Did Cameron Text Rebekah Brooks 12 Times A Day?

2 May 2012

11:36 PM

2 May 2012

11:36 PM

The Prime Minister’s supporters will hope that this detail in Peter Oborne’s column today is not true:

A fresh embarrassment concerns Rebekah Brooks, who providentially retained the text messages she received from the Prime Minister, which I’m told could exceed a dozen a day. These may now be published, a horrible thought.

Now "I’m told" and "could" allow for some doubt. But the quantity of texts zipping between Ms Brooks and Mr Cameron is not the only problem, so too is their frequency. I cannot think the Prime Minister’s reputation will be enhanced by the disclosure that he was in contact with Ms Brooks almost every day. Indeed, if what Peter suggests could be true actually is true then we will be left with the impression that Mr Cameron spent more time wooing Ms Brooks than he did his own wife. That won’t end well either.


Until now I’ve thought the Murdochpalooza embarrassing but something the Conservatives can survive. But the possibility there could be a trove of DC to RB texts begins to make one wonder if matters could yet take a turn for the worse. If nothing else it all makes the Prime Minister seem weak, weak, weak. The public may be a hypocritical bunch of sods at the best of times but they still, at least occasionally, want to see their Prime Minister behaving in a vaguely dignified fashion. They don’t, I think, want him texting tabloid newspaper editors a dozen times a day. It is the sort of thing that can ruin a chap’s reputation.

Peter’s column overstates, I think, the extent to which Murdochpalooza grips Britain or can really be considered "the defining story of our age". But that is Peter’s style. This government is Cock o’ the North one week and Cock-a-leekie the next. Even so, these can’t be comfortable times in Downing Street and there is an awkward sense that, what with this and the economy and everything else, the waters are slowly rising…

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.

Show comments
  • Herbert Thornton

    In case anybody fails to see my 6:50pm point it is that a man’s being being a mass murderer does not necessarily prevent him from securing massive support.

    Circumstances thrust power into the hands of both Hitler and OBL (not to mention other bloodthirsty humans such as Pol Pot) and it is far from impossible that circumstances created by jihadists will eventually thrust power, if not into Breivik’s hands too, then into the hands of others very much like him.

  • Herbert Thornton

    Fergus – Maybe Breivik is what you say – but so were both Hitler and Osama bin Laden, weren’t they?

  • Fergus Pickering

    Herbert, I don’t think anybody of our sort could possibly view Mr Brievik with approval. If they did they wouldn’t be of our sort, would they? The man is a walking advertisement for the Death Penalty.

  • Baron

    Herbert, many others share your choice of who you prefer, Baron’s amongst them, it’s vomit inducing to see someone like Clegg, the other tossers, who never created a penny of wealth trying to destroy a man who created a business providing jobs for tens of thousands.

    Nobody ever points out that those scarred of Murdoch had something to hide, something they didn’t want the public to know.

  • Herbert Thornton


    If we are discussing what is the most important phenomenon of our age, then I agree with you that it is the precipitous decline of Europe and its civilisation and the extent to which it is allowing Islamic barbarism to replace it.

    Obviously, Cameron, Clegg and Milliband are entirely nonchalant about it as is the Establishment.

    UKIP may be slightly better, but otherwise who is much better? The EDL and BNP obviously, and even the National Front are better; in Holland there is Geert Wilders, and in France there is Marine LePen but too few people listen to her.

    Every sign is that the decline is accelerating and as things grow worse it will not be surprising if many frightened people begin to view Anders Breivik with approval.

  • Tiberius

    Oborne’s piece is one of the few fair and balanced ones we read these days. It is unfair that Labour appear to be getting off scott free from their relationship with Murdoch, while Cameron’s erstwhile reputation as a lucky general is being tested as the brown stuff is hits the fan on his watch. And it could cost him.

    Oborne questions Cameron’s judgement but also acknowledges that the post-Murdoch era (if indeed we are in one) only commenced a few months ago. This poses the question of whether Cameron could have beaten Brown if he had (supposedly judiciously) eschewed Coulson, Wade, and Murdoch.

    He wouldn’t have won the election. Labour had a big majority from 2005, and still had a grip on the client state created by Brown, which delivered it 259 seats in 2010. The client state includes (amongst others), England and Wales’ boundary bias, Scotland in its near entirity, teachers, council workers, health workers, and welfare claimants. Indeed the DT reports today that, surprise, surprise, some groups of claimants are worse off after attempted reforms. Here we see why Brown wouldn’t address cuts, and why the advice the Tories took from some before the election (that they should be honest about reform) was bad advice.

