Downing Street Says » Tessa Jowell

Asked why Tessa Jowell had not used a blind trust instead of a hedge fund to avoid a conflict of interest, the Prime Ministers’ Official Spokesman (PMOS) said that he would not get drawn into a speculative discussion about this issue. It had been done the way it had and Tessa Jowell had explained the circumstances in her statement. Asked whether the Prime Minister was happy that Tessa Jowell had not declared the Centurion investment, the PMOS said that Tessa Jowell had set out her explanation in her statement. Sir Gus O’Donnell had established the facts and the Prime Minister had set out his view in his statement. Asked whether we accepted that she had an interest in other investments, the PMOS said no. What he had said was that Tessa Jowell had set out the position in her statement and he had nothing further to add.

Put that it stated in the ministerial code that if a minister mislead the commons in any way that they should, at the earliest opportunity, set the record straight and did Tessa Jowell have plans to set the record and the members’register straight about her investment, the PMOS said that the person an MP talked to about their interests was the standards commissioner and Tessa Jowell, like any MP, had and would continue to speak with him as and when necessary. Put then that she accepted there had been a mistake in the 2000 members’register, the PMOS said that was not what he had said. Tessa Jowell, like all MPs, continued to talk with the standards commissioner, who was the person responsible for such matters.

Asked when that discussion started, the PMOS said that all ministers and most MPs made sure that they were in compliance with the standards commissioner’s criteria so such discussions should not come as a surprise. Asked whether the £350,000 might constitute a material interest for Tessa Jowell, the PMOS said that the reasoning on that had been set out in her statement and in Sir Gus O’Donnell’s letter. Asked if she had spoken to the standards commissioner about the £350,000, the PMOS said that any conversations with the standards commissioner were private, as was the case for all MPs. MPs consulted the standards commissioner on a regular basis as and when they needed. This was a normal part of parliamentary life.

Asked if they could expect Tessa Jowell to update her register, the PMOS said that she would do whatever was necessary. She would continue to discuss such matters and take the guidance of the standards commissioner. The handling of this area was between any MP, minister or not, and the standards commissioner. It was important to keep separate the ministerial code and the register of members’ interests. In terms of the ministerial code Sir Gus O’Donnell had established the facts, Tessa Jowell had stated her position and the Prime Minister had responded.

Asked whether he was saying the MPs set of standards might need updating, the PMOS said that was not what he had said. Asked then if it was still correct that Tessa Jowell had nil registered for her interests, the PMOS said all he was stating was the process and the process for Tessa Jowell was exactly the same as it was for any other MP, which was that you established a position and if you had any questions you talked to the standards commissioner. Tessa Jowell continued to follow that procedure like any other MP. Asked to clarify what had to be declared on the register, the PMOS said that was the job of the standards commissioner and he was not that person.

Put to the PMOS that some newspapers had suggested that Sir Gus O’Donnell had not actually cleared Tessa Jowell but had merely set out the facts, the PMOS said that he had tried prior to yesterday to set out what Sir Gus O’Donnell’s role had been. The words he had used, and why he had avoided words like inquiry, had been precisely because Sir Gus O’Donnell’s role had been to establish the facts. The person who made the decision in the end, based on that advice, was the Prime Minister. This was the distinction between the two roles and he had tried to be clear about that throughout the week. It was a complex matter but it was important to be clear about the distinction between the role of the cabinet secretary and the Prime Minister.

Asked if the Prime Minister was having any second thoughts about whether he was the right person to make these decisions, the PMOS gently suggested that even if you had a different system, such as the set up in London where independent non-elected figures made the decisions, they were not without controversy. The reason why the Prime Minister had rejected the recommendation of Sir Alistair Graham had been because the Prime Minister’s strong view was that it was part of his responsibility directly to the electorate, who elected the government, to take the decisions about the future of ministers. Ministers were accountable, through him and through parliament directly to the electorate. Therefore it was best that someone who was accountable to the electorate took those decisions. Asked what the Prime Minister’s thinking had been behind his decision that there had been no conflict of interest, the PMOS explained that the important thing was that Tessa Jowell had said that she had not been aware of the gift. She had also stated that had she been aware she would have declared it to her permanent secretary. He had nothing further to add.

Put to the PMOS that Tessa Jowell’s explanation invited some newspaper commentators to suggest that it was surprisingly innocent of her and was there was a view on that and how this impacted on her role as a cabinet minister, specifically on how she coped with those in the gambling and licensing industry, the PMOS referred journalists to what Tessa Jowell had set out in her statement. In terms of her job as secretary of state people could look back at her record including winning the 2012 bid and taking through controversial pieces of legislation such as the licensing bill where the media expectation was at odds with what she had said would be the results and what had turned out, so far, to be the result. Tessa Jowell, as the Prime Minster had said yesterday, was an excellent minister.

No Comments »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required)
(You must give an email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)
Website
(You may give your website, and it will be displayed to the public.)

Comments:

This is not a way of contacting the Prime Minister. If you would like to contact the Prime Minister, go to the 10 Downing Street official site.

Privacy note: Shortly after posting, your name and comment will be displayed on the site. This means that people searching for your name on the Internet will be able to find and read your comment.

Original PMOS briefings are © Crown Copyright. Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland. Click-use licence number C02W0004089. Material is reproduced from the original 10 Downing Street source, but may not be the most up-to-date version of the briefings, which might be revised at the original source. Users should check with the original source in case of revisions. Comments are © Copyright contributors. Everything else is © Copyright Downing Street Says.

» Friday, March 3, 2006

Tessa Jowell

No Comments »

Post a public comment

Search

Supported by

Recent Briefings

Archives

Links

Syndicate (RSS/XML)

Credits

Enquiries