Mike Hancock News
News International/Murdoch Update
Staying above the fray
Labour and the Conservatives have both been keen to cosy up to News International.
Tony Blair preferred to jet to Hayman Island, Australia, to attend a Rupert Murdoch-organised conference in 1995 and court his support rather than address the Durham Miner's Gala. He also spoke at length to Murdoch on the eve of the Iraq War.
The first person to phone and wish Andy Coulson well after he resigned from NOTW was Gordon Brown. Gordon Brown and David Cameron both attended Rebekah Brooks' wedding. Ed Miliband has employed News International/ Times journalist Tom Baldwin.
The Conservatives have long wooed News International and succeeded in winning support from The Sun during Labour Party Conference 2009. David Cameron famously hired former News of the World editor Andy Coulson despite the former journalist resigning from the paper in the wake of Clive Goodman's conviction.
Last month, both Ed Miliband and David Cameron attended Murdoch's summer party, as did many of their front bench teams. No one discussed phone hacking. No Liberal Democrat attended.
The Liberal Democrats alone have remained unwilling to bend to suit News International's agenda. The result of that was years of being ignored by The Sun and the News of the World when in opposition coupled with vicious attacks on Nick Clegg's character during the general election.
David Yelland, the former editor of the Sun, said at the time of those attacks that News International had made a mistake.
"One man utterly beyond the tentacles of any of his family, his editors or his advisers. That man is Nick Clegg.
"Make no mistake, if the Liberal Democrats actually won the election - or held the balance of power - it would be the first time in decades that Murdoch was locked out of British politics. In so many ways, a vote for the Lib Dems is a vote against Murdoch and the media elite."
In Lord Aschroft's book 'Dirty Politics, Dirty Times' which was published in 2005, he made allegations of how Tom Baldwin, now Ed Miliband's Director of Communications, was involved in blagging to get personal information for stories.
He alleges that Gavin Singfield, a private investigator, was tasked by Mr Baldwin and his former colleagues with accessing information from a bank account belonging to the Conservative Party to look at payments Lord Ashcroft had made to that account.
Tom Baldwin's advice to Labour on phone hacking
From: xxxx | Sent: 27 January 2011 To: xxxx
Subject: Important: Phone hacking
Dear all,
Tom Baldwin has requested that any front bench spokespeople use the following line when questioned on phone hacking.
BSkyB bid and phone tapping
These issues should not be linked. One is a competition issue, the other an allegation of criminal activity.
On BSkyB, we have been consistent in calling for fair play. We believe ministers should conduct themselves properly in what is a quasi-judicial process. We said Vince Cable showed he was incapable of behaving fairly towards News Corp. We have since raised questions about whether Jeremy Hunt can be fully impartial given his record of past statements. We do believe the bid should be referred to the Competition Commission and think Hunt should get on with it. Downing Street says that Cameron's dinners with Murdoch will not affect Hunt's judgement. We have to take them at their word.
On phone hacking, we believe the police should thoroughly investigate all allegations. But this is not just an issue about News International. Almost every media organisation in the country may end up becoming embroiled in these allegations. This goes to the root of a wider problem in public life. MPs are taking a hard look at themselves in the mirror over expenses. It is time the media did so too over the way it conducts itself.
Frontbench spokespeople who want to talk about their personal experiences of being tapped should make it clear they are doing just that - speaking from personal experience.
We must guard against anything which appears to be attacking a particular newspaper group out of spite.
Thanks,
xxxx
Labour Party Press Office
A history of standing up to Rupert Murdoch
It followed systematic price-cutting by The Times, which threatened to close other papers. Taylor said:
"There is an urgent need for the OFT to step in before the choice of quality newspapers in this country is cut to those in the hands of media magnates. If nobody else will act, the Government must. Having allowed Murdoch to take over the greater part of the British print media, they cannot allow him to close down the rest."
Independent on Sunday, 26 June 1994
Because of this pressure the OFT conducted an investigation but ruled later that year that price-cutting by the Times and the Daily Telegraph was not predatory pricing because it was not aimed at a specific title.
