Coulson escapes unscathed
David Blackburn 4:50pm
So far, so good for Andy Coulson and the Tories. The former News of the World editor’s appearance before the Culture Select committee earlier today passed without further revelations. And, despite the efforts of Labour spin doctors, this remains a media scandal, not a political one.
The real drama occurred when the News of the World’s lawyer, Tom Crone, and editor Colin Myler gave evidence, and even that was pretty tame. Illustrating that there are no new revelations, the committee asked further questions concerning the emailed transcript of a tapped conversation sent by a junior reporter to Neville Thurlbeck, NotW’s chief reporter. Collective amnesia seems to have beset the NotW: Crone, the junior reporter and Thurlbeck recall next to nothing about this email.
Labour MP Paul Farrelly wished to know the whereabouts of the junior reporter and was informed by Crone that he was in Peru. Myler was quick to clarify that the reporter had not been sent there but was on holiday voluntarily. Then the Committee attacked.
Tory MP Philip Davies doubted Goodman was a lone rogue reporter. ‘What interest would the royal editor Goodman have in the taped conversations of Elle Macpherson?’ It was an incisive point, but Crone and Myler remained defensive, citing the conclusions of that arch sleuth ‘Yates of the Yard’: “No additional evidence has come to light since this began and I see no reason to continue the enquiry.” Still the committee pushed, fixated with Ms Macpherson.
Eventually, Myler lost his cool, launching an ill-advised tirade. “If you share an office with an MP who’s a crook does that make you one?” The outburst received frosty glares from the panel. He compounded his error by claiming the contentious email “was not redacted, unlike MPs’ expenses”. This would have been a rhetorical knock out had it been true – the email was actually replete with black bars.
The first session overran by nearly an hour, perhaps this left the MPs mentally drained when it came to grilling Coulson. He swanned through the session, straight-batting everything with the very reasonable observation that at no point has he been implicated in any skulduggery. The only awkward moment arose when Plaid MP Adam Price forced Coulson to admit that he never queried Clive Goodman’s sources, and that he no recollection of a story about Prince William mimicking Prince Harry’s then girlfriend Chelsey Davey, ripped by Goodman from the Princes’ phones. But the demob-happy MPs did not take the opportunity to question Coulson’s judgement, and proceedings became more and more sedate. Even the usually bullish Tom Watson did not attempt to draw Coulson’s blood; in fact, Coulson drew Watson’s, comparing his ignorance of Goodman’s activities to Watson’s innocence in Damian McBride’s connivances.
The session ended - the committee neither wiser nor better informed. How could they be anything other? No evidence suggesting that Coulson or any other NotW journalist were aware of tapping has emerged. As Pete has said, unless that changes Coulson is safe. The Tory leadership will certainly be relieved.
Previous
strapworld
July 21st, 2009 6:07pm Report this commentJust WHAT is the story please?
This is a complete waste of time and money. Just to attempt to embarrass the tories and Mr Coulson!
I hope that Mr Murdoch now gets his lawyers on the case to sue the Guardian/Observer. The Editor and the BBC.
Now THAT would be a story!!
Stan,UK
July 21st, 2009 6:07pm Report this commentI thought Coulson was very good. Admitedly not the normal polished Cameroon public school boy verbal skills. But he did well and even had a dig at Watson about McBride.
Carly
July 21st, 2009 6:09pm Report this commentLabour will be gutted they didn't land a blow. First Osborne then Coulson, wonder who they will target next???
Andy "Amnesiac" Coulson
July 21st, 2009 6:34pm Report this commentYou ain't seen me, right.
I ain't seen you. I ain't seen nuthin.
No. I don't remember.
Anyway, gissa job as a keen observer of the media scene.
I don't know why it don't make no sense. I don't know nuthin.
Steve.W
July 21st, 2009 7:04pm Report this commentNot really important this but it's the sort of thought that follows me around all day; according to the Guardian there is simple algebra here, McBride = Coulson. There are umpteen photos of McBride with Brown can anyone produce a photo of Coulson with Cameron?
There is no equality between McBride and Coulson, end of story?
Alex
July 21st, 2009 7:11pm Report this commentI'm not completely thick, but as a political nerd, I still don't understand what the story is.
If political nerds can't understand what the story is, why are the Labour attack dogs insistent on pressing this 'story'?
Do they really think (in their desperate quest for the Tories to drop a few points in the opinion polls) that the public will understand / be interested in this story?
mitch
July 21st, 2009 8:02pm Report this commentThis is one dog that just wont hunt we can all see its just tit for tat over McBride.
gordon-bennett
July 21st, 2009 8:32pm Report this commentReminds me of when the beeb and grauniad got together to frame Neil Hamilton.
Lies then, lies now.
Thinking for Beginners
July 21st, 2009 11:38pm Report this commentFor those gentle souls who "don't get" what the story is, it's all quite simple.
The "newspaper", of which Coulson was editor, is being accused of spying on private citizens on an industrial scale.
The story is what did Coulson know of this, and if he did know is he a fit and proper person to be chief media advisor to a potential future PM.
That's the story. Proof of it is another matter.
jock
July 22nd, 2009 6:47am Report this commentthis committee,labour dominated,at our expense trying this on,is a scandal.
they really have to get real and realise erybody feels like they are being taken to the cleaners by our political class.this just confirms it.
logdon
July 22nd, 2009 6:57am Report this comment"Coulson escapes unscathed".
Not according to the BBC who, after excruciatingly wringing every tiny nuance out of this non story pronounced that it still had, and I quote, 'as they say, legs'.
Quite shameless on all levels.
One: a chance to snipe at Murdoch, (no partisanship there, eh).
Two: a chance to snipe at the Tories, (ditto comment).
We pay the licence fee to fund an independent broadcaster supposedly free of any grace or favour.
What has emerged since Labour took power is a harnessing of this massive media organisation until it has virtually become it's political wing.
Their reporting, once the envy of the world has descended into farce and has lost much of the trust the whole edifice is supposed to be built on.
Once that's gone, what exactly is the point?
Break it up. Allow them BBC One and Four, plus the core radio stations, then hive off or remove the rest.
They've betrayed their remit by blatantly stepping across countless red lines into highly dubious reporting.
Time for a shake up.
I hope Dave is taking note.
logdon
July 22nd, 2009 7:43am Report this commenthttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/5882105/Councils-use-bugs-to-spy-on-public-illegally.html
Select committee investigation into this?
The hypocrisy reaches new lows as Johnson actually now defends illegal snooping.
David Short
July 22nd, 2009 8:22am Report this commentThis business shows that Cameron lacks judgment.
Despite appearances.
That's the real story.
Chuck Unsworth
July 22nd, 2009 9:19am Report this comment@ DAvid Short
No. What it shows is that you disagree with Cameron's judgement - not quite the same thing, eh?
Mel Cannon
July 22nd, 2009 10:10am Report this commentFor the enlightenment of 'Thinking for Beginners', the real story is not what he/she alludes to, for there really is no evidence of 'spying on private citizens on an industrial scale' as suggested
The real story is the feeble attempt by the Guardian to get one back for the Draper/McBride debacle and the complicity of the 'left of centre thinking' media (i.e. BBC including Andrew Neil, Channel 4 News and all the other usual suspects) in a pathetic attempt to smear David Cameron and the Conservatives.
Now that is what I call 'Conclusions for Beginners'.
Oscar
July 22nd, 2009 10:21am Report this commentCompare and contrast Coulson with the treatment of Damian McBride. When McBride was called before a Commons committee he was allowed to get away with mysteriously disappearing. Suddenly noone knew where Damian was and this only merited online reporting, not broadcast headlines. Damian of course resurfaced in time for the Coulson hearing with a soft interview for the Guardian and loads of headlines about Gordon's fury and other such spin attempting to mend McPoison's damaged reputation. Coulson, meanwhile was treated as if he was a criminal by the HoC, C4 News and the BBC, despite there being no new evidence and no news story. It is obvious that this entire 'hearing' was designed for party political reasons to get Cameron. The fact that Coulson handled it so well does not change the bias and discrimination he has been subjected to.
David Short
July 22nd, 2009 4:17pm Report this commentNo, 'Chuck', not at all the same thing.
I wasn't going to bang on about why an old Etonian with long-standing wealth and good connections couldn't have a better career than a PR man for a telly company then taking on the leadership of a party that couldn't get elected for a decade, but whoops, I just have done.
Mel Cannon
July 22nd, 2009 4:43pm Report this commentI seem to recall that the Labour Party couldn't get elected for 18 years (1979 - 1997) and I would suggest, will not get elected for another 28 years which is about as long as it will take the sort out the mess they have left.
Chuck Unsworth
July 22nd, 2009 7:43pm Report this comment@ David Short
So being an Old Etonian, or wealthy, etc is some sort of crime? But perhaps this is simple Class Warfare, then - the usual politics of envy. What sort of 'career' would be appropriate? Has Brown had an appropriate career - or Clegg for that matter?
And as to 'leadership of a party which etc etc' - remind us when Cameron took over leadership.
You disagree with his judgement, his choice of employee? So what?
Paul
July 22nd, 2009 10:52pm Report this commentDavid Short - and that is why you are a Leftie.
The Labour Party will now disappear for ever - God willing.
Rainer Unsinn
July 23rd, 2009 7:35am Report this commentDavid Short, how many of your Labour MPs and ministers send their children to private schools, rather than into the state system?
Back to top