common practice, legally. but you chose to make the responses public, why was that? it is chose to make the responses public, why was that? why was that? it is indeed common ractice why was that? it is indeed common practice for why was that? it is indeed common practice for libel why was that? it is indeed common practice for libel lawyers why was that? it is indeed common practice for libel lawyers to - why was that? it is indeed common practice for libel lawyers to send i practice for libel lawyers to send letters which asked people to retract and claim that their confidential things should not be published, it is common practice, and it is a disgrace. and it has now been confirmed to me, solicitors may not do that. do use a yourself now as a journalist, and if so, where do you think you stand in terms of being impartial? people could read your blog and get the sense that in a sense, you set a nadhim zahawi in your sites and you were going to get him, that was what you were u
through the solicitors to mr neidle to correct a few inaccuracies. you know, this is fairly common practice. legally, it ll. but you chose to make the responses public. why was that? it is indeed common practice for libel lawyers to send letters which ask people to retract and then claim that they re confidential letters and can t be published. it s common practice and it s a disgrace. and the solicitors regulation authority, i asked them, has now confirmed that solicitors may not do that. and it s interesting, isn t it? i just wonder whether you see yourself now as a journalist and if you do, you know where you think you stand in terms of being impartial. you know, lots of people could read your blog and think, you know, you get the sense that you set in a sense you said you set in a sense you set nadhim zahawi and your sites and you know, you were going to get to him that that was what you were up to. i really wasn t. and if he d responded saying, for example. yes, i think there are
he says he acted properly. jonathan portes is a professor of economics at kings college london, and former chief economist at the cabinet office. he said mr zahawi s behaviour over his tax affairs had been inappropriate. as far as as faras hmrc as far as hmrc are concerned, that s the end of the matter and that s up fine. know that changes the fact that this investigation and settlement took place while he was chancellor of the exchequer in charge of hmrc none of that changes the fact. and that, as i said, he clearly did not tell the full truth, or possibly directly lied about it at the time and threatened people who made perfectly reasonable, and as it turns out correct allegations about his conduct with libel lawyers at the
facts. nadhim zahawi did not pay the taxes he should have done, that s now undisputed fact. he lied about it, that s a breach of the minister will code. he threatened people who are making the allegations against him with very expensive libel lawyers i would say that s a breach of the ministerial code, as well. , , ., , well. but surely all this will come out from the well. but surely all this will come out from the ethics well. but surely all this will come j out from the ethics investigation, if what you say is true, surely that will be the result and there can be consequences. but why shouldn t there be an investigation, what s there be an investigation, what s the point of having an ethics adviser if he isn t allowed to investigate this kind of think was yellow he can investigate all he wants, but i m saying to you is there are facts already established which any prime minister who was intent and serious about upholding the standards of professionalism and accountability do
for standards in public life, which i ve read because we discuss on the podcast that s out tomorrow. it says that when people in positions of leadership tolerate misconduct by others in this way, they are encouraging others to do the same. so he s encouraging these attacks and dishonesty, he s encouraging people threatening libel lawyers when a journalist or tax lawyer asks legitimate questions which turned out to be true. he s gone way beyond so what s the ethics adviser meant to investigate when we already know the key facts? the key facts? what about the key facts when it the key facts? what about the key facts when it comes the key facts? what about the key facts when it comes to the key facts? what about the key facts when it comes to other - facts when it comes to other questions facing the government at the moment, which is the appointment of the bbc chairman, richard sharp he will be before the digital culture sport select committee next month, we are hearing all abou