ALEX Salmond has complained to the head of the civil service over the allegation that a senior Scottish Government official identified one of his accusers.
Last week, in his written submission to the Holyrood harassment inquiry, the former first minister alleges that his old chief of staff, Geoff Aberdein, was given the information in early March 2018 by someone who worked for the government.
That name was then passed on to him.
When asked about the accusation in pariament last week, Sturgeon replied: “To the very best of my knowledge, I do not think that happened.”
But during his six hour evidence session last Friday, Salmond said it was true, and that others could back it.
He added: “As far as I'm aware, and you'd have to ask the people concerned, but as far as I'm aware there are three other people who know that to be true."
On Tuesday night, former party strategist Kevin Pringle, and advocate Duncan Hamilton - a former MSP - told the committee that the First Minister knew she was meeting Salmond in her house on April 2 to discuss the complaints against him.
Hamilton said: "I can also confirm that I was told the name of a complainant by Mr Aberdein in the early part of March 2018.
"I cannot recall the precise date, but it was very shortly after the 7th March 2018, the date Mr Salmond received his letter.
"The name of the complainant had been given to Mr Aberdein by a senior government official."
But during her evidence session this morning Sturgeon said Salmond already knew the name of one of the women as he had already apologised to her.
She also said he undertook his own investigation to discover the identity of the other complainant.
She said: "Alex Salmond was open with me about the identity of one complainant, because he knew.
"He knew about the identity of one complainant because he knew about the incident, because he had apologised to the person concerned.
"I can't recall if the name of the other complainant was shared openly on April 2 [at a meeting between Sturgeon and Salmond at her Glasgow home in 2018].
"He also knew the identity of that complainant because I remember him talking about how he had gone through the Scottish Government Flickr account to find out who had been with him on particular days.
"He knew the identity of both complainants, in one respect because he knew about the incident and in the other respect through his own investigations."
Labour's Jackie Bailie pressed the First Minister on the issue, saying it would be an "extraordinary breach of confidentiality" if the government had leaked the name.
She said in any other position doing this would be a "sackable offence" as she demanded to know if the First Minister or the Permanent Secretary had authorised this.
Sturgeon said: "I am not accepting that that happened, therefore I am clearly not accepting that was authorised."
The First Minister accepted this was a "matter of contention".
She added: "Certainly in relation to one of the complainants Alex Salmond was pretty clear he had found out through investigations of Scottish Government social media accounts he had found out who that was.
"And in relation to the other one, and this is the bit I am perhaps speculating on, it must have been the case when he got that letter, because he knew about the incident because he had apologised to the person.
"So my assumption would be that he would have known that without anybody having to tell him. And I know from what he told me he found out the identity of the other one through his own investigations."
Baillie asked if she investigated this alleged leak.
Sturgeon said: "The clear view of the person who is being accused of this is that it didn't happen.
"I am not able to go into, for the legal constraints I am under, why that is the case."
LibDem Alex Cole-Hamilton said it would be "an egregious breach of confidentiality" if true.
He asked if speaking to the senior official involved was the reach of her investigation into the issue.
Sturgeon said: "At the moment, I am trying to respect the other investigative processes under way here.
"I know that [independent ministerial code investigator] James Hamilton has an account of this and it's up to the committee to decide what it does."
Sturgeon agreed that if it had happened, it would be a breach of confidentially, but added: "I've set out why I'm not accepting as fact that it happened, as I think there is an alternative explanation of that."
She said: "The person who told me the identity of one of the complainants, and gave the impression that he knew the identity of the other, was Alex Salmond."
Sturgeon said: "Alex Salmond himself shared openly the identity of at least one, possibly two of the complainers, and did not give any indication he had got the identity from someone with the description that you're using."
As she was speaking, Alex Salmond's spokesperson released a statement, saying the former First Minister had complained to Leslie Evans, Scotland's most senior civil servant.
The spokesperson said: "Mr Salmond has lodged a formal complaint with the permanent secretary to the Scottish Government under the civil service code, on the conduct of the official who is alleged to have breached civil service rules, by disclosing the name of a complainant in the Scottish Government process."
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