Wandsworth Conservative Group have broken cover in response to Guido’s recent exposé. Their Chairman Anthony Cole has released this statement:
“In the course of his employment with Wandsworth Conservative’s [sic.], Mr Morritt was required to incur expenses. In early 2010, legitimate questions were raised about expenses paid to Mr Morritt and the surrounding control systems. A detailed, thorough and independent investigation was performed and a series of detailed questions subsequently put to Mr Morritt. Mr Morritt satisfactorily answered all of these questions. There was no ‘missing money’ or ‘fraud’; there is absolutely no evidence he ‘kept the cash for himself’ or that there was personal gain for Mr Morritt. I request that you immediately desist from allegations to the contrary.”
They are standing by their Councillor Robert Morritt, who sits on Wandsworth Council’s audit committee…
So Mr Cole, Guido has a copy of the said report that was compiled in late 2010. As covered here, Morritt was forced out from his position as agent in July 2010 – after the General Election – and it was only after that the books were turned over and other questions arose. Guido has asked Wandsworth Tories whether “early 2010” suggests that suspicions had been raised pre-election.
The “detailed, thorough and independent investigation” that Guido has a copy of would suggest that far from “satisfactorily answering” questions about missing cash, it in fact opened a huge can of worms. Guido showed you yesterday over £8,000 of unexplained cheques. There are more to come too…
If there was no “missing money” or “fraud” how come the accounts do not show any reference to these “expenses” racked up by Mr Morritt? The accounts were not an accurate reflection of spending…
If, as Mr Cole claims, “Mr Morritt satisfactorily answered all of these questions…” and there was no “personal gain for Mr Morritt”, how come he was forced to pay back over £5,000 when he was ousted in autumn 2010?
Guido will “desist from allegations to the contrary” when some evidence is presented. Vague claims of “expenses” are not good enough in the light of overwhelming evidence of dodgy activity. Given Guido has the accounts, the reports and the cheques, perhaps Mr Cole and Mr Morritt would like to show him some receipts?
See also:
