The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


Through the stable door

Posted on February 22, 2021 by

Alex Salmond’s written evidence to the Fabiani committee:

 – on the Ministerial Code
 (largely previously published by this site and The Spectator.)

final written submission
 (working link, the actual one on the committee website is broken)

– previous written submissions: 1, 2, 3

Analysis will follow.

Meanwhile Alex Salmond has issued the following statement:

SALMOND TO DELIVER EVIDENCE ON WEDNESDAY 

A spokesperson for Mr Salmond said;

“We have now reached agreement with the Parliamentary clerks on the publication of Mr Salmond’s evidence to the Committee.

This clears the way for Mr Salmond to attend an oral hearing on Wednesday.

We have done so despite the fact that we believe some of the redactions made today to Alex’s evidence are unnecessary and serve only to deprive the Committee, and the public, of the full picture. 

This issue has nothing whatsoever to do with anonymity of complainants which Mr Salmond has proactively upheld at every stage in the process. Indeed it was Mr Salmond who in October 2018 moved to protect the identity of the complainants in the civil action in a hearing where the Scottish Government was not even represented. 

The major issue delaying agreement today concerned an affidavit submitted by Anne Harvey, a senior SNP official based in the Whips Office at Westminster. 

In that affidavit she describes in detail her reasons for believing that a “witch-hunt” was orchestrated against Mr Salmond by SNP officials. She provides contemporary documentary evidence from emails in 2018 which support her view.

Ms Harvey further describes her awareness that “one or more members of SNP Headquarters staff was engaged in a cynical attempt to construct a disingenuous and totally unwarranted case against Mr Salmond” 

That affidavit has now been heavily and, in our view, unnecessarily redacted before publication. Its remaining contents have now been published on the Parliament site.

Out of respect to the Parliament Mr Salmond will nonetheless attend the Committee on Wednesday to deliver his evidence.”

Print Friendly

    117 to “Through the stable door”

    1. Another_Ian_Blackford_Speech says:

      Finally.

    2. Another_Ian_Blackford_Speech says:

      I want to see challenging questions put to the people at the heart of this.

    3. MWS says:

      The link on the committee website is broken? How unfortunate and inconvenient.

    4. James says:

      Goodbye Nicola.

    5. Captain Yossarian says:

      Sturgeon said on Reporting Scotland tonight that there was not a shred of evidence in support of Alex Salmond’s assertion that he was framed.

      He attended a High Court trial and we found that there wasn’t a shred of evidence in support of the assertion that he was a sex-pest.

      What’s it to be, Nicola? What are your lawyers saying…James Wolffe and the other miscellaneous fannies of the COPFS?

      My money’s on Alex Salmond.

      He’s a much diminished man nowadays, but more than a match for you and your team.

    6. Breeks says:

      Aye. There speaks Alex Salmond, using due process and integrity, even when they’ve tried every trick in the book to gag him.

      Compare and contrast to Sturgeon, launching gratuitous smears and accusations through the Unionist Rag “The Hootsman”.

    7. Al says:

      Ok – so if all the tweeters had said I work ‘in’ rather than ‘for’ how would the message have been different?

      Unless it is to imply they are not party political?

      Which we now know they all are more so than if they included ‘in’.

      Really do wonder – all those comms staff and can’t even get that right!

    8. Captain Yossarian says:

      By the way, the civil-service ‘Secretariat’ is full to overflowing with crooks. Crooks who would be doing serious jail time in any other walk of life. In Scotland, they get sent to the Secretariat instead.

    9. Republicofscotland says:

      I had a quick scan Rev of the articles but I prefer to read your take on it, we await your slant on it.

      Meanwhile.

      Sturgeon’s defence against Alex Salmond.

      “Nicola Sturgeon says she doesn’t believe her predecessor Alex Salmond can show evidence of a conspiracy against him because his claims are ‘not true”.

      https://twitter.com/STVNews/status/1363908355127996423

    10. Astonished says:

      Tick Tock .

    11. Scotland_Votes_Indy says:

      Was expecting more of a smoking gun tbh with all the hype. It’s just a big fucking he-said / she-said.

    12. Cath says:

      It’s 26 pages and I’ve had a couple of beers…tomorrow, fully, sober, I shall afford it my full attention.

    13. Captain Yossarian says:

      ‘The Lord Advocate is manifestly conflicted in his roles as both Government legal adviser and prosecutor.’

      You are being too kind, Alex. The Lord Asvocate is, in fact, manifestly corrupt and you have paid dearly for it.

    14. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Was expecting more of a smoking gun tbh with all the hype. It’s just a big fucking he-said / she-said.”

      It really isn’t. Try to read properly.

    15. laukat says:

      This is extraordinary “It was, in fact, me who instructed Counsel to seek that anonymity on the part of the women concerned.”

    16. Mountain shadow says:

      This is probably the most important series of documents ever issued since The Scottish Parliament reconvened.

      The SNP leadership cannot survive this.

    17. Annie 621 says:

      (As a women who works for the Scottish parliament), I would like to know why the link is broken.

    18. Garrion says:

      So Sturgeon’s still hoping that the membrane between fact and media slant is going to hold for her, judging by that outright lie filled catastrophe of a “friendly” interview.

      Tick, as they say, tock.

    19. Harry mcaye says:

      “The evidence supports a deliberate, prolonged, malicious and concerted effort amongst a range of individuals within the Scottish Government and the SNP to damage my reputation, even to the extent of having me imprisoned”

      I wonder how many newspapers will include that part tomorrow?

    20. Saffron Robe says:

      Nicola Sturgeon said on camera today that Alex Salmond made her aware of all the “gory” details of the accusations against him. The only thing “gory” about the whole affair is Nicola Sturgeon’s character. She is using misleading language to imply that there was any substance to the allegations. Alex Salmond was cleared of all criminality, the most he could be accused of would be inappropriate behaviour. If inappropriate behaviour is deemed to be a criminal offence then we would all end up in a court of law. Who amongst us has not behaved inappropriately at some point in our lives?

      It beggars belief that Nicola Sturgeon continues to besmirch Alex Salmond, trying to deflect from her own guilt even when she knows Alex Salmond to have been found innocent of all charges. The problem for Nicola Sturgeon is that in regards to her own conduct which is the purpose of the inquiry, if Alex Salmond is innocent (which we know he is), then she must be guilty. She therefore cannot accept the decision of the court so she persists in her contempt. If she holds the law of the land in such contempt, then she holds the whole nation in contempt and would think nothing of lying to parliament.

    21. Stu says:

      Surely Barbara Allison is typing her resignation letter now

    22. wee monkey says:

      Hmmm.

      And it’s only Monday.

      This has the prospects of being a GREAT week for Justice and Freedom.

    23. Nosey says:

      NS is a goner

    24. Scott says:

      My take

      The Civil Service have handed Scotland its independence on a plate.

      Do I win £5?

    25. Tommy Box says:

      Shes fucking toast

    26. Morgatron says:

      It so shocking to think what AS has been through,although reading it all, none of it shocks. Your excellent commentary on the whole sorry saga along with Craig Murray’s already opened our eyes to the level of just how low they have stooped to try and frame an innocent man. It’s just blown a party I loved to smithereens and she deserves along with the other lackeys the contempt of our nation.

    27. Captain Yossarian says:

      (working link, the actual one on the committee website is broken) Is this Scotland, or is it Cambodia?

    28. Ian Mac says:

      If there ‘isn’t a shred of evidence’, Chairman Nicola, why have you fought tooth and nail to bar Salmond’s evidence and obstructed the inquiry a mere 58 times? I have no doubt you are instructing Fabiani to limit what Alex can talk about and for how long. They will seek to disallow him presenting his case with their usual obfuscatory tactics. And of course the pretence will be to ‘protect’ the poor claimants, none of whom was believed by the majority of women on the jury. NS is such a blatant brazen truth dodger. Expect the media to be fed some more smearing and diversionary codswallop.

    29. Bob Mack says:

      Alex, Hat tip. Your most certainly are ending some careers tonight with those evidenced assertions.

      Stunning reading. Now we know why David Hannan told us we would never believe why he resigned from the SNP.

      A Statesman to the last.

    30. ClanDonald says:

      TFFT

    31. Rose Ford says:

      #ISTANDWITHLEXSALMOND

    32. Rose Ford says:

      That should say #ISTANDWITHALEXSALMOND

    33. JSC says:

      From a basic read-thru so far, there seems to be a greater light being shone on the Westminster group’s workings. It did occur to me that Blackford had avoided any real scrutiny in this mess up to now. The WM fishing trip found nothing, but what would the WM group have to fear from AS, if anything?

    34. Shiregirl says:

      Watergate#2.

    35. Merkin Scot says:

      “We will not be dragged out of the EU into the Court” : Daddy Bear/Blackford any other Numpty.

    36. JGedd says:

      Oh, there will be lots of friendly interviews and tearful ones with blurred faces of ‘terrified’ complainers as well as a frantic herding of hordes of squirrels from the Scottish media.

      It still remains to be seen how the UK media will deal with it. They have yet to show their full hand. Some cards will still be held in reserve to see how the play goes. I doubt very much that they will be on the side of AS while they might be panting to go after the Scotgov. Let’s see how they handle it.

