First Minister Alex Salmond admits he's not 'whiter than white' over Westminster expenses scandal as questions arise over £800 food allowance claims

Scotland's First Minister Alex Salmond blamed expensive food allowance claims on William Wallace events. Scotland's First Minister Alex Salmond who is also an MP at Westminster, been sucked into the expenses scandal at the House of Commons in London, with revelations Mr Salmond had claimed £800 for food expenses for two months, while the Parliament was actually in summer recess.

Mr Salmond, speaking on BBC radio last week, did not give specifics to callers on his expenses claims, choosing to blame attending William Wallace commemoration events as one of the reasons for the large food claims. Mr Salmond continued, saying he was "quite happy to go before an independent audit" but admitted no one including himself could claim they were "whiter than white" in the expenses scandal.

First Minister Alex Salmond on £800 food claims admits "I'm not whiter than white" in expenses scandal.

The SNP's Nigel Don embarked on a series of property deals to get Holyrood to pay his mortgage. While the First Minister claimed on BBC Radio that no one within the SNP had been 'house flipping' to claim thousands of pounds from the taxpayer on second homes, recent revelations over Nigel Don's property deals to secure £688 a month from the taxpayer to pay his mortgage, despite receiving a salary of £55,381. It is worth noting that Mr Don is also Parliamentary assistant to Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, and is also a member of Holyrood’s Petitions Committee, where recently Mr Don’s remarks on an access to justice petition ‘constituted disinformation’ as some pointed out at the time.

I wrote about Mr Don’s mortgage arrangements and work on the Petitions Committee in an earlier article here : Influencing Justice reforms in Scotland worth ‘price of a mortgage allowance’ as MacAskill's ministerial aide gets £688 a month to fund capital flat

Christine Grahame, the SNP’s MSP for South Scotland claimed a staggering £26,465 for ‘stationery’. Another example of huge expenses claims at Holyrood surfaced recently with revelations the SNP’s Christine Grahame claimed a staggering £26,465 for postage and stationery, while other politicians from the Tories and Liberal Democrats representing the same area claimed ‘significantly less’ sums. You can read more about MSPs stationery claims here : Scottish Parliament : Christine Grahame’s £26k stationery expenses claim on 'consultations'

Currently, up to 28 MSPs at the Scottish Parliament, 12 of that number being SNP MSPs and 6 of those being Cabinet Ministers in the Scottish Government, including the Cabinet Secretary for Finance, John Swinney, are claiming mortgage interest payments of up to £1000 a month from the Scottish taxpayer to pay for their second homes in Edinburgh. This state of affairs could hardly be described as being ‘whiter than white’ – Scottish MSPs collectively claiming millions of pounds from the taxpayer in expenses while themselves claiming they are a model for transparency & accountability compared to their colleagues caught up in the Westminster expenses scandal.

You can read more about the Scottish Parliament’s own expenses milking scandal here : An extra £2m for MSPs at Holyrood while Westminster’s reputation withers in expenses scandal

Many MSPs have ensured they have not been outdone by their Westminster counterparts in expenses claims, in examples I have previously covered here : Scottish MSPs get in on the act of expenses milking too

Ex Tory leader & lawyer David McLetchie was brought down over huge taxi expenses claims. The Scottish Conservatives, who have raised the issue of the First Minister’s food expenses, have themselves suffered expenses scandals, which led to the resignation of David McLetchie as the Scottish Conservative Party leader, after revelations he claimed more than £11,500 for taxi journeys ‘into the unknown’, some of the destinations being revealed later as his law office at Tods Murray, and a few trips to Morningside …. You can read more of the McLetchie scandal here : McLetchie taxi details revealed

It is also worth noting that while the Liberal Democrats in England have been told to pay back any Capital Gains Tax on profits made by selling properties funded by taxpayers, the Scottish end of the party, seems to have a different policy for its members, as has been covered in the media here : LibDems leader Tavish Scott refuses to reveal capital gains tax payments on property profits

Lets also not forget that Scottish politicians were also recently caught for even claiming wreaths from the taxpayer, reported last month here : Scottish Parliament MSPs 'as crooked Westminster' claimed expenses for funeral wreaths

What is so disgusting to me, is that while there are people including children literally begging for cancer or other medical treatments to their local NHS Trusts throughout the country, only to be told there is either no money to pay for it, or that they are in the wrong postcode, politicians from all political parties, including the SNP are able to basically claim for what they want. A thoroughly disgusting situation which no honest decent person can defend.

How could a politician, already being paid over £70,000 plus, justify they deserve £800 for food, or £14,000 to clean moss off the front of their house, while, say, a 14 year old child cannot get a life saving course of medication simply because they live in the wrong area or their own health board has run out of money. That HAS to be an affront to humanity, politicians putting money and self gain before the lives of constituents while having such a huge salary for allegedly representing our interests.

Indeed the caller in the radio show who questioned Mr Salmond on his food expenss may well be right when he said “All you politicians are in it to line your own pockets”.That much is true – they certainly do, but it must now stop, and we the electorate must hold all politicians to account for their actions of lining their own pockets, no matter which party they are from.

The Sunday Herald reports :

Fresh challenge to Salmond over London meals claims

By Tom Gordon, Scottish Political Editor

ALEX SALMOND is facing fresh accusations over his expenses as an MP, after the Conservatives proved he was out of London for several weeks during the whole period for which he submitted maximum claims for meals from the House of Commons.

The first minister claimed the monthly £400 maximum for both August and September 2005, despite Westminster being in summer recess.

Salmond has repeatedly refused to publish his diaries for the months, dismissing suggestions the claims were unjustified as "laughable".

Last week, he told a BBC Radio Scotland phone-in: "I was in London in recess in 2005. MPs often go to London. They were all legitimate Parliamentary claims."

But the Scottish Tories last night produced a list culled from SNP press releases and newspapers showing Salmond was in Scotland on at least 22 of the 61 days in question. His eight August engagements included Robin Cook's funeral, a cricket match in Edinburgh, a gala in Rhynie, an art exhibition in Banff, and a constituent's 100th birthday in Portsoy.

The following month he was in Scotland for at least a fortnight, campaigning in the Livingston and Cathcart by-elections, and attending the SNP conference in Aviemore.

Salmond's spokesman said the first minister had never stated he was in London all the time, and suggested some of the claims might refer to days when parliament was sitting.

Besides claiming £400 for food in August and September, Salmond also claimed the maximum for six other months in 2005-06, a total of £3200. He also claimed £1751 for food in 2007-08, when he was first minister, despite voting on only six days in the Commons.

Annabel Goldie, the Scots Tory leader, last night wrote to Salmond urging him to publish his diaries. She said: "I am asking him to be open and transparent with the taxpayers about his Westminster expenses. He claimed the maximum food allowance of £800 for August and September 2005, but there are doubts over how much time he actually spent in London during that period that would justify such a large claim.

"I hope for the sake of the Scottish Parliament he takes this opportunity to clear up any lingering doubt."

Salmond has been the MP for Banff and Buchan since 1987 and is also the MSP for Gordon.

The continuing row over his Commons expenses comes as a fresh review of the MSP expenses system begins at Holyrood.

Sir Neil McIntosh is to examine whether "key elements of the scheme could be expected to continue to command public confidence".

Although praised as more transparent than Westminster, the Holyrood scheme still allows MSPs to keep all profit from the sale of second homes funded by the taxpayer.

Last month, the Sunday Herald revealed 28 MSPs currently claiming mortgage interest would make around £2 million profit if they sold up.

A Holyrood source said the McIntosh review, which will report by December, was aimed squarely at closing the second homes loophole. Tavish Scott, the Scottish LibDems leader, who would make a £120,000 profit on his second home, is under fresh attack over "despicable" expense claims by his MSPs.

Peter Nield, a LibDem councillor in Angus, resigned from the party in disgust at Scott's failure to discipline four LibDems who claimed for Remembrance Day poppy wreaths.

