Annex i15
Transcription of an interview by the Parliamentary
Commissioner for Standards with Ms Maria Fernandes and Mr Mohammed
Pathan held on 4 July 2001
MS FILKIN: I do apologise for having to again take
your time on a matter which I know is not to do with you. I apologise
for that. I am not wishing to interfere in your affairs in any
way that I do not have to, and I have not wished to do that throughout.
MS FERNANDES: Thank you.
MS FILKIN: Having said that, I have a duty to the
House of Commons which is to make sure that I am giving a full
and accurate picture in relation to the complaints that I have
had and I have to verify information to them. Obviously there
are some things where I can only do that by asking other people
and that is always embarrassing for the Member of Parliament.
I do not do it if I do not have to, but that is the reason for
seeing you. Having said that, I do not in any way, of course,
wish to make any implication that you or your company, or Mr Pathan,
have in any way been involved in anything that is improper. Nothing
that I say should be taken to imply that in any way. All I am
doing is looking at the Member of Parliament and trying to check
what I have been told by complainants and to check what I am told
by the Member of Parliament, and that is all I am doing. I shall
not be disclosing anything that goes on in this meeting until
I make a report to the Standards and Privileges Committee. The
Committee is not set up at the moment and the new Committee is
not even created, so it is unlikely that I shall be making any
report until the early autumn. Unless they suddenly set themselves
up, that is the likelihood. It is likely to be that period of
time before I report. Of course, nothing will go out of this office
about what you say to me until the Committee receives it. There
are two areas that I have to check, and I do know, because I was
there and because I have read your transcript again, and indeed
all of the correspondence, on some of these things you will already
have told us the answer, so please bear with me. It is not that
I do not know what you said before, it is just that I want a complete
record in one place so that I can provide it to the Committee.
I hope that is not too wearing. I will try to get through my questions
as quickly as possible. Before we start, is there anything that
you need to ask me?
MS FERNANDES: It is something I need to tell you
rather than ask you actually.
MS FILKIN: Fine.
MS FERNANDES: I am taking proceedings against the
Mail on Sunday.
MS FILKIN: Yes.
MS FERNANDES: And one of the issues obviously is
the issue of Mapesbury. I do not know if you have read the article
in the Mail on Sunday of three or four weeks ago?
MS FILKIN: I do not think I have, no, but I will
check it. We get an horrendous amount of stuff here, so we try
not to take too much notice of it. I will look at it.
MS FERNANDES: They are the subject of proceedings.
MS FILKIN: I see.
MS FERNANDES: Therefore I need to be very careful
because I do not want to do anything that will affect those proceedings.
MS FILKIN: Of course not and, of course, I will respect
that because I would not wish to jeopardise any proceedings anybody
is taking, so do be assured of that from my point of view. Right,
anything else? Mr Pathan, is there anything you want to ask me
before we start?
MR PATHAN: No. I have come to help Mrs Fernandes
and to help you, if there is anything that I can help with. I
understand that this is a sort of casual-type meeting.
MS FILKIN: It is not casual, it is formal.
MR PATHAN: Is it? Right.
MS FILKIN: You have to know that I need the information
because I have got a job to do for the Committee.
MR PATHAN: Sure. I have come here on my own to see
you.
MS FILKIN: Of course, at my request only.
MR PATHAN: Of course, yes, and see if I can help
in any way.
MS FILKIN: I am grateful for that. You are quite
right in saying it is absolutely voluntary, your coming in and
agreeing to my request. I am grateful to you for coming and spending
your time, particularly on this hot day. As I said, I will try
to get through my questions as fast as I can. Obviously there
are some things that I am aware of both from the public records
and from what you have said before and some of those things will
be repetitive for you. You appeared before the Committee on 13
February. You have had the transcript of your oral evidence from
that day.
MS FERNANDES: I have.
MS FILKIN: Is there anything now which on reflection
you want to add or subtract from that account, just to make sure
that I have got a full picture? Afterwards when you read it, because
sometimes those situations are a bit daunting and people afterwards
think "oh, my goodness, I could have said x, y and z".
MS FERNANDES: The only comment I would make is in
relation to the fact that it was suggested that I managed the
company. I own and I am a director of the company but I did not
have day-to-day management of it. That is the only thing. I think
that was put to me by a Member.
MS FILKIN: Yes, it was. You made it clear during
that evidence session. And am I right that you would confirm,
that no money as far as you know went out of Mapesbury Communications
to support Mr Vaz in his role as an MP?
MS FERNANDES: That is right, yes. Of course, you
have had independent evidence from two accountants stating that.
MS FILKIN: Yes, of course. This is really about me
trying to make sure that I am fully informed because the Committee,
of course, ask me all sorts of questions that I am not anticipating
when they meet. This is to make sure that I am absolutely clear
about things. It is clear from your evidence that there was at
some point a decision to change the focus of Mapesbury Communications.
You said that at that time you could have bought another off-the-shelf
company but you decided not to do so. What date was that that
you, if you like, took on the company so that you could process
your own activities through it?
MS FERNANDES: To be quite honest, Mrs Filkin, I could
not tell you. There was a point at which there was the issue of
these calendars. There was a period, I think, when it was not
doing anything. The first project that I came across was a book.
I wanted to write it, I wanted to publish it.
MS FILKIN: I see.
MS FERNANDES: And I wanted it to be something that
I did.
MS FILKIN: What was the date of publication of that
book?
MS FERNANDES: September 1995. Could you help?
MR PATHAN: About ----
MS FERNANDES: September 1995. I know I was writing
the book at around the time that my son was born, March/April.
About that time I completed it and then there was a period when
my child was born and then I, sort of, got it published.
MS FILKIN: And then the transactions about the book
went through the company?
MS FERNANDES: Yes.
MS FILKIN: Yes. Why did you make that decision to
use that off-the-shelf company that Mr Vaz had told my predecessor
that he had set up to process his earnings outside Parliament?
Why did you decide to use it rather than to buy another off-the-shelf
company?
MS FERNANDES: There was a company there.
MS FILKIN: I see.
MS FERNANDES: To be quite honest, I did not know
what Mr Vaz had
discussed ----
MS FILKIN: No, no, of course not, there was no need
to.
MS FERNANDES: ---- with the previous Commissioner.
There was a company there, I bought it. There was a little bit
of activity and then it was lying dormant. Not dormant but it
was there.
MS FILKIN: So it was there.
MS FERNANDES: I wanted to publish a book. I had just
started in practice on my own account and I wanted to, I suppose,
in a sense, give myself the opportunity to raise my profile. It
was just the means was there and I just used it.
MS FILKIN: Right. It was not to benefit in any way
from the existing connections that the company had at that time?
MS FERNANDES: What do you mean?
MS FILKIN: I just wondered if it had contacts and
had previous work ----
MS FERNANDES: Whether the company had contacts?
MS FILKIN: Yes, and I wondered whether you thought
the company has already got contacts with the printers and so
on and so forth. It was not in any way in relation to that?
MS FERNANDES: No. The primary aim of me writing and
publishing the book was to help me, in a sense, with my new practice,
to have a book published.
MS FILKIN: So that people would know what you did,
yes.
MS FERNANDES: Partly that but also, I suppose, I
just wanted something that I had done myself.
MS FILKIN: Absolutely.
MS FERNANDES: Not just the writing of the book, I
was involved in the areas of how to get it published.
MS FILKIN: I see. Looking at the Companies House
accounts and looking at the turnover that is in those accounts,
in 1997, unlike other years, the turnover was zero. What happened
that year?
MS FERNANDES: There must have been no activity, that
is the only ---- It started off with a bit of activity. The only
thing I can think is 1997 was the year my second child was born.
I had wanted to do other things but as it happened maybe it did
not ---- To be quite honest, I could not put my hand on my heart
and say there is a certain reason for that.
MS FILKIN: Fine, thanks. The accounts, of course,
the public accounts, give the figures for the turnover each year.
Can you remember what the profit or loss in each year was?
MS FERNANDES: Not really, no.
MS FILKIN: Did you take a profit out of it?
MS FERNANDES: It made a profit but the company retained
all the profits.
MS FILKIN: I see.
MS FERNANDES: So it was sort of carried over. It
was rolled over from year to year, so it was retained. Whatever
retained profit there was in each year was just kept in for the
following year.
