Glasgow East MP Natalie McGarry has been called on to explain an alleged discrepancy of tens of thousands of pounds in funds raised by a high profile pro-independence campaign group.
The SNP politician is a co-founder of Women for Independence (WFI) and is understood to have played a key role in overseeing finances in its early days.
Detectives were called in by WFI after Ms McGarry was asked to account for donations worth tens of thousands of pounds.
The vocal MP recently suspended her Twitter account and has been uncontactable by telephone.
“It's very sad, shocking and inexplicable right now,” said one source close to the pro-independence group, who asked not to be named.
“However, WFI did the right thing and I'm proud of how they've dealt with it. We are looking at tens of thousands of missing cash. It’s a serious matter.”
It is understood the group’s national committee was informed of the allegations at a meeting on Sunday afternoon.
A statement released by WFI yesterday said: “Women for Independence have, for several weeks now, been examining the finances of the organisation, after our senior support staff raised concerns in late summer.
“We have identified an apparent discrepancy between our income (via donations) and the expenditure which we currently have evidence of.
“Because of the potential seriousness of this issue, the National Committee of WFI decided that the right thing to do was to pass this matter to the police.
“The discrepancies occurred during the period from 2014 through to our formal constitution as an organisation at our first AGM in March 2015.
“It is the robust and appropriate systems and procedures that were adopted following that AGM that have revealed the discrepancies concerned."
Ms McGarry, who is engaged to Glasgow's only Conservative councillor David Meikle, co-founded the Women for Independence group in 2012 and was elected as the SNP MP for Glasgow East in May this year.
She was unavailable for comment yesterday but lawyer Aamer Anwar released a statement on her behalf which said: "Natalie McGarry is aware that suggestions of reported discrepancies in the accounts of Women for Independence have been passed to Police Scotland. This morning I contacted Police Scotland at Natalie's request to advise them that she is ready to meet with them should they wish to.
"Accordingly I have advised Natalie that it would be inappropriate to make any further comment until the conclusion of that inquiry, other than to state that she is certain that there has been no wrong doing on her part."
The WFI statement added: “The situation we have referred to the police for further inquiry is serious.
“But we want to stress to our supporters that appropriate, robust and transparent controls are now in place to protect any monies donated to WFI now or in the future.
“We hope that our members and supporters are reassured that WFI have acted promptly and taken the appropriate steps.
“We will be making no further public comment on this matter until the police have conducted their investigations.”
A spokeswoman for Police Scotland said: “Enquiries are continuing. There are no arrests imminent.”
McGarry is the second SNP MP to be caught up in a scandal after Michelle Thomson resigned the whip when a police probe was launched into her property deals.
A Scottish Labour spokesman said of the investigation into WFI: “These are very serious issues and there are very serious questions to answer.
“It feels like we have been here before. When the allegations into Michelle Thomson surfaced it took weeks to sort out who knew what when and for the truth about links between Business for Scotland and the SNP to come out.
“Given the number of high profile SNP figures involved in Women for Independence we need to know who knew what and when.
“When it was reported that Michelle Thomson was subject to a police investigation she had to leave the SNP. Nicola Sturgeon told the Scottish Parliament that was the right thing to do.
“What is right for Michelle Thomson must surely be right for Natalie McGarry.”
An SNP spokeswoman said: “The SNP are aware of reported discrepancies in the accounts of Women for Independence however we have yet to see the detail behind these claims."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article