Media

How Cameron can regain some initiative

The phone hacking scandal has now been leading the news for a fortnight straight. When a story has been on the front pages for this long, it develops its own momentum. If we were on day two of the story, I very much doubt that Sir Paul Stephenson would have resigned as quickly as he did or if David Cameron would have agreed so readily to extending the parliamentary session. Cameron is now out of the country, allowing Ed Miliband to stay on the front foot. The danger for Cameron is that Miliband constantly appears to be half a step ahead of the PM. Miliband’s line that Cameron is ‘hamstrung’

Quizzical eyes turn on Yates

The phone hacking saga is now moving at such pace it threatens to engulf the political establishment (whether it is a sufficiently serious story to do so is another matter). After Sir Paul Stephenson’s theatrical resignation, timed to upset newspaper deadlines and plotted to embarrass the Prime Minister, attention has now turned to John Yates. Boris Johnson has said that Yates has ‘questions to answer’; and Brian Paddick argues that Yates should fall on his sword too. The Metropolitan Police Standards Committee meets this morning, and, as Laura Kuenssberg notes, it may discuss John Yates’ conduct. Yates’ defence (that he was overseeing 20 terror cases at the same time as

Missing the target

It has been a mixed week for Parliamentary Select Committees: they have regained some of their bite, but recent events have also served to remind us of their supine performances in the past. Yesterday it was the turn of the Defence Committee to seek our attention, briefing their latest report on the British military campaign in Helmand to the Sunday Telegraph. Under the headline ‘British Force Was Too Weak to Defeat Taliban’, we read of ‘a devastating report’ which is ‘deeply critical of senior commanders and government ministers’. But, the Committee have got some fairly crucial things wrong. They conclude that the task force was ‘capped at 3,150 for financial

Rebekah Brooks arrested

There is a growing controversy about the timing of the arrest of Rebekah Brooks. Having now been arrested, Brooks may well not appear before the select committee on Tuesday. This will enrage parliamentarians who feel that parliament has been misled several times during this scandal and want answers. (The Murdochs, though, are still scheduled to appear). The next source of controversy is that the arrest occurs at a time when the police were beginning to take centre stage in the scandal. There will be those who suspect that this is not just a coincidence. Then, there is the fact she has been arrested just two days after resigning from News

From the archives: When Gordon loved Rupert

Gordon Brown graced the political stage with a rare cameo this week – if half an hour of deluded invective masquerading as reasoned piety qualifies as a cameo. Brown would have you believe that he had nothing to do with Rupert Murdoch. This following piece by Peter Oborne says otherwise.   The murderous intent of Gordon Brown, Peter Oborne, 20 April 2002 This Friday a triumphant Gordon Brown flies to New York for a business conference. The Chancellor and his colleagues perhaps see the trip as a well-earned break.   In No.10 Downing Street there is a temptation to take a more jaundiced view, and interpret it as a quick

James Forsyth

Cameron comes clean

Later on today, Downing Street will reveal all of David Cameron’s meetings with newspaper / media proprietors and editors since the election. This is a welcome move, transparency is the best disinfectant and by getting the information out there it will end speculation about precisely how close he was to various people in News International. But one detail has already leaked out and will cause controversy: Andy Coulson was a guest at Chequers several months after he quit the government. In some ways this is no great shock, Coulson — as Cameron said at last Friday’s press conference — is a friend of the Prime Minister and someone whose advice

Murdoch atones

Sky News reports that Rupert Murdoch is set to apologise for the activities of the News of the World in a newspaper advert to be run tomorrow. It will read: ‘We are sorry. The News of the World was in the business of holding others to account. It failed when it came to itself. We are sorry for the serious wrongdoing that occurred. We are deeply sorry for the hurt suffered by the individuals affected. We regret not acting faster to sort things out. I realise that simply apologising is not enough. Our business was founded on the idea that a free and open press should be a positive force

James Forsyth

Brooks resigns

Rebekah Brooks has finally resigned this morning. Her departure was actually expected yesterday, in the morning indications were given that she would quit that afternoon. My understanding is that the thinking at News International was that if she was still in her job when she attended the select committee hearing on Tuesday, she would just be monstered. But this strategy was thrown into confusion when the Murdochs themselves were compelled to attend. But this morning, the decision has clearly been taken that she has to step down before facing parliament. Her departure was in many ways inevitable. But it does remove the last fire break between this scandal and the

Murdoch prepares to fillet Brown

“He got it entirely wrong.” That is Rupert Murdoch’s response to Gordon Brown’s singular account of his relationship with the Murdoch press. “The Browns were always friends of ours,” Murdoch added in an interview with the Wall Street Journal, in which he promised to set the record straight on the “lies uttered in parliament” when he appears before a select committee next Tuesday. It is going to be a moment of the most gripping political theatre. Murdoch also uses the interview to defend News Corp’s handling of the phone hacking crisis. He concedes that ‘minor mistakes’ have been made, but, fundamentally, all is well with the Kingdom. However, he still

