Cameron needs to move fast to regain the initiative

Vulture

Those who argue that this has nothing to do with Dave since the sins happened while Labour were in office had better think again.

AS Oborne underlines in the Telegraph, desp;ite many warnings, Dave arrogantly went out of his way to associate himself with the two figures most in the firing line: Brooks and Coulson. By hugging these tar babies to his manly chest he has merely covered himself in their slime.

This is just the first of Dave's chickens flapping home to roost. The sky is already darkening with Libya, the cuts, the Euro crisis and panicky Lib Dems up in arms.

And the way that the heir to Blair has responded to the crisis suggests that he himself has become one of those chickens - but without a head.

DavidDP

The Speccie must be enjoying all the new people who have suddenly started commenting here.

Although only on the Murdoch stories, and all saying how evil the man is. Odd.

Rhoda Klapp

I wonder why things which are essentially trivial garner this much attention, whereas things which do matter may be ignored by the whole damn stupid crooked lot of them.

As an aside, I wonder whoever the hell takes public inquiries seriously any more, and on what grounds.

Sara de Witt

Concerning the tedious phone hacking furore, why can't anyone realise that this episode is nothing more than the left, backed by the BBC and The Guardian, trying to prevent any further incursion into the UK by Rupert Murdoch. Murdoch's News Corporation currently backs the Coalition which, despite every vicious effort by the left to vilify every move it makes, is doing really rather well. The last thing the left needs is a really strong propadanda tool ie Murdoch, working on site for Cameron. Phone tapping by hacks and police paying underworld low life for tips offs have been in existence since God was in short trousers. So bloody what?

Cameron hired a first class journalist in Andy Coulson. How could he possibly know what Coulson was doing years ago whilst Editor of the NoW? His judgement is immpecable. The only people whose judgement needs to be questioned are the appalling J Prescott and dreadful Chris Bryant. One thought it OK to be cavorting with his secretary on our time and with our money and the other, whilst employed as a Minister of the |Crown, thought it OK to pose in his pants on the internet whilst cruising for gay partners. Before the left has too much of a field day, can one ask why BBC executives think it perfectly OK to use entrapment methods when going after right wing prey - ie the BNP?

Needless to say, the first question on Question Time tonight will be about Cameron's judgement and ditto on the other left wing side show - Any Questions tomorrow night. Same old, same old leftie rubbish.

Lance

Its quite obvious how serious the allegations surrounding the NoTW are to the general public and with it the seemingly toxic legacy of News Corp and their relationships with successive UK governments. Leaving aside the BSkyB issue, Dave Cameron must launch a full and independent inquiry into ALL areas, including police and journalistic practices. This avoids the populist and demonising move on NewsCorp that people may like to see, while sending a message to them at the same time that their behaviour must not be tolerated. Otherwise like the Blair government he will be seen as yet another lap dog of Rupert Murdoch, his links to the company are bad enough, so speed and confidence is needed here with gusto!

Colin

So, let me get this straight.

As a result of a media sh*t storm, whipped up by a failing, tax avoiding, comedy rag, aided by a rabble of left wingers, the government has caved in and delayed a perfectly sensible deal.

What happens if it turns out that the "evidence" for all this doesn't actually stand up in court and most of it is just press hype and conjecture, aimed at scuppering a legal transaction, for narrow competitive advantage?

AJK

surely the government can refer BSkyB merger to Ofcom? And dare Rupert to take it to judicial review

Mark Cannon

Mr Cameron needs to put together a statement to the following effect:

(1) He is appalled and disgusted by what has been going on at the News of the Screws. In particular, the apparent hacking of the mobile phones of murder victims, war dead etc.

(2) It seems likely that there will be criminal prosecutions which means that the government has to be extremely careful what it says in order to make sure that anyone who is guilty does not get off because of what has been said by the government. He realises that the public will find this difficult to understand, but it is the law and he asks the public to accept this.

(3) The BSB/News International deal is governed by strict rules and the decision has to be made in accordance with specified criteria. If the government took into account other matters the decision would be set aside by the courts. The government has to be very careful to abide by the law.

(4) He employed Coulson in good faith. If Coulson lied to him, then that is for Coulson, not him. It is not prudent for him to say any more at this stage.