    37. cynicalHighlander says:

      Fishgate

    38. JSC says:

      Watergate had Tricky Dicky
      Salmondgate has Tricky Nicky

      Only one is currently defined in history as a criminal in high office who had to resign
      2nd one? coming right up

    39. 100%Yes says:

      For starters good luck on Wednesday Mr Salmond your people are right behind you every step of the way. As for Sturgeon times up and the hour glass is running down I would have fought you would have done the right thing for the cause of Independence and for the party your no leader and Scotland is best rid.

    40. Anonymoose says:

      Ooft that’s some statement, I have read it all and it is still digesting.

      I wonder if the inqiury committee will now Section 23 request ALL of the documents Alex alludes to in his statement as quite evidenced, the FM, her office with her army of SPADs, the Lord Advocate, the Crown Office & COPFS are deliberately misinterpreting the law in an effort to frustrate the Scottish Parliament’s inquiry into seeking the truth about the policies complete failure to all of those involved from the complainants to Alex Salmond himself.

      I also wonder how twitchy the arseholes of a whole range of government officials are tonight, I bet Peter Murrel and Nicola Sturgeon(Murrel) have sunk into their second bottle of brandy by now such is the earth shattering claims in Alex’s Salmonds statement.

      If those can be backed up with the documents which are being hidden by ScotGov along with documents from the Judicial Review at the courts which have been blocked from the inquiry are now forced into the public eye under a Section 23 order, then this will and rightly should bring down the upper echelons of the SNP Scottish Government, the SNP party, the civil service and COPFS.

    41. BuggerLePanda says:

      Lesley Evans will fall and I suspect Murrell and perhaps one or two Golliwog badge types.

    42. BuggerLePanda says:

      Oh forgot McKinnon

    43. Helen Yates says:

      Wow, I should think that there will be quite a few squeaky bums in Holyrood this week.
      RIP SNP.

    44. Strathy says:

      In addition to Stuart’s analysis, Wings readers will be eagerly awaiting those of NUJ Scotland members, Conor Matchett, Neil Mackay and Hannah Rodger.

      No?

      What, nobody?

    45. Bob Mack says:

      Evans is definitely gone.

      I think Murrell is on the edge as are a few SPADs.

      There will have to be a Judicial Inquiry. Inevitable given the accusations against Lord Advocate.

      Revenge is a dish best served cold

    46. MWS says:

      Just read it all. God I so wish we knew what’s in those documents the Crown Office are refusing to disclose! Interesting that Alex says he’s more or less certain who leaked the story to the Daily Record and intends to deal with that at a later stage. I hope he brings the whole lot of them down.

    47. Scott says:

      If Leslie Evans was acting of her own volition and not guided by Whitehall throughout the chicanery alleged by Alex Salmond, I’ll eat my hat.

      (I don’t own a hat, but I’ll buy a particularly delicious looking one)

      If she was guided by London, shirley we can declare UDI on the basis of a hostile attack on the people of Scotland?

      (In which case I’ll buy a mahoosive hat-shaped celebration cake and eat that whether it’s delicious or not)

      …and breathe….

    48. Jack Murphy says:

      Morgatron said at 8:26 pm:

      “It so shocking to think what AS has been through, although reading it all, none of it shocks. Your excellent commentary on the whole sorry saga along with Craig Murray’s already opened our eyes to the level of just how low they have stooped to try and frame an innocent man.

      It’s just blown a party I loved to smithereens and she deserves along with the other lackeys the contempt of our nation.”

      Sadly, you Morgatron have eloquently stated my feelings of the past few months.

    49. Bound to be a major diversion coming up. I wonder if she’ll do a Tony and put a ring of tanks round Edinburgh Airport?

      Let’s hope we’re in the end game and there’s time to rescue things.

    50. Black Joan says:

      All that throwing of toys out of the pram by RCS, all those “demands” for suppression of evidence “to protect the poor wronged women” and we learn that it was actually AS who requested anonymity for the two original “complainers” at JR stage. Evans etc just ignored their wishes and did nothing to protect them.

      What a rank stink of corruption. How many of this lot are going to be allowed to disappear over the horizon, clutching their gold-plated pensions, having cost the public millions and caused AS to endure years of injustice?

    51. Gordon Currie says:

      Rose Ford says:
      22 February, 2021 at 8:33 pm
      #ISTANDWITHLEXSALMOND

      Change that to Lex Luthor and you have Sturgeon in a nutshell…..

    52. Craig Murray says:

      Just finished reading it. One startling point is that there is absolutely zero in it that in any way risks revealing the identity of any complainant – which indicates how absolutely devious and malicious were the SNP MSPs, and Wightman, it using that as an excuse to suppress it.

    53. Not for me to say says:

      Proud to be Scottish?

    54. Caledonia says:

      Its been heavily redacted
      Who decides the redactions

    55. Jim Bo says:

      I now know what it feels to be politically homeless.

