:00:28. > :00:30.Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics. As the Prime Minister's
:00:31. > :00:35.former director of the medications is arrested in connection with the
:00:35. > :00:38.phone hacking scandal. The Prime Minister says the relationship
:00:38. > :00:42.between the politicians and the press must change. It is no good
:00:42. > :00:46.just pointing the finger at this individual journalist or that
:00:46. > :00:50.individual newspaper. It is no good actually just criticising the
:00:50. > :00:55.police. The truth is, to coin a phrase, we have all been in this
:00:55. > :01:00.together. The press, politicians, and leaders of all parties, yes,
:01:00. > :01:07.including me. He announces two inquiries into the conduct of not
:01:07. > :01:11.only the press but also the police. We will look at what questions they
:01:11. > :01:18.have to answer. And where did this week's
:01:18. > :01:23.revelations leave the press and politicians?
:01:23. > :01:29.And with me today, Anne McElvoy of the Economist and Danny Finkelstein
:01:29. > :01:38.of the times. We are also joined by Lord Prescott. As the former
:01:38. > :01:42.director of the communications for the Conservative Party was
:01:42. > :01:46.attending a police station, the Prime Minister was holding an
:01:46. > :01:50.impromptu press conference at Downing Street. He announced two
:01:50. > :01:57.inquiries. One to be led by a judge into the phone hacking scandal and
:01:57. > :02:01.the police investigations that followed. This will start work when
:02:01. > :02:05.the police investigation has concluded. A second inquiry will
:02:05. > :02:09.look into the press, its ethics and how it is regulated. This will be
:02:09. > :02:17.led by a panel of independent experts. David Cameron said he
:02:17. > :02:21.hoped it would started work immediately. He'd -- he told
:02:21. > :02:26.journalists that the political classes were guilty of not waking
:02:26. > :02:31.up to the press. Politicians and the press have spent time courting
:02:31. > :02:36.support, not confronting the problems. It is on my watch that
:02:36. > :02:40.the music has stopped. I am saying, loud and clear, that things have
:02:40. > :02:45.got to change. The relationship needs to be different in future. I
:02:45. > :02:49.am not going to pretend there is some nirvana of two separate worlds
:02:49. > :02:53.relating to which other on the basis of total transparency and
:02:53. > :02:58.edible perfection. That is not real life. But we can do a hell of a lot
:02:58. > :03:05.better than what we have done so far. As this scandal shows, while
:03:05. > :03:08.it is vital that a free press can tell the truth to power, it is
:03:08. > :03:13.equally important that those in power tell the truth to the press.
:03:13. > :03:17.Let me just say this about a couple of the individuals concerned. First,
:03:17. > :03:20.Andy Coulson, who worked for four years of my director of
:03:20. > :03:24.communications. He resigned from the News of the World because of
:03:24. > :03:27.the things that happened on his watch. I decided to give him a
:03:27. > :03:31.second chance and no one has ever raised serious concerns about how
:03:31. > :03:36.he did his job for me. But the second chance did not work out and
:03:36. > :03:41.he had to resign all over again. The decision to hire him was mine
:03:41. > :03:44.and mine alone and I take full responsibility for it. On the case
:03:44. > :03:48.of Rebekah Brooks, as I have said, I don't think it is right for the
:03:48. > :03:53.Prime Minister to start picking and choosing who should run and who
:03:53. > :03:56.should not run media organisations. But it has been reported that she
:03:56. > :04:00.offered her resignation over this and in this situation I would have
:04:00. > :04:04.taken it. The Prime Minister saying that the resignation of Rebekah
:04:04. > :04:08.Brooks, the current executive of News International, should have
:04:08. > :04:11.been accepted. He was also asked if he was warned that Andy Coulson
:04:11. > :04:18.might not be a suitable person to employ as head of communications at
:04:18. > :04:22.Downing Street. I was not given any specific, actual information about
:04:22. > :04:25.Andy Coulson. The decision I took was the same decision right from
:04:25. > :04:30.the beginning, that, you know, very bad things have happened at the
:04:30. > :04:33.News of the World, he had resigned, I gave him a second chance, he had
:04:33. > :04:36.proved himself as an effective person in opposition and it was
:04:36. > :04:40.acceptable for him to come into Downing Street. That was the
:04:40. > :04:44.decision I took and a decision I will be held responsible for. I was
:04:44. > :04:50.not given any specific information that would lead me to change my
:04:50. > :04:53.mind. I am checking all of that. David Cameron at that press
:04:53. > :04:57.conference. Danny Finkelstein, I was watching that press conference,
:04:57. > :05:05.he said repeatedly that the public would have to judge him on his
:05:05. > :05:09.decision to take on Andy Coulson as a former director of communications.
