Letter to the Parliamentary Commissioner
for Standards from the Rt Hon Dr John Reid MP
I am continuing to review the materials sent to me.
I am bound to say that I have considerable difficulty
in ascertaining the evidential basis for Mr Nelson`s complaint.
I note you do not state any view on his soundness. (Please see
enclosed.) However, all that he appears to have provided to back
up his allegations is some material apparently from his conversation
with Mr McKinney. The transcript perhaps shows Mr McKinney dislikes
me but his words do not appear to support the complaint. Your
interview with him again does not reveal support for the complaint.
I should ask you whether you really intend to continue with this
complaint against me?
What follows assumes that you will decide not to
drop the complaint.
To assist me in producing what you wish viz. a complete
response from me, it would be helpful if you would provide the
1) Confirmation that you have heard the Nelson/McKinney
tape and that the purported transcript is correct.
2) Confirmation that the purported transcript
of the "contemporary short-hand note" by Nelson is correct
and that you have seen the note.
3) Confirmation that I have been provided with
all the material you state you "have received from others",
and if that cannot be confirmed any other such material.
4) Any further information relative to the Scottish
Labour Party documents. I note you are awaiting clarification
concerning these and as I have never seen these before information
concerning their status and provenance would assist.
5) The references in the transcripts for various
statements that form party of the content of your questions. (Given
the voluminous amounts of transcripts I have difficulty in locating
(i) Q9the reference
for Rafferty saying Winslow implied a breach of House of Commons
rules had occurred.
(ii) Q11the reference for Rafferty saying my son worked
full time for the party when he was being paid as a House of Commons
researcher. (If this aspect does indeed refer to my son)?
(iii) Q14where is it said my son worked "extremely
long hours for the party" when he worked part time for me.
(iv) Q19the reference for Rowley saying Ms Hilliard
"was working full time for the party"
(v) Q21the reference for Rowley`s explanation of the
"SLP budget projections"
(vi) Q24where do Rowley, Rafferty and Sullivan say
that neither my son nor Ms Hilliard could have met their obligation
to me during their employment with me?
6) Confirmation that you do not expect me to
research and answer matters relative to Mr Winslow.
May I remind you I await responses to my letters
of the 30th of May and 2nd June. Again I should say a speedy response
will facilitate preparation to my statement to you. I am at least
as keen as you that this investigation be brought to a conclusion
but you will appreciate I must know the full extent of what is
apparently said against me in order that I may rebut the complaint
if it is to proceed.
6 June 2000