|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
Keith Vaz's property holdings
by Andrew Hosken
|
|
|
|
An investigation by Today has unearthed evidence that the Europe Minister Keith Vaz did not disclose all his property interests to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, Elizabeth Filkin, during her investigation into his affairs. As Andrew Hosken reports he told Mrs Filkin, back in October, that he owned three properties when documents show, that at the time, he owned four.
Keith Vaz emerged last week after a two month illness and is fighting Leicester East for Labour.
The Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards held a lengthy inquiry into his affairs. But serious questions remain unanswered: why did Mr Vaz tell the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards that he owned he owned three properties, when at the time he owned four?
And why did he transfer the ownership of a fifth property to his mother. Eight days after he was asked for details of all the properties owned by him.
Members of Parliament have their own strict Code of Conduct in which they must declare some of their outside interests.
Category 8 of the Code deals with property interests. It says members should declare the following:
"Any land or property, other than any home used for the personal residential purposes of the Member or the Member's spouse , which has a substantial value or from which a substantial income is derived.The nature of the property should be indicated."
During her inquiry into Mr Vaz, Mrs Filkin wanted to know which property he owned. First she asked about his two properties in Leicester and added:
"For the sake of completeness, would Mr Vaz also give me details of any other properties he owns , their purpose and the date of purchase."
Mrs Filkin was told that Mr Vaz owned two properties Leicester as well as his home in Stanmore in North West London which he owned jointly with his wife.
Mrs Filkin said she had to ask about all properties owned by Mr Vaz so she could:
"assure the Standards and Priviliges Committee that no other atters which have come to light during an investigation indicated breeches of the Code or rules..." and "...in addition to protect the member from additional complaints being triggered when the report is published...."
But a document obtained by this programme from the Land Registry shows that Keith Vaz transferred a fourth property - a studio flat in Kennington in South London - to his mother as a gift.
According to the document the transfer took place on October 27. This was eight days after Mrs Filkin first wrote and asked for detail's about all his properties.
Mr Vaz told us that his mother originally purchased this property for him . And that he transferred the property to her so she could be close to hospitals in London for cancer treatment. And that the timing was a coincidence.
However six months after the transfer Mrs Vaz put the property on the market.
He had also failed to tell Mrs Filkin about another property. This time in Pimlico in central London which he purchased in April 1999 and which he still owns.
On March 9, this year the Parliamentary Committee concluded:
"Mr Vaz owns a home in London and two adjoining properties in Leciester, one of which is used as a second residence and the other as a constituency office."
The Code of Conduct says Mr Vaz should have registered any property of a substantial value not used by him or his spouse.
Documents with the Land Registry show Mr Vaz became the owner of his Kennington flat on August 5, 1988.
According to the Electoral Register, this was Mr Vaz's address for 2 years in 1988 and 1999.
But for four years between February 1992 and February 1996, this studio flat was the address of a person called Reza Shahbandeh.
In fact since 1989 neither Mr Vaz or his wife have appeared on the electoral register for this address. And no one has appeared on it since Mr Shahbandeh moved on. When we asked Mr Vaz, he denied all knowledge of Mr Shahbandeh.
Mr Vaz says he gave details of all his properties to the Commons Registrar of members Interests in January and that the Registrar was happy with what he had done. He has denied misleading Parliament.
But the Liberal Democrat peer Lord Goodhart, a member of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, said the evidence uncovered by Today should be investigated by Mrs Filkin.
However, the shadow Foreign Secretary Francis Maude called on the prime minister to take more severe and immediate action.
"This now goes straight to Tony Blair's door," he said.
"He has now got to say, today, whether he still endorses Keith Vaz as a Labour candidate in this election. He should certainly be booted out of his ministerial office today and Tony Blair must also withdraw his support for him as a Labour candidate."
His comments were dismissed by the Leader of the Commons Margaret Beckett. But she said the allegations against Mr Vaz should be examined by the proper channels.
"There are people whose job it is to look at these things and I have no doubt at all that they will be looked at if Keith Vaz is returned as an MP," she added.
Links:
Standards and Privileges Comittee Report on Keith Vaz March 2001:
Andrew Hosken's previous report on the running of the Labour Party in Mr Vaz's constituency:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Elizabeth Filkin |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mr Vaz transferred a flat in this block to his mother |
|
|
 |
|
Francis Maude: Vaz should be 'booted out' |
|
|
 |
|
Margaret Beckett: Allegations should be examined properly |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
