|
David Blunkett was appointed British Home Secretary in Tony Blair's Labour party government in 2001. On 15 December 2004 he was forced to resign amidst mounting scandals concerning his affair with a married woman, Kimberly Quinn, his attempts to wrest control of Quinn's son and unborn child from her and her husband, abuse of travel warrants that are reserved specifically for MPs' spouses and children aged under 18 and his abuse of office by speeding up the visa application of Quinn's Filipina nanny.
Abuse of travel warrants
Members of the British House of Commons receive first class rail travel at the taxpayers' expense between London and their homes or constituencies. Their spouses, and children aged under 18, are entitled to make up to 15 such return journeys in a year. MPs are given foil strips (travel warrants) that allow them, their spouses and children to claim the free travel.
Around August 2002, Blunkett gave two travel warrants to his married lover, Kimberley Quinn, who used them for a return journey to Doncaster, contrary to the rules. This was first revealed in newspapers in November 2004, when Blunkett himself confessed to the breach and repaid the £179 cost of the return tickets. The revelations also led to a formal complaint being made to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, Sir Philip Mawer.
The Green Book on Members' allowances etc says that Members' spouses and children up to the age of 18 are each entitled to up to 15 return journeys each year between London and the constituency or the Member's home. There is no mention of Members' partners or friends.
The rules that Blunkett was alleged to have broken also state that:
- "No improper use shall be made of any payment or allowance made to Members for public purposes and the administrative rules which apply to such payments and allowances must be strictly observed."
On 20 December 2004 Mawer presented his report to the House of Commons Committee on Standards and Privileges. Mawer upheld the complaint against Blunkett, and the House Committee agreed with him.
Mawer also found that certain other allegations against Blunkett were outside his scope as they relate to his actions as a Government Minister rather than as a Member of the House of Commons. These allegations were:
- That he used his government chauffeur to drive a lady who was not his wife to his home in Derbyshire;
- That he took a lady who was not his wife to Spain accompanied by four security men and a driver, with much of the cost met by the taxpayer;
- "Fast-tracked" a visa for his lovers Filipina nanny in order to allow her to stay in Britain indefinitely;
- Shared confidential security information with Mrs Quinn, in what a friend of hers described as "pillow-talk". This included advice to her parents to avoid Newark airport, in New York, hours before a security scare and giving Mrs Quinn advance knowledge of police raids in Manchester that led to the death of an officer in January, 2003;
- Ordered a policeman to stand outside Mrs Quinns Mayfair home to safeguard her against anticapitalist rioting that had been expected during a May Day demonstration;
- Put pressure on the American embassy to issue a temporary passport for William Quinn in May 2003, so that Mrs Quinn and her son could join him on holiday in France;
- Used his government chauffeur to drive Mrs Quinn to his home in Derbyshire for weekend trysts;
- Took Mrs Quinn, the publisher of The Spectator, to Spain for a wedding, accompanied by four security men and a driver, with much of the cost allegedly met by the taxpayer.
Visa-application
On 21 December 2004, Sir Alan Budd reported on the allegations that David Blunkett's office had fast-tracked the visa application of his married lover's nanny. Budd's terms of reference were set by the Labour Government, and were:
"To inquire into the handling by the Home Office of the application for indefinite
leave to remain, made by Leoncia Casalme in April 2003."
The terms of reference were criticised as being too narrow by the main Opposition parties.
In his report Budd wrote:
- "I have not been able to determine whether Mr Blunkett gave any instructions in relation to the case and, if so, what they were."
Budd found that Blunkett was first involved when Quinn passed him a letter to the Immigration and Naturalisation department (IND) on or about 28 April 2003. The letter reached Blunkett's private office after 28 April, most probably on 29 April. From then, Blunkett's private secretary for Immigration faxed the letter to the office of the Director-General of IND, again most probably on 29 April. On 6 May, 8 days after the letter was passed to Blunkett, the case was reconsidered by the caseworker who had dealt with it initially
and the decision was changed to grant indefinite leave to remain.
There were a number of discrepancies in the evidence where Budd decided Blunkett's recollection, and the recollection of his officials, were at variance with what actually happened:
- Blunkett and his office insisted he had provided a blank form to Ms Casalme to complete. Budd found that either Ms Casalme or her sister had downloaded a blank form from the internet.
- Blunkett and his office said the form had been taken to the Home office and check by Blunkett's private secretary. Blunket's principal private secreatary and private secretary said they though they could recall something like this occurring but neither of
them has a clear memory. Budd preferred Mrs Quinn's and Ms Casalme's statements that it was not taken to the
Budd added:
- "One might ask why the Home Office appeared to accept this story and the story of the blank application form, when neither Mrs Quinn nor Ms Casalme, when I interviewed them, suggested that this happened."
At paragraph 3.35 of the report Budd announced:
- "I believe that I have been able to establish a chain of events linking Mr Blunkett to the change in the decision on Ms Casalme's application for ILR."
Mrs Quinn also told Budd of two other cases in which she claimed that Blunkett
had provided assistance. The first referred to an application for an American passport for her son. Blunkett had already mentioned that case to me. The second referred to Ms Casalme's
application for a visa to travel to Vienna. When these cases were raised with Blunkett he said "Yes, that's right. I help people".
Blunkett's resignation speech
When the issue of the application for ILR (indefinite leave to remain) for Ms Casalme emerged on November 28, I immediately asked for an inquiry to be set up.
Sir Alan Budd has undertaken that inquiry over the last two weeks.
The key issue has always been whether I used my public office for private benefit.
Since these issues were first raised, I have always given my honest recollection of the facts, on the record as I remembered them.
At that time and subsequently I said that the issue of Ms Casalme's application was not taken up by my office beyond it being read to me initially.
These statements have been based on the recollections of myself and the officials in my office at the time.
Yesterday, Sir Alan Budd told me there had indeed been a fax and an exchange of e-mails between my office and the Immigration and Nationality Directorate - not based on the application form as originally alleged but on the subsequent letter (informing her of a possible 12-month delay) of which I was always aware but did not remember holding a copy. I have no recollection of dealing with this in any way.
However, whether or not I asked for any action to be taken is irrelevant to the inference that can be drawn.
Given I have no recollection of issuing instructions to deal with the application, but only to continuing the elimination of the backlog in general, the easy thing would be to hide behind my officials. I will not do such a thing.
In no way is my office or any individual within the department to blame for what happened.
I believe these issues would never have been raised had I not decided in September that I could not walk away from my youngest son.
I could not live with myself or believe I had done the best for him in the long term if I had abandoned my relationship with him. I only sought continued access to him through the courts, as I made clear two weeks ago, because all other avenues had been denied me.
For 34 years, I have built my political career and earned the trust of the people I have served through being honest and truthful. Everything I have said in the last few weeks about this application I have believed to be true based on my own recollections and those of others despite the frenzy of allegations made in the media against me.
I have always been honest about my recollection of events. But any perception of this application being speeded up requires me to take responsibility.
That is why with enormous regret I have tendered my resignation to the Prime Minister today.
I want to thank the thousands of people who have contacted me over the last weeks with such supportive messages. I would also like to thank my ministerial and parliamentary colleagues.
Above all I want to thank my sons and my closest friends for the tremendous support they have given me.
In particular I want to thank the Prime Minister - my friend and the most outstanding international politician of our age. It has been an honour to serve him and the Labour Government I worked so hard to help create.
References
| 
