Matheson urged to quit in police row
● Matheson told SPA chairman agreeing to Gormley’s return was ‘a bad decision’
The justice secretary described the planned return to work of Police Scotland’s Chief Constable Phil Gormley as a “bad decision”, MSPS have heard. Michael Matheson was urged to consider his position, after a Holyrood committee heard evidence from Andrew Flanagan, ex-chairman of the Scottish Police Authority.
The former chairman of the Scottish Police Authority has said he had “no choice” but to cancel Chief Constable Phil Gormley’s return to work following an intervention by the justice secretary.
Andrew Flanagan told MSPS he put on hold an agreement by the SPA board to allow the chief constable to resume his duties after Michael Matheson told him it was a “bad decision”.
Mr Flanagan said he met the justice secretary twice on 9 November, two days after the SPA board had approved Mr Gormley’s return to work. In the first meeting, Mr Matheson told the then SPA chairman he thought the decision was wrong, but in a later meeting moved to discuss the process, which he is said to have called “deficient”.
Mrmathesonlastnightfaced calls for his resignation after opponents said it was clear he had “leant” on the independent police board.
The chief constable has been on leave since September while the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner (Pirc) looks into allegations of bullying. Mr Gormley denies any wrongdoing.
Appearingbeforeholyrood’s auditcommitteeyesterday,mr Flanagan said the SPA decided Mr Gormley could return to work when it emerged he was considering taking up a fulltime post in England with the National Police Chiefs Council, while continuing to collect his £214,000 Police Scotland salary.
Mr Flanagan said he had a short meeting with Mr Matheson on the morning of 9 November in which he said Mr Gormley would be returning to work and was told it was a “bad decision”.
After attending a meeting of Holyrood’s justice sub-committee on policing, Mr Flanagan met the justice secretary and three civil servants.
He said: “It was clear the Cabinet Secretary was still very unhappy, but he changed to discuss the process rather than the decision itself.
“I reminded him of his comment earlier that it had been a bad decision, but he told me not to bother with that and we then went on to discuss some of the process itself.”
Asked by Labour MSP Iain Gray if he felt he had “no choice but to pause the decision”, Mr Flanagan said: “Yes”.
Mr Gormley’s lawyer has previously accused Mr Matheson of making an “unlawful” intervention, preventing his client’s returning to work.
The SPA’S complaints and conduct committee met yesterday and is expected to continue Mr Gormley’s period of leave.
Raising the matter at First Minister’s Questions, Conservative leader Ruth Davidson said: “The independent chair of an independent body has two meetings with the justice secretary.
“For the first, he’s told he’s made a bad decision. And after the second, he’s left in no doubt he has to reverse it. How can that possibly tally with what SNP ministers have claimed in recent weeks?”
But Nicola Sturgeon said it was also clear from Mr Flanagan’s evidence that he had not been “directed” by Mr Matheson to change his position.
“Questions were asked and I absolutely am of the view that the justice secretary was right to ask those questions,” the First Minister added.
“If the justice secretary hadn’t asked any of those questions and the next morning the chief constable turned up to work, Ruth Davidson and other opposition leaders would have come to this chamber, demanding a statement and no doubt demanding the justice secretary consider his position.”
But Scottish Labour’s justice spokesman, Daniel Johnson, said it was now time for Mr Matheson to consider his position. He said: “Mr Matheson misled parliament, telling the chamber that he had only raised concerns about the decision-making process, not the decision to reinstate Phil Gormley itself.
“It is clear that Michael Matheson has behaved inappropriately for a Cabinet Secretary, repeatedly obscuring the true details of exactly what happened in his meeting, or as it now has been revealed, meetings, with Andrew Flanagan, and he now must consider his position in the Cabinet.”
Following yesterday’s meeting of the audit committee, its convener, Jenny Marra, called into question the evidence given by Mr Flanagan, who has now left the SPA.
She said: “Members of the audit committee were entirely underwhelmed by the accuracy and reliability of evidence today from current and formerscottishpoliceauthority board members on important issues of governance and use of taxpayers’ money.”