Salmond gets £512k in legal costs after botched inquiry
●Government’s bill for collapsed probe into claims against ex-leader
Alex Salmond has received more than £500,000 in legal costs from the Scottish Government over a collapsed internal probe into complaints about his behaviour while serving as first minister. Opposition MSPS are now demanding a special Holyrood probe “gets to the bottom” of the failed inquiry.
Mr Salmond has stepped up his criticism of the government he once led and warned the final legal bill could be closer to £750,000.
He also pledged that all “surplus” cash from the £100,000 he raised in a crowdfunding appeal will be dispersed to good causes.
The EX-SNP leader won a dramatic victory in the Court of Session in January following complaints made by two civil servants.
Mr Salmond was subsequently charged with a string of sexual offences, including attempted rape. He denies all charges.
A spokesman for Mr Salmond said: “The huge amounts which have been paid in legal expenses by the Scottish Government reflect the agreement by which the investigation of Mr Salmond was declared by the Court of Session‘ unlawful ’,‘ unfair’ and‘ tainted by apparent bias ’.”
The former first minister warned
after winning his case that the costs to the public could be around the half-a-millionpound mark.
But the spokesman said: “As the legal expenses and court expenses have been agreed, it is now clear that the total bill could be upwards of threequarters-of-a-million pounds, when proper allowance is made for the in-house legal work of the government.
“No doubt the upcoming parliamentary inquiries may wish to ask the very obvious questions of why this unlawful process involving such a huge waste of public funds was undertaken by the Scottish Government and who was responsible for these decisions. The inquiries may wish to probe why the Scottish Government decided to continue to oppose the judicial review amid mounting legal bills.”
Mr Salmond had called on the government’s top civil servant, Permanent Secretary Leslie Evans, to accept responsibility after the collapse of the government case and to “consider her position”. He described the climbdown as an “abject surrender”.
Ms Evans, who established the procedures which were used to investigate Mr Salmond, refused to quit.
A government spokesman said: “We can confirm that final settlement of £512,250 has been made to Mr Salmond for legal costs arising from his petition for judicial review.”
MSPS at Holyrood have established a special committee to investigate what went wrong with the government’s probe, but it has been suspended until the end of the criminal case.
Conservative MSP Donald Cameron, a member of the Committee on the Scottish Government Handling of Harassment Complaints, slammed the payment.
“It is outrageous that over half a million pounds has been wasted thanks to the botched handling of this investigation,” he said.
“This is taxpayers’ money that will be handed over to Alex Salmond thanks to the appalling way these complaints were dealt with.
“In addition to this wasted money, the two people who made these complaints have been badly let down by the Scottish Government.
“That is exactly why the Holyrood inquiry that we called for is necessary.”
Mr Salmond faced criticism from women’s groups after launching a crowdfunder to finance his legal case against the government.
His legal costs for the judicial review, including those not fully covered by the court expenses award, are in the process of being paid. When that is completed, there is likely to still be a surplus in the crowdfunder which supported his application for judicial review, his spokesman said.
He added: “This will be independently audited and distributed to good causes in terms of the commitments previously given by Mr Salmond.”
Nicola Sturgeon has previously apologised over the way the case was handled. It has led to a freeze in relations between the First Minister and Mr Salmond, her political mentor.
The SNP leader told MSPS following the Court of Session ruling: “I want to express my regret in particular for the difficult position that the complainants have been placed in.
“I can only imagine how difficult the decision to raise concerns, as well as the publicity around this investigation and the judicial review, must have been for them in recent months.”