MR JOHN MAJOR has dismissed as "total and complete junk" allegations that he knew one of his MPs had taken cash for parliamentary questions when he appointed him a Northern Ireland minister.
Despite the renewed "sleaze" row threatening a long shadow over the Conservative election campaign, the Prime Minister seems set to resist calls for the recall of parliament to enable the Standards and Privileges Committee to receive Sir Gordon Downey's full report on the "cash-for-questions" affair.
Meanwhile, Sir Gordon, the Parliamentary Commissioner, weighed into the row, deploring the selective leaking of parts of the evidence to his inquiry.
Transcripts published in yesterday's Guardian newspaper had Mr Tim Smith admitting taking between £18,000 and £25,000 in cash payments between 1986 and 1989 while asking questions in Parliament on behalf of Harrod's owner, Mr Mohammed Al Fayed. Mr Smith admitted taking the money in envelopes containing notes without invoices or receipts and without declaring the payments for tax purposes.
But Mr Major vehemently dismissed the allegation that Mr Smith had been allowed to remain at the Northern Ireland Office after being told he had confessed to taking the payments. Downing Street said Mr Major had asked the Cabinet Secretary to investigate as soon as he became aware of the allegations in September 1994. Mr Major received the Cabinet Secretary's report a week later and asked for further urgent inquiries to be made. Mr Smith resigned three days later and the Downing Street spokesman said it was merely "a coincidence" the resignation came on the same day the Guardian published the detail of the allegations.
Mr Smith broke his silence yesterday to confirm that he had advised the then Tory Chief Whip and his constituency chairman about the payments in 1989. But he insisted: "I am sure the Prime Minister had no knowledge of this before October 1994."
In his statement Sir Gordon reiterated his regret that it would not be possible for the committee to receive and act upon his report before the general election. But he said: "The selective leaking of evidence against the interests of natural justice."
The statement said: "It was the intention of Parliament that my investigations should be completed in private and submitted to the Select Committee on Standards and Privileges. The committee would give members against whom I upheld allegations of misconduct an opportunity of making representations and would, if they judged it necessary, take further evidence before publishing my report." It continued: "The procedures for my inquiry necessarily involve enabling witnesses to comment on the evidence of others where there is a conflict of evidence. But evidence supplied to witnesses under this procedure is privileged, and those receiving it are warned that any unauthorised disclosure would be viewed by the select committee as a contempt of Parliament."
The Guardian editor, Mr Alan Rusbridger, had earlier indicated the paper was unlikely to make further disclosures. He told the BBC: "We have made the point. What we wanted to do was give an indication of the confessions - these aren't allegations, these are confessions - that the MPs have made in private. He added: "One of the nauseating aspects of this whole thing is that MPs have been confessing dishonesty in private, then going on television, saying, `I am innocent, please vote for me'." He insisted the paper had not prejudiced the inquiry, but simply published extracts of the report's appendix which would have been published next week had Parliament continued in session.
As Labour continued to press for a parliamentary recall, Mr Robin Cook last night questioned why Tory Whips had not advised the Prime Minister about the cash-for-questions admission when Mr Smith was appointed - and why his resignation came only after the Guardian disclosures.