Cocaine, suicide, blackmail and me, by Steven Purcell

• Former Glasgow City Council leader, Steven Purcell, has admitted taking cocaine 'half a dozen times' at parties. Picture: Robert Perry

The disgraced former politician said he had taken the drug "half a dozen times" at parties and spoke of fears he could be the subject of a blackmail attempt.

In an interview with the Sun, Mr Purcell also confessed to having a problem with alcohol, brought on by feelings of "loneliness" and the stress of running Scotland's largest council.

He claimed it was his relationship with drink that saw him check into a rehab clinic, despite revelations published in The Scotsman that council chiefs were set to disclose Mr Purcell had a "chemical dependency".

And in a damaging revelation for the Glasgow administration, he said senior colleagues knew of his drug-taking for months but took no action "on condition it never happened again".

Mr Purcell spoke to Scottish Sun editor David Dinsmore, a regular lunch colleague during his time as the leader of Glasgow Council. He used the interview to outline his anguish in the months leading up to his resignation and speak of his time spent in the Castle Craig clinic in Peebleshire.

But it is the admission he took cocaine and was warned by senior police officers he was at risk of being blackmailed that has sparked most controversy, with some political opponents insisting the interview raised more serious questions about the scandal.

MR PURCELL insisted he took cocaine "no more than half a dozen times" at house parties. "I was offered cocaine at a party and I accepted," he said. "I used cocaine a handful of times – maybe five or six, no more – over a couple of years. Why did I do it? Stupidity while drinking. I can't explain it any other way."

Discussing the meeting he had with two officers from the Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency (SCDEA) in his City Chambers office, Mr Purcell said: "They told me that during the course of an investigation they came across information that could mean I was subject to blackmail because of the use of cocaine.

"They said there might be a video of me using cocaine and that could be used to blackmail me. I told them I wasn't the subject of blackmail and have never been the subject of blackmail."

He claimed to have pledged to never take the drug again. "The last time I used it was a year ago, a few weeks before the police came to see me," he insisted. "I told close colleagues at the council about it because I think it is important to be honest. They were happy for me to (continue in post] – with the strict condition that it never happened again."

Mr Purcell was speaking for the first time since news of his resignation broke on 2 March. A vigorous campaign by PR firm Media House and lawyer Peter Watson followed, to keep tales of his drug-taking out of the media. The former councillor insisted he had suffered from increasing loneliness during the past year, brought on by the stress of running the city and dealing with the arrangements for the 2014 Commonwealth Games.

This, he claimed, had led to drinking binges that came to a head in the weekend prior to his resignation.

"I was drinking on my own at home – glass after glass of wine. My head was literally bursting with the pressure." He went on: "On the Friday morning, I was in the office and actually had quite a good, constructive meeting with Labour MSPs.

"BUT by lunchtime I couldn't take any more and left the office and went home to drink again. I felt that everything I had built over the last five years was coming crashing down one by one. By the Saturday, I was contemplating suicide. I thought to myself, 'Life isn't worth living like this'."

Mr Purcell, who claimed not to be an alcoholic, revealed that in the days following his resignation, he had travelled to rural Australia to escape the pressure.

He apologised for letting his family, constituents and colleagues down, and conceded that his political career was now over.

But the SNP said his comments "left more questions than answers" for the council. Glasgow East MP John Mason said he had again written to police to urge them to investigate Mr Purcell amid fears he could have been subject to undue influence during his time at the helm of the city.

Meanwhile, at Westminster, SNP MP Angus Robertson raised a point of order in the chamber, calling on the Prime Minister to clarify what he knew of concerns surrounding Mr Purcell in Labour circles.

Glasgow City Council would not comment on the interview, insisting there was nothing new in the comments. But a senior council source confirmed a council officer had been in the room during the SCDEA interview, although they insisted no confession of drug-taking had been made by Mr Purcell during that meeting.

"There was nothing the council could have done, at that time, other than say that the SCDEA were wrong and launch an investigation," the source said, when asked why they did not take Mr Purcell to task. "That wasn't a tenable position for the council."

The SCDEA said they were unable to comment specifically on any contact they may have had with Mr Purcell.

CLOSE TIES

STEVEN Purcell spoke exclusively to David Dinsmore, editor of the Scottish Sun, in a move that is likely to stoke suggestions of an all-too-cosy relationship with certain sectors of the Scottish media.

In the aftermath of his resignation, the media storm that engulfed Mr Purcell became as much part of the story as the councillor's dramatic fall from grace, as a PR operation was carefully orchestrated by Media House chief Jack Irvine – himself a former Scottish Sun editor.

It later emerged Mr Purcell was part of a regular Friday lunch club that included Donald Martin, editor of the Herald.

It was the Herald that was initially briefed on Mr Purcell's resignation.

The latest PR efforts will do nothing to ease accusations that some media outlets went easy on the ex-council leader because of their relationship.

And it will not have gone un-noticed in Labour circles that a man once tipped as a future Scottish party leader spoke exclusively to a paper that has come out against the party ahead of the general election.