THE YORK-based Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust has defended its decision to give £50,000 to an under-fire Scottish MP who had to fight through the courts to keep his parliamentary seat.

Orkney and Shetland MP Alistair Carmichael, the only Liberal Democrat MP left in Scotland, ran up huge legal fees fighting a challenge by some constituents who said he should be thrown out for office for lying about a controversial leaked document during his campaign.

The foreign office document in question showed a French diplomat reporting that SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon thought a win for David Cameron's Conservatives in the general election would be better for her party.

Carmichael was taken to court by four of his constituents after the election, but won the case when judges ruled he could not be proven to have acted illegally.

The trust - which is separate from other York-based trusts bearing the Rowntree name - initially gave Carmichael £34,000 to help cover his legal fees, after judges refused to award him costs and other pleas for help with the legal fees were refused, but the trust later raised the amount to £50,000.

SNP MP Tommy Sheppard has slated the trust's decision, saying it was sad that an organisation which had done so much good for progressive policies should become associated with such an MP, adding: "Little wonder that there is public concern about what is being done in the name of Joseph Rowntree.”

A trust spokeswoman told The Press there were a number of issues. "First is the question of whether someone who has successfully defended themselves in a court of law ought to face financial ruin for having done so. On balance, our directors decided this would be a disproportionate consequence of the case, and that some assistance was reasonable.

"While Alistair Carmichael has made serious mistakes, it is also beyond doubt that he has done much good for his constituency, for Scotland and for the UK.

“Secondly, there is case law to consider. Had the petitioners against Alistair Carmichael been successful, the law on when MPs can be unseated would have been effectively widened, and many more election petitions provoked in future.

"Many of these would have been politically motivated, and would have involved more Members of Parliament – and constituents – fighting more very expensive legal battles.

"A system of recall for MPs who have been found guilty of ‘serious wrongdoing’ is in the process of being introduced. While it is both limited and imperfect, that will be a more effective route for constituents to seek redress in future without the need to for anyone to line lawyers’ pockets.”