:05:09. > :05:14.That was a judgment he made, and was he right? The public will judge
:05:14. > :05:18.him. What's do you think? I don't think the public have better things
:05:18. > :05:22.to do. These issues excite people. Both he and Andy Coulson will
:05:22. > :05:27.regret that all of this has happened in retrospect, I suspect.
:05:27. > :05:31.We hire people to be very tough with the press, so you tend to hire
:05:31. > :05:34.tough press people. I am sure that he would hope that it had worked
:05:34. > :05:38.out differently. You take a risk when you do that and it did not
:05:38. > :05:42.work out. The judgment will be whether he should have taken him on
:05:42. > :05:45.on the basis of assurances. He said there were assurances and he was
:05:45. > :05:48.not sure about warnings that were given to him by civil servants,
:05:48. > :05:52.maybe by members of his staff, about the suitability of Andy
:05:52. > :05:58.Coulson. It is very easy for me to sit here and say that of course you
:05:58. > :06:04.made a misjudgment on the date that Andy Coulson is arrested. But I
:06:04. > :06:07.shared that misjudgment. Clearly, it was a risk. You do need people
:06:07. > :06:14.that are very tough with the media. They tend to have a media career
:06:14. > :06:18.behind them and all that that brings with it. Lots of people are
:06:18. > :06:22.arrested and nothing ever happens afterwards. We don't know, but I
:06:22. > :06:25.think this morning it is probably something that David and Andy
:06:25. > :06:29.Coulson which they had not done. the Prime Minister done enough? He
:06:29. > :06:33.was pretty open and candid and he said the buck stopped with him and
:06:33. > :06:38.he was in it just as much as anyone else. I have been campaigning for a
:06:38. > :06:42.long time to get rid of the useless PCC. That is going. The inquiry
:06:42. > :06:46.must have a judge come in immediately. Then they must stop
:06:46. > :06:51.the shredding that is going on. Medic has a tremendous reputation
:06:51. > :06:54.of withholding information. -- Rupert Murdoch. The police inquiry
:06:54. > :06:58.is essential and that came about because of the action we took on
:06:58. > :07:03.judicial review. They had not done their job properly. On the second
:07:03. > :07:08.chance, I wrote to him two years ago to this day, to say that he
:07:08. > :07:14.would regret it if he appointed Andy Coulson. That was when he was
:07:14. > :07:17.in opposition. The Prime Minister has all the security available in
:07:17. > :07:21.the world to ask about people. He did not. That affected his judgment
:07:21. > :07:29.and when the truth comes out they will judge the Prime Minister.
:07:29. > :07:32.he right? Yes, I think Ahmad point, John Prescott is right. -- on that
:07:32. > :07:37.point. He struggled a bit in the press conference on what he had
:07:37. > :07:41.known and what he tried to find out. I think he pretended and we let him
:07:41. > :07:47.pretend, like in Casablanca. Andy Coulson was effective with the
:07:47. > :07:51.press, Danny is right. But that was not the question. There were
:07:51. > :07:54.criminal charges hanging over him, and that was beginning to get going
:07:55. > :07:58.by the time he got into Downing Street. It looks like a lapse of
:07:58. > :08:02.judgment to retain him at that point, even if he had hired him in
:08:02. > :08:06.the first place. In terms of the relationship with the press, the
:08:06. > :08:11.Prime Minister made a great deal about the fact that cosying up
:08:11. > :08:15.between journalists and use their proprietors and broadcasters had to
:08:15. > :08:19.effectively be changed. -- newspaper proprietors. But what
:08:19. > :08:27.will change? They will not meet the head of the BBC? That is not
:08:27. > :08:30.practical. I don't think it is practical, actually. The
:08:30. > :08:35.relationship between Parliament and Jonas has always been strong,
:08:35. > :08:39.because they are going after stories. I think that is not the
:08:39. > :08:47.issue. Their practices in the media and those practices, particularly
:08:47. > :08:53.in the case of the News of the World, those practices were a wreck
