Battle of Culloden

The First Minister's love of golf has generated some bad headlines recently involving the Ryder Cup.
Now there's more anger over the use of public money for a costly stay at the Scottish Open, where the FM held court with overseas investors.

Here's a guest post from @paulhutcheon of the Sunday Herald.

EXCLUSIVE
By Paul Hutcheon

ALEX Salmond has been criticised after the taxpayer funded a five-night stay in a luxury hotel to help him attend a golf tournament beside Inverness.

The SNP Government has confirmed putting up the First Minister at the famous Culloden House as the Scottish Open was being staged nearby.

Officials are refusing to put a figure on the accommodation costs, or say whether the First Minister’s wife also stayed in a hotel that has hosted Elton John and actor Hugh Grant.

Culloden House: Not your average B&B

It was revealed last year that the First Minister-led delegation to September’s Ryder Cup cost around £470,000, a sum described by Labour as “eye watering”.
Two months before the Ryder Cup, the public purse was also used to help Mr Salmond visit another high-profile golf event.
The 2012 Scottish Open was held at the Castle Stuart course overlooking the Moray Firth between the 12th and 15th of July.
According to the First Minister’s log of chauffeur-driven car journeys, which is available on the Government website, the SNP leader arrived at Culloden House, a twelve minute drive from the course, on July 10th.

Alex Salmond take part in the pro-am on 11 July 2012

A car took Mr Salmond from the hotel to Castle Stuart on the 11th July, where he took part in the “pro-am” event, a journey that was repeated for the next three days.
The logs also show that the First Minister was taken from the course back to Culloden House on the days between the 11th and 14th of July.
However, questions are now being asked about the appropriateness of the taxyaper funding such of lavish accommodation.
Mr Salmond’s home, in Strichen, is a two hour drive from Castle Stuart.
Culloden House was where Bonnie Prince Charlie had his lodgings before the Battle of Culloden in 1746.
In 2011, readers of Conde Naste Traveller named Culloden as their “favourite hotel” in the British Isles.
Set over 40 acres, a “superior” double room costs £320, while a suite is priced at £395 a night.
A spokesperson for the First Minister confirmed the Government paid for him to stay at Culloden House, but pointed out that Mr Salmond had carried out six ministerial engagements in the Inverness area during the period.
Three of these meetings - with Mitsubishi, Seawind and Daktari - took place at the golf club.
Asked whether the First Minister’s wife also stayed overnight at Culloden House, the spokesperson said this question would be considered under freedom of information legislation.
The Government also declined to answer questions about costs.

Salmond in the rough 11-7-12

Patricia Ferguson, Scottish Labour’s sport spokesperson, said: “At a time when families all over the country are tightening their belts because of the financial crisis, the idea that the First Minister of Scotland is charging them so he can enjoy the best part of a week at the golf is unbelievable.
“When the First Minister isn’t using his office to run a full-time referendum campaign, it would appear he is using it to fund his lavish hobby as a golf fan. What he clearly isn’t doing is the job he was elected to do, which is protect the people of Scotland from the Tory cuts.”

Tory MSP Murdo Fraser said: “We all know the First Minister enjoys his golf, but like everyone else he should be paying for his own accommodation, particularly when there are so many demands on public resources. If he and his SNP Ministers expect public sector workers to tighten their belts, they should lead by example.”

A Scottish Government spokeswoman said: “The First Minister undertook Government business at Castle Stuart and nearby, including business meetings to discuss employment and investment - and we expect a major jobs announcement soon as a result of these talks. He stayed overnight ten minutes from Castle Stuart, rather than making a four-and-half-hour round trip each day.”

EU said, she said

There's a new development in the row that refuses to die -  the argument over the SNP government and its protean legal advice on the status of an independent Scotland in Europe.

Nicola Sturgeon was supposed to have cleared up all the confusion in October, when she told MSPs that, despite the FM appearing to suggest otherwise, there was no such advice after all.

But fear not, she had now commissioned "specific advice" from the law officers.

Except the law officers didn't get the official paperwork for another two months.

The opposition parties are now asking how Sturgeon could have commissioned "specific advice" without posing specific questions, and think an apology and correction to the Official Report may be in order.

Here's a longer version of the story in today's Herald.

EXCLUSIVE

Tom Gordon

ALEX Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon are facing new claims they misled parliament over government legal advice on the status of an independent Scotland in Europe.

Both the First Minister and his deputy told MSPs in late October that ministers had commissioned “specific advice” from their law officers on the topic, ending months of speculation about whether such advice existed.

However the government has now confirmed that it was not until two months later, on December 18, that ministers actually submitted the formal request to their top legal advisers.

The two months was needed simply to draw up the questions to the Lord Advocate and Solicitor General to answer, suggesting significant gaps in ministers' knowledge on the issue.

Opposition parties are now querying how Sturgeon and Salmond could claim to have commissioned “specific advice” before any specific questions were posed, and have urged them to amend their statements in Holyrood’s official record.

Questions over the status and entry terms of an independent Scotland in the EU have bedevilled the SNP’s referendum campaign, with ministers forced into a series of retreats.

After insisting for years that entry would be “automatic” and Scotland would inherit the UK’s opt-outs on the euro and free travel, ministers now admit there would be detailed negotiations, including on the opt-outs and the UK rebate.

Many of the SNP’s problems track back to March last year, when Salmond was asked in a BBC interview if he had sought specific legal advice on EU membership from his law officers.

