|
Letter from Mr Peter Welch to the Parliamentary
Commissioner for Standards
I refer to your letter of 26 February and our
subsequent telephone conversation.
I do not know what you mean by the allegations
concerning the relationship between Sir Michael Grylls and the
Unitary Tax Campaign. I will be grateful if you would advise me
as to who has alleged what concerning whom.
As to the questions you asked:
- Sir Michael's services were enlisted
following a recommendation from Mr Ian Greer.
- the nature of the work included:
- advising those directing the campaign
- introducing campaign members to members
of parliament with a potential interest in the campaign
- attending steering and review meetings of
those directing the campaign
- attending meeting of campaign members
- advocating the campaign's cause in Washington
to members of congress, administration officials and diplomatic
representatives of other countries
- similar advocacy in Sacramento, the State
capital of California
- giving evidence to committee hearings on
draft legislation in the USA
- initiating Early Day Motions in the House
of Commons
- I am unable to answer your questions
on the volume of work in any quantitive manner as I understand
you have taken possession of the campaign files. I recall well
that the volume varied considerably from year to year: in some
years there were numerous steering and review meetings - I would
estimate in excess of twelve - and several visits to the USA.
- I do not know why it was felt that
Sir Michael needed additional remuneration over and above the
fee he was receiving from UTC. I was not aware until very recently
that such a need was said to exist. As explained above, the volume
of work varied with some periods of extensive activity and other
quieter periods. These variations were largely dictated by political,
diplomatic or judicial initiatives or responses.
- UTC was financed by member contributions
and its financial resources varied from time to time according
to the inflow of contributions and the level of expenditure. However
I was not aware that UTC had indicated it was unable to increase
Sir Michael's fee from within its own resources. It is possible
that others concerned with directing the campaign may have indicated
this but I have no knowledge of any such indication. I do recall
negotiating an increase in the fee for Sir Michael but I do not
recall when nor the precise amounts involved. This information
may be in the UTC files which you hold.
- I was not aware of the arrangement
by which Mr Greer agreed to pay Sir Michael a "top-up"
fee of £10,000 per annum until this month when Mr Greer
told me of it.
As discussed on the telephone, I will be grateful
if you would arrange for me to be told when you no longer have
a need for the UTC files and I will arrange to collect them.
I hope that this reply has been of some assistance.
Please do not hesitate to contact me again if you need any further
information.
Peter J Welch
28 February 1997
| 
