Phone hacking scandal – live coverage

• Live coverage throughout the day following Rupert Murdoch’s decision to abandon News Corporation’s bid for BSkyB •  NoW’s Neil Wallis arrested over phone hacking • Murdoch and Brooks must give evidence – Clegg 11.51am: Correction: It was Operation Weeting, the phone hacking investigation, not Operation Elveden, that arrested Neil Wallis, the News of the World’s former executive editor. Apologies. 11.34am: Patrick Wintour , the Guardian’s political editor, writes that cabinet secretary Sir Gus O’Donnell has denied claims he blocked an inquiry into phone hacking sought by the former prime minister Gordon Brown just before the may 2010 general election. O’Donnell has now released his full advice to Brown setting out the options and sent to Brown’s principal private secretary, Jeremy Heywood, on 19 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 the inquiry being called so close to a general election in May 2011 there was no possibility that a judicial inquiry could produce 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. He wrote “From the limited information available it is doubtful whether this case would merit holding an inquiry under the 2005 act. Any decision to hold such an inquiry could be challenged by judicial review particularly if the inquiry were extended to the media in general and it is not inconceivable that such a challenge might succeed”. He also stressed the immediate proximity to an election would inevitable raise questions over the motivation and urgency of such an inquiry. 11.31am: Breaking: The Guardian understands that Neil Wallis has been arrested by Operation Elveden – the Met police’s investigation into alleged payments by journalists to police – rather than Operation Weeting – the investigation into phone hacking. 11.51am correction: It was Operation Weeting, the phone hacking investigation, not Elveden, that arrested Wallis. Apologies. 11.27am: Lord Prescott, the former deputy prime minister, Brian Paddick, the former senior Met police officer and Lib Dem candidate for mayor of London, and Chris Bryant MP, who are all applying for judicial review of the police over phone hacking, are to be joined by two new claimants, according to Bindmans solicitors. Ben Jackson and “HJK” are members of the public whose voicemails were hacked into on behalf of the News of the World, the law firm says. Neither were told by the police they were victims until the new investigation took charge earlier this year. The family of Milly Dowler and others will also give statements as interested parties in support of the judicial review. The claimants are asking the high court to order that the police failed in their legal duties by not warning people that they were victims, and for failing to conduct a proper investigation, the firm says. 11.16am: My colleagues on the media desk have confirmed that the 60-year-old arrested over phone hacking this morning is ex-News of the World executive editor Neil Wallis. 11.13am: Over on his Politics blog, Andrew Sparrow assesses Nick Clegg’s speech from this morning, which he calls “an exercise in liberal triumphalism”. Andy points out that Clegg’s call for the Press Complaints Commission to be replaced with a system of “independent regulation” dovetails with David Cameron’s preference for “independent regulation” over self-regulation or statutory regulation. The concept is still quite vague, although Clegg said the new press regulator should have the power to fine editors or journalists for breaking the code of conduct. The deputy prime minister also suggested the law be changed so journalists and investigators could be jailed for “blagging” – obtaining personal information by deception. 11.06am: Sky and the BBC are both reporting that the man arrested today is Neil Wallis, former executive editor of the News of the World. More as we get it. 11.00am: The New York Times is claiming that James Murdoch had argued that News Corp should press ahead with the BSkyB deal, but his father overruled him, “consulting him only after the decision was all but final”. The paper also speculates that News Corp might split off all its newspapers into a new company run by new management. This is a move that Rupert Murdoch, 80, is certain to resist fiercely. Though Fox News has of late become the thrust of his political power in the United States, as well as a major source of revenue, his newspapers were the seedlings of his vast media enterprise. His emotional attachment to them runs deep, and they remain influential platforms not just in this country but in Britain. James Murdoch, 38, is said to share none of his father’s romantic notions about newspapers. The NYT also reports on the prospect of News Corp’s facing a US inquiry. Some legal experts cast doubt that the government would pursue a legal case against News Corporation. Ellen S Podgor, a law professor at the Stetson University College of Law and a regular contributor to a blog about the anticorruption act, said that initiating an investigation against the company “would be like entering a minefield”. She said prosecutors would weigh the first amendment [free speech] issues involved and the fact that other statutes covered the conduct in Britain “where they allegedly occurred”. 