I've recently been contacted by a journalist from the Sunday Times running a story tomorrow about dodgy dealing in defence procurement.
They seem to be implying that I've been part of some sort of covert lobbying operation run by a former defence chief.
Regular readers of this blog will know that the idea I have been lobbying on behalf of any vested interests is absurd. It has my role precisely the wrong way round.
No other MP has done as much to challenge the way in which vested interests try to carve up the defence budget. See here or here - or see my proposal for a Bill to reform defence procurement here. No other MP has more frequently made the point that the defence budget seems to be spent in the interests of the defence contractors, rather than the armed forces. See here. I've banged on about the way MoD chiefs go off to work for private contractors and ran an FoI campaign on the subject.
I even got thrown off the Armed Forces Parliamentary Scheme shortly after raising questions about who was funding it.
It is absurd to imply that I might have had contact with academics, civil servants, soldiers or contractors, other than in pursuit of this long running campaign to ensure greater transparency over how we spend the defence budget.
I don't ask questions about defence procurement because contractors get in touch. Contractors – alongside a whole range of interested parties – often get in touch because I have an interest in defence procurement.
Of course, I made these points to both Jonathan Calvert and Heidi Blake of the Sunday Times.
Let's see if what they publish tomorrow reflects any of this.blog comments powered by Disqus
"A revolutionary text ... right up there with the Communist manifesto" - Dominic Lawson, Sunday Times