    56. LaingB French says:

      AFTER READING ALL OF IT MY CONCLUSION SHAL BE BRIEF AND SHORT TO THE POINT.
      ” she is politically fucked!”

    57. Lenny Hartley says:

      Caledonia, think in this case, both Mr Salmonds team and Scottish Govt Clerks. The evidence he is not allowed to even talk off is the redactions at the beginning and I guess the Government Clerks
      Do the rest,

    58. Karen says:

      Wow with a capital “W”!
      (“HR qualifications” – ha ha ha ha ha!)

    59. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      I’m with you, Craig.

      Took me ages (even skim-reading the bits I knew already) to read,
      final written submission
      and
      previous written submissions: 1, 2, 3.

      I saw absolutely NOTHING that would lead to ‘jigsaw identification’ of complainants.

      Which leads me to pontificate…
      Alex Salmond was cleared of ‘attempted ®@p€’ in his trial.

      Why then, is ‘®@p€ Crisis Scotland’ stickin’ their oar in, to have AS’s evidence suppressed, when no attempted ®@p€ took place?

      Surely they can’t be dancing to a tune played by someone further up the financial chain, who gives them DO$H every year?

    60. Anonymoose says:

      O/T

      Is this the start of a £7 million taxpayer fund to destroy human rights and equality laws in the name of genderwoowoo?

      It will be interesting to see which groups get fed our taxes through this quango!

      https://twitter.com/ScotGovFairer/status/1363831052389806080

      https://www.gov.scot/news/launch-of-gbp-7-million-equality-and-human-rights-fund/

    61. Garrion says:

      @Not for me to say 9:17pm

      Are we assigning corruption as a particularly Scottish trait? Cuz you’re gonna love the ongoing PPE contracts scandal.

    62. Cenchos says:

      This looks like a job for Godzilla Squirrel.

    63. Captain Yossarian says:

      @Garrion – what about the Scottish Futures Trust? At least PPE projects didn’t fall-down.

    64. XX and proud says:

      I think that we are going to discover that NS was willing to drop any complaint (real or not) in return for Salmond agreeing not to stand for his former WM seat. NS champion for women? (hardly)-totally mendacious.

    65. Ian Mac says:

      IF there was a functioning justice system in Scotland, independent of government and parties, which is such a huge ‘if’ that it is very unlikely, then the top layer of this rank, rotten government would be immediately sanctioned and swept out of office. They have corrupted an entire system of responsibility and accountability, the most basic of requirements for a functioning, democratic government. This goes way beyond the individual whose reputation was to be trashed and attacks the heart of what people assumed was some kind of democracy answerable in law to its population.
      It beggars belief that they continue to brazen it out, hanging on to the belief that they can smother the issues in ‘complexity’, obfuscate and deny, while refusing to hand over documents which it is their legal responsibility to do. It can only come from people who believe, because of the total domination of the SNP in the political sphere, that they are above the law, and are unreachable by justice. The only response can be an immediate sacking and clear out of these individuals, but the system they have set up is so weak, so unexamined by a compliant, fearful media, that they still might get away with proven corruption and conspiracy.
      What a hellish way for an independence movement, which had the support of a majority of the population, to kill itself and all hope that they can steer Scotland to independence and that they could be trusted in any way, shape or form. They have screwed Scotland and independence. They should be disgraced, but clearly believe they can continue lying and conning the public. That is the humiliation and shame of it. Unless justice is done and seen to be done, Scotland has become a shameful, backward autocracy, fit for despots and liars to rule at the public’s expense.

    66. Bill Halliday says:

      Watched Nicola’s TV appearance where she denied any and all claims Alex Salmond has made in his submission, for the first time I have seen the bad side of her, a nasty aura surrounded her when she was commenting on his appearance and his allegations.

    67. Aye – “all the gory details.” She just can’t help herself.

    68. AndyH says:

      She’s gonna need medication to control the blinking on this one.

    69. velofello says:

      Evans: “Development of the 2017 Procedure, it is not my procedure, it is a procedure agreed by cabinet” – In fact this Procedure was never seen by Cabinet nor Government!

      Documents instructed to be released by Lord Pentland , despite the gov’t being willing to certify to the court that the documents did simply not exist!

      It was me who instructed Council to seek anonymity for the women.

      Names! Give me names!

    70. ScottieDog says:

      So how can they obfuscate all of this…
      Big ‘indy’ splash in the National. A ‘fictitious’ date for infyref??

    71. blackhack says:

      IU think I’ll need to redecorate….The amount of the shit hitting the fan is getting to the stage where I’ll need to get the decorators in……

    72. Neil in Glasgow says:

      Stu, you say comment to follow. No need. And really no need for the committee to publish any findings either. Alex has just done it. No further comment needed.

