Hamilton consultancy Inspirent expands into private sector
The firm will launch a series of one-to-one sessions covering marketing, finance, growth, and IT audits.
Ms McCutcheon said: "Almost six years ago, when I stepped into the role of CEO, I recognised a significant opportunity to evolve our business.
Read more:
Man who died after incident on major road pictured by police
"With over three decades of expertise in supporting organisations, it became clear that our knowledge and approach could benefit a wider audience, particularly SMEs.
"These businesses often don't want a large consultancy firm; they need an approachable, experienced partner who understands the unique challenges they face.
"That's what we've become.
"We are proud to now offer practical, hands-on support designed to help small businesses overcome implementation challenges and drive sustainable growth.
"This shift reflects our ambition to build long-term resilience by diversifying into the private sector while staying true to our values of putting the client at the heart of everything we do."
The one-hour sessions will be delivered by Inspirent's team of business growth specialists and are designed to provide honest, actionable advice.
Sessions will be available online across the UK or in person at Inspirent's headquarters at Barncluith Business Centre in Hamilton.
For more information, go to https://inspirent.co.uk/inspirent-studio-marketing-audits/.
Marketing audits will be led by Donna MacLeod and Keith Parsons, who said the sessions will give businesses clear, practical advice.
They said: "The audits offer a no-nonsense, expert review of a company's business activities to drive growth and success.
"For example, the marketing audits are ideal if business owners are spending time or money on marketing but not seeing results, unsure what's actually working in their current approach, or thinking about hiring help, but want to know where to focus first."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Record
2 hours ago
- Daily Record
Perth and Kinross Council objection to super-sized solar farm in Coupar Angus sparks public inquiry
Councillors have voted to object to a 110MW battery and solar energy park on 105 hectares of prime agricultural land A public local inquiry has been sparked after Perth and Kinross councillors voted to object to a massive energy development on prime agricultural land. The 105-hectare plant is the latest of many renewable energy proposals for the Coupar Angus area, prompting concerns the Perthshire town - famed for its fertile land - was transforming into "Solar" Angus. On Wednesday, August 6 Perth and Kinross Council's (PKC) Planning and Placemaking Committee voted - against council officers' recommendation - to object to Stirling Battery and Solar Energy Park. Sirius EcoDev (Stirling) Ltd submitted an application to the Scottish Government's Energy Consents Unit (ECU) to develop a 110MW energy plant on land between Burrelton and Coupar Angus, 600 metres north-west of Caddam Cottage, Keithick. The planning application is being considered by the Scottish Government's ECU due to it generating over 50MW of power. The 50MW battery storage system and 60MW solar energy park would be erected on prime agricultural land the size of over 146 football pitches. At Wednesday's meeting, councillors were simply asked whether or not PKC should object to the application as a statutory consultee. PKC'S Building Standards and Development Management service manager Kristian Smith reminded councillors the National Planning Framework 4's (NPF4) policy "allows this sort of energy development proposal on prime agricultural land". He said council officers had considered the cumulative impact and deemed it as being "acceptable". However, uncertainty does still loom over the controversial nearby 91-hectare Markethill Solar Farm proposal, which drew 173 objections. It was refused by councillors in December 2023. The decision was subsequently appealed and called in by Scottish Ministers. Mr Smith said: "It's been sitting with Ministers since May of last year and we have chased multiple times to get a decision and that has not - as yet - been forthcoming. "It would have been very helpful to have had an outcome on that application over the last year and a half but, notwithstanding, we've still taken into account that proposal and feel the cumulative impacts related to the proposals that are subject to this consultation are acceptable." Conservative councillor Keith Allan said: "What is the ceiling? Where do we feel the line is where we would say, 'we can't consider that'?" He added: "Looking at the map, and the bits that have previously gone under consideration, it seems excessive. If this all goes ahead, we can change its name from Coupar Angus to Solar Angus." Liberal Democrat councillor Claire McLaren added: "The frustration is the recognition food producing land (prime agricultural land) - where there is only eight per cent in Scotland - is being overlooked within