0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
The prime minister has been asked to clarify comments that a senior Labour MP may be "appropriately rewarded" for his support on the 42-days vote. David Cameron said the leaked letter from Labour chief whip Geoff Hoon to Keith Vaz showed Gordon Brown's "inability to be straight with people". Mr Cameron raised the letter after the PM said "no deals were done" to win the controversial anti-terror laws vote. Mr Brown said it was simply a thank you for doing "exactly the right thing".
Keith Vaz
Righteous corruption is my middle nameIn February 2000 the Parliamentary standards watchdog Elizabeth Filkin was requested to investigate allegations of undisclosed payments to Vaz from businessmen in his constituency.[1] The following year, 2001, members of the opposition began to question what role Vaz may have played in helping the billionaire Indian Hinduja brothers - linked with a corruption probe in India - to secure UK passports.In March 2001, the Filkin report cleared Vaz of nine of the 28 allegations of various financial wrongdoings, but Elizabeth Filkin accused Mr Vaz of blocking her investigation into eighteen of the allegations. He was also censured for one allegation - that he failed to register two payments worth £4,500 in total from Sarosh Zaiwalla, a solicitor whom he recommended for a peerage several years later.Mrs Filkin announced in the same month a new inquiry which would focus on whether or not a company connected to Vaz received a donation from a charitable foundation run by the Hinduja brothers. The results of the inquiry were published in 2002 and it was concluded that Vaz had "committed serious breaches of the Code of Conduct and a contempt of the House" and it was recommended that he be suspended from the House of Commons for one month.[2].Keith Vaz was also a director of the company General Mediterranean Holdings' owned by the Anglo-Iraqi billionaire Nadhmi Auchi, who had in the past hired British politicians Lords Steel and Lamont as directors. Vaz resigned his post as director when he became Minister for Europe, but it was later discovered that he had remained in contact with Auchi and had made enquiries on his behalf over a French extradition warrant, Auchi even calling Vaz at home to ask the minister for advice.[3]Since 2003 he has been a Member of the Constitutional Affairs Select Committee.[edit] 42 Day Rule VoteKeith Vaz was again brought to public attention when the Daily Telegraph printed a hand written letter[4] suggested that Vaz had, or was due to receive, some sort of reward for voting for the Government under the 42 Day Rule Vote. In a letter to Mr Vaz, written on the 12th June, a day after the key vote. Geoff Hoon wrote.“Dear Keith…Just a quick note to thank you for all your help during the period leading up to last Wednesday’s vote. I wanted you to know how much I appreciated all your help. I trust that it will be appropriately rewarded! ...With thanks and best wishes, Geoff.”Vaz was originally against the idea of holding suspects for 42 days without charge but days before the key vote, changed his mind.Gordon Brown still refutes that any deal was ever made for any MP's vote. The Prime Minister has been accused of offering rebel backbenchers a series of deals in exchange of their votes
Gordon Brown has denied offering backbenchers incentives to vote through controversial counter-terrorism laws, during questioning by senior MPs. The prime minister is facing the chairs of 30 Commons committees, among them Home Affairs chairman Keith Vaz. Mr Vaz, whose decision to back the proposals prompted rumours he had been offered a knighthood, asked Mr Brown to confirm he had made no such offers. "Not at all," replied Mr Brown, who is also being questioned on the economy. Mr Vaz was in the news on Wednesday, after a letter to him from Labour chief whip Geoff Hoon, suggesting he may be "appropriately rewarded" for his help, was leaked to the Daily Telegraph. 'Totally misplaced' At the start of the session Tory MP Patrick Cormack suggested the reward might be the opportunity to question Mr Brown. But in his question to the prime minister about counter-terrorism laws he asked him: "You only got your legislation through by nine votes. Is it the case that you authorised or offered any backbench Member of Parliament a peerage or a knighthood or honour, or even the Governorship of Bermuda in order to vote for your legislation?" Mr Brown replied: "Not at all, nor do I recall writing any letters to anyone." Asked if he made any offers to the Democratic Unionists whose nine votes proved to be decisive in the vote, Mr Brown replied: "I think that the criticism of the DUP has been totally misplaced. "If there was any party in the House of Commons that knows what terrorism can do and what is its impact on our society, it is the Ulster Unionists." 'A great disservice' Conservative chairman of the public accounts committee, Edward Leigh, also pushed Mr Brown for a "yes or no" answer on whether there were "absolutely no discussions" with the DUP about anything other than the merits of the 42-day proposal. Mr Brown replied "yes" and added: "We were discussing the issue on its merits and I think you do a great disservice to members of Parliament if you suggest otherwise." Mr Vaz also asked whether there was a danger of breaching the "constitutional settlement" by having Parliament vote on extending pre-charge detention for terrorism suspects. Mr Brown said he did not accept that, as the home secretary would come to Parliament with the support of police and prosecutors. Globalisation benefits He also said he thought Muslims would support the laws as they wanted protection from terrorism as much as anyone. He has also been asked about each individual's rights and responsibilities, the powers of the attorney general and rebalancing power between Parliament and the executive. Sir Patrick Cormack, chairman of the Northern Ireland Affairs committee, suggested some of the constitutional changes had been "window dressing" - Mr Brown said there had been significant changes, such as giving MPs' a vote on going to war. He was also questioned on "managing the economic slowdown" a day after predictions of lower standards of living in the UK for at least a year. Quizzed by Labour's European scrutiny committee chairman Michael Connarty, Mr Brown said people saw the disadvantages of globalisation - like job losses to emerging economies like China - without appreciating the benefits - like cheaper consumer goods. He said western economies were capable of adapting and producing high value goods and services. Asked whether he was still enjoying being prime minister Mr Brown said: it was "the best job in the world" and "plenty of other people" wanted it.
