SCOTLAND’S sole Liberal Democrat MP Alistair Carmichael has told the Frenchgate “trial” that he did not tell a Cabinet Office inquiry the truth about his role in a leaked memo until five days after he was re-elected to Parliament.
The former Scottish Secretary yesterday told an Election Court in Edinburgh that he had not been truthful about the part he played in The Daily Telegraph being given a confidential memo that later proved to be a false account of a private conversation between Nicola Sturgeon and the French Ambassador to the UK.
He said he “explained the full background” when he was interviewed during the official inquiry on May 12, adding that he thought it would be “politically beneficial” for the memo to be leaked.
Carmichael’s evidence came on the first of a four-day sitting of the Election Court, which is sitting in Scotland for the first time in more than 50 years.
Four of his Orkney and Shetland constituents have brought the action under Section 106 of the Representation of the People Act 1983, paid for through a crowdfunding appeal that by last had night raised nearly £128,000.
Carmichael told Jonathan Mitchell QC, who is acting for the petitioners, that he gave Euan Roddin, his special adviser or spad, permission to leak the memo to The Daily Telegraph while they were travelling on a flight between Copenhagen and the Faroe Islands.
The story appeared prominently in the paper on April 3, and the Cabinet Office probe was launched under civil service chief Sir Jeremy Heywood.
Carmichael said that because his spad released the document, he could have avoided telling any lies to the inquiry.
He told Mitchell: “I didn’t know it would require me to deny it. I felt I could truthfully answer that I hadn’t leaked it.”
Mitchell said the evidence trail only emerged because Roddin had used his own phone to contact the newspaper.
However, Carmichael denied misleading the inquiry and added: “The inquiry has to find evidence and put evidence to the people.”
He admitted that his conduct “fell south” of that expected of a government minister and said he thought the government probe would not uncover the truth about the leak.
“It has to be said that most leak inquiries very rarely establish the source of the leak,” said Carmichael.
The court heard there were 28 people who had knowledge of the memo and they had to complete a questionnaire for the inquiry.
“You are obviously at this stage not coming up with the truth of the matter, are you?” asked Mitchell.
Carmichael replied: “I was not giving the full truth.”
He added that he ultimately accepted responsibility when he was interviewed for the inquiry.
Mitchell asked him: “On the 12th of May you go to a face-to-face interview. At that point you say for the first time ‘I did it, I’m the person’.”
Carmichael replied: “I explained the full background, yes.”
Mitchell then suggested Carmichael had therefore “managed to keep the ball in the air until after the election”.
“No,” replied the MP.
Carmichael denied a suggestion from Mitchell that he had left Roddin “hanging out to dry”, and said he had decided to reveal his role after becoming concerned about his spad's wellbeing following the election.
He added: “He [Roddin] was legally represented. He was under enormous pressure on social media.”
Carmichael also said that Roddin felt the document should be given to a newspaper, adding: “Euan felt very strongly that this was information that should be put in the public domain.”
The proceedings were earlier branded a “political show trial” by an ally of Carmichael’s – LibDem MSP Tavish Scott.
He said people felt the action was being funded by those who “do not want opposition in this country”.
Scott, a former leader of the Scottish Liberal Democrats, was called by the Orkney four to give evidence and, during sometimes heated exchanges with Mitchell, he said: “I think people don’t like these proceedings.
“They think it’s a political show trial. They think it’s a political event being funded by people, particularly Nationalists, who do not want opposition in this country.”
The court heard how, in a local newspaper dated May 27, Scott was reported as giving his backing to the “embattled” Carmichael.
In it, he was reported as being “disappointed” by the actions of his party colleague and feeling “let down”.
Scott said: “The best idea is not to lie in politics.”
The first witness yesterday was Fiona Grahame, a Scottish Green Party activist and one of the petitioners bringing the case.
The 57-year-old business owner, of Sandwick, Orkney, told the court that she respected Carmichael.
“He was extremely hard working. He did help a lot of people,” she said.
But her opinion of him changed when the truth about the leak became known, and she said she felt “shocked”.
She said: “It was hard to get your head around. I can’t understand why somebody who you trusted and respected so much, and who had an important position in Scotland as well, could lie to the people of Orkney and Shetland.”
The hearing continues today.
Alistair Carmichael has no chance to dodge the question as a witness in Election Court
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here