GP Masthead

What the media says about me...

"The independent-minded and fearless Pendle MP is the hero of the Cashcroft affair"

The Mirror, March 2010


Pendle Matters PDF Print E-mail
Thursday, 04 March 2010 12:33
“Pendle Matters” the frequent newspaper put out by the would-be Conservative MP for Pendle, Andrew Stephenson, and delivered free to 37,000 households, was given a public airing in Parliament yesterday.  

 

Local MP, Gordon Prentice, said: “The next election in Pendle is being bought by Ashcroft cash.”  

 

“Money that the tax dodging Ashcroft gave to the Conservatives is money that should have gone to the Revenue to pay for schools and health centres.”  

 

During the debate on the Parliamentary Communications Allowance, introduced by Streatham MP, Keith Hill, the Pendle MP revealed for the first time that he had reimbursed the Commons authorities for the cost of one of his reports. A single anonymous complaint about a reference to Conservative Vice Chairs Lord Laidlaw and Lord Ashcroft forced the pay back.  

 

Prentice commented: “What I said then was absolutely true. About both of them. We now know Ashcroft is a non dom.”   

 

Note to editors: Westminster Hall speech is below:3 Mar 2010 : Column 292WH
Mr. Gordon Prentice (Pendle) (Lab): I have a lot to say, but I shall compress it because I know that so many colleagues on both sides of the House want to make a contribution. I begin by saying that what happens in Britain is not unique. I know a lot about Canada-I chair the all-party Canada group. Canadians can mail their MPs without putting a stamp on the envelope. Canadian MPs can send out annual reports; they can do what we do here, so what happens in Britain is not unique. The big problem that we face is that there are effectively no spending limits except in the immediate run-up to a general election-in the six months before it. Before that, however, anything goes. We have heard about Streatham.
 

Perhaps I am making a party political point here, but my jaw dropped last night when my colleague, the Member for Edmonton (Mr. Love), told me that his Conservative challenger spent £142,000 in the last three months of 2009-that is documented in Electoral Commission figures. There is no level playing field-I hate using that term. It is possible, and we are seeing it happen, to buy an election. We heard about the difficultly of contacting constituents in small inner-city seats. Many years ago, I was the leader of Hammersmith and Fulham council and I know the constituency like the back of my hand. There is a flip side, however: my Pendle constituency is 65 square miles. I do not know how many Hammersmith and Fulhams you could put in that. It is impossible to contact my constituents by just walking up the farm track-there are not the hours in the day. The way to contact people in a far-flung rural constituency is to pay people-Royal Mail-to do it.

 

 Mr. Graham Stuart: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

 

 Mr. Prentice: I have my own speech to make, and if the hon. Gentleman catches your eye, Mr. Cook, he will be able to make his own. When the communications allowance was brought in, I did not use it for the first year. I felt uncomfortable, to be honest. Since then, I have been 545th in the list. In the first year, I spent £2,349, on surgery advertisements and so on, but people were saying to me, "What on earth are you doing? You're doing nothing down at Westminster, but we've been getting all this stuff from Andrew Stephenson". I was getting letters in my office addressed to Andrew Stephenson MP, the MP for Pendle. He may well be the MP in a couple of months' time. It is not just people in this room who are listening to this debate, it is people outside as well, and he could very well be the next MP.

 

 I used my communications allowance on five occasions, in October 2008, and in January, April, October and December 2009. My communications were not bland at all. There are no photographs of me cuddling babies, or with police officers-none of the usual stuff. In my latest parliamentary report, I complain in the article "Waiting for the ambulance" that in the West Craven part of my constituency people were having to wait ages for an ambulance, even when their situation was life-threatening. That probably did a lot of damage to my Labour Government. In an article in the previous issue, entitled "Afghanistan: What now?", I talked about my position on Afghanistan, saying that "the bloody conflict in Afghanistan drags on" and that it is now time to set a clear exit strategy. That is me speaking, not the Labour Government. In the issue before that there was the article, "Royal Mail: Save it-don't sell it"; that is not bland communication. I was arguing against the position of my own Government. I want to see Royal Mail stay in public ownership. That is not bland; it is letting people know my views. Another article was entitled, "Fat Cats slated". I had to pay money back to the Commons authorities for that.

 

 There was one anonymous complaint. The Commons authorities could not tell me who had made the complaint, but it was about two paragraphs that I had written in one of my reports. I hope that you will allow me to read them both out, Mr. Cook, because they are, as we now know, absolutely factually correct. The first paragraph stated: "I told the Commons"-I was quoting from a Commons speech-

 

 "the Conservative peer and donor, Lord Laidlaw, was ennobled in 2004 after promising to become a UK resident for tax purposes. He reneged on that promise and lives in tax exile in Monaco."

 

 That is a fact, but I had to pay money back for saying what I did. In the next paragraph, I said

 

: "Another Conservative peer, Lord Ashcroft openly admits bankrolling local Conservative Associations yet refuses to say if he pays UK taxes. He is based in the Central American tax haven of Belize." As a result of those two paragraphs, I had to reimburse the Commons authorities. [Interruption.] No, I will not go down that road; everyone knows about Lord Ashcroft

 

. Mr. Binley: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

 

 Mr. Prentice: I will not. I have a lot of ground to cover, and the Member can make his own speech.

 

 My fifth parliamentary report talked about hard choices regarding DNA, and I made it clear that my position is probably more akin to the Liberal Democrat position than the Labour Government's position. When people read my parliamentary report, therefore, they say, "Whatever his faults, this guy Gordon Prentice isn't a cipher. He's not just telling us what Labour Whips are telling him to say." They get an idea of where I am coming from.

 

Those were my five parliamentary reports. Now, if you will allow me, Mr. Cook, I will whistle through some material from Andrew Stephenson, who will probably be the MP in a couple of months. I have a copy of his leaflet "Andrew Stephenson Reports Back", which has just come out. I also have the February and March edition of his "Pendle Matters", which the Royal Mail delivered to all 37,000 households in Pendle; it talks about the "Year of Change" and runs to four pages. Another edition, which was delivered free to 37,000 households, talks about "Putting Pendle on the Map" and has a picture of the Leader of the Opposition. That is all since Christmas

 

. The December 2009 edition of "Pendle Matters", which was delivered to 37,000 households, says, "Shop Local"-unfortunately, it was printed in Guildford. I also have the October 2009 and August 2009 editions of "Pendle Matters", which were delivered to every household in my constituency. The headline in one edition reads "Cameron spells out a Plan for Change". The headline in another, which was delivered to 37,000 households, talks about "Transport in the North". Another edition has the headline "Tackling the Credit Crunch" and runs to four pages.

 

 Mr. Binley: On a point of order, Mr. Cook. May I ask a simple question? Are we allowed to use such props in the House?

 

 Frank Cook (in the Chair): There is a convention on the Floor of the House that visual aids are not allowed. I cannot see what is on the leaflets that the hon. Member for Pendle (Mr. Prentice) is holding up, so they are hardly visual aids. However, I can count and I can see that there is a discrepancy in terms of acreage and number, and I await his conclusions on that. I must remind hon. Members that we have about 17 minutes before I call the Front Benchers.

 

 Mr. Prentice: I do not want to test the patience of colleagues, so let me just say that I have too many leaflets to go through; there are three years' worth. It is not just "Pendle Matters" that is being delivered; there is loads of other stuff as well. There are six-page booklets, which look like Hello! magazine, the ads in the local papers and so on.

 

 Let me come to my peroration. I think I have demonstrated conclusively that the next election is being bought. Election spending should be controlled; if it is not, it will be totally unfair, and rich people will be able to determine who sits in this House. 
 
  Privacy Statement | Advanced Search | Tech Details | Sitemap