Although all agreed to repay the money after the claims were publicised, Nield said that was "irrelevant".

Now sitting as an independent, he said of Scott: "When a party leader is so out of touch with society he does nothing to reprimand those responsible, it is a step too far for me. It is despicable MSPs on good salaries and generous expenses claim back Remembrance Day poppies as expenses."

A LibDem spokesman described Nield's decision as "disappointing".

In a statement, Salmond said he was "entirely confident" about his expenses. "I was in London in both August and September, securing an unfurnished rented flat and other engagements, and during that period also paid bills from the Commons refreshment department incurred during the parliamentary session."

***

Council expenses cost taxpayer £3m Argyll and Bute Scotland's most expensive authority By Tom Gordon, Scottish Political Editor

SCOTLAND'S councillors claimed more than £3 million in expenses last year on top of £22.4m in salaries, according to new official figures. In recent days, all 32 local authorities were forced by law to publish councillors' salaries and expenses for 2008-09, showing spending on travel, accommodation, meals, phones and IT.

Analysis by the Sunday Herald shows that the average expenses claimed per councillor ranged from £325 in the country's smallest authority, Clackmannanshire, to £6004 per head in the largest, Argyll and Bute. The Scottish average was £2486.

Under a complicated remuneration formula, all 1222 councillors earned a basic salary of at least £15,000, with more for those in bigger councils and those with special responsibilities, such as committee chairs, and provosts.

The most expensive council in terms of salaries was the City of Edinburgh, with its 58 members taking home an average £21,079 in pay.

The least expensive was Moray, with its 26 members earning an average salary of £17,314. The average across the country was £18,351.

Overall, the most expensive council, including salaries and expenses, was Argyll and Bute, run by a coalition of Independents and the SNP. Its 36 councillors cost an average of £24,088. With 25 inhabited islands covering the largest geographical area of any council, their expense claims included £152,974 on mileage and £10,703 on ferry fares.

The least expensive was Labour-run Inverclyde, whose 20 members each cost £18,128 overall. Across Scotland, the average councillor cost £20,837.

Despite outnumbering them 10 to one, the councillors expense claims came to less than a third of those made by MSPs.

The highest expenses claim was made by the SNP's Donald Manford, chairman of the transportation committee in the Western Isles, whose £20,081 claim was larger than his £17,819 salary - it included £11,740 in travel and £5300 in subsistence claims.

In contrast, several dozen councillors around the country claimed no expenses at all.

Argyll and Bute said its unique geography contributed to high costs. A spokeswoman said: "We have very strict controls on what can be claimed as expenses, and in what circumstances claims can be authorised.

"Receipts are required not only for subsistence or accommodation claims, but also for fuel ...

"Councillor remuneration is fixed by the government by statutory order, not by councils themselves. Mileage rate is also fixed by government."

Robert McGill, the deputy leader of Labour-run Clackmannanshire council, said: "We are looking to offer value for money to our constituents. It's important that local people trust their council and the expenses are all itemised and accounted for."

The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, the umbrella body which represents all of the country's 32 councils, said: "Scotland's democratically elected councillors offer extremely good value for money.

"Councils put a real value on the public pound and therefore operate extremely well controlled systems around expenses for councillors.

"All expenditure rightly needs to be proven and would include things like the cost of mobile phone calls, IT and the sort of other businesslike necessities being a democratically elected member committed to representing communities entails."

Westminster Expenses : Ex Scottish Borders Libdem MP Lord Kirkwood claimed furnishings & more on taxpayer - should be stripped of title

Archy Kirkwood as a member of Parliament offered little help to victims of crooked Scottish Borders lawyers. Former Scottish Borders MP, now 'Lord' Archy Kirkwood features in today's Telegraph newspaper revelations on the Westminster expenses scandals, and deservingly so, as the paper reports he "claimed £5,000 in expenses to refurbish his London flat before retiring as an MP and selling it to his daughter for less than half its value."

Archy Kirkwood offered little help against crooked lawyer Andrew Penamn & crooked accountant Norman Howitt. I always wondered what Archy Kirkwood did for the Scottish Borders, because all I was ever able to secure from him was a letter writing contest to the former Scottish Office then Scottish Executive on the corruption of crooked Borders lawyer Andrew Penman of Stormonth Darling solicitors, Kelso - right in the heart of Archy Kirkwood's constituency. It seemed to me, backed up by information provided by others in the region, Mr Kirkwood was a touch soft on the likes of crooked lawyers, and particularly didn't want to do much regarding corrupt Borders accountants such as Norman Howitt, who you can read more about here : A picture is worth a thousand words - Images of fraud reveal corruption & deceit by lawyers & accountants in the Scottish Borders

Borders accountant Norman Howitt of JRW Group, Hawick took pensioner’s pension & bank book, even made false statements to Police to cover his tracks, but Kirkwood did nothing. Now, you’d think ‘Lord’ Kirkwood would have done something about a crooked accountant confiscating a pensioner’s pension book and wanting to take control of a pensioner’s entire savings for himself .. but, strangely, no. It seems there was too much to gain from supporting the same crooked accountancy and legal firms as one of the region’s leading solicitors informed me …

However, it wasn't just me who felt the lack of support from Mr Kirkwood during his time as an MP, after several people in the Borders began to contact me over similar problems in getting Mr Kirkwood to do anything for them at all other than the standard fair of writing letters, while refusing to raise issues or early day motions at the Westminster Parliament, during the time where that's all we had as a legislature.

Taking a look around the Scottish Borders as I did before I left it years ago (and apparently it has changed little to-date) backs up the idea the region needs younger, harder working idealistic politicians who have the region's people and Scotland's interests at heart, rather than preferring the Westminster cabal to give them long term jobs and the facility to milk the taxpayer for expenses while their constituency lies in ruins.

I note Lord Kirkwood still remains in the LibDems armoury, his name cropping up on the GovNet website here, alongside other such luminaries as Lord Foulkes of Cummock, also an MSP : Govnet Advisory Board, which lists his following details as :

Lord Archy Kirkwood of Kirkhope

Archy Kirkwood was MP for Roxburgh and Berwickshire for 22 years, standing down at the May 2005 General Election. First elected in June 1983, he became the Liberal Party’s spokesman on Health, Social Services and Social Security. In 1992, he became the Chief Whip of the Liberal Democrat parliamentary party. In 1997 Archy became Chair of the Social Security Select Committee (now Work & Pension Committee).

He served on the House of Commons Audit Committee and on the House of Commons Commission and was knighted in 2003 for services to Parliament. Archy was made a life peer in 2005. He is currently head of external relations at the office of the Liberal Democrat Leader.

However, despite all of his positions, 'Lord' Kirkwood is now revealed as just another British politician who has milked the taxpayer, for, as the Telegraph reports, everything down to £3,000 for carpets and flooring for his kitchen and bathroom from John Lewis and £94 for a lavatory paper holder and tiles from Fired Earth.

Not satisfied with that, as the Telegraph continues to report, he returned to John Lewis to buy a £207 bathroom cupboard and mirror, curtains for £90 and lighting worth £72. Whatever relationship carpets, flooring, and other furnishings has to politics, evades me. Pay the money back. In fact, give up your title - as sure as all titles should be stripped from any politician caught milking the system.

Congratulations to the Telegraph for their excellent reporting, and I hope someone makes 'Lord' Kirkwood pay all the money back he has claimed from the taxpayer, along with all the other Westminster, and Scottish politicians who have done the same. Politicians are paid plenty for their job, and should bear in mind its all about representing the community, not ripping us off.

Pay the money back 'Lord' Kirkwood. In fact, since everyone was recently shouting to take Sir Fred Goodwin's title away, give up your title too, 'Lord' Kirkwood, as sure as all titles & privileges should be stripped from any politician caught milking the system.

The Telegraph reports :

MPs' expenses: Lord Kirkwood did up flat on expenses, then sold it cheaply to daughter

Lord Kirkwood, a Liberal Democrat peer, claimed £5,000 in expenses to refurbish his London flat before retiring as an MP and selling it to his daughter for less than half its value.

