MSPS ARE demanding the First Minister's chief of staff should be required to give written and oral evidence to the Alex Salmond inquiry.
Linda Fabiani, the convener of the committee investigating the Scottish Government's botched handling of complaints against him, has written to the top civil servant requesting that Liz Lloyd should be required to give her own account. Fabiani’s letter was emailed to the Permanent Secretary Leslie Evans on August 11.
Evans is to give evidence in person to the committee next Tuesday. She has previously insisted Nicola Sturgeon's chief of staff's evidence would be included in a general submission by the Scottish Government setting out a written timeline of officials' actions. But the committee's response suggests this would not be sufficient.
READ MORE: Alex Salmond inquiry 'frustrated' as Government withholds evidence
"As I said in my letter of July 31, the suggested timeline is welcome, particularly because the Government submissions received so far have reflected the Government’s actions at a very high general level," Fabiani told Evans in the letter published by the Scottish Parliament today.
"Should the ocmmittee require further evidence from individual officials, it will seek it directly. I also made it clear that the committee was not content for the actions of the First Minister’s Chief of Staff to be added to the timeline of actions by Government officials.
"I have discussed these matters further with the committee. While the committee agrees that a timeline is a helpful reference, it wants to confirm at this point that further evidence from individual officials providing a factual account of their involvement in the development of the policy and in the judicial review, as originally requested, will also be required.
"This includes from the Chief of Staff. The committee is clear, as stated in my last letter, that civil servants can give evidence to Parliament, in person or in writing, on an individual basis on how their actions contributed to delivery of a particular policy, in this instance the development and use of the complaints procedure. The committee requires a factual account of individual actions, in person and in writing, and will proceed on that basis."
Last week it emerged that the Scottish Government has refused to release information to the Holyrood inquiry with the administration citing legal privilege as a reason for why some material will not be disclosed.
In 2018, the Scottish Government investigated allegations of sexual misconduct against Salmond when he was first minister. Salmond pursued a judicial review and was vindicated when the internal investigation was ruled to be biased and unlawful.
A committee of MSPs was set up to investigate the botched handling of the complaints that has cost more than £500,000 of public money. As part of the committee's work, MSPs asked the Government for information relating to the judicial review.
In response, published last week, the Government claimed that "legal professional privilege" restricts what can be handed over: "The Scottish Government asserts its privilege over all communications it holds about or in relation to legal advice to the Scottish Government and litigation involving the Scottish Government.
"That is not to say that the Scottish Government will not give a full account of its legal position at various points, just that, in accordance with usual practice, it will not disclose the internal processes of taking and receiving advice or the scope and nature of any requests for legal advice or any legal advice provided."
However, the Scottish Ministerial Code says legal advice can be published "if, in exceptional circumstances, ministers feel that the balance of public interest lies in disclosing either the source or the contents of legal advice on a particular matter, the Law Officers must be consulted and their prior consent obtained".
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