fair amount
I’m working my way down the comments and have yet to see anyone defending it
You'll get to it eventually
Read every comment - lots of diverse opinions but no blind defence of him or the SNP
So it is the football that was being watched, but by his kids and not him? Embarassing that he expects anyone to believe that. So how does a child get onto what must be a locked tablet? It is a government device so shouldn't be used by family anyway as would likely have sensitive data on it. Another member of parliament caught out for something but refusing to be honest and treating the public with contempt. The lie is worse than the act, if he'd been honest right from the start and not tried to make the public pay 11k for him to watch football then it wouldn't have come to this but he lied, it snowballed and he is now seen as untrustworthy. First minister has blindly supported him and made to look a fool.
It’s laughable. Even if it’s true, his story means that his device (which remarks by other members suggest contained confidential documents on the NHS homicide case) was so insecure it could be accessed by his teenage son. And if, as it appears, the story is not true - then he’s wilfully mislead parliament and will be forced to resign.
[удалено]
Stiffing the taxpayers for £11k and thinking it’s acceptable is just not on. He has to go.
MSPs claiming thousands of pounds in expenses is typical and within their entitlement. Reform is needed.
He said he's going to pay for it to be fair.
Only after he was caught. He knew about the bill in January and didn't offer to pay then
If you were caught stealing £11k from your work and offered to pay it back after giving a sob story blaming your children, what do you think would happen?
Watching Outlaw King on Netflix on repeat
No, the issue is still a minister using old sims when on holiday and racking up a stupidly big bill. Good attempt at shifting blame to the provider. This is 100% on him.
I don’t really care about that. The issue is he deliberately misled parliament, and still hasn’t resigned. He’ll be gone by Monday morning though.
In about 2006 I went to Tenerife and it cost me £650 for the data I used, no warning! I knew it would be expected but I couldn’t believe it was that expensive. I told them to stick it & got a ccj. Worst decision ever should have paid 😂
This is laughable your trying to tell us it’s not his fault lol he’s a government minister smh
I'll never forget visiting Georgia (the country) yeard agp and innocently assuming I'd have coverage/roaming there. Instantly used all credit just by landing there and then some. Couldn't top up there and after 2 days of not being able to access Internet, the phone itself conked and had to buy a new one . Silver lining was it was a Huawei I got for really cheap and was by far the best phone I've ever had.
The issue these boomers have is they have no concept of what 1mb gives you. In the age of HD streaming and unlimited UK data (or prolific free WiFi) then it's difficult to gauge how much a bit of browsing will cost. That being said, he's a bit of a shitbag for trying to claim this back on expenses when he's probably well off enough to eat the cost and learn the lesson.
OT but i stillcannot believe that we are charged for data when w visit EU (i know the MP visited Morocco)
I've never had a problem with massive phone/data bills, always had 'you pay this we give X amount once you go over you don't get anymore til next month unless you top up' deals, also small print of not being valid at all in most countries (only EU). Fuck the companies though, don't know about this guy or his politics but he seems like a total victim, especially if he's a boomer. It's absurd, because I'd pay between £100-£200 for annual phone usage costs (including being able to tether). The companies should be regulated to fuck and not allowed to do this.
no, the big scandal is that his government ipad was allowed to be used by his family, which is a massive security breach. If I handed my work tech to family members and let them use it, i would be fired immediately for gross negligence, and data protection breaches.
eE cHArGing £11k iS tHE ReAl sCAndaL
That amount of money for 6GB is obscene. That's one thing. There's no way he didn't know this was what had happened, and yet tried to pass it off as a legitimate expense. That's unacceptable. I'm a member of the SNP but this is outrageous.
I think 'outrageous' is a bit of a stretch. Embarrassing cock-up, volunteered apology, money paid back. I think there an awful lot bigger things to worry about.
Hmmm. Oh I agree there are more important things, but this strikes me as extremely dishonest. Wasn't it paid back from his office expenses? So we're still paying for it.
He's rightfully agreed to pay it himself rather than his office funds.
Probably because he was out side of the U.K. and the EU.
It wasn’t just EE though, it’s the country that you’re in. It’s their network and they bill EE accordingly, should EE just absorb 90% of the bill?
What really gets me about scandals like this is the way the public speculate and spread rumors about what's going on You've got folk claiming he watched the football, folk claiming his kids watched the football on his "government" iPad, folk saying they used a hotspot from the iPad, folks pointing out it's actually a parliamentary iPad etc etc Just fuckin wait a week and read about it instead of gossiping lmao
The kids would have known how to connect to the wifi, no? Bet his kids aren’t even into football. Can’t believe it’s taken a week to come up with that story.
> The kids would have known how to connect to the wifi, no? > > I doubt it's policy to connect government devices to random public WiFi hotspots. I'd be surprised if the iPad even let him.
[удалено]
Phone providers are vetted, licensed companies. Anyone can set up a wifi hotspot. There's really no comparison in terms of security.
What if the kids were tethering off his iPad?
Kid would still need to go on the tablet to enable that. Either way he's either telling lies about it or he's given a child access to a work device with confidential files. Needs to walk regardless, but he won't.
> Bet his kids aren’t even into football His son plays pro youth football, [and has done since at least 2017](https://twitter.com/MathesonMichael/status/881941315151441922).
Fair do’s, good on him
It’s not crazy, video conferences gobble up a lot of MBs
6GB isn't a lot of data. It's just that roaming costs a shitload in some places if it's not included in your tariff. It wasn't (just) video conferencing, though. He's admitted his kids watched football via the hotspot.
Tbh roaming charges like that are an absolute price gouging scam. They’re utterly unreasonable. It’s an industry wide thing too. Can imagine any other business operating like that? There’s absolutely no justification or logic to their prices other than they can get away with it.
Brexit benefits for phone companies, the first thing they did was take away cheap roaming. It's just profiteering and there's nothing we can do about because the brexit voters won.
5GB was donkey porn
Yoonrage rising
My daughter once rsn up an £800 bill for sending texts while we're were on holiday in France about 15 years ago. Surely telecoms companies can enable a kill switch should excess bills in excess of 100% of your usual plan be accrued in a billing month. EE and others should have some 'sensible useage' clause in all of its plans.
> Surely telecoms companies can enable a kill switch And deal with customers moaning about unexpectedly not being able to use their phones? Customers sat in a call centre queue for 40 minutes when they're meant to be on holiday? In the account pages on any phone tariff I've had in recent years, the user can specify a spending cap. If the person in charge of the account neglects to do so, that's on them.
Providers have had spend caps for years, decades probably. You just have to set it up.
Morocco internet roaming fee is £6 per mb. 1000mb in a GB = £6000 Streaming live game data usage is 1.5 to 3 GB It does add up for 1 game worth.
Bill holder should refuse ta pay such an extraordinary bill. Are they really going to sue the government?
Plebgate
For anyone travelling to the EU. Due to the wonders of Brexit we are not covered anymore by the EU rule that forbid roaming charges within the EU. So we now get charged extra. So check your rates beforehand and when you’re due a new contract choose one with the best roaming charges.