by Paul Torday
‘What will happen to him?’ asked Fred.
‘Oh, that is not up to me. He begged my forgiveness, and of course I forgave him. He is not an evil man. The people who sent him are another matter. Long ago we pushed them out of our country, but still they are a danger. See how they can try and strike me from their caves in Afghanistan or Pakistan. But the man himself will be tried by a sharia court, and I am afraid the penalty may be severe. I will take care of his family when I return. It is all I can do.’
‘At least you are safe now, thank God,’ I said. The sheikh looked at me fondly.
‘Yes, we should thank God for this escape. But they will try again, Ms Harriet. They will keep trying until I am dead.’
17
Extract from Hansard
House of Commons
Thursday 9th October
The House met at half past eleven o’clock
PRAYERS
(Mr Speaker in the Chair)
Oral Answers to Questions
The Prime Minister
Mr Hamish Stewart (Cruives & The Bogles) (SNP):
If he will list his official engagements for Thursday 9th October?
The Prime Minister (Mr Jay Vent):
Later this morning I will be in meetings with ministerial colleagues, and for most of the rest of the day.
Mr Hamish Stewart:
Will the Prime Minister find time during the course of his meetings with colleagues to explain his support for yet another example of how this government and recent governments have considered it appropriate to interfere with the political, cultural and religious affairs of a sovereign Middle Eastern country?
The Prime Minister:
I presume the honourable gentleman is referring to the Yemen salmon project?
Hamish Stewart:
That is correct. Will the Prime Minister explain to the House why this government is sponsoring the export of live Scottish salmon to die miserably in a desert country? Is he aware that salmon fishing is not a recognised activity in the Muslim world? Does he appreciate the gross religious and cultural intrusion this project represents? Has the export of salmon been in any way regulated by appropriate agencies such as the Food Standards Agency? Is the RSPCA aware of this project? Can the Prime Minister assure us that he is content these Scottish fish will not suffer as they die from heat stress in the sand?
The Prime Minister:
That is quite a lot of questions to answer at one time. However, if the honourable member for Cruives & The Bogles has paused to draw breath, I will respond as best I can. The Yemen salmon project is a privately funded project which does not involve this government in any way. Nor does it constitute interference, political, cultural or otherwise, with the affairs of the Republic of the Yemen. On the contrary, it is a vindication of this government’s multicultural policies that a Yemeni citizen has come to think of this country as his second home, and that as result of his UK residency he has developed an interest in salmon fishing and as a result of that, has involved UK scientists and engineers in this project.
Of course we are also aware that a government agency, the National Centre for Fisheries Excellence, has been selected as the primary source for the science for the project. And that is why this government can rightly be proud of its continuing support for environmental science and environmental projects, something that does not appear to be a priority for the party opposite.
Mr Andrew Smith (Glasgow South) (Lab):
Is the member for Cruives & The Bogles aware that the export of salmon to the Yemen actually represents a very large order with the respected Scottish firm of McSalmon Aqua Farms? As a result of that order I believe six more Scottish jobs are being created in a region where unemployment has always been high. Of course, these jobs are not in the member for Cruives & The Bogles’ constituency, nor are they in mine, but I welcome this tribute to Scottish environmental engineering and this boost for Scottish jobs. I am surprised the member for Cruives & The Bogles is not more supportive of such matters.
Mr Hamish Stewart:
The right honourable member for Glasgow South might do better to become more familiar with the affairs of his own constituency before he offers me advice on the affairs of others. [Cries of ‘Shame!’ The House is called to order by Mr Speaker.]
Will the Prime Minister explain to the House, if the government is not involved in this project in any way, as he has just stated, why his director of communications, Mr Peter Maxwell, has recently spent two days as the private guest of Sheikh Muhammad ibn Zaidi bani Tihama on his estate in Glen Tulloch? Is the Prime Minister not aware that Sheikh Muhammad is the chief financial sponsor of the Yemen salmon project? [Interruptions from the Opposition benches]
The Prime Minister:
The right honourable gentleman correctly refers to my colleague Peter Maxwell’s job title as director of communications. As such, his job is not only to communicate with the nation about this government’s policies and its many achievements [Cheers from Government benches] but also to communicate to my office and to me personally matters in which I take an interest. I am personally interested in this project not only because I have always been a keen angler [Laughter from Opposition benches] but because I think it is a splendid example of how, despite the many differences that exist between our nation and some Islamic nations in the Middle East, cultural and sporting values can transcend such religious and political differences as may exist. And that is why I have instructed my director of communications to make it clear to my friend Sheikh Muhammad that while the government has no official position on this matter, we would not wish any unnecessary obstacles to be placed in his way, and would wish to be kept informed at all times of his progress. That is the reason for Mr Maxwell’s recent visit, except I might add I believe he used his influence to ensure that the order for salmon, to which my right honourable friend Mr Smith alluded a moment or two ago, was placed with a Scottish firm rather than a Norwegian one.