Another self-inflicted wound by Murdoch

The Murdochs have done a reverse-ferret and now will attend the Culture select committee on Tuesday. The harm done to their reputation by their initial refusal is yet another self-inflicted wound. It was clear, given how previous select committee inquiries on these matters had not received proper answers from various representatives of News International, that parliament would do everything it could to compel their attendance. Indeed, both the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister had gone on the record to say they should attend before the Murdoch’s curt letters saying they wouldn’t were dispatched. Their appearance on Tuesday will, I suspect, now become the focus of this story in the

It was the Times wot won it

The latest issue of the Spectator features an article in qualified defence of Rupert Murdoch by William Shawcross, author of Murdoch: the Making of a Media Empire. In it, Shawcross writes: ‘Simon Jenkins, now a Guardian columnist, wrote before the current horrors that Murdoch ‘is the best thing that ever happened to the British media and they hate it.’ He was right. There are obviously many things wrong with Murdoch’s group, but without his epic victory over the print unions in the 1980s, there would be far fewer papers in Britain today. Murdoch means pluralism…Who else would have subsidised the huge losses of the Times, an excellent paper, for so

James Forsyth

Parliament versus Murdoch, part two

The Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee has responded to Rupert and James Murdoch rejecting their request to give evidence to them, by issuing a summons. My understanding is that parliament cannot compel them to attend because they are not British subjects. But others think that as long as they are in the country they can be forced to come to parliament. That a select committee chaired by Margaret Thatcher’s former political secretary is prepared to issue this summons shows how much the standing of the Murdochs has changed in the past ten days. MPs are pretty much united in their fury that News International figures failed to give proper

James Forsyth

Ed Miliband: Murdoch’s spell has been broken

I have an interview with Ed Miliband in the latest issue of The Spectator, conducted the evening before yesterday’s Parliamentary debate on News Corp and BSkyB. Here’s the whole thing for CoffeeHousers: Rupert Murdoch’s hold on British politics has finally been broken. The politicians who competed to court him are now scrapping to see who can distance themselves fastest. As the Labour leader, Ed Miliband, says when we meet in his Commons office on Tuesday afternoon, ‘The spell has been broken this week and clearly it will never be the same again.’ Miliband and his staff have just heard that the government will support their motion calling for Murdoch to

A day like no other

Was there ever a PMQs like this? The mood was like a revolutionary court. On the central issue – the judge-led inquiry into the hacking affair – there was general agreement. But the doors of justice have been flung open at last and hosts of other crimes are rushing in to receive an airing. Ed Miliband arrived convinced that he had a killer question for Cameron. Assuming his favourite expression of indignant piety he asked about a specific warning given to Cameron’s chief of staff last February that Andy Coulson, when News of the World editor, had hired an ex-convict to bribe the cops. The effect was feeble rather than

James Forsyth

News Corp withdraws its bid for BSkyB

Two things struck me about PMQs today and the Prime Minister’s statement on the forthcoming public inquiry. First, the Prime Minister took a very different approach to Andy Coulson than he did at his press conference last Friday. Today, all the emphasis was on how angry Cameron would be if the assurances given to him turned out to be false.   The second was that Cameron rowed away from suggesting statutory regulation of the press. He stressed that he favoured ‘independent’ not ‘statutory regulation’. This should be more acceptable to the press.   But, as so often in this scandal, these events have now been overtaken by the dramatic news

James Forsyth

Cameron on the back foot

This has been another difficult morning for David Cameron. He’s now taking flak for having said he would take part in the BSkyB debate this afternoon and then deciding not to. But what should, perhaps, worry the Prime Minister more than this criticism is the evidence that the Liberal Democrats are siding with Labour to portray Cameron as being behind the curve on this issue. The FT, the Lib Dems’ paper of choice, reports that Clegg and Miliband pushed Cameron for a wide-ranging public inquiry. The paper details how Clegg is demanding an end to the practice of politicians, and particularly Prime Ministers, meeting newspaper proprietors but keeping the meeting

Parliament prepares to take on Murdoch

Politicians are swarming all over the phone hacking scandal today, in even greater number than during the past week. If it isn’t the main topic at PMQs at noon, then it certainly will be immediately afterwards; when David Cameron delivers his statement on an inquiry into the whole mess. And then there’s Labour’s Opposition Day motion, urging Rupert Murdoch to withdraw his bid for BSkyB. By the end of the day, our parliamentarians will surely have delivered an official reprimand to the News Corp boss and his ambitions. The news that the government will vote in favour of Ed Miliband’s motion has sucked some of the vicious factionalism out of

The war between Brown and Murdoch heats up

Gordon may have come carrying dynamite, but News International has some explosives of its own. In a pair of statements this afternoon, the Sun and the Sunday Times have set about undermining, or just plain denying, our former Prime Minister’s testimony. By the Sun’s account, not only did they get the story about his son’s medical condition from a “member of the public [who] came to The Sun with this information voluntarily because he wanted to highlight the cause of those afflicted by [cystic fibrosis],” but Brown’s colleagues also “provided quotes” to be used in the final article. By the Sunday Times’s, their investigation into Brown’s property transactions was pursued