THE HOLYROOD committee probing the Scottish Government’s botched handling of complaints made against Alex Salmond has written to SNP boss Peter Murrell with more questions.
In a letter, convener Linda Fabiani has asked the SNP's chief executive - who is the husband of Nicola Sturgeon - for more information about the meeting between the First Minister and her predecessor and aides at her home in Glasgow on April 2 2018.
In his evidence, Murrell said he did not know about the meeting, but later in the session said he was aware the previous day of Salmond coming to the house.
He also claimed in his written and oral evidence that he was not at home when the meeting took place, but then appeared said he arrived back at the house "not long before the meeting ended".
Fabiani has now asked for clarity on both points.
There are also questions over the status of the meeting. The First Minister said she believed it was a party issue, that means it does not have to be recorded in line with the ministerial code. But Murrell told MSPs that he had not asked Sturgeon about the meeting because it was Scottish government business.
In her letter, Fabiani wrote: "To inform the session with the First Minister, it would be useful to establish whether you assumed the meeting was a Government matter before it happened and whether you continued to assume so after the meeting took place."
The Committee have asked the party boss to “confirm when you knew that the former First Minister was coming to the house and any details of how you knew this to be the case, to the best of your recollection.”
Murrell was also forced to submit further evidence to the committee on his use of the messaging app WhatsApp, which he told the inquiry he did not use.
Later when media reports said an account was registered to Murrell's number and it had been "last seen" on November 22, he said the app was on his phone but he did not use it.
The inquiry is seeking clarification on his use of WhatsApp, as well as any other electronic messages which discuss the case with SNP officials.
MSPs on the inquiry are looking into how the Scottish Government mishandled a probe into sexual misconduct claims levelled against Salmond in 2018.
Salmond had the results of that investigation set aside in a judicial review, showing it had been “tainted by apparent bias” from the start, a flaw that left taxpayers with a £512,000 bill for his costs.
Meanwhile, the committee has also written to Police Scotland’s chief constable, to find out when complaints about the former First Minister were passed to the single force.
In a letter to Iain Livingstone, Fabiani said the committee had discovered that the force had been consulted during the development of the Government’s anti-harassment procedure.
She requested information on this contact, any advice provided by Police Scotland, and any communications on the issue.
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