STARTS
INQUIRY FINDINGS MUST BE ACCEPTED SAYS SALMOND
“This is my third and final public statement on the subject of the parliamentary and Hamilton investigations and the Dunlop Review.
The Inquiries are over and despite their manifest limitations, the findings are in and must be accepted, just like the verdicts of juries and the judgements of courts.
A year ago, outside the High Court, I said that there was evidence which I wished to see the light of day. Some of that key material, including the government legal advice, eventually emerged through the Parliamentary Committee. Much of it did not.
A month ago, I gave public evidence to the Parliamentary Inquiry itself. I called for some in leadership positions to consider their position. It is in the public interest that such action be taken to prevent a damaging erosion of trust in the institutions of government. As the record shows I did not call for the resignation of the First Minister.
I have waited to see the response from those individuals to the publication of the Inquiry reports. Unfortunately, it appears that the clear intention is to carry on regardless.
Thus I intend to take two specific actions which emerge directly from the findings of these reports.
First, the Parliamentary Committee has made clear that the catastrophic failures in this matter are not just systemic, but can properly be laid at the door of individuals, and in particular, the Permanent Secretary.
(para 599 Committee Report)
I was previously forced to take the Permanent Secretary to the Court of Session over the illegality of her actions and was successful. Despite being found responsible for that unlawful and unfair process and incurring a vast and avoidable cost to the taxpayer of over £600,000 in legal expenses, the Permanent Secretary did not offer her resignation on January 8th 2019.
Now, more than two years later, and despite the most damning condemnation from a Committee in the history of the modern Scottish Parliament, the Permanent Secretary still refuses to accept real responsibility.
Instead, the waste of public resources has continued to grow as has the impact on all the people concerned.
This cannot stand. I have therefore taken legal advice and will shortly be instructing my lawyers to bring proceedings in the Court of Session arising as a direct result of the conduct of the Permanent Secretary. I hope it is the only legal action that I am required to take.
I have complete faith in the outcome of that Court process, coming as it does with all the proper powers of recovery of documents and thus the ability to properly interrogate those individuals responsible, the absence of which so restricted the Parliamentary Committee.
Secondly, the report of Mr James Hamilton makes clear that the question of the leak of the story of the original complaints in August 2018 was not part of his remit but should instead be referred to the Police.
The Parliamentary Committee Report was fully condemnatory of that same leak noting the extreme level of damage to all concerned. I agree.
(para 17 of Hamilton Report , paras 408-414 of Committee report)
I will accordingly now make that complaint to the Police and allow them to discover who within the Scottish Government was responsible for passing these details to the Daily Record newspaper. I have every confidence that Police Scotland will pursue that matter with rigour.
I intend to make no further public comment on these issues and will leave the police and the courts to do their job.
Instead I intend to move on, just as Scotland should now move on to debate the key election issues before us all, principally economic recovery from the pandemic and the future independence of our country.”
From alex@alexsalmond.scot
ENDS
Far more statesmanlike than Sturgeon deserves. He has far more faith in Police Scotland and the Courts than I do.
Dignified to the last, in stark contrast to the savage and spiteful petulance of those who so eagerly arrayed against him, and still do.
I hope the judicial system does this properly and ruthlessly pursues every scrap of every document to fully and thoroughly investigate what has been a massive, amoral, and thoroughly corrupt witch hunt, with, at the very minimum, the threat of significant contempt of court penalties if they do not. I hope Alex has all the documentation as i’m fairly certain shredders in several civil service and governmental office will be glowing hot with the effort this evening as ‘I cannot recall’ morphs into ‘I cannot find’.
I would hope a court investigation would release its findings this year, and within two months. But reality would suggest it will be next year before an investigation would be concluded, and as the NEW SNP would hope, far enough from the elections in May to elicit little to no public enthusiasm for the result. Sturgeon has succeeded, with the help of her sycophants, to push any consequence past the end of this parliament, and past the election.
