Downing Street Says » Shahid Malik

Asked whether the Prime Minister was aware that Shahid Malik had a second office and was he satisfied with Mr Malik s explanation, the Prime Minister s Spokesman (PMS) said that issues in relation to Shahid Malik and the Ministerial Code had been looked at by Sir Philip Mawer. Other issues relating to Mr Malik s expenses as a Member of Parliament were a matter for Mr Malik.

Asked why the Prime Minister did not agree with Sir Christopher Kelly that Sir Philip s report should be published, the PMS told the assembled press that the report was confidential and contained personal information. The PMS said that the Government would, of course, be happy to publish a summary version of the report which we would do later today.

Asked when the decision was taken to publish a summary document, the PMS said that he would not be getting into a discussion about internal Government matters, other than to say that the Government was happy to publish a summary version of the report.

Asked whether the summary report would detail the rent that Mr Malik was paying, the PMS said that the report would be published in summary version and as he had said yesterday, Sir Philip Mawer found that an independent valuation of the properties had confirmed that the rent said to be charged was reasonable in the light of market and other commercial considerations. There was personal and confidential information relating to Shahid Malik in the report that would be inappropriate to publish.

Asked whether this would be a Government summary or a summary produced by Sir Philip Mawer, the PMS said that it would be produced by Sir Philip Mawer.

Asked to confirm that the process by which civil servants assisted Ministers with their Commons expenses had been extended to include Mr Malik, the PMS pointed out that that process related to consistency with the Ministerial Code. The issues in relation to whether or not Mr Malik had complied with the Code had been looked at by Sir Philip Mawer.

Asked whether Sir Philip Mawer was aware of Mr Malik s second office, and if he wasn t, was he going to reopen his investigation, the PMS said that if there were specific accusations people wanted to make regarding Mr Malik and the Ministerial Code they could make them. The issues that were raised previously had been looked at by Sir Philip Mawer.

Asked repeatedly about Mr Malik s office, the PMS said these were questions about an MP s expenses. Mr Malik, like many many other MPs, was facing questions about his expenses and was providing explanations.

Asked whether the PM thought it appropriate for an MP or Minister to have in effect four offices, the PMS said that there would be a process for all MPs where all of their expense claims would have to be re-examined by an independent panel. That applied to the Prime Minister, to Shahid Malik, and to every other MP.

3 Comments »

The treatment of Dr. Gibson when compared to that of Mr. Shahid Malik this week, just gives the increasing public impression of your governance by cronyism.

Curtains for Dr. Gibson (a very good constituency representative, & consequently not labour lobby-fodder) v. The Communities Ministry for Mr. Malik (unrecorded cash deals, no proper legal documents, taxpayer paying for his constituency office & his“office2” home office, in more cash deals & his maximum claims for an expensive London flat, plus all the additional luxurious purchases claimed for.)

Dr. Gibson seems to have been sacked for NOT making a profit on the sale of his London flat.

This inequality of treatment of one of Gordon Brown’s allies as opposed to one of his critics, does not inspire public confidence. From the Public point of view, this looks like a very different degree of deliberate expenses obfuscation.

i.e. Serious “cash in hand” fraud and the deliberate disguising of the address of second office claimed for, against selling your own flat to your own child, without making a profit.

It seems inexplicable that one offence merits re-employment as a minister and the other offence merits expulsion from the labour party candidacy lists. This dichotomy is exactly why the general public are becoming increasingly alienated from its politicians and the committees and quangos that are supposed to keep them in check.
Comment by Cindy Stock — 11 Jun 2009 on 3:29 pm | Link
gordon brown must resign,and take his crooked gang with him. shame upon them all,regardless of race or religion. a thief and a liar is a universally reviled person by all but other theifs and liars.
Comment by as below — 12 Jun 2009 on 7:09 am | Link
Of course the PM wouldn’t agree, why should he with all the power he has bought.
Comment by christopher — 27 Jun 2009 on 5:25 pm | Link

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.

» Wednesday, June 10, 2009

Shahid Malik

3 Comments »

Post a public comment

Search

Supported by

Recent Briefings

Archives

Links

Syndicate (RSS/XML)

Credits

Enquiries