44. Letter to Rt Hon Andrew Mackay
from the Commissioner, 12 August 2010
When I wrote to you on 3 August, I said that I was
writing to the former Head of the Fees Office to meet your request
that that witness should see the final paragraph of your e-mail
to me of 13 July. As you will know from that letter, I sent that
witness paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Director's letter of 17 March.
I have now received a response of 8 August from the
former Head of the Fees Office. I attach a copy. As you will see,
he has taken the opportunity to provide more information about
matters which he believes would have influenced any advice which
he gave you; he has commented on the evidence from the Director
of Strategic Projects; and he has offered some further comments
reflecting his views on the designations both by you and Ms Kirkbride.
As you will see, he has concluded that: "There
is, therefore, no reason for me to change my evidence, for Mr
Mackay is wrong in his recollection of my advice given in September
1997."
In view of this witness's comments on the evidence
which you asked me to show him from the Director of Strategic
Projects, I have written to the Director to show him this witness's
comments and to invite any response he may wish to make. I have
also written to the witness to let him know that, while I have
noted his own views on the designations made by you and Ms Kirkbride,
he has not seen the evidence which you have provided in relation
to your designations. These were not matters which I had put to
him.
There is clearly a difference in the recollections
which you and the then Head of the Fees Office have of your discussion
in or about September 1997. I will need to reflect this in the
memorandum which I am preparing for the Committee on Standards
and Privileges and in preparing my conclusions on this matter.
You are, of course, welcome to let me have any further
factual points you may wish to make on the witness's response,
although I suspect that we are now at the point where the evidence
from you and the other witness has been fully explored. I will,
however, let you have a copy of the Department's response when
I receive it. And I look forward to receiving your response to
the one remaining point I put to you in my letter of 3 August.
12 August 2010
| 
