On 21 December Tom Watson tabled a written question for Eric Pickles asking “what proportion of [DCLG] expenditure on legal fees was allocated to advice in respect of potential defamation cases”. The question explored the possibility that Pickles’ department sought external legal advice on his special advisers’ smears against the Chair of the Audit Commission. We now have our answer.
Call us cynics, but could the timing of the announcement — which comes after a 73 day wait and apparently breaks conventions on disclosure of legal advice — have anything to do with this weeks headlines?
“David Cameron Rebuked By Gus O’Donnell Over Special Advisers” – PR Week
“David Cameron warned: control your ‘unacceptable’ spin doctors” – The Guardian
While the going rate for such legal work would be in the region of £50,000, a figure we blogged in the New Year, the belated response from DCLG was that “no expenditure has been undertaken on legal fees”. We would run that (carefully phrased) story again based on the quality of the sources. Indeed, the wording of Bob Neill’s statement does not discount the possibility that initial contact was made with defamation lawyers.
Out to bat for the Tories, the Guido Fawkes team would have you believe this stops the whole story in its tracks, that PR Week and interlocutor Caroline Flint have “egg on their faces” — but neither mentioned the issue of legal fees. Nice try, chaps, but the questions (and headlines) are still mounting up:
1) Who smeared Jenny Watson?
2) What exactly did Eric Pickles know about it?
3) Why hasn’t anyone been disciplined?
Guido can have his £50.
Eric Pickles is (metaphorically at least) on the run.