      The first minister escapes much of the focus to the quick eye, however. My only issue. You need to read a bit more between the lines on that one. However, if you really need a push in a slightly different direction how the fuck can someone ultimately in charge of such an incompetent crew retain any credibility to run a bath let alone a country? We’re past ‘Frank get the door’ and even ‘Frank, start the car’. It’s now ‘Frank, go and stop at Gretna so we can get a Greggs’

    73. Strathy says:

      Gordon Dangerfield on the Scottish Sun story – ‘Nicola Sturgeon faces serious questions over claim she didn’t know about harassment allegations against Alex Salmond.’

      The story was lifted from Gordon’s blog without any acknowledgement; hardly the conduct of a professional journalist.

      Perhaps NUJ Scotland will get right on that.

      https://gordondangerfield.com/

    74. Wee Chid says:

      Cue a royal event?

    75. willie says:

      Well they may try o close this down in the UK media but it isn’y getting closed down across the world.

      Scotland is exposed as a banana state with a police force, prosecution service, and senior civil service more corrupt than you could imagine.

      Yes the perpetrators were local but the hand of the deep British state is not hard to detect.

      Police Scotland with an executive management team of ex military intelligence, an ex chief constable of the RUC. A Crown Agent who worked as an Mi5 agent before taking up a position in the foreign and colonial office overseas.

      Yes, the local team were helped along, facilitated even, just like NI.

    76. Bob Mack says:

      My wife has just read it. She is very senior HR.

      She uttered the words ” Due Process utterly absent”.

      Alex has a hell of a claim against many folk after this is finished

    77. boris says:

      https://caltonjock.com/2021/02/22/george-foulkes-makes-a-sensible-proposal-for-holyrood-honestly-he-does/

      The area I think is in critical need of addressing is Holyrood itself. As it stands, Scotland’s unicameral constitutional set up is inadequate.

      Having only a single chamber drastically reduces the checks and balances needed in a mature democracy.

      It makes the likelihood of flawed legislation being passed much greater, because it does not provide a restraint on a majority Government.

    78. Geoff Anderson says:

      Alex,

      Ignore every critic, ignore every doubter but above all enjoy the day because we will?

    79. holymacmoses says:

      Scotland_Votes_Indy says:
      22 February, 2021 at 7:49 pm
      Was expecting more of a smoking gun tbh with all the hype. It’s just a big fucking he-said / she-said.

      There’s more than one level of interpretation and understanding. Read carefully what Mr Salmond has said himself about evidence

    80. If I’m reading it correctly he intends having whoever leaked it to the Record after this is all done. Hope there’s grounds for him suing that bogroll as well.

    81. Mac2 says:

      Does anyone know what evidence he would like to be released, but is being withheld?

    82. AL voice of reason says:

      Strange how NS came out with this an hour ago
      https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-56155102
      I can only have sympathy with AS, the toll on his health must be severe. Having had allegations made aginst me in the past (non sexual) from a so called “manager” (lazy,lying, thieving, psychotic lying bastard) and being unsupported by HR (nothing new there) it still has taken it’s toll.
      Stopped voting SNP when NS became FM as my wife (am i still allowed to use that term) worked for NS when she was Health Minister, she ran good professional people to breakdown, threw temper tantrums, bullied and abused to get her own way.

    83. SOG says:

      Anne Harvey of The Giant Squirrel post, I assume?

    84. terry moore says:

      its on BBC1 10 o’clock news

    85. laukat says:

      Wolfe is gone based on this “I believe that the Committee should ask the Lord Advocatedirectlywhether he instructed two unwilling complainants to make police statements”

      Murrell is caught with this “Mr Murrell deployed his senior staff to recruit and persuade staff and ex staff members to submit police complaints. This activity was being co-ordinated with special advisersand was occurring afterthe police investigation had startedand afterI ceased to be a member of theSNP”

      Riddick is knackered based on the email in the appendix 3 and Anne Harvey’s evidence in Appendix 4.

      Evans has so many faults its not worth identifying one in particular

      Sturgeon is nackered on the the minesterial code in so many places assuming Hamilton widens his scope.

      Lloyd is implicated in a lot of things without be directly cited on a particular action.

      John Somers has a problem because of this “John Somers, The Principal Private Secretary to the First Minister confirmed that her office had received a copy of the Permanent Secretary’s report in evidence on 1st December 2020. However, that evidence was then corrected to say that it had not been received.”

      This is genuinely the most explosive couple of documents in Scottish Governement history. Any idea that was just a serious of gaffes by the Scottish Government is torn apart by them decising to sisting the Judicial Review in the hope the criminal case would take care of it and for that advice to come from the Lord Advocate is mindboggling

      Henry McLeish had to resign for subletting his office space that isn’t even on the same planet never mind the same ballpark compared to what the Sturgeonista’s have been up to. This should mean a complete clearance of the SNP leadership, Scottish Government Senior civil servants and the Crown Office.