By Jon Swaine
Published: 10:30AM BST 03 Jun 2009

The peer, a work and pensions spokesman, used public funds to buy carpets, curtains and bathroom furniture for his Westminster flat from stores including John Lewis and Fired Earth.

He made the purchases after announcing in April 2004 that he would retire as MP for Roxburgh and Berwickshire at the general election in May 2005. During his final year in the Commons, he claimed a total of £18,806 in allowances for the flat, which he bought for £182,500 in 2001.

These included about £670 a month to pay the interest on its mortgage. He then sold it in May 2007 to his daughter Holly, 31, a journalist for Country Life magazine, for £100,000. On Tuesday he said the flat had been valued at £225,000.

Three weeks before the sale, a flat in the same building sold for £358,000.

When he made the claims, Lord Kirkwood, then Sir Archy Kirkwood, sat on the House of Commons commission which was overseeing the first publication of basic details of MPs' expenses. As the details were published in October 2004, he said that he welcomed the fact that "taxpayers can really see how their money is being spent".

However, he dismissed suggestions that voters would be shocked by the amount of money involved. "I'm not saying it's an insignificant sum, but it's pretty small beer," he said.

Between November and December 2004, Lord Kirkwood claimed more than £3,000 for carpets and flooring for his kitchen and bathroom from John Lewis. He also claimed £94 for a lavatory paper holder and tiles from Fired Earth.

In April 2004, the month he announced his intention to step down as an MP, he claimed £200 for repairs to the flat's electrics. In June 2004, he claimed £50 for fans. In July he claimed £660 for unspecified work by a contractor.

Over the following months, he returned to John Lewis to buy a £207 bathroom cupboard and mirror, curtains for £90 and lighting worth £72.

In February 2005, he claimed £145 for a clothes rail and storage devices, £78 for kitchen stools and £56 for roller blinds. He also claimed £115 for computer equipment through his office expenses two months before he retired.

Lord Kirkwood, 63, had designated as his main home a house in Selkirk where he still lives with his wife Rosemary.

He claimed more than £63,000 in House of Lords allowances last year, including £20,019 on overnight subsistence: the Lords' equivalent of second home allowances.

He claimed £11,419 in "day subsistence" allowances, £11,419 in office running costs and £9,741 in travel costs.

Lord Kirkwood, who was knighted for services to Parliament in 2003, was one of five Lib Dem MPs put forward for peerages by Charles Kennedy, the then party leader, after the 2005 election. He announced his retirement after it was decided that his seat should merge with that of Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale, which was held by Michael Moore, a fellow Lib Dem.

Lord Kirkwood said yesterday: "When I sold the flat to my daughter a professional valuation was secured on the property. It was valued at £225,000. This was declared for capital gains.

"The fuse box and wiring system was unsafe and needed to be replaced. There were some costs of relaying flooring in parts of the property."

MacAskill must clean up law complaints body as members 'booze culture conduct' reflects lack of discipline & will to investigate crooked lawyers

Scottish Legal Complaints Commission has lost credibility. Stunning revelations in the weekend media coming on top of my article of last Thursday on further scandals at the SLCC show that senior law figures within the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission who were personally appointed by Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, appeared to have taken the ‘booze culture’ into their duties at the multi million pound joint taxpayer & lawyer funded independent’ SLCC which is supposed to deal with complaints against lawyers.

Margaret Scanlan was ‘on the razzle again’ while clients of ‘crooked lawyers’ burned. Yesterday, the Sunday Mail newspaper featured email correspondence obtained under Freedom of Information laws in which SLCC board member Margaret Scanlan, a solicitor with Russells Gibson McCaffrey in Glasgow, confessed to the Commission she was suffering from the effects of a hangover after being “'out on the razzle again last night”. Stunningly Scanlan in her emails then went on to tear apart consumers hopes the SLCC would fulfil its intended monitoring role of the ‘crooked lawyer compensation schemes, operated by the Law Society of Scotland, known as the Guarantee Fund & Master Insurance Policy which are designed to (but do not) protect consumers funds from crooked lawyers who steal money or mishandling client’s legal affairs.

Margaret Scanlan : “Was out on the razzle, again, last night so bit cross-eyed this morning. Please excuse any consequent gibberish. Here are my comments on Master Policy and Guarantee Fund…. The consultation should be viewed with some caution. It provides very little by way of a sound evidential basis for us to do anything…. One unidentified responded … reports complaints about difficulty in finding solicitors to pursue a claim under MP (Master Policy). Apart from fundamental misunderstandings about MP which is for benefit of practitioner and in respect of which consumer has no rights ..”

So, despite suffering from a hangover after ‘being on the razzle’, there was still time for SLCC board members to throw the public out the door once again on rights against crooked lawyers … but even worse was to come as new emails reveal a more serious scandal :

Margaret Scanlan condemns claimants against crooked lawyers as “chancers”. However, further emails from Margaret Scanlan have now emerged which depict the same Law Society style 'anti-consumer-anti-claims culture' operating at the supposedly independent Legal Complaints Commission, where Scanlan stunningly labels claimants to the Guarantee Fund as "chancers" indicating she may have personal knowledge of cases, despite the fact that claims to the Guarantee Fund are supposedly confidential.

Margaret Scanlan : "The only complaints I am aware of on the functioning and extent of the GF have come from corporate bodies eg lending Institutions whose claims have largely not been entertained on basis that is not what GF is for. This includes our friend **** (censored) whose cause is vigorously esposed by **** (censored) but is a complete chancer in my opinion."

Margaret Scanlan's comments, directed against a claimant to the Guarantee Fund, appear to reflect a level of feeling many at the Law Society of Scotland are known to have against members of the public who dare to either complain or make a claim for damages against their rogue lawyer. More seriously, Scanlan's email comments in her capacity as an SLCC board member may have potentially damaged claims to the Guarantee Fund, and sources say today, she could face the possibility of legal action over her comments disparaging the individual involved in the claim she was referring to.

A legal insider hit out at Scanlan's comments against claimants to the Guarantee Fund, claiming her words "were wholly out of place and since the SLCC hadn't even began its monitoring role of the Guarantee Fund & Master Policy, the comments against an actual claim should not have been made."

He went on "There is an all-out attempt by the Law Society of Scotland and the insurers to block any substantial monitoring by the 'independent' commission of the Guarantee Fund & Master Insurance Policy. Many meetings have taken place already between the senior members of the SLCC, the insurers, and the Law Society, who have put the profession’s own views forward on how the fund & insurance operates "perfectly well" in their own eyes."

"People who have actually tried to make a claim against the Master Policy or the Guarantee Fund have been blocked from attending the SLCC to give their actual real life experiences on what happened to their claims, probably because most financial claims against solicitors fail due to Law Society meddling with clients legal teams and court access which obviously no one wants to hear about at the commission."

The legal profession’s ‘point of view’ on how the Master Insurance Policy actually operates, is as you know, slightly askew from the truth of the matter, which I have reported previously in articles such as the following : Law Society boss Mill lied to Swinney, Parliament as secret memos reveal policy of intervention & obstruction on claims, complaints.

Eileen Masterman, SLCC Chief Exec. Insiders to the SLCC reported over the weekend that Eileen Masterman, the SLCC’s Chief Executive apparently did not reprimand the poor conduct of board members, and rather than keeping above the bitter exchanges, agreed with lawyers hostile sentiments towards consumer groups. It is worth noting Eileen Masterman had a long history of involvement with the Law Society of Scotland prior to her joining the SLCC as Chief Executive, having actually served on Law Society committees on the flawed regulator which the SLCC was designed to replace.

