ALEX Salmond could be a bully and intimidating, but no formal complaints were made against him during his final five years as First Minister, Scotland's former top civil servant has said.
Sir Peter Housden told a Holyrood inquiry that Salmond's premiership was "punctuated" by concerning behaviour.
But while Sir Peter was permanent secretary between 2010 and 2015, no formal complaints were raised and there was "no indication" of sexual harassment.
Giving evidence to the committee investigating the Scottish Government's handling of complaints about Salmond, Sir Peter said there was a "gross imbalance of power" in the Government that may have put staff off coming forward with concerns.
Sir Peter told MSPs: "I knew the former First Minister could display bullying and intimidatory behaviour."
READ MORE: 'No trust' left between Holyrood and 'hostile' Westminster, Michael Russell says
Asked if he witnessed Salmond shouting at or bullying any staff members, Sir Peter said: "I was well aware - in the way I have described - that those behaviours took place.
"I had a number of conversations with people who had been on the receiving end of that and they indicated many conversations about what we could do to prevent their reoccurrence."
Although he said the former First Minister's office "ran really well" much of the time, he added that it was "punctuated by these kind of behaviours that were a problem".
But at the end of his time at the top of Scotland's civil service, Sir Peter insisted there were "no bodies buried" in relation to serious bullying or sexual harassment concerns.
When issues were raised, Sir Peter said he dealt with them informally, usually by making the minister involved aware that he knew about the allegations.
Despite confirming he also spoke to "senior" ministers about concerns, the retired civil servant refused to disclose whether they were raised with the then-deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, in line with the Government's policy.
Explaining why he dealt with concerns about ministerial behaviour informally, Sir Peter said there was an "asymmetry of accountability" for ministers.
"In those circumstances, where you have got a formal complaint and there is no known egregious acts, informal means were the only ones available," he said.
On his method of informing ministers about complaints, Sir Peter continued: "I felt it was important to make sure that the administration knew what we were dealing with.
"This was part of keeping these issues front and centre, because I think the civil service is entitled to expect ministers to be able to control their behaviour.
"And where that had gone beyond reasonable bounds, but had not triggered a complaint, it did not seem to me unreasonable that it should be a fact that was known about."
Reflecting on how effective the informal measures were, he concluded: "My honest answer would be, in the short term, sometimes."
Asked about whether he passed on details of any concerns to his successor, Leslie Evans, Sir Peter explained she was already part of the senior management team so would be aware of any relevant issues.
READ MORE: Former Tory MP Charlie Elphicke jailed for two years for sexual assaults
He said: "We had no known egregious acts or formal complaints or indications of sexual misconduct so, as far as we knew, we had no bodies buried.
"So there was nothing that was in my secret box that I must pass on to the new permanent secretary."
Commenting after today's hearing, Scottish Conservative MSP on the Salmond inquiry Murdo Fraser said: “The former Permanent Secretary may not have been willing to go into specifics, but the First Minister now simply has to following his comments.
“As a matter of urgency, Nicola Sturgeon must confirm if she was spoken to by the most senior civil servant about serious harassment claims within the Scottish Government.
“With each passing week, more and more questions are being raised about what Nicola Sturgeon knew and when during this period.”
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel