Seek the Truth - Without Fear of Favour
He was supposed to reveal himself as a blustering fantasist, a conspiracy theorist. All ego, no evidence.
— Iain Macwhirter (@iainmacwhirter) February 28, 2021
It didn't quite work out like that. https://t.co/5iE2DaOYg2
"Whatever else he is, the Rt Hon Alex Salmond is no Donald Trump. He was fluent and measured and in command of a bewildering armoury of dates and documentation. This included testifying under oath to the existence of incriminating documents he had seen which have been censored by the Crown Office. And if the committee wants to see them, he said, just contact my lawyers.
"Salmond said the evidence “already in the public domain” demonstrated that there was a malicious “fishing expedition” – collusion – to procure complaints even after the police investigation had started. Mr Salmond had quoted messages from the First Minister’s husband, Peter Murrell, apparently pressuring the police. His submission had also quoted a message from an official talking about how they would “get him [Salmond]”.
"He went on to quote one of the complainants who had refused to come to a meeting because she felt “pressurised not supported”. Then a text from SNP official Sue Ruddick, calling for another woman accuser to be “got back in the game”. Another text from an official read: “ask the police what they want and we’ll get it for them”. He quoted from his trial evidence an SNP figure saying: “I have a plan by which we can remain anonymous.”
"The Salmond submission also included a sworn statement from an SNP lawyer, Anne Harvey, accusing SNP HQ of conducting a “witch hunt” against Mr Salmond in 2018. Much of that testimony has been redacted. Mr Salmond claimed repeatedly, under oath, that he had seen further corroborating evidence which the committee was not being allowed to see because it had been censored. None of it, he insisted, broke the anonymity of complainants."
Holyrood Inquiry, Top Dollar and Mediocrity (27/02/21)
I watched quite a bit of yesterday's Holyrood Inquiry which was, in turns, both illuminating and unedifying.
I am planning a separate post about the significance of Alex Salmond's evidence, but my overriding impression was that while the opposition MSPs on the committee were at least trying to get to the truth of what happened - the SNP members were concerned above all else with protecting their party and the Scottish Government.
I may have missed something, but I don't recall any SNP member asking a single tough question aimed at the behaviour of their own political leaders and Scottish Government officials who appear to have closed ranks around their woeful handling of the affair.
Most of the SNP questions were openly hostile towards Alex Salmond and one even went as far as rudely rebuking their former leader with the words 'I'll take that for a No, then'.
Quite astonishing and I was reminded on social media later that three of the four SNP members are former Scottish Government ministers and were paid @ £90,000 a year plus a non-contributory, non-taxable employer's pension contribution - taking their annual salaries to over £100,000.
On that showing Scotland's public purse is paying top dollar for dreary mediocrity.
