HOME: The week Uncut

16/07/2011, 10:30:20 AM

In case you missed them, these were the best read pieces on Uncut in the last seven days:

Dan Hodges says phone hacking is not the silver bullet

Anthony Painter calls for media ownership reform

Kevin Meagher thinks Ed deserves a pat on the back

John Woodcock on the BskyB bid and media regulation

Atul Hatwal reports on Ed’s next move

Dave Talbot says big up to the Guardian

Ian Austin isn’t after blue or new, he wants future Labour

Matt Cavanagh says the government are spinning rising crime rates

… and this weeks Commons sketch

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

UNBOUND: Saturday News Review

16/07/2011, 08:00:42 AM

Cameron under pressure for Coulson slumber party

David Cameron is under more pressure over phone hacking after records revealed that Andy Coulson had stayed at Chequers two months after he resigned as director of communications at 10 Downing St. Mr Cameron was also visited twice by Rebekah Brooks last year and once, in November, by James Murdoch and his wife Kathryn. William Hague moved to defend the Prime Minister, saying Mr Coulson’s visit was a “normal, human thing to do”. Mr Hague told BBC Radio 4: “In inviting Andy Coulson back, the Prime Minister has invited someone back to thank him for his work who worked for him for several years. That is a normal human thing to do, I think that shows a positive side to his character and actions.” – PoliticsHome

One Downing Street source said: “The Prime Minister has made clear he was and is a friend, that is why he was invited.” Downing Streeet sources stressed that Mr Coulson’s was a private visit. Officials did not have to reveal the details, but chose to. Labour is certain to again question Mr Cameron’s judgement for failing continuing to stay close to Mr Coulson despite worrying questions about his time as a News International editor. Mr Cameron reluctantly accepted Mr Coulson’s resignation in January after weeks of pressure over phone hacking allegations from the period when he was editor of the former News of the World. Last week he described Mr Coulson as “a friend” but on Wednesday he appeared to distance himself from his former adviser who was arrested and questioned by detectives. – the Telegraph

… and Rebekah, James and the rest came to play too

The scale of private links between David Cameron and News International was exposed for the first time last night, with the Prime Minister shown to have met Rupert Murdoch’s executives on no fewer than 26 occasions in just over a year since he entered Downing Street. Rebekah Brooks, who resigned yesterday as chief executive of Mr Murdoch’s Wapping titles over the escalating scandal, is the only person Mr Cameron has invited twice to Chequers, a privilege not extended even to the most senior members of his Cabinet. James Murdoch, News Corp’s chairman in Europe and the man responsible for pushing through the BSkyB bid, was a guest at the Prime Minister’s official country residence eight months ago. And the former NOTW editor Andy Coulson – who was arrested this week in connection with police corruption and phone hacking – was invited by Mr Cameron to spend a private weekend at Chequers as recently as March. No 10 bowed to pressure over Mr Cameron’s handling of the phone-hacking scandal last night and released details of all his contacts with senior staff at the company since he became Prime Minister. – the independent

Murdoch’s right hand resigns

Les Hinton, the head of News Corp’s flagship American newspaper and a trusted, long-serving executive, resigned on Friday over his role in the phone-hacking scandal that has rocked Rupert Murdoch’s global media company. He became the first high profile casualty of the controversy in the United States, where he had been chief executive of the Wall Street Journal and Dow Jones, a financial news service, since Mr Murdoch’s takeover in late 2007. In his resignation letter, Mr Hinton, 67, apologised for the “pain caused to innocent people” by repeated illegal intrusions by News of the World reporters and private detectives. Mr Hinton was in charge of News International, Mr Murdoch’s British newspaper division, from 1997 to 2007, when most of the egregious cases of phone tampering that have come to light occurred. – The Telegraph