MS FILKIN: I see. So you did not take a fee out of
it?
MS FERNANDES: I did not take a salary.
MS FILKIN: No.
MS FERNANDES: I did not declare any dividends. It
was there to ----
MR PATHAN: Sorry. At the time Mr Mahmoud was dealing
with it and he wanted to make sure ---- To make a profit, make
the company successful, it was best if we retained it and took
it over to the next year. It looks like a profit but it was moving
on every year.
MS FILKIN: So you were re-investing the profit?
MR PATHAN: That is right, yes. That is why there
were amounts there that were big and sometimes were low. That
was how it was because Mr Mahmoud wanted it, that we should all
leave it in there and just only take expenses out that we have
to take out.
MS FILKIN: I see. But the company was employing staff,
was it?
MS FERNANDES: Yes, it was.
MR PATHAN: I was one of the employees, yes.
MS FILKIN: Yes. I have got ---- No, we will wait
until we get to that question because I was going to ask if you
could just clarify for me who was employed at which time and then
I could understand that. I understand you have taken the decision
to wind up the company.
MS FERNANDES: I have.
MS FILKIN: Why did you do that and when was the company
wound up? Has it been wound up yet?
MS FERNANDES: It has not been completed.
MS FILKIN: No.
MS FERNANDES: The winding up has not been completed
but it is very close to being completed.
MS FILKIN: Do you know when you expect to wind it
up?
MS FERNANDES: Within the next month or six weeks.
The final stages of the closing accounts are currently being prepared
and when that has been done then it will go through a formal process,
I believe, of winding up. So it is very soon.
MS FILKIN: Do you want to say anything to me about
why you have taken that decision?
MS FERNANDES: The first thing is the company, to
be quite honest, was not trading as such for a while.
MS FILKIN: I see.
MS FERNANDES: I was involved ---- I was more interested
in my practice, to be quite honest. I did not know what was going
on. Mr Mahmoud, in the middle ---- He died last year.
MS FILKIN: Yes, I know.
MS FERNANDES: There were changes happening. With
this current publicity I did not feel that it could get itself
back on its feet and it was best to dissolve it. And I am fed
up with it, frankly speaking. It has taken up a huge amount of
my time which is disproportionate to what it is, which is a small
company.
MS FILKIN: Yes, of course. Take me through, if you
would, where the actual work done by the company was carried out.
I have got various registered addresses from the public records
and I have got various other correspondence and so forth with
different addresses. Could you tell me where the company operated
from over the years that it was in existence?
MR PATHAN: We had the registered office at Savant
House and then Mr Mahmoud used to deal with everything we used
to do from his house.
MS FILKIN: And that was where?
MR PATHAN: That is in, what is it called? Harrow.
MS FERNANDES: It will probably come under Pinner.
Pinner? It is probably the area of Pinner.
MS FILKIN: I just need to be clear. I do not particularly
want to know the number or anything. What I am trying to be clear
is at which points it was where.
MR PATHAN: I do not have dates or anything like that.
MS FILKIN: What I have got is the following and tell
me if this is right. On 2 November 1994 it was set up and it was
said to be operating from Teignmouth Road in NW2.
MS FERNANDES: That was the registered address.
MS FILKIN: Did it operate from there or was that
just a postal address?
MS FERNANDES: Apart from the time I worked on my
book when I operated from that address ----
MS FILKIN: Oh, you did. That was where you lived,
was it?
MS FERNANDES: That was where I lived.
MS FILKIN: I see. So at that time when it was first
set up when you first had it it was said to be operating from
your home?
MRS FERNANDES: Yes. That was its registered address.
In the early days, yes, that was its address. It changed its address
following that.
MS FILKIN: Then there is a PO box and then I understand
it moved to Scraptoft Lane in Leicester, Mrs Vaz senior's home,
is that right?
MR PATHAN: Because she was the secretary, yes, that
is right.
MS FILKIN: Yes, so that was the registered address
whereas the Register of Members was held at your North London
home, * * *.
MS FERNANDES: Sorry?
MS FILKIN: * * *.
MS FERNANDES: Was what?
MS FILKIN: Was where the Register of Members was
held.
MS FERNANDES: Right. Yes, I suppose because I am
the director that would be right.
MS FILKIN: That is right. But then in January 2001,
but not until then, I get the address of Savant House in Camden
High Street.
MR PATHAN: Right, yes.
MS FILKIN: What I am doing is really asking you are
those dates right? Was it operating from those different places?
MR PATHAN: I do not know about the dates but the
major work, the day-to-day work, was done at Savant House and
at Mr Mahmoud's House.
MS FILKIN: From when until when?
MR PATHAN: Oh, I do not know the dates. The day-to-day
work, companies can be registered at different addresses.
MS FILKIN: Of course.
MR PATHAN: And you have day-to-day work at different
addresses.
MS FILKIN: It is the day-to-day work obviously that
I am interested in.
MR PATHAN: So it was done at Savant House from, I
do not know, I cannot remember, two or three years. Then we used
to do work from Mr Mahmoud's house because he preferred it to
be done from there.
MS FILKIN: But from about 1997 or so, is that right?
MR PATHAN: I cannot remember.
MS FILKIN: Okay. In any event I am not giving you
information which is inaccurate?
MR PATHAN: We cannot say it is accurate or ----
MS FILKIN: I just got it from the public records
and I just wanted to check it because these can be wrong.
MR PATHAN: That is right, I know.
MS FILKIN: As I understand it, also for a while the
company was based at your * * * home, or it did work from your
home?
MS FERNANDES: No.
MS FILKIN: No?
MS FERNANDES: No, absolutely not, because I was not
involved in the day-to-day running of it. It might have been registered
or, I do not know.
MS FILKIN: The Register of Members was there but
no work was done for the company?
MS FERNANDES: No work was done, absolutely not.
MS FILKIN: So when Mr Vaz described the times he
went into your office I suppose I had got a picture in my head,
oh that is quite understandable, it was in their home and Mr Vaz
would have popped in and out. Which office would he have gone
into then?
MS FERNANDES: I work from home in my firm.
MS FILKIN: Yes, I understand that.
MS FERNANDES: My solicitor's practice.
MS FILKIN: I understand that, I mean Mapesbury. This
is talking about Mapesbury.
MS FERNANDES: I do not know what he said but it did
not operate from * * *.
MS FILKIN: Did he ever go into either of those offices,
either the one you have talked about at Savant House ----
MR PATHAN: No, never.
MS FILKIN: Or Mr Mahmoud's office?
MR PATHAN: No, he never went to our offices.
MS FILKIN: So you say he did not go to the Mapesbury
offices?
MR PATHAN: What do you mean? You said Mapesbury's
office was * * * first.
MS FILKIN: No. I said because I knew, or I believed,
that for some of the time the Mapesbury work went from * * *,
the question was asked of Mr Vaz "how often did you ever
go into the office of Mapesbury?" and he answered that question,
I put two and two together and am checking with you, and I think
I have got it wrong, I thought that he must he have gone into
the office in your home ----
MS FERNANDES: No.
MS FILKIN: But as it was not there ----
MS FERNANDES: It did not operate from there.
MS FILKIN: No, then I am asking another question
which is if he did not go into the Mapesbury office in your home,
which office did he go into that was Mapesbury's and when was
that?
MS FERNANDES: You will have to talk to him.
MS FILKIN: You cannot remember him going into the
office?
MR PATHAN: No, I cannot, but I was not there every
day so I cannot say that he has been or he has not been. He has
not been when I was there.
MS FILKIN: I see, fine.
MR PATHAN: We were getting confused because you were
saying the office at * * *, which we have never had, no.
MS FILKIN: I understand. I have got that bit clear.
Why was a box number added to the address in 1996?
MS FERNANDES: I do not know. Can you answer that?
MR PATHAN: In 1996? I cannot remember but I think
it may have been just a PO box number Mr Mahmoud added because
he was well into these things, yes. Mr Mahmoud, bless his soul,
he was a very good networker and everything and he knew what he
was doing. I do not know why but he must have added a box number.
MS FILKIN: But what was the company doing that might
require a box number? What I have got so far is it was publishing
your books.
MR PATHAN: It was publishing books. It was a PR company
organising events or something like that.
MS FILKIN: I see, it was an events operation.
MS FERNANDES: It was operating out of people's back
rooms basically.
MS FILKIN: It was a box number to deal with that?
