The Courier & Advertiser (Fife Edition)
First Minister mounts her defence
“I refused to follow the age old pattern of allowing a powerful man to use his status and connections to get what he wants.”
Nicola Sturgeon on Alex Salmond at Holyrood inquiry
First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has insisted she would “never have wanted to ‘get’ Alex Salmond”, while giving evidence under oath during eight hours of grilling yesterday by a Scottish Government committee.
In her opening statement she apologised to the public and the women who submitted sexual harassment complaints about Mr Salmond, admitting there had been a “very serious mistake” in the government’s botched investigation.
However, Ms Sturgeon argued she had “refused to follow the age-old pattern of allowing a powerful man to use his status and connections to get what he wants”, following claims her former ally wanted her to intervene in the process.
But last night opposition politicians said “serious questions remain” over the conduct of the first minister.
The Holyrood committee questioned the first minister in depth on allegations she breached the ministerial code over meetings in 2018.
Ms Sturgeon initially informed MSPs she was told about a complaints process that was under way against Mr Salmond when she met him at her home on April 2 2018.
However, she later said she had “forgotten” about another meeting four days earlier with Geoff Aberdein, former chief of staff to Mr Salmond.
Mr Salmond has claimed these talks set up the April 2 meeting.
However, the first minister told MSPs Mr Aberdein “did indicate a harassment-type issue had arisen, but my recollection is he did so in general terms”.
Describing the April 2 meeting, she said while he denied the complaints against him, he gave his account of “one of the incidents complained of which he said he had apologised for at the time”.
Ms Sturgeon said: “What he described constituted in my view, deeply inappropriate behaviour.”
Of her decision not to record the meeting, the first minister said she did
“not want to compromise the independence or the confidentiality of the process under way”.
She maintained she did not get involved in the Scottish Government’s investigation, and it would have been an “abuse of power” to have “intervened on behalf of Alex Salmond to try to engineer the outcome he wanted”.
Scottish Conservative leader Douglas Ross said it was “plainly absurd” for Ms Sturgeon to “ask us to believe her account of a secret meeting she claims to have forgotten entirely, instead of the evidence of multiple witnesses”.
His party has called for Ms Sturgeon to resign after two witnesses backed up Alex Salmond’s claim that the first minister misled Parliament about a meeting with her predecessor.
Written evidence from Duncan Hamilton – a former SNP MSP and lawyer for Mr Salmond, and the SNP’s former communications director Kevin Pringle – reveal they both believe Ms Sturgeon was aware the meeting would be about the government’s investigation of Mr Salmond.
Mr Ross said: “Geoff Aberdein’s account can be corroborated. The alternative version of events cannot, so it is now clear that Nicola Sturgeon repeatedly misled the Scottish Parliament.”
Scottish Labour deputy leader Jackie Baillie said while the first minister’s appearance was “welcome”, it is “not much further forward in understanding her role in this failure of the Scottish Parliament”.
She said: “On several occasions Nicola Sturgeon has stated she did not offer to intervene in the process in favour of Mr Salmond.
“This has been disputed by several witnesses. It is unbelievable the reason for this discrepancy in accounts is she was trying to let Mr Salmond down gently. Time and time again, Nicola Sturgeon assumed responsibility for the litany of failures of her government but still no one has resigned.”
Ms Baillie said “serious questions remain over the first minister’s conduct”.
The public civil war between Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond is a personal tragedy masquerading as political drama. It is a sorry tale that reflects poorly on almost everyone involved and has raised important questions about Scotland and its governance.
When two women came forward in early 2018 with historical allegations about Mr Salmond, it was an opportunity to prove Scotland is a forward looking country that treats everyone equally and with fairness.
Unfortunately the Scottish Government botched the process horribly, utterly failing the women involved and Mr Salmond himself.
The former first minister’s anger over that shambles – and the criminal trial that followed in which he was acquitted of all charges – is palpable.
It is worth remembering the committee inquiry was not set up to help him settle old scores but get to the bottom of this murky business.
Ms Sturgeon was yesterday convincing on her motives but vague on the detail of her actions.
Why did she forget a key meeting? Why does her account of important events differ from others involved?
Wider questions also remain unanswered – not least the impact it will have on May’s Holyrood election and any future independence referendum.
But it is impossible to consider this sorry mess without concluding that Scotland’s institutions failed their first MeToo test.