News

News feeds |

MP unmoved by accuser

By LUCY MILLARD - 13-03-1999

Allegations made in the Advertiser about Labour's spending in the General Election by Liberal Democrat candidate Mr Peter Harris did not worry Mrs Jones, she told the court. 

Under cross-examination on Tuesday afternoon Mrs Jones said it was not uncommon to have a dig at the opposition.

"I didn't take him seriously," she said.

"I was satisfied with my return."

Prosecutor Mr Paul Mann asked her if it was right that she felt there was no expectation on Mr Whicher to present a report to the constituency party of how the money had been spent.

Mrs Jones replied: "It was the last thing on my mind."

She said the annual meeting was held in June with little time to produce a report. It would probably have been a difference case if it had been held later.

Mr Mann asked her how anyone would know if they had overspent the election limit.

Said Mrs Jones: "They would trust the fact we had properly filled in the electoral return."

He said her reply in the Advertiser over Mr Harris' claims said that Labour's accounts conformed with election law.

She said she had an understanding of what should and shouldn't be in a return acquired over a number of years.

"I was quite confident what was an expense and what wasn't," she said.

"I may, in hindsight, have been wrong but I was confident I had been guided in the right way."

Mrs Jones was asked who provided the information for the returns. She said Mr Whicher had brought accounts, receipts and hand-written lists.

Mr Mann asked about a ledger she had referred to in her police interview.

She said it was a book with a break-down of the money paid out for the voter identification work. She could not remember what else it contained.

Mrs Jones said invoices had been carefully collected in date order and filed in the office.

"My view is that the materials and information we had was sufficient to fill in the return," she said.

Mr Mann asked if she had disagreed with Mr Whicher over what should be included in the return and if they had sought advice.

She said no, they had not disagreed, and they had asked for advice from the regional office over one or two items.

Click here to go back a page