FORMER MSP Andy Wightman has accused the SNP of leaking the findings of the Holyrood harassment committee's probe into the Alex Salmond affair in a bid to “discredit unhelpful narratives."
Last March, just days before the publication of the final report, Sky News obtained some of the findings of the cross-party investigation into the Scottish Government’s botched handling of harassment allegations against the former First Minister.
They reported that by five votes to four, MSPs on the committee had decided Nicola Sturgeon's evidence was "an inaccurate account of what happened and she has misled the committee on this matter".
At the time, the First Minister said the leaks were “partisan,” and suggested it was a member of the opposition who had shared the findings.
Linda Fabiani, the SNP MSP who chaired the committee, said they were “selective” and “party political”.
Over the weekend, Wightman, who was a member of the committee said he was confident that it was the First Minister’s party who was responsible for the leak,
The SNP rejected the claims, and said they were without a “shred of foundation”.
Marking a year since the leak, Wightman took to Twitter to share his thoughts.
“One year ago, Scottish politics was gripped by shocking leaks from the ScotGov Handling of Harassment Complaints Committee prior to publication of its report.
“The leak of some of the Committee’s conclusions took place late afternoon on Thur 18 March and the contents of the then draft report was reported by Sky’s James Matthews at 1858 that evening.
“This remains one of the most serious breaches of the MSP Code of Conduct ever to have taken place. Having been at the centre of events I am now very confident that I know who was responsible.
“In the immediate aftermath of the leaks, SNP spin doctors mounted an intensive campaign to discredit opposition MSPs on the Committee. SNP members themselves wilfully broke the Code of Conduct and defamed us. Private briefings went out to undermine me in particular.”
Mr Wightman said the SNP benefited from the leak.
“The SNP playbook is often to manage the release of information, to discredit unhelpful narratives and to mount personal attacks on those they disagree with.
“Opposition MSPs had no interest in leaking the Committee’s findings in advance. This would merely serve to undermine the impact of the report’s publication.
“The vicious smears and lies spun by the SNP comms machine plus the timings of documents I circulated leads me to the conclusion that it was an SNP member of the Committee who leaked these findings to the SNP media in order to spend the next 4 days trashing the Committee.
“In the coming months we will learn more I hope about what exactly went on.”
An SNP spokesperson said: "No SNP member on the committee leaked anything from the inquiry - to suggest this to be the case is ludicrous and without a shred of foundation."
Ms Fabiani said she was not responsible for the leak. She told The Herald: “If Mr Wightman has any evidence he should provide it to the appropriate authorities.”
As well as Ms Fabiani, Alasdair Allan, Maureen Watt, and Stuart Macmillan from the SNP were all on the committee.
Alongside Mr Wightman, the other members were Tories Murdo Fraser and Margaret Mitchell, Labour’s Jackie Baillie and Alex Cole-Hamilton of the Lib Dems.
After a draft of some of the report was leaked to the media, Mr Allan, Ms Watt and Mr Macmillan attacked the rest of the committee, saying: “For the opposition, this was never about the truth. It was never about the evidence and, shamefully, it was never about the women.
“All of these are being sacrificed for political ends. This is the politics of desperation.”
The committee was set up after former First Minister Alex Salmond had the government's investigation into complaints against set aside in a judicial review, leaving taxpayers with a £512,000 bill for his costs.
The MSP’s Code of Conduct requires that all drafts of committee reports should be kept confidential unless the committee decides otherwise.
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