Justice Secretary MacAskill appointed ‘on the razzle’ hung-over lawyers to the SLCC. Given the state the SLCC currently finds itself, where decisions taken by Mr MacAskill's appointees have restricted its investigations of consumer complaints against crooked lawyers to issues which occur only after 1st October 2008, millions of pounds of taxpayers money has evidently been wasted on a commission which is self serving, and has no obvious intention to deal with the sins of the legal profession, which the Law Society of Scotland has so far failed to clear up after decades of being the self regulator of all Scottish lawyers.

A client of a solicitor the Law Society is currently investigating over complaints of poor service & severe misconduct agreed the SLCC needs to be reformed in the wake of recent scandals and said “This SLCC is just another version of the Law Society and is full of lawyers and others who just want to close ranks with their legal world friends no matter how crooked they are.This commission needs to be cleaned up and made to do what it is supposed to be doing, not what the Law Society and crooked lawyers want it to do.”

One solicitor today who did not wish to be named said the comments against the Guarantee Fund claimant made by Scanlan in her capacity as an SLCC board member may amount to possible defamation of the so-far unidentified claimant, who now faces the prospect their claim against the Guarantee Fund will not be met.

He said “There may be cause for the claimant to sue the SLCC for damages over the Board members accusations. At the very least the matter merits a full investigation and an apology to whoever Margaret felt strongly enough to refer to in this way in her emails.”

While recent news leaks show SLCC board members engaged in some kind of free for all party-on approach to their duties & mission to offer increased consumer protection against crooked lawyers, I would remind you all from two previous articles the same board members were quick enough to threaten resignation if they didn’t secure greater perks from the taxpayer, such as personal insurance cover and increased pensions, which you can read here :

Legal Complaints Commission in crisis amid funds shortage & resignation threats over lack of insurance protection &

Complaints Commission 'unfit for purpose' as secret meetings with insurers & pensions take focus over consumer protection against crooked lawyers

I’d say the conduct of the SLCC to-date is evidence enough if more were needed the SLCC needs a clean up of its present structure which appears biased towards the legal profession it was put there to regulate, and a representative element from consumer organisations & actual users of legal services added to its staff & board.

The Sunday Mail reports :

Called to the Bars : Top lawyer admits talking gibberish at work due to hangover

Mar 15 2009 By David Taylor

A TOP legal watchdog admitted to her boss she was talking gibberish - because of a hangover. Lawyer Margaret Scanlan made the confession in a email which described herself as "cross-eyed" after a night on the tiles.

Scanlan was appointed to her job in the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission by anti-booze crusader Kenny MacAskill. She wrote: "Was out on the razzle, again, last night so bit cross-eyed this morning. Please excuse any consequent gibberish."

Divorce lawyer Scanlan sent the lengthy email at 11.30am one day in November last year to watchdog chief Eileen Masterman. It was also copied to Alan Paterson, a law professor at Strathclyde University.

Campaigner Peter Cherbi, who champions legal and consumer issues, said: "This is not the sort of service the people of Scotland deserve. "It's not very good conduct for people who are supposed to be in some of the most respectable positions in the legal profession."

Scanlan was hand picked by Justice Secretary MacAskill as one of five lawyers to serve on the SLCC - a "one-stop shop" for complaints against lawyers. MacAskill plans to enforce mimimum prices for drink to combat alcoholism and drink-related problems.

The SLCC was set up by the Scottish Government to "modernise the legal complaints" system and ensure gripes are resolved quickly and effectively. It was formed after complaints that self-regulation by the Law Society of Scotland often protected crooked lawyers through cronyism.

Scanlan's email - about an insurance policy to cover solicitors' mistakes and misuse of clients' cash - was released to legal reform campaigners through a Freedom of Information request. The request also released emails from Scanlan attacking outspoken legal reform group Scotland Against Crooked Lawyers.

In one email, she wrote: "I would prefer that we not give any recognition to SACL. "I do not see why we have to name them even if we are bound to engage with them. "Their website is offensive and so far as I am aware no reputable organisations has anything to do with them"

Scanlan is a specialist in family law at Glasgow-based Russells Gibson McCaffrey.

She has also tutored in family law at Glasgow Caledonian University and was deputy chair of the Scottish Legal Aid Board between 1997 and 2007. She was also director of the Legal Defence Union between 1998 and 2002. She earns £350 a day plus expenses for her work with the SLCC.

When asked about the emails, Scanlan told us: "I have nothing to say."

Witch-hunt at Legal Complaints Commission 'ends at MacAskill's doorstep' as Justice officials forced to confirm leaks inquiry

SLCC once again under fire. Officials of the Scottish Government's Justice Department have been forced to admit a series of interventions with the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, over leaks to the media which depict the quango which handles consumer complaints against solicitors as more interested in protecting the legal profession than investigating actual complaints.

Diary of Injustice reveals SLCC’s secret leaks inquiry. As I revealed earlier last month, a witch hunt at the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission began after the Justice Department ordered an investigation into leaks which began in August 2008, one of which gave details on non Law Society staff at the SLCC who were being subjected to an attempt by the Law Society and Scottish Government to 'drive them out of the Commission, ensuring total control of the 'independent' SLCC by the legal profession itself.

You can read last month’s report on the witch-hunt at the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission here : 'Culture of fear' grips Scottish Legal Complaints Commission as Justice Department witch-hunt threatens whistleblower staff over leaks to media

You can read my earlier report on the leaks as they began at the SLCC here : Law Society target ‘outsider staff’ for exit at Complaints Commission as lawyers undermine attempts at independent regulation

Scottish Government initially denied any involvement. The Scottish Government was asked to explain why it had ordered an investigation at the SLCC, however officials initially sought to play down and deny, several times, that any such investigation, or even discussions between the SLCC and Justice Department took place. A Justice Department official would only admit : "Staffing is a matter for the SLCC. If they have concerns about security of their information then it is a matter for Eileen Masterman and her team."

Leaked SLCC papers show Justice Department ordered investigation. However, after initial denials from the Justice Department, a further leaked document quoted an SLCC meeting where mentions of “Action and impact arising from the unauthorised leak of information that was raised by the Justice Dept.” exposed the Government's account of matters as completely false. Justice Department officials were then hurriedly forced to admit they had directly intervened with the SLCC and demanded immediate action to curb any information reaching the public. Officials sought to justify their attempt to clamp down on dissent at the quango by claiming that when the leaks be some of the staff under suspicion were still employed by Scottish Ministers.

A Justice Department official sought to play down the leaks investigation and protect the Justice Secretary from involvement, claiming : "I had a very brief discussion with Jane Irvine in her capacity as Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman last summer when it seemed from your website and an approach that you made to her that you were receiving information about the Ombudsman’s staff."

The official went on "These members of staff were at that time employed by Scottish Ministers so it was appropriate that I should be made aware of any concerns. Jane and I discussed whether or not we thought there had been a breach in security and we concluded that there had not been. We agreed that it was unlikely the information was coming from the Ombudsman’s office because it was completely inaccurate and we therefore decided to take no further action.That is why there are no minutes or notes"

However, the Justice Department official had no explanation to offer for how the entire episode came to light in leaked documents from the SLCC (more yet to be published) which reported a meeting where the Justice Department raised the leaks issue and demanded action.

A Justice Department official on being handed a copy of one of the leaked documents said : "I have no idea why the matter was raised at a meeting of the SLCC in October. I was not at the meeting."

However, an insider at the SLCC countered "That is pure rubbish from the Government's point of view. We were all warned to shut up after these discussions between Jane Irvine and the Government. The fact of the matter is there has been a lot of inequality between members of staff at the SLCC and the Law Society want everyone out who isn't under their thumb."

"Law Society staff who transferred over were being paid higher salaries and were to be considered for more senior positions. Whoever denies that is a liar and they know it, and even though you reported it there is still an undercurrent of mistrust between Law Society staff and non Law Society staff."

"What I said last year to you stands, the present Scottish Government are simply allowing the Law Society to dictate terms to the SLCC and we are not able to perform our role as was intended under the previous administration which created the SLCC in the first place."

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill must have known his department intervened with SLCC. A senior source within the Government said however, he doubted the Justice Department’s explanation on the matter and pointed to the leaks of documents, and reports of bitter infighting within the Commission as a direct challenge to the reliability of the Government’s explanations.

He said “I doubt this was left to an official to clear up, considering there is a great deal of interest in your reporting of the matter and criticisms of regulation of the legal profession”.

“I understand the Cabinet Secretary for Justice knows all about what took place and probably wants to shut the whole discussion on leaks down because ultimately the quango is his responsibility and the people there are at his appointment.These reports of problems at the Commission are making life very difficult for those who want to keep control of regulating lawyers for themselves.”

“Clearly responsibility for this rests with Kenny MacAskill himself no matter who tries to throw themselves into the path of the oncoming train and the Law Society has to be stopped from gaining full control of the Commission if the public are to be properly protected”

The insider went on to refer to claims in the Justice Department’s statement there were “no minutes or notes” of the Government’s intervention with the SLCC on the leaks issue.

He said : “It is preposterous to claim there are no minutes or notes of such a matter given the importance of it and implications for the SLCC and the Justice Department and why did they even put such a thing in their statement. I regret to say I sense this issue is being covered up deliberately to protect people here in Government, at the SLCC and probably at the Law Society.”

SLCC Chairman Jane Irvine. The Commission’s Chairman, Jane Irvine was asked for comment on the situation, but refused. This does seem to leave the obvious impression the Commission is indeed in crisis, amid staffing problems, threats of resignation by its own members unless they get increased financial perks & insurance protection, and the intense layer of secrecy which the Commission has been operating under, seeking to blank out most Freedom of Information requests specifically to law journalists while releasing the same information to elements of the legal profession.

A brief history of leaked reports relating to the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission :

The story that started the ball rolling on leaks at the SLCC : Law Society target ‘outsider staff’ for exit at Complaints Commission as lawyers undermine attempts at independent regulation

SLCC members demanded more perks or would resign. You can read an earlier article where the Commission members threatened their resignation over lack of perks and insurance cover, here : Legal Complaints Commission in crisis amid funds shortage & resignation threats over lack of insurance protection. The resignation threats came even though the SLCC had received a whopping £2 million of public money, and yet more was being paid in by the Scottish Government for demanded perks, as I reported here : MacAskill silent on taxpayers £2million 'write off' to lawyers quango as Complaints boss reveals Law Society defaulted on levies

I also reported that insiders to the Commission don’t even believe the SLCC is up to the job because of too much interference from the legal profession and a lack of will at the Scottish Government to protect it’s intended role, which you can read here : Insiders attack MacAskill's Legal Complaints Commission as 'a front' while millions go on quango which refuses to investigate crooked lawyers

Lets also not forget the SLCC seems to be so mired in problems it has to rely on a veil of secrecy to continue its operations, as I reported here : FOI disclosures censored to law journalists as MacAskill’s legal complaints commission prefers secrecy to public accountability

FOI disclosures censored to law journalists as MacAskill’s legal complaints commission prefers secrecy to public accountability

In a picture of what is fast becoming a gauge of accountability for Scottish legal issues under the current SNP controlled Scottish Government, Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill's unaccountable Scottish Legal Complaints Commission has decided it is better to operate under complete secrecy rather than be the transparent independent organisation it claims to be.

Material taken from an FOI release from MacAskill's legal complaints quango, the SLCC, which is populated by ex Police Chiefs, lawyers, members of the Law Society of Scotland, & ex public service ministerial appointees, show the SLCC to be just as secretive as the Law Society of Scotland are when it comes to operational matters, even after receiving multi million pound gifts of taxpayers money from the Justice Secretary.

Financial accountability at the Legal Complaints Commission – Keep everything secret, just like the Law Society of Scotland.

Worse is to come in that while MacAskill's ministerial creation, the SLCC, will release information to the legal profession itself, and selected individuals, it now appears the SLCC have been found out to be apparently operating secret rules of information discrimination which are applied to those deemed too dangerous to the issue of handling legal regulation & complaints against Scottish solicitors, ensuring certain individuals do not receive compromising material.

One of those individuals on the SLCC's exclusion list, appears to be me, where as you can see from the following FOI release, papers which were released to others, were completely censored in response to my own FOI request, which has now been passed to the FOI Commissioner, Kevin Dunion for investigation.

Legal complaints quango releases rules discussion to some friends in the legal world :

… and the censored versions released to enquiring law journalists:

So as you can see its full steam backwards for MacAskill’s Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, as censorship seems to be the preferred order of the day, supported by elements of the Scottish Government’s Justice Department who themselves see the information I requested, as far too damaging to release to the public.

A source at the Justice Department earlier this week condemned the SLCC’s attempts to maintain public secrecy over it’s less than perfect operations : “I don’t think anyone out there would believe the SLCC is an honest organisation when it stoops to this kind of level – especially when they have had so much of the taxpayer’s money to begin with”.

Jane Irvine, SLCC Chairman. I asked Jane Irvine, the SLCC’s Chairman for an explanation as to why FOIs were censored when the information had already been released to others, but so far, no ‘official’ statement has been given on why the SLCC felt secrecy should be maintained, at a significant use of black ink to conceal the workings of the quango from the general public, who have paid some £2 million pounds plus into the commission on the Justice Secretary’s say so …

It seems therefore, the SLCC has been forced to resort to secrecy, due to the many ongoing scandals surrounding the beleaguered lawyers complaints quango, scandals which have seen the likes of stories reporting that the quango’s members have concentrated more on pensions benefits & insurance protection than actual case handling.

You can read two of my recent ‘hot topic’ articles on the going’s on at the SLCC here :

Complaints Commission 'unfit for purpose' as secret meetings with insurers & pensions take focus over consumer protection against crooked lawyers

MacAskill silent on taxpayers £2million 'write off' to lawyers quango as Complaints boss reveals Law Society defaulted on levies

A legal insider reported to me that my recent reports on the faulty operation of the SLCC, “it was felt internally PC had caused considerable damage to the organisation's public credibility to the point where attempts must be made to prevent this kind of news from reaching the public in the future”.

Fine then, and as that appears to amount to an attempt of censorship, I decided to test it out and ask some difficult questions of the Scottish Government today on another article I am writing about, concerning Mr MacAskill’s recent announced ‘consultation” on legal services in Scotland.

Justice Minister concerned over quango revelations ? : I was given what appears to be a hostile rebuke by the Scottish Government’s Press Officials today, who now refuse to talk to me over apparent concerns I am revealing highly sensitive issues which appear to show a concerted attempt by the present Scottish Government to undermine independent regulation of the Scottish legal services market.

Also up for criticism seems to be my damaging portrayal of last week’s announcement by Mr MacAskill of the Legal Profession Bill consultation, which, rather than actually widening ordinary Scots access to justice, will leave the legal services market as restricted and monopolised by the Law Society of Scotland as before, rather than allowing Scots to chose their own legal representatives.

I shared the Scottish Government’s Press comments to me today with a friend who is an Editor of one of Scotland’s national newspapers, his comments were : “Well Peter what do you expect ? You are doing a lot of good reporting on complicated legal issues and they will have to try and shut you up. At least you can’t be bought off with threats of ‘pulling the ads’ or a threatening telephone call from the Law Society !”.

Thanks for the vote of confidence .. I hope some of the media will take up the issues and continue to expose the lack of justice when it comes to dealing with those who supposedly represent justice !

You can read through some of the censored FOI releases, and compare them with some of the uncensored material (in Acrobat .pdf format) from Mr MacAskill’s less than open Scottish Legal Complaints Commission here :

Justice Secretary MacAskill fails in 'gag attempt' of Appointments Chief over quango jobs for lawyers sleaze

Papers just released show the Scottish Government’s Justice Department, acting on the authority of its Minister, Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill attempted to impose a blanket of secrecy and lies to protect the legal profession over their release of inaccurate details of lawyers and their regulatory or service histories, who the Justice Secretary personally appointed to the 'independent' but now discredited Scottish Legal Complaints Commission.

Scottish Government attempted to gag independent Appointments Commissioner over lawyers service details :

Amazingly, not only did the Scottish Government attempt to gag the Commissioner over disclosing the truth about the lawyer appointments, the Government also demanded that OCPAS swap their disclosure of the actual material for an entirely false statement which was to read as follows :

Kenny MacAskill’s Justice Dept ordered OCPAS issue the public a misleading statement : "It is in our view that in this case the information in its present form should not be released without the consent of the individuals concerned. However, a general statement that no appointees had findings of professional misconduct recorded against them would be acceptable"

It is of little surprise the Scottish Government's Justice Department were so desperate to gag the Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments in Scotland (OCPAS) over the release of documents, which now conclusively prove there were no proper disclosures from the legal profession over Kenny MacAskill's sleaze appointments of lawyers and former Law Society Committee members to the 'independent' but now discredited Scottish Legal Complaints Commission.

The Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments in Scotland thankfully refused to be drawn into the Scottish Government’s web of secrecy, and promptly released the documents, which I covered in an earlier report here: Legal Complaints Commission discredited after revelations Law Society lied during ‘stage managed’ appointments process

All this may cause some to wonder why the Justice Secretary is so determined to protect the Law Society of Scotland and his own appointees to the discredited legal complaints commission.

Kenny MacAskill – I will always defend lawyers …

Well .. there isn't much need to wonder, because not only does the release of the Law Society documents make the Justice Secretary look at best, misleading, the released documents now also contradict responses given by the First Minister, Alex Salmond, who was asked in January to conduct a full investigation into the appointments to the SLCC after revelations of sleaze.

First Minister's letter now contradicted by Law Society disclosure ".. we must abide by the OCPAS Code of Practice which ensures that selection is based on merit and individuals selected will be those who have demonstrated that they best match the skills, knowledge and personal qualities requiredfor the appointment in question.Candidates were also probed on probity and potential conflicts of interest.As you may be aware from the recruitment literature shortlisted lawyer candidates were subject to checks on their disciplinary records”

however, from my earlier report here :

Philip Yelland only gave limited information on the lawyer applicants : "I should point out to you that in terms of upheld complaints the only issues which it seems to be would be relevant would be if there were findings of professional misconduct against any of the individuals. Service complaints run against firms rather than individuals."

So, clearly the First Minister was misinformed by the Law Society and his Justice Secretary over the state of the checks on the appointees disciplinary records, because there were none – only the Law Society’s say so, which has now been revealed to be inaccurate in its content.

It does stretch the bounds of credibility Mr Salmond wasn't able to find out for himself what really happened .. and make no mistake - what really happened was that the legal profession, along with elements of the Justice Department of the Scottish Government stitched up what was to be an 'independent' complaints commission which has now been turned into just another rubber stamp quango for 'crooked lawyers', as many of you are attesting to yourselves in comments and emails.

Scottish Government feared stories of impropriety on MacAskill’s jobs for lawyers and ex-cops on law complaints quango appointments : “Chief Superintendent Douglas Watson is facing an internal inquiry after he walked out on his wife to be with an officer he hand-picked for a specialist squad.Watson, the former head of CID, was picked by Chief Constable Paddy Tomkins to head up the Capital Project, which will completely change the way Edinburgh is policed and create a single 1,000-officer super-division….”

Apparently OCPAS were denied access to material relating to the internal investigations into SLCC appointee and former Police Chief & Law Society Committee member Douglas Watson, nor were details of those investigations made public, raising questions on why the Justice Department covered it up.

Its a pity that our own fellow Scots in the current Scottish Government are going along with this, protecting crooked lawyers and an ever corrupt Scots legal system from reform and genuine change. Is that what 'Scottish Government' is all about these days ?, bending over to the professions, promoting injustice, and protecting the dishonest and crooked at any cost ?

Scottish Legal Complaints Commission that wont investigate complaints posts rules of no help to many victims of crooked lawyers

The newly created Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, which was intended as a bold attempt to clean up Scotland's notoriously corrupt legal profession has just posted its rules on what types of complaints against 'crooked lawyers' it can and cannot investigate.

The final set of rules for the SLCC, which you can view here : SLCC Rules have been widely condemned by campaigners and consumers as having too many loopholes and let outs for the Law Society to take over investigations and shut them down as 'conduct issues' which the new Commission is not entitled to investigate.

However as a shock to many clients of solicitors who have complained against poor work or corrupt practice by their solicitors, anyone who instructs a solicitor to act before 1st October 2008. are to be excluded from any assistance from the new Commission, which is refusing to investigate any complaints against crooked lawyers before it begins work next week.

This refusal to look at complaints of the past conveniently excludes a huge amount of serious client complaints which the Law Society of Scotland has deliberately bogged down in paperwork lasting years in some cases, in the legal profession's long running battle against consumers to protect solicitors against complaints and financial claims at all costs.

From the Scottish Legal Service Ombudsman's website :

"It is proposed that the Commission will investigate complaints about service if you instructed the legal practitioner to do the work you wish to complain about after 1st October 2008. If the work you wish to complain about started prior to 1st October 2008 then the Commission will keep a record of it, but will pass the complaint to either the Law Society of Scotland or the Faculty of Advocates to investigate. If you are unhappy with the way those bodies handle your complaint the Commission may consider complaints about their handling."

A client involved in a current complaint being investigated by the Law Society of Scotland described the new Commission's complaints process as a 'fit up' and one which people "shouldn't be trapped into, as the entire process is controlled by lawyers and makes sure you get nowhere even if they steal every single penny you have".

He went onto say "The Law Society have deliberately drowned me in paperwork, delays, excuses and have done everything to stop me from getting some justice after my lawyer ruined me".

“I have been to 28 different firms of solicitors to try and get a lawyer to represent me in court and every one of them have refused to act for me, yet 2 of those firms took the case on and had to drop it after being ordered to do so by the Law Society”

“Having the same people on this new complaints body who have been part of the operation to kill my complaint, stop me from getting access to justice and basically steal my life away from me is not the way to improve complaints against lawyers”

The client's complaint apparently involves allegations of criminality and embezzlement which so far have not been passed over to the appropriate authorities by the Law Society of Scotland, which cannot investigate criminal matters .. but as many clients know .. the Law Society can certainly cover up even criminal issues to protect crooked lawyers.

Another client who also did not wish to be named, for fear of retaliation from the Law Society said "This new Commission is full of ex Law Society staff and members.Its just a new name for the Law Society who will see to it through their own people that complaints against crooked lawyers get nowhere as usual"

You can read more on my previous reports into the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission here : Scottish Legal Complaints Commission previous reports

… and if you are interested in reading a little more about some of the personalities on the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission and what they got up to before their new Ministerial appointment to the SLCC, you should go directly to the following article :

Call for MacAskill appointments 'sleaze investigation' as revelations show Legal Complaints Commission member was subject of Police inquiry

Kenny MacAskill always did say he would protect lawyers at any cost against anyone who wasn’t a lawyer …

As a reminder to everyone who the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission actually are, here is a ‘summary’ from the Commission’s website : Who we are

Non-lawyer members

Jane Irvine (Chairing Member)

Jane Irvine has been the Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman since April 2006. She is a specialist in consumer complaints having held a number of positions as a mediator, arbitrator and adjudicator of consumer complaints. Between 2001-05 she was HM Lay Inspector of Constabulary, and considered the handling of complaints against the police in Scotland. She later prepared a report on modernising police complaint and conduct systems for the Justice Minister. She also sat on a range of disciplinary tribunals and currently sits on the Discipline Board of the Institute of Actuaries.

“This new Scottish Commission is an important body. It will provide a modern system for resolving complaints about legal services that both the profession and the public can have confidence in. I am delighted to have been appointed with such a strong group of commissioners who bring with them a diverse and exceptional range of skills and experience.”

