In late December 2017 the Scottish Government introduced an untried and unauthorised by the UK Government, procedure for receiving and resolving complaints of harassment against former Minsters.
Less than 2 weeks later, in January 2018, two complainants came forward with allegations of harassment against the former first minister Alex Salmond under the new rules.
Allegations were made that there had been “malice aforethought” by Nicola Sturgeon who had ordered the immediate implementation of the new procedures on the day they were completed by a senior civil servant.
It was also alleged that the complainants had been coached by senior civil servants and prevented from formally complaining since they were held back waiting for the new rules to come into force. A view strengthened by the fact that no effort had been made by the two complainants to register allegations against the formerFirst Minister in the previous four years. The complainants alleged incidents had occurred in 2013 (four years before).
James Hynd: Head of Cabinet, Parliament and Governance Division, Scottish Government was a key figure at the start of an alleged review and update of the Scottish Government policy on handling harassment complaints.
At the outset his review included any incidents involving current Ministers but this was then extended adding former Ministers, even if they were no longer in the employ of the Government or State.
Mr Hynd’s contribution to the process commenced on 1 November 2017 and required him to bring forward new procedures, if required, and he did so.
His commitment eventually required him to compile a total of eight draft procedures, in reponse to senior civil servants and the First Minister’s, Special Adviser suggestions.
The First Minister’s, Special Adviser, who insisted on being involved was provided with copies of drafts and in discussion with the civil servants, advised changes.
The Special Adviser was personally recruited by the First Minster and is a political appointee who supports the Minister with political advice and expertise.
Special Advisers are are exempt from the civil service’s obligation of political impartiality.
07 November 2017: Hynd, met with senior civil servant colleagues Richards and MacKinnon. At her request MacKinnon said the nw procedures would have include a section on how to deal with harassment complaints against former Ministers. She tabled a “routemap” of a draft policy she had prepared for application to any allegations of misconduct against former Ministers and proposed it should be included in the revised procedures being prepared by Hynd Hynd was not happy advisedhe would need to seek legal opinion before doing so.
08 November 2017: Hynd delivered the first draft procedure Referring to his work and that of MacKinnon he said that “neither of the pathways involving Ministers look right”.
13 November 2017: Cabinet Secretary James Hynd wrote to senior civil servants about sexual harassment allegations against current Ministers:
“We would need to alert Sturgeon to the fact that a complaint had been received against one of her Ministers and to take her mind about how she wished it to be handled.”
15 November 2017: Hynd wrote a second email, this time to Evans private secretaries, commenting on a suggestion that complaints against Ministers might be resolved by informal means without the need for Sturgeon to be involved: “I am not at all sure that this … will be acceptable to Sturgeon either generally or in the specific context of sexual harassment. Especially for the latter I think she will want to know straightaway if a complaint against a Minister has been received and will want to decide how it should be treated.”
There is, then, no ambiguity cancelling out the slightest plausible argument that Evans or any of her fellow civil servants could possibly have thought that it was acceptable for them to keep Sturgeon in the dark about any allegation of sexual harassment against any of her current Ministers.
Why then would any of them think it would be acceptable not to inform Sturgeon of allegations against her mentor and closest friend of thirty years? Just doesn’t add up !!!!
16 November 2017: A copy of the draft policy was forwarded to the UK Government’s Cabinet Office in Westminster for approval.
17 November 2017: Hynd circulated to the Scottish Government civil service senior management team, and Lloyd (first sight, at her request) a second draft procedure titled “Handling of sexual harassment complaints involving current or former ministers.”
17 November 2017: Approval was not forthcoming. Instead the response expressed grave concerns about implications for politicians throughout the UK if the Scottish Government would be permitted to act in isolation from the other governments of GB and Northern Ireland introducing a process for complaints about ministers and former ministers which had not been universally approved.
The cabinet Office instructed that the policy changes should be deferred until such time as the other governments had completed their own reviews.
