Sturgeon must answer serious questions over WhatsApp deletions

When Sturgeon posted her excuses on social media, trying to knock down reporting of the matter, and claiming the Covid Inquiry really does have messages from her, Vorderman said she was “glad” and would “delete reference to the original report now, as it seems it was misleading”.

She told her 950,000 followers: “Thank you for all your messages of support for her. She’s very popular.”

Neil Mackay: Sturgeon’s sleekest slipperiness over WhatsApp spits in our faces

Seemingly so. Following Sturgeon’s digital statement, social media was flooded with admirers claiming their idol was a victim of unionist conspiracy/media wrong-doing. Delete as appropriate.

It seems that a rather large coterie of individuals who would crawl over broken glass to lambast the Tories, or Labour, suspend all critical faculties when it comes to Scotland’s former First Minister. Others smell the stink of rot.

In effect, they’re giving a free pass to Nicola Sturgeon which they wouldn't afford any other politician. They have decided to believe every word she says, yet with other politicians - those seen as their enemies - they would damn them to hell the moment an accusation is made.

This isn’t even-handed or logical, and it’s not how we should conduct debate. I say that as someone who - as most readers know - still supports independence, has voted SNP in the past, and, despite my wariness of all politicians, once considered Sturgeon rather better than most. Times evidently change.

Carol Vorderman backtracked over Nicola Sturgeon at the weekend (Image: PA)

We should all hold our own ‘side’ to the same scrutiny as our opponents.

Regardless of Vorderman and Sturgeon’s loyalists, there remain some very troubling questions the former First Minister must answer.

But first, perhaps, we should note, by way of background and context, that in August 2021, Sturgeon was asked by Channel 4’s Ciaran Jenkins: “Can you guarantee to the bereaved families that you will disclose emails, WhatsApps, private emails if you’ve been using them? Whatever. That nothing will be off limits.”

In a rather high-handed tone, Sturgeon assured Jenkins she would do just that, declaring she wished for “every appropriate lesson that we’ve gone through to be learned”.

Just months later, however, in November 2021, the Sturgeon Government brought in new mobile messaging guidance. It said that ministers “must transcribe the salient points of any business discussions and/or decisions in a mobile messaging app into an email or text document”. This would then be stored. Once that’s done, guidance states, “you must delete business conversations in the mobile messaging app”.

It’s rather handy that just months after Sturgeon made her patrician promise to hold nothing back from us plebs, the rules changed. Or am I just another cynical journalist?

So question: what lay behind this rule change, in terms of timing and reasoning?

Aamer Anwar, lawyer for the Scottish Covid Bereaved Group, said the change “smacks of a desperate attempt to avoid scrutiny and provide cover for anyone wanting to get rid of their WhatsApps”.

Now to Sturgeon’s proclamation issued on Saturday afternoon - just in time for Sunday newspaper deadlines. It followed, as you know, the counsel to the UK Covid Inquiry saying Sturgeon appeared to “have retained no messages whatsoever”.

That unleashed a firestorm of anger which clearly stung Sturgeon, with many saying there was no difference between her and Boris Johnson.

Neil Mackay: Sturgeon and the missing Covid messages - something is rotten

Sturgeon’s statement claimed: “Contrary to the impression given in some coverage, the inquiry does have messages between me and those I most regularly communicated with through informal means.

“Although these had not been retained on my own device, I was able to obtain copies which I submitted to the inquiry”.

So the point seems to be that messages from her device were deleted but recovered from the devices of other individuals.

Question: how do we know all messages were recovered, rather than just a selection? It isn’t enough to take Sturgeon’s word.

Sturgeon then said she conducted Covid work through “formal processes” not WhatsApp, and claimed she wasn’t a member of “any WhatsApp groups”.

Question: again, why should we take the word of this politician, when we wouldn’t take the word of another, say Boris Johnson?

Additionally, Sturgeon has a history of using WhatsApp. In October 2020, she read out WhatsApp messages between herself and Alex Salmond on TV.

Notably, Humza Yousaf denies deleting Covid WhatsApp messages.

Question: why would Yousaf keep messages, but others delete?

Sturgeon’s statement then said any “handwritten notes” were “recorded as appropriate”.

Question: again, are we to take this simply on Sturgeon’s say-so? Is it wrong to suggest that if doubt has been cast on an individual regarding their handling of government material, that everything they say on the matter should be met with caution, even suspicion?

There’s been plenty of slippery Covid-related behaviour from Sturgeon. During the pandemic, she told the nation that “we’re not dealing with politics at the moment”.

However, we’ve subsequently discovered that on the same day she was insisting she was only focused on Covid, her government was considering using the pandemic to restart the independence campaign.

As we know, Sturgeon - until recently, one imagines - considered she’d had a rather good pandemic, compared to most politicians.

Question: are we to take no heed of other breaches of trust?

Neil Mackay: Only populism can save the SNP now

In 2021, Ken Thomson, the Scottish gGvernment’s former head of strategy and external affairs, told others in a messaging group including Jason Leitch, the Government’s Senior Clinical Advisor: “I feel moved at this point to remind you that this channel is FoI [Freedom of Information] recoverable.” He added an emoji with a zipped mouth.

Leitch replied: “WhatsApp deletion is a pre-bed ritual”.

Thomson earlier said: “Plausible deniability are my middle names”.

Question: Do these people take us for fools?

Perhaps Carol Vorderman and others still blinded by what was once Sturgeon’s stardust can accept any word that falls from the mouths of their favoured politicians. To others, such a position is a betrayal not just of integrity but common-sense.