    It has been said before that employing Coulson must have been a calculated gamble, in order to maximize the probability of winning the election. It is still supposition at this stage, but it may come to pass that Cameron will have to face the tragic situation that in order to gain office, he had to make a Faustian pact which will have a fatal political conclusion.

  • Ian Walker

    What was it that hell hath no fury like? It’s slipped my mind….

  • david welsh

    Maybe Peter Oborne is wrong about the frequency and content of the correspondence between Rebeka & Dave.

    Maybe there is an innocent explanation.

    Maybe it was lurv.

    Only one thing to do: publish and be damned.

  • codhead

    “This government is Cock o’ the North one week”

    Which week was that then?

  • Fergus Pickering

    Murdoch is symbolic of no such thing. In fact no human being is symbolic of an abstraction. How would YOU like to be a symbol?

  • TomTom

    “the rise and fall of Europe must be the defining story of our age”

    Untergang des Abendlandes (191* Oswald Spengler, Fergus old dear. That is the reason for Mussolini and Hitler – to reverse the Inevitable Decline of the Euro-American Civilisation which has proceeded at a frantic pace since 1945.

    The EU was but the latest dam to break. Murdoch has titillated British political classes for 4 decades as the decline accelerated. He has been the Wizard of Oz delivering Voters en-masse to the Corporatist Party Elites – so they thought.

    Political Elites have lived in a fantasy world of Self-Delusion since 1940s and increasingly lunatic have given away key technologies to Russia and Asia thinking they have some Perpetuity to guarantee their Wealth and Safety.

    Murdoch is symbolic of the Political Betrayal of The West with its Cult of Celebrity and Money over Integrity and Work

  • Guru Mackenzie

    Cameron is over

  • Fergus Pickering

    Herbert, the quote says ‘the defining story of our age’. Surely the rise and fall of Europe must be the defining story of our age, rather than something about a powerful newspaper man. Such chaps come and go, don’t you know, or are the names of Northcliffe and Rothermere unknown to you? ASnd I seem to remember a fat blusterer called Cecil King who thought he could get rid of Harold Wilso. Of course if you are a journalist you might think like that. Journalists are notoriously pompous and self-important, much like politicians, come to think of it. As for the man who incorporates the zeitgeist, that man is surely Tony Blair.

  • Herbert Thornton

    Fergus – Surely it would be reasonably easy. Just arrange to stop calling it the Sun on Sunday & call it The News of the World instead?

    Your second paragraph seems to be trying to say something, but what that is is unclear. If you are suggesting that the person who personifies the zeitgeist or something is not Murdoch but is David Cameron, you may alas, be right.

    But what do either the Euro or the EU have to do with the topic?

  • Fergus Pickering

    Herbert, how cn Rupert revive the NoW when he’s just replaced it wih the Sun on Sunday?

    So this Murdoch thing is the defining whateveritis of the age. I suppose the death of the euro to be followed by the death of the EU is but a blip. Dearie me.

  • daniel maris

    Could explain Cameron’s cazy rant style in the Commons.

    I pointed up the dangers of this Brooks connection yesterday on another thread. He wasn’t just sucking up to the press – he was intimately involved with the Murdoch web through the Cotswold set. Add to that the Nun’s Story and you have a pretty corrosive barrel of fun.

    In all seriousness, Cameron’s authority might not survive this.

    It sounds like Brooks will publish if she is going to be prosecuted.

  • Herbert Thornton

    When I say that I much prefer both Rupert Murdoch and Rebekah Brooks to any of the Cameron, Clegg and Milliband conglomerate, I suspect that my attitude is shared by most of the public.

    Having said that I also think that the public would be no more sad to see the so-called ‘Conservative’ party as well as the Liberal and Labour parties suffer the same fate as was suffered by the News of the World.

    Murdoch certainly emerges from all this as being far less sleazy and deceitful than most current politicians.

    Is it too much to hope that the public will now turn instead to alternative parties, such as UKIP, the EDL and the BNP? I think that if Murdoch will take advantage of that – and throw in the bonus of reviving the News of the World it would produce general satisfaction.