In November 1997 the new Labour government took a Competition Bill through Parliament to outlaw predatory pricing among supermarkets and petrol retailers - but specifically failed to include newspaper groups. Many commentators saw this as a result of the deal Tony Blair struck with Rupert Murdoch for his support in the general election earlier that year.
"Given the state of newspaper finances, it seems that newspaper pricing is in an extraordinary muddle. Big conglomerates with bottomless pockets shouldn't be able to distort the market. The press is so important to our democracy that this matter raises public issues which should be aired, and the Bill provides an excellent opportunity to do so."
The Guardian, 10 November 1997
The Liberal Democrats upped the pressure on both Murdoch with a motion at spring conference that year calling for the Government to review his ownership of The Times in light of his influence over the paper's coverage of China.
"In an emergency debate yesterday morning, the conference unanimously backed a motion deploring the HarperCollins decision not to publish former governor Chris Patten's book on Hong Kong. The motion said Mr Murdoch's conduct made it even more important to maintain Lord McNally's amendment to the Competition Bill, challenging the predatory pricing policy of the Times."
The Independent, 16 March 1998
Calling for a curb on press intrusion
The Liberal Democrats have long been putting pressure on the Governments of the day to impose a more stringent code of conduct on the press.
In 1992 the party argued that each paper should deposit around £1m with the Press Complaints Commission, which it would lose in the wake of "bad behaviour". The Liberal Democrats also called for 'placing a surveillance device on private property' to be made a criminal offence:
"The party's submission to the Calcutt review into the press suggests that every publication deposit an annual "good behaviour" bond at the Press Complaints Commission. The bond, set according to circulation levels, would be repaid with interest so long as the publication obeyed the nationally agreed standards. All or part would be forfeited if a paper broke the code or ignored a commission ruling. At a Westminster press conference yesterday, the party firmly rejected statutory regulations on the press or a privacy law. But it warned the press that stories about David Mellor, the former national heritage secretary, and the royal family, added to public disquiet about intrusion...
The party's submission to the enquiry urged the government to bring in changes to the law recommended by the original Calcutt report, which wanted three forms of intrusion to become criminal offences: entering private property, placing a surveillance device on private property and taking a photograph or recording without consent for the purpose of publishing personal information. "
The Times, 15 October 1992
In September 1994 the Liberal Democrats endorsed demands for a criminal offence to deal with aggressive media harassment. The blueprint, emerging from a party review of media issues led by the libel lawyer Richard Rampton QC, called for a new criminal offence to be created of "physical intrusion" [The Guardian, 10 September 1994].
The Government implemented none of the conclusions.
In May 2006 the Information Commissioner laid a special report before Parliament - 'What Price Privacy?' The report was the result of an investigation into the illegal trade of personal information - much of it carried out by journalists. The investigation uncovered evidence that up to 305 journalists working across a range of newspapers had sought to gain personal information illegally.
Prosecutions brought under the Data Protection Act generally resulted in low penalties: either minimal fines or conditional discharges. Between November 2002 and January 2006, only two out of 22 cases produced total fines amounting to more than £5,000.
The report's central recommendation called on the Lord Chancellor to bring forward proposals to raise the penalty for persons convicted on indictment of Section 55 (unlawful obtaining of personal information) offences to a maximum two years' imprisonment, or a fine, or both.
While the government published an initial positive response, it failed to launch a consultation until October 2009. It concluded in January 2010 but we are still awaiting a response.
NB. Clive Goodman was charged under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act.
Media plurality
The Liberal Democrats have long been at the forefront of moves to amend legislation to make it more difficult for media cross-ownership.
Having served on Puttnam's scrutinising committee, McNally - then deputy leader of the Lib Dems in the Lords - helped table a series of amendments that introduced new media plurality tests for any deal covering more than 25% of the sector or where the combined entity would have a turnover of more than £70m per annum.
The Government then accepted these amendments.
In the Lords McNally said:
"The Minister has made a great to-do about how powerful the test is, and we want to make sure that it works. I am not making any predictions. However, Mr Murdoch will come calling; believe me, because it fits into his strategy and his pattern. The noble Lord, Lord Lipsey, should know that when he comes calling he never plays just by the rules. As he did in New York, he will threaten to close down The Times if he does not get his way, or he will have some other blockbuster to intimidate Ministers."
