Cash for honours: donors say Blair 'misled' police
Sunday 17 December 2006
Latest in UK Politics
On Facebook
From the blogs
More than half of Afghanistan’s families live in extreme poverty
Leila is watching her baby intently, as his mouth moves trying to swallow the small blob of yellow p...
Time for a new approach to alcohol
Ambulances were called and three drunk teenagers were brought to my care. One was so drunk we had to...
Bahrain: One year on
I am used to endless lies and criticism from the BNP and its favourite blogster, as well as Islamist...
Paul Volcker stands tall against the banking lobby
Why is Europe, which likes to present itself as an opponent of speculative "Anglo-Saxon" finance, li...
Millionaire Labour Party donors have contradicted Tony Blair's evidence to the police in the cash-for-honours affair - saying that they were nominated for their public service to the nation, and not for services to Labour, as claimed by the Prime Minister.
Secret No 10 papers, copies of which have been seen by The Independent on Sunday, back up their claims, putting fresh pressure on Mr Blair over the cash-for-honours affair.
The donors expressed surprise after Mr Blair's historic interview with Scotland Yard in Downing Street last Thursday, when he told the police the honours were "expressly party peerages given for party service".
In contrast, the official nomination documents, marked "Restricted Appointments", say that Mr Blair's "grounds for recommendation" to the House of Lords were the donors' work in the fields of education, health and charity. The leaked citations make no mention of "party service" and cast doubt on No 10's assertion that the honours were not bestowed in exchange for cash.
The revelation comes as Mr Blair's personal fundraiser, Lord Levy, again became the focus of the police inquiry following the PM's evidence in which he said he personally did not have "full knowledge" of the financial help received by Labour, or the nominations of lenders for peerages.
Mr Blair's evidence has baffled the donors, who believe they were nominated for the contribution they made to British society, not to the party. The curry magnate Sir Gulam Noon, who lent £250,000 to Labour, told the IoS he had been nominated for a peerage "for my charitable work [and] my building of the business".
A spokesman for the other businessmen at the centre of the cash-for-honours affair, Sir David Garrard and Barry Townsley, said: "My recollection was they were told it was for services to education." Earlier this year, Dr Chai Patel gave a BBC interview in which he outlined the achievements that had led to him being nominated - including founding the Priory Group of clinics. His office refused to comment on his nomination, but a friend said: "When he was nominated he thought it was for public service."
Last night, opposition politicians queried the nature of the "party service" provided by the millionaires, as none has a clear track record of Labour Party activism. It is not clear whether Sir David Garrard is even a Labour Party member, while Sir Gulam Noon has also given cash to the Liberal Democrats.
Downing Street said the "party service" referred to their willingness to serve as working Labour Party peers. A party spokesman said: "I am not going to get into how many leaflets they have delivered."
But Lord Oakeshott, a LibDem Treasury spokesman, said: "What services have the failed peers performed for Labour apart from giving big donations? The sooner Mr Blair has to tell the truth on oath in court about the real reasons he nominated these people for peerages the better."
Dr Chai Patel's official citation lists his contribution to mental health services as well as his advisory positions. The citation for Sir David Garrard notes his £2.4m contribution to the Business Academy in Bexley, and other work. Barry Townsley's citation says he "is involved with numerous charitable organisations and good causes". It concludes: "He would be [sic] active contributor to the Lords speaking on education and business matters." Sir Gulam Noon's citation says "he would be an active member of the Lords bringing wide ranging business experience".
- 1 No secularism please, we're British
- 2 Apple admits it has a human rights problem
- 3 'Drunk tanks' and minimum prices to help Britain sober up
- 4 Working as a jail torturer ruined my life
- 5 Lightning kills an entire football team
- 6 Reinstate Knox's murder charge, Italian court told
- 7 Caught in his own blast: an Iranian targeting Israel
- 1 Spotify: 1 million plays, £108 return
- 2 How Koscielny became prince of the Emirates
- 3 Apple admits it has a human rights problem
- 4 Mark Steel: If religion is 'marginal', I'm the Pope
- 5 No secularism please, we're British
- 6 Lightning kills an entire football team
- 7 Matthew Norman: There's always the Human Rights Act, Trevor
- 8 Special report: The hungry generation
- 9 I was born to be a killer. Every night I see the Devil in my dreams
- 10 Six Grammys, five years off: Adele puts love before career
Free trial of new Independent iPad app
Get your daily dose of the best of British journalism, sponsored by American Airlines
Win a three-week coastal jaunt
Spend three weeks exploring every nook and cranny of gorgeous Atlantic Canada.
Amazing restaurant offers
Three glasses of free champagne and a special menu at 46 top London restaurants.
Latest Independent competitions
Win anything from gadgets to five-star holidays on our competitions and offers page.
Commercial thought leaders
Watch the best in the business world give their insights into the world of business.
Career Services
Day In a Page
How an abortion divided America
Did they all live happily ever after? That's up to you...




Comments