THE Deputy First Minister has addressed allegations made by Tory MP David Davis in the House of Commons that Nicola Sturgeon and her chief of staff knew about complaints against Alex Salmond before they have admitted under oath.

Davis also used parliamentary privilege, which allows him to speak freely without fear of prosecution, to allege a “concerted effort by senior members of the SNP to encourage complaints” against Salmond.

The Tory MP, a friend of the former first minister, read out messages he said he had received from an anonymous whistleblower.

These messages, allegedly from two civil servants and said to have been sent on February 6, 2018, suggest Liz Lloyd, Sturgeon’s chief of staff, was “interfering in the complaints process against Alex Salmond”, Davis claimed.

READ MORE: Tory MP uses parliamentary privilege to attack SNP over Alex Salmond case

He alleged that the messages prove Lloyd, and by extension Nicola Sturgeon, had knowledge of complaints against Alex Salmond two months earlier than they claimed.

Although he said they did not prove a conspiracy, he claimed they “show a very strong prima facie case which demands further serious investigation”.

However, a spokesperson of the First Minister said the messages were not related to the complainants against Salmond.

They said: “As with Mr Salmond’s previous claims and cherry picking of messages, the reality is very different to the picture being presented.

“Every message involving SNP staff has been seen by the [Harassment complaints] committee previously. Their views have been widely reported as dismissive of them.”

Appearing on the BBC’s Good Morning Scotland, John Swinney said he understood the messages read out by Davis to be “essentially irrelevant”.

In response to allegations that Sturgeon may have known about the complaints as early as February 2018, Swinney said: “I don’t think anybody looking at the eight hours of evidence that the First Minister gave to the harassment committee could be in any doubt about the clarity of the information that the First Minister set out openly and candidly.”

The National:

He went on: “She stands by all of that information. I think in relation to some of the material that David Davis was recounting last night, as I understand it from media reports, these messages have been considered by the harassment committee and they’ve been widely reported as being dismissive, as essentially irrelevant to the inquiry that’s being undertaken.

“We’ve set up the process of inquiry, I think we should let it take its course and come to the conclusions that we need to, as I’ve said we will do in connection with the reports that arise out of these events.”

Pressed on the issue, he added: “The First Minister’s spokesperson issued a statement last night which said that the comment read out by Mr Davis in relation to the chief of staff does not relate to the two complainants, Ms A and Ms B, and at that time she was not aware there was any connection to the former first minister so there’s the answer to the point that Mr Davis was raising.

“I think what’s important and I think what’s been very clear from the public reaction to the First Minister’s evidence session at the harassment committee is that the First Minister gave an open and candid account of all of the involvement that she’s had and her recollections of this process and obviously we await the outcome of different inquiries that are looking at these issues.”

READ MORE: Investigations of former ministers should be independent, senior lawyer says

A report from Laura Dunlop QC was published yesterday and called for allegations against government ministers to be handled independently.

Further reports from the Holyrood harassment complaints committee, and from James Hamilton QC, are due in the coming weeks.

Swinney told the BBC these reports would all be looked at in the round and changes made accordingly.

Davis also made headlines with his Commons speech on the Salmond case by calling for further powers for Holyrood. He said that the Labour Government in the late 1990s had “decided to devolve power to the Scottish parliament but failed to do it properly”.

MSPs in Holyrood do not have the same level of parliamentary privilege as is afforded to their counterparts in Westminster, a discrepancy Davis said shows a “deficit of power” which needs reformation.

Asked about these arguments, Swinney said he looked “forward to Conservative support for making sure that we do have a much stronger Scottish Parliament with a much wider range of powers”.

He told the BBC: “I’m all for the Scottish parliament having a very wide range of powers. I want parliament to be able to challenge the government, the government is never afraid of scrutiny and it’s right that government should be held to account.

READ MORE: Ruth Davidson to 'have unelected role in UK Government once in House of Lords'

“Some of the issues that David Davis was complaining about in relation to the powers of the parliament were of course a product of decisions that were made in Westminster in the late 1990s, when I was a member of the House of Commons taking the Scotland Act through the House of Commons, and these issues were well aired on that bill process back in the late 1990s.

“So, of course there is scope to strengthen the powers of the Scottish parliament. I look forward to Conservative support for making sure that we do have a much stronger Scottish parliament with a much wider range of powers, and of course I believe that should be an independent parliament.”

Salmond was acquitted on all charges by a jury in March 2020. In a separate legal case, the government’s botched handling of complaints against him ultimately cost the taxpayer more than £500,000.