But neither that nor apparently the fact that after the Cultural Revolution he broke his religious vows affected the spiritual esteem in which

But neither that nor, apparently, the fact that after the Cultural Revolution he broke his religious vows, affected the spiritual esteem in which he was held in Tibet. For Tibetans he remained the Great Teacher, a man prepared to risk his own life to defend Tibet’s religious and cultural traditions.ISABEL HILTON. CHRISTIAN WOLMAR

BR Research, the former research arm of British Rail, is due to be sold off in the next nine months but faces a legal action from a quarrying company over the failure of a bogey designed for a wagon carrying stone.
An internal memo by Clifford Chance, the City solicitors which is handling the privatisation for British Rail, reveals BR Research is anxious that liability for any legal action should “stay with the board” and not transfer to the new company. BR Research, which employs 380 people and is based in Derby, may have a turnover of more than pounds 20m when it becomes privatised.The Low Track Force wagon was designed to allow each wagon to carry higher loads. BR Research passed on the design to the Gloucester Carriage Company, which provided the stone wagons to ARC, the Somerset-based quarrying company.It bought 145 of the wagons, costing pounds 70,000 each, but a series of derailments led to them being withdrawn. ARC was then forced to lease smaller wagons and, according to the memo, “ARC lost millions of pounds and it is possible that ARC will seek damages with BR Research being joined as a third party to any action”.The memo suggests that any other liabilities “that may arise as a result of impending litigation” should be excluded from the terms of sale.The matter raises a much larger doubt over the sell-off of British Rail.

While intellectual property rights may form a large part of the value of the new companies, failings in research may lead to litigation. If other sales of former British Rail sections are conducted on the same basis as that proposed for BR Research, taxpayers may face litigation while the new owners of the companies face no risk.A BR insider said: “We do try to palm off the risk if we can. But if they spot the problems, we have to reach a compromise.”Michael Meacher, Labour’s transport spokesman, said: “It is outrageous that taxpayers should be stuck with a large bill while the company is sold off and its shareholders are allowed to make large profits.”. STEVE BOGGAN

The public relations man who accidentally leaked highly embarrassing correspondence intended for Jonathan Aitken threatened yesterday to sue the Independent on Sunday for publishing it.
Patrick Robertson, whose office faxed the Aitken correspondence to a wrong number, tried to deflect attention from his gaffe by describing the decision to publish as “sleaze”.The fax, which was supposed to have been sent to Mr Aitken, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, showed that the minister believed “one more bad story will break the camel’s back”. Mr Robertson, 26, who is favoured as a spin doctor by the Tory right, was advising Mr Aitken on how to handle a “nasty” story which the minister expected to break in a number of Sunday tabloid newspapers yesterday.He advised against issuing a statement which would serve as a “pre-emptive strike” and added: “I am as certain as I can be that if you issue the statement in its current form you will be forced to resign within days.”The advice was supposed to have been faxed to Paul Raynes, Mr Aitken’s private secretary, on Wednesday evening. But Mr Robertson’s PR firm, Taskforce Communications, which he set up with Cecil Parkinson, the former Tory party chairman, made a mistake, sending it to David Scholefield, who passed the fax on to the Independent on Sunday.Yesterday, Mr Robertson refused to discuss the contents of the fax or cast more light on what kind of “nasty” story Mr Aitken feared.

But he said he was taking legal advice on suing the Independent on Sunday and Sunday Mirror, which also ran the story, for breach of copyright.He described as “humbug” Mr Scholefield’s decision to pass the fax on and for the newspapers to publish it. “This is precisely the kind of sleaze that Jonathan Aitken has been a victim of,” he said. “For this private letter to end up in Sunday newspapers describes quite adequately the situation in the country we live in these days.”Mr Robertson, the PR man for tomorrow’s wedding of Imran Khan, the former Pakistan cricket star, and Sir James Goldsmith’s daughter, Jemima, said he was not employed by Mr Aitken. “I am his friendly adviser and I drop him an occasional note or give him a call to suggest ways of dealing with problems.” He said he could not take credit for Mr Aitken’s decision not to issue a pre-emptive statement because the Chief Secretary never received his advice. His office sent a second fax asking Mr Scholefield to return the first fax but received no reply.In his fax, Mr Robertson, founder of the Bruges Group of Euro-sceptics, discussed ways of handling the media and argued against issuing the pre- emptive strike. “I completely understand your primary concern, which is that one more bad story will break the camel’s back,” he wrote.

“I still believe, however, that your fundamental problem is and will continue to be BMARC. The statement does nothing to reassure on that score.”He said a source told him that three tabloids were “sniffing around” the “nasty” story and advised: “If the objective is to stop the tabloids from running a nasty story against you on Sunday, there is only one way to do it: you would need to talk to the other person involved. Nothing else would work.”Mr Aitken refused to comment yesterday.James Fenton, page 17. David Scholefield, a successful arts promoter, was sitting in his central London flat on Wednesday evening when his fax machine started churning out a memo to Jonathan Aitken, writes Nick Cohen. The 48-year-old New Zealander did something of a double take. “I’d been talking about Aitken with my friends earlier in the day,” he said.