Tiny turns on adviser: Rowland blames PR man for bad publicity about expenses

David Hellier
Saturday 03 September 1994 23:02 BST
Comments

LONRHO'S Tiny Rowland has made an unprecedented and astonishing attack this weekend on his company's own public relations adviser, Anthony Cardew.

In an interview with the Independent on Sunday, he blamed Mr Cardew for being responsible for some of the damaging publicity about his expenses that at one point last week threatened to force the 76-year-old tycoon off the Lonrho board.

Thursday's board meeting at the international trading company's headquarters in the City was preceded by press reports that Mr Rowland's position as joint chief executive of Lonrho would be under threat, following allegations that he cost the company more than pounds 5.5m a year in salary, expenses and other charges under his control. But Mr Rowland survived the meeting unscathed.

This weekend, a typically combative Mr Rowland expressed surprise at the amount of press speculation that preceded the board meeting.

'I cannot understand why there has been so much publicity this week. It seems to have all come from Cardew,' he said. 'It's Cardew who appears to be running the company.' This was seen as a veiled attack on Dieter Bock, Lonrho's other joint chief executive, who has been trying to normalise Lonrho and wrest power from Mr Rowland during the past year.

Mr Cardew, one of the City's best-known public relations men, whose past and present clients include British Aerospace, Eurotunnel, Brent Walker and Ferranti, worked for Mr Bock before Mr Bock joined Lonrho.

'If Cardew ever does anything like this again, I shall go for him,' Mr Rowland added. 'He's supposed to be our public relations officer. He gets paid by us.'

It is virtually unknown for a senior executive of a substantial public company to launch a public attack on a recognised adviser.

Mr Rowland's outburst is characteristic of his turbulent career - and symptomatic of the feud between himself and Mr Bock, with whom Mr Cardew is closely identified.

According to Mr Rowland, Lonrho pays Mr Cardew, who runs his own firm, pounds 15,000 a year. 'Bock spends 10 hours a month with him,' says Mr Rowland.

Mr Cardew says that the allegation that he is behind the recent publicity is without foundation.

Mr Rowland vigorously contested the suggestion that he was costing Lonrho too much money. 'I am underpaid,' he said.

Mr Rowland has defended his need for expenses such as the use of Lonrho's private jets and insisted that such expenses have only been used for business purposes.

Lonrho has extensive activities in Africa, and Mr Rowland has close personal relations with many prominent figures in the country.

It has been reported that the company was charged pounds 110,000 for Mr Rowland's domestic staff in 1993; that just under pounds 200,000 was spent from a 'hotels' account on poliicians and business contacts; that about pounds 200,000 is spent annually on the education of the dependants of African politicians and business contacts. Mr Rowland's basic salary exceeds pounds 1.2m.

Mr Bock appears to have tried to use the row over Mr Rowland's expenses to remove him from the Lonrho board, or at least neutralise his influence. But the underlying cause seems to be that a film financed by Lonrho into the Lockerbie aircraft bombing has recently been sold to an Egyptian company said to be connected to the Libyan Arab Finance Company.

Mr Rowland said: 'I started the film. We (the Lonrho board) then decided that we should not proceed with it. An Egyptian company then repaid Lonrho.'

He denied that this company had ties with Libya.

The film, which is near completion, is believed to dismiss Libyan involvement in the Lockerbie bombing.

Mr Rowland said that he had discussed the film with several key people in the UK and in the US.

'I have been to Washington, and I have discussed Libya in great detail with the head of the CIA,' he explained.

Asked if Mr Bock was upset about the film, Mr Rowland replied: 'How can Bock be upset if Clinton and my friends in the US know all about it? The Libyans are not responsible for Lockerbie. If the film is made, it will totally clear Libya.'

(Photograph omitted)

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in