Alex Salmond says his evidence would NOT have been censored at Westminster

Alex Salmond today insisted his evidence about Nicola Sturgeon would not have been censored at Westminster as he suggested the Scottish government is not fit to be independent.

In an extraordinary session before a cross-party committee, the former First Minister lashed out at his SNP successor over the handling of harassment allegations against him. 

Pointing to multiple 'failures' by Ms Sturgeon's government over the claims against him, he warned that the 'move to independence... must be accompanied by institutions whose leadership is strong and robust'. 

He criticised the way his evidence to the Holyrood inquiry had been redacted to remove key sections at the request of the Crown Office. 

Mr Salmond, who was previously an MP, said the redaction of his written evidence would not have happened at Westminster as Parliamentary Privilege would have been invoked.

Insurance Loans Mortgage Attorney Credit Lawyer

He said: 'The normal response from the House of Commons, any parliament I would argue, would be to reject any such overtures and say the parliaments are there to serve the people, and the prosecution service, whether it be the Crown Office or the Crown Prosecution Service in England, is there under the same obligation.

Before: Mr Salmond's testimony made claims against Ms Sturgeon and her office which have now been redacted

Before: Mr Salmond's testimony made claims against Ms Sturgeon and her office which have now been redacted

After: The Scottish Parliament redacted the most damning parts of Mr Salmond's bombshell evidence against Ms Sturgeon

After: The Scottish Parliament redacted the most damning parts of Mr Salmond's bombshell evidence against Ms Sturgeon

Alex Salmond (pictured taking the oath ahead of the committee session) said Nicola Sturgeon had cast doubt on the court process that cleared him over harassment allegations, and contradicted the idea he had to prove he had not done anything wrong

Alex Salmond (pictured taking the oath ahead of the committee session) said Nicola Sturgeon had cast doubt on the court process that cleared him over harassment allegations, and contradicted the idea he had to prove he had not done anything wrong

'Obviously the parliament shouldn't be interfering in the independence of the prosecution services, but neither should the prosecution service be presuming to interfere in the legitimate business of the parliament.'

And he questioned: 'What is it in the leadership of the Crown Office that is deficient that it is drawing itself in to what is properly the political arena?'

Mr Salmond said he had received a letter to say 'what I was and wasn't allowed to talk about' at the committee.

Insurance Loans Mortgage Attorney Credit Lawyer

He said this stated he was not to speak to parts of his evidence which had been 'submitted in good faith to this committee' and which were readily available online.

'The idea that the only place that can't be discussed is in a parliamentary committee is the direct opposite of what should be true,' he said.

'Parliamentary committees should actually be able to discuss things that cannot be discussed elsewhere, because of the proper exercise of parliamentary privilege and the duties of members of parliament.'

Not being able to discuss some parts of his submission was an 'intolerable situation', the former first minister added, insisting this should 'not be allowed to continue'.

The former first minister had been due to attend a hearing on

read more from dailymail.....

NEXT Australian house prices in March surge at the fastest pace in 32 years, ...