Douglas Watson

Douglas Watson was a police officer for 30 years and is currently an adult protection development officer for Edinburgh, Lothian and Borders Executive Group. Mr Watson has previously been a chairing member of the Child Protection Committee, Scottish Borders Council and Edinburgh Drug and Alcohol Action Team. He was a lay Committee member for the Law Society of Scotland and is a Sessional Inspector with the Social Work Inspection Agency.

Linda Pollock

Linda Pollock has had a broad based career in the NHS with clinical, teaching, research and management experience. She was an Executive Nursing Director until 2006, and interim Board Nurse Director (2002-2003). Her last role, before leaving the NHS, was a full time secondment as the Chief Nursing Officer's Advisor for Nurse Prescribing. Dr Pollock was a part time nurse member of the Mental Welfare Commission (1997-2005) and is currently a registrant member of the Nursing and Midwifery Council Appointments Board

George L Irving CBE

George Irving was Director of Social Work North Ayrshire Council and during the period 1999-2000 he served as President of the Association of Directors of Social Work (Scotland). From 2001-2006 he was Chair of NHS Ayrshire and Arran. He led the National Support Team, Management of Offenders 2005-2007 and is currently a Visiting Professor to Glasgow Caledonian University School of Health and Social Care.

Ian Gordon OBE, QPM, LL.B (Hons)

Ian Gordon is a retired Deputy Chief Constable of Tayside Police. He is currently an associate professor in policing for Charles Sturt University (Australia). He was Chair of the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland (ACPOS) Professional Standards Business Area and Vice-Chair of ACPOS General Policing Business Area.

Lawyer members

Alan Paterson

Alan Paterson is Professor of Law and Director of the Centre for Professional Legal Studies at Strathclyde University, an independent "Think Tank" on the Scottish Legal System. He has researched in, and published on, the regulation of lawyers and the provision of public legal services for over twenty years. Although he is qualified as a solicitor in Scotland, Professor Paterson has never practised. He served as a co-opted member of the Council of the Law Society between 2001-2008. He is currently a research adviser to the Scottish Legal Aid Board, and a member of the Judicial Appointments Board.

David Smith

David Smith is a retired solicitor. He was a commercial property partner with Shepherd and Wedderburn LLP for 34 years, including 6 years as Chairman. He has extensive experience of client relations, professional negligence and risk management.

Margaret Scanlan

Margaret Scanlan is an accredited specialist in family law at Russells Gibson McCaffrey. She has also tutored in family law at Glasgow Caledonian University. Mrs Scanlan was a member and latterly Deputy Chair of the Scottish Legal Aid Board between 1997-2007. She has also been Director of the Legal Defence Union between 1998-2002. Mrs Scanlan was a founder member of both Strathkelvin Women’s Aid and the Family Law Association. She held the post of Chair of the latter between 1992-93.

David Chaplin

David Chaplin was the senior partner in Anderson Fyfe for 17 years until his retiral in 2008. He is a specialist in insolvency law. He was the Client Relations partner for ten years and he advised in pre litigation resolution of commercial disputes for clients. He was a member of the Education Committee of the Royal Faculty of Procurators in Glasgow during 2004-05

Call for MacAskill appointments 'sleaze investigation' as revelations show Legal Complaints Commission member was subject of Police inquiry

Late tonight, calls were being made to First Minister Alex Salmond for a fully independent investigation into the appointments process of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, after it was revealed that former Lothian & Borders Police Chief Superintendent Douglas Watson, who was recently selected & appointed by Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill to the new independent commission which is intended to handle complaints against solicitors in Scotland, was the subject of a serious Police inquiry into appointments and conduct related matters as far back as 2002.

Insiders at the Scottish Government last night insisted they knew nothing about the "internal inquiry" into Mr Watson at Lothian & Borders Police which revolved around an alleged affair with a work colleague and claims of undue promotions.

From the Scotsman :

"Chief Superintendent Douglas Watson is facing an internal inquiry after he walked out on his wife to be with an officer he hand-picked for a specialist squad.

Allison Strachan was personally selected by Watson to be part of a 22-strong team which is carrying out a complete review of the way Lothian and Borders force operates.

Strachan, who had twice failed to win promotion, was plucked from an administration job at police headquarters and promoted to Inspector but senior officers are angry after it was revealed Watson has been having an affair with her."

Last week, Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill who personally appointed Mr Watson, proudly announced that "Douglas Watson has been a police officer for 30 years and is currently an adult protection development officer for Edinburgh, Lothian and Borders Executive Group. Mr Watson has previously been a chairing member of the Child Protection Committee, Scottish Borders Council and Edinburgh Drug and Alcohol Action Team. He is currently a Committee member for the Law Society of Scotland and is a session inspector for the Social Work Inspection Agency."

Amazingly, the Scottish Government received some 93 applications for the lay membership positions on the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, but had to pick former Policeman Mr Watson, who is already a lay member on Law Society of Scotland Committees, and former Tayside Deputy Chief Constable Ian Gordon, who himself also has a law degree.

It seems Kenny MacAskill had to go out of his way to find currently serving lay members of Law Society Committees to slide them into the new Scottish Legal Complaints Commission ... throwing out any notion there could be a degree of independence from the legal profession in the new 'independent' complaints handling regime for Scottish solicitors.

A Scottish Government spokesman said earlier today :

‘Appointments to all public bodies are made based on how well candidates meet the criteria set’.

Apparently the "criteria set" involved being asked one question - whether they had any conflict of interest or not .... no disclosures of the past, nothing ... and sources at the Justice Department continue to insist the Law Society of Scotland have interfered too much in matters surrounding the formation of the new 'independent' complaints commission.

Mr Watson, who was former head of CID, was handpicked by Sir Paddy Tomkins, the current Chief Inspector of Constabulary, to head up a multi million pound project, which was to change the way Edinburgh is policed and create a single 1,000-officer super-division.

The cost of the project was put at over £1 million, including wages, computers, travel and cars and Watson was expected to be appointed commander of the new division at the time ...

No excuse for the Justice Department not knowing anything about Mr Watson's past then ... or that may imply they aren't doing their job ...

Jane Irvine, the current Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman and the incoming Chairman of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, said last night she knew nothing of this Police inquiry into Mr Watson, insisting the appointments process was down to the minister concerned - that being Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill.

Jane Irvine said earlier today : "I know nothing about this. The appointment process was carried out by Ministers."

Last night Mrs Irvine was asked if she may look into this matter when she takes over the position of Chairman of the new Scottish Legal Complaints Commission.

It should be pointed out that Jane Irvine was a past HM Lay Inspector of Constabulary for Scotland, and in her capacity, Mrs Irvine reviewed the manner of responses by Scottish Police forces to complaints by members of the public for three years between 2001 and 2004.

Given Mrs Irvine's lack of knowledge of this matter, the details of 'internal' inquiries by the Police into Former Chief Superintendent Watson may have been concealed from Mrs Irvine in her capacity as Lay Inspector of Constabulary.

The Scotsman reports :

Inquiry into police chief who promoted his lover

By Stephen Rafferty

A POLICE chief has been accused of jeopardising a £1 million-plus project by having an affair with a female officer he promoted.

Chief Superintendent Douglas Watson is facing an internal inquiry after he walked out on his wife to be with an officer he hand-picked for a specialist squad.

Allison Strachan was personally selected by Watson to be part of a 22-strong team which is carrying out a complete review of the way Lothian and Borders force operates.

Strachan, who had twice failed to win promotion, was plucked from an administration job at police headquarters and promoted to Inspector but senior officers are angry after it was revealed Watson has been having an affair with her.

The affair has been the talk of the force since Watson left his second wife Anne and Strachan left her police constable partner, John Donoghue.

Watson, the former head of CID, was picked by Chief Constable Paddy Tomkins to head up the Capital Project, which will completely change the way Edinburgh is policed and create a single 1,000-officer super-division.

The cost of the project is put at over £1 million, including wages, computers, travel and cars and Watson was expected to be appointed commander of the new division but senior sources say an inquiry into his behaviour is now inevitable.