10.43am: Here’s my colleague Hélène Mulholland’s report on Nick Clegg’s call for Rupert Murdoch and Rebekah Brooks to give evidence to the Commons media committee . She has a good quote from the deputy prime minister: Firstly we need to look at whether they have got the power and the ability to compel them. If someone cannot be compelled I don’t know whether we can frogmarch them to the select committee. But if they have any shred of sense of responsibility or accountability for their position of power then they should come and explain themselves to the select committee. Evan Harris, the former Lib Dem MP, said he expected Brooks to appear before the committee on Tuesday. 10.38am: Here’s my colleague Jason Deans’s piece on the 60-year-old man arrested over phone hacking at the News of the World. Detectives from Operation Weeting, the Metropolitan police investigation into mobile interceptions by News International, are understood to have raided an address in west London. The man was taken for questioning at a local police station on suspicion of conspiring to intercept communications, a Scotland Yard spokesman said. The suspect is the ninth arrest Scotland Yard has made since the fresh investigation into phone hacking was launched in January. A Scotland Yard statement confirmed the arrest was carried out at 6.30am. “The man is currently in custody at a west London police station,” the Met said. “It would be inappropriate to discuss any further details at this time.” 10.27am: Australia’s government may review media laws in the wake of the phone hacking scandal at the News of the World, Julia Gillard said today. The Australian prime minister said: To see some of the things that have been done to intrude on people’s privacy, particularly in moments of grief and stress in the family lives, I’ve truly been disgusted to see it. 10.26am: My colleague Andrew Sparrow has more details of Nick Clegg’s interview on Radio 4 this morning, during which he said Rupert Murdoch, James Murdoch and Rebekah Brooks should give evidence to the Commons culture committee. He said it was not clear whether parliament had the ability to force them to attend. But they should do so voluntarily, he said. Here’s the key quote: If they have any shred of sense of responsibility or accountability for their position of power, then they should come and explain themselves before a select committee. On changes to the Press Complaints Commission, the deputy prime minister called it “far too weak”, and he said that the Lib Dems had never been in thrall to Murdoch. To be far, I’ve been criticised for many things in my time, but the idea that Liberal Democrats have been in the pockets of media moguls … not least because they were perhaps not very interested in having us in their pockets in the first place. We’ve actually been talking about this for years and years and years. Andy also points out that John Whittingdale, the chairman of the Commons culture committee, was on BBC News earlier explaining what the position is in terms of the Murdochs and Brooks being compelled to attend the select committee. The committee has invited the three to attend, and asked them to reply by 9.30am. Andy writes: Whittingdale said it was “not completely” clear what would happen next. If the three do not reply, the committee will issue a formal summons. The hearing will then go ahead next Tuesday and either the three will appear or there will be “three empty chairs”. Whittingdale said he really would hold a hearing with three empty chairs. If the witnesses did not appear, the committee would report that to the Commons as a whole as a contempt of parliament. But at that point it was not clear what would happen, Whittingdale said. The last time this happened was 50 years ago, when John Junor, the Sunday Express editor, was summoned to parliament. Junor obeyed. To find a precedent where someone refused to obey a summons, you have to go back much further. “We are almost into uncharted water,” Whittingdale said. (My understanding is that, in theory, the Commons could order the serjeant-at-arms to go off and arrest the Murdochs or Brooks for a contempt of parliament. That is what used to happen in the 18th century, when the Commons also had the power to jail people for an offence of this kind. But apparently the lawyers accept that it would be impossible for parliament to do this now. For a start, it would never get past the Human Rights Act.) 10.20am: Over at Bloggingheads , Reuters media blogger Felix Salmon describes the hacking scandal as “the UK’s Arab Spring”. Academic Henry Farrell likens it to the child abuse scandal in Catholic church in Ireland. _ 10.15am: The BBC points out that at one point Nick Clegg accidentally called Rupert Murdoch’s company “News Corpse”. 10.14am: That’s it from Clegg. Coming up today: • It is expected that Rebekah Brooks may be called to give evidence to the Commons media committee. • The advice given by cabinet secretary Gus O’Donnell to former prime minister Gordon Brown suggesting Brown should not hold a judicial inquiry into phone hacking may be published today. • The Metropolitan police authority is meeting at 2.30pm and may make an emergency motion about hacking. • We will also be watching the US for any moves by the attorney general, Eric Holder, or other US politicians or bodies, against Murdoch’s companies. 10.09am: Is Vince Cable owed an apology now for being punished for saying he had “declared war on Murdoch”, when he had the responsibility for deciding whether News Corp should take over BSkyB? Clegg does not give a clear answer. “Do I think that Vince’s misgivings about the proposed deal have been vindicated?” he muses, without answering. “Was it a deal serious enough to elicit serious scrutiny? You bet.” 10.05am: Should parliament take on new powers to compel people to attend select committee hearings? “Let’s see what happens,” Clegg says. “We don’t know if the individuals who have been asked to attend will refuse or not” – a reference to Rupert and James Murdoch and Rebekah Brooks. When you give people power and they think they can act without being held to account that will always go wrong, Clegg says. They should make themselves available for questioning, he says. He says he has an enormous amount of sympathy for Gordon and Sarah Brown about the publication of details about his son’s illness. But on his speech yesterday “I sensed a whiff of rewriting history … Are we really supposed to believe that for 13 years he was hamstrung by dastardly officials? … There were many other things that he wanted to do over those years that he just “bulldozed through”. Not on phone hacking or regulation of the media, Clegg says. To Brooks and Murdoch he says: “Do the decent thing … When you’re in that position of power, you are also accountable … Make yourself available.” 10.03am: The Lib Dems have been the most outspoken on this issue, he says. At every single turn we were blocked, “by the bigger vested interests in politics … who didn’t want to open that Pandora’s box.” This is now an opportunity, he says, to do things better in the future. 10.02am: Is News Corp fit and proper to own its existing 39% stake in BSkyB? “Fit and proper” is not a clearly defined concept in law, he says, and we need “greater clarity” on that. It has been developed in other domains, such as financial services. 10.00am: What was Clegg’s wanring to David Cameron about hiring and Andy Coulson? He won’t be drawn on specifics. But he says he had “serious misgivings” about “allegations of hacking and so forth … Of course we discussed this”. But he and Cameron don’t vet each other’s advisers. “It was his decision and his decision alone, for which he takes responsibility.” 9.57am: Questions from the media. Is he saying the public should stop buying and watching News Corp products? Clegg says the public has realised the media was invading their privacy. They are disgusted and feel revulsion, he says. They are looking at what they are reading with a cynicism that was not there before, and that is healthy, he says. Do the Tories agree with his proposals today? He says what he has said on the Press Complaints Commission and plurality and transparency is “not that radical” and “long overdue”. 9.56am: The hacking scandals will no doubt continue but we must stay focused on the endgame: getting the ball rolling while the demand for change is still strong to rebuild confidence in our media institutions and make sure this never happens again, Clegg says. 9.53am: On to the police. The Met has a big job winning back public confidence, Clegg says. If information was obtained in the public interest there may be a case for a custodial sentence, Clegg suggests. 3. Plurality . A corporate monopoly threatens democracy almost as much as a state monopoly does. Traditional media still matters, he says – it’s still responsible for the majority of original journalism. The plurality test – why doesn’t it cover companies that expand their market share naturally through market growth? We should also look at the way competition law operates, Clegg says. 9.48am: 2. Accountability . This has improved in other areas of the economy: financial services and the police are now far more accountable. But the media has not kept up. It has “institutionalised immunity” from the basic standards of the rest of the country, Clegg claims. Corporate governance for the media needs to be examined. Something must be wrong when misconduct and lawbreaking can be endemic in an organisation while senior staff do nothing, he says. He thinks we need to address a lack of clarity over what it means to be “fit and proper” to own media companies. The PCC has failed, he says. It is only a limited complaints body. If a member of the public is shocked by the treatment of Kate Middleton (above), they can’t complain. Only Kate can complain. Clegg thinks that’s crazy. We need an independent body, he says, with proper sanctions including financial penalties. Scrutiny needs to extend to dealings between press, politicians and police. Civil servants and advisers will have to record their meetings with media figures. 9.44am: His three principles for reform of the media: 1. Press freedom . “The lifeblood of liberal democracy.” He says the last week has been a triumph for proper investigative reporting. Journalists will never be shrinking violets and papers will never be owned by angels, he says. He does not want to live in a society where politicians feel comfortable with the press. 9.44am: Nick Clegg is giving a speech in central London now on phone hacking. He says all parties now have a rare opportunity to work together to reform the media. 9.39am: Breaking: A 60-year-old man was arrested in London this morning by detectives investigating phone hacking at the News of the World. More as we get it. 9.24am: Hello, and welcome to today’s live coverage of the continued crisis in Rupert Murdoch’s media empire, the day after Murdoch abandoned News Corporation’s bid for 100% of BSkyB. To recap the main developments from this morning and yesterday : • Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister, has said that Rupert Murdoch should appear before the Commons culture, media and sport committee to answer questions about the phone hacking scandal that led to the closure of the News of the World. Clegg said today that Murdoch had “big questions” to answer after the scandal forced him to drop his bid for full control of BSkyB yesterday. The committee has asked Murdoch to appear next week with his son James and Rebekah Brooks, the chief executive of News International, Murdoch’s British newspaper arm. Clegg said the three should appear “if they have any shred of sense of responsibility or accountability for their position of power”. • Rupert Murdoch abandoned his bid to buy the whole of BSkyB yesterday. News Corporation announced that it was withdrawing its bid only a few hours before the start of a Commons debate that saw all three major parties supporting a motion saying that the bid would not be “in the public interest”. • David Cameron launched a wide-ranging inquiry into media standards. It will be headed by Lord Justice Leveson and it will take place in two parts. The first part will cover the “culture, practices and ethics of the press” generally and Cameron wants it to report within a year. It will have the power to summon witnesses, and Cameron said that he expected politicians and newspaper proprietors to be called to give evidence, saying: “If you own the media in this country, you should be able to be called under oath.” This has been interpreted as a call for Murdoch to appear. • MPs passed a motion opposing Murdoch’s bid for BSkyB. During the parliamentary debate Gordon Brown accused the civil service of blocking his attempts to hold an inquiry into phone hacking before the election. He asked Sir Gus O’Donnell, the cabinet secretary, to look into setting up an inquiry but was advised not to set one up. • Ed Miliband accused Cameron of making a “catastrophic error of judgment” when he gave Andy Coulson a post in Downing Street. At PMQs, Miliband accused Cameron of ignoring warnings his staff had received from the Guardian about Coulson. • Senior US politicians called for the Justice Department, the FBI and Congressional hearings to investigate allegations that the News of the World hacked phones and bribed police officers. Amid signs that the scandal is becoming a major issue in the US , the families of victims of the 9/11 terror attacks also backed demands for an investigation following claims that the phones of those killed had been targeted by the UK tabloid. A number of key members of the family that controlled the Wall Street Journal said they would not have agreed to sell the newspaper to Murdoch is they had been aware of News International’s conduct over phone hacking at the time. Phone hacking United States Rupert Murdoch Newspapers News of the World BSkyB BSkyB Paul Owen guardian.co.uk

Posted by on July 14, 2011. Filed under News, Politics, World News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.