MS FERNANDES: It could have been. I cannot say why
it was done.
MS FILKIN: How is Mapesbury Communications connected
with Coleridge House?
MR PATHAN: Coleridge House?
MS FILKIN: It is not?
MR PATHAN: No.
MS FILKIN: That does not mean anything to you?
MR PATHAN: No.
MS FILKIN: Right. In the list of payments that you
have provided in and out of Mapesbury, there is a mention of rent
being paid to Acacia Holdings.
MR PATHAN: Yes.
MS FILKIN: Who are they?
MR PATHAN: They own Savant House.
MS FILKIN: I see, right. So they are the property
company that own that house?
MR PATHAN: That is right, yes.
MS FILKIN: And Mapesbury Communications pay them
rent?
MR PATHAN: Yes.
MS FILKIN: What sort of rent does Mapesbury have
to pay them?
MR PATHAN: I do not know. Mr Mahmoud used to deal
with the financial side so I would not know. I would not ask him
"how much rent are you paying?"
MS FILKIN: But since he died, what has the rent been?
MR PATHAN: I do not know, I have not looked at anything.
MS FILKIN: But you could give that to me.
MR PATHAN: You want to know how much rent has been
paid?
MS FILKIN: Yes, because I am trying to get a picture
of what size of property this is and what this company is like.
MR PATHAN: Sure, yes.
MS FILKIN: Thanks very much. I hope that is all the
bits on getting the property straight. Sorry about that. Now,
I need, I am afraid, to turn to the work that you have done for
the Hinduja brothers, or their Foundation, or their business.
How did you and/or Mr Pathan first become aware of the Hinduja
brothers and first be in contact with them for work?
MS FERNANDES: For work?
MS FILKIN: Start off with how you got to know them.
MS FERNANDES: Can I say that I have no personal knowledge
of that particular event. It was a surprise to me that that event
had been carried out.
MS FILKIN: Which event are we talking about?
MS FERNANDES: Are you talking about the Hinduja ----
MR PATHAN: The Dada Vaswami, the priest one?
MS FILKIN: Yes.
MS FERNANDES: That was something that was done by
Mapesbury. I have no personal knowledge of that event.
MS FILKIN: Thank you for telling me that but if I
could ask you when you first got to know the Hindujas.
MS FERNANDES: I have known them for a number of years.
MS FILKIN: How did you get to know them? Was it social?
MS FERNANDES: Social.
MS FILKIN: Or was it professional?
MS FERNANDES: Social, I think. I have known them
for a number of years.
MS FILKIN: Have you been involved at all with their
Foundation?
MS FERNANDES: No.
MS FILKIN: You have had dealings with both of them,
have you, you know both of them? It is not one or the other?
MS FERNANDES: I know both of them, yes, and I know
their wives and various members of the family.
MS FILKIN: I see. Your legal practice is called Fernandes
Vaz.
MS FERNANDES: I thought I was coming here to talk
about Mapesbury primarily.
MS FILKIN: Yes, you are, but what I have to find
out - and I do not want to find out about your legal practice.
What I have to check is the information that I have been given
about the relationships with the Hindujas is complete. You will
know from the questions that the Committee has raised with Mr
Vaz that what they asked him was they wanted to know all the contacts
with both himself and his family, so I am afraid I do have to
ask you the questions. If you decide that you do not want to answer
them, that is your choice. I am not trying to poke into your private
practice, I am only focusing on this narrow bit about relationships
with the Hindujas. Your firm is called Fernandes Vaz. I know that
you usually are know professionally as Ms Fernandes, so could
you tell me why the name Vaz appears in the firm's title? Is that
just a name or does that mean Mr Vaz does work for the company?
MS FERNANDES: No, it is just a name. As solicitors
we are allowed to call ourselves anything.
MS FILKIN: Of course.
MS FERNANDES: And I choose to call myself Fernandes
Vaz.
MS FILKIN: Because they are both your names.
MS FERNANDES: Yes, they are, and it made the firm
look a little bigger than it was.
MS FILKIN: I do understand that you have carried
out work through that practice for the Hinduja brothers.
MS FERNANDES: Who do you understand that from?
MS FILKIN: I am afraid I cannot tell you that at
the moment but the source is good.
MS FERNANDES: Okay.
MS FILKIN: And perfectly respectable and solid and
that is not know outside this office, but I do know that.
MS FERNANDES: Okay. Can I just say that in terms
of my clients am bound by the duty of confidentiality and that
duty is absolute unless the clients themselves want that information
to be made available. That is why I am asking you the source of
that.
MS FILKIN: I understand. Since I do have what I regard
absolutely reliable information of that legal work carried out
for the Hinduja company, would you mind confirming to me that
no part of any payment for such work was transferred to the account
of Mapesbury Communications?
MS FERNANDES: Can I say that, again, I am not willing
to discuss my clients and you are drawing me into discussing my
clients. My duty of confidentiality remains unless I am given
permission to divulge any information.
MS FILKIN: Did Mr Vaz play any part in the legal
work ----
MS FERNANDES: None at all.
MS FILKIN: ---- that Fernandes Vaz ----
MS FERNANDES: None at all.
MS FILKIN: ---- did for the Hinduja brothers? Then,
accepting what you have to say about your duty of confidentiality,
I would be very grateful if you would approach your clients and
ask them if you are able to confirm to me the payments they made
to you, to your legal practice.
MS FERNANDES: Could you write to me? That would be
helpful.
MS FILKIN: Certainly, yes. Turning back to Mapesbury,
and leaving your legal practice on one side, perhaps you would
tell me what work Mapesbury Communications has carried out for
the Hinduja brothers, or for the Hinduja Foundation, or business?
MS FERNANDES: None that I know of. Are you able to
help?
MR PATHAN: None, no.
MS FILKIN: Other than the payment I have already
disclosed.
MR PATHAN: That Dada Vaswami event?
MS FILKIN: Yes.
MR PATHAN: This priest event.
MS FILKIN: Yes.
MR PATHAN: They paid for the expenses or something
of it, yes. That is the only one I know of.
MS FILKIN: That is the only one?
MR PATHAN: Yes, definitely.
MS FILKIN: Thank you. There have been allegations
that Mr Vaz has received gifts from some of the Hinduja brothers
and that those were given to you jointly with him. Have you ever
received any gift from the Hinduja brothers?
MS FERNANDES: None that I recall. As a Member of
Parliament Keith does from time to time go to events and he gets
sweets and flowers and you know, but I cannot say there is any
particular event that I can remember that sticks out in my mind
about something that was received by him.
MS FILKIN: No. And, of course, there is nothing improper
in that at all.
MS FERNANDES: They are not the type of people who
send a lot of gifts and flowers. I cannot remember them sending
me anything in particular.
MS FILKIN: You said that as a public relations company
Mapesbury was involved in organising events. There are some events
that I need to ask you about and as I go through them you may
think of other events that it would be helpful for me to understand
what they are, and I would be grateful to know that. As I said,
what I am trying to do is get an absolutely accurate but fair,
totally fair, picture of the events and the size of the company.
The ones that I would like to start off with are as follows: Mapesbury
Communications booked an event on 23 June 1999 for the Asian Business
Network at the New Connaught Rooms. Did you book that event?
MR PATHAN: Sorry, say that again.
MS FILKIN: I believe that Mapesbury Communications
booked an event at the New Connaught Rooms on 23 June 1999 for
the Asian Business Network. I was asking whether you were involved
in booking that event?
MR PATHAN: No, nothing I know about, no. The event,
no.
MS FILKIN: Do you have a complete list of the events
that the company has been involved in over the recent years?
MR PATHAN: No. I can remember the, what was it called,
visa event that we had.
MS FILKIN: Yes, I am going to come on to that in
a moment.
MR PATHAN: What was the other one called? We had
the visa event, the work permit event.
MS FILKIN: Those are two events you can recall?
MR PATHAN: Yes.
MS FILKIN: And the one that you have talked about,
the religious event.
MR PATHAN: That is right, yes, the priest one.
MS FILKIN: Are you saying that as far as you know
those were the only events?
MR PATHAN: That is right, yes.
MS FILKIN: So you do not recall any connection between
Mapesbury Communications and the Asian Business Network?
MR PATHAN: Mr Mahmoud ---- I do not know about that.
Mr Mahmoud might have, I do not know. I cannot answer that question.
MS FILKIN: And would you have a record of that somewhere?
MR PATHAN: I do not know. Really I do not know.
MS FILKIN: Does that mean anything to you, Ms Fernandes?
MS FERNANDES: It does not.
MR PATHAN: It does not, no.
MS FILKIN: Take me through then, if you would, the
Dada Vaswami event. What was the role of Mapesbury in relation
to that event?
MR PATHAN: I was not involved in that.
MS FILKIN: No.
MR PATHAN: I remember the event because it was a
priest who came and did something, a lecture or something like
that.
MS FILKIN: Yes.
MR PATHAN: That is all I know. Mr Mahmoud used to
deal with the paperwork and all that, so he would know.
MS FILKIN: So you do not know whose initiative that
was set up on?
MR PATHAN: I do not know, no.
MS FILKIN: Who was promoting it, who wanted it to
happen, etc?
MR PATHAN: No, I do not, no. I only know that the
event took place and the Hinduja Foundation paid for the expenses.
That is all I know about it.
MS FILKIN: And those were processed through Mapesbury.
MR PATHAN: That is right, yes.
MS FILKIN: So what did Mapesbury do for that event?
MR PATHAN: At the time Mr Mahmoud was heavily involved
so I do not know what he did.
MS FILKIN: Would you know what he did, Ms Fernandes?
MS FERNANDES: What? In relation to the event?
MS FILKIN: Yes. There was a £1,200 bill. Do
you know what the bill would have covered?
MS FERNANDES: No, not really. It would have been
an event, I suppose, normal expenses of an event. But, to be quite
honest, I do not know anything about the event, so I do not want
to start saying something that ----
MS FILKIN: Did you go to the event?
MS FERNANDES: No, I did not.
MS FILKIN: Did you go to the event?
MR PATHAN: No. I have seen a copy of the invoice
form and it says "administration", something like that,
so I am sure he must have been sending out invites or something
like that, administration, so that was why he listed it like that.
MS FILKIN: Am I right, therefore, from what you have
said that you do not know whether the Hindujas approached Mapesbury
or Mapesbury approached the Hindujas?
MR PATHAN: Yes, that is right.
MS FILKIN: Could you tell me, the invoice that was
raised that you have just referred to, was that raised on a not
for profit basis or was it raised on an ordinary commercial basis?
MR PATHAN: I do not know because I did not raise
the invoice or anything, Mr Mahmoud used to do the financial things.
I have looked at a copy of that invoice and it looks quite clearly
that it was small expenses that were paid to cover for stamps
and things like that. It was like a reimbursement rather than
profit making. It looks very clear as a reimbursement to the company.
MS FILKIN: I see. Thank you. Now, I have had some
difficulty with the date of that event and I wonder if you could
help me with it. The invoice is dated 4 June.
MR PATHAN: Right.
MS FILKIN: Which I believe is before the event took
place.
MR PATHAN: Really? Oh, right.
MS FILKIN: I wonder if you would help me, perhaps
outside this meeting, by going back and checking the paperwork
so that I get it clear whether the invoice was raised before the
event, which it might have been if it was done on a not for profit
basis because the company might have needed the money to actually
do the work but, on the other hand, it is not usual commercial
practice to raise the invoice before you have done it. I wonder
if you could let me know.
MR PATHAN: What date the event was?
MS FILKIN: The date of the event.
MR PATHAN: The date of the event. I cannot remember.
It is a long time ago, it is so long.
MS FILKIN: I thought you might have it in your paperwork.
MR PATHAN: No. This is where the problem is because
Mr Mahmoud used to keep everything. He was a person where he wanted
to hold on to everything, that is why Mr Mahmoud used to have
it. I think it was a long time ago, was it not, about six years
ago, something like that? I cannot remember the precise month
or anything like that. I know it was a long time ago because I
read about it, that a priest gave a lecture in the House of Commons
or something.
MS FILKIN: That is right, yes.
MS FERNANDES: I am sure the House of Commons must
hold some sort of a record.
MS FILKIN: Yes. What I have got is different pieces
of information from different people and I want to get the facts,
that is all. There is nothing sinister about it being different
bits of information, it is to do with, as you say, being a long
time ago and people forgetting and records not being very wonderful.
There is no problem about it, I just do not want to give a date
that is not right if I can possibly check it.
MR PATHAN: Right.
MS FILKIN: Do you know who was responsible for drawing
up the guest list for that event?
MR PATHAN: No, I do not.
MS FILKIN: You do not know that either?
MS FERNANDES: I do not, no.
MS FILKIN: Let us go on to the other conferences
that you were talking about. First of all, the Work Permit Conference.
Can you tell me about that and where that was, who organised it,
who paid for it, etc?
MR PATHAN: It was a conference where Mr Mahmoud used
to send out to the delegates. My role was ---- In Mapesbury I
was working with Mr Mahmoud, assisting him in every way, but I
was more of a technical person where he used to send me out and
say "go and get these copies done" or "go and put
the stage up" or "go and put this out on the seats",
so I did not have a heavy role. What Mr Mahmoud promised me and
what he said was once he got everything in order he was going
to set up a company, not a publishing company, we were going to
do an internet company, and he was going to get me heavily involved
in that, so I said "fine". That was why I was keen to
work with Mr Mahmoud, because he did promise me.
MS FILKIN: It was a good opportunity.
MR PATHAN: Yes, it was a good opportunity. I was
a young man and I wanted to help Mr Mahmoud and do something for
myself. That was why he did that. I remember other conferences.
He sent out letters to delegates and normal public people would
come to it who were interested in work permits, something like
software companies, hoteliers or business people who wanted work
permits or something like that.
MS FILKIN: And where was that held, that Work Permit
Conference?
MR PATHAN: It was in London, yes. It was in London.
I cannot
remember ----
MS FERNANDES: There was one, I think it was the St
James' Court Hotel, the London one.
MS FILKIN: That one was, the work permit one?
MS FERNANDES: Yes.
MS FILKIN: Fine. It was done on an ordinary commercial
basis of sending out invitations and seeing who came?
MR PATHAN: To the normal public, yes, that is right.
MS FILKIN: Yes, I see. What about the event on visa
policy?
MS FERNANDES: There was an event ---- That was the
Birmingham one.
MR PATHAN: That is right, yes. Exactly the same thing,
where you send out letters and normal people would reply because
they have got an interest in visa policy or to do with that and
they would fill out the delegate forms and then apply and come
and attend the conferences.
MS FILKIN: Were either of those conferences held
at Millbank Towers?
MS FERNANDES: No.
MR PATHAN: No.
MS FILKIN: Was any conference that you can remember
held there?
MS FERNANDES: Yes, there was one.
MS FILKIN: What was that?
MS FERNANDES: There was one on food policy which
covered the issue of work permits but it also covered, because
I chaired that meeting, health and safety and various issues.
MS FILKIN: And which of those that you have talked
about, the Work Permit Conference at the St James' Hotel or the
Birmingham conferences ---- Where was the Birmingham conference
held?
MS FERNANDES: I cannot remember, to be quite honest,
but it was held in the centre of Birmingham. I will try to rack
my brains. We should be able to work out where that was.
MS FILKIN: If you can give me a list of those then
I can at least set some of these to ground and not let people
make more of them than they are. And the Millbank conference on,
as you say, food policy.
MS FERNANDES: I chaired that. I could not give you
any more information other than speakers probably.
MS FILKIN: If you could give the date and the speakers
and the locale, and if you have got the guest list.
MS FERNANDES: If I have got that information.
MS FILKIN: If you have got the guest list that would
help me get a feel for it. Which of those, if any, did Mr Vaz
take part in?
MS FERNANDES: None of them.
MR PATHAN: None.
MS FILKIN: None of them.
MS FERNANDES: The Work Permit Conferences we are
talking about?
MS FILKIN: Yes.
MS FERNANDES: None of them.
MS FILKIN: Nor the food policy?
MS FERNANDES: No.
MS FILKIN: Or the visa policy?
MS FERNANDES: No.
MS FILKIN: No. But he did take part in the Dada Vaswami
event?
MS FERNANDES: I believe so. I did not go to it myself.
MS FILKIN: No, I understand that. If you can give
me any information about those conferences I would be most grateful
because then I will be absolutely accurate, particularly saying
that Mr Vaz was not involved in them and was not involved in the
guest list, etc., unless when he thinks about it he says "oh,
yes, I did suggest some guests". There is no problem about
that, but just so that we have dealt with it all. Were all those
conferences that we have just talked about, other than the Dada
Vaswami event, run on a commercial basis, an ordinary commercial
basis?
MS FERNANDES: I could not answer that, to be quite
honest. I chaired them more than was involved in the day-to-day
collection of fees or whatever. I was a speaker at them and I
did chair one of them, I was a speaker.
MS FILKIN: You were the sole shareholder of Mapesbury,
presumably ----
MS FERNANDES: But I do not run the company.
MS FILKIN: No, no, no.
MS FERNANDES: I own the company and I am a director
but, to be quite honest, that was my involvement in the company.
I did not deal with the day-to-day work.
MS FILKIN: So they would not be consulting you about
any conference where they were not going to try to make a profit?
MS FERNANDES: On the work permit side, it would be
something that I would have thought about and it would have been
something that I probably raised.
MS FILKIN: Yes.
MS FERNANDES: And then it was assessed probably and
they worked out whether it would make a profit or not.
MS FILKIN: And would run it on a commercial basis
obviously.
MR PATHAN: Yes. This goes back to Mr Mahmoud because
he used to do the paperwork. He used to make sure that everything
was in order and all that. I am sure whatever he used to do, he
knew what he was doing. He wanted to make sure this company was
successful, it was a small company, and that was why he was putting
back the money.
MS FILKIN: There is no problem with it, I just want
the facts. I do not think there is any issue about it.
MR PATHAN: The thing is the papers have made it sound
like it was such a big company, a massive company, and the thing
is it was such a small company, it is amazing.
MS FILKIN: I am trying to make sure that is all grounded
properly. I think I know the answer to this but let me ask you
to make sure. What part, if any, did the firm of Fernandes Vaz
play in any of these events that we have just talked about?
MS FERNANDES: The firm play?
MS FILKIN: Yes.
MS FERNANDES: We are back to my firm, are we?
MS FILKIN: Yes.
MS FERNANDES: None, I practise in the area of immigration
and there are Work Permit Conferences held but that is the extent
of the involvement.
MS FILKIN: You kindly provided the Committee with
a list of payments that you tried to ascertain, even though the
records were not very good that you were working from, payments
into and out of the company. What I need to understand, if I may,
as I said in my letter to you, is the size of those payments so
I get some sense of the size of the company. You very properly
said you cannot guarantee that is comprehensive, but what I need
to be able to say is "well, it is pretty comprehensive because
if you look at the turnover and what they actually got it does
cover" or "no, it is not comprehensive at all because
that only covers a very small amount and presumably the other
payments were very small". I have got to get some picture
of what was happening in this company and that is why I ask the
question. You drew this list up?
MR PATHAN: Yes.
MS FILKIN: Did you draw this list up?
MR PATHAN: I remember drawing this list up. I came
back from Pakistan, I was on holiday, and Maria said that the
Chairman wanted this long list. I remember sitting down and we
were racking our brains. The thing is, Mr Mahmoud had the files
and he used to do paperwork and everything like that. These would
be the contacts or clients of that. We sat down and said "let
us put this down, let us put this down", so we could get
this in time to the Chairman.
MS FILKIN: That was without the benefit of invoices,
it was just out of your head?
MR PATHAN: That is right. Of course, yes.
MS FILKIN: You obviously had enough information in
your head to provide it. Would you be able to give at least round
figures against the payments?
MR PATHAN: I would not because Mr Mahmoud would deal
with the finances.
MS FILKIN: So how did you make a decision that those
were over £1,000 each?
MR PATHAN: I made the decision but I think these
would be the companies that were involved somehow, we have done
an event and that is why we have done something for them or we
have published something for them. That was why I came to the
decision to put these names down.
MS FILKIN: Have you found that there is actually
no other information which you can provide to settle that now?
MR PATHAN: That is right, yes.
MS FILKIN: It does not exist. You were talking about
Mr Mahmoud's garage that you were going to look at and so forth.
It is not there is what you are telling me, is it, there is no
other information?
MS FERNANDES: Well, I have asked his widow. Mr Mahmoud
was involved in a number of activities and she has got a number
of papers. I have had a look, I cannot see anything that relates
to Mapesbury there. I have asked her to have another look for
the paperwork but, to be quite honest, to date I have not got
it. Of course, if any of it becomes available I would like you
to have it.
MS FILKIN: I am sure you would, I would like to settle
it. Absolutely, that is what I am trying to do. I do not want
these things to run.
MR PATHAN: What did you want? What did you want from
the client list? What are you trying to obtain, any particular
name? When we sat down with the Chairman I remember when he went
through it he was looking and we asked him this question and he
was saying "yes, that is right" and he said he was looking
at the time for Mr Zaiwalla.
MS FILKIN: Yes, he was.
MR PATHAN: And he saw it clearly and said "yes,
there is nothing wrong", it was listed and everything, so
he said "yes, that is fine". Are you looking for something
else?
MS FILKIN: I am first of all looking for what you
have already told me, any connection with the Hindujas. You have
told me that event was connected with them and they have paid
that.
MR PATHAN: With the Foundation, yes.
MS FILKIN: With their Foundation. I obviously then
need to ask you the general question whether the Hindujas made
any other payments in any form to Mapesbury.
MR PATHAN: I do not think they would, I am quite
clear on that. Everyone knows they are rich people but they are
very tight people, I have heard. I do not know what they would
do. I do not think there was any other event they were connected
to or any other money or anything they have done with us.
MS FILKIN: What I need to say is if any other information
other than this, even if not precise, becomes available so that
I can understand the public information on the finances of the
company, and that is all I have had obviously, that would be very
helpful.
MR PATHAN: Sure.
MS FILKIN: If your accountants hold anything at all
then I can, I hope, try to deal with some of these concerns that
are about and I am sure are very wearing for you. I want to be
able to try just to set the record straight and I hope that will
be the end of it. Anything else that has come to your attention
to do with Mr Zaiwalla, you have already answered that question,
and the Hindujas and the Hinduja Foundation, you have already
answered that question. The other general question, and why this
was looked at in any event, is whether there were any payments
from this that in any way related to Mr Vaz, and you have already
answered me that question so I do not need to ask.
MS FERNANDES: Actually you have had independent evidence
of what I am saying. Two accountants have said that.
MS FILKIN: I take that. Yes, I take that. Are you
able to say what the totals of those payments come to, about?
MR PATHAN: What the total of payments ----
MS FILKIN: What you have done is you have given me
a list of payments, you say you cannot be precise about what each
one consisted of but you have tried to rack your brain and list
them.
MR PATHAN: Yes.
MS FILKIN: Are you able to say in round figures what
you think the total of payments in from those come to and over
what period those cover and if you are able to give me the total
of those, so I know what I am dealing with? If what I am dealing
with is payments out over seven years I am dealing with something
quite different from payments out in one year. What I am trying
to do is to get this picture as tight as I can.
MR PATHAN: Right.
MS FERNANDES: Mrs Filkin, can I ask you why you want
that information?
MS FILKIN: I want it because the allegations that
have come in, as you know, concern whether or not Mr Vaz received
benefits which he has not registered, and I am trying to settle
that.
MS FERNANDES: That is right, but we are reaching
a point of stalemate really because we have got two accountants
saying that whatever has gone into that company Mr Vaz has not
received a benefit from. Just going into the affairs of the company
like this must have a purpose beyond that. I think you are reasonably
satisfied, I would have thought, that two accountants have certified
that he has received no personal benefit.
MS FILKIN: I am satisfied that there was no direct
payment out of the company to Mr Vaz from what they have said,
I am satisfied about that. What I have to be satisfied about is
if there is any other benefit and that is my problem.
MS FERNANDES: Such as? Maybe we can get to the heart
of your concerns.
MR PATHAN: Yes. If you expressly tell us what it
is so we understand.
MS FILKIN: Of course. The allegation concerning the
Dada Vaswami event, made not of course by me, made by other people,
was that this was, in fact, an event to promote Mr Vaz as an MP
and that he booked the rooms and your company was involved in
setting it up and in processing the money which came from the
Hindujas to fund it. The allegation is that was about promoting
Mr Vaz as an MP. I have no reason to believe it was. I have reason
to believe it was an ordinary event that Mr Vaz was being helpful
to and he was booking a room in the House of Commons so it could
run for the community. What I have to be able to say to (a) protect
Mr Vaz as best as I am able in these situations, but (b) to protect
my duty to the House of Commons and the Committee, is "no,
I have not overlooked anything else which might have been like
that". That is why I am trying to ask the questions, so that
I can say "this is a little company, it had these certain
amounts of money. They have gone to some trouble to supply me
with the list of payments", but at the moment I would have
to say, if asked, "I cannot be 100 per cent sure there were
not other payments in or out because they cannot be sure".
MS FERNANDES: I think what you have moved from is
a direct benefit to promotion. So if a company promotes a particular
person by inviting them to speak at an event that amounts to a
benefit to that Member, does it?
MS FILKIN: It could do, and then you would have to
look at whether it did.
MS FERNANDES: I think 650 MPs are going to be in
an awful lot of trouble if that is how it is interpreted.
MS FILKIN: I am not interpreting it in any way, all
I am trying to do is to get at the facts. I am telling you what
people have alleged when I say that. I am not making an assumption
that any benefit was received, and I have not made that assumption
and I am not doing so. What I want to be able to
do ----
MS FERNANDES: Was that the intention of the rules,
promotion of a Member? Members of Parliament are notorious for
promoting their own interests. It is difficult.
MS FILKIN: Of course. That is why all I am trying
to do is to get at the facts.
MS FERNANDES: This company has been dragged in for
a number of months and it is just this sort of thing, what are
we getting at? If he borrowed a Mapesbury car is that a benefit
to him? Where are we saying that he received a benefit?
MS FILKIN: If the company ----
MS FERNANDES: I was confused about it when I gave
my evidence to the Committee because I do not think the Members
of the Committee quite knew what they were getting at.
MS FILKIN: I hope that this will not sound in any
way trying to make excuses but when one is making any investigation
of any kind one does not know anything. One has allegations, one
goes into them always, one should always go into them, with a
totally open mind. Many allegations about many people are pure
malice and another set of allegations are made in the spirit of
the public interest but when you actually get at the facts the
person has put two and two together and made five. So there is
a set of allegations, and I deal with those all the time, which
never get any further than my grounding the facts and finding
that the allegation is not upheld. So that is my job and it is
the Committee's job. Why people ask questions which might to the
person being asked the question seem vague or not precise is because
the person doing the investigation does not know.
MS FERNANDES: But there are fairly clear rules about
what "benefit" means. Nobody has yet ----
MS FILKIN: To go back to your question, what the
rules say is that if a Member receives a gift of £125 or
hospitality of about more than £250 from anybody, that is
regarded as a benefit. Then, of course, there is the issue about
how do you define those things, of course that is right, but I
think we have got really quite a lot of experience of doing that.
So we are looking for real benefits, not just promoting the person
and making them more famous, we are looking at real benefits.
To answer your question, if Mapesbury had provided a car for a
period of time to any Member of Parliament, yes, that would be
a benefit. That was why I had to ask this car that Mapesbury owns,
does Mr Vaz use it, because if he did that would be a benefit
that he ought to register. There is nothing wrong with him getting
it, and he may have just forgotten to register it, but he would
be required to register it. That is why I have to ask these questions,
which I know sound absolutely infuriating, but there we are. Let
us go back to this list. If there is any other information that
becomes available, or you can find, that relates to the clients
----
MR PATHAN: We want to be helpful.
MS FILKIN: I am sure. I have no doubt about that.
MR PATHAN: That is why we have come here.
MS FILKIN: That is why I have to bore you with these
questions, because I want it settled. If you can give me any help,
even if you are putting question marks by it, "£1,000
about" or whatever, by this list, to give me any more help
on dates, amounts, that would be very useful. If you cannot I
will leave it as it is and assume you cannot.
MS PATHAN: Sure.
MS FERNANDES: Mrs Filkin, just to come back again
to that point. The purpose of the amounts, how will that take
anything forward?
MS FILKIN: At least it will allow me, I hope - we
both have best endeavour to not achieve it. What I hoped it might
do, as I was explaining earlier, I know what the turnover was
of the company in those particular years, you have said to me
"some of those were these sums of money and some", we
will come on to that in a minute, "must have been payments
to staff". That may take up almost the money that is in that
turnover, that may account for why the money is demonstrated in
the accounts in the way it is, it may cover it all, it may not.
That does not say anything one way or the other but if it covers
near enough all the money it allows me to say to the Committee
"I think we have got as full information on this company
as it is reasonable to expect to get". But if we cannot,
we cannot.
MS FERNANDES: The list is not, I would have thought,
comprehensive.
MS FILKIN: No, you have said that. That was why I
felt I should ask these questions.
MR PATHAN: Coming back to this point, what Mr Mahmoud
was always saying was "let us put it back in there".
He had this, that was how he worked.
MS FILKIN: When you have thought about the conversation
you may want to write me a note which says "I gave you the
list, the other payments were small other than each year there
was this amount in staff payments and the amount that was left
over was always taken forward and reinvested the next year",
whatever the situation is. It is not my affair what ----
MS FERNANDES: The accounts should actually show that.
MS FILKIN: They do not.
MS FERNANDES: Do they not?
MS FILKIN: Not the published accounts.
MS FERNANDES: They should. I thought they did.
MS FILKIN: Not in as much detail as that. The company
purchased a
car ----
MS FERNANDES: Before we move on can I just take a
note. Can I borrow your notebook? You said you would like information
about?
MS FILKIN: Anything else that makes this list clearer,
that specifies amounts, that specifies dates, that tries to give
me a fuller picture of what is in the published accounts, that
is what I am after.
MS FERNANDES: Okay.
MS FILKIN: We have talked about the payments that
were connected with the Hinduja Foundation, and you have confirmed
it was the only one. We have talked about cars, I know the company
purchased cars. Can you tell me which dates the company purchased
cars on and who they purchased them for but, specifically for
me to be absolutely clear about your earlier answer, that none
of these cars were purchased for Mr Vaz and Mr Vaz did not use
them other than perhaps being given a lift in one by somebody
else whose car it was. That is my understanding of this, is that
correct?
MS FERNANDES: That is correct.
MS FILKIN: That is absolutely correct. Am I right
in thinking that the cars were bought for Mrs Vaz senior?
MS FERNANDES: Yes.
MS FILKIN: Only for Mrs Vaz senior?
MR PATHAN: I have seen Mr Mahmoud use it once.
MS FILKIN: I did not mean use it. He did not have
another car bought for him?
MR PATHAN: No.
MS FILKIN: It was just the car for Mrs Vaz.
MR PATHAN: I thought you said ----
MS FILKIN: I was just trying to understand who they
were bought for. The company is described as "publishing
and PR". Can I be clear about that. Has it published other
things apart from your book?
MR PATHAN: That Root thing we did.
MS FILKIN: Root?
MR PATHAN: Something that was called Root. I cannot
remember the name, something like that. Maria's book was the main
thing.
MS FILKIN: That was about visas, was it? That was
immigration and visas?
MS FERNANDES: Yes.
MR PATHAN: Yes.
MS FILKIN: Right. What printers did you use for getting
that book published?
MS FERNANDES: I could not tell you.
MS FILKIN: I see.
MS FERNANDES: I used Hansard Publications, which
is a company. I think they might have used their own printers
because they had the company. That is something I could maybe
find out quite easily.
MS FILKIN: Thank you. Perhaps you will give me the
date of it as well so I have got that tidied up. That was the
guide, as I understand it, that was dedicated to Mr Vaz. Am I
right in thinking that there were no other Mapesbury publications
which carried Mr Vaz's name? Was that the only one that carried
his name?
MS FERNANDES: So far as I know.
MS FILKIN: There were no other publications that
you can recall that carried his name?
MS FERNANDES: No.
MS FILKIN: Right. This list here does not record
any payments to Wildberry, the printers Wildberry. They were the
printers who, if you recall, printed Mr Vaz's calendars.
MS FERNANDES: Which calendars?
MS FILKIN: Certainly some of the calendars.
MS FERNANDES: There are two types.
MS FILKIN: Yes, I know, but some of them were printed
by Wildberry and they have got that written on them, so they were.
You did not include this in this list. Perhaps you could explain
to me why Wildberry was not included in this list as some body
whom the company made payments to?
MR PATHAN: I do not know. I do not know about Wildberry.
MS FILKIN: You do not know about that?
MR PATHAN: No.
MS FILKIN: You said, Ms Fernandes, "I do not
know who Wildberry are".
MS FERNANDES: I do not know who they are, to be quite
honest.
MS FILKIN: I find that very odd and I wonder if you
would explain that to me because the directors of Wildberry include
your mother and brother-in-law.
MS FERNANDES: My mother?
MS FILKIN: Mother-in-law and brother-in-law.
MS FERNANDES: No, I do not know. I do not know anything
about Wildberry, to be quite honest. It certainly was not my mother.
MS FILKIN: No, your mother-in-law and brother-in-law.
MS FERNANDES: Right.
MS FILKIN: But you have never heard them talk about
it?
MS FERNANDES: No.
MS FILKIN: You have never heard them mention it?
MS FERNANDES: No, never.
MS FILKIN: So can you tell me anything about the
relationship between Mapesbury and Wildberry?
MS FERNANDES: No.
MS FILKIN: Looking at the records that exist on the
printing firm Wildberry, it was set up at the end of 1993. I am
sure you cannot answer this question from what you have just said
but what I was going to ask you was was the firm set up to specifically
receive the business involved in printing the Asian community
calendar?
MS FERNANDES: I cannot answer that.
MS FILKIN: No. And you will not know when it was
set up. It was wound up as a business in 1997. That does not jog
your memory?
MS FERNANDES: No.
MS FILKIN: All right. Is there any way in which we
can find out from your Mapesbury records what Wildberry has been
paid over the years by the company?
MR PATHAN: I do not know. I have never dealt with
Wildberry or anything, so I do not know anything about them.
MS FILKIN: I see. Do you think that there is anywhere
else?
MS FERNANDES: As I said, I do not know anything about
Wildberry.
MS FILKIN: Right. So you have not used it as a company
for printing work other than the ones I have referred to, ie invitations
for events or posters for events or any of the events that we
have talked about, you did not use Wildberry to print those items?
MR PATHAN: I do not know, I do not think so. I could
not say because Mr Mahmoud would deal with that. I do not think
it was because I cannot remember Wildberry. I would remember Wildberry
or something.
MS FILKIN: I am getting to the end, you will be pleased
to hear. This is just me doing checking. You have been the sole
shareholder of Mapesbury Communications throughout its life, that
is correct, is it not?
MS FERNANDES: That is right.
MS FILKIN: Thank you. Mr Pathan, could I understand
properly your connection with the company. You have been an employee
and a director.
MR PATHAN: That is right.
MS FILKIN: Could you tell me over the time period
you were an employee and the time period over which you were a
director?
MR PATHAN: I think I was an employee sometime in
1998. 1998 sometime.
MS FILKIN: Just 1998?
MR PATHAN: No, it could be 1998/99, something like
that. I remember I came and we had a dispute with Mr Mahmoud because
I said to him "I want to be involved too" and then I
went off. Then I came and I became a director.
MS FILKIN: When did you become a director?
MR PATHAN: I cannot remember. I am sure it is easily
available, this information.
MS FILKIN: Thank you. If you can confirm to me those
dates I would be grateful. You resigned early this year. What
prompted you to resign as a director?
MR PATHAN: Well, Mr Mahmoud died. There was no future
now for this company. What Mr Mahmoud promised me was we wanted
to take this. I know it was in Maria's name, or Maria was a director
or something, but Mr Mahmoud said "this is going to be our
company, we are going to take it over" because I was a director
and he was going to become the director or something, I do not
know what you have to do. We wanted to change it into an internet
company. That was what the whole idea was, that was what we were
working to. Then he suddenly died and there was no future, there
was nothing left to follow it.
MS FILKIN: That was what prompted you to resign at
the point you did?
MR PATHAN: Yes, there was no other reason.
MS FILKIN: When did he die?
MR PATHAN: He died in late October, October/November
sometime.
MS FILKIN: 2000?
MR PATHAN: Yes.
MS FILKIN: Could you take me through the staff who
were actually employed by Mapesbury Communications over what period.
You have talked about yourself being employed in those two years,
can you recall other staff who were employed? Was Mr Mahmoud employed?
MR PATHAN: I do not think so. He used to draw expenses,
something like that. I do not think he was employed or anything.
MS FILKIN: Was anybody else employed as a member
of staff?
MR PATHAN: Someone may have been, of course.
MS FILKIN: Pardon?
MR PATHAN: He must have employed someone to do some
work, to do secretarial work or something.
MS FILKIN: Can you recall who those people were?
MR PATHAN: I wrote something down, Laura Coco as
an employee.
MS FILKIN: I see.
MR PATHAN: That is the one I recall.
MS FILKIN: That is the only one you recall?
MR PATHAN: Yes.
MS FILKIN: I see.
MR PATHAN: But, I mean, he may have taken on casual
staff to do things.
MS FILKIN: Nobody else who was long-term?
MR PATHAN: I cannot remember, no.
MS FILKIN: When was Laura Coco an employee?
MR PATHAN: I do not know the precise dates, sorry.
I do not know the precise dates or anything.
MS FILKIN: About?
MR PATHAN: I was there in 1988 - sorry, not 1988,
1998. I think 1998 sometime, yes.
MS FILKIN: Did any of the staff from your law practice
do work for Mapesbury?
MS FERNANDES: No. As I said, my firm was operating
completely independently of Mapesbury.
MS FILKIN: Could you explain to me Mr David Goulding's
relationship to Mapesbury?
MS FERNANDES: I do not know who David Goulding is.
MR PATHAN: No, I do not know who David Goulding is.
MS FILKIN: You have never had contact with a David
Goulding?
MS FERNANDES: Not to my knowledge.
MR PATHAN: No.
MS FILKIN: Have you?
MR PATHAN: I have not personally, no.
MS FILKIN: And the name does not mean anything to
you?
MR PATHAN: I do not know. There may be someone but
I have not had contact with Mr David Goulding. Who is Mr David
Goulding?
MS FILKIN: He was somebody who appeared to be operating
from Mapesbury at one period of time, but I am checking whether
this is true. This is another person with whom my position is
the same. Can I check whether you have ever employed somebody
called Mary Matin?
MS FERNANDES: Are you straying on to ---- I think
we are now talking about other areas, are we?
MS FILKIN: I am in some difficulty, I do not know
whether we are, we may be. What I am trying to ascertain is who
was employing different people for different activities and which
of these ----
MS FERNANDES: How does that relate to Mapesbury?
MS FILKIN: Well, I do not know, that is why I am
asking the question. Did you ever employ anybody called Mary Matin?
MS FERNANDES: No.
MS FILKIN: You have never employed anybody of that
name?
MS FERNANDES: No.
MS FILKIN: Her name has been given variously to me
as Mary Martin or Mary Ahmed. Have you employed anybody, Mary,
with those surnames?
MS FERNANDES: No.
MS FILKIN: No. Does that person's name mean anything
to you in any other capacity?
MS FERNANDES: Yes.
MS FILKIN: Oh, I see.
MS FERNANDES: I know Mary quite well.
MS FILKIN: I see. What capacity do you know her in?
MS FERNANDES: I know her as a friend.
MS FILKIN: I see.
MS FERNANDES: She is a very good friend.
MS FILKIN: But not as an employee in any form?
MS FERNANDES: No, she is not an employee.
MS FILKIN: No. Did you, through Mapesbury Communications
or, indeed, through your practice, because then I will be able
to clear it out of the way, help her with her immigration issues?
MS FERNANDES: No.
MS FILKIN: So you have never done work for her?
MS FERNANDES: No.
MS FILKIN: In any capacity. Thank you. Various people
have mentioned "Mr Vaz's public relations company" and
that is why I have been besetting you, I am sorry to say, with
questions about your company, Mapesbury. It struck me that I had
better ask is there another company, another public relations
company, that Mr Vaz is involved in?
MR FERNANDES: No, not that I know of, but you will
have to ask him.
