Prescott to declare Anschutz stay
John Prescott will declare his stay at the home of an American billionaire on the Commons’ register of members’ interests.
The deputy prime minister’s about-face follows the launch of an inquiry into his failure to declare the two days he spent at the home of Philip Anschutz, whose company Anschutz Entertainment Group is hoping to turn the Millennium Dome into Britain’s first super-casino.
Previously, Mr Prescott had claimed he had no reason to enter it onto the register of interests because it was “entirely on official business and the cost was entirely covered by public funds”.
But today a spokesman for Mr Prescott said it would be registered because he “does not wish there to be any doubt that he has acted at all times with integrity”.
Following complaints by the Conservatives, Sir Philip Mawer, the Parliamentary standards commissioner, has opened “preliminary inquiries” into why Mr Prescott did not declare the visit to Mr Anschutz’s Colorado ranch in July 2005.
Ministerial rules state that ministers must not accept “gifts, hospitality or services” from people where a conflict of interest could be inferred.
The government is set to give the go-ahead to the UK’s first super casino on a trial basis later this year, and the Conservatives have expressed concern about the potential for conflict of interest in any role Mr Prescott might have in making this decision.
Shadow culture secretary Hugo Swire, who made the complaint to the standards commissioner, said Mr Prescott’s decision to declare the stay left many questions unanswered.
“Mr Prescott has been forced kicking and screaming to do the right thing in registering the hospitality from an American billionaire,” he said.
“However, this late decision fails to answer any of the many questions still hanging over this visit and his relationship with big business.”
Mr Swire has obtained information under the Freedom of Information Act showing that Mr Prescott visited the Sydney Star City Casino in Australia on “official business”.
He also pointed out that in March 2006, Mr Prescott’s department issued planning guidance on casinos, which directly affected the planned casino at the Dome.
DCMS minister Richard Caborn rejected suggestions that decisions on the location of super-casinos could be unduly influenced, explaining that they would be made by an independent panel of experts.
“This is the most transparent, arms-length from government process there is,” he told Today.
He added: “It is fundamentally wrong to suggest that John Prescott or anybody else will influence this process now.”
On Tuesday, Mr Prescott disclosed in a letter to Mr Swire that he had met Mr Anschutz on seven occasions, but said they had not discussed the sale of the Dome.
Mr Prescott claims that his stay, along with several members of his staff, took place on a day off during a nine-day official trip. A donation was later made to charity – by the taxpayer – to cover the cost of the stay.
In a letter to Mr Swire, Mr Prescott says: “I can categorically confirm that no discussion took place about the sale of the Dome (indeed contracts had been signed three years earlier), nor about the awarding of regional casino licences.”
Former minister Kate Hoey said the deputy prime minister had become a “figure of fun” in the eyes of the public and should consider his position.
At the weekend Mr Prescott released a statement saying: “My contact with Philip Anschutz relates solely to the use of the Dome, post-sale, in terms of regeneration of the area, and Mr Anschutz’s interest in William Wilberforce, former Hull MP and abolitionist, about whom Mr Anschutz is making a film, as I am personally involved in the 2007 Abolition Bicentenary.”
