Cash for access: stonewalling at 8am but all out by 6pm: keepers of Cameron's dinner list He was fairly newly in his post as the senior treasurer of the party. No one in the treasurer's department knew he was having that meeting and actually we are pretty meticulous about doing these things properly," the minister said. The tone was set, the impression given that the Conservative hierarchy was planning a stonewall approach, holding the line that Mr Cameron's dinners with donors would remain entirely secret. Later in the morning, Downing Street put a few more stones in the wall at the 11am briefing for Westminster journalists. There, the Prime Minister's spokesman insisted that there would be no publication of the guest lists for "private" dinners in the flat. The message was clear: only when taxpayers" money paid for food and where civil servants were present to record discussions of government do the voters have a right to know whom their Prime Minister is meeting. Otherwise, meetings are private. "If the Prime Minister hosts private events, he meets the costs of that himself," the spokesman said. If he wants to have friends around, that's a matter for him. Still, the briefing did reveal some significant information. The spokesman confirmed that the Coalition's "transparency" publications about prime ministerial meetings were actually less comprehensive than many had thought. The annual list of guests at Chequers, for instance, is not all-embracing. It only includes "official" visitors. "Private" guests, whose bed and board is funded by Mr Cameron or the Conservative Party, are not subject to such transparency. Neither Mr Maude's interview nor the Downing Street briefing did anything to stem the Westminster village's appetite for details about Mr Cameron's dealings with donors. That persistent pressure forced No 10 into its first climb-down of the day. Shortly before noon, Mr Cameron took to the podium at a central London hotel to address a public meeting about dementia care, but first he had a few words to say on donors and dinners. Not only would he publish the names of those who attended donors" dinners in Downing Street - 11 people in all - he would put in place new rules on disclosure. From now on, he said, any ministerial meal with major donors will be published. Whitehall officials will also police more closely cases of donors attempting to influence Government policy, he added. His aides were adamant that those rules would not be applied retrospectively. They also insisted that the disclosures relating to Downing Street would not be applied to Chequers. The reasons for the partial disclosure were vague, but as late as 3.30pm, No 10 was strongly arguing that the Chequers guest list would not be published, partly on principle and partly on practical grounds. The records from the Buckinghamshire retreat, aides said, were incomplete and unreliable. Some guests who attended may not even have been recorded, it was suggested. By 4pm, as Mr Maude was again under fire in the Commons, the stonewall was crumbling still further. The Prime Minister had announced an internal review of the scandal by the Tory peer Lord Gold, which Ed Miliband told the Commons was "completely inadequate given the scale of these allegations." It's a whitewash and everyone knows it," he said. As the parliamentary debate raged, Downing Street sources told journalists that work was now underway on a list of donors who had attended "private" functions at Chequers. They said the records remained hard to assemble and no list was likely to be forthcoming by the end of the day. In the light of previous statements, it was not entirely surprising when, shortly before 6pm, the Conservative press office issued a list of those donors who had been Mr Cameron's guests at Chequers.