[ad_1]
Image copyright
PA media
Salmond won a £ 500,000 expense payment from the government for his failed investigation
The MSPs say an investigation into the Scottish government’s handling of the complaints against Alex Salmond cannot currently continue due to “obstruction”.
A committee was set up to investigate the failed investigation, which the government admitted was illegal.
But the convenor Linda Fabiani said he was “completely frustrated” by the lack of evidence provided.
He said the committee was still awaiting responses from the government, Mr. Salmond and SNP chief Peter Murrell.
This has meant that the committee has not been able to conduct any more testing sessions, and Ms Fabiani said the investigation “simply cannot continue at this stage.”
Another committee member, Labor MSP Jackie Baillie, claimed he was being treated as a “laughingstock” by the Scottish government and “many others involved in this matter.”
And Murdo Fraser of the Scottish Conservatives, who is also on the committee, said the investigation was turning into a “cover up.”
The Scottish government insisted that it was fully cooperating with the investigation and “strongly rejects any suggestion of obstruction”.
He also said that he intends to initiate legal proceedings aimed at allowing the delivery of more documents to the committee.
- Salmond ‘could go to court’ over investigative papers
The committee was established following a judicial review court case in which the Scottish government admitted that its internal investigation of two allegations of harassment against Mr Salmond had been illegal.
The government had to pay more than £ 500,000 in legal fees to the former prime minister, who was later acquitted of 13 counts of sexual assault in a separate criminal trial.
Several witnesses, including Permanent Secretary Leslie Evans and Lord Advocate James Wolffe, have testified to the committee thus far.
However, sessions with other witnesses, including Mr. Salmond, his successor Nicola Sturgeon, and her husband, Mr. Murrell, have had to be suspended while the MSPs on the committee try to have various documents delivered.
The committee has been locked in a dispute with the government over the release of documents related to the judicial review, while Salmond’s lawyers said they had been warned that it would be illegal for him to release some other documents.
Image copyright
PA media
Linda Fabiani said her committee “simply cannot continue at this stage.”
Ms Fabiani, who is an SNP MSP and one of the deputy chairs of Holyrood, urged everyone involved to “engage productively” with the cross-party group “so that it can continue the task at hand.”
She said: “The committee continues to be completely frustrated by the lack of evidence and, frankly, the obstruction it is experiencing.
“We were hoping to be in a position to hear more oral evidence, but with responses still pending from the Scottish government, the SNP executive director and the former prime minister, this all means that we simply cannot proceed at this stage.” “
‘Contempt shown’
Ms. Baillie went further and said that “the government and others are treating this committee like a laughingstock.”
She added: “The Scottish government and indeed many others involved in this matter have shown contempt for this committee and its aims.”
And Mr. Fraser said that “it now appears this investigation will be a cover-up,” and said that Sturgeon had undoubtedly “breached his promise to deliver all the materials that the investigation requested.
The prime minister had said in January 2019 that “the inquiries will be able to request the material they want, and I commit today that we will provide them with the material they request.”
Mr Fraser said that if the government did not release the documents that members had requested, it meant that Ms Sturgeon “has misled parliament.”
Image copyright
Scottish parliament
Ms Evans, the top Scottish government official, has faced the committee twice
A Scottish government spokesman said it had already provided the committee with more than 1,000 pages of relevant material, and that government witnesses also provided “many hours of oral evidence” so far.
He added: “When the committee has requested more information or clarification, we have followed up promptly in writing, including to correct inaccurate claims that documents had not been provided when in fact they had already been submitted.
“As the committee has recognized, the investigation involves sensitive information. We are providing the relevant information requested to the extent possible given the confidentiality, data protection and legal restrictions that apply and will continue to do so.”
Leslie Evans, the top Scottish government official, had previously assured members of the government of a “commitment to cooperate fully with this committee”, saying that “multiple files of information” had been released.
He also said the government “acted in good faith” in investigating the allegations against Salmond, and said it “had already learned the first lessons” from the defeat in the judicial review.
‘Relevant material’
Salmond’s lawyers have written to the MSPs saying the former prime minister was “very interested in providing as much information to the committee as the law allows” but said there were some “legal restrictions” on this.
They said the government had released “relevant material” during Salmond’s trial, but said they had been told it “would be a crime” for them to release it.
They added: “Our client cannot realistically provide a statement or documents that are partial and fragmented. Any meaningful statement will necessarily imply a reference to a large amount of the material that it is not authorized to publish, and in some cases, even access or refer to.”
Image copyright
PA media
Peter Murrell sent a written presentation to the MSPs, but the committee requested more details.
Murrell, the SNP’s executive director, sent a two-page written submission to the committee in August, saying that he had only learned of the complaints against Salmond when they were made public in 2018.
He said that he “had a feeling that something serious was being discussed” between Mr. Salmond and his wife, Mrs. Sturgeon, during a meeting at their home in Glasgow earlier that year, but said that “Nicola told me that I couldn’t discuss the details. ” .
Subsequently, Ms Fabiani responded by asking her to “re-examine certain questions asked by the committee to assess whether there is more evidence that she can provide.”
He specifically requested “relevant emails, minutes, notes, texts, articles and WhatsApp messages from all levels of the SNP.”
A SNP spokesperson said: “Mr. Murrell provided written evidence prior to the original August 4 deadline.
“The committee’s additional requests on September 9 did not set a deadline for a response; however, we are in an active dialogue with the secretaries about the additional information requested.”
A SNP deputy, former Holyrood Attorney General Kenny MacAskill, has called for action to be taken against Murrell over the WhatsApp messages he allegedly sent about the case.
MacAskill said he had been sent an anonymous letter “allegedly messages from the SNP’s executive director to another senior official” that “suggested pressure be put on the police investigating Alex Salmond.”
At the committee’s last public meeting, he heard complaints from Salmond’s top official that he “could display harassment and intimidating behavior,” although he said there were “no suggestions of sexual misconduct” and that issues were generally dealt with in a manner “informal”. .
Members have also heard complaints from unions that dozens of public officials have expressed concern about the behavior of “multiple ministers in multiple administrations.”