(5) While it would be easy to join Ed Miliband in calling for certain heads to role at News International, it is first and foremost a matter for the individuals concerned.

(7) There may well be prosecutions and the government has to hold back while those take place. But there will be a full inquiry into the practises of journalists, not limited to one newspaper, or to one newspaper group, but across the board. This will include relations between the press and the police.

And he needs to submit to interview rather than stay in Number 10.

Simon Stephenson.

Rhoda Klapp : 2.34pm

I was just about to make the same point about public inquiries. As long-grass destinantions they've just about been done to death over the last 15 years, and it's dubious whether Cameron referring these recent events to one will generate as much relief for him as it generates scepticism of his motive.

Maybe this is crunch-time for the political class. Maybe they've played fast and loose with the truth for so long that it's no longer possible to rescue situations with the white lies of sophisticated deceit. Maybe, in their stupidity, they have denied themselves the ability to deliver correct policy through the nuanced communication that is sometimes necessary to soothe a frightened public.

If so, they and their immediate predecessors have a great deal to answer for.

Tron

The BBC are just loving this.
I know they have to report it but the sheer joy as they say “dead teenager”, “7/7 victim”, “dead soldier” then turn to a Guardianista or Labour MP pass them a baseball bat and say “there is Rupert Murdoch’s head, hit it for as long as you like” is getting a bit much. Radio 5 live are happier than they were on election night 1997.
Of course all BBC journalists and all the other newspapers never ever dwell on teenage deaths or get information from police officers.
Also, I thought Labour was in power (and in bed with Rupert ) when all this happened. A point the BBC seems to have forgotten.

Sue Collini

@Sara de Witt

Wrong. Spectacularly wrong.

Collini out.

oldtimer

Cameron has lost the initiative - if he ever had it. All he can do is attempt to respond to events as they unfold.

If, as you suggest, there are arrests followed by prosecutions then they will unfold in all their prurient detail. The police and the Director of Prosecutions will run that show.

The fate of Rebekah Wade rests in the hands of Murdoch, not Cameron. Murdoch will be worrying about his bottom line - Cameron could only help Murdoch by approving the BSkyB deal - and that, it seems, has been put on the back burner.

The one thing he can do is set up a judicial enquiry but its terms of reference and membership will be scrutinised carefully for signs of neutrality and independence; for Cameron the risk there is downside if its terms and membership leave open grounds for criticism.

MacMillan coined the phrase about "events, dear boy, events" as the bane of his Prime Ministerial life. Cameron is now finding out how true that is. In the meantime he will continue to be tarred ruthlessly with the brush of his close association with Coulson, Wade and News International.

Tiberius

Vulture: This matter does of course have something to do with Cameron because it is so serious and he is PM. But what you fail to mention, because it doesn't suit you bias, is that the Met has far more questions to answer over their part in this affair.

As for Peter Oborne, his hyperbole is all the more eccentric because in the next breath he'll be praising Cameron again.

As for Cameron's response, well I would suggest that in the aftermath of yesterday's PMQs, your characterization just doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

strapworld

Mr Forsyth. Your headline states Cameron needs to move fast to regain the initiative.

An hour has past. Has he?

Ivy Eileen

Mark Cannon -

items 1 to 7 : isn't this what he said at yesterday's PMQs ?

Percy

Funny how we haven't heard a peep out of the top cop of the New Labour years, Sir Ian Blair.

Robert Eve

@Sara de Witt

Spot on!!

HampsteadOwl

For a sinister SMERSH-like organisation with pretensions upon planetary-control, News Corp would appear to have played this issue with extraordinary ineptitude.

If, as is reasonable, we assume that the only thing Rupert Murdoch cares about in all of this is to take control of the remaining 60% of BSkyB, then to have this horrendous scandal break right upon the moment of deciding whether he gets it, is the worst possible timing.

Nor is it bad luck, since News Corp/News International must have known all along the full extent of the hacking and how bad this story could get. As soon as it became clear that the "single rogue reporter" defence had burst, if not before, it would have been far better for them to go for full disclosure, in the expectation that the whirlwind would have blown itself out by the time a government decision on referral to the Competition Commission had to be made.

So if I were Rupert Murdoch I would be hacked-off with Rebekah Brooks not so much for her culpability as the then editor of the News of the World (I doubt whether her scruples as a tabloid editor much concern him), but because, as the principal steward of his UK interests, she has singularly failed to navigate the best possible course through this calamity. It is starting to look as if for certain the takeover will be delayed, if not doomed, and I cannot but imagine that Mrs Brooks will pay the price for it.

The only other explanation is that the full extent of James Murdoch's role in all this hasn't yet come to light. After all he was London-based from 2003 right through to spring of this year. Brooks may have been the golden girl, but James M is blood and that counts, even in the most ruthless businessman's mind.

Perry the HardHearted

'Cameron' ...

'move' ...

'fast' ...

nah ... you've lost me there.

Tom Pride

A seedy tabloid newspaper long accused of behaving unscrupulously and insensitively with scant regard for individual privacy or decency and whose editor admitted some five years ago to having paid police officers for information (which brought no consequences at the time) is now revealed as having behaved in an underhand and hurtful manner to various vulnerable persons by listening to their or their relatives un-secured voicemail messages.

Politicians, journalists and broadcasting media now go over the top in a feeding frenzy. Official enquires and extralegal actions are demanded.

The tax-funded BBC ignores its duty of impartiality and attempts to close down public discussion by its coverage (or deliberate non-coverage) of the EC, the euro and the UK entry to the Euro, immigration, multiculturalism and Islamic extremism, Israel/ Palestine issues, economic policy and levels of Government spending and borrowing, anthropogenic global warming, green issues, nuclear energy and alternative energy sources.

Consequences – none.

Potential and / or actual immeasurable harm done to the country by one; unwarranted intrusion and hurt to individuals by the other.

Duyfken

I wonder why so many of those commenting seem to consider Murdoch as a Conservative supporter? He is not, except in the sense that he is supporting a government and Party for the time being in the expectation of advancing his own interests. Look at his history (Wikipedia) and see how he has switched sides throughout his career, here and in Australia. In fact, when he was a student at Oxford, he is credited as being a Labour supporter. He was even prepared to renounce his native Australia to become a US citizen for patently commercial reasons to expand his empire.

RCE

Tom Pride - spot on.

Publius

Parish-pump politics at its worst, whipped up to a frothing frenzy by a decadent, irrelevant and complicit media.

Still, Cameron had his chance to deal with the BBC and all the others now lining up against him. And he blew it.

TrevorsDen

Vulture - Ms Wade married one of Camerons best friends. Seems to me SHE went out of her way.

And by the way Vulture you and a few of the usual labour Lemmings should look at the guest list when she and Mr Brooks re-took their vows in good old Chippy --- Top of the list one G.Brown Esq.

I do not see how much quicker Cameron could move then announcing there would be several enquiries At PMQs.

I repeat - my 95 year old sadly demented father in law could have written a more coherent piece than Oborne. Hell - I could!

DavidDP

"Dave arrogantly went out of his way to associate himself with the two figures most in the firing line: Brooks and Coulson"

Coulson I'll give you, but I'm not sure the PM has much control over who his friends marry.

As for speed, I'd prefer the right response over a fast one. The inquiry has to be set up properly. Cameron is quite right when he says he does not want another Svaille inquiry.

By accounts, the PM has been consulting Ed Miliband over the best way to proceed. His repayment is for Miliband to make political points about speed and trying to protect his friends.That says a lot about Miliband's chracter. And not a good lot.

Ralph

Interesting that you think acting is the best option when the reverse seems much better. Cameron should wait until things calm down then act, not react in the midst of a load of silly over the top coverage.

TrevorsDen

Ms Klapp is disturbingly on the ball.

I am not quite sure either hat the total number of British casualties were in Iraq or how much it cost.
Labour however saw fit to wait until both the war and occupation were over before launching an enquiry.
Its when you think about this that you realise how manufactured labours false hysteria is over this eaves dropping business.

michael

"So bloody what"... NotW seriously overstepped the mark so the penny has dropped ... that's what.
-What's more... Politicians (inc the PM) who have been actively chasing endorsements/sponsorship from this 'profiteering - don't mess with OUR freedom of speech or expression' business, are up shit's creek. - And rightly so .

Charles Martel

@Percy

Ian Blair is a fool, but this happened before his watch. A man by the name of Sir John Stevens (2000-2005) was at the helm.

Lord Stevens was asked by the Conservatives, under David Cameron, to be their candidate for the London Mayoral elections. He declined this offer.

John Rentoul, 4th May 2008:
He [Cameron] hadn't wanted Boris to be the mayoral candidate in the first place. "That was Steve's fault," he said to himself. Steve Hilton, his director of conceptualisation, had the idea to have an open primary election to choose the Conservative candidate for London. It was postponed once because no one credible came forward and, after embarrassing conversations with Greg Dyke, Digby Jones and John Stevens, Boris was Cameron's only option.

Imagine, the Met Chief at the time of this 'hacking' could have been the Conservative Mayor of London right now... This story would be in a whole different league right now.

Axstane

One must ignore Vulture since she would criticise Cameron simply because it is Thursday - she needs no other excuse.

It is no way for Cameron to attempt to dicate what NewsCorp should do about the employment of Rebekah Brooks anymore than he should exert pressure on any employer over any employee.

Last night Max Clifford on the Sky News Review pointed out exactly what I had posted here and other blogs - that no enquiry can be held whilst police criminal enquiries are in progress. Nobody would give evidence if there was any chance that they had been implicated, nor could they be compelled to.

Cameron had already made it perfectly clear at PMQs what courses of action he thought appropriate and no sane person could dispute anything he said.

The only thing that he could add was to instruct the Minister to delay a decision on the takeover of BSkyB. That would, of course, result in a legal challenge by NewsCorp but the government could live with that even if it was eventually lost.

Vulture obviously intends to hold Cameron to account even for matters over which he has no control, even those that happened whilst he was in Opposition. That only reflects the views of her employer The Daily Mail which, I am fairly sure, conducted similar illegal activities itself at some time. As a neo-Fascist rag it would not be overly concerned with people's rights to privacy. In 2006 The Ministry of Truth published this table of transgressors, obtaining information by illegal means:

1. Daily Mail – 952 incidents by 58 different journalists
2. Sunday People – 802 incidents by 50 different journalists
3. Daily Mirror – 681 incidents by 45 different journalists
4. Mail on Sunday – 266 incidents by 33 different journalists
5. News of the World – 182 different incidents by 19 different journalists

Tiberius

Fraser doesn't need to consider his position now: James Murdoch has said the NoW won't print again after next Sunday.

lescam

from the Telegraph;

"James Murdoch makes shock announcement that the News of the World is to print its final edition on Sunday"

I think Peter Oborne's article is terrible. Purple prose, over the top, rubbish. Shouldn't think most of the population care two hoots about Cameron's social circle, in spite of what Oborne thinks.

Jupiter

I'm getting really bored with this story. Isn't there any real news you could be reporting?

Percy

@Charles Martel

I stand corrected.

Boudicca

I really can't believe that joe public is really that appalled and angry about this story. This is a Westminster bubble and British media obsession - which the BBC and leftwing are using to whip up a storm against the current Government.

Cameron was extremely foolish to hire Andy Coulson and should have kept both Murdoch and Rebekah Brooks at arms length; he has shown serious lack of judgement over this - just as he has over more important issues such as the EU, immigration, Libya, foreign aid etc.

But it shouldn't be forgotten that the alleged crimes took place when Labour was in power - and Blair/Campbel;/Mandelscum et all cosied up to Murdoch and News Int even more blatently than Cameron.

As there's not a scrap of difference between the Lib/Lab/CON let's hope the electorate ignores Murdoch's rags completely next time and vote UKIP.

2trueblue

Liebore and the BBC make such a good pair. It all happened on Liebores watch, the BBC have investigative journalists??? Go do it.
Cameron employed a chap and ?? this was a mistake. Somehow this is just a load of verbals, no one has the facts, but the BBC and Liebore think they have it all sorted? What a load of....

Ianda

What is almost amusing about several of your commenters here (Sara De Witless, etc)is their inability to grasp, as Peter Oborne so excellently does, that this is a moral issue. But why am I not surprised? In general, the Right always believes that money trumps morals, doesn't it? And what goes is what you can get away with. No wonder that Britain has lost its bearings....