Sturgeon in second probe over Salmond sex claim shambles
‘Scandal cannot be swept under carpet’ ‘She’s the subject of a vendetta’
ALEX Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon are set to be quizzed by MSPs about their secret discussions during the inquiry into sexual misconduct claims against the ex-SNP leader.
A special committee will investigate the Scottish Government’s legal battle with Mr Salmond, Holyrood chiefs confirmed yesterday.
This will include looking into the secret talks between Miss Sturgeon and her predecessor about the two complaints of sexual misconduct against him, relating to his time as first minister. He denies the allegations.
The cross-party committee will also examine the reasons for the legal U-turn by the Government, which handed Mr Salmond victory and left the taxpayer with a bill of at least £500,000.
Mr Salmond launched a judicial review last year into the Government’s handling of its inquiry into the allegations against him.
Last week, the Court of Session branded the probe ‘unlawful’. The Holyrood committee will now focus on the processes followed by civil servants, including Permanent Secretary Leslie Evans.
It was announced as the bitter war of words between the First Minister and her former mentor continued, amid new allegations about when Miss Sturgeon’s top adviser knew about complaints against Mr Salmond.
Yesterday, critics compared Miss Sturgeon to former US President Richard Nixon, who was brought down by the Watergate scandal.
Confirmation of the Holyrood probe comes only two days after Miss Sturgeon referred herself to the panel of independent advisers to consider whether she breached the ministerial code of conduct.
Scottish Conservative interim leader Jackson Carlaw said: ‘An investigation has been botched, two complainants have been let down and hundreds of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money has been wasted.’
He added: ‘This scandal cannot be swept under the carpet. Parliament must, and now will, get the chance to probe this matter fully, learn lessons and ensure it can never happen again.’
It comes amid revelations that Miss Sturgeon failed to publicly disclose five discussions with Mr Salmond, when they spoke about the SNP Government’s inquiry.
The First Minister is expected to be called to give evidence, as is her chief of staff, Liz Lloyd, who helped set up a meeting between Miss Sturgeon and her predecessor in April last year. Mr Salmond is also expected to be called.
A Government spokesman said it ‘will of course fully co-operate with the parliamentary inquiry’.
A spokesman for Mr Salmond said: ‘Alex will be happy to cooperate, in principle and if asked, with a parliamentary inquiry which seeks to examine how the administration of the Scottish Government could get itself into a position where the Court of Session had to rule that it had acted “unlawfully”, “unfairly” and “tainted by apparent bias”.’
Meanwhile, Mr Salmond’s former chief of staff, Geoff Aberdein, said yesterday he met Miss Lloyd at her request on March 6 last year.
They then arranged the meeting between Mr Salmond and Miss Sturgeon on April 2, when the complaints were discussed by the pair for the first time.
Mr Aberdein said Miss Lloyd told him in ‘late March’ that she ‘suspected the Scottish Government had received an official complaint about Mr Salmond’.
Yesterday, Miss Sturgeon’s official spokesman did not challenge the details provided by Mr Aberdein. But he said: ‘Liz is the subject of what is quite openly now being briefed as a vendetta.’
He added: ‘There is an agenda at play here in terms of Liz’s involvement. That has been made abundantly clear in terms of what has been briefed by the other side.’
He refused to comment on whether Miss Sturgeon knew of any allegations against Mr Salmond before the April 2 meeting, which she has publicly insisted was about ‘party business’.
Mr Carlaw said: ‘The revelations that it was Liz Lloyd that initiated these discussions and then had a further meeting to discuss the issue again, and all ahead of a meeting the First Minister then had on April 2, which left the First Minister unaware what the content was going to be... it stretches the bounds of all credibility.
‘If true, the chief of staff was failing in her duty. If not true, the First Minister was even more reckless in proceeding with the discussion. If you behave like Richard Nixon, you will end up with the same outcome as Richard Nixon.’