2. The lives of potentially hundreds of Scottish sub-postmasters and their families were ruined by the Post Office and Fujitsu. People lost their livelihoods and, in some cases, even lost their lives. They have described being ostracised in their communities, their families shunned and their children targeted. It is a national disgrace. I welcome that the convictions will be overturned, but there is more to the scandal.

Unlike in England and Wales, where the Post Office itself brought the prosecutions, in Scotland they were carried out by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. As we have heard, ministers and the Crown were made aware of concerns about unsafe prosecutions in 2013. What conversations have the First Minister, his Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs and the Lord Advocate had about the role of Scottish institutions in prosecuting those cases and how that was allowed to happen for so long?

Again, l et me be clear: whether as justice secretary at the time or in my current role as First Minister, it would be wholly inappropriate for any Government minister to demand to see the evidential basis for a case that the Crown was prosecuting. [

Interruption

.] I know that Anas Sarwar is not asking that, but I am making the point that, if the issue is the evidence that was provided by the Post Office, it would be wrong for me, in any ministerial position, to suggest that I need to see that evidential basis in any individual prosecution.

Anas Sarwar asked what conversations I have had with the Lord Advocate. Again, I had a conversation this morning with the Lord Advocate, when she stressed a number of points. She is happy to provide a timeline of how the Crown has responded and she is very confident about the Crown’s response. It was told in 2013 about possible problems, and it issued guidance to its individual prosecutors in 2013. After a period of continual conversation with the Post Office, in 2015, it stopped prosecuting cases where the sufficiency of evidence was dependent on the Horizon system.

The Lord Advocate is open to briefing members of the Scottish Parliament, as we have already heard, and I am sure that she will reflect on whether that is through a briefing or a ministerial statement.

Anas Sarwar is absolutely right that at the heart of this are hundreds of people right across the United Kingdom whose lives and reputations have been tarnished and ruined. It is incumbent on this Government that it works with any other Government in the United Kingdom, including the UK Government, to ensure that justice is forthcoming and that access to compensation is not impeded.

There are big questions for the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, and it would be right for the Lord Advocate to come to the Parliament to answer those questions from members. However, the matter goes beyond convictions.

Disturbing accounts from the public inquiry have revealed that Post Office employees were going door to door in Scotland to threaten and extort money from sub-postmasters. With behaviour that was reminiscent of the mob, those stories show that the Post Office behaved like a private police force and showed little regard for the law in Scotland. Sub-postmasters were pressured into accepting accusations of false accounting and were forced to hand over thousands of pounds that day or face imprisonment. If any other organisation had behaved like that in Scotland, we would expect to see criminal investigations into its conduct. Does the First Minister agree that potentially criminal behaviour by Post Office officials in Scotland should be properly investigated so that the scandal does not go unpunished?

The First Minister:

I say to Anas Sarwar—I should have perhaps said this at the beginning of my response to Douglas Ross—that I absolutely empathise in the strongest way possible with the harrowing tales that we have heard from sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses up and down the country. My family members are sub-postmasters—my late grandfather was a sub-postmaster and my stepgran continues to be so, although they were not affected by this particular scandal. The big difference from the situation in England and Wales is that the Post Office does not have the ability to lodge private prosecutions in Scotland. It is absolutely right that the behaviours of the Post Office should be interrogated, which is why there is a public inquiry. If there were any behaviours in Scotland that were possibly criminal, it would not be for me to investigate them—rightly, the independent Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service would do so. I have every confidence that the Crown will look into any allegations that are made to it about any potential criminal behaviour.

Too often in this country, when there is an injustice, the first instinct of institutions and Government is to protect themselves. Whether it is sub-postmasters taking on the Post Office, the Hillsborough scandal, the Clostridioides difficile—C diff—scandal at the Vale of Leven hospital or victims at the Queen Elizabeth university hospital, it should not take victims disclosing the most harrowing moments of their lives to shame both Scotland’s Governments into action, but it happens too often. The Government is meant to be on the people’s side, but, tragically, when victims come looking for justice, all they get are more barriers put in their way. The silence, denial and cover-up compounds the injustice and amplifies victims’ pain. Ministers—whether Scottish or UK Government ministers—always say that we must learn the lessons and that it cannot be allowed to happen again, but it does. Does the First Minister agree that the priority for Government should be truth and justice for victims, rather than protecting institutions or individual reputations?

The First Minister:

I agree that that is of paramount importance. I remind Anas Sarwar that the Labour Party was in the UK Government for a number of years while sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses were telling UK Government postal ministers—Labour ministers—that the Post Office was presenting inaccurate data. It is important for all UK-based parties to reflect on their relationship with the Post Office and whether they were listening or not.

On the Government’s approach, we can demonstrate that, time and again, when issues have been brought to this Government, we have engaged—often in really difficult conversations—with individuals who bring forward harrowing stories and tales. Where necessary, we will always investigate, whether that is through independent commissioners, such as the patient safety commissioner—I am pleased that the Patient Safety Commissioner for Scotland Bill has been passed—through the duty of candour in relation to the national health service, or through the public inquiries that we instruct. The Government’s approach has been and will always be to ensure that we seek the truth and that we do right by the people of Scotland. When it comes to sub-postmasters in Scotland, we will work with whoever we need to, including the UK Government, to ensure that those individuals get access to not only justice, but the compensation that has been denied to them for far too long.