THE Holyrood inquiry into the Alex Salmond affair has rejected the former first minister’s plea for public money to help him submit evidence.

Mr Salmond’s legal team have asked both the parliamentary inquiry and the Scottish Government for cash to help process a large volume of legally contentious documents.

Mr Salmond has been threatened with prosecution if he, as he would like to do, he tries to share material he obtained for the defence of his criminal trial with MSPs.

However the cross-party inquiry today wrote to Mr Salmond’s lawyer, David McKie of Glasgow-based Levy & McRae, turning down his request for financial aid.

Instead, the inquiry repeated its view that Mr Salmond could submit “partial” evidence, to minimise costs, then submit more at a later date if possible.

The rejection came as Slainte Media Ltd, the company behind Mr Salmond's Kremlin-backed TV show, filed new annual accounts showing equity of £208,346.

The firm, which Mr Salmond  set up jointly with former SNP MP Tasmina Ahmed Sheikh, had the assets as of 30 November 2019, compared to £89,778 a year earlier.

The inquiry is looking at how the Scottish Government botched a probe into sexual misconduct claims levelled against Mr Salmond in 2018.

Mr Salmond had it set aside in a judicial review, showing it had been “tainted by apparent bias” from the start, a flaw that left taxpayers with a £512,000 bill for his costs.

Despite the inquiry starting in early 2019, earlier this month the Scottish Government asked Mr Salmond’s lawyers to sift 2000 pages of potential evidence for release to the inquiry.

In response, Mr McKie told the inquiry the last-minute work was proving “complex and voluminous” and had taken up “many hours both of our client’s and our time”. 

In a letter dated 20 November, he went on: “It is ongoing and our client is committed to completing it but a number of documents require consideration, possible redaction and many have potential legal consequences arising on which our client requires to take advice and consider his position. 

“The critical question of funding to assist our client help the Committee to fulfil its extremely important remit remains unanswered by both you and by the Scottish Government, despite now having been raised many months ago and on numerous occasions. 

“It cannot be fair that our client has been left to fund this personally when both the Inquiry and the Scottish government have legal support, provided by the public purse. 

“In spite of that obvious disadvantage, which we have pointed out to you on numerous occasions, the [inquiry] Convener has nonetheless publicly criticised our client for delays in providing a statement creating the impression that he is being uncooperative. 

“Nothing could be further from the truth.

"This, notwithstanding the fact that, as a private citizen, he has spent many hundreds of hours and thousands of pounds supporting the inquiry and that he has explained in detail why he cannot make submissions or give evidence under oath in a partial or piecemeal fashion. 

“We have reached a stage, therefore, where the Committee has to make a choice whether to fund our client supporting the work of the committee or not. 

“Please address this question clearly and without any further delay.”

In reply, inquiry convener Linda Fabiani said today: “As I explained in my letter of 6 November 2020, the Committee acknowledges the workload and associated costs involved in the processing of documents your client holds to comply with the Committee’s statement on evidence handling. 

“In addition, the Committee recognises the position of your client as a private citizen without access to the resources of the Scottish Government or the Scottish Parliament. 

“However, our letter of 6 November 2020 sets out measures which the Scottish Parliament has taken to seek to facilitate the release of documents which are likely to be of relevance to your client’s submission. 

“In addition the Committee has made it clear that it is willing to accept a submission from your client to the extent to which he is able at this point in time, even if it is a partial one. 

“On that basis, and having discussed your letter of 20 November, the Committee does not consider it can meet your request to fund your client to support the work of the Committee.”

Mr McKie said last week that the Scottish Government had not even had the courtesy to respond to the request made to it for financial support.

Shortly after Mr Salmond won his civil action at the Court of Session, he was charged with sexual assault, leading to a trial in March this year, as which eh was acquitted on all counts.