NPF4. Food supply to food retailers is an important matter and there is a cumulative impact on that." Conservative Blairgowrie and Glens councillor Bob Brawn moved to formally object to the application. He said he did not object to renewable energy developments but added: "The important thing is they have to be in the right place. And I feel that over the past few months we are slowly seeing Coupar Angus potentially becoming some form of industrialised site for solar farms and in doing so we're losing prime agricultural land. "Our own policy says prime agricultural land should be protected and it does allow it for essential infrastructure. I would argue that, at the moment, this is not essential and the cost of losing agricultural land - in this instance and what we have seen and what is already approved - is getting to the point of too much." Cllr Brawn suggested national planning policy makers perhaps did not believe "prime agricultural land would be thrown at developers like this". He said: "That wasn't the spirit of what NPF4 was about. It was about producing renewable energy in the right place at the right time. I feel we're witnessing abuse of NPF4, simply by people throwing prime agricultural land out to do this." PKC objecting will trigger a local public inquiry, which Cllr Brawn welcomes. He said: "I think a public local inquiry is deserved in this instance in this area. I think it would be a good thing for everyone whatever the outcome is. People will get their chance to speak." Cllr Ian James seconded the motion. SNP councillor Ian Harvey tabled an amendment not to object. Cllr Richard Watters seconded the amendment with the proviso "a thorough investigation is done into the cumulative impact on prime agricultural land around Coupar Angus and across Perth and Kinross". Seven councillors - four Conservatives, one Lib Dem, one Independent and local Strathmore ward SNP councillor Grant Stewart - voted to object to the Coupar Angus development. The remaining four SNP councillors voted not to object to the development. Convener SNP councillor Ian Massie thanked councillors for their votes and said: "Therefore that means the consultation goes forward with an objection from Perth and Kinross Council."
Telegraph
4 hours ago
- Telegraph
Revealed: Chagos deal to cost 10 times what Starmer claimed
Sir Keir Starmer's Chagos Islands deal will be 10 times more expensive than he has claimed, official figures reveal. The Government's own estimate of the cost of giving away the British Indian Ocean Territory to Mauritius is almost £35bn, according to documents released under the Freedom of Information Act – far higher than the £3.4bn figure Sir Keir has previously used in public. Labour ministers now face claims that they misled Parliament and the press with an 'accountancy trick' to hide the size of the bill from taxpayers. Under the terms of Sir Keir's deal, the UK will give up the Chagos Islands by the end of this year and lease back the Diego Garcia military base, a facility built there in the 1970s that has been used by UK and US forces. The cost of the agreement has been fiercely disputed. Sir Keir claimed in May that it would cost £3.4bn over 99 years, accounting for inflation and other discounts, but the Conservatives said it would total £30bn. An official document produced by the Government Actuary's Department shows the cost of the deal was first estimated at 10 times Sir Keir's figure, at £34.7bn, in nominal terms. It explains how the cost was lowered by the Government using inflation estimates, then reduced again under a controversial accounting method sometimes used by the Government for long-term projects. The total cost, which ministers refused to release to Parliament, is equivalent to 10 Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers, or more than half the annual schools' budget. Sir Keir now faces accusations that he misled Parliament, because he told MPs in February that cost estimates between £9bn and £18bn were 'absolutely wide of the mark' and suggested the true figure was lower. The document shows that civil servants were first instructed to lower the cost of the deal on paper to £10bn, to account for an estimated annual inflation rate of 2.3 per cent over 99 years. Then it was reduced again by between 2.5 and 3.5 per cent per year using the Treasury's Social Time Preference Rate, a principle that money spent immediately is more value than funds earmarked for future spending. The final figure was calculated to be 90 per cent lower than the cash value of the payments the UK will make to Mauritius over the next century, in what critics say was a deliberate attempt to mislead the public. Writing for The Telegraph (read the article below), Dame Priti Patel, the shadow foreign secretary, said: 'Instead of owning up to the costs, Labour have used an accountancy trick to claim the amount was only a mere £3.4bn. 