Alex Salmond has been forced to make an embarrassing apology to the Scottish Parliament after making misleading claims about college funding.
The First Minister said colleges received more cash this year than last, despite official figures showing a steep fall.
His assertion, during First Minister's Questions at Holyrood today, effectively silenced efforts by Johann Lamont, the Scottish Labour leader, to press him on the crisis in further education.
But minutes after their exchange, it emerged he had used a misleading figure to present this year’s cash allocation as an increase.
Mr Salmond’s embarrassment was heightened by his boast, in reply to Ms Lamont, that he had provided “as an exact an answer as anyone has ever given to parliament”.
As he spoke, he was flanked by the Education Secretary, Michael Russell, and the Finance Secretary, John Swinney, who nodded in agreement.
Later, the First Minister was forced to return to parliament to make a humiliating apology to MSPs at the end of the day’s proceedings.
He said: “The figure I used was provided to me and used in good faith. There was no intention to mislead.
“I take full responsibility for what I say in this chamber therefore I have taken the earliest opportunity to correct the figure. I apologise to the chamber for this error.”
Ms Lamont dismissed the apology and insisted the error was deliberate.
She said “He did not accidentally go from one column to another.The contempt Alex Salmond shows to the Scottish people and this parliament is breathtaking.
“Facts come second to put -downs and the interests of the Scottish people come second to the interests of Alex Salmond’s career.
“After the Euorpean debacle (on legal advice about EU admission) how can we ever believe a word Alex Salmond says again?”
During question time, Mr Salmond had claimed college funding had risen from £545million in financial year 2011/12 to £546 in 2012/13, adding that was “by definition an increase in funding”.
However the figure he gave for 2011/12 was a baseline amount and did not include extra spending for bursaries and extra places added during the course of the year.
According to official Scottish Government figures presented to parliament by Mr Russell in October, the true figure for 2011/12 was £556million.
The figures were accompanied by a note saying “college resource funding has fallen slightly between 2011/12 and 2012/13”.
His spokesman claimed the First Minister had been reading from a pre-prepared briefing note provided by education department officials.
Officials spent four hours checking their own figures on college spending before Mr Salmond returned to the Holyrood chamber shortly before 5pm.
In his apology he acknowledged he had ignored budget changes.
Hugh Henry, Scottish Labour’s education spokesman, said later: “It is beyond belief the First Minister thought college funding was going up when he is cutting it.”
Education Secretary Michael Russell was also ordered to apologise in writing for relying on the same erroneous figure in a Parliamentary Answer on June 28, when he claimed there was “no reduction in funding for colleges in 2012/13”.
Mr Salmond’s apology came three weeks after he agreed to an inquiry into claims he “lied” during a TV interview about Government legal advice on an independent Scotland’s membership of the EU.
He denied the claim but is being investigated by a former senior Whitehall mandarin.
Timeline: how Mr Salmond’s day of embarrassment unfolded:
12.10pm He tells MSPs during First Minister’s Questions that college funding rose this year. “That’s as exact an answer as anyone has ever given parliament,” he says.
1.40pm His spokesman admits the claim may not be true. He cannot confirm that either the First Minister or Education Secretary know if college funding is rising or falling. “If an update is required we will be happy to provide one,” he tells reporters.
2.30pm Labour’s education spokesman Hugh Henry demands an emergency statement from the FM. “Has he made an elementary mistake not worthy of the economist he is or has he fiddled the figures?” he asks.
4.55pm Mr Salmond admits his mistake but insists there was no intention to mislead. “I apologise to the chamber for this error,” he says.
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