Disputed Claims About Peter Murrell’s Financial Control Spark Debate
Lawyer’s Statement Rejected as Evasive Language
Yes Scotland statement on Peter Murrell – Assertions that Peter Murrell maintained no authority over the financial resources of the pro-independence organization Yes Scotland have been characterized as “weasel words” by advocates demanding a formal police inquiry. The controversy centers on whether Murrell, who recently received a five-year prison sentence for misappropriating in excess of £400,000 from the Scottish National Party, truly lacked access to the campaign’s monetary holdings.
On Tuesday, legal representative Aamer Anwar issued a declaration on behalf of Blair Jenkins, the former head of Yes Scotland. The document asserts that Murrell never possessed the ability to access the political campaign’s financial accounts. Additionally, the statement addresses allegations regarding £1.5 million that critics have labeled as “missing” from the organization’s records, clarifying that these funds were utilized for operational expenditures.
Campaigners Challenge the Official Position
Following a consultation with law enforcement officials at Fettes police station in Edinburgh, campaigners David Henry and Sean Clerkin publicly dismissed Anwar’s assertions. Henry, who unsuccessfully contested an SNP candidacy before departing the party in 2021, was particularly vocal in his criticism.
“That’s weasel words,” Henry declared to assembled reporters.
He continued by questioning the semantic precision of the statement: “Access doesn’t mean he wasn’t in control or acting as a shadow director, right?” Henry elaborated that while Murrell might not have held direct access to the Yes Scotland Limited account specifically, this does not equate to a lack of overall authority.
Henry further alleged that former SNP attorney Scott Martin managed the Yes Scotland banking arrangements. Clerkin supported this assertion, noting that Martin’s superior was none other than Murrell himself. “Peter Murrell had very close control over all the donations that were coming into Yes Scotland,” Clerkin emphasized.
Broader Implications and Police Review
The two campaigners proposed that multiple individuals could be implicated in the financial matters, with Clerkin suggesting the possibility of a “potential criminal cabal inside the SNP.” Both men indicated that Police Scotland is currently evaluating the information they have provided before determining whether to initiate a formal investigation.
A representative for Police Scotland confirmed: “Information has been received and it is being assessed.”
Financial Details and Additional Clarifications
Anwar’s earlier statement on Tuesday provided further context regarding the financial records. “All of the income received by Yes Scotland is fully accounted for and it is grossly defamatory to say otherwise,” he wrote. The statement also characterized the efforts to connect Murrell’s SNP-related criminal behavior with Yes Scotland’s finances as a “desperate attempt.”
According to the documentation, Yes Scotland accumulated donations amounting to £2,403,976 during 2013, which were recorded in the accounts under the category of “other income.” The organization concluded the year with a surplus of £878,978 after deducting operational expenses totaling £1,535,855. These expenditures encompassed staff remuneration, the Glasgow headquarters facility, and various campaign activities including events and publications.
“A balance sheet surplus of £878,978 and income of £2,403,976 doesn’t mean that over £1.5 million had gone missing or been stolen, rather that Yes Scotland’s operating costs were about £1.5 million in 2012-13,” Anwar explained.
In a subsequent statement, Anwar addressed additional concerns, including claims about the £3.5 million contributed by Colin and Christine Weir. He noted that small companies are not required to include detailed income and spending figures in abbreviated accounts, only the year-end balance sheet.
An SNP spokesperson emphasized that the criminal conduct involving Murrell was identified through a thorough police investigation, which concluded that the SNP itself was the victim of embezzlement. The spokesperson clarified that Yes Scotland Ltd remained an entirely distinct organization from the SNP throughout the referendum period, operating under an independent board of directors while maintaining its role as a major SNP partner in the campaign.