Lords Hansard, 8 Jul 2003 : Column 164
Media plurality was again debated on 4 November 2010 in the light of News Corporation's bid for BSkyB. Opening the debate Lord Puttnam referred to the work he and others had put in amending the 2003 Communications Bill. He criticised Labour for initially opposing his amendments and said that at the time the official Conservative line was 'somewhat similar'. He then added:
"In truth, the only party that has consistently taken a thoughtfully independent position on this issue has been the Liberal Democrats. In this context, when I use the word "independent", I am referring to the Lib Dem leadership having felt itself free of prejudicial outside influences. Earlier still, in an important debate on the predatory pricing of newspapers in 1998-an issue I will return to a little later-the noble Lord, Lord McNally, now the Justice Minister, reminded us that with regard to the media, "concentration of power, married with the advance in technologies, offers a challenge to democratic governments and free societies which we have scarcely begun to address". I am certain that his personal views have not changed."
Lords Hansard, 4 Nov 2010 : Column 177
Replying for the Liberal Democrats, Tim Razzall said:
"My Lords, in thanking the noble Lord, Lord Puttnam, for introducing this extremely important debate, let me give him the undertaking he asked for. There has been no diminution whatever in the Liberal Democrats' commitment on this issue; indeed, various colleagues of mine regard this as a significant marker for our involvement in the coalition. I can certainly reassure the noble Lord on that point."
Lords Hansard, 4 Nov 2010 : Column 1784
December 2010: Vince Cable was secretly recorded saying he had 'declared war on Murdoch'. While the disclosure was deemed to have compromised Vince Cable's quasi-judicial role adjudicating on the BSkyB deal, it clearly demonstrated an opposition to Murdoch's expanding media empire consistent with the party's approach for years.
Holding the News of the World to account
When it emerged that the News of the World phone hacking scandal was not limited to one royal reporter, Liberal Democrat MPs used all the powers available to them to hold News International to account.
•· Demanded emergency statement, 9 July 2009
On the day the scandal broke, Evan Harris called for - and was granted - an emergency statement by ministers in the House of Commons.
Harris said: "We all want to see healthy, responsible investigative journalism - especially of public figures who wield power - but that must be within the law." [Press Association, 9 July 2009]
- Raised questions of Andy Coulson's involvement, 9 July 2009
Speaking in the chamber following the minister's statement, then Home Affairs spokesman Chris Huhne said: "At the very least Andy Coulson was responsible for a newspaper that was out of control and at worst he was personally implicated. Either way, a future prime minister cannot have someone who is involved in these sort of underhand tactics. The exact parallel is with Damian McBride. If it is more than a thousand [phone taps] it seems most unlikely to me to have been just one journalist. There needs to be a full investigation." [The Guardian, 10 July 2009]
- Called for the Independent Police Complaints Commission to investigate Scotland Yard's decision not to reopen the inquiry into phone hacking, 10 July 2009
Chris Huhne submitted a formal request to the IPCC, saying there had been a potential "neglect of duty" by the Metropolitan Police.
Huhne said: "The Metropolitan Police cannot act as judge and jury in its own trial. Only an independent inquiry can properly consider any possible neglect of duty by the Specialist Operations Department into the original investigation. Given the scale and scope of the allegations, the possibility that other journalists and investigators were involved must now be seriously considered." [BBC, 10 July 2009]
- Forced the then-Government into reporting quickly back upon three inquiries into the phone hacking, 16 July 2009
Just before summer recess, Simon Hughes tackled the Government on when it would report back upon three inquiries into the allegations of widespread illegal phone tapping, by the Director of Public Prosecutions, Information Commissioner and Common's culture select committee.
Hughes said many members of the public could be victims and would be less able to defend themselves in public compared to celebrities and politicians.
He asked the Government: "Could you make sure that when we come back in the first week (after the summer recess), a Home Office minister comes to the House to report on the three inquiries that have now started - by committees of this House, by the DPP and by the Information Commissioner - so that if the law isn't tight enough, it is tightened and if people ought to be prosecuted, they are prosecuted."
