|
Letter from Mr Ian Greer to the Parliamentary
Commissioner for Standards
My colleagues and I were pleased to have the
opportunity of meeting you, Mr Pleming and Mr Doig last Tuesday,
18 February. In an endeavour to further assist you, I thought
that it would be helpful to respond to some of the points raised:
1. Invoice for £13,333
As you are aware
from my witness and other statements, the above was a project
fee negotiated between Mr Royston Webb and myself, in the period
surrounding the publication of the DTI report into the purchase
of the House of Fraser.
I was asked why the files seemed to show that
there was less activity undertaken, on paper, during that period.
Given the lapse of time, it is difficult to provide a detailed
response. I have however, had the opportunity of speaking to
Mr Patrick Ferreira, now living and working in Brussels, but who
was, at the time, the head of IGA's Research, Information and
Parliamentary Unit. His explanation is, I believe helpful, in
that it had reminded me of some of the circumstances:
(a) The timing of the report's publication
was not known, although it was regularly anticipated. As the
decision was with Minister and all representations had been made,
there was little scope, if any, for a continuation of the Parliamentary
activity hitherto undertaken.
(b) When the report was published, its
contents were so damning, that the Parliamentary support that
had been achieved over many years, to a large extent, melted
away. There was therefore little point in writing letters of
holding meetings, although I recall that one to one briefings
were arranged on the telephone, by me, Mr Royston Webb and Sir
Peter Hordern.
(c) The IGA workload which was anticipated,
concentrated on the fall out from the report's publication -
press coverage, Early Day Motion, Statements and Parliamentary
Questions, all had to be monitored and analysed for the House
of Fraser; a very time consuming exercise.
As will be readily understood, it was
a tense and fraught time for our then client. I was forced to
undertake responsibility for "hand holding", restraining
where necessary, political intelligence, gathering information,
the provision of strategic advice etc. As you will appreciate,
the circumstances did not require letters on files.
Mr Patrick Ferreira would be prepared
to provide you with a statement, if you think that it might be
helpful.
Moreover I have no doubt that the company's
bank statements will show that the cheque for £13,333 was
paid into the account. No cash (beyond presumably a small amount
of petty cash) was withdrawn and no cheques were written to Members
of Parliament.
2. Select Committee on Members' Interests
I have already written to you and apologised,
accepting my responsibility for the inaccurate information that
was supplied by me to the Select Committee in 1990. As you are
aware, the error was made by my bookkeeper and it was not realised
by me, until discovery at the time of the libel trial, in late
September 1996.
I think it fair to point out that in accepting
my responsibility for the wrong information provided:
(a) I had informed the Committee that I
had made referral payments for the introduction of new business;
I was told that such payments were not wrong and that the Committee's
interest lay in the behaviour of Members, as it related to their
declaration.
It would have made no difference to me
to have said six referral payments or indeed 26, as the principle
had been acknowledged and accepted by the Committee.
(b) You will appreciate that my appearance
before the Committee would have been totally unnecessary, had
the declarations been made by Members at the time of receipt of
referral payments.
3. The Fayed allegations
It has become impossible to keep track or indeed
answer the allegations made by Mr Fayed, concerning me. His (and
The Guardian's) allegations have been added to, altered
and dropped on numerous occasions. May I make the following observations:
(a) You informed me that Mr Tim Smith,
MP, had admitted to receiving some £18,000 from Mr Fayed.
Presumably he confirmed that I have never acted as a "conduit"
for the passing of such moneys. This being the case, I would
imagine that you can only conclude that the original allegations
made by both Mr Fayed and The Guardian, are false.
(b) It is alleged that at my first meeting
with Mr Mohamed Fayed and Mr Ali Fayed, I said that "MPs
could be rented like taxis". Mr Webb has now sought to justify
yet another outrageous allegation, by using a casual comment
made to him some two years later. It seems to me to be quite clear
that that Mr Webb, like other former Fayed employees, has been
called to the rescue.
4. Unitary Tax Campaign
Should you wish to contact the former Chairman
of the UTC, please do so as follows: Peter Welch Esq.,
* * *
5. Waiver of Privilege
You asked for my written consent to approach
Mr Richard Ferguson, QC or Ms Victoria Sharp, in relation to
the reasons that precipitated the discontinuance of the libel
action against The Guardian. This I am happy to provide
(subject of course, to Mr Hamilton). It may also be useful to
contact Mr Mark Stephens of Stephens Innocent, Solicitors, who
were appointed to act on my behalf on Friday, 27 September 1996,
following the conflict of interest that had arisen, and prior
to receipt of The Guardian's Amended Defence (which, if
my recollection serves me correctly, was delivered to solicitors
acting for Mr Hamilton, in the afternoon of Saturday, 28 September).
Ian Greer
20 February 1997
| 
