Chamber and committees

There will be a number of options.

So it will be your process and then that person—

It was her choice to make that decision and she was able to do so.

Was there any inquiry from them or anybody else about the reason for the resignation, or was it simply said that the chief executive had stepped down? Obviously, that call was made four days later, although I am not sure exactly which days of the week those were.

Moving on a little bit, I think you said that the Scottish Government was made aware on the 31st. How was that done?

I am conscious of time, so I will stop there.

My next question might be on an area in which you are not able to comment; I am comfortable with that. You said that Eilidh Mactaggart resigned on 27 January. Was an enhanced severance package or anything like that made available?

Were there are any efforts by you, or instructions from the board, to see whether there was any way that the chief executive could stay on, perhaps looking at the circumstances?

You were comfortable that it was for personal reasons. There was nothing relating to the work or her relationships with the board, or anything like that.

According to the timeline that you gave us, the chief executive was supposed to have stepped down on the 27th, but a statement was not made until 5 March. Your argument would be that it was a personal issue, but that is quite a long time for a formal response to come. Are you aware whether the Scottish Government or any of its agencies were involved in encouraging the chief executive to come out with something, or was the bank doing so? The cabinet secretary and the First Minister have made the point that you are making now—that the resignation was for personal reasons—but that had not officially been said. There was a kind of suggestion that there was a reason behind it. Do you know why that statement was made, why it was made so late and whether there was any encouragement to make it?