SNP on rack over ‘manifesto’ row

Salmond may face inquiry into ‘misuse’ of public money

ALEX Salmond could face an investigation following claims that he used taxpayers’ cash to fund his independence ‘manifesto’.

The move comes after details emerged last night of a private meeting between SNP officials and civil servants last summer to discuss the launch of Mr Salmond’s long-awaited White Paper on separation.

While the document was funded as an official Scottish Government publication, critics fear public resources were spent on what is effectively an SNP manifesto for the 2016 Holyrood election.

Now the Scottish Conservatives may ask Scotland’s top civil servant, Sir Peter Housden, to investigate whether or not public funds were misused.

Taxpayers’ cash should not be used to finance activities by political parties, as they are private organisations. The full sum spent on the White Paper is not yet known but a public awareness campaign to promote it is costing the taxpayer £450,000.

The ‘manifesto’ element of the White Paper includes a series of policy pledges that an SNP government elected in an independent Scotland would pursue, such as increasing free childcare and scrapping the married couples’ tax break. Following a parliamen-

‘Politicisation of our Civil Service’

tary question from the Tories, Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has admitted that SNP officials and special advisers met government officials leading work on the White Paper on August 12, 2013.

She claimed this was to ‘ensure that the respective roles of government and party in publicity relating to the paper were understood by all concerned and that a clear and appropriate division was maintained between governmental and campaigning activity’.

But yesterday Scottish Conservative MSP Liz Smith said that Permanent Secretary Sir Peter may be asked to investigate, adding: ‘There is growing concern that we are seeing the politicisation of the Scottish Civil Service by the SNP Scottish Government and this is yet further evidence of this.

‘The Civil Service code includes the values of “impartiality” and “objectivity” but the manner in which the White Paper has been put together raises serious questions on whether or not this is actually being upheld.

‘The public will be surprised that SNP officials had a role in drawing up the White Paper, along with civil servants. It is now becoming increasingly clear that this document is nothing more than an uncosted SNP manifesto for 2016 Scottish parliament elections.

‘Questions are rightly being asked as to why Scotland’s independent civil servants are being used in this manner and what cost there has been to the taxpayer. If it is found that taxpayers’ money has been used to benefit the SNP in any way, then Sir Peter Housden must decide if this money should be refunded to the public purse.’

The White Paper was launched by Mr Salmond and Miss Sturgeon in front of the international media in Glasgow’s Science Centre last November. Around 2.5million taxpayer-funded leaflets have since been distributed by the Scottish Government, explaining how to find information about Mr Salmond’s vision for separation. The postcards advise people how they can ‘access the guide’ to independence and form part of a £450,000 ‘public information campaign’.

At the end of January, at First Minister’s Questions, Mr Salmond seemed to slip up as he told MSPs: ‘The White Paper sets out the policies of the Scottish National Party that will transform the lot of the poor and low-paid in Scotland.’

Afterwards, Lib Dem MSP Liam McArthur asked: ‘Why are Scottish taxpayers paying for what Alex Salmond admits is a 650-page policy document for the SNP?’

Labour’s Ken Macintosh has also written to the Auditor General for Scotland, asking her to investigate an ‘abuse of taxpayers’ money’.

But Miss Sturgeon said: ‘Scotland’s Future is a Scottish Government publication developed and drafted by civil servants under the direction of ministers. Officials developed Scotland’s Future as part of their normal duties in support of Scottish ministers in line with the Civil Service code.’

Comment – Page 14