Examination of Witnesses (Questions 300-319)
Lord Snape
10 MARCH 2009
Q300 Baroness Manningham-Buller:
I am back on the top of page 18 before the bit that Lord Irvine
was talking about on civil servants.
Lord Snape: Yes.
Q301 Baroness Manningham-Buller:
The Sunday Times journalist says, "In this case it
is basically just to get this amendment" and you say, "Right,
right. Man: Favourably for our client. PS: Yes, sure. I couldn't
give any guarantees for obvious reasons." The next bit is,
"I'll find out and I'll sort of talk to [people] ..."
and so on. So you knew that they were being very clear to you
exactly what they wanted for the money and the time that was being
discussed on the previous page.
Lord Snape: They came back to this particular
point at that stage after we had been discussing various other
things. I did say I could not give any guarantees for obvious
reasons because I outlined to them that even the blanket amendments
were subject to approval elsewhere. Again, my second sentence,
"It appears to me an eminently sensible thing". I cannot
repeat too often, my Lord Chairman, to you and your Committee
that I thought so then and I think so now.
Chairman: Shall we carry on with page 19?
Q302 Lord Irvine of Lairg: Let us
go to page 19 and there you raise the possibility of approaching
John Healey's PPS who would, you said, be a reasonably junior
MP. You pick that up about a third of the way down.
Lord Snape: Yes.
Q303 Lord Irvine of Lairg: So, again—
Lord Snape: I am sorry, which page are
we on again?
Q304 Lord Irvine of Lairg: Do ask
me to point you to the relevant page if I have not done so.
Lord Snape: You probably did.
Q305 Lord Irvine of Lairg: It is
page 19.
Lord Snape: Thank you.
Q306 Lord Irvine of Lairg: Just a
third of the way down, "I don't again off the top of my head
know who John Healey's parliamentary private secretary is, but
he or she would be a reasonably junior Minister".
Lord Snape: "Junior MP".
Q307 Lord Irvine of Lairg: MP, yes,
forgive me. Then you explain, "That's normally the way to
the civil servants and I'll say, look, you know, this is what
I want to do. It's for a client I'm working for."
Lord Snape: The client being MJA Consultancy.
Q308 Lord Irvine of Lairg: Yes.
Lord Snape: If I got the go-ahead I would
have declared an interest to the civil servant. I would not have
said, "Look, I've had this bright idea, it's all mine",
I would have said to that civil servant that I have a consultancy
with a company which has a client who is interested in this and
I think it would benefit business generally.
Lord Irvine of Lairg: My Lord Chairman, with
your permission, I am going to leap a few pages.
Chairman: Does anybody else want to raise anything
on any other pages?
Q309 Lord Irvine of Lairg: I am going
to leap a few pages and go to page 26. There was a discussion
of them, that is to say the lobbying company, giving you a draft
of some proposed amendments.
Lord Snape: Yes.
Q310 Lord Irvine of Lairg: Down at
the foot of the page, "..I just assumed I would get a parliamentary
draftsman to do, to actually draw up, because I mean it is quite
a specific task isn't it? The whole thing. PS: It is, yeah, yeah.
Man: And then we could give you the draft and then you could give
it to—" and you say "Whoever".
Lord Snape: Yes.
Q311 Lord Irvine of Lairg: Then at
page 27 you say you would circulate it to the appropriate people,
"So, if you, you know, if you do that, and let me have a
copy of it, then obviously I'll circulate it to those people I
think might be sympathetic, people on the committee initially,
but I'll talk first to the Minister's PPS, I'll find out who it
is ..." and you say, "if it's the wrong generation sort
of thing". Pausing there, what you are saying you are happy
to do is to circulate the amendment to the appropriate people.
Lord Snape: That would be one of the
alternatives that I would look at.
Q312 Lord Irvine of Lairg: There
might be other ways but this was one of the things that you were
willing to do.
Lord Snape: Yes.
Q313 Lord Irvine of Lairg: Then we
come to the part we jumped ahead to some time ago, in the middle
of the page, "I mean what I want from you as far as we're
concerned is if you would summarise this conversation and our
agreement in a letter to me, formally requesting me to act as
a consultant on the lines financially that we have just agreed."
Would you agree, Lord Snape, that bears all the marks of a conversation
where you have concluded an agreement?
