JACK McConnell admitted to his cabinet that he had been questioned by the police in the cash-for-peerages investigation - but only after it was reported in the press.
The Labour First Ministe told his colleagues on 24 January 2007, according to minutes of the meeting released by the National Records of Scotland.
However he did so the day after the Herald first reported the interview, and more than a month after the event itself.
Mr McConnell was quizzed by the Metropolitan Police in the office of a Labour party lawyer in London on 15 December 2006 as a witness rather than under caution.
He was reported to have been “annoyed” by the 15 minute interview, as it had focused on his sole nomination to the Lords, that of his Lord Advocate Colin Boyd.
Mr Boyd was nominated for a peerage in 2004, but this was delayed by the 2005 general election, and he was awarded it in 2006 - which was the year being checked by detectives.
The cash for honours inquiry was started by a complaint from the SNP MP ANgus MacNeil in 2006 in response to a Labour donor being nominated for the Lords under Tony Blair.
Although no charges were brought, it damaged Labour’s reputation at Westminster, and was particularly awkward for the Scottish party going into the 2007 Holyrood election.
Under “Metropolitan Police Investigation”, the cabinet minutes record: “The First Minister said that he had been interviewed in December by the Metropolitan Police in connection with their ongoing investigation into alleged links between the honours system and Labour Party funding.
“This had occurred because the processing of his nomination to the peerage of the former Lord Advocate, Lord Boyd QC, had been significantly delayed, and as a result had been announced at the same time a, the Party nominations which were now the subject of the investigation.
“The First Minister said that he had been able to confirm to the police that he had no knowledge of anyone else on that list, nor of any related Party funding arrangements.”
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel