ConservativeHome's Columnists: Theresa May MP: The questions Harman still has to answer

This week must have felt like an eternity for the Prime Minister. The David Abrahams story that broke last Sunday has got worse and worse for the Labour Party. Gordon Brown will now be the second British prime minister, after Tony Blair, to be questioned by the police. His general secretary had to resign. His chief fundraiser is on the rack. And several ministers are in a state of nervous exhaustion.

So let me deal today with my opposite number, Harriet Harman.

On Tuesday, I wrote to Harriet demanding that she make a statement in the House of Commons in order to answer a series of questions about the donation she received from Janet Kidd. Unsurprisingly, the Leader of the House of Commons – who is responsible for deciding what business is taken in Parliament – chose not to take my offer up. Moreover, she failed to reply to my letter. And most importantly, she failed to answer virtually all of the questions.

Amongst the questions were:

Why did you accept a donation for your deputy leadership campaign on 4 July – almost two weeks after your campaign ended?

Given that you say that you received the donation after you stepped down from the Department of Constitutional Affairs, why did you declare it to the Permanent Secretary of the DCA?

Why did you make the declaration to the Permanent Secretary three months after your received the donation?

And we have not had satisfactory answers. In fact, as the week has gone on, more and questions have been raised. Harriet was implicated in the scandal in the Tuesday newspapers. But her response was a limited press statement on Tuesday morning followed by a couple of evasive interviews on Tuesday evening. But her statements only led to further questions.

Mr Abrahams has confirmed that you solicited the donation. Did you approach Mr Abrahams or Ms Kidd?

Did Baroness Jay or anybody else warn you that Mr Abrahams was trying to make donations to the campaign teams or the Labour Party through conduit donors during the Deputy Leadership election campaign or since?

You apparently wrote to 1,000 people asking them to donate to your campaign. When did you write to them? Was it at the same time as you approached Janet Kidd/David Abrahams?

Then on Thursday, she was due to speak in the House of Commons twice. First, as Leader of the House, during our weekly Business Questions session. And second, as Minister for Women, on improving the number of rape prosecutions. She dropped out of the latter debate – a sure sign that this sleaze scandal is getting in the way of her ability to do her (several) jobs. And during Business Questions, despite the screams and shouts from the Labour benches, and the interventions of the Speaker, Harriet failed to defend herself. She trotted out her lines to take but couldn’t answer the outstanding questions.

Harriet might be completely innocent. If that’s the case, she should come to the House of Commons, make a full statement, and take questions from MPs. If she can answer these outstanding questions, then she can stay in her job. But if she can’t, her position must be in grave doubt. It’s up to her.

*****

Incidentally, when Harriet Harman was made Leader of the House, I and many colleagues protested that her position as Deputy Leader and Chairman of the Labour Party was incompatible with her duty to protect the rights of Parliament. As Leader of the House of Commons, it’s her job not just to be the Government’s representative in Parliament, but Parliament’s representative in Cabinet. Nonsense, Labour claimed: she wouldn’t put party interests before Parliament. Well, what happened yesterday? This week’s ‘topical debate’ – the subject of which is chosen by the Harriet Harman – was on ‘the future prospects for apprenticeships in England’. I don’t know how many MPs asked her for a debate on apprenticeships, but I rather suspect it was fewer than those who wanted a debate on Northern Rock, the HMRC fiasco, and the David Abrahams dodgy donations.