MS FILKIN: Of course. I just thought "oh, dear,
perhaps I have been focusing on the wrong company", so I
thought it better to ask you that and, of course, I shall ask
him that question. I am pleased to tell you that I am coming to
my very last question, and I am sorry about this. Is there anything
else that now you have heard my, and I do agree, sometimes general
or vague questions to try to pinpoint something, get answers from
you, has alerted you to anything else that you think you could
tell me to make sure that I have got a full picture of the sorts
of things that Mapesbury Communications was doing, any connections
of any kind with Mr Vaz and any connections in whatsoever with
the Hindujas?
MS FERNANDES: No.
MR PATHAN: No.
MS FILKIN: Thank you. I am very grateful to you for
being so patient with me, thank you.
MS FERNANDES: Now a full note has been taken ----
MS FILKIN: And you will get it immediately it comes
out from the House of Commons ----
MS FERNANDES: Will I be able to get a copy of the
questions you have asked?
MS FILKIN: They will all be in there.
MR FERNANDES: The questions will?
MS FILKIN: It will be complete. What I do with that
is ----
MR PATHAN: Is this a tape recorder?
MS FILKIN: It is a House of Commons' shorthand taker.
MR PATHAN: Not a tape?
MS FILKIN: And a tape, yes.
MR PATHAN: We were taped, were we?
MS FILKIN: Yes, so that she gets it absolutely correct.
SHORTHAND WRITER: It is a back up for me.
MS FILKIN: It is a back up for the shorthand writer.
MS FERNANDES: Ah, right. You did not tell me at the
start of the meeting about the tape.
MR PATHAN: We were not told that we were being taped.
MS FILKIN: Sorry?
MS FERNANDES: You did not tell me at the start of
the meeting that you were actually taping. I think in your complaints
procedure you actually say if you are taping people you offer
them an opportunity to decide whether they are going to be taped
or not.
MS FILKIN: That is for MPs, yes.
MR PATHAN: You do not tell us about taping?
MS FILKIN: I am sorry, why I said "here is my
note taker" here and that this was all in front of you was
because I wanted you to know that. That was why I said it, to
avoid doubt.
MR PATHAN: All right.
MS FILKIN: She only takes the tape recording for
her benefit, it is not for any other benefit.
MS FERNANDES: She is taking a shorthand note and
I am sure that it is a very accurate record.
MS FILKIN: It is, they are wonderful, the House of
Commons' shorthand takers, but they always take a tape as well
because they want to be accurate. I hope I can reassure you in
the following way: they are very quick and efficient and they
tend to produce the transcript of this from their notes and if
they are unclear, or if a person's word is unclear from their
tape, within about three days, I do nothing with that other than
send it to you.
MS FERNANDES: What, the note or the tape?
MS FILKIN: The note complete.
MS FERNANDES: What happens to the tape?
MS FILKIN: They destroy the tapes, they use them
again. The tape is for their benefit.
MS FERNANDES: Right. Is that standard procedure?
MS FILKIN: Yes, in the House of Commons.
MS FERNANDES: Is that what you have been following
throughout?
MS FILKIN: It is what I follow whenever I think the
matter is complicated and I have got to ask people a lot of questions,
because what I want to do is make an absolutely accurate record.
MS FERNANDES: I appreciate that.
MS FILKIN: Could I just finish?
MS FERNANDES: It is just that I must say I am a bit
put out that you have taped the whole meeting and you did not
give me that opportunity ----
MR PATHAN: We thought the note when you said ----
MS FERNANDES: ---- to tell me that that was being
taped. I might not have objected. Frankly speaking, I would have
had I known at the start that you were taping me because I understood
this was an informal meeting, but then to get to the end of the
meeting and to discover that I have been taped and it is for some
other purposes, I do not think it is fair to me actually as a
third party.
MS FILKIN: I do apologise. Do let me explain. Why
I introduced the note taker, with her tape beside her and her
microphone in front of you, was so that you knew that I was taking
a full note of this meeting. The tape recording of this meeting
is to assist the note taker only. You will get the full record
of her note. She uses the tape to check that she has got you accurately
on that record. I send that to you with a letter that says "please
would you correct this" and that does mean if you get it
and there is anything in it that you have afterwards found is
wrong that you can correct it.
MS FERNANDES: It is very difficult to correct something
that I have
not ---- This is on tape at the moment and I ----
MR PATHAN: I think when you introduced her you said
"this is the note taker".
MS FILKIN: Absolutely.
MR PATHAN: So we thought "the note taker is
there". I did see a microphone but because you said it was
a note taker we thought "yes, it is a note taker".
MS FERNANDES: There is no need to correct what is
a transcript of a tape. What you are saying basically ----
MS FILKIN: There is for me because all I am interested
in is your considered answers to my questions. I am not interested
in catching you out. I am not interested in using what you have
said which you afterwards think "wait a minute, I wonder
if that was quite right" and you go back to your books or
look them up and find out that it was not. What I am interested
in is having your considered answers to those questions, that
is all. I do not want to give the wrong impression at all. That
is why the note, the full note, is then sent to you for you to
correct, and I do not use the note until it is corrected by you.
MS FERNANDES: Okay.
MS FILKIN: You are welcome, if you wish, to have
the tape. You can have it if that is of any use to you.
MS FERNANDES: We would like a copy.
MS FILKIN: You can have the tape because we do not
keep a copy of it. It is only for the shorthand taker to make
sure it is accurate.
MR PATHAN: I am sorry we are concerned about it,
it is just that when you introduced her you said "the note
taker" and we said "the note taker, that is fine"
because we took out our notebooks and we were making notes.
MS FILKIN: That is my mistake and I do apologise.
I thought that because this machinery was on the table that was
obvious. I do apologise, I should have been fuller about that
from what you have said to me. I hope I have now reassured you
as to the purpose to that and to say to you if you want the tape
we can give it to you. It is only done to make sure that we have
got a correct record of what you say. It is exactly the same process,
it is exactly the same company that do it, as when you gave your
evidence to the Committee. It is exactly the same, it is no different.
It is the House of Commons' shorthand takers who take everything
that goes through the House of Commons, it is no different from
that. What I will do is I will send you a copy and please correct
it in any way you think fit. If there is anything in it that afterwards
you think "well, I would prefer that that was not used",
please suggest that to me and if I do not need to use it to inform
the Committee I will not use it. Indeed, I can always request
the Committee to not use information and they do not use information
publicly if they think that there is no good reason in the public
interest to use it. What I have to warn you is that I cannot ever
say what they will think is in the public interest. I have to
give them a full, as best I can, account when I have made a decision
as to what they need to know. You are welcome to make those suggestions
to me if there is anything of that nature. I have to say that
from your very open answers I have not been struck that there
might be anything like that. You have not done what some people
do, which is to tell me personal matters as an aside and, of course,
I would then take those out because that would not be relevant.
Obviously if anything strikes you like that please do suggest
it because I am not wishing to do anything other than get a full
and accurate picture. You ought to get that transcript by the
middle of next week at the latest. I will send it if that is still
correct, perhaps you can confirm for me, to your * * * address?
MS FERNANDES: Yes, please.
MS FILKIN: That is right. And where shall I send
yours, Mr Pathan?
MR PATHAN: To Savant House, yes, please.
MS FILKIN: That is the Camden address.
MR PATHAN: That is right, yes.
MS FILKIN: Then, if you would not mind, if I could
trouble you to, as quickly as you are able, correct it and send
it back to me.
MR PATHAN: Yes.
MS FILKIN: Write on it and send it back to me.
MR PATHAN: You must understand, I have to get out
and earn some money and do another job and I am sure Maria has
to run her own practice.
MS FILKIN: Absolutely.
MR PATHAN: That is why if there is a delay or something
like that, it is because we have to come back to this and then
get time out and report to you and tell you what is happening.
That is why if there is a delay or if there is something we will
get back to you but we have to get on with our daily lives too.
MS FILKIN: Of course, I fully understand that. You
will know from when we started this discussion and I started by
writing to you and asking you questions that what I was trying
to do was to get the matter settled. I am still trying to get
it settled. I do not want it to drag on, I am sure you do not
want it to drag on and I am perfectly sure Mr Vaz does not want
it to drag on, and I totally share that view. What I would like
to do is to draw a line under all of this and this is why I want
to be very careful that there are no loose ends that anybody can
pick up. That is why I am trying to make sure that we have got
an absolutely full picture and I do not get to that situation
before I report to the Committee. So the sooner you are able to
let me have any other bits of information that you think of, or
corrections, I would be grateful. Okay?
MS FERNANDES: Thank you very much.
| 