:08:53. > :08:58.-- reprehensible. The idea that you are going to break the relationship
:08:58. > :09:05.altogether between politicians and the press, while... Have been was
:09:05. > :09:09.self-criticism on David Cameron's part. It was near copper. I did not
:09:09. > :09:15.like the spreading of the blame, and we all have to examine
:09:15. > :09:19.ourselves, it is like when social workers tell you we are all in it
:09:19. > :09:23.and we are all guilty. It is largely about one specific title,
:09:23. > :09:28.the News of the World. And New Labour was just the same. That
:09:28. > :09:32.includes you, maybe not personally, but in terms of Tony Blair and
:09:32. > :09:35.Gordon Brown, they were as close to the Rupert Murdoch empire. All of
:09:35. > :09:41.the leaders have been like that and I thought it was terrible. I used
:09:41. > :09:45.to argue with Blair and Brown about this. Yes, the press will find ways
:09:45. > :09:51.to get information, that is how they get the story, but not by
:09:51. > :09:57.using telephone tapping. That is the same. That relationship, if you
:09:57. > :10:03.have Christmas dinner together and get close, then... In is that
:10:03. > :10:10.healthy? It is not. We have pictures of Tony Blair with Rebekah
:10:10. > :10:14.Brooks. I am trying to answer you. Then do. Why is it useful to have
:10:14. > :10:23.that relationship? Can I answer now? My experience with Tony Blair
:10:23. > :10:28.and Gordon Brown was difficult at times, when the press reported on
:10:28. > :10:32.that they were right. One would have some information, and where
:10:32. > :10:37.would they get it from? Rebekah Brooks. How the hell does that
:10:37. > :10:42.women get this kind of information? She plays them off in politics.
:10:42. > :10:45.They don't just eat together, they get political. They have a purpose.
:10:46. > :10:50.She is entitled to have a conversation with a politician.
:10:50. > :10:57.am trying to get an agreement between two guys, but it is the
:10:57. > :11:02.tittle-tattle. News International have a lot of big questions to
:11:02. > :11:06.answer about the dysfunctional relationship between Gordon Brown
:11:06. > :11:10.and Tony Blair, but that was just their fault. It is how they get
:11:10. > :11:16.involved in the politics. That is why they say the son of won it.
:11:16. > :11:21.They are trying to get rid of one party and bring in another. -- the
:11:21. > :11:26.Sun newspaper won it. Tony Blair and Gordon Brown have a newspaper
:11:26. > :11:31.to get across and they want to do so. Hence the fraternisation. What
:11:31. > :11:35.the newspapers do with that is up to the newspapers themselves. Tony
:11:36. > :11:40.Blair and his team believed that the deal had been done. If Rupert
:11:40. > :11:44.Murdoch had been able to pursue his interests in peas, he gave them
:11:44. > :11:49.fair wind. That worked both ways. And not convinced that they
:11:49. > :11:52.produced new Labour or the Labour Government. They believe that but I
:11:52. > :11:58.don't accept it. They play that game, no doubt about it.
:11:58. > :12:03.Politicians actually believe it. That is why they play this game.
:12:04. > :12:09.Miliband, he is employing Tom Baldwin, part of News International,
:12:09. > :12:13.should he not do that? Well, I was concerned. I do the News
:12:13. > :12:18.International play that part. I am very suspicious of most people from
:12:18. > :12:25.using to National. Danny is putting a good case for Murdoch, the best
:12:25. > :12:29.you possibly can. There is no place for the Murdoch role in politics.
:12:29. > :12:33.This is turning from cleaning up something that is very bad and that
:12:33. > :12:39.everybody is aware of, into you just getting Murdochs. As though
:12:39. > :12:44.everything is OK if we get him. I correct that? I would not want
:12:45. > :12:49.that to be the position. Murdoch is in the docks because of the issue
:12:49. > :12:54.with Glenn Mulcaire and everything. They pointed out that 30 newspapers
:12:54. > :13:04.were involved, 300 journalists, doing a legal things to get
:13:04. > :13:09.information. This is not just Rupert Murdoch it, it is everybody.
:13:09. > :13:15.When I worked for William Hague, he was betrayed as a dead parrot. And
:13:15. > :13:20.the reader's thought there was truth in that. When newspapers tell
:13:20. > :13:23.people things that are not true, it does not work. Everybody has to
:13:23. > :13:26.completely understand why you are angry about it, with what has
:13:26. > :13:31.happened with your phone hacking. You have probably regarded the
:13:31. > :13:37.coverage as disappointing, too. I can completely understand. But
:13:37. > :13:40.don't think it is dangerous to overestimate. If a newspaper
:13:40. > :13:44.stepped out of line with where its readers were, it would not get
:13:44. > :13:46.support. When The Sun moved from the Labour Party to the
:13:46. > :13:56.Conservative Party, it did so because its readers have already
:13:56. > :14:00.gone that way. Rupert Murdoch was managing a situation. All of the
:14:00. > :14:05.information that came out, I heard James Murdoch say it, we started
:14:05. > :14:13.the inquiry voluntarily. Did you howl! It was a judicial inquiry
:14:13. > :14:18.into the rock of the police that made them produce it. In order to
:14:18. > :14:21.separate this idea of influence and press regulation, it has been said
:14:21. > :14:27.that press regulation would be dangerous. Anything that is
:14:27. > :14:31.controlling the free press. I think he is right. My opinion might be
:14:31. > :14:34.the minority right now. There is a lot to be lost from over regulating
:14:34. > :14:39.the press. I have travelled in continental Europe this week.
:14:39. > :14:49.Reading these dead newspapers, clearly not holding the leaked to
:14:49. > :14:50.
:14:50. > :14:53.account, sharing rough-and-tumble. -- holding the elite to account. I
:14:53. > :14:58.don't think we should throw the baby out with the bathwater. There
:14:58. > :15:01.are many good things about the British press. There is a solution
:15:02. > :15:05.to that and er think it is an independent body. If you control
:15:05. > :15:10.the press, then it is state press and I don't think we should have
:15:10. > :15:15.that. You could not win that argument. You can use a body like
:15:15. > :15:21.that. In 1997, dealing with the Human Rights Act, the industry
:15:21. > :15:26.fought against any kind of sanction in terms of press complained. They
:15:26. > :15:32.wanted it to be self-regulated. You can build on that. You could make
:15:32. > :15:36.it work. That is where we have to As the Prime Minister said this
:15:36. > :15:39.morning it's not just News of the World journalists who are in the
:15:39. > :15:42.frame over the phone hacking scandal, the police are also in the
:15:42. > :15:45.firing line. The Met Police initially launched an inquiry into
:15:45. > :15:48.phone hacking in 2006, which saw the News of the World's royal
:15:48. > :15:52.editor Clive Goodman and private investigator Glenn Mulcaire jailed.
:15:52. > :15:55.But no one else was implicated. In 2009, the Guardian Newspaper
:15:55. > :15:58.produced further allegations of the hacking of thousands of people, but
:15:58. > :16:00.the Met chose not to investigate further. By 2011, however,
:16:00. > :16:05.Operation Weeting was launched, following what the Met called
:16:05. > :16:09."significant new information". And, in total, five people have been
:16:09. > :16:12.arrested and bailed as part of the police investigation. Pressure has
:16:12. > :16:15.now also come on the police following News International
:16:15. > :16:20.handing over emails which allegedly show tens of thousands of pounds
:16:20. > :16:23.were paid to police officers in return for information. And that
:16:23. > :16:26.they were authorised by Andy Coulson, who was arrested this
:16:26. > :16:30.morning. Andy Coulson has always denied any involvement in, or
:16:30. > :16:35.knowledge of, illegal activity. Back in 2003, Rebekah Brooks
:16:35. > :16:39.admitted to a Commons Committee that: "We have paid the police for
:16:39. > :16:41.information in the past." although she later said she had no knowledge
:16:41. > :16:44.of "any specific cases". The Independent Police Complaints
:16:44. > :16:47.Commission has now launched an inquiry into the allegations with
:16:47. > :16:50.the watchdog's deputy chairman Deborah Glass saying the inquiry
:16:50. > :16:56.will be "robust in its attempts to identify any officer who may have
:16:56. > :16:59.committed an offence." with me now is the former Scotland Yard
:16:59. > :17:07.Commander, Brian Paddick, who recently won a High Court bid for a
:17:07. > :17:11.judicial review into the police inquiry.
:17:11. > :17:15.Welcome to the programme. The first thing to say is, your judgment that
:17:15. > :17:19.the police at the end of that investigation, did not reveal
:17:20. > :17:24.widespread phone hacking, was it because they were implicated?
:17:24. > :17:30.theory, we had more important things to do, we didn't have the
:17:30. > :17:35.resources. Which creates in my mind, the adage, a stitch in time saves
:17:35. > :17:39.nine. Second excuse, it is important we have positive media
:17:39. > :17:44.coverage because we need the confidence of the public if we are
:17:44. > :17:50.going to police effectively. Therefore we mustn't upset them, so
:17:50. > :17:55.narrow this down and move on. Third, all these are possible but there is
:17:55. > :17:59.no evidence, in the same way politicians on the parliamentary
:17:59. > :18:02.committee refused to recall Rebekah Brooks to give evidence because
:18:02. > :18:08.they were threatened aspects of their private life would be made
:18:08. > :18:14.public, maybe some police officers, they refused to take it further,
:18:14. > :18:19.because they had the same threat. For it is that final point, that
:18:19. > :18:23.relationship between the police and journalists, and Rebekah Brooks did
:18:23. > :18:33.reveal something when she said they had paid police officers which was
:18:33. > :18:33.
:18:33. > :18:43.illegal, although at the time, it wasn't picked up. When Ian Blair
:18:43. > :18:52.
:18:52. > :18:59.became commissioner, he went on a charm offensive. I know the sort of
:18:59. > :19:05.thing you're talking about. Inviting used -- news editors to
:19:05. > :19:10.dinners. People were coming away with a worse impression after the
:19:10. > :19:15.dinner than before, but that's another issue. Why weren't you
:19:15. > :19:23.saying anything? As a senior officer? As far as offices being
:19:23. > :19:30.paid for information, it is very difficult to establish who is being
:19:30. > :19:34.paid, how much, and less... At a lot of information was going into
:19:34. > :19:38.the press, some obviously from the police. Without the active co-
:19:38. > :19:42.operation as we now have of News International offering up the names
:19:42. > :19:47.of people being paid. Journalists have gone to court and being
:19:47. > :19:51.threatened with being jailed, refusing to say who their
:19:51. > :19:55.informants are. That would apply whether that was a police officer.
:19:55. > :20:00.And lest the newspapers are prepared to offer up the police
:20:00. > :20:03.informers, they will get away with it. You are putting the onus back
:20:03. > :20:08.on the press and not looking inside the police. Did you think the
:20:08. > :20:12.police dealt with those allegations properly? As far as money being
:20:12. > :20:21.paid for information, very difficult to do anything unless you
:20:21. > :20:27.have the active co-operation of the Police -- Press. The phone hacking,
:20:27. > :20:31.we have won a right to judicial review, the police waiting did not
:20:31. > :20:37.fulfil their legal obligation to investigate it properly first time
:20:37. > :20:43.around. Do you think in that case, if Brian Paddick does not feel it
:20:43. > :20:47.was done properly, that the police now are being put into the frame by
:20:47. > :20:52.the Prime Minister saying they must take responsibility? There is
:20:52. > :20:58.clearly police negligence here for a mixture of reasons. Various
:20:58. > :21:03.reasons. This does go back before phone hacking. The police and
:21:03. > :21:07.tabloid and crime reporters have had a close relationship which has
:21:07. > :21:12.produced good stories which people would want to know about. It is
:21:12. > :21:18.clearly massively out of control. Failure to investigate looks
:21:18. > :21:26.extremely culpable. Everyone wondered after the first, why debt
:21:26. > :21:32.-- why they did not press further. Drinking down the pub together to
:21:32. > :21:42.get stories is one thing, payments is another. Were they fearful of
:21:42. > :21:42.
:21:43. > :21:46.newspaper editors? Police culpability will form the basis of
:21:46. > :21:50.one inquiry. When there is a discussion about general media
:21:50. > :21:55.ethics, the relationship with the police will become part of that.