Reference was also made to the unfairness of the revised policies which demanded standards of personal conduct for Scottish politicians much in excess of those for civil servants which had remained unchanged. Double standards were not acceptable. The document was unfit for introduction.
Afternote: The Westminster “Cabinet Office” exposed the hypocrisy of the intent behind the proposed changes and rightly blocked the proposals.
17 November 2017: Somers, Evans and Lloyd held a meeting at which they discussed the progress of the new procdure. A record of the discussion was not retained.
17 November 2017: Hynd forwarded the Cabinet Office response to Sturgeon’s Principle Private Secretary (PPS), John Somers, who replied:
“Oh dear, I did wonder if that would be their reaction. Not sure how long their review will take but Sturgeon and Evans are keen to resolve quickly and discuss on Tuesday. I suspect we don’t have a policy on former civil servants. But we are looking at this in the context of the overall review of policies and the justification for having something about Ministers is the action that Parliament is taking in light of allegations about MSP conduct which includes a recent SG Minister?”
The Holyrood Inquiry
Questioned about the matter at the Holyrood Inquiry Hynd said: “Sturgeon was keen to take national leadership on the matter and delaying implementation of the new procedure was not an option for consideration.”
Personal Adviser Lloyd who was prevented from attending the inquiry by John Swiiney submitted a written statement (not for questioning) to the Holyrood Inquiry in which she wrote that the inclusion of herself in the circulation of the draft procedures created a requirement to identify and amend the ministerial code if necessary since the code was Sturgeon’s responsibility. But the Ministerial Code and the proposed complaints procedure was the business of the Civil Service and Lloyd had no legitimate input.
24 November 2017: 1315-1400: Lloyd, Somers, Hynd and a member of the Evans office, attended a meeting to further discuss the content of the “instruction from Sturgeon” and to establish and agree clear lines of responsibility between Sturgeon and Evans.
A second purpose was to reword the draft procedure inserting changes designed to prevent Sturgeon from stopping Evans, who had a duty of care to civil servants, from investigating a sexual harassment complaint made by a civil servant against a minister if Evans judged there was something to investigate.
Additional input from Lloyd included the view that it was essential that Sturgeon should be made aware of an investigation or allegation into a serving minister, before the event, in order to determine if, under the ministerial code, that minister could remain in post whilst an investigation was conducted.
27 November 2017: Hynd to Richards. Have looksee at the next draft procedure. All hands to the deck!!! Why so much urgency over one man??
The question for Grok is. Clearly the procedure was being put in place with one man in mind. What man is Hynd referring to?
caltonjock 
Alec was also unfit, months before he died me and other stated on the Alex show chat he was looking unfit and was finding it hard to breath and if he didn’t act he’d be dead before the 2026 Holyrood election.
@PorthLlwyd
10 months ago If Alex wants to make it to the end of the next Scottish parliament, he needs to work on his health. 13 @glasgowgrad6277
10 months ago Alex, please look after your health. There’s work to be done for sure – but we need you fit and healthy. 13 @SaorAlba-st5fs
10 months ago (edited) Mr Salmond, I say this as a concerned Scot. Your performance was great as always. But your health is of a great concern to me, every single breath you take is with a deep grasp as if it your last and your face was sweaty and red, I’m afraid if you don’t lose a lot of weight you won’t be here in two years you just don’t sound a well man and I’d hope your friends and family are telling you some home truths and that being your not in good shape. 13 @doncar9
10 months ago Alex , like the others on here I like to thank you for all you have done for our Country and are still doing, but as an asthmatic , I’m breathy and can’t help but see a decline in your health. Scotland needs you and you need to eat less! Good luck. Saor Alba.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I concur with your comments but argue that they are symptomatic of someone who has succumbed to the brutality and wrongful harassment after being pilloried and hounded out of politics by the hyenas of the media aided and abated by his political friends and foes
LikeLike