Army to face further cuts

The government is considering making further cuts to the size of the Army to enable a “substantial increase” in reserve forces such as the TA. An independent review of reserve forces is expected to recommend a recruitment drive for more part-time soldiers. Better pay and training will be offered but there will be more emphasis on reservists in civilian jobs to go on military operations when needed. The government already plans to reduce soldiers by 7,000 to 95,000 by 2015. The review, which is set to be published next week, is calling for more part-time soldiers, sailors and airmen in the TA, the Royal Naval Reserve and the Royal Air Force Volunteer Reserve. The aim is to make the reserves more professional, forming more stand-alone units that can deploy and operate on their own, rather than just attaching reservists in small groups across the regular forces. – the BBC

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

UNCUT: Reforming, yes. Refounding, no thanks

15/07/2011, 01:50:48 PM

by Kevin Meagher

When I hear all this talk about “refounding” Labour, my heart sinks.

I’m not dewy-eyed about it – I don’t mind a bit of tinkering to make the engine of our beloved old jalopy of a party run a bit better – but according to the Refounding Labour website, the party ‘must change fundamentally if it is to lead progressive opinion and win again.’

Why? Our unreformed, unreconstructed party has managed to attract 50,000 new members in the past year, won every by-election fought and delivered 800 new councillors. Not bad for an old banger.

Set in that context, self-loathing about the party’s structures seems a bit perverse. Unfortunately, it’s always been voguish in Labour circles to decry the state of the party’s organisation and push for change.

We need to be careful. When I used to work in the party’s north-west regional office we used to dread talk of organisational reform from smart Alec, dilettante, newbie MPs. I remember one of them dispensing with the monthly meetings of her constituency general management committee in favour of quarterly coffee mornings instead.

As the 2001 election fast approached she needed to be bailed out as her party had by then completely disintegrated. No meetings meant no activists, cash or campaign plan either. Something as simple as scrapping the four-weekly get together removed the organisational tent poles, leaving her local party a billowing shapeless void as people simply got out of the habit of being active members.

The Labour party’s grassroots ecology needs careful management. Local parties are not the plaything of MPs – however senior they are or however well intentioned they may be. Beware, therefore, O Great Leadership of ours, of refounding the party’s structures over the heads of ordinary members.

Most local parties are held together by half a dozen super-activists. Lose them and its curtains. If members like the existing arrangements, don’t risk upsetting them with careless top-down reform.

But what about the hordes of would-be activists who are said to be put off getting involved in the party because of the drudgery of meetings and general party foot sloggery? Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

UNCUT: Where next for Labour on hacking? Follow the money Ed

15/07/2011, 09:46:57 AM

by Atul Hatwal

The wreckage of Rupert Murdoch’s empire floats in the political waters. MPs and journalists view a landscape transformed. But as the initial storm surge from hacking slows, Labour faces some tough new political choices.

Where next in the campaign?

By common consent Ed Miliband has had a good war. Should he now step back and let the Levenson Inquiry go about its business? Or should he keep on keeping on?

Around Miliband, two camps have rapidly emerged.

On one side are those advocating a Glee strategy – don’t stop believing.

If News International can be brought to its knees, what about the Daily Mail?

The Daily Mail is unique in eliciting the same reaction from Tony Blair and Alastair Campbell as the left of the Labour party. For this group, it is a once in a generation opportunity to fix one of Labour’s most implacable enemies and help create genuinely more open political debate.

The voices on this side of the divide include Ed Miliband’s base – his early and most enthusiastic supporters, new politics think-tankers and those yearning to move on from the technocratic managerialism of New Labour.

Belief is intoxicating. They want the moral crusade to keep rolling. This is the Ed they voted for.

On the other side are the old media hands.  They have been out of their comfort zone for the past two weeks. Their world view involves dealing with the media to get Labour’s message across. War on News International was unthinkable ten days ago. War on the Daily Mail makes them feel ill.

Come what may, at some point, Labour is going to have to deal with the media.

