• Text size
  • Send this article to a friend
  • Print this article

New twist in SNP row over blog

It appeared to be a story with a limited shelf-life. An aide to an SNP minister gets caught writing an anonymous internet blog, the politician denies all knowledge of the website, and the employee resigns.

However, the row over an SNP-supporting website that made suggestions about the sexuality of a married MSP, described a respected QC as a liar, and made claims about the conduct of Labour’s top official in Scotland, has now taken a potentially explosive turn for the new Education Secretary, Michael Russell.

A leak of e-mails between him, his staff and the blogger -- one-time aide Mark MacLachlan -- contains claims that the senior minister not only knew about the blog but even suggested ideas for his site. In one e-mail, Mr MacLachlan threatens to go public with his story unless the minister helps him find a job.

Mr MacLachlan’s blog, The Universality of Cheese, attracted attention last month following the scrutiny of various SNP-supporting websites which specialise in gossip and innuendo.

“Cyber-nat” sites have become notorious for attacking anyone critical of the SNP and Scottish Government.

When Mr MacLachlan was outed as the blog’s author, a spokesman for Mr Russell condemned the writings and said he knew nothing about them, saying: “Mike was shocked to be told about this on Thursday evening, he knew absolutely nothing about it, and has accepted Mark MacLachlan’s resignation.”

The first challenge to this position came earlier this week when the former aide wrote an article for a Sunday newspaper. Mr MacLachlan denied he had resigned and revealed that an apology issued in his name had been written by Kevin Pringle, the First Minister’s senior special adviser.

He also implied Mr Russell, who was promoted to Education Secretary days after the MacLachlan story broke, knew more about the blog than he was making on: “The big question I’ve been asked repeatedly is: Did Michael Russell know about your blog? I haven’t answered the question; that’s for Michael Russell ...”

E-mails from Mr MacLachlan to Mr Russell, which were sent in the days after his resignation on November 26, now take the story to a different level.

A row that was confined to one man’s computer has now spread to the top of the Scottish Government.

 

The e-mail trail

 

Sent: November 26

From: Mark MacLachlan

To: Michael Russell

I realise I’m toast and reckon it would always be a mill around Michael’s neck. Regardless of whether we get through the weekend, it would surface at every opportunity, yet another thing to defend.

 

Sent: November 27

From: Michael Russell

To: Mark MacLachlan

Mark -- the party “resignation” line is necessary because it forestalls any talk of expulsion. HQ has assured me that it will not be seen as a public resignation, so you will be able to rejoin at some stage in the future.

 

Sent: December 3

From: Mark

MacLachlan

To: Michael Russell

Whatever reason is given, whether I am, in fact, being sacked or have supposedly resigned I’d like to know what the actual grounds are. Yes, I owned and operated an innocuous pro-SNP blog. I worked on it in my own time and from my own computer. It is not a vile, hate-filled Labour smearing blog, as you know.

 

Sent: December 4

From: Michael MacLachlan

To: Michael Russell

Joan [McAlpine, of the Sunday Times] has asked if I want to give my side of the story to Jason Allardyce [of the Sunday Times]. I don’t want to. What I do want is help finding a job. It needn’t be immediate, some time in the next few months, stuck in some quango, under my first name, not even in Dumfries and Galloway. Falling on the sword is one thing, destroying my family’s future for the SNP is an entirely different thing.

 

Sent: December 7

From: Michael MacLachlan

To: Michael Russell

I am sending this to your Feorlean [personal] account as neither of us want the following appearing on the Parliamentary system where it could be accessed by an FOI request. I am unhappy about a situation where I humbly resign, as I do not accept that the blog was a sacking offence. Yourself, Kevin Pringle [First Minister’s spokesman] and the FM [Alex Salmond] responded in a knee-jerk fashion and chose to sacrifice a loyal party member, employee and friend. If you remember correctly, you also told me about driving a drunken [name deleted by The Herald] and him stopping the car to pick up some young men, where else could I have found that information.

As it is, your subsequent feeding me to the lions has left me virtually unemployable. As stated previously, I am looking to you as my employer to assist me in finding an alternative job, rather than let all of this sorry mess make its way into the public domain.

I intend to contest my sacking, given that although you deny it, you were aware of the blog and even suggested possible subjects ...

I’m merely looking for some help from a friend in a powerful position who has not been truthful to the world about his knowledge of what I was doing. You could have at any point told me to shut it down and I would have. I will give you the same opportunity to respond to the above before I send it to your parliamentary address and cc the presiding officer and other interested parties. I would dearly love to walk away from this whole mess by the end of the week, if this is not possible then I will take up the offer from the media to talk about

the blog.

 

Sent: December 9

From: Michael Russell

To: Michael MacLachlan

In that e-mail you also make serious allegations about your blog which I absolutely refute. I will not respond to, nor expect, any further correspondence from you to my private e-mail address. Nor will I be entering into any further communications on the points your raise. I have also confirmed in previous correspondence that I will provide you with an employment reference as and when approached by a prospective employer. We enjoyed a positive working relationship and I will reflect that if requested ...

 

Sent: December 9

From Michael MacLachlan

To: Michael Russell

Dear Michael, I do not agree with your recollection of events. I did not resign, I signed no resignation letter and do not agree with the statement you issued to

the press on the Friday the 27th of

November. Regarding your denial of prior knowledge, I will be handing over all the evidence I have including e-mail correspondence to the Presiding Officer and the Parliament.