THE Scottish Government have been accused of “war-gaming” a new harassment policy before it was ultimately used in the probe against Alex Salmond.
Civil service chief Leslie Evans has previously said the new government policy to deal with complaints about former ministers was a response to the MeToo movement and not designed with the former First Minister in mind.
But in a letter to the Holyrood committee probing the government’s botched probe, deputy chief constable Fiona Taylor revealed Police Scotland was contacted on a number of occasions by the civil service with “hypothetical questions” which it seemed “were predicated upon a specific set of circumstances and the SG response to that set of circumstances, rather than development of a generic procedure”.
In her letter, Taylor said: “The hypothetical questions suggested more than one victim of potential criminality and as such, it was stressed that without knowledge of the detail, any risk that a suspect might present could not be properly assessed or mitigated. It was highlighted that SG staff were not trained to undertake such investigations or to engage with victims.
“No details of potential victims or perpetrators were provided by SG and throughout the contact, Police Scotland encouraged SG to refer victims to appropriate support services.”
READ MORE: Salmond inquiry might not come to complete final conclusion, MSP warns
The cross-party committee is investigating the Scottish Government’s investigation into allegations of misconduct made against the former First Minister.
Salmond had the exercise set aside in January 2019, with a judicial review declaring it “unlawful” and “tainted by bias”. The Government’s botched handling ultimately cost the taxpayer half a million pounds.
The committee had also asked Police Scotland when the complaints were first passed on by the Scottish Government.
However, the DCC revealed the Government had passed the complaints on directly to the Crown Office, who then passed them on to the police. “This took place during a meeting at the Crown Office, Edinburgh, involving the Crown agent, the Chief Constable and the DCS, head of public protection,” Taylor revealed.
Evans told the inquiry that the two accusers had not wanted their complaints passed on to police.
She told the committee: “I was very mindful about their concerns and anxieties – but there may be occasions in which those have to be weighed up against the potential of criminality.”
Scottish Labour MSP Jackie Baillie said the letter showed the Scottish Government was “attempting to stress-test their procedure ahead of taking action against Mr Salmond by war-gaming what the deputy chief constable refers to as ‘hypothetical questions’”.
She added: “It is also clear that the Scottish Government referred complaints to the police via the Crown agent, against the wishes of the women involved, and despite the police encouraging the Government to refer complainants to support services as a first port of call.”
Meanwhile, evidence to the committee from Geoff Aberdein, the former First Minister’s chief of staff, will not be published.
His testimony was handed over to MSPs three months ago, but won’t be made available because of “legal obligations”. He’s a key figure in questions over when Nicola Sturgeon first knew of the sexual misconduct complaints against her predecessor.
Parliament’s decision means the evidence cannot be used as part of the committee’s deliberation.
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