|
2) IAN GREER ASSOCIATES
111. Mr Greer's company,
although only three years old, boasted a lengthy and growing list
of prestigious clients and seemed ideally placed to offer Mr Al
Fayed what he most lacked. Above all, this was a team of Members,
preferably sympathetically inclined towards Mr Al Fayed in his
feud with Mr Rowland and Lonrho over the ownership of Harrods,
who would be willing to champion his cause in the House and within
the relevant government departments, principally the Department
of Trade and Industry. What Mr Al Fayed said he wanted from this
dedicated lobbying service was "processions in Parliament."
112. At an introductory
meeting with Mohamed and Ali Al Fayed, Mr Greer referred to the
access to key decision makers he enjoyed, through a network of
personal friendships, business acquaintances and, most importantly,
inside knowledge of the Conservative Party. According to the
Al Fayeds, Mr Greer claimed an ability to hire Members like taxis
(Mr Greer denies this). Certainly, during the gathering of material
for a Central Television programme in 1994 (which was not broadcast),
Mr Greer, who was being covertly filmed in conversation with actors
posing as potential clients, stated: "We would never go out
and say we can arrange to have a question tabled, but actually
we can." (He later added that it was up to Members to decide
individually whether to take such action.)
113. The arrangement agreed
between the Al Fayeds and Mr Greer was for a renewable one year
contract, starting on 1 November 1985, for IGA to act as "political
advisers" to the Al Fayed Investment Trust, which was then
the holding company owning Harrods. The fee, of £25,000
plus VAT, was to be invoiced monthly to Mr Royston Webb, the in-house
legal adviser to Harrods.
114. Mr Greer immediately
set about making contact with Ministers, backbench Members and
the lawyers who had been most closely involved in the dispute
between the Al Fayeds and Lonrho. Because of its importance in
placing the present allegations in context, this lobbying operation,
and the parts played in it by the individual Members, is described
in some detail in the following paragraphs. In doing so, I have
drawn on the documents, including Mr Greer's papers, which were
assembled for the libel action.
|
