Thread by @Sakura509

"This situation began with an extremely serious issue. The mishandling of an investigation into sexual harassment allegations. And I honestly wish that everyone’s focus had remained on that issue."

"But what we’ve seen since then has been the deliberate, systematic and entirely cynical exploitation of that issue to suit motives which are all too apparent today."

"The media in Scotland and throughout the UK is awash with speculation about the Sturgeon/Salmond psychodrama. The coverage of this has been culminated by one question, what does this mean for the independence cause?"

"When we should be asked what this means for the treatment of harassment or the position of those who want to call it out."

"Sadly we already know the answer to that question. Since the original committee leaks months ago through multiple instances of MSPs on that committee prejudging the evidence, announcing their political motivations to the world,"

"and then to the disgraceful betrayal of trust, the original complainers over the last weekend. What should have been a serious inquiry has descended into farce."

"I believe this is the deliberate choice of those who have nothing to offer the people of Scotland."

"They looked at the devolved institutions and saw a high level of public trust in them and could not bear it. And they set about trying to drag everything down to their level. They will fail."

"And as a direct result of their actions the women who complained about sexual harassment in the first place had to put out a statement via Rape Crisis Scotland to complain about the violation of their trust."

"So here we are. On one hand, we have an independent report by someone with enough professionalism not to go hawking quotes to the press in advance, that clears the First Minister of any breach of the ministerial code."

"And in the other hand we have a report by a committee of this parliament whose members have prejudged the evidence, called for resignations before listening to it, betrayed the original complainers in the sexual harassment case and leaked their own conclusions to the media."

"Their actions are a betrayal of the trust we all placed in them when we appointed this committee. Calling out this behaviour does not, as Anas Sarwar suggests, reflect on the rest of our parliament. Our parliament is better than this."

"But they have clearly destroyed the credibility of their own work, advertised their partisan motivations for all to see. And far worse than that, they have sent a chilling message to anyone else considering complaining about harassment by powerful men."

"That if they do so, their lives can be turned into political theatre for months or even years."

"The only resignations I have any interest in debating today are those of the committee members who have so systematically broken our rules, abused the trust of witnesses and played childish games with the serious issue they were asked to examine."

"They are the ones who should be resigning today. And any political party that wants to come out of this episode with a shred of credibility will do whatever it takes to identify the culprits and ensure that they are not able to stand for re-election in six weeks’ time."

"They have shown contempt for the serious issue of sexual harassment. They have shown contempt for their witnesses. They have shown contempt for the rules of this parliament. And having failed in their attempt to drag Scottish politics down to their level, they should just go."

Excellent speech!! 👏👏👏👏😀

I second EVERY word!!

I would like to add a couple of my own, should @maggieann15 allow me to get a word in edge ways!

#Mitchell's conduct in @ScotGovFM evidence to committee was deplorable and nothing less than verbal abuse and a diatribe exemplifying deep personal hatred and jealousy of #ScotGovFM.

It was only last month, that we witnessed @agcolehamilton verbally abusing @MareeToddMSP but afterwards sought to defend himself implying 'she made him do it' - too often this is the indefensible defence of abusers that fail to take responsibility for their own actions.

This ought perhaps to have raised questions on his suitability to continue as a member of a committee tasked with assessing @scotgov procedures for handling complaints of harassment.

Furthermore, if something is "hard to believe" this does not equate to firm conclusion "beyond reasonable doubt".

edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/uk-news/h…

@murdo_fraser breached the guidance on conduct and remit that all committees must follow.

For #murdo_fraser, the committee hearings regarding the implementation of procedures to handle complaints of sexual harassment, were an 'open and shut case'.

Quick as whippet, he pronounced HIS judgement on @ScotGovFM when all evidence had not been presented and certainly allowed no other committee member to even consider evidence given.

No time to waste, it was down to @murdo_fraser to assume the role of judge, jury and executioner!

12 February 2021: "Fraser said: “It’s all been my view that (Salmond) is a key witness to this inquiry and the committee will not be able to conclude its work properly and draw up a report on what’s happened without his evidence.""

Surely, in accordance with the remit the committee's task was to focus on the PROCEDURES to handle complaints of sexual harassment in light of the conclusion from the judicial review?

Surely, the committee had the necessary information to assess and make recommendations.

"Asked if the committee was in danger of failing in its work, he said: “The committee has been in danger of failing for a long time for all the reasons I’ve set out -"

"because of the woeful lack of cooperation from the Scottish Government, despite promises from the First Minister that the government and the SNP would cooperate with this committee.""

Incorrect IMHO!

Had the committee's focus and agenda not shifted from the remit defining the scope of their investigation and their raison d'etre, the committee would have been better able to deliver the results and outcome they were tasked to deliver.

The remit was not to assign blame or guilt to any individual but to assess the procedures and what went wrong in their implementation.

