Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Scott legal advice could cost pounds 1m

Paul Routledge Political Correspondent
Saturday 10 June 1995 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

THE taxpayer faces a bill for up to pounds 1m for private legal advice for ministers caught up in the Scott arms-to-Iraq inquiry.

At least one member of the Cabinet, the Minister of Agriculture, William Waldegrave, has already gone outside the government legal service for help, and four other ministers are thought to be similarly countenancing such advice.

Two ex-ministers could also avail themselves of the privilege, as well as an unknown number of civil servants.

The total could could run to hundreds of thousands of pounds, and one legal source said it could rise to pounds 1m.

Gerry Bermingham, Labour MP for St Helens's South, has tabled two parliamentary questions to John Major, asking which of his ministers or former ministers have sought legal advice from solicitors or barristers (in private practice) in respect of extracts from the Scott Inquiry which have been forwarded to them for comment, and what has been the cost to the public purse of these legal moves. The Prime Minister has promised to reply "shortly".

Mr Bermingham, himself a practising lawyer, said yesterday: "I am awaiting his response with considerable interest. I think the principles involved raise constitutional questions."

In line with normal Whitehall practice, draft versions of the Scott report have been sent to ministers who are named and criticised, and some - particularly Mr Waldegrave - have taken strong exception to references to their conduct.

Ministers normally use their own departmental lawyers, but the Government's own law officers are directly involved in the Scott Inquiry.

A Cabinet spokeswoman yesterday defended the unusual move to take private legal advice, saying that it related to their conduct as ministers rather than as individuals. "If they weren't in government, they wouldn't need the advice," she said. "It is a matter for departments to decide."

However, Labour back-benchers take a less charitable view. "Why should the taxpayer pick up the bill for legal advice for ministers who have goofed?" asked one.

When Norman Lamont, then Chancellor, charged the taxpayer for legal advice to evict a sex therapist who had been renting the basement of his London home two years ago, there was an outcry.

Furore hits Major, page 6

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in