Then-Leader of the Commons Harriet Harman said she "absolutely agreed". [Press Association, 16 July 2009]
- Called for a judicial inquiry, 24 February 2010
Following the report of the Culture select committee into phone hacking, Chris Huhne was the first politician to call explicitly for a judicial inquiry - risking incurring the wrath of News International just weeks before the General Election.
Huhne said: "The select committee report blows a gaping hole in the News of the World's line that only a sole rogue reporter was involved in illegal hacking of phones, and reveals enormous worries about the feeble response of the Metropolitan police in investigating what was clearly widespread illegal activity. There are very serious issues at stake here for the privacy of the citizen and the report highlights deep concern at the weak reaction to these illegal intrusions by News International, the Press Complaints Commission, the Metropolitan police and the information commissioner." [The Guardian, 24 Feb 2010]
- Criticised the News of the World's £1m settlement with Max Clifford, 10 March 2010
The settlement meant that there would be no disclosure of court-ordered evidence that threatened to expose the involvement of the newspaper's journalists in a range of illegal activity.
Huhne said: "This is a clear attempt to buy the silence of people who had their phones hacked by the News of the World's reporters. It would make more sense for the newspaper to come clean. The trouble with cover-ups like this is that they give no reassurance that the guilty parties have really changed their ways." [The Guardian, 10 March 2010]
- Called for a judicial inquiry, 3 September 2010
Adrian Sanders, who sits on the Commons Culture and Media Select Committee, called for a judicial inquiry into newspaper phone-hacking allegations, while pressing Home Secretary Theresa May on the issue as she responded to an urgent question in Parliament.
8. Liberal Democrat Conference Motion
Press Complaints Commission - carried Sunday 19 Sep 2010.
Conference reaffirms its belief in the freedom of the British press and the valuable role it can play in holding people, politicians and businesses, to account.
Conference reaffirms its belief in the freedom of the British press and the valuable role it can play in holding people, politicians and businesses, to account.
However, conference believes that the freedom of the press should be exercised with greater responsibility and higher standards; and that this responsibility should respect not only the subject of an article but also the readership, who rely on the press to provide them with the facts of current events.
Conference notes comments by the then chairman of the Commons Culture Media and Sport select committee, in February this year, that the Press Complaints Commission is widely viewed as 'lacking credibility and authority' among the public.
Conference further notes that:
a) Of the 17 members of the PCC, seven are serving editors or editorial directors.
b) A clear conflict of interest arises if a complaint is made against a publication whose editor is a PCC member.
c) The PCC received more than 37,000 complaints from members of the public in 2009 - a sevenfold rise on the previous year.
Conference believes that for the Press to retain the confidence of the public, it is vital to have an effective and independent regulator that can deal robustly with any breaches of its own Code of Conduct.
Conference asserts that such a regulator should be entirely independent of serving editors, and should have the power to take disciplinary action, including financial penalties, against editors who breach the Code.
Conference affirms its support for a free and independent Press and believes that a stronger, more independent PCC will encourage better standards in the Press and help to protect both the public from unwarranted media intrusion, and the Press itself from a potential privacy law, which could restrict Press freedom.
Conference therefore calls on the government to:
1. Insist on reforms to the PPC to make it more independent of serving editors by having 2/3 lay members to 1/3 industry representatives as suggested by the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee. Ensure further reform by including lay members, and members from Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland where applicable on the Editors Code of Practise Committee and give it more powers to take disciplinary action against editors whose publications breach the code.
2. Support the recommendation by the CMS select committee that the PCC should be renamed the Press Complaints and Standards Commission, and appoint a deputy director for standards.
3. Affirm their opposition to a privacy law that would restrict press freedom in Britain.
4.Insist on a full review of the Code of Conduct to bring about higher standards of press responsibility and probity.
Applicability: Federal.
Letter to Murdoch from Simon, Tim and Don
Rupert Murdoch
Chairman and Chief Executive
News Corporation
c/o News International Ltd
3 Thomas More Square,
London E98 1XY
Proposed take-over of BSkyB by News International
Ever since the report of our Information Commissioner 'What Price Privacy?' and the conviction and imprisonment of Goodman and Mulcaire in 2006, there has been growing concern about the policy and practices of UK newspaper titles owned by News International.
Recent weeks have seen the publication of a flurry of further allegations against your company's publications in the UK which have shocked and sickened the British public, and rightfully so.
It now appears that:
- an investigator working for your newspaper the News of the World hacked into the phone of a kidnapped young girl and deleted her messages, giving her family false hope that she may still be alive.
- journalists and editors are implicated with police officers in illegal arrangements to obtain contact details of members of the royal family, which has put the royal family at risk through a completely irresponsible breach of security.
- people working for a News International title have hacked into phones and invaded the privacy of victims of terrorist attacks and the parents of dead soldiers.
We have no doubt that these events led directly or indirectly to the decision of your organisation to close the News of the World this week, seeking to draw a line under this terrible affair.
However, recent events have made clearer that illegal activities were not limited to the News of the World. There is now evidence that your papers The Sun and The Sunday Times improperly obtained the medical records of the then Chancellor Gordon Brown so they could run a story about the health of one of his children - as a result of activity which could not possibly have any public interest defence.
People who were in charge of these newspapers are still employed by you at News International in the UK. Your son James, current chairman of News International, and a senior executive at News International's parent company News Corporation, has admitted that he authorised cash payments to victims of phone hacking, payments which he himself has now admitted were wrong.
People working for your company have sought to cover up the many wrongs that it has committed. Your company has been accused of lying to the Press Complaints Commission, by its chair. Only yesterday the police accused News International of trying to undermine the ongoing police investigation into the affair.
News International is simply no longer respected in this country. Given the history of the last six or more years, it should be of little surprise to you that many people in this country have no desire to have any more of our media fall into your hands, tainted as News International is by a history of completely unacceptable journalistic practices. News Corporation, as the owner of News International must take some responsibility for this.
Two days ago the Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said you should do the decent thing and withdraw your bid to take full control of BSkyB. Many others have said similar things.
We hope you will respect the widespread expressions of public opinion and change News Corporation's commercial strategy in this country.
We therefore ask, both on behalf of our party but also on behalf of a very large number of people in this country, that you now withdraw your News Corp bid for BSkyB and concentrate all of your efforts on cleaning up News International. We are clear that this would be the right thing for Britain, and for the reputation of broadcasting and journalism in the UK. We hope you are willing to give a positive response.
News International Time Line
1992
October 14th: the Liberal Democrats call for violations of privacy such as surveillance of private property to be outlawed.
1994
June 26th: Liberal Democrat Chairman of Campaigns Matthew Taylor calls for the Office of Fair Trading to prevent Rupert Murdoch using the Times' price-cuts to drive other newspapers from the marketplace. The OFT conducts an investigation, and concludes that News International is not using predatory pricing tactics.
September: Liberal Democrats call for the criminalisation of media harassment.
1995
July 18th: Tony Blair flies to News Corporation's Hayman Island management conference, abandoning his engagement at the Durham Miner's Gala.
1997
November: Labour introduces a competition Bill outlawing predatory pricing amongst most retail companies, but not newspaper groups.
November 10th: Tom McNally, Liberal Democrat Trade & Industry spokesman introduces amendments to the Competition Bill to include newspaper groups in the new legislation. In the teeth of government opposition, the amendments pass.
1998
March: Rupert Murdoch, as owner of publisher HarperCollins, refuses to publish a book on Hong Kong by its last British governor, Sir Chris Patten. The Liberal Democrats attack this behaviour in Parliament.
June 9th: Labour removes the Liberal Democrat amendments to the Competition Bill during its committee stage. The Bill is forced through when the Tories abstain from voting.
2003
Tony Blair talks extensively to Rupert Murdoch in the lead up to the Iraq War.
June: Liberal Democrats call for the criminalisation of payment to the Police by the media, directly or indirectly, in exchange for information, following a report by the Culture, Media & Sport Select Committee. The Labour government ignores these.
July: Liberal Democrat Tom McNally introduces media plurality tests to the Communications Bill covering large-scale deals in the sector. The Labour government accepts these.