    86. Grahame says:

      @wee child
      It would be an awful handy coincidence if Prince Philip was to pop his clogs,

    87. Big Jock says:

      Sturgeon mentioned the Sky News ” Airport incident” as if it is a thing. You know the one where he said killer heels at the lady setting off the alarm.

      They must have really scraped the barrel on that one. I remember Roger Moore was one being frisked by a female customs officer at the airport. He said:” You have wonderful hands” every one of them burst out laughing.

      Remember when people used to laugh at silly things!

    88. Anonymoose says:

      re: Alex Salmonds statement following the publication of his evidence.

      It did strike me when I saw large swathes of the appendices redacted, entire paragraphs of evidence and affadavits heavily redacted, even extremely redacted.

      What this shows to me, from the example we have of prior evidence which was published elsewhere and then by the committee in heavily redacted form, is that everything which has been heavily redacted in this way by the committee clerks, as well as COPFS/Lord Advocate under threat of legal action by COPFSs’ misrepresenting the law, is because they contained damning allegations which were backed up with irrefutable facts and signed affadivts, evidence which mentions directly those at the heart of the Scottish Government & Civil Service who surround the First Minister.

      You can literally put money on it – that those heavily redacted appendices and extremely redacted affadavit from Anne Harvey in Alex Salmonds evidence contains evidence which pinpoints agents within the Scottish Government and Civil Service who are directly applicable to this inquiry and the absolute failure of the Harassment Complains policy created by Leslie Evans under the watchful eye of Nicola Sturgeon.

    89. Big Jock says:

      Al. The most astonishing word she used was loyalty , saying Salmond had none.

      You just couldn’t make it up. She is completely deluded , a narcisict. She would boil her granny to get her out of a tight hole.

    90. Graham says:

      Alex Salmond is having to fight them with one hand tied behind his back due to the shenanigans of the COFPS and he’s still going to knock fuck out of them.

    91. Dan says:

      Makes for quite the read, and have shared with acquaintances.

      In light of that submission one ponders if there will be any more DaftPunks calling it a day in the near future…

    92. David Gray says:

      Annie 621 says:
      22 February, 2021 at 8:03 pm

      (As a women who works for the Scottish parliament), I would like to know why the link is broken.
      The link is broken because SNP members are forbidden bt Nicola to read this blog so they won’t be able to see this evidence.

    93. Dan says:

      @ David at 10.37pm

      Daily Record link archived to save giving Unionist papers traffic.

      https://archive.is/ytBuO

    94. Jim Tadgercock says:

      Wee Chid says:
      22 February, 2021 at 9:56 pm
      Cue a royal event?

      I was saying the same to my pal yesterday tongue in cheek.

    95. MarkH says:

      The crunch is that all the evidence is still held by the Crown Office, if they can keep that locked up then they might get away with it, albeit severely wounded.

    96. McHaggis69 says:

      Evans just has to go surely

    97. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      “In her letter of 21st June 2018 to Levy and McRae she describes the policy as “established by me”. She claimed ownership of it then, but not now. When asked at the Committee she said “there seems to have come into being a tradition of calling it my procedure. It is not; it is a Scottish Government procedure and one that has been agreed by Cabinet..” In fact, this procedure was never even seen by Cabinet or Parliament. It was established by Ms Evans.”

      Think it was Al-Stuart who made reference recently to Civil Action to get repayment of Taxpayers money back from politicians/civil servants.

      Think a Crowdfunder to make the Permanent Secretary pay it all back seeing as it is her procedure would stand a good chance of success!

    98. Mac2 says:

      “The Committee has heard evidence that there were 17 meetings between Scottish Ministers, civil servants, a Special Adviser and external Counsel between late August 2018 and early January 2019. It is likely that there were additional meetings before that date, when Counsel were first instructed.

      The Committee has heard evidence from Mr Cackette that, in addition, there were daily meetings to discuss the progress of the Judicial Review and Ms McKinnon indicated that she herself attended such meetings some three times a week. She also told the Committee that she continued her role of reporting back to the complainers.Despite this, minutes, ‘OneNote’ notes and exchanges between civil servants about the progress of the Judicial Review are missing entirely from the documentation presented to the Committee. In her evidence on 1st December Ms McKinnon referred to the “update emails that went to the complainers.” These updates should be provided to the Committee.

      Document INV 212 provides an indication of why that might be the case.

      In this email of 28th August 2018, Ms
      Richards provides an update on the early stages of the Judicial Review, including what appears to be legal advice from the SGLD which includes the prospects of “sisting” (suspending) the Judicial Review behind the
      criminal investigation.

