Annex 33
File note by the Parliamentary Commissioner
for Standards
MR KEITH
VAZ
29 JUNE 2000
TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
WITH MR
BINDMAN...
...Mr Bindman wrote to me with some concerns
about the proposed meeting on 3 July. I had almost completed my
letter of 29 June and list of questions—so I informed him
that I would fax those to him prior to answering his questions
in his letter.
He telephoned me on receipt of my letter and
questions and I answered the new questions in his letter of 29
June. I said that I hoped that I would not need to see Mr Vaz
again after Monday but if I had any small points that I thought
of subsequently, I would put them to him in writing and as I had
confirmed—if I got any other small factual pieces of information
that were at variance with his account, I would let him have those
for comment.
Mr Bindman asked whether there were any other
allegations that I had knowledge of and I said no, and I said
that I had not put in the letter matters where I had no evidence
that was at variance with Mr Vaz's. So he asked—could he
assume that the other matters have been settled. I repeated that
I had no information that I was aware of which was at variance
with Mr Vaz on those matters and therefore I had nothing further
to put to him.
He said Mr Vaz was most concerned about the
idea of having the meeting taped as he felt this would create
a precedent for other Members. I assured him it would not, that
interviews with my predecessor had been taped. But he referred
to the published document on investigations. I said that was based
on a report I had made to the Committee about my processes and
I to date had not needed to tape a Member, since I had not been
asking a rather large number of questions but in this instance
it was different. I felt it would help me and Mr Vaz if it could
be taped, as then we would have an accurate record. I repeated
that I was more than happy to ask the shorthand writer to withdraw
at any point, or to stop taking notes. I repeated that I was only
concerned to get a totally accurate and full record of what Mr
Vaz had to say in response to the questions. Mr Bindman said that
he thought the best thing might be for Mr Vaz to produce a written
response in the first instance, and to bring that to the meeting
and then have a discussion about procedures. I said I was more
than happy to receive his answers in writing but that of course
I might still wish to ask some follow-up questions as I had indicated.
I said it might well cut down on the time if Mr Vaz did prepare
answers in writing. I said that I would only go ahead with a shorthand
note taker present with Mr Vaz's agreement, because I felt that
was courtesy to an MP—to put it in those terms, but that
I did request it because I felt it would lengthen the meeting
and make it much more difficult for me to have a proper conversation
with Mr Vaz if I was also required to take a note.
Mr Bindman made it clear that Mr Vaz was adamant
at the moment that he would not take part in the meeting that
was taped. I asked Mr Bindman to put the request to him and to
let us know by tomorrow if Mr Vaz was unhappy about going ahead
with a shorthand writer there, so that we could cancel the writer.
Mr Bindman asked if he could assure Mr Vaz that I would not use
the transcript without his permission. I said no, I was happy
to give an assurance that I would not use it until Mr Vaz had
had the opportunity to correct and clarify it, but that it was
my process and my responsibility to be in charge of that process
and therefore I could not let Mr Vaz determine whether or not
I used a record of a meeting. I said I hoped Mr Vaz would understand
that in his case, I would be happy to agree it but that I could
not agree it because if I was dealing with some Members it would
be quite appropriate. Mr Bindham agreed to put my point of view
to Mr Vaz and to let my office know if he was not happy to go
ahead with a shorthand taker present.
We concluded the conversation by agreeing that
we would meet on Monday at 11am, that unless I had heard from
Mr Bindman tomorrow, the shorthand taker would be there, but that
it was always open to Mr Vaz to ask for me to remove her at that
point. We said goodbye to each other and said we would meet on
Monday 3 July.
| 