Lord Snape: Certainly the word "agreement"
was not a wise one to have used in those circumstances, but there
is nowhere in that transcript that you could base an agreement
on in the way I have obviously misused the word. The fact is I
wanted something in writing. I was rather anxious to get away
by this time because they had been there quite a long time, so
my language was perhaps a lot less specific than it should have
been. The fact was I just wanted them to set out in writing their
proposals for me to act as a consultant so I could bid them goodbye
and get on with my next business.
Q314 Lord Irvine of Lairg: If we
go forward to your letter to the Registrar of 11 February, and
we come to the summary on page 5 under the heading "summary"—
Lord Snape: Yes, it is on page 4.
Q315 Lord Irvine of Lairg: "In
summary, I am very conscious of the rules of the House, and have
always abided by them. The meeting with MJA discussed tentative
proposals for a consultancy, which proposals were never in fact
received"[10].
If these were tentative proposals, why did you say that you felt
you had arrived at an agreement?
Lord Snape: I thought we had agreed specifically
on the fees that I charge, which were my normal consultancy fees
to any of my clients. That was all I meant. I did not mean anything
particularly specific as far as my duties on behalf of the company
were concerned.
Q316 Lord Irvine of Lairg: So you
are saying you thought it was purely an agreement as to money
and not an agreement as to the things you would do?
Lord Snape: I thought they had agreed
with my scale of charges and I wanted them to set out in writing
for me to formally sign, if I chose to do so, exactly what they
wanted me to do.[11]
Q317 Lord Irvine of Lairg: In fairness
to you, you did say at page 27, "I mean what I want from
you as far as we're concerned is if you would summarise this conversation
and our agreement in a letter to me, formally requesting me to
act as a consultant on the lines financially that we have just
agreed."
Lord Snape: Which were my standard and
normal fees. Can I just draw your attention, my Lord Chairman,
and the Committee's, to page 26 of this. You said, my Lord Chairman,
it is me that is on trial and not the Sunday Times, and
I acknowledge that particular fact, but six paragraphs down: "Man:
So, have you amended any legislation before on behalf of clients
or? PS: I think we are back to the bus business there. I don't
think I've got any specific amendments I could think of. I mean,
I've certainly amended legislation as an Opposition spokesman",
which was a job I did for 12 years, I think, "but not on
behalf of clients ..." Again, bearing in mind your strictures,
my Lord Chairman, about the Sunday Times not being on trial,
I should point out that in their version of the transcript "but
not on behalf of clients" is described as "inaudible"[12].
It was not inaudible to the Hansard writers. If I may say to the
Committee, I think it is significant that is not the only example
I could draw the Committee's attention to, that the Sunday
Times decided on this story and wanted to include as many
Members of the upper House as possible and were quite prepared
to leave out and slant some of the things I said in order to do
that. Forgive me, my Lord Chairman, but the Sunday Times'
version leaves out that very important line "not on behalf
of clients".
Q318 Chairman: Could I just go back
to page 26. When the journalist asked you, "So, have you
amended any legislation before on behalf of clients, or?"
why did you not suggest that this might be an improper thing to
do?
Lord Snape: Again, it was the tail end
of a long—I denied—accurately—amending legislation
on behalf of clients. I said earlier that I could not amend legislation
on behalf of his client. I thought I had made it quite plain.
I did not particularly want to be rude to the people concerned
but I had made my position quite plain. Saying "not on behalf
of clients" is fairly specific having said I would not do
it for them right from the start and I pointed out I never had,
although it might have been better if I added the words "and
I never will". I think it is apparent from my own conduct
that I never have and I never will.
Q319 Chairman: Can I ask for clarification
of one thing on page 28. You make reference to the fact that most
people like the ambience of visiting which indicates you have
some sort of connection in Parliament. You seem to be making clear
to them that they could use your access to Parliament to impress
their client. Was that what you meant?
Lord Snape: I think for a fairly new
company just starting up, bringing clients to the House of Lords
would be fairly useful from their point of view. If you said that
was an improper thing to do then the Refreshment Department in
the House of Lords would take a bit of a battering most weeks.
10 Comment by the witness: the next sentence from
the Summary section of the letter dated 11 February 2009 states
"Had they been, I would have considered their communication
and would have taken no steps to advance the matter without seeking
the advice of the Registrar of Members' Interests". Back
11
Comment by the witness: see footnote 6. Back
12
Comment by the witness: or that they had considered not to be
relevant-further to a letter from the Clerks which said: "The
Sunday Times have told the Sub-Committee that the transcript
is not complete because they have not included some material that
was inaudible or that they considered to be not relevant". Back
| 
