Mohamed Al Fayed and “cash for questions” probably did more to bring about the downfall of John Major’s government than any of the other political scandals of the 1990s.
It was Al Fayed’s bribery of Tory MPs Neil Hamilton and Tim Smith – in cash stuffed in brown envelopes – and hospitality at his luxury Ritz Hotel in Paris for cabinet minister Jonathan Aitken that led to the word “sleaze” being associated with the Major government.
It was almost certainly more damaging than the several sex scandals that engulfed Major’s government in the ’90s, because it involved financial impropriety and corruption and projected an image of dishonesty and Tory MPs on the take.
Hamilton was the Thatcherite MP for Tatton in the Cheshire stockbroker belt – a seat later represented by Tory chancellor George Osborne – and was made a junior minister at the Department of Trade and Industry, responsible for the City and corporate affairs, by Major after his surprise general election victory in 1992.
Image: Neil Hamilton in 1994, while he was trade minister
But two years later, in 1994, it was revealed that he had taken cash for asking parliamentary questions on behalf of Al Fayed, along with Smith, who had been MP for Beaconsfield since defeating Tony Blair in a by-election in 1982.
Both MPs had failed to declare the donations from the Harrods tycoon.
It was to cost them their political careers and rob the Conservatives of one of their safest seats, Tatton, in the Blair landslide victory in 1997.
Al Fayed claimed he paid Hamilton up to £110,000 and also gave him Harrods gift vouchers and a free holiday at his Ritz Hotel in Paris, in return for asking parliamentary questions about Harrods during his battle for control of the store with Lonrho tycoon Tiny Rowland.
Smith – also a junior minister – was said to have received between £18,000 and £25,000, handed over in brown envelopes stuffed with £50 notes.
Advertisement
Image: Mohamed Al Fayed in 1997
He quit straight away, but Hamilton battled on in a futile bid to clear his name.
Aitken, Major’s chief secretary to the Treasury and a former defence procurement minister, was revealed to have stayed without charge at the Ritz in Paris at the same time as Saudi arms dealers.
He sued for libel but was later convicted of perjury and served a jail term.
Smith stood down from parliament in 1997 but Hamilton attempted to cling on in Tatton, but was comprehensively defeated by the so-called “man in the white suit”, anti-sleaze candidate Martin Bell, who was backed by Labour and the Liberal Democrats.
Image: Jonathan Aitken in 1995
The hugely damaging scandal led Major to set up the Committee for Standards in Public Life, which is still operating, though criticised at times for being toothless.
But despite its critics, the committee remains a lasting legacy of the cash-for-questions scandal and advises prime ministers, civil servants and parliament to this day.
And the committee’s best-known former chairman, Sir Alastair Graham, who headed the committee from 2004 to 2007, remains a frequent critic of political scandals such as Boris Johnson’s Partygate.
Hamilton, whose notoriety led him and his extrovert wife Christine to become TV celebrities, later defected to Nigel Farage’s UKIP.
Aitken, on the other hand, turned to God in prison and is now an Anglican priest.
Thousands of savers face potential losses after a $2.7 million shortfall was discovered at Ziglu, a British crypto fintech that entered special administration.
Another hint that tax rises are coming in this autumn’s budget has been given by a senior minister.
Speaking to Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips, Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander was asked if Sir Keir Starmer and the rest of the cabinet had discussed hiking taxes in the wake of the government’s failed welfare reforms, which were shot down by their own MPs.
Trevor Phillips asked specifically if tax rises were discussed among the cabinet last week – including on an away day on Friday.
Tax increases were not discussed “directly”, Ms Alexander said, but ministers were “cognisant” of the challenges facing them.
Asked what this means, Ms Alexander added: “I think your viewers would be surprised if we didn’t recognise that at the budget, the chancellor will need to look at the OBR forecast that is given to her and will make decisions in line with the fiscal rules that she has set out.
“We made a commitment in our manifesto not to be putting up taxes on people on modest incomes, working people. We have stuck to that.”
Ms Alexander said she wouldn’t comment directly on taxes and the budget at this point, adding: “So, the chancellor will set her budget. I’m not going to sit in a TV studio today and speculate on what the contents of that budget might be.
“When it comes to taxation, fairness is going to be our guiding principle.”
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Afterwards, shadow home secretary Chris Philp told Phillips: “That sounds to me like a barely disguised reference to tax rises coming in the autumn.”
He then went on to repeat the Conservative attack lines that Labour are “crashing the economy”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
10:43
Chris Philp also criticsed the government’s migration deal with France
Mr Philp then attacked the prime minister as “weak” for being unable to get his welfare reforms through the Commons.
Discussions about potential tax rises have come to the fore after the government had to gut its welfare reforms.
Sir Keir had wanted to change Personal Independence Payments (PIP), but a large Labour rebellion forced him to axe the changes.
With the savings from these proposed changes – around £5bn – already worked into the government’s sums, they will now need to find the money somewhere else.
The general belief is that this will take the form of tax rises, rather than spending cuts, with more money needed for military spending commitments, as well as other areas of priority for the government, such as the NHS.