January 29, 2008
As the Tory Party is engulfed in (yet another) scandal over MP Derek Conway, the media have deliberately suppressed the biggest news of the story: that it was a BNP man who laid the original complaint against Conway.
The complaint against Conway was brought by Michael Barnbrook, a retired policeman who stood against him as a candidate for the UK Independence Party, and is now a member of the British National Party.
He told the BBC: “I don’t get any personal joy from it. He’s my local MP - he’s there to work on my behalf. It’s my money he’s working with and he should be using it properly.”
The BBC only made a fleeting reference to the BNP angle in one story (here), and the rest of the media has deliberately suppressed it, instead going to other parties for quotes. We are, of course, not surprised.
Conway has “unreservedly apologised” to MPs after the Commons standards watchdog said he paid his son too much from parliamentary allowances. Conway paid his son Freddie to work part time for him as a researcher — while the lad was studying at Newcastle University.
Standards and Privileges Committee MPs said there was “no record” of what work he had done and said the £1,000-plus a month he was paid was too high. The Old Bexley and Sidcup MP has been suspended from the Commons, and now faces a new inquiry that he also employed his other son, Henry, the same way.
MPs are given allowances to run their office and pay their staff and there are no rules to stop wives, husbands, sons, daughters and other family members working for them.
But in its critical report, the committee ordered Conway to repay “the overpaid bonus sums” of about £13,000 and pension contributions received by his son.
The committee said Freddie Conway, who they refer to as FC, seemed to “have been all but invisible during the period of his employment”.
The committee found that FC was paid at a full-time equivalent rate of £25,970 per year throughout his employment. However, “no records appear to exist of either actual work that FC did for his father, or of the work he was required to undertake”, the report said.
For the majority of that time he was based at Newcastle University where he was engaged in a full time degree course. “He had little or no contact with his father’s office, either in the House or in the constituency,” the report said.
“No record of the work he is supposed to have carried out, or the hours kept. The only evidence available to us of work carried out was that provided by FC and his family.”
The report added that this arrangement was “at the least an improper use of parliamentary allowances” and “at worst, a serious diversion of public funds”.
The committee said there was “conclusive evidence” that Conway authorised bonus payments to his son “that went way beyond the permitted ceiling throughout the period of FC’s employment”.
The complaint against Conway was brought by Michael Barnbrook, a retired policeman who stood against him as a candidate for the UK Independence Party, and is now a member of the British National Party.
He told the BBC: “I don’t get any personal joy from it. He’s my local MP - he’s there to work on my behalf. It’s my money he’s working with and he should be using it properly.”
The BBC only made a fleeting reference to the BNP angle in one story (here), and the rest of the media has deliberately suppressed it, instead going to other parties for quotes. We are, of course, not surprised.
Conway has “unreservedly apologised” to MPs after the Commons standards watchdog said he paid his son too much from parliamentary allowances. Conway paid his son Freddie to work part time for him as a researcher — while the lad was studying at Newcastle University.
Standards and Privileges Committee MPs said there was “no record” of what work he had done and said the £1,000-plus a month he was paid was too high. The Old Bexley and Sidcup MP has been suspended from the Commons, and now faces a new inquiry that he also employed his other son, Henry, the same way.
MPs are given allowances to run their office and pay their staff and there are no rules to stop wives, husbands, sons, daughters and other family members working for them.
But in its critical report, the committee ordered Conway to repay “the overpaid bonus sums” of about £13,000 and pension contributions received by his son.
The committee said Freddie Conway, who they refer to as FC, seemed to “have been all but invisible during the period of his employment”.
The committee found that FC was paid at a full-time equivalent rate of £25,970 per year throughout his employment. However, “no records appear to exist of either actual work that FC did for his father, or of the work he was required to undertake”, the report said.
For the majority of that time he was based at Newcastle University where he was engaged in a full time degree course. “He had little or no contact with his father’s office, either in the House or in the constituency,” the report said.
“No record of the work he is supposed to have carried out, or the hours kept. The only evidence available to us of work carried out was that provided by FC and his family.”
The report added that this arrangement was “at the least an improper use of parliamentary allowances” and “at worst, a serious diversion of public funds”.
The committee said there was “conclusive evidence” that Conway authorised bonus payments to his son “that went way beyond the permitted ceiling throughout the period of FC’s employment”.
No comments:
Post a Comment