In her new queen of the world persona she will think she has an unbroken run to victory, and 5 more years of sitting in Holyrood conjuring up ever more extreme legislation against women, men, cats, dogs, elephants, and whoever, or whatever else she dislikes at the time. The right to protest will be gone, as will over 500 years of rights women fought so bloody hard to attain. Ms Pankhurst would be spinning in her grave at the moment at the massive backward step in the day to day rights of 51% of our population, by an angry, spiteful, and politically lightweight woman, for whom the fight for female equality seems an irritation to swatted away, or crushed under the autocratic boot of amoral and contemptuous legislation on behalf of fetishists who are mentally and instinctively incapable of seeing women as human beings in their own right.
In all of this Alex has remained calm, and measured. And it is both qualities Scotland needs now, more than ever before. His pursuit of legal redress is an understatement of the reality of the war against him by a thoroughly corrupt and amoral collection of organizations, all of whom are in the sway of Sturgeon. That legal redress effectively rules him out of any front line role in the battle to come before May, but I hope, if he has the energy and will, he can share a little time offering some of his experience and immense political savvy to the new independence parties. We have no choice now, we must start anew, and this election offers the chance of a practice runs of sorts, learning to work together to outwit and outfox not only the unionist parties, but select individuals in the NEW SNP who have relentlessly pushed the extremist fetishist cause above all else, including the chance of an independent future for Scotland, and who expect to be rewarded for their extremism with a seat in Holyrood.
We cannot ask Alex to do more for Scotland than he already has. We can only ask if he will contribute in some way, and if he chooses to step away and enjoy his life, then we accept that with the utmost grace and thanks for his massive contribution.
If however he decides to fight on in some capacity, then we must support him with the same enthusiasm and determination we mustered for the first indy referendum.
It will take a mighty fight to displace the extremists of all colours and get Scotland back on track to independence.
Good luck Alex in your pursuit of the truth, and justice.
Why mention The Dunlop Review at the head and not in the statement.
You must be all conservatives, still after a witch hunt.
I am sure your village is missing you. Toddle off
You, Isabelle, along with your like-minded friends are, I suspect, completely confused by this latest development. What a wonderful opportunity then for you all to sit down, check the facts, do the needful research and find out for yourselves what has been done in your name in Scotland of recent times. Only then can you ever hope to understand why so many people, few of them remotely “conservatives”, are absolutely delighted this evening.
Roddy, I’m surprised no one has asked him how best to use the list vote.
It’s all the usual stuff with the Sturgeonista —listen to only what you want to hear ,ignore facts especially if they are inconvenient ( and anyway what’s Facebook for ) and worship at the feet of the ultimate con artist and her cabal .l referred a Facebook group to Leslie Evans EDC conduct in 1993 when she faked an official report on the basis of personal dislikes !!!!!! And you would have thought l had passed wind in Buck House —no one wants to read anything among the Sturgeonista —what a disservice she has done to us with her cult of personality.
In his statement, Alex Salmond says “As the record shows, I did not call for the resignation of the First Minister”.
Why not?
If as Alex says above, she is “queen of the world”, “an angry, spiteful and politically lightweight woman”, who “holds sway” over “a thorougly corrupt, amoral collection of organisations”, and, as Kenneth Macaulay calls her “ultimate con artist”, why DIDN’T Alex Salmond call for her resignation?
I think you have a appalling cheek to try and recruit Alex Salmond into your anti-Sturgeon rant.
I have no idea how Alex Salmond (my ultimate political hero) would feel about your anti-Sturgeon remarks, but I’m pretty certain that you have no idea how he feels either.
Yes, he IS responding like the statesman he is, because he IS a political giant. If you REALLY respect Alex Salmond as much as I do, you’d be following his example of accepting the result of the QC’s enquiry. Alex Salmond is the one who was wronged, and he has decided to act in the best interests of the independence campaign. What part of his final statement didn’t you understand, Alex?
“I intend to move on, just as Scotland, just as Scotland should move on to debate the key election issues before us all, principally economic recovery from the pandemic and the future independence of our country”.
Maybe because Alex is a better man, human being than most of the rest of us.
Of that there is little doubt. If that had happened to me, I’d have torn Holyrood down. However, nobody is doing independence (or Alex Salmond for that matter), by continuing these attacks on Sturgeon.
If you find yourself saying stuff that is similar to what comes out of Davidson’s or Baillie’s or Tomkins’ or Fraser’s or Mitchell’s mouths, then you sure as shit aren’t helping independence.
I am totally in agreement with Alex Salmond. Leslie Evans has to go…..
Here’s my problem Davidson, Baillie, Tompkins, Sturgeon none of them has advanced independence one inch intentionally or otherwise. We are no nearer independence now than we were in 2014.
Correct. The NEW SNP may as well be another unionist party for their lack of enthusiasm for indy.
Deeds, not words, are a politician’s legacy, and in our case, independence is the prize for which politicians will be remembered. Not the same meaningless drivel of misdirection and a clumsy rendition of “Bread and Circuses”, year after year.
Alex Birnie – you are just comfortable with the SNP leadership because they are like NEW Labour. So if what comes out your mouth is like what was coming out of the mouths of British Labour for decades then you know where you stand and it is not for independence.
You have some cheek lecturing people.
Cubby,
What’s the diffence between me “lecturing people”, and you “lecturing people”?
I’ve got a cheek lecturing people, but in your case it’s different?
I fundamentally disagree with both those points of view.
I don’t agree with the argument that the SNP are a “new” party as Alex suggests above. The “new” SNP came into being with Alex Salmond taking the reins, and moving the party sharply to the left. Since that time, the basic ethos of the party hasn’t changed, and these suggestions that the party is “new” are just a sleekit dig.
I also don’t buy into the idea that they party is being led by devolutionists. The leadership has been moving as fast as they can, while bringing the bulk of Scots along with them. Some folk would have us all rushing to the top of the hill, only to find, when we get there, that we’ve left the bulk of Scots either at the foot of the hill, or only half way up.
It is farcical to say that we are no nearer to independence now than we were in 2014. I’m sure that we are all hoping for a majority for the SNP, plus 10 or so Greens in Holyrood after the May election. Much, much more important than that though, is that we get a majority of voters voting Green or SNP. In THAT case …… for the very FIRST time …… there will be a REAL mandate for independence. THEN will be the time to move decisively to independence via a referendum, because we Scots (a MAJORITY of Scots) will have indicated that we are ready to say yes.
Now, if Sturgeon, armed with this mandate, drags her heels, then I and tens of thousands of SNP supporters will have to admit that Stuart Campbell, Craig Murray et al have been right all along, and that we’ve been had for fools.
I’m not ready to admit that yet, because I believe that if this mandate is given by the Scottish people to the SNP leadership, they WILL move decisively towards a referendum and, inevitably, independence.
The question is, if Sturgeon DOES move decisively, how many of the naysayers will admit that THEY’VE been wrong all along? I’m absolutely certain that hell will freeze over before the “mannie fae Bath” admits he was wrong, but how about everybody else?
I hope in this spirit you demand that you will admit you were wrong. Sturgeon has moved the party do far right the Tories are asking her to budge over. HCB was too right wing even for the Tories to support. GRA likewise.
You obviously didn’t read right through my comments…….
“Now, if Sturgeon, armed with this mandate, drags her heels, then I and tens of thousands of SNP supporters will have to admit that Stuart Campbell, Craig Murray have bee right all along, and that we’ve been had for fools”
I’ve read through your reply to that, and there is no sign from you of a similar commitment, that I and tens of thousands of SNP supporters have been right all along, and that you guys are wrong.
CAN you bring yourself to admit such a thing?
You obviously didn’t read all of my comment.
“Now if Sturgeon, armed with this mandate, drags her heels, then I and tens of thousands of SNP supporters will have to admit that Stuart Campbell, Craig Murray et al have been right all along, and that we’ve been had for fools.”
I notice that you have avoided saying something similar about you having been wrong all along, if Sturgeon DOES act decisively…….
Alex Birnie – hell will freeze over before people like you will wake up. Blackford was on Sky recently accepting that a referendum will not take place until the second part of the next parliament. After that there will be more excuses – the most likely is – the not carrying out an illegal referendum excuse. The people who fitted up Salmond are trusted by you to deliver a referendum. They fitted up Salmond because they don’t want a referendum.
