In a bid to save his Cabinet career, Liam Fox has just issued a statement, which he also read to the cameras, apologising for allowing ‘distinctions to be blurred between my professional
responsibilities and my personal loyalties to a friend’.
The defence secretary goes on to accept that he should have ensured that officials were present at meetings between him and Adam Werritty at which ‘defence and security related issues were rasied.’ He says that he has apologised to the Prime Minister for the Dubai meeting, at which Fox saw a commercial supplier with no official present. Apparently, the MoD permanent secretary will now be putting in place new procedures to ensure that this does not happen in future. This seems to rather ignore that it was Fox’s fault that such a meeting happened in the first place.
Friends of the defence secretary will be hoping that this display of contrition will be enough. But there are several reasons to think that Fox is not out of the woods yet. First, there is the issue of the ongoing blackmail case in the United States that relates to emails sent after the Dubai meeting. Fox has found himself in the middle of an American lawsuit, which will ensure that the whole story gets another airing at some point in the not too distance future. Then there is the fact that several of Fox’s comments on these matters so far have had to be clarified or added to. This means that his political opponents and the press are not inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. Indeed, Jim Murphy, Fox’s opposite number, has already claimed publicly that Fox assured him in private that an official was present at the infamous Dubai meeting when we now know that none were.
We also learn nothing new from Fox’s statement. We had contrition, but hardly full disclosure of the political links between Fox and Werritty. So it is hard to see today’s apology as an end of the matter, especially as defence questions in the Commons tomorrow will likely lead to another day of coverage of the story in Tuesday’s papers.
Here’s the full statement:
“I accept that it was a mistake to allow distinctions to be blurred between my professional responsibilities and my personal loyalties to a friend. I am sorry for this. At no stage did I or my Department provide classified information or briefings to Mr Werritty or assist with his commercial work – let alone benefit personally from this work. Nevertheless, I do accept that given Mr Werritty’s defence related business interests, my frequent contacts with him may have given an impression of wrongdoing, and may also have given third parties the misleading impression that Mr Werritty was an official adviser rather than simply a friend. I have learned lessons from this experience. I accept that with the benefit of hindsight I should have taken much greater care to ensure that any meetings with Adam Werritty, at which defence and security related issues were raised, were properly attended by officials and recorded – to protect myself and the Government from any suggestion of wrongdoing. With respect to my meeting with Mr Boulter in Dubai in June 2011, I accept that it was wrong to meet with a commercial supplier, without the presence of an official. I have apologised to the Prime Minister and agreed with my Permanent Secretary to put in place new procedures to ensure that this does not happen again. My Permanent Secretary will report her interim findings to the Cabinet Secretary tomorrow. It is important that this process is allowed to run its course. I will answer all questions in the House of Commons.”
Comments