“`html
Scotland’s Justice Secretary Angela Constance is set to face an investigation regarding potential breaches of the ministerial code, stemming from her remarks about an expert on grooming gangs.
The inquiry is prompted by accusations that Constance misrepresented Prof Alexis Jay’s stance on public inquiries into child sexual abuse and exploitation, allegedly misleading parliament in the process.
During parliamentary proceedings, the SNP minister stated that Prof Jay did not support further inquiries. However, Prof Jay subsequently clarified that her comments were not applicable to inquiries within Scotland.
Constance survived a vote of no confidence at Holyrood last week, following allegations from opposition parties that she had violated the code by neglecting to correct the record.
Independent advisors to the Scottish government have now informed First Minister John Swinney of their intention to launch a formal investigation into Constance’s conduct.
In a released statement, the Scottish government affirmed its expectation that the probe will be concluded in a “timely manner.”
Constance’s controversial statements about Prof Jay were made while opposing a Conservative amendment to a victims bill, which called for an inquiry into grooming gangs.
Emails subsequently released by the government revealed that Prof Jay clarified her statement was made “in the context of the England and Wales Public Inquiry on Child Sexual Abuse,” which she had chaired.
Prof Jay wrote: “It had nothing to do with [the Conservative] amendment, or the position in Scotland, as could be interpreted from your statement.”
She suggested that Scottish ministers should instead prioritize collecting “reliable data” on the issue and clarify her position.
Constance issued an apology to Prof Jay regarding the matter last week.
While a clarification was included in meeting notes last month, it was not delivered in the Holyrood Chamber, meaning it was not officially recorded in the parliamentary record.
Initially, opposition figures called for Constance’s resignation, followed by demands for Swinney to dismiss her. However, the First Minister voiced his support for his colleague.
A vote of no confidence, initiated by the Scottish Conservatives and Scottish Labour, was ultimately defeated, with the Scottish Greens siding with SNP MSPs.
Constance has since publicly apologized to Prof Jay before Holyrood’s education committee, stating to its convener, Scottish Conservative MSP Douglas Ross, that she did not believe her actions constituted a breach of the ministerial code.
She stated that she initially apologized in a “personal” telephone conversation with the academic.
The committee was informed that no government officials were present during the call.
Constance has maintained that her comments about the academic were “accurate.”
Subsequently, opposition parties petitioned the independent advisors to initiate an investigation.
The First Minister appoints a team of three independent advisors to provide guidance on the ministerial code.
Typically, the First Minister would refer matters involving potential breaches to the advisors for further investigation.
However, as of December of last year, the advisors are empowered to notify the First Minister of their intention to independently initiate an investigation.
Swinney stated that this rule was introduced to “set the highest standard of propriety and integrity.”
This marks the first instance of advisors launching an inquiry independently of the First Minister since the rule change.
The ultimate decision regarding a minister’s continued tenure rests with the First Minister.
Scottish Conservative leader Russell Findlay, stated that Swinney had been “defending the indefensible.”
He further added: “His lack of judgment and refusal to face the facts is bewildering.”
“Having lost all trust and credibility, it’s long been evident to everyone apart from John Swinney that Angela Constance’s position is untenable. She needs to go.”
Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar argued that the investigation calls Swinney’s “lack of judgement” into question.
He stated: “The justice secretary clearly misrepresented Prof Alexis Jay on an issue as serious as grooming gangs and child sexual exploitation.”
“There are now serious questions for John Swinney to answer too. The sad truth is that this is an SNP government which time and time again lies to the public and thinks it can get away with it.”
This controversy has dragged on for weeks and that need not have been the case.
My own sense is that if Angela Constance had clarified her use of Prof Alexis Jay’s quote at an early stage and publicly apologised for any misunderstanding – that would have been that.
Yes, her political opponents might have tried to keep the row going but it would have been laughable for them to call a confidence vote in those circumstances.
It is the defensiveness of the Scottish government, their reluctance to admit a mistake even when Prof Jay was pointing it out to them in private that has got them into much of their trouble.
It has always been an option for the first minister to refer the matter to his independent advisers for adjudication.
When I asked him if he would do that, he insisted that he had personally looked into the matter himself and decided there had been no breach of the code of conduct for ministers.
If that is what the advisers eventually decide, John Swinney and Constance will be greatly relieved.
But if they consider that the rules have been broken, that would call the first minister’s own judgement into question and leave him with little option but to dispense with his justice secretary.
The changes to the judgement, which was also amended last week, are described as clerical mistakes, errors or omissions.
Inverness Royal Academy said in a message to pupils and parents the new rule would start in February.
The Scottish singer has been gifted a jacket by the US actor after he hailed her one of his biggest British heroes.
The child told medics she didn’t consent to receiving a blood transfusion even in the event of a medical emergency.
The remains were found three years ago but further analysis has identified them as a man and a young female.
“`