James Gray's battle to keep hold of Wiltshire North was apparently dealt another blow by this morning's story in the Mail on Sunday and its sensationalist 'Tory MP's dumped wife forced to seek work as a cleaning lady' headline. But ConservativeHome has learnt that Mr Gray will take the MoS to the PCC tomorrow - in protest at alleged inaccuracies in the story as well as its intrusive nature. Sarah Gray herself is consulting solicitors over some of the article's content.
>>> Lunchtime update on 15th January:
"Tom Toulmin, Esq.,
Director, Press Complaints Commission
Halton House,
20/23 Holborn
London
EC1N 2JD
I write to object in the strongest possible terms to an article in The Mail on Sunday dated 14 January which is wildly inaccurate, personally intrusive to the extent of being a clear invasion of privacy and plainly designed to be damage my political reputation unfairly rather than to report on events.
It is entirely untrue that “TORY CAD’S DUMPED WIFE FORCED TO SEEK WORK AS A CLEANING LADY,” as the sensationalist headline reads. As I understand it, Sarah no more than jokingly said something along those lines to a friend on one occasion. It was an ironic remark.
Nor is she in any way “facing bankruptcy” as the photo caption and the article maliciously suggest. Sarah is in precisely the same financial situation as she has been for many years. I have offered her the entire proceeds from the sale of our Westminster flat, which our lawyers are currently holding pending our divorce. In the meantime she has access to precisely the same funds as she always has had, and our solicitors are currently discussing financial arrangements post divorce. Sarah is discussing action on this particular slur with her lawyers, since even the rumour of it might adversely affect her credit worthiness in the future.
There are other more detailed inaccuracies which have been placed in the article for vicious political motivations. From the top of the story:
- Sarah did have chemotherapy 18 months ago to treat mainly pre-cancerous cells, but she was given the all clear last Spring long before our separation. To say that she is “cancer stricken” is substantially misleading.
- I have not “refused to support her.” (an accusation which occurs throughout the article). She is being supported in precisely the same way as she was before our separation. It is my intention to be as generous to Sarah as I am able, hence the offer of our entire shared capital.
- The flat into which I have moved is by no means “luxurious”, but nor is it subsidised by the army in any way at all. On the contrary, I pay a full commercial rent. The newspaper tried repeatedly to make me admit to my private address, at which they more than hinted in the article. Surely it is a gross invasion of privacy for an MP to have his private address made known in this way.
- The ballot of my members will not take place “this week”, but any time from now until 29 January.
- I do not “want her out of our Wiltshire home.” Indeed I have said that she can stay there as long as she wishes, indeed permanently if she chooses to take on the lease in her own name.
- I have never said that our separation gives “Sarah the chance to blossom,” nor anything remotely resembling it.
- Even if I were “eccentric” which is a description which would ring no bells with friends or enemies alike, it is perhaps worth recording that when I rode a horse into Parliament, it was nothing whatever to do with fieldsports. I was supporting the campaign by the International League for the Protection of Horses against the live export of horses for human consumption. It may seem like a small point, but seems to me another element in a malign article designed to portray me in as bad a light as possible.
As a whole, the article adds nothing legitimate to the debate over whether or not I should be re-selected as the Conservative Parliamentary Candidate for North Wiltshire. It is a desperate attempt by those who are opposed to me to slur my good name using some of the most disgraceful lies that I have ever come across in a newspaper. The timing of the article, within days of ballot papers on my future being circulated is by no means a coincidence.
I do not believe that my new living arrangements are a legitimate line of enquiry for a newspaper, but more important than that, the suggestion that I have refused to support Sarah, that I am throwing her out of our Wiltshire home, that she faces bankruptcy and may be forced to seek work as a cleaning lady are untrue in every respect, and a disgraceful slur.
In the light of all of this, would you please ask the Press Complaints Commission urgently to investigate the matter, and advise me on the remedies available to me, in particular with regard to preventing any repetition of these inaccuracies and to requiring the Mail on Sunday to publish a comprehensive correction and apology."
