STURGEON FIGHTS TO SAVE JOB
Salmond launches devastating attack on First Minister’s leadership — and says she DID mislead parliament in damning evidence to Holyrood probe
NICOLA Sturgeon faces a battle to save her career after Alex Salmond swore under oath she broke strict rules which could force her resignation.
In a six-hour grilling at a Holyrood inquiry, he made a series of claims which could put his former protégé’s career on the line.
He also called for the resignation of officials involved in the Scottish Government investigation into his conduct , which cost taxpayers more than £500,000 after it was found by the Court of Session to have been ‘unlawful’ and ‘tainted by apparent bias’.
In a remarkable attack on the First Minister, he accused her of
multiple breaches of the ministerial code and of misleading parliament.
He disputed her account of their meetings at her home, saying she was aware beforehand that they were set up to discuss complaints about him to the Scottish Government.
If found to be true, she would have breached the ministerial code by failing to disclose details of the meetings.
Miss Sturgeon is under investigation by James Hamilton, QC, over whether she breached the rules. If found guilty, she would be expected to resign.
Mr Salmond told MSPs: ‘These are, to me, clear breaches of the ministerial code. What happens as a result is not for me, it’s for this committee, it’s for Mr James Hamilton, it’s for others.’
Scottish Tory leader Douglas Ross said: ‘Devastating evidence has revealed SNP cover-ups, costly mistakes and terrible errors of judgment.
‘The number of accusations of misleading parliament and breaking the ministerial code are extraordinary.
‘The entire leadership of the party of government are on the ropes. They are fighting for their political careers.’
In other dramatic developments yesterday, Mr Salmond:
■ Called for the resignation of Lord Advocate James Wolffe and Permanent Secretary Leslie Evans over the ‘unlawful’ investigation into complaints;
■ Claimed he was the victim of a ‘malicious’ plot devised to sweep away the ‘cataclysmic’ loss of the legal battle because senior figures knew they were heading for defeat;
■ Accused Miss Sturgeon’s
‘Terrible errors of judgment’
husband, SNP chief executive Peter Murrell, of pressurising police to step up their investigation of the complaints;
■ Called for a police probe into a ‘politically inspired’ leak.
In explosive comments, Mr Salmond said: ‘It is absolutely certain that the meeting on March 29 in the Scottish parliament was pre-arranged for the express purpose of Nicola being briefed on the situation with regard to me and complaints, and the meeting on April 2 arose from the meeting, or the final arrangements for it at least, arose from the meeting of March 29.
‘Otherwise, how on earth would I have known to turn up on April 2? There is no other way the invitation could be gathered.’
He added: ‘If the meeting of March 29 is admitted, and indeed the subject matter is admitted, then it makes it very difficult to argue that the meeting of April 2 was on party business, as opposed to government business.
‘All I would say is that meeting was, in Nicola’s terms, “forgotten about”, but she says she was reminded about it in late January 2019 or early February 2019 in evidence to the committee.
‘If that were the case then under the ministerial code, the correct thing to do would be to correct the record as timeously as possible as opposed to waiting 18 months until Sky News broadcast it, as is what happened.’
He added: ‘In terms of the breach of the ministerial code, I would have thought either explanation breaches the ministerial code.
‘Because either the meeting on March 29 wasn’t forgotten about and parliament was deliberately misled or alternatively it was forgotten about and parliament wasn’t informed when she was reminded of it.
‘All I can do is come here and tell you the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth – with the frustration, of course, that we all know there is evidence in terms of March 2018 which this committee is prohibited from hearing.’
In his opening remarks to the inquiry, Mr Salmond said that the civil service and the Crown Office had not failed but its leadership had. He added: ‘Scotland hasn’t failed, its leadership has failed.’
He also criticised Miss Sturgeon for ‘effectively’ questioning his acquittal last year when a court cleared him of 13 charges of sexual assault.
Mr Salmond said: ‘I watched in astonishment on Wednesday when the First Minister used a Covid press conference
‘Leadership has failed’
to effectively question the results of a jury.’
At the end of his evidence, Mr Salmond called on the inquiry to use legal powers to call for his legal team to release the messages, which he says corroborate some of his key claims.
A spokesman for Miss Sturgeon said: ‘Today was Alex Salmond’s chance to provide proof of the conspiracy which has been alleged – and he did not do so.
‘Instead, under oath, he explicitly conceded there was no such evidence against the First Minister.
‘The First Minister now looks forward to addressing all of the issues Mr Salmond raised – and much more besides.’
Alex Salmond’s appearance before the Holyrood inquiry yesterday was unprecedented. A former First Minister outlined a series of charges, each more incendiary than the previous one, that painted a shocking portrait of government conniving, collusion and cover-up.
He alleged there had been ‘pressurising witnesses, colluding with witnesses and the construction of evidence’.
He alleged a complainant had been identified in a crucial meeting. He alleged there had been a ‘calculated and deliberate suppression of key evidence’.
Allegations, to be believed or disbelieved by the committee and the public, but allegations made under oath. The very suggestion that such things could happen in Scotland – a modern, 21st century democracy – is nothing short of scandalous.
It is imperative that these charges are rigorously (and vigorously) examined.
However, it is unclear that this can be done unless Mr Salmond is allowed to present his evidence in full, without fear of prosecution and, vitally, while shielding the identities of the complainers.
Members of the inquiry will pore over Mr Salmond’s evidence – including the matter of contacts between Mr Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon and those affiliated to them.
Miss Sturgeon told Holyrood she learned of the accusations against Mr Salmond at a meeting in her home. Mr Salmond submitted that the nature of that meeting had been established four days prior in a summit involving his former chief of staff.
Miss Sturgeon said she believed the encounter to have been a party political matter. Mr Salmond maintains it was plainly about the claims levelled against him under the Government’s harassment procedure.
If Mr Salmond’s version of events is accurate, there can be no doubt what must happen. Miss Sturgeon must take responsibility. Not just a civil servant or a bag-carrier, the First Minister herself.
She must put the integrity of government ahead of her personal or party interests.
If she has been found to have misled parliament, or to have broken the ministerial code, she must resign. No ifs, no buts.