Coulson loosens the noose
David Blackburn 12:52pm
The New York Times has produced what last year’s Guardian phone-hacking campaign lacked: direct testimony against Andy Coulson. Sean Hoare and an unnamed former News of the Screws editor allege that the practice was widespread and that Coulson encouraged it. These new revelations have rightly forced the Met to re-consider the case.
At present, the political furore surrounds the Met’s incompetence not just the allegations against Coulson. Bill Keller, executive editor of the NYT, has claimed categorically that the ‘police already have evidence that they have chosen not to pursue’. Critics always believed the original investigation's remit was too narrow, and Yates of the Yard was less than convincing when trying to dispel such criticism on this morning’s Today programme – his claim that ‘just because your name is on an invoice (of a private investigator) doesn’t mean your phone has been hacked’ does not establish the facts of specific allegations.
The sources briefing against Coulson do not appear to be beyond reproach. Sean Hoare has emerged from nowhere and, according to News International, comes with a lot of liquid and powdered baggage, which will demean his evidence if true. The story will lack credence until the unnamed alleged former editor reveals his identity, blowing the whistle on News International’s supposed skulduggery, which Tina Brown hints at in today’s Daily Beast.
Coulson is not David Cameron’s chief spin doctor for nothing. He is right to have responded immediately and offered Scotland Yard an interview to rubbish the allegations. Delay and obfuscation would have allowed this story to, as Labour’s Tom Watson puts it, ‘run and run’. Now Coulson must convince of his innocence and repay Cameron's 'full confidence'.
UPDATE: Labour are gunning for a second Commons inquiry into alleged NOTW phone-hacking. Theresa May will face urgent questions from Tom Watson and others in the chamber at 3:30 this afternoon. From what I gather she will reject calls for a second inquiry, which seems the right call - there is no need to investigate while the police are examining new evidence. John Whittingdale, chairman of the commons culture committee, is also adamant that his committee's inquiry not be re-opened.
UPDATE 2: Committee investigations get political. Labour MP Keith Vaz's Home Affairs Committee will go where Tory John Whittingdale's Culture, Media and Sport Committee won't be interviewing John Yates over the phone-hacking scandal. It's a bit of an elaborate bluff: Yates can only really tell Vaz of his investigation's findings and progress. Owing to the question of jurisdiction, I doubt Vaz will be able to bring Coulson before his select committee.
Previous
Peter From Maidstone
September 6th, 2010 1:18pm Report this commentYou say..
..his claim that ‘just because your name is on an invoice (of a private investigator) doesn’t mean your phone has been hacked’ is neither true nor false.
but your statement is clearly false. It is entirely true that just because your name is on an invoice does not mean you have been hacked. What do you think is not true about that statement?
You may perhaps want to say that if your name is on an invoice you might have been hacked, but that is a completely different statement, although that would also be true.
Nevertheless the main point, that having your name on an invoice is not proof of having been hacked is entirely true, and is not 'neither true nor false'.
ollie
September 6th, 2010 1:47pm Report this commentLol amazing how Labour have taken to Opposition - this has all the stench of crass opportunism dressed up as "public duty".
This sums up modern politics - a game of tit-for-tat mud slinging.
strapworld
September 6th, 2010 2:04pm Report this commentPeter from Maidstone is absolutely correct. Your statement is quite wrong. Indeed, whilst I share your distaste for this particular individual, Coulson, let us not start throwing muck at Yates of the Yard, he answers, correctly, the questions asked of him!! Blame the questioner for asking the wrong question, perhaps.
Ollie, Labour have always been excellent in opposition. They go for the jugular at every opportunity. They just make lousy governments!
lescam
September 6th, 2010 2:29pm Report this comment"Labour have always been excellent in opposition. They go for the jugular at every opportunity. They just make lousy governments!"
Very true. Maybe there are just too many "gentlemanly types" in the present-day Tory party. They seem to lack the killer instincts and viciousness of the Labour party in opposition.
When the Tories were in opposition, up till last May, they were far too nicey-nicey, and still are. The Tories could do with a Tory version of Ed Balls, Lord Mandelson or even Denis Skinner, to liven things up and put in the boot occasionally.
I absolutely agree with Strapworld that Labour make a good opposition, but a lousy govt. But the Tories seem to be lousy at both, at least under the present "leadership" (I use the term loosely). What we want are a few b******s in charge, who will stamp hard on Labour and kick them back under the stones whence they emerged.
Ian Walker
September 6th, 2010 2:37pm Report this commentA Tory version of Ed Balls? That would just be "Ed Balls born 13 years later" - he hitched a ride with the wagon he thought would take him furthest.
I don't much like the man, but I'm rather rooting for Coulson on this one.
FF
September 6th, 2010 2:51pm Report this commentre Peter's comment. Yates' statement may be true. But more importantly it looks to be irrelevant. The issue for the Met is not Coulson's innocence or guilt, but whether they should investigate Coulson. In this case your name on a hacker's invoice may indicate the possibility of having been illegally bugged.
Patricia Shaw
September 6th, 2010 2:56pm Report this commentCameron should
1)never have appointed him! The recommendation came from Hague - Great.
2) Dumped him after the election
Now Cameron is the story.
Even if, by some magical Murdoch mystery Coulson gets away with it, the damage has been done, seen to be done and the sleaze will stick.
ONLY COURSE LEFT - put him on a sabbatical until Coulson has been proven, beyond any doubt, to be innocent.
Paul Hawkins
September 6th, 2010 3:08pm Report this commentWhat next -weeks of Lord Ashcroft rants?
Of course the Observer and Guardian would never have used such underhand methods,nor would Alistair Campbell, would he? So Labour's occupation of the moral high ground seems an uncertain tenure. If this is tit for tat mudslinging,Labour would do well to ponder who now holds the keys to the skeletons in their cupboard after 13 years of government.
Fex Urbis
September 6th, 2010 3:14pm Report this commentCan anyone explain why the New York Times should be bothered about all this?
porkbelly
September 6th, 2010 4:35pm Report this commentFex - because they are locked in a circulation war to the death with News International, who own the NY Post and the Wall Street Journal. But just because they (and the Labour party) have an axe to grind, and just because their hands (and Labour's) are not spotless, does not render the allegations false or moot.
Anyone who read the original story would have been struck by the quality of the reportage - unlike most of what decorates the pages of the NYT these days. It does not read like a hatchet job.
The salient question is, since NOWTW was concerned with finding the usual rubbish, why were the phones of boring politicians hacked as opposed to celebs, athletes, etc.? And especially, what became of the information the hackers thereby obtained since it doesn't seem to have been published? Did Murdoch do the gentlemanly thing and dispose of it, or is it being held in reserve in case someone threatens that which is most dear to him (loadsamoney)?
In2minds
September 6th, 2010 4:56pm Report this commentKeith Vaz looking into the Coulson story, pots and kettles?
Fergus Pickering
September 6th, 2010 5:10pm Report this commentHow can anyone be proved, beyond any doubt, to be innocent? What sort of proof could that possibly be? You'd have to prove that he didn't know something. Try proving that you don't know something. How would you go about it?
Victor Southern
September 6th, 2010 6:03pm Report this commentI didn't realise that the MP for Calcutta South still heads a committee. Last I heard of him he was trying to ruin Cameron's visit to India by demanding that the Koh-in-Noor diamond be returned. Is there ba present-day Rajah of Patiala? It was a gift from one of them to Queen Victoria.
Richard of York
September 6th, 2010 10:07pm Report this commentThere is a stench of a rotting corpse about Coulson a dead man walking....or could it be Hague?
Ian Stewart
September 7th, 2010 9:36am Report this commentI never realised that so many people could be so relaxed about a multinational corporation seemingly running a highly organised bugging campaign against individuals, political opponents and rival businesses. It is very doubtful whether NewsCorp would dispose of information gathered in this way.
This company has a track record of interference in politics of nations around the world. And remember, for 13 years they backed New Labour.
As for Gentlemanly Tories, well I think you will find more players than gentlemen these days, so chin up!
Back to top