Friday, January 11, 2008

Who is Gregory McEwen?

After quite a busy day in between meetings I've finally digested the Hain story and as has been noted by Ben Brogan, "if you drop by [the Progressive Policies Forum] registered address in Wimpole Street, you find the office of the solicitor listed on its company file". That solicitor is listed as McEwen Parkinson.

In the detailed company file it shows that the company itself is solely owned by one shareholder, Mr Gregory McEwen of Chorleywood, presumably one half of the solictors. Does the Parkinson half of the outfit know I wonder? Is Gregory McEwen just a lawyer, or does it go deeper?

I couldn't help but laugh when I googled "Gregory McEwen" and the second link was "Gregory McEwen' Store Front". Alas it was not a confession but just an author's Amazon Store.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

See also
http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/business_money/is+hains+think+tank+for+real/1315847

Gareth said...

The donations had to be declared within 30 days. They were not. Hang him.

Pride comes before a fall, fiscal incontinence or a perma tanned chancer?

By the time Hain paid his 15% (of a mere £77k) to Labour in September 2007 he'd already received £50k more in donations as this release details.

Why go to any lengths to hide this? Perhaps because it makes him look like a giant orange cock for spending so much money and failing.

The business with PPR is strange. Hain claims he went to PPR for money. By that time a number of large donations had already been made to PPR and were duly donated to Hain. What was the purpose behind PPR receiving donations if they were not passed on to Hain's campaign fund until he realised he needed the money?

Anonymous said...

I'm sure Greg McEwen is nothing to do with this. His firm has done perfectly legitimate work for John Underwood's PR consultancy when that was acquired by an AIM-listed company, Freshwater, a year or so ago. McEwen's involvement is very unlikely to be anything other than as the director of a shelf company used by Underwood for this so-called think-tank. This is perfectly standard for solicitors and McEwen will, I'm sure, be horrified to hear what has happened.