‘The SNP chief executive has sunk Nicola Sturgeon’ – Political opponents react to Murrell’s evidence to Salmond inquiry
Evidence given by the SNP'S chief executive to an inquiry into the handling of complaints against Alex Salmond has “sunk Nicola Sturgeon”, according to the Scottish Conservatives.
Peter M ur re ll, who is Ms Sturgeon's husband, has given evidence to the Committee on the Scottish Government Handling of Harassment Complaints.
Scottish Tory MS PM ur do Fraser, a member of the committee, said: "The SNP chief executive has sunk Ni cola Sturgeon.
"He has directly contradicted the First Minister and exposed her claim that it was party business to be utterly false.
"Peter Murrell's words indicate that Nicola Sturgeon misled Parliament, gave false evidence to the committee and broke the ministerial code.
"The SNP chief executive said today that the meetings with Alex Salmond were government not party business.
"That is the opposite of what Nicola Sturgeon claims."
He added :" The First Minister's ever-changing story has been dealt a fatal blow by her own chief executive and husband.
"His evidence has shattered her claims to pieces."
Scottish Labour deputy leader and committee member Jackie Baillie said: "Peter Murrell's appearance today demonstrated the lengths that the SNP will go to in order to prevent this committee from getting to the truth.
"Nicola Sturgeon claims her meeting with Alex Salmond was as SNP leader but Peter Murrell has contradicted her previously and said it was in her capacity as First Minister that she met him. Both can't be right.
"If Peter Mur re ll, as chief executive of the SNP, was not aware of the nature of the meeting in his own home, then I am astonished.
"However, more serious would be if the First Minister was breaching the ministerial code and discussing details of the Government's investigation to Alex Salmond."
Scottish Liberal Democrat MSP Alex Cole-hamilton said: "The suggestion that Nicola Sturgeon gave her husband no warning of the what was potentially the biggest threat to their party in its history, and a head star t on bracing the party for impact, is wholly implausible."