      The question of sisting has been mentioned by a number of witnesses including Mr Cackette and the Lord Advocate. It is certainly a matter which was discussed at these meetings, on which advice was given and information was forwarded on to the complainers and perhaps others. This has now been confirmed by Ms mackinnon in her letter to the Committee of 7th December 2020 but as yet there are no documents provided to show how this was done.

      It would be instructive for the Committee to see the notes and minutes of any of these meetings and the communications and emails of civil servants attending them, to judge how the prospects of success in defending the Judicial Review were being regarded in Government and whether it was hoped or believed that the Judicial Review (and the likely consequences of losing that Judicial Review) might be delayed indefinitely
      behind the prospect of criminal proceedings”

    99. birnie says:

      In fact, I think that Alex has been remarkably restrained in his remarks re the current First Minister. If we augment his testimony with all that is in Craig Murray’s and Gordon Dangerfield’s analyses, the evidence is even much more comprehensive and compelling.

    100. Don says:

      @Scott says:22 February, 2021 at 8:55 pm

      “If Leslie Evans was acting of her own volition and not guided by Whitehall throughout the chicanery alleged by Alex Salmond, I’ll eat my hat.
      If she was guided by London, shirley we can declare UDI on the basis of a hostile attack on the people of Scotland?”

      At what point is it going to sink in this has nothing to do with London ? This burach is 100% Made in Scotland.
      https://twitter.com/htscotpol/status/1034369196459732992 , https://www.civilserviceworld.com/professions/article/nicola-sturgeon-appoints-leslie-evans-as-new-scottish-government-permanent-secretary

    101. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      Sturgeon mentioned the Sky News ” Airport incident”

      Aye @Big Jock says at 10:21 pm that one continually gets mentioned even though they fail to explain it amounts to a shite joke but it has Angus Robertson making an appearance apparently mentioned to him by SkyNews?

      I can’t put my finger on it but reckon he AR who is a Sturgeon Loyalist who’s selection for Edinburgh Central (after it was Cherrymandered) smells considerably like Succession Planning he’s been mooching for a real job since he lost his seat in Moray in the GE2017.

    102. Derek says:

      @Wee Chid says:
      22 February, 2021 at 9:56 pm
      Cue a royal event?

      “Okay, give him the needle tonight…”

    103. David Neill says:

      Cue a “distraction”. Rumour has it a SPAD has been dispatched from Bute House with an ‘extra’ pillow for Philip.

    104. Scott says:

      @Don

      Civil Service is controlled entirely by Whitehall, there’s no seperate Scottish version controlled in Edinburgh.

      They decided who got put forward for the job, FM appoints from that ‘list’. LE is employed by them to be PS, not SP or SG.

    105. Al-Stuart says:

      .
      Frank, get the Ratmobile,

      Ah’m leavin’ on a jet plane, don’t know if ah’ll be back again.
      .

    106. Witchy says:

      Big Jock says:
      22 February, 2021 at 10:25 pm
      Al. ”The most astonishing word she used was loyalty , saying Salmond had none.”

      True to type of playground tactics. Trying to convince us that she is in the right and we shouldn’t listen to him…to the extent of questioning his loyalty! To whom? Her? The country? It’s almost like she’s telling him to wheeest for Indy or be seen as a ("Tractor" - Ed) to the cause. Eh? Funny time to ‘pop in’ for an informal interview before AS has even said a word! It would have been better if she had said nothing. I was not convinced. That interview did her little good, and made many of us question just what the hell was going on.

      Question: We know how the sting was set up….even who the usual suspects are. (LE is about to retire, she doesn’t care now, or back them, she doesn’t work for Scotland, and she can’t be sacked. She’ll still get her pension!)
      So why?
      AS re-entering politics wasn’t such a big deal, many politicians have done this…so why the concern? Challenging the leadership? Hmmm, maybe challenging policies. Realising Indy was becoming a lost cause within the party and trying to put it back on the agenda? Why does Murrell hate him so much, and will NS put herself and her position on the line to support him? Looking likely. It’s the ‘Why’s’ that I find interesting…

      Anyways, I’ll get the popcorn in….

    107. Kaiama says:

      Its 2.19am and i just finished reading the final submission. Not enough strength to read the rest now. How the hell are the accused going to refute this information? And how can anyone vote for NS after reading these documents? Someone somewhere is going to publish the withheld documents eventually. Nothing short of a mass firing, or winding up of the independence movement will do, in favour of a new organisation untainted by the conniving and backstabbing of the current administration.

    108. BuggerLePanda says:

      Does anyone know if Jennifer Robertson, wifr of Angus, has a post in NS’s Close entourage?

    109. Kiwilassie says:

      If as Nicola claims, the meeting on the 2nd of April was party business. Why wasn’t Peter Murrell present?

      It looks like the further we go down into this rabbit hole, the more we seem to find flaws in all their statements from the Scots Government.

    110. Mac says:

      Craig Murray says:
      22 February, 2021 at 9:10 pm
      Just finished reading it. One startling point is that there is absolutely zero in it that in any way risks revealing the identity of any complainant – which indicates how absolutely devious and malicious were the SNP MSPs, and Wightman, it using that as an excuse to suppress it.

      This point above from CM needs amplified.

      We can now clearly see that the redactions they made had nothing to do with preserving the anonymity of the accusers and everything to do with preserving the anonymity of criminals, people blatantly engaged in perverting the course of justice and attempting to stitch up an innocent man.

      I have only just started on Salmond’s latest submission but you don’t have to go far to read it from Salmond for yourself…

      (I quote.)

      “Thirdly, the crown response to the section 23 request has hindered rather than assisted the Committee. The information provided was neither sought nor publishable by the Committee. Those in Crown Office providing that information must have been well aware of that. However, text messages which could be properly considered and published and which have been part of the Committee’s questioning and would bear directly on the veracity of evidence given under oath to this Committee have been withheld. The blocking of the Committee in this matter and others is nothing whatsoever to do with protecting the anonymity of complainants, which I support and have upheld at every stage in this process. Rather, it is a matter of the shielding of some of the most powerful people in the country who are acutely aware of how exposed they would become.”

      So… Nothing to do with protecting the anonymity of the accusers.

      Everything to do with shielding the identities of some of the “most powerful people in the country” who plotted to send an innocent man to jail.

      This is what the Lord Advocate and COPFS have been working so hard to do this whole time.

      The SNPG, the Lord Advocate, COPFS are rotten to the core.

      This is a massive scandal that completely dwarfs Watergate. Watergate is nothing in comparison to the Sturgeon Scandal. This reaches everywhere.

      Ah well onto page 3…

    111. Mac says:

      On no did not make it to page 3… there was these two paragraphs from the overview that catch the eye.

      “The Parliamentary Committee has already heard evidence of activities by civil servants, special advisers, Ministers and SNP officials which taken individually could be put down to incompetence, albeit on an epic scale. However taken together, and over such a prolonged period, it becomes impossible to explain such conduct as inadvertent co-incidence. The inescapable conclusion is of a malicious and concerted
      attempt to damage my reputation and remove me from public life in Scotland. It is an attempt which would, in fact, have succeeded but for the protection of the court and jury system and in particular the Court of Session and the High Court of Justiciary.

      However, underlying all of this and perhaps the most serious issue of all is the complete breakdown of the necessary barriers which should exist between Government, political party and indeed the prosecution authorities in any country which abides by the rule of law.”

      Watergate? Pffft. The Sturgeon Scandal shits on Watergate.

      The reach, depth, breadth, sheer scale of it. It is not even a contest.

    112. Andy Ellis says:

      So, let’s see which @scotparl “workers” have tweeted the co-ordinated cut and paste tweet which appears to be putting inappropriate pressure on the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body not to publish information damaging to the Scottish Government on the spurious grounds it will identify complainers:

      1) @SDonnelly1993 – @theSNP Health and Education Researcher
      2) @_KatieStephen – Stage Manager
      3) @ZoeLMacKenzie – Protected Profile
      4) @MagsSGP – Political researcher & Green activist / Co-convener of @scotgp
      5) @KivaRichard1 – SNP Researcher
      6) @_SarahMasson – failed WM candidate for Edinburgh West, current candidate for Holyrood. “Activism through theatre”
      7) @theLauramitch – SNP comms person, H&I NEC member

      Doubtless there are others…..? The question is of curse whether this is appropriate and whether if they are in any sense actually in the employment of the parliament and not just virtue signalling they have broken any rules.

    113. Olive Perrins says:

      Rev, has there been a formally updated scope post the November letter from James Hamilton?

      “My inclination is to think that in the case of matters which form part of, or are closely related to, the subject matter of the remit it could be open to me to consider whether any provisions of the Ministerial Code other than those mentioned expressly in the remit had been broken. However, that situation is distinct from broadening the factual scope of the inquiry”

      Is this saying the scope remains the same but evidence can be considered and reported albeit not necessarily form part of the judgement?

    114. Prasad says:

      So still hiding first 1 and 3/4 lines of paragraph 26 (now 24) of Ministerial Code (which is on Grousebeater) and archived.

      I see why they want to suppress the name of the woman but what possible excuse can they have to redact the name of Geoff Aberdein?
      What reason are they giving to block the testimony of Geoff Aberdein? Serious question.



    Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.




    ↑ Top