He said: “We have, yes, in terms of the debate.” 
But on October 23, Sturgeon told parliament that in fact no such advice had been sought.

However in light of the Edinburgh Agreement signed on October 15, in which the UK and Scottish governments agreed the referendum process, she said that situation had changed.

“I can confirm that the Scottish Government has now commissioned specific legal advice from our law officers on the position of Scotland within the European Union if independence is achieved through [the Edinburgh Agreement],” she said.
Two days later, Salmond also told MSPs: “We have sought the advice of the law officers”.

L: Nicola Sturgeon on 23-10-12, and R: Alex Salmond on 25-10-12

But after a Freedom of Information request in November to see the formal, lengthy request submitted to the law officers on such occasions, the government took four months to admit that it didn’t exist until December 18.
It was only then that junior lawyers within the government actually finalised the questions and passed them to the law officers.

Tory chief whip John Lamont MSP said: “Alex Salmond has already been caught red handed in revealing what legal advice the Scottish Government has on an independent Scotland’s position within the EU. Now, it seems his deputy has been less than straight on the same issue.

“Ms Sturgeon now has to think carefully on whether she misled Parliament, and if the official record should be changed accordingly.”


No problems here

Labour MSP Patricia Ferguson said: “Both the First Minister and his deputy clearly stated that legal advice had been commissioned and they need to urgently clarify the situation or face the accusation they misled parliament yet again.”

The Scottish Government said the Lord Advocate, Frank Mulholland, had consented to Sturgeon’s form of words in parliament on October 23.

A spokesman said: “The Deputy First Minister commissioned specific legal advice on 23 October, which was accepted by the Lord Advocate and he gave permission for her to advise parliament that such legal advice had been commissioned. It is part of the normal process that Scottish Government lawyers then prepare a detailed submission.”

My Way Code

THE First Minister's use of the Ministerial Code has been much in the news since the New Year.

But overlooked - until now - has been a 630-page document dump by the Scottish Government on the topic just before Christmas.

Containing background memos on the Code's composition, it was released after a request under Freedom of Information.

Rather than subjecting the FM to rigorous examination, the material shows the Code has in fact been crafted to help him pick and choose when he is investigated - or whether he is investigated at all.

Here's the story

EXCLUSIVE

Tom Gordon

Paul Hutcheon

ALEX Salmond is facing demands for a judge to oversee his behaviour in office, after it emerged the Ministerial Code of Conduct had been kept deliberately vague to help the First Minister choose whether to investigate himself.

A previously secret government memo reveals that details of the investigative process, including the types of alleged misconduct to be checked, were “intentionally not included on the face of the code” to ensure the First Minister could “exercise his own judgement” in each case.

Keeping the process opaque was “also intended to limit the number of spurious complains from third parties,” according to the document.

Opposition parties said the memo exposed the code as a sham which allowed Salmond act as “judge and jury” in his own investigations.

At present, Salmond alone decides whether or not to refer himself to one or more handpicked “independent advisers” on the code if there is an allegation of misconduct against him.

He has referred himself six times since March 2009, and been cleared in every case, the most recent of which was published on January 10.

In the latest instance, Sir David Bell cleared Salmond of breaching the code after he appeared to say on TV last year that the SNP government had specific advice from its law officers on the position of an independent Scotland in the EU.

It later turned out that no such advice existed.

Salmond’s comments were “muddled and potentially confusing”, but did not amount to a breach of the Miinsterial Code, Sir David concluded.

He also recommended that the section of the code covering legal advice should be made clearer.

Now there is evidence that, rather then imposing oversight on the First Minister, the Code has in fact been tailored to help him avoid scrutiny if he chooses. 

Buried among 630 pages of background information on the code released by the Scottish Government just before Christmas is a memo to the First Minister making the point explicitly.

Marked “restricted”, it was written by Robin Benn of the Cabinet and Corporate Business Secretariat on 11 June 2011, and addressed to Salmond and his then Parliamentary Business Manager Bruce Crawford. 

At the time, the code was being updated for the start of the new parliament.

That's handy... how the Ministerial Code intentionally leaves bits out

Referring to the independent advisers, Benn wrote: “You will also recall that details of the process whereby the First Minister will refer matters to the independent advisers (and the types of issues that he may consider it appropriate to pass to them for consideration) were intentionally not included on the face of the Code itself.”

The word “not” was emphasised in bold type.

Benn went on: “We have retained this principle, which should ensure that the First Minister has the appropriate opportunity to exercise his own judgement [sic] on a case-by-case basis, and is also intended to limit the numer of suprious complaints from third parties.”

The full memo is available here (press the 100% icon top left). 

Scottish LibDem leader Willie Rennie said: “These documents prove that accountability of the First Minister within government has become a sham.

“The First Minister has been personally involved in drawing up the code by which is he is judged, and then deciding which cases he’ll refer himself to his hand picked jury. This kind of sinister scheming turns people off politics.”

First Minister: Not guilty again

Labour MSP Paul Martin said: “This makes further mockery of the Ministerial Code. Not only does the First Minister decide the judges, he also gets to decide if he gets charged and what with. It is now in everyone’s interests to overhaul this system and have it policed by an independent judge that we can all have faith in.”

A spokesman for the First Minister said: “This First Minister is the first person holding the office to establish an independent panel to investigate complaints – when Labour and LibDem members held the post they thought it was right to investigate themselves. It is absolutely right that the ministerial code should not give carte blanche to endless, spurious and politically-motivated complaints against the First Minister or any other minister.”