Chief Supt Watson left his first wife 11 years ago when he began an affair with his current wife Anne, who was then a 19-year-old secretary at police headquarters.

A Lothian and Borders police spokesman refused to comment.

Amazingly, Mr Watson is also a Lay Member for Committees at the Law Society of Scotland ... and one wonders whether they were paying attention to reports of inquiries into Mr Watson's conduct at the time either ...

Well, it didn't take long for the legal profession to co-opted the appointments process of the new Scottish Legal Complaints Commission now, did it ...

This is such a sad start for what was hoped to be a break from the past problems of regulation of Scotland's beleaguered legal profession.

Earlier today, campaigners & critics of the legal profession condemned the scandal surrounding the appointments process involving the lawyers and lay members to the SLCC.

One client who has been waiting years for a resolution to his complaint against a well known legal firm said "There has been too much fiddling from the Law Society in what is supposed to be an independent body to take over complaints against lawyers. We are just getting another talking shop to save crooked lawyers again. Its a disgrace I didn't think the SNP could give us"

Mr MacAskill, who is being blamed from all quarters for the appointments furore which has brought discredit to the new Commission, even before it begins its work, seems to have allowed the legal profession too long a hand in controlling the entire formation process of the 'independent' complaints commission which was designed to address significant levels of corruption by the Law Society of Scotland in its role as self regulator of the legal profession.

Late today, calls were being made to First Minister Alex Salmond for a fully independent investigation into the appointments & formation process of the SLCC and for the sacking of Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill over this highly public let-down to Scotland's legal system.

For further reading : The Scottish Government's Press Release on Kenny MacAskill's appointments to the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission ... more interesting in what it leaves out than what it leaves in ...

Scottish Legal Complaints Commission

10/01/2008

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill today announced the appointment of Jane Irvine to chair the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission (SLCC), the new independent legal complaints handling body. Jane Irvine is currently the Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman. Mr MacAskill also announced Alan Paterson, David Smith, Margaret Scanlan and David Chaplin as lawyer members and Douglas Watson, Linda Pollock, George Irving and Ian Gordon as non-lawyer members of the Commission. The SLCC will be a new, independent, complaints handling body which will receive and deal with complaints which could not be resolved at source. The Commission will be located in Edinburgh and is expected to be operational in October 2008.

Kenny MacAskill said:

"This Government is committed to modernising the legal complaints handling system to ensure that any complaints against the legal profession are resolved quickly and effectively. That is why we supported the setting up of this Commission.

"Jane Irvine and her fellow commissioners will have a strong remit to deal with complaints and I am confident that their independent scrutiny will safeguard the rights of both the profession and the users of legal services throughout Scotland.

"Complaints handling is not just about dealing with things that go wrong, but ensuring that things go right. The commissioners will help to build a culture of learning from complaints through their oversight and promotion of standards. This focus on the quality of service will undoubtedly benefit both consumers and the profession alike."

Jane Irvine said:

"This new Scottish Commission is an important body. It will provide a modern system for resolving complaints about legal services that both the profession and public can have confidence in. I am delighted to have been appointed with such a strong group of commissioners who bring with them a diverse and exceptional range of skills and experience."

Chairing member

Jane Irvine has been the Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman since April 2006. She is a specialist in consumer complaints having held a number of positions as a mediator, arbitrator and adjudicator of consumer complaints. Between 2001-05 she was HM Lay Inspector of Constabulary considering handling of complaints against the police in Scotland. She later prepared a report on modernising police complaint and conduct systems for the Justice Minister. She has sat on a range of disciplinary tribunals and currently sits on the Discipline Board of the Institute of Actuaries.

Non-lawyer members

Douglas Watson has been a police officer for 30 years and is currently an adult protection development officer for Edinburgh, Lothian and Borders Executive Group. Mr Watson has previously been a chairing member of the Child Protection Committee, Scottish Borders Council and Edinburgh Drug and Alcohol Action Team. He is currently a Committee member for the Law Society of Scotland and is a sessional inspector for the Social Work Inspection Agency.

Linda Pollock has had a broad based career in the NHS with clinical, teaching, research and management experience. She has been in leadership roles since 1989, an Executive Nursing Director until 2006, and interim Board Nurse Director (2002-2003). Her last role, before leaving the NHS, was a full time secondment as the Chief Nursing Officer's Advisor for Nurse Prescribing. Dr Pollock was a part time nurse member of the Mental Welfare Commission (1997-2005) and is currently a registrant member of the Nursing and Midwifery Council Appointments Board

George L Irving CBE was Director of Social Work North Ayrshire Council and during the period 1999-2000 he served as President of the Association of Directors of Social Work (Scotland ). From 2001-2006 he was Chair of NHS Ayrshire and Arran. He led the National Support Team, Management of Offenders 2005-2007 and is currently a Visiting Professor to Glasgow Caledonian University School of Health and Social Care.

Ian Gordon OBE, QPM, LL.B (Hons) is a retired Deputy Chief Constable of Tayside Police. He is currently an associate professor in policing for Charles Sturt University (Australia). He was Chair of the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland (ACPOS) Professional Standards Business Area and Vice-Chair of ACPOS General Policing Business Area.

Lawyer members

Alan Paterson is Professor of Law and Director of the Centre for Professional Legal Studies at Strathclyde University, an independent "Think Tank" on the Scottish Legal System. He has researched in, and published on, the regulation of lawyers and the provision of public legal services for over twenty years. Although he is qualified as a solicitor in Scotland, Professor Paterson has never practised. He is currently a research adviser to the Scottish Legal Aid Board, a lay member of the Judicial Appointments Board and a co-opted member of the Council of the Law Society.

David Smith has been a partner in Shepherd and Wedderburn for 33 years. He has spent over 20 years as part of the firm's management board and was Chairman between 1999-2005. Mr Smith is a senior commercial property lawyer. Since 2004 he has been the Client Relations Partner within Shepherd and Wedderburn and since 1998 he has chaired the firm's Compliance Committee which monitors professional indemnity claims, client complaints and risk management issues.

Margaret Scanlan is an accredited specialist in family law at Russells Gibson McCaffrey. She has also tutored in family law at Glasgow Caledonian University. Mrs Scanlan was a member and latterly Deputy Chair of the Scottish Legal Aid Board between 1997-2007. She has also been Director of the Legal Defence Union between 1998-2002. Mrs Scanlan was a founder member of both Strathkelvin Women's Aid and the Family Law Association. She held the post of Chair of the latter between 1992-93.

David Chaplin has been a senior partner in Anderson Fyfe for the last 15 years and is a specialist in insolvency law. He has been the Client Relations partner for his firm for ten years. Mr Chaplin advises in pre litigation resolution of commercial disputes for clients. He was a member of the Education Committee of the Royal Faculty of Procurators in Glasgow during 2004-05.

The SLCC is established by virtue of the Legal Profession and Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 2007. Its main functions are to resolve complaints alleging inadequate professional service or negligence by legal practitioners, to refer complaints which allege professional misconduct or unsatisfactory professional conduct to the relevant professional body and to promote good practice in complaints handling.

The chairing member has been appointed for a five year term from 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2012. The lawyer and non-lawyer members' appointments will be for four years, from 1 January 2008 - 31 December 2011.

The posts are part-time and attract daily fees of £302 for the chairing member for a time commitment of four-six days per month and £205 for the lawyer and non-lawyer members with a time commitment of four days per month. Jane Irvine holds one other public appointment, that of the Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman, with remuneration of £56,746 for 37 hours a week. All the other members do not hold any other Ministerial appointments.

These Ministerial public appointments were made in accordance with the Commissioner for Public Appointments in Scotland's Code of Practice.

All appointments are made on merit and political activity plays no part in the selection process. However, in accordance with the original Nolan recommendations, there is a requirement for appointees' political activity (if there is any to be declared) to be made public. Within the last five years members have not been involved in any political activity.