According to the survey, 82 per cent of women and only 52 per cent of men wear a suit.But it is not just that managers wear smart clothes themselves They also feel that others should conform. Only 6 per cent of them would regard a colleague who turned up for a meeting in casual dress as "modern" and "uninhibited"; 76 per cent of women and 53 per cent of men considered someone wearing casual dress to be "unprofessional and unreliable" or "lacking in respect for business protocol".Though Khalid Aziz, chairman of Aziz Corporation, finds it surprising that women have such strong views about formal dress, this could have more to do with the fact that those who have reached management positions wish to demonstrate their status by the way they dress, to make it clear that they are not mere members of the support team.The survey also found a clear generation gap in attitudes to casual dressing. Business people aged over 40 were more hostile to the idea, while nearly half of those below 40 considered dress-down days helpful, in that they broke down barriers and helped bosses to be seen as friends rather than tyrantsn. Builders get a bite-sized preview of the new London Aquarium at County Hall, which opens on Good Friday. On the opposite side of the Thames, sharp-toothed predators of another kind were savaging the Prime Minister in the Commons Photograph: John Voos. John Major was drawn into the heart of the cash-for- questions scandal last night when evidence to the Parliamentary inquiry was published in today's edition of the Guardian.
The evidence to Sir Gordon Downey, the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, reveals that Tim Smith, the minister who resigned as soon as the affair came to light, accepted between pounds 18,000 and pounds 25,000 in cash payments from Mohamed al Fayed which he did not declare on the register of members' interests. He was allowed to continue in office even after John Major had been told about the payments, according to the Guardian.The Guardian was given all the evidence to the Downey inquiry because its revelations led to its establishment and has published it over five pages in today's edition.According to the newspaper: "In September 1994, after Mr Fayed's investigations against Mr Smith and three other ministers were brought to Mr Major's attention, Sir Robin Butler, the Cabinet Secretary conducted an investigation.Mr Smith admitted taking fees of up to pounds 25,000. Mr Major was told about this, but Mr Smith did not offer his resignation and remained in office.This was a month before Mr Smith's eventual resignation after the allegations were made public.The Guardian's decision to publish is set to cause a furore and will clearly anger both Sir Gordon, who has spent six months gathering evidence, and the Tories.In an editorial, the Guardian justified its publication of the evidence, which appears to be a massive breach of privilege, by saying it believed "in elections fought in the light, not in the dark".Last night, the Guardian's editor, Alan Rusbridger, said: "It's up to Parliament to decide whether this is a privilege. Our lawyers have advised us that there is a public interest defence open to us."Mr Smith is standing in the election for Beaconsfield where he has a majority of nearly 24,000 but his candidacy will undoubtedly be put in doubt by these revelations.The Guardian says that the evidence also reveals that Neil Hamilton, the MP who has repeatedly claimed he did not accept any undeclared payments, now admits that he took the "secret commissions" worth about pounds 10,000.He also "admits not declaring them on the register [of members' interests]."Mr Hamilton further admits claiming travel to New Orleans as a business expense, the newspaper says, when the plane tickets were given to him free by Ian Greer, the former parliamentary lobbyist at the centre of the affair.The Guardian says that Mr Hamilton and another MP, Michael Brown, have admitted to the Downey inquiry that they lobbied ministers without declaring their financial interests in the members' register. Both men have rejected the Guardian's claims.The cash-for-questions affair had already led to the angriest ever exchanges between the Prime Minister and Tony Blair at Question Time. The Labour leader accused the Prime Minister of leaving a stain on Parliament, drawing the retort that the Opposition were engaged in a political stunt.Mr Major concluded the question-time exchanges by running through a breathtaking list of Labour double-standards that delighted the Conservative benches, and enraged the Opposition.Earlier, Michael Heseltine, the Deputy Prime Minister, set the tone of the day, telling BBC radio's Today programme that Labour did not "give a toss" about the cash-for-questions issue.In a later Sky News interview, Mr Heseltine had appeared to libel Mr Blair by saying, wrongly, that the Labour leader was under investigation by Sir Gordon Downey, the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards.Today's prorogation kills all further action until after the election, and Mr Blair yesterday offered Mr Major two ways of keeping the investigation alive: a postponement of prorogation; or a short Bill giving the committee power to carry on meeting.The Prime Minister also said that it was "improbable in the extreme" that there would be enough time to complete an investigation before Parliament was finally dissolved on 8 April..
Most voters think the Conservatives can still win the election, according to today's Independent/Harris opinion poll, writes John Rentoul. Despite a buoyant 27-point lead for Labour, our poll finds that two-thirds of voters - 69 per cent - say the Tories can still win. While only 17 per cent think the election is "certainly not over yet", half of the electorate - 52 per cent - say "while Labour are favourites there is still a slight chance" the Tories can win. A further 20 per cent think that the Tories have "no chance".Labour has an average 24-point lead in the six main polls, compared with 18 points before winning the Wirral South by-election three weeks ago,The Independent/Harris PollLabour..............................56%Con..................................29%Lib Dem...........................10%Others.............................5%Harris Research interviewed 1,016 adults in their homes between 14 and 17 March. The world's major tobacco companies, including British American Tobacco, were readying for battle last night after one of their own broke ranks and, in a remarkable public confession, accepted that smoking is addictive and can kill. The admission came in a dramatic settlement reached by the Liggett Group, the number five cigarette manufacturer in the United States, with the attorneys general of 22 US states. All 22 are pursuing lawsuits against the whole industry that could result in billions of dollars in medical damages. "This is the beginning of the end for the conspiracy of lies and deception that has been perpetrated against the American public by the tobacco companies," declared Grant Woods, the Attorney General of Arizona.Liggett, which makes Chesterfield and L&M cigarettes, formally acknowledged that cigarettes are addictive and medically harmful and pledged to begin saying as much in new warnings printed on their packs.
It has agreed to pay out 25 per cent of its pre-tax profits for the next 25 years.The company pledged also to hand over internal documents that threaten to expose the industry's alleged efforts to conceal the dangers of smoking.Philip Morris, the industry leader, hit back even before last night's announcement. In a North Carolina court, it won a temporary restraining order to block the release by Liggett of the documents.The manoeuvre was ridiculed by the attorneys general, however "That dog won't hunt," insisted Mike Moore of Mississippi. The first of the lawsuit trials is set to open in his state in just three weeks' time.Mr Moore said the Liggett papers were the "most incriminating documents ever in the history of tobacco litigation".Predicting that they would be released in time for the trial, he added: "I guarantee that we will bring the tobacco companies to their knees.". Bill Clinton's handlers could scarcely have handed a greater gift to the scoffing wags of late-night American television comedy. The President, a notorious foodie, touched down in Helsinki only to be offloaded into an airline catering truck. He came to make history, but arrived like a consignment of frozen chicken wings. "This must be the most bizarre arrival of any foreign politician on Finnish soil that we have ever witnessed," said Radio Finland's commentator "He has now left the catering wagon ...
and is being slowly wheeled down the red carpet and is shaking hands with members of the Finnish government". You would have thought someone would at least have pinned a United States flag across the tell-tale FinnAir catering logo.The band was cancelled, because Bill might have had to stand, a feat beyond him, though he had been working out in mid-air on parallel bars. Air Force One has its own gym.An hour or two later, Boris Yeltsin swept in, in his brand-new plane, walked out on to the snow-dusted tarmac, and launched into a speech as if he had never heard of the words "coronary'" or "cardiac".Round one of the PR war to the Russians.It was more than a matter of Mr Clinton's fumbled entry. The Kremlin, which has the weaker hand going into the summit, has mounted a super-slick press operation in Helsinki. Usually cagey top officials have been drafted in to talk about immigration, freedom of information, relations with the West and crime.Cleverly, the Russians have set up camp in the same building as the world's television companies; the President's spokesman, Sergei Yastrzhembsky, only has to walk out of his door and he is surrounded by lenses.
Comments are closed.