The fall of News International might have taken them by surprise, but that doesn’t change the fundamentals of media management where some type of working relationship is essential, even with the enemy.

This group includes rafts of former advisers, members of the shadow cabinet and Labour-leaning journalists.  It’s no coincidence that this nexus was also the source of Miliband’s recent leadership crisis.

But in the debate on resolving this dilemna, something’s been missing.

Neither camp has provided a cogent analysis as to why News International’s position collapsed so quickly. Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

UNBOUND: Friday News Review

15/07/2011, 07:04:40 AM

Murdoch’s woes cross the pond

The investigation into criminal behaviour by journalists at Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp crossed the Atlantic yesterday as the FBI opened an inquiry into claims that the News of the World tried to hack the phones of victims of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. As News Corp’s shares slid in New York and legal problems threatened to engulf the rest of his media empire, Mr Murdoch launched a vigorous defence of his own handling of the scandal and of the conduct of his son, James. The FBI opened the inquiry after sustained pressure from both Republican and Democrat politicians, who expressed outrage at the claims that 9/11 victims could have been among the NOTW’s targets. The FBI is following claims first made in the Daily Mirror at the start of this week that NOTW journalists contacted a former New York police officer, now working as a private investigator, and offered to pay him to retrieve the phone records of those killed in the 2001 terrorist attacks. Police sources said the investigation is at a preliminary stage. – the Independent

Media baron Rupert Murdoch‘s troubles are spreading across the pond from Britain to the USA. The Federal Bureau of Investigation is looking into allegations that Murdoch’s News Corp. tried to hack into the phone messages of U.S. 9/11 victims and families, a federal law enforcement official said Thursday. The official, who has been briefed on the matter but declined to be identified because he is not authorized to speak publicly, said the review was based on concerns raised by Rep. Pete King, R-N.Y., and Sens. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va.; Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.; and Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., among others. King, who heads the Homeland Security Committee, is from a Long Island district that was home to many victims of the terrorist attacks in 2001. The lawmakers suggest that allegations against News Corp. in Great Britain— including paying off British law enforcement authorities for news tips — violated theForeign Corrupt Practices Act, which makes it a crime for companies with U.S. holdings to bribe foreign officials. They also want to know whether any U.S. citizens’ privacy was violated. – USA Today

Will they, won’t they?

Rupert and James Murdoch capitulated to Parliament last night and agreed to appear before MPs investigating phone hacking after facing the bizarre threat of imprisonment in a cell halfway up Big Ben. The media tycoon and his heir apparent had prompted fury at Westminster after declining an invitation to give evidence to a powerful Commons select committee next week. As a near-hysterical mood gripped the Commons, there were even suggestions that Parliament should somehow ‘impound’ Mr Murdoch’s private jet to prevent him leaving the country. With an unprecedented legal summons from Parliament’s most senior officials forcing them into a dramatic U-turn, Business Secretary Vince Cable said the humbling of the Murdoch empire was ‘a little bit like the end of a dictatorship’. The last time such as summons was issued was in 1992 when Kevin and Ian Maxwell were ordered to answer questions relating to their late father Robert’s plundering of the Mirror Group pension pot. A News Corporation spokesperson said: ‘We are in the process of writing to the select committee with the intention that Mr James Murdoch and Mr Rupert Murdoch will attend next Tuesday’s meeting.’ James, the chief of his father’s European and Asian operations, had said he was not available Tuesday but offered to appear on Aug 10 or 11, without explaining his inability to attend next week. While Rupert Murdoch had said he would not appear at all offering instead to speak before a separate inquiry initiated by the Prime Minister. That left former News of the World editor Rebekah Brooks facing the prospect of being grilled on her own by MPs scenting blood. – Daily Mail

