Nicola Sturgeon on the ‘moment she will never forget’ when Alex Salmond showed her letter of harassment she was facing | UK News

Scotland’s Prime Minister Nicola Sturgeon has spoken of the “moment she will never forget” when Alex Salmond showed her a letter detailing allegations of sexual harassment against her.

She told a committee of the Scottish Parliament: “What he described constituted, in my opinion, deeply inappropriate behavior on his part, perhaps another reason why that moment is so ingrained in my mind.”

Remembering when Mr. Salmond delivered the letter to her home in Glasgow on April 2, 2018, Mrs. Sturgeon He said: “My head was spinning, I was experiencing a whirlwind of emotions, Alex Salmond had said something quite shocking to me and there were several things in my head.”

Sturgeon faces calls from Scottish Conservatives to resign following claims that he misled parliament about meeting with his predecessor.

He said he did not “immediately record the April 2 meeting” as he did not want it to be made public and ran the risk of “violating the confidentiality of the process.”

He added that he had no intention of intervening in the investigation process and did not intervene, saying that doing so would have been an abuse of his role.

The prime minister had originally claimed that she first learned of the Scottish government investigation into Salmond on April 2, 2018, before later admitting to attending a meeting on March 29 with former Salmond chief of staff, Geoff. Aberdein.

Aberdein claims that he discussed the complaints with her at that meeting in his office.

Mrs. Sturgeon I was testifying before the Holyrood harassment committee. At the hearing:

• He said April 2 was when “any suspicion or general awareness that there was a problem turned into real, detailed knowledge.”
• He said that at the March 29 meeting, Mr. Aberdein “indicated that a harassment-type problem had arisen, but I recall that he did so in general terms.”
• I wish his memory of the March meeting were “more vivid,” but “it was the detail of the complaints under procedure that was given to me on April 2 that was significant and indeed shocking.”
• She denied having any reason to “catch” Mr. Salmond
• She denied having misled parliament and insisted that the government has nothing to hide.
• He said it was “absurd” to suggest that someone acted maliciously or conspired against Salmond.
• He apologized to two women who filed complaints against Salmond.

She refuted the allegations made by her predecessor in her testimony last week that she had violated the ministerial code on several occasions.

On the government’s failed investigation into the allegations against Salmond, he said the two women who had complained about him had been defrauded by a “very serious mistake.”

And he repeated his apologies to them and to the taxpayer for the hundreds of thousands spent on his government’s judicial review of the Salmond investigation.

His £ 512,000 legal costs were paid by the Scottish government in August 2019 after the review ruled that the government’s investigation into the complaints was “tainted by apparent bias”.

He was acquitted of 13 charges in March 2020 following a criminal trial.

Sturgeon denied having any reason to “catch” Mr. Salmond and called his claims of a plot against him “absurd.”

The prime minister rejected the “suggestion that someone acted maliciously or as part of a plot against Alex Salmond”, saying that the “claim is not based on any fact.”

He added: “There is nothing here for the government to hide.”

He said he acted “appropriately and appropriately” in handling the harassment allegations against his predecessor.

The prime minister addressed a central accusation that she violated the ministerial code by misleading parliament about when she learned of the complaints against Alex Salmond.

She told parliament that Mr. Salmond told her when he delivered a letter detailing the complaints at his home on April 2, 2018.

That has been contradicted by an account by Geoff Aberdein, who has said that he discussed the complaints with her in his office four days earlier, on March 29, 2018.

Sturgeon told the committee that no specific details had been mentioned during the March meeting.

She said: “Geoff indicated that a bullying type problem had arisen, but my recollection is that he did it in general terms.

“Since a Sky News approach in November 2017 (regarding complaints by female staff at Edinburgh Airport of perceived ‘inappropriate’ behavior, which he denies) he had harbored a persistent suspicion that such problems in relation to the Mr. learning of a potential problem would not, in itself, have been a massive shock.

“What I remember most strongly from the conversation is how concerned Geoff seemed to be for Alex’s well-being and mood, which, as a friend, worried me.

“He also said that he thought Alex might be considering giving up his party membership.

“It was these factors that led me to meet him, and it was these factors that placed the April 2 meeting firmly in the personal and party space.”

Mr Salmond has said that the Prime Minister offered to intervene after he informed him of the complaints against him and that position is substantiated.

Duncan Hamilton QC, Salmond’s legal counsel, has told the investigation in a written communication that he attended the April 2 meeting and recalls that Sturgeon said: “If the time comes, I will step in.”

The prime minister insisted that she did not intervene and did not offer to do so.

There has been controversy surrounding the fact that she did not record the April 2, 2018 meeting as a government matter out of a “desire to protect the independence and confidentiality of the process.”

Salmond had said that none of those present at the April 2, 2018 meeting had any doubts about what the meeting had been organized for.

Nicola Sturgeon responded to that suggestion, saying, “When he [Mr Salmond] He came to my house, insisted that I speak to me in private, away from him (others in the house).

“That would not have been necessary if there had already been a shared understanding on the part of all of us.”

The Scottish government released its legal advice on the eve of Ms Sturgeon’s witness appearance.

He had raised concerns among the government’s legal advisers about losing a challenge to a judicial review initiated by Mr. Salmond.

He has claimed that it constituted a breach of the ministerial code by the prime minister because she allowed her government to continue a costly legal action that was doomed to fail.

Sturgeon rejected any non-compliance, saying: “In any legal challenge a government faces, there is a balance of risk. That risk cannot be eliminated, but the task of ministers is to carefully consider all the advice we receive and consider the public interest more. large .

“And the evidence in the ministerial code is not the opinion of external lawyers but of law enforcement officials.”

On Mr Salmond’s claim that he was the victim of a plot by leading figures in the SNP and the Scottish government to harm him and remove him from public life, Sturgeon called this “absurd”.

She said: “That statement is not based on any fact. What happened is this and it is simple.

“Several women made serious complaints about Alex Salmond’s behavior.

“The government, despite the mistake it undoubtedly made, tried to do the right thing.

“As prime minister, I refused to follow the old pattern of allowing a powerful man to use his status and connections to get what he wants.”

Analysis: Nicola and Alex, best friends and worst enemies

By James Matthews, Scotland Correspondent

Nicola Sturgeon’s term of endearment was a reminder of how close they were. So too, a voice that didn’t break with emotion but occasionally tensed.

Nicola and Alex, the best friends and the worst enemies: the political force that could not have fought more.

Their combined 14 hours of eyewitness evidence was a fight over what he said, he said. It was the same before they sat in the hot seat and will remain long after you are gone.

The Scottish government was quick to issue a press release saying it had “dismantled all claims against him”.

The opinion is not necessarily shared by the bullying committee, which will, after all, be judge and jury.

One member of the opposition stated that their work “is not progressing any further” as they are still awaiting key documents from the Scottish government.

Another noted that corroborated evidence still exists to contradict the prime minister’s testimony.

It is clear that much of this story remains to be written, the suspense is which of the ‘best friends’ comes out worse.