Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner.

Calls for Sturgeon to quit following submissions in Salmond inquiry

Calls have been made for Nicola Sturgeon to resign as First Minister of Scotland
Calls have been made for Nicola Sturgeon to resign as First Minister of Scotland

Calls have been made for First Minister Nicola Sturgeon to resign following submissions to the committee running the rule over the Alex Salmond inquiry into alleged sexual harassment.

Evidence has been provided suggesting that taxpayer funds were used to fund a legal fight against Mr Salmond, despite being warned the government was going to lose.

Submissions from two other witnesses have also raised questions over Ms Sturgeon’s recollection of her involvement in the saga.

First Minister of Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon

The current first minister, who is due to face the Holyrood inquiry into the affair tomorrow, has been warned she will face a vote of no confidence from the Scottish Conservatives for breaching the ministerial code “on numerous counts”.

‘No longer any doubt’

Leader Douglas Ross said: “Credible witnesses have now backed up Alex Salmond’s claims and the legal advice shows the government knew months in advance that the judicial review was doomed but they still went on to waste more than £500,000 of taxpayers’ money.

“There is no longer any doubt that Nicola Sturgeon lied to the Scottish Parliament and broke the Ministerial Code on numerous counts.”

He continued: “No First Minister can be allowed to mislead the Scottish people and continue in office, especially when they have tried to cover up the truth and abused the power of their office in the process.

“The weight of the evidence is overwhelming. Nicola Sturgeon must resign.

“No evidence she can provide tomorrow will counter the claims of numerous witnesses or refute that her government ignored the legal advice for months and lost more than £500,000 of taxpayers’ money in the process.

“We will be submitting a Vote of No Confidence in the first minister.”

Utterly irresponsible

Commenting on the Conservatives’ statement regarding a confidence motion, a spokesperson for the First Minister said: “The First Minister will address all of the issues raised – and much more besides – at the committee tomorrow, while the independent adviser on the ministerial code will report in due course.

“But to call a vote of no confidence in the middle of a pandemic, before hearing a single word of the First Minister’s evidence, is utterly irresponsible.

“It is for the public to decide who they want to govern Scotland and – while we continue to fight the covid pandemic – with the election campaign starting in just 20 days, that is precisely what they will be able to do.”

Reservations raised prior to handing over of documents

Deputy First Minister John Swinney had already agreed to hand over legal advice under threat of a no-confidence vote, and acknowledged “reservations were raised” by government lawyers about the way allegations about Mr Salmond were investigated.

Former first minister Alex Salmond gave evidence to the Scottish Parliament’s Harassment committee on Friday.

The Scottish Government launched an investigation into allegations of sexual harassment by the former first minister, but it was found to be unlawful, unfair and “tainted by apparent bias” because of prior contact between the investigating officer and two of the women who complained.

Redacted legal advice published by the Scottish Government this evening has shown that lawyers advised them in September 2018 that there “is a real risk that the court may be persuaded by the petitioner’s case in respect of the ground of challenge based on ‘procedural unfairness’.”

On December 6, 2018 legal advisers told ministers that in their view the “least worst option” would be to concede the petition.

They wrote: “We understand how unpalatable that advice will be, and we do not tender it lightly.

“But we cannot let the respondents sail forth into January’s hearing without the now very real risks of doing so being crystal clear to all concerned.”

Open about contact with complainers

Although the investigating officer, Judith Mackinnon, said under oath that she had always been open about the contact with complainers, Scottish Government lawyers purportedly did not learn of it until October 2018, nine months after the investigation began.

It took the Scottish Government until January 8 for the government to concede the case – a week before the full judicial review was due to start.

The former first minister, who was awarded maximum legal costs of £512,250 in part because of the late concession, has alleged that the government had hoped a looming criminal trial would “ride to the rescue” and prevent its unlawful investigation suffering a “cataclysmic” civil court defeat.

In November 2020, the Scottish Parliament twice passed motions demanding the government publish all the legal advice it had received about Mr Salmond’s judicial review.

After a motion of no confidence was lodged, on Monday, in the deputy first minister, over the government’s refusal to comply with the will of parliament, Mr Swinney agreed to hand over the “key” legal advice to the Holyrood inquiry into the botched investigation.

Deputy First Minister, John Swinney

In a letter ahead of the release of the legal advice, Mr Swinney acknowledged lawyers had raised “reservations” about the issue of prior contact.

But he insisted there were “good public policy arguments and reasonable grounds for the government to continue to defend the judicial review and to seek a determination from the court on the matters raised, until the events of late December 2018”.

That December, a private civil court commission was held ahead of the planned court hearing as part of efforts by Mr Salmond’s legal team to get the government to hand over evidence.

Mr Swinney, who is leading the government’s response to the committee after First Minister Nicola Sturgeon recused herself, suggested he agreed to release the legal advice over concern that the allegations “could impact negatively on public confidence in the parliament, government and even our justice institutions”.

Already a subscriber? Sign in

[[title]]

[[text]]