Rupert Murdoch and his son James last night caved into pressure from David Cameron, Nick Clegg and MPs and agreed to give evidence to a Commons select committee next week. They will be joined by Rebekah Brooks, the News International Chief Executive, in what will be the most eagerly anticipated hearing at Westminster for decades. Both Rupert Murdoch, News Corporation’s chairman and chief executive, and James had initially said they would not be attending next Tuesday’s meeting of the Culture Media and Sport Committee. James, who is News International’s European chairman, said he could only attend at a later date. But after a six-hour stand off, and with pressure from MPs, the Prime Minister and the deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, and faced with being sent a summons by the Serjeant at Arms, both men relented and agreed to attend. The three executives will face fierce questioning from MPs who have fought a tenacious campaign to expose the phone hacking scandal which has plunged Mr Murdoch’s media into crisis in the space of two weeks. Among them will be Tom Watson, the Labour MP, who has relentlessly pursued News International and has made clear his own disgust at the behaviour of Mrs Brooks in particular. – Daily Telegraph

Clegg and O’Donnell turn on Brown

Nick Clegg today accused Gordon Brown of “rewriting history” by claiming his desire for a hacking investigation was thwarted by MPs and civil servants. The former prime minister accused News International yesterday of forming a “criminal-media nexus” with members of Britain’s underworld. He told the Commons he had tried to hold a judicial inquiry into phone hacking shortly before the general election last year but was opposed by Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O’Donnell, the Home Office and the police. Mr Brown said he was advised that media culture was permissive of unlawful activities and the Commons culture committee did not believe hacking was continuing. He claimed he was also told there was no evidence of systemic failure in the police and that targeting The News of the World could be deemed to be politically motivated. Deputy Prime Minister Mr Clegg said today: “I sensed a whiff of rewriting history, to be honest. If as prime minister he’d really be so determined to get to grips with this – and he was a powerful Chancellor – he was at the apex of British politics for 13 years … Are we now supposed to believe he was hamstrung by dastardly officials who stopped him doing that? There were many other things he wanted to do where he was happy to bulldoze the opposition but he didn’t seek to do so on this particular issue.” – Evening Standard

The cabinet secretary, Sir Gus O’Donnell, has denied claims he blocked an inquiry into phone hacking sought by former prime minister Gordon Brown just before the May 2010 general election. He also released his full advice to Brown setting out the options, which was sent to Brown’s principal private secretary, Jeremy Heywood, in March 2010. In his first major speech in the House of Commons since he resigned as prime minister last year, Brown said on Wednesday: “I deeply regret my inability to do then what I wanted to do and to overturn the advice of all the authorities and set up a judicial inquiry.” O’Donnell said: “I gave advice based on the evidence that was available at the time. It was for the prime minister to decide what to do. I set out options. My advice is clear and was based on the evidence available at the time, and I would have taken the same decision now if I had the same evidence as I had then.” O’Donnell also pointed out to Brown that if an investigation were called so close to a general election, there would be no possibility of a judicial inquiry producing a result in time. In his document marked “restricted” O’Donnell set out the necessary steps to be taken before an inquiry was launched and whether in this case such an inquiry would be merited. – the Guardian

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

UNCUT: The government is spinning crime rates rather than tackling them

14/07/2011, 05:58:51 PM

by Matt Cavanagh

Earlier today the Home Office published the annual crime figures for England and Wales. The Spectator blog informs us that ministers are trying ‘to spin the figures as a vindication of their nascent reform programme’. This is foolish: their only big reform, elected Police and crime commissioners, will not come in until next spring at the earliest. The other policies ministers are fond of citing, like online crime maps, local beat meetings, and a reduction in top-down targets, are all broadly welcome but are incremental developments of initiatives begun under Labour.

Meanwhile, the only major changes in today’s BCS figures which the statisticians judge to be statistically significant are a 9% fall in vandalism – this is the extent of the good news – and a 14% rise in burglary, a 38% rise in assault with minor injury, and a worrying 35% rise in domestic violence. The raw BCS figures also show a 6% rise in all violence, and a 1% rise in overall crime, but neither is judged to be statistically significant.

It is too early to say whether these increases are blips; or a sign that the long downward trend in crime since 1995 has flattened out; or the start of a belated surge in crime associated with the state of the economy. The second is the preferred hypothesis of Home Office statisticians; the third has some grounding in past experience, in that burglary and domestic violence are particularly prone to rising in tough economic times.

At the start of the downturn in early 2009, Conservatives and Liberal Democrats reacted to a much smaller increase in burglary by, first, accusing Labour of complacency, and second, predicting a ‘recession crime wave’. They were wrong on both counts: far from being complacent, ministers had already been working with the police to try to pre-empt a rise in acquisitive crime; and the increase in burglary turned out to be a blip, in marked contrast to the pattern in the last recession in the early 1990s – as I set out on this site two weeks ago.

I hope these latest increases will also be a blip. But it would be more reassuring, as well as more consistent, if Tory and Lib Dem ministers showed the same concern as they evinced in 2009 in reaction to today’s figures, and rather less complacency. The real test of their reforms – and of the impact of their cuts – will come in the equivalent figures in 2012 and 2013.

Matt Cavanagh was a special adviser on crime and justice under the last Labour government.


Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

GRASSROOTS: There is an alternative

14/07/2011, 03:00:52 PM

by Amanda Ramsay

When Jacob Rees-Mogg MP spoke in prime minister’s questions in January, he may as well have stepped out of a time machine and metaphorically donned a leopard-skin tabard as he banged the drum to that old Maggie favourite, of TINA – there is no alternative.

Recollections of TINA induce shudders down centre-left spines, remembering all too well the last time TINA entered political parlance in the dark, recessionary years of the 80s and 90s, huge swathes of industry decimated, home repossession rife and unemployment sky-high.

Sadly, the public largely seems to have bought into the Tory and Lib Dem line that blames Labour for the economic crisis of debt. Labour must take bold ownership of the truth over the government’s economic narrative to counter this, otherwise how will the electorate think any differently? Which of course is where campaigning on the doorstep comes-in.

It is important to note that before the global financial crisis, despite rhetoric to the contrary, the UK had the second lowest debt of G7 members and national deficit was smaller pre the 07/08 crash at 2.3 per cent of GDP than that of 3.4 per cent in 96/97, with total debt down from 42.5 per cent to 36.5 per cent.

There is many a policy alternative to lazily slashing the very fabric of our society. Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

UNCUT: Labour, like Britain, must look to the future

14/07/2011, 11:30:09 AM

by Ian Austin

I’ve been really worried these past few months. People kept asking me what I thought of “all this Blue Labour stuff”.

I wasn’t sure what to say, but I knew it must be significant because it was creating such a buzz.

You can imagine my relief when they put together an “e-book” setting out the details.

It explained that a series of seminars had been held in London and Oxford to “open up the Labour tradition to new syntheses of meaning, and so to originality and transformation.”

The introduction said it would discuss the “relationship with tradition and modernity, nation and class, labour and capital, community and the individual, society and the market, the state and mutualism, and between belief and empiricism, romanticism and rationality, obligation and entitlement.”

Fortunately, help was at hand in the form of an interview a week or so ago with Lord Glasman, the leading figure behind our new approach.

“There are three poles,” he said, when asked to explain Blue Labour. ‘”First: a conception of the common good. That comes from Aristotle. Second: an impulse to organise labour. That comes from Minsky and Alinsky. And third: decommodification. That means stopping things that were not produced for sale being sold. That comes from Polanyi.”’

Of course we need seminars as well as conversations on doorsteps, but it’s where the theory takes us that worries me, not the inaccessibility of the language.

Elsewhere we’ve been told the new big idea is based on the insight that New Labour’s response to globalisation failed to value and protect local and community services like post offices and pubs and the traditional high street, or failed to recognise the value of the human relationships that underpin our communities.

The danger, as Mary Riddell pointed out recently, “lies in a neverland inhabited by superannuated pigeon-fanciers who like Woodbines and Watneys and don’t think much of foreigners.” She was absolutely right to warn that “Britain is not a museum of nostalgia but a forward-looking country.” Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

UNCUT: Peter goes to the palace

14/07/2011, 07:58:01 AM

by Peter Watt

I think I am going all Blue Labour.  All that longing for the lost icons of a simpler more communitarian age; it warms the fraternal cockles of my nostalgic heart.  Or am I mixing my popular political philosophies?  Anyway, it doesn’t matter because on the whole they’re all gobbledygook!  But what I do mean is that whilst I am all for modernisation, I also happen to think that there are some more traditional aspects of life that are also worth preserving.  They provide us with a feeling of stability and security whilst all around is changing.  One of those traditional aspects, that many on the left struggle with, is the royal family.

A couple of weeks ago I was privileged to attend a garden party at Buckingham Palace.  It was a fantastic experience.  There were several thousand people attending from all walks of life.  Charities, the military, business, politics all gathered as a recognition for their, or their organisations’ work.  The focal point was Her Majesty and Prince Phillip who made themselves available to meet and greet their guests.  Their energy levels at their age were really incredible.  And the guests had of course all dressed up, with a handy protocol card sent in advance ensuring that the ladies wore hats and gentlemen morning or lounge suits.  The national anthem was played and people mingled.  My only complaint was that we missed out on the cakes and sandwiches because by the time we got to the tea tent there was none left.  I couldn’t help but notice that there were plenty of other guests with very full plates.  I tried not to be bitter about their gluttony.

There was lots of the choreography and so on that I didn’t really understand.  The Yeoman of the Guard; the men in top hats who seemed to be in charge of the walkabout; all of the titles of the various palace officials and the heraldry.  It did all feel a bit ‘olde worlde’ and yes there were an awful lot of very posh voices.  But do you know what?  It didn’t matter because it was an honour to be there and it felt special.  This was the royal machine delivering an event in the same way that it probably has for 100 years.  I bet that  the Royal and diplomatic tea tents are in exactly the same place, tea served at exactly the same time and the running order is pretty much the same as it was in 1911.  And that to me is quite simply fantastic and something to be proud of.

I accept that intellectually the hereditary principle is a little at odds with notions of equality.  But I don’t care.  The alternative to a royal head of state is an elected one.  Quite frankly, I can think of little worse than an elected head of state.  Another powerful, elected, party political politician.  Another point of political friction taking on those in the Parliaments.  Try selling that one to the public; good luck. Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

UNBOUND: Thursday News Review

14/07/2011, 06:09:13 AM

Murdoch’s mess

Rupert Murdoch has capitulated to parliament and abandoned News Corporation‘s £8bn bid for BSkyB, as he faced the prospect of appearing in front of a judicial public inquiry to salvage his personal reputation and the right for his company to continue to broadcast in the UK. After 10 days of sustained public outcry over phone hacking, and facing the prospect of a unanimous call by MPs to withdraw his bid for total ownership of the broadcaster, Murdoch succumbed at a morning board meeting in Wapping. The News Corp deputy chairman, Chase Carey, said the bid had become “too difficult to progress in this climate”. The withdrawal represents the biggest single reverse of Murdoch’s mercurial career, but may presage even further commercial damage not just in the UK, but worldwide. News Corp’s current 39% stake in BSkyB could also still be at risk from the “fit and proper” test for ownership being conducted by regulator Ofcom. On a cathartic day at Westminster in which politicians acted as if they had been liberated from the thrall of the Murdoch empire, David Cameron announced a sweeping public inquiry into widespread lawbreaking by the press, alleged corruption by police, and the failure of the initial police investigation into phone hacking. – the Guardian

Rupert Murdoch’s grand plan for a huge expansion of his media empire was in tatters last night as the ‘firestorm’ over phone hacking forced him to withdraw his bid to take over BSkyB. The tycoon shelved his £10billion offer for the satellite broadcaster as it became clear that David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband were joining forces in a Commons vote urging him to back off. It came as Mr Cameron relented in the face of intense pressure from Labour and the Liberal Democrats and agreed to a judicial inquiry into press standards, regulation and ownership, and allegations of illegal phone hacking by the News of the World and police corruption. The probe will be headed by Lord Justice Leveson, who prosecuted Britain’s worst female serial killer, Rose West. The Prime Minister said News Corporation had made ‘the right decision’ in dropping its bid to buy the 61 per cent share in BSkyB that it does not own. Mr Cameron also vowed that media executives responsible for the scandal would be barred from owning newspapers or broadcasters. ‘The people involved – whether they were directly responsible for the wrongdoing, sanctioned it, or covered it up, however high or low they go – must not only be brought to justice, they must also have no future role in the running of a media company in our country,’ he said. – Daily Mail

Summoned, but will they turn up

Rebekah Brooks, Rupert Murdoch and his son James may appear before MPs next week over the phone-hacking scandal, according to the Culture Committee’s chairman. The News International (NI) chief executive, her News Corporation boss and his son, the NI chairman, could be questioned in Westminster next Tuesday. MPs on the Culture, Media and Sport (CMS) Select Committee want to ask Mrs Brooks about her knowledge of alleged payments to police, Labour politician Tom Watson said. The committee also wants to quiz James Murdoch on his involvement “in authorising payments to silence” the Professional Footballers’ Association boss Gordon Taylor after his phone was hacked, Mr Watson said. Commons Culture Committee chairman John Whittingdale told Sky News he earlier understood the trio had agreed to give evidence to the committee. But he later clarified that while NI has agreed to co-operate he did not know if that extended to all three appearing before the panel of MPs. – Sky News

MPs are to meet later to decide whether to summon News International chief Rebekah Brooks to appear before them over the phone-hacking scandal. The Commons Culture Committee also wants to question News Corporation executives Rupert and James Murdoch but may be unable to compel them to appear. The company has shut down its News of the World newspaper over the scandal and dropped its bid to control BSkyB. US politicians are also demanding a probe into phone hacking allegations. On Tuesday, the Commons Culture Committee invited Ms Brooks and the Murdochs to give evidence about the phone-hacking scandal at the House of Commons. In a statement, the MPs said that serious questions had arisen about the evidence Ms Brooks and the News of the World’s former editor Andy Coulson gave at a previous hearing in 2003. – BBC News

Gordon goes for it

After years of being courted by Mr Brown and other senior Labour figures, the tabloid dramatically announced it was switching its allegiance to David Cameron’s Conservatives. “Labour’s lost it” proclaimed the best-selling daily paper, alongside a big picture of Gordon Brown. The announcement was timed to cause maximum embarrassment to Labour and dominated the headlines on the day after the then Prime Minister’s keynote conference speech. As a result, Mr Brown is alleged to have said that he would “destroy” Rupert Murdoch. Yesterday, we discovered that during this period in 2009 Mr Brown attempted to order an independent inquiry into the growing allegations of phone hacking at News International. He was blocked by the country’s most senior civil servant, partly on the basis that it was just months before a general election. However, it now appears that Mr Brown secretly orchestrated — or at the very least supported — a campaign among Labour MPs to bring public attention to the phone hacking scandal. On Monday, with political opinion virtually united against Mr Murdoch, Mr Brown finally decided to break cover and “go public” over his alleged long-held concerns over News International’s activities. He spoke of his “tears” at allegations that his son’s medical records had been hacked by The Sun, at the time edited by Rebekah Brooks, and, for good measure, accused another Murdoch paper, The Sunday Times, of hacking his bank accounts. – Daily Telegraph Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon