‘Huge questions’ for John Swinney after documents published, says Sarwar

Labour’s Anas Sarwar has insisted there are “huge questions for John Swinney personally” after the Scottish Government published legal advice linked to an investigation into whether then-first minister Nicola Sturgeon breached the Ministerial Code.

The Scottish Labour leader also claimed documents released by ministers raised concerns that ministers could be “playing fast and loose with public money”.

Mr Sarwar spoke out in the wake of the publication at the weekend of more than 100 pages of emails and legal opinions relating to the case.

Scottish Information Commissioner David Hamilton had ordered the documents to be released, and while the papers showed lawyers initially advised the Scottish Government that the prospects of an appeal against this ruling were “reasonable”, there were also “significant presentational risks for ministers”.

Later papers showed that the likelihood of success was “downgraded”, with two senior members of the SNP – former Holyrood cabinet secretary and veteran MSP Fergus Ewing and ex-MP Joanna Cherry KC – claiming the “revelations show that the Scottish Government chose to spend huge amounts of money in pursuing a court appeal which their counsel and head of legal services advised they were likely to lose”.

The investigation by James Hamilton took place amid concerns that Ms Sturgeon had misled Parliament in relation to meetings she had with her predecessor Alex Salmond in the wake of harassment complaints made against him.

But in March 2021 James Hamilton, a former director of public prosecutions in the Republic of Ireland who is the independent adviser to the Scottish Government on the Ministerial Code, cleared her of any breach.

Mr Sarwar insisted the publication of the papers raised “huge questions on transparency and accountability for the SNP government”.

With regards to the current First Minister, he said: “There are huge questions for John Swinney personally because he was obviously heavily involved in that process.”

Mr Sarwar added: “There is also huge questions around them playing fast and loose with public money as if it was their own money and using it for what looks like potentially illegitimate  means.

“And I think it creates an impression that this is a political party that has lost its way, is incompetent in government and misuses public money.”

He said: “All of this points towards a political party that is all about playing games, isn’t transparent with the public, that has lost its way, is incompetent and is wasting public money.”

Mr Sarwar’s comments came after public finance minister Ivan McKee stressed that releasing the information had been “absolutely the right thing” for the government to do.

Mr McKee told BBC Radio Scotland’s Good Morning Scotland programme that Mr Swinney would “make a decision” on whether he should make a statement on the matter to Holyrood.

But the minister said: “The government has now released information and I think that is absolutely the right thing to do.”

Scottish Information Commissioner David Hamilton previously welcomed the Scottish Government “complying with my direction, albeit at the 11th hour”.

He said: “We have now learnt that Scottish ministers were advised that prospects of winning this appeal were ‘not strong’ and indeed diminished as advice developed.

“It is therefore frustrating to know that my scarce resources were absorbed in an appeal that advisers pointed out was not the one to test the particular legal argument being deployed.”

A Scottish Government spokesperson said: “The Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 reflects the longstanding convention that government does not disclose legal advice except in exceptional circumstances.

“This convention, which is also reflected in the Scottish Ministerial Code, is central to the processes of effective government in the public interest.

“It is intended to ensure that government is able to access full, frank and confidential legal advice to support decision-making, just as other organisations and individuals are able to.

“The material released shows Scottish ministers took decisions based on appropriate analysis of the legal considerations.

“This included discussions with the Lord Advocate, who was content that there were grounds for appealing and who agreed with ministers that the decision should be appealed.”