The only decisive move Sturgeon will make is to leave the country.
As I’ve said in my reply to Barrhead Boy, you obviously didn’t read my comment properly…..
“Now if Sturgeon, armed with this mandate, drags her heels, then I and tens of thousands of SNP supporters will have to admit that Stuart Campbell, Craig Murray et al have been right all along, and that we’ve been had for fools”.
Now, I COULD make a comment about hell freezing over before folk like you will admit you’re wrong, as I did in the case of Stuart Campbell, but that might be unfair to you. WILL you admit to being wrong, if Sturgeon acts decisively on the strength of a majority voting for Indy parties? Or are you going to stand alongside the “wee manning face Bath”, proclaiming that ir was him that shamed Sturgeon into acting?
Cubby, I will ” wake up” when the majority of Scots have voted for Indy parties and the SNP drag their feet. That’s when I’LL wake up. If Sturgeon doesn’t act decisively, once she’s been given a mandate by a majority of those who voted, then I will (sadly) admit that the Bath sage has been right all along, and that I’ve been duped. If Sturgeon DOES act decisively, on a referendum after a majority have voted for Indy parties, are YOU going to “wake up”, and admit that you’ve been duped by Campbell and the rest. Hell will freeze over before HE’LL admit he was wrong. We’ll probably get some BS about how he single handed lay saved Indy by shaming the SNP into action.
Alex Birnie – wow TWO replies. I’m not worthy.
Sturgeon tried to fit up Salmond. I would not want her negotiating any independence for Scotland with Westminster. She is a liability.
All these lies from all these people on oath to the Inquiry. What an insult to the people of Scotland and the Scottsh parliament.
Salmond was acquitted. Was he welcome back in the SNP – no. Because it was all Sturgeons gang who tried to fit him up.
When the party became more left-wing with Alec Salmond, Alex, it did not change fundamentally as it has under Nicola Sturgeon. All that did happen, really, was that the conservative (small ‘c’) ultra gradualist wing had to step aside. It took seven years for Alec Salmond to bring us the first indyref, but, never once throughout those seven years did we doubt that he would actually bring in independence if it was in his power to do so.
He played a canny game with Westminster, and even David Cameron, for all his failings, was not stupid enough to think that he could go on and on denying us independence. On the contrary, he was quite sanguine about granting a S30 Order and signing the Edinburgh Agreement because he believed that he would win. However, he was shrewd enough to realize that there are few absolutes in politics, so he decided to play the division card over the EU (sleekitly telling EU residents that they would be repatriated in the event of independence because Scotland would be out of the EU – not exactly a lie, but very far from the truth of the situation since there was no mechanism whatsoever to expel a state, or part of a state. When we lost in 2014, there was never again going to be a referendum-acquiescent Westminster government. That should have been obvious to the dimmest light bulb.
What lost us the referendum was a combination of Scottish Unionist NO votes (a minority), augmented by EU (a minority, and around 54% or so of the total EU presence in Scotland), plus the rUK NO vote (stunningly massive, at almost 75% of all rUK residents in Scotland). Both the EU and rUK NO votes were, and remain, contrary to international law as laid down by the UN, and smacked, and still smack, of colonialism. That, essentially, played into the hands of the gradualists who took over again from Alec Salmond, in the form of Nicola Sturgeon and her cohort. From early 2015 onwards, it became obvious to me and others that she would never bring us independence by confronting the British State. It was also screamingly evident that she would never allow that referendum result to be properly dissected politically because it chimed too much with Westminster’s thinking. So, we got the ‘persuasion’ technique – which was always going to be a limited success – plus various distractions. That is not to say that some good things have not been achieved domestically.
Around the same time, in 2015, the pseudo ‘woke’ element began to infiltrate all aspects of the party, and their entryists started to gain ground. Now, Stonewall decides every aspect of governance, from schools to councils, from unions to businesses. If you don’t believe me, feel free to check. Their baleful influence is not just the sign of a captured and science-denying mentality which has filtered through to the FM herself, to the higher echelons of the civil service, to the MSPs and MPs, to the SPADS, et al, but is also a sign that weakness has started to permeate our country.
Anyone with any knowledge of past societies and civilizations will understand the significance of this juvenile identity politics: it is invariably the precursor of the gradual destruction of some part of Western society: the Greeks; the Romans; the Weimar Republic of Germany, to name but three, and there are others. I bring no moral context to the equation, just the historical and sociological facts.
Now, some might think that it is worth it to achieve what they term as liberalism, but liberalism it is not. It is, generally, the precursor to totalitarianism or fascism as women are relegated once again into baby machines and domestic slaves, embracing androgyny along the way, and men are persuaded to embrace their inner woman. The backlash is, usually, the ushering in of the monster. I am not trying to be alarmist, just trying to let people see what they are buying into, and to show that the very people who promote this ‘new sexual licence and liberty’ (it is anything but new) are, themselves, its first sacrifice.
Think Hitler, think the camps, think the pink star. It may not happen here, but the foundations are being laid, and we need to pull back in time. People can live their lives how they choose, have their human and civil rights, but the state should have no stake in pushing this stuff, and certainly not by penalizing other groups (women, mainly, and children). It is a blatant abuse of power. If the price of this science denial is independence, we are in real, deep doo-doo. The Tories will never succumb to it, and Scotland will be lost to a right-wing backlash that will see us destroyed as a nation. But, hey, what do I know?
Cogently argued. I saw the same evidence as you, and I have come to a completely different conclusion. I look at this differently. Independence has always depended on one thing only, in my opinion, and that’s a majority of Scots wanting it.
Once that happens, it doesn’t matter a damn who is PM of the UK, because the Scottish people will demand independence, and short of using force, nothing will prevent them from obtaining it.
Back in 2015, I was very nervous about Nicola Sturgeon’s manifesto pledge that a vote for the SNP was not a vote for independence. Even though it had only been a few months since the disappointment of the referendum result, I thought this was timid, and I asked Alex Salmond about it at a local constituency meeting. He told me that he was a gambler, much more than Sturgeon was, but that “she is her own woman and she knows exactly what she is doing”. Since Alex Salmond is my all time political hero, I took heart from that, and I’ve seen nothing since then to make me doubt Sturgeon’s commitment to independence. You see the glass as half empty, and I see it as half full. I believe that Sturgeon has been moving at the pace that Scots (all Scots) are comfortable with.
The ONLY people who matter are the no voters. Folk like you and I are always going to vote yes, but we CANNOT get independence, until such time as we have persuaded enough people to vote yes alongside us. This NOW looks like being the case (if the polls are accurate), and if there is a majority voting for Indy parties in May, it will be for the FIRST time, and Sturgeon will be able to act decisively, knowing that the odds are with her and the Indy movement. I believe she will do this. You don’t.
If I’m wrong, and the likes of Stu Campbell is right, then with a heavy heart I will start out on the much longer route to independence which reorganising politically will take. I am NOT prepared to do that until I see how many of my fellow Scots agree with US.
If I’m right, then Campbell and his ilk will NEVER admit that they were wrong. We’ll get some bullshit about him shaming the SNP into action.
Everything you are saying about the evils of Tory rule will only be negated by independence. If I’m wrong, then things are going to get worse. If I’m right, then we get independence and everything you mention becomes moot.
That’s my opinion…..
I read a blog last night from a chap calling himself “ wee ginger dug “ in which he exhorted the troops to ignore all “ deviant “ voices as they weren’t really true independence people anyway and no matter what Nicola would lead us to the promised land .Stuff like that is really unhelpful as it assumes that all politicians are utterly incorruptible and will make good on every promise they made .No one will be happier than me if l am wrong about Sturgeon and she does eventually lead an independent Scotland but all evidence is to the contrary —there is no master strategy as far as l can see and her constant shutting down of non believers is a very worrying symptom indeed redolent of a petty dictator in the making .What l find so offensive about her is that she had led an Independence Party up legislative blind alleys and is continuing to do so —from any stand point her evidence to committee was merely an eight hour excercise in early onset something and if her memory really was that bad is she fit to lead the country anyway?The greatest mystery to me is why she expresses full confidence in that malevolent incompetent Leslie Evans .
Where is this blog that you are referring to? I’ve read no such blog, and I read WGD every day.
I’m glad that “no one will be happier than you if you’re wrong about Sturgeon”. I guess that’s about as close to an admittance that we can expect.
Kenneth, WGD is a fraud. He knows what Sturgeon has been up to. He is scared of upsetting his readership – people like Alex Birnie.
People like Alex Birnie cannot ask themselves why does Sturgeon back all these people who attacked Salmond. He is against Evans but Sturgeon backs her.
Cubby, “WGD is a fraud”. Give yourself a wee shake, for goodness sake! You are exhibiting al, the attributes of a cultist. You have formed an opinion, and any evidence has to be pummelled into shape to make it fit into your narrative. You are just as bad as those who allege that Stu Campbell has been suborned by MI5, and is now in the unionist camp. Having said that, the evidence for THAT piece of loony toons conspiracy theory is a HELLUVA lot stronger, than fr tour wild assertion that WGD is a fraud. You’re not “lecturing”?
Alex Birnie – I know that is the case. My evidence formed my opinion.
I note that you ignored the other part of my post.
Cubby, I cannot ask myself why Sturgeon backs all these people who attacked Sturgeon, because I’ve never heard her back these people who attacked Salmond. He is against Evans (as I am), but it would be wholly inappropriate for Sturgeon to attack the principal civil servant in Scotland. For you, everything is black or white. If you’re not against Sturgeon, then you must be against Salmond. Does that mean that Salmond is against Salmond? Because he didn’t call for her resignation. If you’re for Salmond, then you have to be against Sturgeon. Those are the attributes of kids in the playground. The idea that Sturgeon was put in an impossible situation doesn’t even cross you mind, does it? In your mind, the fact that Sturgeon didn’t immediately leap to Salmond’s defence, MUST mean that she instigated a plot to get him once and for all. The idea that Sturgeon would deliberately set out to put Alex Salmond in prison ( her decades-long friend and mentor) is a pretty horrendous accusation to make, particularly with the evidence that has come out so far, but that doesn’t worry you, in the slightest, does it? This has been a tangled web of lies, deceit which has been a disappointment to everyone, including Salmond admirers like myself. The ONLY people who have benefited from this debacle have been the unionists, and certain bloggers, blogging from afar, and making a nice little earner from the blog……
Alex Birnie wow wow and wow – three replies this time.
She did Alex.
I ask questions all the time. I’m still not certain as to the truth of this whole affair. I envy your certainty. I have access to exactly the same evidence as you, but I certainly don’t have the single minded ability to declare myself right, and everyone else wrong, as you seem to be able to do. Of course Sturgeon can’t come out and condemn Evans. She is the FM and Evans is the senior civil servant in Scotland. There are protocols and standards of behaviour that have to be upheld.
Alex Birnie – how exactly do you know you have the same access to evidence as me?
Alex you will find that I am not alone. Why do you think it is me declaring everybody else is wrong- quite astonishing.
Of course Sturgeon cannot come out and condemn anyone because they were following her orders.
The thing is Alex Is that Evans has previous
For malicious jiggery pokery when she was with EDC and for the life of me l can’t see given such prior knowledge that she should have been appointed by WM as a permanent secretary in the first place .l personally would have less than full confidence in such an individual but l will give the FM the doubt and accept that she might have been unaware of her previous blot but she certainly is now and the “ full confidence “ endorsement is rather puzzling .Regarding the Alba party the Sturgeonista were out in force yesterday repeating discredited allegations encouraged by the Govanhill Mother Teresa .l did point out to one gentleman that the repeating of an untruth in writing ,especially one disproved in court might lead to a court appearance in his own right but for that l was dismissed as a “ Numpty “.Another distressing aspect of yesterday was the running commentary from Hamza ,what is it with this guy ?Is he the Justice secretary or a Twitter influencer —he doesn’t seem that certain but then that’s what you get when you promote people above their ability levels which brings us neatly back to Evans and her role in the needless disposal of £ 500,000 of our money .