2006
May: The Information Commission publishes a report damning the high occurrence of journalists attempting to obtain personal information illegally. The government launches a consultation on this matter in 2009. The results are yet to be published.
2008
June: News of the World Editor, Rebekah Brooks, joins Sarah Brown and other media operatives for a 'sleepover' at Chequers.
2009
June: Gordon Brown and David Cameron attend Rebekah Brooks' wedding
July 9th: Chris Huhne, Liberal Democrat Home Affairs Spokesman, calls for a full investigation into the phone-hacking scandal.
July 10th: Huhne goes on to call for the IPCC to investigate Scotland Yard's premature closure of the phone-hacking inquiry. "The Metropolitan Police cannot act as judge and jury in their own trial"
July 16th: Simon Hughes forces the Labour Government to report back swiftly on phone-hacking inquiries.
September: News Corporation abandons Labour and declares its support for the Conservatives after a long period of courting by David Cameron.
2010
February 24th: Chris Huhne is the first politician to call for a judicial inquiry into Phone Hacking.
March 10th: Chris Huhne attacks News of the World's £1 million settlement with Max Clifford; "This is a clear attempt to buy the silence of people who had their phones hacked by News of the World's reporters"
April 18th: David Yelland, editor of The Sun, writes: "One man utterly beyond the tentacles of any of his [Rupert Murdoch's] family, his editors or his advisers. That man is Nick Clegg"
November 4th: Lord Puttnam, introducing the debate on News Corporation's bid for BSkyB, admits that the Liberal Democrats are "The only party that has taken a thoughtfully independent position on this issue... free of prejudicial outside influences"
2011
June: David Cameron and Ed Miliband attend Rupert Murdoch's Summer Party.
July 11th: Nick Clegg, Liberal Democrat leader and Deputy Prime Minister, calls upon Rupert Murdoch to "reconsider" his bid for BSkyB.
July 5th: Allegations that Milly Dowler's phone was hacked emerge
July 6th: Further allegations emerge about the hacking of families of Soham murder victims and bereaved families of dead soldiers.
July 6th: PM says he supports 'inquiries into events' without specifying details.
July 6th: All member email from Nick Clegg in which he calls for inquiries including a judge-led inquiry into original police investigation and also the behaviour of the British press, their practices and ethics.
July 7th: Announced that NOTW will close with loss of 200 jobs
July 8th: Simon Hughes writes to Ofcom calling on them to investigate whether BSkyB are 'fit and proper' to hold a broadcasting licence. Ofcom reply saying there they are monitoring the situation closely, that this is first and foremost a police inquiry but that they have asked to be kept abreast of developments.
July 8th: PM and Ed Miliband hold press conferences
July 8th: Ed Miliband calls for judge-led inquiry and the PCC to be scrapped
July 8th: PM defends his decision to hire Coulson
July 10th: Final edition of NOTW
July 10th: Chris Huhne on Marr says that he had warned Nick Clegg about the 'reputational risk' of appointing Coulson, who had in turned raised the issue with the PM, but that given it was a political appointment the Lib Dems could not tell the PM who he could/could not hire.
July 10th: Simon Hughes on Murnaghan calls on Labour to talk to the Liberal Democrats in order to get a motion on Wednesday which would delay the BSkyB takeover until criminal investigations are completed.
July 10th: Observer report Ashdown warned No 10 of the 'terrible damage' to the Coalition if Coulson was appointed.
July 10th: Independent, Tim Farron writing in the Independent says that the Tories and Labour have been cosying up to Murdoch for years and that Coulson's appointment is a 'stain on the Government'.
July 11th: Nick Clegg meets family of Milly Dowler and calls on Murdoch to 'do the decent thing' and abandon plans for BSkyB takeover.
July 11th: Jeremy Hunt writes to Ofcom to request advice on "whether last week's events caused them to reconsider previous advice about the "credibility, sustainability or practicalities of the undertakings offered by News Corporation".
July 11th: Don Foster on Daily Politics says that Lib Dems want to halt BSkyB takeover until police investigation is completed, if we can legally do so and that we may support a Labour motion which seeks to achieve that end.
July 11th: Jeremy Hunt refers BSkyB to the Competition Commission.
Share this page:
