Main Index to all Sections

Index to:
The Little Book of Bell

When Martin Bell appeared on the BBC's Face to Face programme opposite Jeremy Isaacs, Isaacs explored Bell's family background, his time as a reporter and so on. Bell gave an excellent account of himself and came across as an inherently decent person.  But when Isaacs broached his stand against Hamilton, Bell looked decidedly awkward, as well he might.

Jeremy Isaacs:
'He [Hamilton] put it to you that he was innocent until he was proved guilty.  What was it that you were campaigning on, on your anti-corruption ticket?'

Martin Bell:
'I never campaigned on cash in envelopes.  I thought it unprovable then, I think it unprovable now - I just don't know!  I campaigned on stuff he'd admitted like the famous holiday at the Ritz, and taking free flights to New Orleans and charging them against tax, misleading the deputy Prime Minister was what I would call conduct unbecoming of an Member of Parliament.'

Martin Bell states that he did not stand on the 'cash for questions' issue but on Hamilton's 'admitted wrongdoing', such as Hamilton's supposed income tax fraud (which was untrue); 'free' flight (which was untrue); deception of Heseltine (which doesn't stand up to scrutiny); and 'holiday' at the Ritz (which was misrepresented and then blown out of all proportion).  His overall claim does not even stand casual scrutiny.
    In fact, the earliest Bell could have learned about Hamilton's alleged 'free flight', alleged 'income tax fraud' and alleged 'misleading of Michael Heseltine' was on the 8 April i.e. the day after he had announced his intention to stand, from page 17 of that day's edition of The Guardian, although his performance on the Heath later that morning suggests that he didn't learn them until the day after that, when The Guardian's David Leigh & Ed Vulliamy journeyed up from London to brief him.
    In any event, Bell's chosen stance was as an 'anti-corruption' candidate, which can only relate to corrupt payments i.e. 'cash for questions'.  And it was only after Tatton's Returning Officer, Brian Longden, advised him that his chosen tag left him open to legal challenge (which Bell had confirmed by the LibDem's solicitors, courtesy of his friend, Paddy Ashdown) that Bell then dropped the tag and renamed himself as an 'Independent'.  And that didn't happen until 15 April, eight days after he announced his candidature.

Bell's utterances in the Press also belie his claim that he entered the election on Hamilton's 'admitted wrongdoing'. In the 9 July 1997 edition of the Northwich Guardian (i.e. the first issue following the release of Downey's report), Martin Bell was reported as having 'considered resigning' if Downey had cleared Hamilton completely.  Bell is quoted directly:

'I think I would have then been in a difficult position.'

But Downey could hardly clear Hamilton of wrongdoings that Hamilton had supposedly already admitted.  (Furthermore, if Martin Bell had entered the election on the allegations that Hamilton had admitted, it would have been immaterial whether Downey had cleared Hamilton of the 'cash for questions' charges or not.)
    Even more revealing is the extract from Martin Bell's own column in the 1 October 1997 edition of the Knutsford Guardian (an independent paper) in which he referred to the imminent Select Committee's planned adjudication on the Downey Report:

'This month should see the final chapter of a long-running political drama, veering at times from farce to tragedy… Neil Hamilton, testifying under oath and probably on television as well, will appear before the House of Commons Standards and Privileges Committee.  He will challenge the conclusion of the Parliamentary Commissioner, Sir Gordon Downey, that there was 'compelling evidence' that he took Mr Al Fayed's cash for asking questions in the House.  In all this business, there are only three verdicts that matter.  The people delivered theirs on election day.  Sir Gordon added his at the beginning of July.  Now it is the turn of the committee, sitting in judgement on one of their former colleagues.'

Bell let slip that, as far as he was concerned, the people of Tatton really had voted for him because of the 'cash for questions' issue, after all.

Chapter Three, Part One

Chapter Four