When the story of the “misleading” websites first broke about ten days ago, Simon Jupp  told the BBC he was “not responsible for the web domains in Mr Foord’s name”. 

Readers of the “Watch” will know that Simon Jupp is an arch equivocator and his statements are always worth “deconstructing”. What they don’t say may reveal more than what they do say.

What Jupp didn’t say at the time was:

I do not know who did this

This is not an action that I would ever sanction.

I will try to find out who did this and get it taken down meanwhile I must apologise to Richard Foord.

Until Wednesday, repeated requests for Simon Jupp to answer questions such as these and provide a full explanation have been met by silence.

It was not until Richard Foord revealed who purchased at least one the domains that either Oliver Kerr, Jupp’s campaign manager, or Jupp broke their silence. (Richard Foord deployed the powerful tool of making a data request of the domain registration company, Nominet) 

Kerr’s apology issued only after he has been uncovered doesn’t look in the least bit sincere. 

Neither does Jupp as he now comes over all “crocodile tears” saying:: “The individual responsible has apologised for making an error of judgement, without my knowledge or approval, and no longer owns the website domains in question.

“That is the right thing to do and I am glad he’s apologised and reflected on his actions.”

But are we really meant to believe that in the intervening ten days Jupp and his campaign manager didn’t talk or joke about this?

Now that we know that the purchaser was Jupp’s campaign manager it also raises the question as to whether or not Jupp does have some responsibility, despite his denial. Presumably Jupp appointed Kerr.

If Simon Jupp really is sincere that Kerr overstepping his remit is unacceptable then he should sack him immediately.

The original inews article also claims Oliver Kerr is employed by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority. If this is correct then a further question arises: is Kerr’s “error of judgement”, his lack of integrity, transparency and accountability in coming forward until caught “red handed” compatible with any continuing  role in that organisation?