How’s that for hiding light under a bushel? Then we read:
Salmond inquiry: Nicola Sturgeon’s evidence explained
The writer, Dr Nick McKerrell had no part in the headlines, I feel sure. I wonder what he thinks as he reads them this morning?
Before going on, some context on Dr McKerrell is useful:
Scots law lecturer named in secret ‘do not employ’ dossier: https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14464136.scots-law-lecturer-named-in-secret-do-not-employ-dossier/
Legal expert warns of barriers to indyref2 without Section 30: https://www.thenational.scot/news/19034593.legal-expert-warns-barriers-indyref2-without-section-30/
So neither an establishment figure nor an uncritical friend?
Anyhow, first, McKerrell makes clear that the problems with the Scottish Government’s ‘catastrophic’ handling of the complaints against Alex Salmond was down to the involvement of the civil servant whom the First Minister, as is proper, did not instruct.
Second, the legal advice did not suggest a ‘doomed case‘ at any point and was followed by the First Minister. McKerrell notes the FM correctly making the point that the Scottish Government had previously pursued the case for minimum pricing in the public interest, against a well-funded legal challenge and had won.