» Tuesday, November 3, 2009Kelly Report
Asked whether the Prime Minister had seen the Kelly Report, the PMS said that the Prime Minister had not seen the Kelly Report. Asked if the Prime Minister would see the report tonight, the PMS said that it was unlikely that the Prime Minister would see it tonight. It was the Prime Minister who had asked for the report, so it would be understandable that the report would be delivered to him in advance. Put that Sir Christopher Kelly had written to Sir Gus O’Donnell suggesting that he wrote a report, the PMS said it was Sir Gus O’Donnell as Secretary of the Cabinet who would have passed it on to the Prime Minister. Asked if the appointment of the Chairman of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) would be made tomorrow, the PMS said that it was his understanding that the appointment was very close to being made. Asked if the Prime Minister wanted the report to be fully implemented or only partly implemented, the PMS said that the Prime Minister had not seen the report. The Prime Minister had said that he was minded to push on quickly with asking IPSA to implement the report. Until the report was in the public domain it would be inappropriate to make any further comment. Briefing took place at 15:45 | Search for related news 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. |
The unofficial site which lets you comment on the UK Prime Minister's official briefings. About us...
Search
Supported byRecent Briefings
Archives
LinksSyndicate (RSS/XML)CreditsEnquiriesContact Sam Smith. |
I believe the general cosensus is a full implementation. No-one has had the “beans” to stand up and oppose it as yet. Especially with an election zooming. No party wants to be the ones accused of trying to keep hold of the public money.
Unfortunately this means full implementation. I say unfortunately because there was never any rules broken.
Comment by Malcolm Clarke — 4 Nov 2009 on 11:11 pm | Link