John Swinney's official spokesman refused to say whether the First Minister will co-operate with a Westminster inquiry into the Peter Murrell embezzlement scandal.
He said the First Minister’s view was that any inquiry by the Scottish Affairs Committee would “destroy” its credibility and that of its chair, Scottish Labour MP Patricia Ferguson.
The SNP has been under growing pressure to hold an inquiry to determine how Murrell was able to embezzle funds from the party for 12 years.
Murrell, who is the estranged husband of former first minister Nicola Sturgeon, pleaded guilty to embezzling £400,310.65 from the SNP while employed as chief executive.
The Scottish Affairs Committee at Westminster met on Tuesday to discuss holding an inquiry, however it is understood MPs are waiting the outcome of Wednesday's Holyrood vote before making a decision.
That Holyrood vote is almost certain to fail after the Scottish Greens refused to back it.
In a rare moment of agreement, Reform UK leader Nigel Farage has said the UK Government should not be able to investigate a Scottish political party.
Last week, the First Minister said discussions are taking place with HMRC to determine whether improper VAT claims were submitted.
Mr Swinney’s official spokesman was asked whether the First Minister would fully co-operate with a Westminster inquiry. He repeatedly refused to say.
The government official said: “If they do decide to hold an inquiry, the First Minister, the government and the party will need to decide how we respond.
Read more:
-
Murrell is the biggest political scandal in a generation - but the Greens protect SNP
-
Murrell case ‘must be catalyst’ to close loophole letting criminals keep legal aid
-
Staggering sum in Peter Murrell's pension fund revealed after SNP embezzlement
-
Peter Murrell facing celeb protection in Scotland’s safest jail after SNP fraud
“But I think the First Minister’s clear view is that if the committee decides to proceed it will destroy the credibility of the committee and its convener.”
Asked again whether Mr Swinney would co-operate, he said: “Well, we will see what is agreed to, if anything is agreed to, and decide how we respond.
“What we’re talking about here is what this inquiry would amount to, effectively political parties, members of political parties conducting inquiries, scrutinising the internal affairs of another party. That seems to set quite a dangerous precedent and I don’t know how the public would have confidence in that process.”
He said the HMRC, Electoral Commission and Police Scotland were independent bodies tasked with investigating any misuse of public funds.
“The First Minister is simply questioning why on earth it is appropriate for effectively parliamentary time to be used, and ultimately taxpayers’ money, to be used on a process which has already been undertaken,” he added.
Read more:
-
Peter Murrell in fresh legal aid row as he prepares for SNP embezzlement repayment
-
SNP to pursue lengthy legal action against Peter Murrell over £400k embezzlement
-
John Swinney accused of rejecting Peter Murrell inquiry to 'protect SNP'
Mr Swinney has steadfastly insisted no inquiry is needed at either Holyrood or the House of Commons because there has been a lengthy police investigation.
Speaking to journalists after First Minister’s Questions on Tuesday, Mr Swinney said he did not think a Scottish Affairs Committee inquiry into the issue was “necessary”.
“I think it’s inappropriate for there to be an inquiry into these matters, because they affect the internal governance of the SNP, which I have sorted out,” he said.
“The idea of political rivals scrutinising the internal business of other political parties is, well, let me just say an interesting precedent to set, that people should think twice about.”
Speaking last week, the SNP leader said: “We’ve had a police investigation, there can be no higher investigation and more forensic investigation than a police investigation.
“I therefore do not support the establishment of a parliamentary inquiry, because we have had an investigation and it convicted somebody for embezzling from my party’s funds.”
He has been backed by senior SNP allies, with Dave Doogan, the party’s Westminster leader, stating an inquiry would be an “unprecedented abuse” of the House of Commons system.
Meanwhile, Mr Farage said MPs should not investigate SNP finances - but he did back a Holyrood inquiry.
During a visit to Scotland, the Reform UK leader said: “I don’t think, having allowed devolution to happen and Holyrood to flourish, it’s for Westminster to come in and start banging the drum.
“I’d be very surprised if MSPs didn’t want to have an inquiry but I would say the Electoral Commission have got big questions to answer.
“All of us, as parties, have to submit accounts to (the Electoral Commission) and I just wonder how this got missed for 12 years, unless it was very, very deviously and very cleverly hidden.”
Jackie Baillie, the deputy leader of Scottish Labour, said it was a “matter of trust and integrity in politics and public life”.
