Salmond digs himself a deeper hole!
Today in First Minister Questions, Alex Salmond told the Scottish Parliament that Nicola Sturgeon had sought permission from Scottish Law Officers in order to tell Parliament on Tuesday that she and the Scottish Government were going to seek legal advice from the Law Officers over an independent Scotland’s position in the EU.
Yet, Alex Salmond said he did not have that legal permission so why in answer to a specific question posed by Andrew Neil did Alex Salmond say he had sought legal advice from Scottish Law Officers.
If he is not allowed to say whether he has sought that advice without permission from said law officers without breaking the ministerial code why then did he not say in reply to Andrew Neil: “I’m unable to confirm or deny that we have sought legal advice”. Unless of course he had asked and received permission from Scottish Law Officers over saying he had received the permission to say he had received advice when he hadn’t.
The full interview I’m talking about, can be viewed below. Alex Salmond saying he sought legal advice is at 10.40.
As you can see Alex Salmond is perfectly clear that he had sought advice from Scottish Legal Officers but was unable to publish that.
Alex Salmond is in a hole and he just keeps digging.
Leave a comment
Nic Prigg's Blog 
Thanks for the post Nicola – I think that it gives a great opportunity to clear this up completely.
When asked if he had legal advice Alex Salmond said “We have, yes, in terms of the debate.”
A few seconds later he said the advice can be read “in the documents that we have put forward which argue the position that we would be a successor state”.
So what this clearly shows – I repeat, clearly shows – is that when he first answered ‘Yes’ he was talking about already published legal advice, advice he had already gained permission to publish. He was not talking about any other advice as that would be against the ministerial code.
I fully agree that the way the questions and answers were phrased could easily lead the listener to the conclusion that the Scottish government HAD received legal advice on this issue, BUT the transcript shows beyond doubt that that was not Alex Salmond’s intended meaning.
Hope that’s cleared this up for you.
Actually, it sounds like your defending the indefensible.
The question was clearly about seeking specific advice from Scottish Law Officers in relation to the question of what an independent Scotland’s position in the EU would be.
If the Scottish Government had already sought and obtained legal advice on this issue, then there would be no need for Nicola Sturgeon to seek more legal advice on the issue, if there was already legal advice.
Absolutely not Nicola. The question may well have been what you said it was, but it’s completely clear that the answer given was about legal advice already published, and not specifically about the advice re the EU post Indy.
Was Alex Salmond avoiding the question? Did he misunderstand it? Was it not clear enough? I don’t know, but I do know that he didn’t lie. His answer was clear and consistent on that.
Watch this space as he is exonerated for the 6th time!!!!! Digging a deeper hole – are you serious. He wiped the floor with them!
Only if your a Nationalist!