Mr Gerald Lamprey (South Glos) (The Leader of Her Majesty’s Opposition):
Would the Prime Minister consider whether it is not odd, at a time when 30 per cent of the armed forces budget is spent supporting military operations in Iraq, and now in deployments to defend the Saudi Arabian oilfields and the oilfields in Kazakhstan, that Mr Peter Maxwell, this government’s highest-ranking unelected and ex officio Cabinet member—[Interruptions from government benches. Mr Speaker calls the House to order.]—I say, Peter Maxwell, should be spending significant amounts of his time thinking about salmon? Surely this government needs to consider the consistency of its policies? We have been told too often in this House that democracy can flower from the barrel of a gun, but we have never yet heard of democracy being hooked on the end of a fishing line. [Laughter]
The Prime Minister:
I do not know whether the honourable member opposite expects a serious answer to his question, if indeed there was a question there. But yes, this government and the preceding governments from this party are proud of their record in introducing democratic ideals through the mechanism of political and sometimes, regrettably but inevitably, military intervention in the Middle East and central Asia. And history will show us to be right. In the matter of the Yemen salmon project, which I believe has led somehow to this line of questioning, if private individuals who share an interest in the sport of angling wish to come together and create what will be, I may say, a miracle of science and engineering, a veritable flowering of the desert, then speaking as an individual, I can only applaud such efforts. I might also add, I believe such efforts will lead to greater harmony between nations, just as the sports of cricket and, perhaps more widely, football have done. [Interruption: ‘The Prime Minster wasn’t at the game between England and Holland last Friday night then?’]
Mr Hamish Stewart:
I am grateful to the Prime Minister for his clarification of the government’s position, although I regret to say I am not much clearer about what the government’s position in this mat
ter is, or is not. Would the Prime Minister find time today during his meetings with ministerial colleagues to discuss with them the failed assassination attempt last week on the life of Sheikh Muhammad ibn Zaidi bani Tihama by a member of the al-Qaeda network at his residence in Scotland? Would the Prime Minister not agree that, in terms of his earlier statement when he referred to the government’s wish to remove any unnecessary obstacles to the Yemen salmon project, the successful assassination of Sheikh Muhammad would perhaps have represented a significant obstacle to the project? [Uproar on all sides of the House]
[Pause while the Prime Minister consults with the Home Secretary.]
The Prime Minister:
I refer the question to my honourable friend and colleague, the Home Secretary.
The Home Secretary (Mr Reginald Brown):
My department is not at this time aware of any such attempt, and I would be grateful if the honourable member would in due course share with my officials any sources he has for such allegations.
Mr Hamish Stewart:
The Secretary of State may read a report of the incident on the inside page of the last week’s edition of the Rannoch and Tulloch Reporter. I am sorry he does not find time to read such an excellent paper, which is published weekly in my constituency. Would the Prime Minister find time, when he discusses matters with his ministerial colleagues later today, to consider whether a person who is an absentee landlord who appears on his Scottish estate for only a few weeks a year and who, when he does appear, has become a magnet for international terrorist activity, is a suitable person for his director of communications to wine and dine with? Would the Prime Minister and his colleagues care to explain to this House, after duly informing themselves of events of which they should have been aware, why the attack was never officially reported, and what happened to the attacker? We are aware that it is necessary from time to time to arrest and hold suspected terrorists without bail pending further investigations, but in this case the matter seems to have been taken out of the Home Secretary’s hands. Would he care to explain why? Would he care to explain what the extradition policy is between this country and the Yemen, and if so what the due process is, and whether those processes were followed in this case? And if they were not, could he tell this House what did happen, and where the alleged al-Qaeda terrorist now is?
18
The termination of the employment contract of Dr Jones
Extracts from government memoranda and emails
Prime Minister’s Office, 10 Downing Street
From:
Peter Maxwell
To:
Herbert Berkshire, Foreign & Commonwealth Office
Subject:
Yemen salmon project
Date:
14 October
Herbert,
The PM was asked about the Yemen salmon project in the House yesterday. It is not an issue he wants to take up any parliamentary time. Our concern is that the involvement of a government agency (NCFE) may be wrongly construed as suggesting that this project has official government backing.
You will, I am sure, understand that our posture has always been supportive with respect to the Yemen salmon project. If it works, then I am sure the PM will be happy to endorse it, and perhaps make a personal visit as a private guest of the sheikh to see the salmon running. Meanwhile we need more deniability.
