05.02.07
Chancellor Gordon Brown’s base in Downing Street
doubled the number of seminars it hosted for the Smith institute despite an
official warning to the “think-tank”.
A second set of documents released under the freedom of information
act (FOIA) shows that the Smith institute, a registered charity, initially
asked to use 11 Downing Street on a monthly basis, and more regularly for
any series of seminars.
The documents show that, in the past 12 months, it held 27 events.
And this doubling of events came after, as revealed by a previous set of documents
released under FOIA, the charity commission warned the Smith institute that
its use of No11 raised questions over its political independence and, therefore,
its charitable status.
The Smith institute, which was founded in memory of the late Labour
party leader, John Smith, rejected the charity commission’s repeated
warnings six years ago that it should stop holding seminars at No11.
It addressed other concerns raised by the charity commission, which
closed the case with a warning that the Smith institute would need to be vigilant
to ensure the distinction between promoting an educational, rather than a
political, cause.
The latest batch of documents also reveals that Brown attended two
of the Smith institute’s events held at No11 in the past 12 months,
one on “China’s economics” and another on “corporate
social responsibility”.
The Smith institute denies promoting Brown’s pol-itical objectives.
The newly released documents are embarrassing for the Smith institute
because it had given the impression to the charity commission six years ago
that it was reducing its use of No11.
In rejecting the recommendation in 2001 to stop using No11, the Smith
institute’s director, Wilf Stevenson, told the charity commission in
a letter: “The trustees consider venues to be largely an operational
matter. Venues are chosen as to maximise our target audiences, and to minimise
their inconvenience.” He said that the Smith institute was holding many
of its events outside London and using other venues in the capital, although
“we would not wish to rule out the use of Downing Street for our seminars.”
After more questions from the charity commission, Stevenson replied:
“We have previously explained that we hold some of our seminars at 11
Downing Street because it attracts a high level of participants and is easily
accessible.”
“As it happens, we would observe that since the original programme
was drawn up, our proposed use of 11 Downing Street has decreased to two seminar
series and two one-off seminars this year [2001].”
The charity commission will no doubt be surprised to learn from the
latest FOIA disclosures that the Smith institute more than doubled its use
of No11 from its initial request.
Last year, the charity commission re-opened the case after the Smith
institute confirmed employing Ed Balls, Brown's former economic adviser, as
a paid research fellow when he was preparing to stand for parliament in the
last general election.
And it has already returned to the use of No11. The latest set of documents
includes an e-mail exchange between the charity commission and the treasury.
The former, in an e-mail sent last week, asked the latter for details about
the extent of the use of No11 by other charities since 2002.
The treasury replied three days later by detailing 54 charities that
had held events at No11 on 72 separate occasions since 2002, but said that
it was unable to provide a list of all the charities that had applied to use
No11.
It said that no charge is made for room hire and that any charity can
apply to the chancellor to request use of No11 as a venue for an event.
“This is fully in accordance with the ministerial code and long
standing conventions governing the use of Downing Street as operated by this
and previous governments.”
“Every external organisation that uses No11 does so on the same
basis: they meet all additional costs of the event, including catering, additional
security, and IT and AV equipment. This is to ensure no public expense is
incurred when events are held by external organisations.”
It added: “The Smith institute asked in 1997 to use the facility
for seminars on a once a month basis and sometimes, when they are conducting
a series of seminars, on a more regular basis. The events are held on the
same basis as every other charitable event.”
“Any charity that uses or wants to use 11 Downing Street can
apply for more extended access if this is their wish and subject to availability.”
FOIA Centre commentary
The Smith Institute’s director, Wilf Stevenson, told the charity
commission, as revealed by FOIA, that the venue for its events was chosen
to “maximise our target audiences, and to minimise their inconvenience.”
As two sets of FOIA disclosures make clear, the Smith institute’s
venue of choice is 11 Downing Street despite the strident warnings from the
charity commission about the plain political associations of such a location.
This suggests that Stevenson had one particular prospective audience
member in mind to “target” and whose “inconvenience”
should be minimised. Indeed, the official resident of No11 did not have far
to travel when he attended two of the Smith institute’s seminars in
the past 12 months.
The Financial Times tonight described the treasury as mounting a “damage
limitation exercise” to head off allegations that the Smith institute
enjoyed preferential access to No11. However, the information now in the public
domain strongly suggests that it does have preferential access, and it is
also clear that the treasury is yet to provide further information to straight-forward
questions from the charity commission.
Moreover, the Smith institute’s remarkably ready access to No11
is emblamatic of its relationship with Gordon Brown, and it is these links
at a wider level that raise serious questions over its claimed charitable
status.
Given No10’s present pre-occupation with fighting off a criminal
investigation into the alleged award of peerages in return for “loans”
to the Labour party, No11’s present occupant might observe that one
advantage for a charity is that there is no comparable requirement for it
to declare donors to the electoral commission – or anyone else.
Comment on this article
Smith institute
warned on use of No11
Headlines
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||