John Swinney issues 'unfair' claim over Nicola Sturgeon ministerial code probe demands
John Swinney has insisted he has “absolutely no intention” of agreeing to calls for a judge-led inquiry into conflict-of-interest concerns over a probe into whether Nicola Sturgeon broke the ministerial code during the Alex Salmond affair.
On Saturday, more than 100 pages of emails and legal advice relating to the case were published, in a move Mr Swinney said was agreed to “reluctantly”.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdScottish Information Commissioner David Hamilton had ordered the documents to be released. And while the papers showed lawyers initially advised the Scottish Government the prospects of an appeal against an Freedom of Information ruling were “reasonable”, there were also “significant presentational risks for ministers”.
In the documents made public, legal advisers to SNP ministers raised concerns about the lack of “distance” between the inquiry and the Government.
The investigation by James Hamilton took place amid concerns that Ms Sturgeon had misled Parliament in relation to meetings she had with her predecessor Mr Salmond in the wake of harassment complaints made against him.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdBut in March 2021, Mr Hamilton, the independent adviser to the Scottish Government on the ministerial code, cleared Ms Sturgeon of any breach.
The secretariat for Mr Hamilton’s investigation was headed by an unnamed Scottish Government civil servant who continued to work in her normal role while seconded to the inquiry on a part-time basis.
The documents revealed the civil servant continued to use her “normal” online work accounts for her work for the inquiry and her usual Scottish Government job even though other officials could gain access.
Lawyers said they were “not aware that anybody accessed the mailbox during the period when information about the inquiry would have been present in the mailbox”, but warned “it is, however, theoretically possible that it could have been accessed by other Scottish Government officials”.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdREAD MORE: Scottish Government delay over publishing Nicola Sturgeon legal advice 'wholly unacceptable'
Delivering a statement in Holyrood on Tuesday, Mr Swinney stressed “as is normal in circumstances where the Government establishes short-term inquiries, this secretariat was drawn from the civil service”.
He said: “I wish to be clear at this point that the individual chosen to undertake this work was not a special adviser, but a non-political, career civil servant of impeccable record and repute.
“Despite being known at the time, concerns have now been raised that a civil servant provided the secretariat function.”
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdMr Swinney told MSPs that “questioning the independence and integrity of James Hamilton and of a civil servant who cannot publicly defend themselves” was “unwarranted, unfair and unsupported by the facts”.
The First Minister outlined examples of his contact with Mr Hamilton throughout the inquiry, but stressed “the first I knew of any of the contents of James Hamilton’s report was when he delivered his report to us on March 22, 2021.”
Asked by former Scottish Tories leader Douglas Ross whether Ms Sturgeon had any contact with the seconded Scottish Government civil servant who headed the inquiry secretariat during the probe, Mr Swinney said: “Not to my knowledge.”
But Scottish Conservative leader Russell Findlay claimed the seconded civil servant was “hopelessly and fatally conflicted”.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdHe said: “The Government then spent huge sums of money trying to keep all of this secret from the public. Despite his protests, the First Minister's fingerprints are all over this cover up.”
Mr Findlay asked the First Minister if he would “agree to a judge-led inquiry to uncover the true extent of his actions”. But Mr Swinney rejected the demand.
He said: I have absolutely no intention of commissioning a judge-led inquiry into all of this business for the simple reason that I have disclosed the information that the commissioner requested.”
Comments
Want to join the conversation? Please or to comment on this article.