Matt Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Breakdown: what we've learned from phone hacking document release Earlier today, the Culture Media and Sport select committee published a mine of new correspondence between the committee and key players in the phone hacking scandal. Here’s what we’ve learned so far: Clive Goodman wrote to News International after he was sacked for phone hacking, to make a claim for unfair dismissal. In the letter, he states that Andy Coulson was aware of the practice of phone hacking, and that it was regularly discussed in editorial meetings until “explicit reference of it was banned by the Editor.” The version of Goodman’s letter provided to the committee by News International had redacted all references to hacking being discussed in editorial meetings. According to James Murdoch, Clive Goodman was paid £243,502.08 in settlement of his unfair dismissal claim. Also, approximately £246,000 was paid to Glenn Mulcaire’s lawyers to cover his legal fees. The Editor and Managing Editor of the News of the World could authorise payments of up to £50,000. Deputy Editors could authorise £10,000 and Desk Heads, £2000. 54 staff have been disciplined under News International’s Corporate Code of Conduct since 2000, including 3 this year. While NI have records stating Rebekah Brooks was on holiday at the time the Millie Dowler story which had been sourced through phone hacking broke, James Murdoch says they do not have records showing who deputised for her, or who the on duty lawyer was. Mark Lewis, Gordon Taylor’s lawyer, says he was told by a lawyer representing News International that he was “negotiating with Murdoch.” Lewis says “I did not know whether he meant Rupert Murdoch or James Murdoch at that time, but it seems likely that the reference was to James.” The 2007 email review carried out by Harbottle & Lewis, far from being a full, unrestrained investigation, was restricted to five email subfolders – and only to look for evidence regarding Clive Goodman. The “limited” selection of documents were examined over a period of two weeks, by junior employees. When James Murdoch the legal firm had been brought in to find out “what the hell was going on”, he may have been, say Harbottle & Lewis, “confused or misinformed.” News International’s former Director of Legal affairs Jonathan Chapman told the committee the 2007 Harbottle & Lewis email review could not be characterised as the “wider internal investigation” it had been made out to be at the committee hearing. He said the attempt to do so could be said to be “a diversion.” HT: Political Scrapbook http://bit.ly/poJ5ip Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 (edited) Or, to summarise: Link Edited August 17, 2011 by leeslover Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 The Sun goes seven days a week and the BSkyB deal goes through in September. Never underestimate the gullibility of the British public. This is the month! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted September 5, 2011 Share Posted September 5, 2011 So, it turns out that Mr Blair forget to tell us that few weeks before the General Election he had been standing in white robes beside the River Jordan in his role as the Godfather to Murdoch's kid. Absent minded silly billy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beag_teeets Posted September 5, 2011 Share Posted September 5, 2011 So, it turns out that Mr Blair forget to tell us that few weeks before the General Election he had been standing in white robes beside the River Jordan in his role as the Godfather to Murdoch's kid. Absent minded silly billy! Just when you think Blair can't surprise you anymore, he does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted September 5, 2011 Share Posted September 5, 2011 <BR>So, it turns out that Mr Blair forget to tell us that few weeks before the General Election he had been standing in white robes beside the River Jordan in his role as the Godfather to Murdoch's kid. Absent minded silly billy!<BR><BR><BR> For this and many other things, Blair is an idiot, but he wasn't standing in the general election, and he's not active in domestic politics at all any more. Why should we know or care to whom he is Godfather? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted September 5, 2011 Share Posted September 5, 2011 It seems fair to assume that Blair and Rupe have had a very close and trusting relationship for a long time doesnt it? Including all the time that the police and government were extremely light handed over the phone hacking. I think it would matter for someone who way fit to bang on about tory racism during the election based on events before Dave was born. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted September 5, 2011 Share Posted September 5, 2011 It seems fair to assume that Blair and Rupe have had a very close and trusting relationship for a long time doesnt it? Including all the time that the police and government were extremely light handed over the phone hacking. I think it would matter for someone who way fit to bang on about tory racism during the election based on events before Dave was born. I don't follow. Did Blair accuse Cameron of racism during the general election? Show me. Politicians and newspaper proprietors have pretty much always been adhesive. The villains in this case are the journos, the 'tecs, the editors and the coppers. Politicians and the public are merely besmirched. Besides which, I can imagine you screaming a different tune if Blair or Brown decided to light an investigatory fire under the free press. You can't have it both ways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted September 5, 2011 Share Posted September 5, 2011 My point is that you are happy to use the tar brush when it suits. Who cares about Blair, he's not standing? But you do case about what some random tory said in a by election 50 years ago. The election you decided you were working class again was lead from the Labour side by Blair's closest political friend (the one who hangs out with corrupt russian gangsters) and his old ally brown, who had a finger in every pie. But no, it doesnt matter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted September 5, 2011 Share Posted September 5, 2011 My point is that you are happy to use the tar brush when it suits. Who cares about Blair, he's not standing? But you do case about what some random tory said in a by election 50 years ago. The election you decided you were working class again was lead from the Labour side by Blair's closest political friend (the one who hangs out with corrupt russian gangsters) and his old ally brown, who had a finger in every pie. But no, it doesnt matter What did I do? Blimey. It's not Blair, it's his closest political friend, who was once on a boat with a Russian oligarch, who is also friends with George