[ad_1]
Nicola Sturgeon has said there is an “alternative explanation” to claims that his officials gave the name of a woman who had filed a sexual harassment complaint against Alex Salmond to her former chief of staff in a major breach of trust.
When he presented evidence for the investigation into his government’s handling of complaints on Wednesday morning, the former prime minister’s office confirmed that he has filed a formal complaint with the highest-ranking Scottish government official, Leslie Evans, about the official who has been charged with – and has denied – revealing the name of the whistleblower.
Sturgeon is under intense pressure to respond to multiple allegations that she misled parliament, after previously secret legal advice and new witness evidence released Tuesday night led to calls for her resignation as prime minister.
During four hours of evidence Wednesday morning, Sturgeon was asked about a letter from Salmond’s attorney, Duncan Hamilton, saying that Salmond’s former assistant Geoff Aberdein had told him in early March 2018 that he was He had leaked the name of a whistleblower against Salmond. by one of your senior officials. This account of events was reiterated by Kevin Pringle, a former special adviser when Salmond was prime minister.
Sturgeon told the MSPs: “It did not happen in the manner described.”
Asked by Scottish conservative Murdo Fraser who could corroborate the different version of events suggested by his senior official, Sturgeon replied: is establishing “.
In a previous reply, he said that he did not accept as fact that it had happened and that he believed there was an “alternative explanation.”
He added that when he met Salmond at his home on April 2, 2018, when he said he first learned the merits of the allegations, he knew the identity of a whistleblower because he had previously apologized to her for his behavior towards her. . and he had done his own research to find out the other woman’s name. He added that he did not recall Salmond “giving the impression that he knew the identity because someone from the Scottish government told him so.”
Describing Salmond as “one of the people closest to me in my entire life,” he continued to deny that there was any plot against him. Salmond has alleged that there was a “malicious plan” by government and party officials close to Sturgeon, including her husband, Peter Murrell, who is the SNP’s executive director, to destroy his reputation.
She was later questioned by Scottish Liberal Democrat committee member Alex Cole-Hamilton about when she learned of the allegations against Salmond. This is one of the main charges brought against her by her former mentor. Salmond, supported by two other witnesses, claims that Aberdein informed him about them in his office on March 29, 2018. Sturgeon previously told Holyrood and the media that he first learned of them from Salmond himself. , at their meeting at his home on April 2.
She told Cole-Hamilton that she had had a “persistent suspicion” about Salmond since the Sky News investigation in November 2017 in relation to his alleged behavior at Edinburgh airport.
“Before April 2 I had knowledge that there was a complaint, without a doubt I had suspicions about what the nature of that could be, but that is what it was, a general conscience, a suspicion, which without a doubt had all kinds of theories in my head “.
At that meeting, he said, Salmond asked him to read a letter Evans had sent him detailing the allegations.
“But it was reading the letter from the permanent secretary, which he showed me on April 2, that gave me the knowledge and the details behind that knowledge.”
Later, independent MSP Andy Wightman asked him about further evidence from Hamilton that Sturgeon had assured Salmond at that meeting that she would intervene in the investigation on his behalf, saying, “If the time comes, I will.”
Sturgeon told the MSPs: “I think I made it clear that I would not intervene. I also know that I was trying to gently disappoint a longtime friend and colleague and maybe I did it too gently and he left with an impression I didn’t want to give. “
She insisted: “I had no intention of intervening and, more importantly, I did not intervene.”
