In August 2018, in a story breaking the news of the formal complaints against Alex Salmond and the Leslie Evans investigation of them, journalist David Clegg wrote in the Daily Record: “Acting on a tip-off, we submitted questions to the Scottish Government on October 31 last year, in a bid to ascertain if any complaintsContinue reading “SALMOND INQUIRY: AN ESSENTIAL QUESTION”
Author Archives: Gordon Dangerfield
SALMOND INQUIRY: THE BLUNDER THAT GIVES THE GAME AWAY
In my first post on this blog, I detailed how the Scottish Government procedure for handling complaints against former Ministers was radically “recast” in early December 2017 so that, bizarrely, it now excluded the First Minister completely from any role in it. The “recast” turned over the entire responsibility for investigating complaints and deciding whetherContinue reading “SALMOND INQUIRY: THE BLUNDER THAT GIVES THE GAME AWAY”
SALMOND INQUIRY : LIES, LIES, LIES
While the many lies told by the Scottish Government about its treatment of Alex Salmond are now being exposed daily, it’s important to remember that they’re all ultimately in service of one central lie: that Nicola Sturgeon “tried to do the right thing”. One way in which that lie was exposed by the revelations onContinue reading “SALMOND INQUIRY : LIES, LIES, LIES”
SALMOND INQUIRY: THE SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT’S CASE MAKES NO SENSE
The Scottish Government have submitted a Statement to the Salmond inquiry in which they seek to explain why they waved the white flag in the judicial review without ever having done anything wrong. As you might imagine, that’s not an easy task, so we probably shouldn’t be too surprised that the Statement makes no senseContinue reading “SALMOND INQUIRY: THE SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT’S CASE MAKES NO SENSE”
SALMOND INQUIRY: MORE DIVERSIONARY TACTICS BY COPFS
The Scottish Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) appear now to be claiming that material disclosed by them to Alex Salmond’s lawyers cannot be further disclosed by Salmond’s lawyers to the inquiry without a criminal offence being committed. I know from personal experience that any such claim is false. It is entirely within theContinue reading “SALMOND INQUIRY: MORE DIVERSIONARY TACTICS BY COPFS”
SALMOND INQUIRY: WHY DIDN’T THEY ASK EVANS?
Readers of my last two posts will have been disappointed, I’m sure, with both the questions asked and the answers given at the Salmond inquiry yesterday. It might be worth reminding ourselves of the remit of the inquiry: “To consider and report on the actions of the First Minister, Scottish Government officials and special advisersContinue reading “SALMOND INQUIRY: WHY DIDN’T THEY ASK EVANS?”
SALMOND INQUIRY UPDATE
In my last post I described how, on 29 November 2017, senior civil servants Nicola Richards and Judith Mackinnon sought to share the draft procedure they were developing for harassment complaints against former Ministers with “Ms A”, a woman who went on to make a formal complaint of sexual harassment against Alex Salmond in JanuaryContinue reading “SALMOND INQUIRY UPDATE”
WHY WAS THERE NO ROLE FOR STURGEON IN THE SALMOND COMPLAINTS PROCESS?
The Scottish Government’s procedure for complaints against former Ministers was fundamentally “recast” on 5 December 2017 after a senior civil servant agreed to “test” the latest draft of it with “key individuals”. One of those individuals, who later went on to make a formal complaint against Alex Salmond, was told in an email of 29Continue reading “WHY WAS THERE NO ROLE FOR STURGEON IN THE SALMOND COMPLAINTS PROCESS?”