Peter Murrell, the former SNP chief executive jailed for embezzling more than £400,000 from the party, had no access to the finances of the pro‑independence group Yes Scotland, according to a statement issued by leading lawyer Aamer Anwar on behalf of the group’s former chief executive, Blair Jenkins.
The intervention follows newspaper reports alleging that the SNP exercised tight control over the referendum campaign body and suggesting a £1.5 million discrepancy in its accounts. Mr Anwar described the claims as unfounded and said the organisation’s records had been fully scrutinised.
“All of the income received by Yes Scotland is fully accounted for and it is grossly defamatory to say otherwise,” he said. “To make it perfectly clear, Mr Murrell never at any time had access to Yes Scotland’s accounts.”
Audited accounts and police access
The statement stressed that all campaign spending by Yes Scotland was subject to audit and that the organisation had provided Police Scotland with its complete accounts for 2013, 2014 and 2015. Those years cover the period of the 2014 independence referendum, during which Yes Scotland acted as the principal vehicle advocating a Yes vote.
Figures set out in the statement provide a snapshot of the group’s finances in 2013. Donations recorded as “other income” totalled £2,403,976. After meeting operating costs of £1,535,855 — which encompassed staff salaries, the cost of its Glasgow headquarters, and spending on events and publications — the organisation reported a year‑end surplus of £878,978.
| Year | Income | Operating costs | Year-end surplus |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | £2,403,976 | £1,535,855 | £878,978 |
Addressing the suggestion that money was unaccounted for, Mr Anwar said the operating expenditure explained the difference between income and surplus, rejecting any notion of missing funds.
“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,” he said, adding that the figure represented operating costs in 2012–13.
Separation from SNP finances
Mr Anwar also said attempts to connect Mr Murrell’s criminal conduct in relation to SNP finances with Yes Scotland’s accounts were misplaced. The statement underlined that Mr Murrell, who is the former husband of Nicola Sturgeon, had no role in controlling or accessing the campaign body’s funds.
While the SNP and Yes Scotland worked towards the same political outcome during the referendum period, the lawyer’s remarks sought to delineate organisational boundaries and to rebut any implication that the referendum campaigning finances were compromised by Mr Murrell’s actions at the party.
Context for readers
Yes Scotland was formed to campaign for a Yes vote in the 2014 independence referendum. The statement issued on behalf of Mr Jenkins emphasises the transparency of the group’s finances, citing audits and the voluntary handover of full accounts to the police for three successive years covering the referendum period and immediately afterwards.
For clarity, the key points from the statement include:
- Yes Scotland’s income and spending were audited, with full accounts shared with Police Scotland for 2013–2015.
- Mr Murrell did not have access to the group’s accounts, according to the legal statement.
- Financial figures for 2013 show income, costs and surplus consistent with a large campaign operation, with no shortfall identified in the accounts cited.
The remarks come amid heightened scrutiny of political finances following Mr Murrell’s conviction. The clarification from Mr Anwar, speaking for Mr Jenkins, is intended to draw a firm line between the SNP’s internal financial matters and the separate arrangements of the 2014 campaign organisation.
