59. Letter to Ms Nadine Dorries MP
from the Commissioner, 1 July 2010
I have now heard back from the final witness, [neighbour
1], from whom I had asked for further evidence in the light of
your response to his initial evidence to me.
I sent you on 23 February this witness's letter of
22 January, my letter to him of 2 February and his response of
18 February. You commented on his letter in your letter to me
of 1 March and again in your letter of 15 March. I said in my
letter to you of 25 March that, in the light of your comments,
I would shortly be writing to him to put to him the suggestion
in your letter of 15 March that he was stretching the facts with
the encouragement from [ a reporter]. I wrote to this witness
on 18 May, once I had recommenced my inquiries following the start
of the new Parliament. I attach a copy of that letter. The witness
responded to my letter on 9 June. I attach a copy of that letter,
together with its attachments. I decided I needed to ask him about
one further point to deal with one of the suggestions you had
made about his evidence, and I wrote to him about that on 15 June.
I attach a copy of that letter. The witness responded with his
letter of 24 June, which I received on 1 July. I enclose a copy
of that letter.
As you can see, the witness takes issue with a number
of points you have made about him and his evidence. He suggests
that he saw and heard you on numerous occasions over a two year
period; that the properties are contiguous; he has only ever owned
one property in France which he purchased at the end of 2008;
he spent just one week in Portugal in 2009; and finally, that
none of his comments have been influenced by a reporter from the
Daily Telegraph
or by any other persons.
I would welcome any comments you may wish to make
on this witness's response. Subject to your response, I will then
need to decide, in fairness, whether I need to show those comments
to the witness. Otherwise, I believe I have taken all the evidence
I need from witnesses. The remaining matters are set out in my
letter to you of 28 June and its attachments. Once I receive your
response to these two letters, and again subject to what you say,
I would hope that that would conclude my inquiry and I can then
complete the drafting of the factual sections of my memorandum
for the Committee. I would show you these sections so that you
can comment on their factual accuracy.
1 July 2010
|
