THE former public relations chief to Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon has joined calls for the former First Minister to be allowed back into the SNP following his acquittal at his trial last week.
Kevin Pringle, the SNP’s former director of communications, who continues to be a highly respected figure in the party, said he sees “no reason why he shouldn’t be readmitted” at “the earliest opportunity”.
In a newspaper article yesterday, Pringle wrote: “To my knowledge, Salmond’s famous temper (hardly a unique personality trait) did not manifest itself in sexual predation towards women.
“Ultimately, judgment fell to a jury with a majority of female members and he was found innocent of all charges.”
Pringle also revealed he had been interviewed by the police as a possible witness in the case but noted nothing he said required him to appear in court.
He added: “That’s not to say [Salmond] is an innocent ... Salmond had been obliged to apologise to a complainant for what he did when ‘tipsy’. That conduct was wrong and unbecoming of the office he held.”
He went on: “Yet the former First Minister must be the most investigated person in Scottish political history following police interviews with hundreds of people and a trial in Scotland’s highest criminal court.
“If he wants, I see no reason why he shouldn’t be readmitted to SNP membership at the earliest opportunity.”
In his Sunday Times article Pringle also noted that Salmond’s QC Gordon Jackson noted during the trial that Salmond could have been “a better man”.
Pringle went on: “But I also know him to be a kind man, both to me and others I care about. Perhaps he will emerge from this nightmare to be that better man.”
The former PR chief also noted more developments would emerge as the Holyrood inquiry into the Scottish Government’s flawed handling of the original complaints against Salmond got under way later.
But he insisted the episode should not be seen in the SNP as a Salmond versus Sturgeon struggle.
“A point I’ve long made is that this isn’t a zero-sum game between Salmond and Sturgeon, or at least it shouldn’t be. The First Minister’s position wouldn’t have been strengthened by her predecessor’s conviction, and by the same token isn’t weakened by his acquittal. That may not be the position of some close to these two prominent individuals, but it remains mine,” he wrote.
“I suggested 18 months ago that the vast majority of people in the SNP didn’t want to ‘pick and choose between Sturgeon and Salmond, because they have enormous admiration for both’. In volatile times, I believe that still holds true.”
Pringle also insisted the wider objectives of the #MeToo movement were not undermined by Salmond’s acquittal.
“Understandably, there is concern about what acquittal means for the #MeToo movement against sexual harassment and assault. I don’t think it needs to have any adverse implications for that important and necessary cause, because jury trials are not and must not be part of any broader movement. If the crown brought forward a flawed case — and it did — the failure belongs to it alone, not to wider campaigns for equality and social justice,” he said.
Pringle’s call for Salmond to be allowed to rejoin the SNP echoes views expressed by several other senior party figures.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article