Osborne and Nathaniel Rothschild, who is descended from Adam, who caused all the trouble in the first place by listening to the missus, to the consternation of friends...as the Daily Mail would put it. What are we to make of it all! Tony Blair is godfather to a Murdoch brat. The question is this: so what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 Murdoch is very close to the right wing types in the USA to who Tone gave a blank cheque to back in a bad was which cost many lost and damaged lives. We knew Tone sucked up as they all do, dont you think this is a couple of notches further down the line? I've had a number of business meetings with people who i wouldnt automatically invite as guest of honour to some quasi-messianical event. But its probably all fine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 Murdoch is very close to the right wing types in the USA to who Tone gave a blank cheque to back in a bad was which cost many lost and damaged lives. We knew Tone sucked up as they all do, dont you think this is a couple of notches further down the line? I've had a number of business meetings with people who i wouldnt automatically invite as guest of honour to some quasi-messianical event. But its probably all fine This is conspiracy theory nonsense. You'd have a point if Blair were still in office, but he isn't and he wasn't. He can do as he likes. What you can't do is give security clearance and power to someone who is in Murdoch's keep and who faces serious and plausible criminal allegations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 So it's absolutely no concern that the Labour prime minister was a very close (but secret) personal family friend of Rupert Murdoch whilst in office? We might need to do a poll on this one, and i think you might be on your own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 So it's absolutely no concern that the Labour prime minister was a very close (but secret) personal family friend of Rupert Murdoch whilst in office? We might need to do a poll on this one, and i think you might be on your own. When was the christening? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 Dont know, i wasnt on the guest list. But then, i wouldnt be. The Murdochs never felt the need to trade support and favours with me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 As far as I can ascertain, the christening was last year. Blair left office in 2007. Are you really saying that Blair's foreign and domestic policies were decided by Murdoch? For your own sake, let it go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 Why would it concern you that Dave had a press officer who was connected to Rupert but you aren't bothered about a prime minister being far more intimately connected with Rupert? No more bleating about dates please, they have plainly been close for many years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 Why would it concern you that Dave had a press officer who was connected to Rupert but you aren't bothered about a prime minister being far more intimately connected with Rupert? No more bleating about dates please, they have plainly been close for many years. The Prime Minister's personal relationships are his own affair as far as I'm concerned - when he's in office or out of it. The problem with Cameron and Coulson is that the relationship was official. Coulson should have declared News International benefits (the car, the legal fees, the health insurance) to both the Cabinet Secretary and the House of Commons. He didn't, but why not? Why was he keeping it a secret that he was still in Murdoch's keep? There is a strong chance that Coulson could have used his position to keep the prying eyes of Inspector Knacker away from any role in phone hacking that he may have had that had not at that time come to light. There's nothing plain about Murdoch and Blair's closeness - you don't know, and neither do I, and it's a waste of time inferring things. It doesn't really matter anyway, because it's personal. Blair didn't owe Murdoch in the way that Coulson did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 There was me thinking that it was a key part of the New Labour strategy to get the Murdoch papers on side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beag_teeets Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 There was me thinking that it was a key part of the New Labour strategy to get the Murdoch papers on side. Is this the 5 minute argument or the 10? Yup, after 1992 the belief that we would never win again without Murdoch's support was an overriding strategy, I doubt whether now with the benefit of hindsight you will find any of the top brass and spin doctors looking back fondly on this policy. With pyjama sleepovers, christenings and flying halfway round the world to curry favour now in the public domain the party will have some uncomfortable truths to face upto as the numerous inquiries begin. Probably the only party that will be untainted when the inquiries report will be the lib dems, even though that is because the Sun King deemed them not worthy of even bothering with. I don't buy Coulson being at number 10 having any impact on the failures of the met to investigate properly, I think the failures by the met are due to incompetence and not wanting rock the fine gravy boat they were riding at the time. My issue with Coulson, Brooks and Cameron are regarding Cameron's judgement, or lack of it. Once again in a little over a year since becoming a propped up Prime Minister Cameron has been found wanting with an ever growing list of cases where he has got things wrong and had to u-turn, backtrack and apologise. He is proving to be very far from being up to the job of PM, a PR man with no aptitude for PR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 George Osborne hired Coulson to return a favour. Coulson went easy on Osborne after finding out about the hooker with the whips and chains and the bag of coke. It's one thing for politicians to have a relationship with the press, but another thing altogether when they are basically being blackmailed. I predict that the words "Dennis Skinner" and "Louise" will appear at close quarters in today's Official Report. Anyone fancy a bet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beag_teeets Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I've just had to search for that, I hope so, I really hope so! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Well, we've all been there... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Well, we've all been there... Amazingly, my "stop word" is also "Louise". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I'm glad my first fears were unfounded and its not to do with louise mensch, for a while i feared i had been stirring george's porridge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.