I suggest that the scientist Jones, who is doing all the work at NCFE, is disemployed from the agency with immediate effect. If you think this can be done by a word in the right ear, he could perhaps be re-employed by Fitzharris, the consultants who are project managers for the sheikh. That is a matter for them. The important thing is that no civil servant or government official should be directly connected with this project. NCFE should, in my view, be discouraged from being so close to the project. Whilst NCFE is part of DEFRA, this essentially is a matter of foreign policy and that is why I am airing the matter with you.
This memo is only a suggestion, of course. I leave it to you in your wisdom to decide the right course events should take.
Peter
Memo
From:
Herbert Berkshire
To:
Peter Maxwell
Subject:
Salmon⁄Yemen
Date:
14 October
Peter,
Thank you for your suggestion of today’s date. I think it is wise that the Yemen salmon project should be perceived as a wholly private-sector project, and I will make appropriate noises in appropriate ears in due course.
Herbert
Email
From:
[email protected]
Date:
14 October
To:
[email protected]
Subject:
Yemen salmon project
David,
There is a degree of concern in (senior) government circles with respect to current NCFE management issues. There is a view developing at ministerial level that NCFE may have embraced the Yemen salmon project a little too enthusiastically. I think you need to be aware that Foreign Office policy is to maintain a neutral stance with respect to the Yemen, which is in a politically sensitive region of the world. Policy is not to, or be perceived to, do anything that might be interpreted as religious, political or cultural interference with that country by the UK government. I recall speaking to you about NCFE giving some limited technical support to the Yemen salmon project as a goodwill gesture, but I cannot imagine that your own department or mine ever envisaged at that time the level of involvement NCFE now has. However, I think you should know my own department has advised, and will continue to advise, government that it is important there are no grounds for a perception being formed by the media and others that the project in any way has official backing. Some ministers, I know, feel a concern that NCFE is now overdependent on the income stream from the Yemen salmon project, and might be said by uninformed observers to be somewhat in the pocket of a private Yemeni individual.
Whilst no one (as far as I know) wants the project to be stopped, it might be a creative and responsible course of action if you were to put a little more distance between your agency and the project and its sponsor.
Herbert
Email
From:
[email protected]
Date:
14 October
To:
[email protected]
Subject:
(no subject)
Fred, please come to my office asap.
Email
From:
[email protected]
Date:
14 October
To:
[email protected]
Subject:
New job
Dear Mary,
I have lost my job.
There were, apparently, some awkward questions in the House of Commons about the Yemen salmon project last week. As a result of that someone called Herbert Berkshire from the Foreign Office rang my boss to say it might be better if I ceased to be on the Civil Service payroll. Apparently Peter Maxwell wants ‘clear blue water’ between the government and the Yemen salmon project.
So, the bad news is, I have had my employment contract with NCFE terminated. David called me into the office and explained that it was ‘no longer appropriate in all of the circumstances’ for me to continue. ‘There was concern in the department at imbalances in workload and priorities caused by the growing demands of the project.’ I have received an appallingly small redundancy cheque and a month’s pay in lieu of notice. David Sugden handed me both yesterday, and explained I had the right to go to an employment tribunal if I did not like the circumstances in which my contract had been terminated.
Needless to say, there was a bit more to it than this. At almost the same time the lady who manages most of the sheikh’s affairs in the UK (a Ms Chetwode-Talbot, I can’t remember if I have mentioned her name before
) sent me an offer of employment. The contract will run for an initial three years and my salary will be—wait for it—£120,000 a year!!! On top of that I will receive a car allowance, plus pension, plus health insurance, plus special hardship allowances for travelling and time spent working in the Yemen. The bottom line is, the project will continue, but now I will be working for Fitzharris & Price, the firm that manages the sheikh’s UK affairs, and the government will be able to say there is no official UK involvement in this project.
I don’t know what to think about it all. On the one hand I am sad to leave the NCFE, where I have spent most of my working life, and I feel sure that once I am out I will never get back in, at least not in the same position. On the other hand, now I am working for the sheikh I am no longer bound by all our departmental procedures—I can just get on with the project, and to be honest that is what I most want to do.
So, Mary, I am now a very well paid and independent fisheries scientist. Well paid enough that you could afford to give up your job in Geneva and come back home to me. I know it isn’t just the money, but maybe you could think about it?
I miss you.
Come back home.
With much love
Your Fred
XXX
Email
From:
[email protected]
Date:
16 October
To:
[email protected]
Subject:
New employment
Fred,
I don’t know what to say. It appears you have been forced out of a respectable if not overpaid position which you have worked hard to get in order to make some politician or other feel more comfortable. What will happen about your pension? It was a final salary scheme, wasn’t it? What are your new pension arrangements? I doubt the private sector will give you anything as generous as you got as a civil servant. Now you tell me you are working for Fitzharris & Price. I looked them up on their website. They appear to be estate agents. What is a (once) eminent fisheries scientist doing working for people whose main business appears to be managing and selling property?