Had committee kept complainants in mind, this would have ensured that recommendations would result in improvements and address their needs.

holyrood.com/news/view,salm…

Dogged and determined, @jackiebmsp may be but, had she focused on evidence before her, and thoroughly examined it, her time and that of the committee, would have been better spent.

Bias and incompetence were abound and obscured the 'neutrality and impartiality' of the committee.

The task before the committee was a significant one, not least because of the distress already experienced by those individuals that felt compelled to complain of inappropriate behaviour in the workplace.

They deserve better!

The remit was not to further #Salmond's agenda!

Alas, @andywightman tries to defend his actions although guilty of that which he seeks to accuse committee members of.

There ought to have been NO media reporting on committee deliberations and opinions BEFORE final report was published.

A trial by media and public opinion offers none of the safeguards and protections available in courtrooms.

The conduct of this committee by those members guilty of having violated their remit, guidance on their responsibilities and the MSP code of conduct must face conseuences.

"INDEPENDENT MSP Andy Wightman used Twitter to make a sly dig at whoever leaked the Holyrood inquiry report into the Government’s handling of harassment complaints against Alex Salmond."

"Last night it was reported that the committee voted 5-4, along party lines, that the First Minister gave an “inaccurate” account of meeting with her predecessor during the live investigation."

An "inaccurate" account - by whose definition?

I observed no indepth questioning of @ScotGovFM in respect of 'how she felt' when confronted with details of the complaints raised against #Salmond nor when he arrived at her home, accompanied by three individuals, for a 'chat'.

@ScotGovFM did refer to a 'maelstrom of emotions' in evidence when discussing when she first learned of the complaints raised against #Salmond; her long time friend, colleage, acquaintance and mentor.

NB The complainants too will have experienced unsettling emotions.

The point I make is that the committee members were not fully competent to undertake questionning in this instance, pertaining to a very significant and sensitive subject matter.

Their bias clouded their 'neutrality and impartialiaty'.

These failed procedures warranted further investigation because their failure left the complaints unresolved and in so doing, added insult to injury, in respect of the complainants that had already suffered from inappropriate behaviour in the workplace.

"This would amount to misleading the Scottish Parliament, however it is unclear whether this would be deemed a resignation-worthy offence. According to Sky News, the text agreed by the MSPs does not include the word “knowingly”."

Committee members displayed incompetence in their questionning, as evidenced in leaked comments and their conclusions.

Evidence they have not understood because of lack of necessary skills, they have asserted that this was due to inaccuracies or obfuscation not based in fact.

"The report, which is still being considered by the committee, is due to be published in the coming days."

The committee report not even published!

...by date of this article 👇

thenational.scot/news/19172577.…

Since when did @Douglas4Moray have any authority in the business of @ScotParl and @scotgov?

#Douglas4Moray does NOT have a seat in @ScotParl - or for that matter, neither does ex-Brexit minister @DavidDavisMP!

holyrood.com/news/view,tori…

thenational.scot/news/19181753.…

Tweet #35 ☝️ *consequences meaning resignations!

Tweet #39 ☝️ *colleague

Tweet #40 *impartiality

@threadreaderapp unroll, please

"ALEX Salmond is to take legal action against the Scottish Government for a second time."

Recap:

1. Criminal trial found his conduct was not 'criminal' although not a vindication of inappropriate behaviour;

2. Judicial Review found that the procedures for handling inappropriate behaviour, including sexual harassment, were "unlawful, unfair to #Salmond, and tainted with apparent bias".

Outcome: #Salmond avoided accountability for inappropriate behaviour that was reported.

WHAT is #Salmond's agenda?

"I called for some in leadership positions to consider their position. It is in the public interest that such action be taken to prevent a damaging erosion of trust in the institutions of government."

Not his call!

"Salmond said: “I was previously forced to take the Permanent Secretary to the Court of Session over the illegality of her actions and was successful."

INCORRECT! see below 👇

2. Judicial Review found that the procedures for handling inappropriate behaviour, including sexual harassment, were "UNLAWFUL, unfair to #Salmond, and tainted with apparent bias".

"Illegal and unlawful have slightly different meanings, although they are often used interchangeably."

"Something that is illegal is against the law, whereas an unlawful act merely contravenes the rules that apply in a particular context. Thus handball in soccer is unlawful, but it is not illegal."

“Now, more than two years later, and despite the most damning condemnation from a Committee in the history of the modern Scottish Parliament, the Permanent Secretary still refuses to accept real responsibility.

Surely, this is not a matter for an ex-minister to determine?

“Instead, the waste of public resources has continued to grow as has the impact on all the people concerned."

The public may not be so willing to crowdfund further legal action initiated by #Salmond, considering that he has avoided accountability for his inappropriate behaviour.

“I intend to make no further public comment on these issues and will leave the police and the courts to do their job."

Many people will be of the impression that this has already been done.

@ScotGovFM : "What we must do now is put right the things that went wrong, so that mistakes are not made in the future. I deeply regret what happened, and I have apologised—and will continue to do so—to the women who were let down.”

holyrood.com/news/view,alex…