'We've all known it's a terrible deal with huge costs to hard-pressed British taxpayers. But for months, ministers in public and Parliament have sought to cover up the true amounts.' Foreign Office sources insisted ministers had used a 'standard' calculation for long-term government spending, and denied accusations that it was part of a 'cover-up'. However, other projects announced by Labour have not used the same method, which has allowed ministers to advertise higher spending on popular policies. Angela Rayner has since launched a 10-year affordable homes plan that included inflation-level increases in government spending as part of the cost of the policy – a method not used with the Chagos deal. The calculations behind the deal were revealed in response to a freedom of information request submitted by the Conservatives. MPs have previously requested the document in Parliament but ministers have refused to release it, in an apparent breach of government transparency rules. Darren Jones, a Treasury minister, said in June that it was 'not normal practice' for the Government to release 'corresponding financial analysis' alongside policy announcements. Official guidance by the Cabinet Office says any information subject to FOI should also be released to MPs, while the ministerial code states that departments 'should be as open as possible with Parliament and the public'. Dame Priti is expected to demand a correction and apology over the 'cover-up' from Sir Keir when MPs return from their summer break on Sept 1. Kemi Badenoch, the Tory leader, said: 'It's bad enough that Starmer and Reeves' economic mismanagement has created a £50bn black hole in the public finances, prolonging the cost of living crisis. 'Now our research has uncovered the Government's own figures showing Labour's Chagos surrender is costing the country another £35 billion. Add that to their £50 billion black hole, and it's clear – when Labour negotiates, Britain loses.' A Government spokesman said: 'The Diego Garcia military base is essential to the security of the UK and our key allies, and to keeping British people safe. 'The average cost is £101 million per year, and the net present value of payments is £3.4 billion – this is less than 0.2 per cent of the annual defence budget. 'The deal is supported by our closest allies, including the US, Canada, Australia and Nato. The costs compare favourably with other international base agreements, and the UK-US base on Diego Garcia is larger, in a more strategic location and has unparalleled operational freedom.' Starmer has been caught red-handed lying to the public Keir Starmer and David Lammy have been caught red-handed lying to the British public over the costs of Labour's Chagos surrender deal, writes Dame Priti Patel. This pair of diplomatic dunces have left Britain humiliated, weak, and the laughing stock of the international community. We've all known it's a terrible deal with huge costs to hard-pressed British taxpayers. But for months, ministers in public and Parliament have sought to cover up the true amounts. Even when the treaty was published and we could see the payments schedule, Labour tried to pull the wool over our eyes and deny the costs. When it was asked questions about the cash payments over the 99 years of the deal, it refused to answer. And when reports suggested the cost of the deal could be from £9 billion to £18 billion, Starmer claimed this was 'absolutely wide of the mark' whilst the Foreign Office tried to claim it was 'entirely inaccurate and misleading'. In fact, instead of owning up to the costs, Labour has used an accountancy trick to claim the amount was only £3.4bn – still a vast waste of money. But now we know the costly truth, having dragged the figures out of Government, kicking and screaming, through a freedom of information request. It's an mind-blowing £35bn. That's almost double the entire annual policing budget. Ten brand new aircraft carriers, 70 hospitals or a 5 per cent income tax cut. New prison places to lock up criminals, funding for social care, and millions upon millions of potholes could be fixed, with the £17bn local highways maintenance backlog covered twice ever. The list goes on. Every single Labour minister is complicit in this cover-up. Instead of paying for front line services in Britain and reducing our tax burden, these payments have lead to Mauritius being able to pay down its debt, cut income tax and slash VAT. Just think, as Rachel Reeves plots tax rises in the autumn to cover her catastrophic financial mismanagement, Labour is forcing you to pay for tax cuts in a foreign country. Is it any wonder the Mauritian prime minister has been bragging about how he secured concession after concession from Labour? From more money up front to the removal of a unilateral right to renew the proposed lease on Diego Garcia to the exercise of sovereign rights over the crucial military base, time and time again Britain backed down in negotiations. It's not just Starmer and 'Calamity' Lammy who are to blame for this diplomatic humiliation. Starmer's friend Lord Hermer, the Attorney General, and Jonathan Powell – Tony Blair's top advisor during the last Labour government's dodgy dossier scandal – have both been involved in these negotiations. They must be the worst team of negotiators in history. And it gets worse. Labour has manipulated parliamentary process to deny the House of Commons a meaningful debate and vote. So frightened are they of democracy that they have wilfully misled Parliament and ignored long-standing parliamentary conventions on holding debates and votes on treaties. The scale of the financial cost is bad enough, but Labour's Chagos surrender deal has profound and serious consequences for our national security and defence. This isn't just about paying for the privilege of something we owned last month. This is a critical strategic asset. In a world that is becoming increasingly dangerous, giving away a military base to a friend of our enemies is a supreme act of self-harm. Under the terms of the treaty, we need to disclose key information to Mauritius about the movements of UK, US and our allies' vessels and aircraft around Diego Garcia, and any military strikes we take from there. This is deeply concerning as, in recent years, Mauritius has grown closer to our key strategic threats – China, Russia and Iran – forging new partnerships, including one with Russia just days before the treaty was signed in May. This means that sensitive information risks being handed over to a friend of our enemies. Again, rather than facing up to the truth of what they are doing to our national interest, Labour ministers, including the Prime Minister himself, attempt to baselessly lie their way out of it. Starmer has tried to claim China, Russia and Iran were against the deal and it was necessary for our national security. That could not be further from the truth. China has welcomed the treaty since it was signed, while Iran and Russia have issued supportive statements towards Mauritius securing sovereignty over the Chagos Islands. Senior Mauritian officials have also publicly thanked China and Putin for their support. Starmer and Lammy must think the British public are gullible to swallow their lies. But we all know the truth. Labour has recklessly undermined our national security just because it wants to appease the whims and demands of its Left-wing lawyer and activist friends, and non-binding opinions issued by obscure international bodies few in Britain have heard of. As a result of Labour's stupidity, lies and incompetence, British taxpayers face a huge £35bn cost, our national security and defence capabilities have been damaged, and it has undermined our standing in the world. When Labour negotiates, Britain loses, and friend and foe alike have seen how feeble Labour is at negotiations over the Chagos Islands and will take advantage of us for years to come. Today, it has become all the clearer why Labour's Chagos surrender deal must be ripped up and consigned to the rubbish bin of history – and that Starmer and Lammy are incapable of understanding, let alone defending, the British national interest. Throughout this whole sorry saga, it is only the Conservative Party that has been fighting against Labour's Chagos surrender. We've challenged the Government in Parliament and in the public to the point where ministers are complaining about the pressure we're putting them under. And we'll keep on exposing Labour's lies and failures as we do all we can to oppose this deal, stand up for hard-pressed British taxpayers and fight for our national interests to be put first.
Glasgow Times
5 hours ago
- Glasgow Times
Queen's Park president resigns citing 'personal abuse'
Shields took on the role in January of last year but is now standing down, citing "personal and online abuse" as a factor. He says others at the club have also been subjected to it. Having recently overseen the completion of the club's safety certificate and the SFA annual club licensing audit, he has decided now is the time to step aside. A statement from the club reads: "Queen's Park FC would like to place on record the club's thanks and appreciation to Graeme Shields who has stood down from his role as President with immediate effect. "Mr Shields has also resigned his position on the club committee. "The club's committee and staff will now work together to manage the club following Graeme's departure. Read more: "No further comment will be made at this time." Upon departure, Shields said: 'I have taken this decision after much deliberation, particularly having experienced an increased level of personal and online abuse towards myself and others associated with the club in recent months. 'Having overseen the successful completion of our safety certificate at The City Stadium and the SFA annual club licensing audit, the time is now right to step away. 'I wish Sean Crighton and all the players and staff at the club every success this season.' Earlier this summer, Shields shocked onlookers of Scottish football by revealing Queen's Park's expenditure for the year has been £5.7 million.