:21:55. > :22:01.There is a real issue here. Sometimes, very dubious methods
:22:01. > :22:07.produce very important stories. One example, stolen goods involved in
:22:07. > :22:12.the MPs' expenses story. You have to be careful that you do not, in
:22:12. > :22:16.cleaning up the media, prevent them going tough investigative work. No
:22:16. > :22:21.one can justify, particularly pursuing stories of incredibly
:22:21. > :22:28.dubious public interest, using illegal methods. There is a point
:22:28. > :22:33.that the investigative work of June the less -- journalists is crucial
:22:33. > :22:40.at times in the public interest. It is difficult to keep that separate,
:22:40. > :22:45.you don't want to stop that. issue is, what is the dividing line
:22:45. > :22:49.between private and public interest? The press want it to be
:22:49. > :22:54.totally public interest. Behind this is a campaign for them to be
:22:54. > :23:00.able to print whatever they get in whatever way they do it. I have to
:23:00. > :23:06.say, we have the chief executive before the committee saying, yes,
:23:06. > :23:10.we do pay the police. Why didn't that lead to News International
:23:10. > :23:19.producing evidence about telephoning? The only do when they
:23:19. > :23:23.find they are going to be exposed. As someone who has spent their
:23:23. > :23:29.career as a radical and never been comfortable with the establishment,
:23:29. > :23:32.wouldn't you be uncomfortable with the idea that the newspaper's
:23:32. > :23:39.ability to investigate its scandal and wrongdoing would be restricted.
:23:39. > :23:43.It is difficult to draw these lines. In the current atmosphere,
:23:43. > :23:50.particularly with my newspaper, because we are on the back foot
:23:50. > :23:54.over terrible practices, we accede to too much control... You should
:23:54. > :24:04.have a body by which you can take appellations. Take the one about
:24:04. > :24:04.
:24:04. > :24:12.the Business Secretary and using evidence and subterfuge, they
:24:12. > :24:15.shouldn't do it. I agreed the method is questionable but we found
:24:15. > :24:19.that what he really thought and in my view still have to have
:24:19. > :24:24.mechanisms for people to find out what the elite think, not just what
:24:24. > :24:28.they say in front of the camera. Yesterday was a sad day for British
:24:28. > :24:31.journalism, we lost a newspaper that did a lot of good work and
:24:31. > :24:35.revealed a lot of stories that would otherwise not have been told
:24:35. > :24:39.which were generally in the public interest. We have to protect that
:24:39. > :24:48.at the same time as making sure there is not an inappropriately
:24:48. > :24:51.close relationship between the media, the police and politicians.
:24:51. > :25:01.There have been a few other things happening this week, apart from the
:25:01. > :25:04.
:25:04. > :25:07.News of the World scandal. Here's Victory for Ed Miliband as Labour
:25:07. > :25:12.MPs voted to deprive themselves of the right to let the Shadow Cabinet.
:25:12. > :25:16.In Afghanistan, a surprise visit by the prime minister to announce the
:25:16. > :25:21.withdrawal of an extra 500 troops, overshadowed when a missing soldier
:25:22. > :25:27.was found dead in Helmand. usually regrettable, all day my
:25:27. > :25:37.thoughts and prayers had been that young man and family fat -- family.
:25:37. > :25:40.
:25:40. > :25:44.The MoD had absent-mindedly mislaid assets worth millions.
:25:44. > :25:51.And a government U-turn, the Treasury has scaled back its tax
:25:51. > :25:56.grab on all and gas companies. Grim news for manufacturing as our train
:25:56. > :26:01.maker revealed it would be cutting 1,400 jobs in Derby after losing a
:26:01. > :26:06.government contract to a German rival. When these thousands join
:26:06. > :26:16.the queues of unemployed... Danny Finkelstein and Anne McElvoy
:26:16. > :26:20.
:26:20. > :26:24.are still with me. The BSkyB takeover, 156,000 commissions had
:26:24. > :26:32.been handed in to Jeremy Hunt. Consultation closed today. Should
:26:32. > :26:36.the Prime Minster has said, yes, we will pause it officially. He is
:26:36. > :26:45.restricted by the law and he has to follow it. This is not an issue
:26:45. > :26:48.about politics. He cannot start the era where he says I'll not have
:26:48. > :26:52.been appropriate if relationships with the press by making at hoc
:26:53. > :26:57.judgments based on the politics of the moment about commercial issues
:26:57. > :27:05.of sensitivity. If it isn't a legal process, it will fall apart in
:27:05. > :27:10.court. You could allow Ofcom to say, they're not fit and proper. That is
:27:10. > :27:19.their role. Couldn't he say. He is the prime minister. The public
:27:19. > :27:26.might say, why can't you step forward curtain-up really, News
:27:26. > :27:31.International acted... People will say it is about saving Rebekah
:27:31. > :27:39.Brooks. It is more about saving the BSkyB deal, this is a commercially
:27:39. > :27:44.astute company. For David Cameron to say, this looks dead full --
:27:44. > :27:47.dreadful, it would look like summary justice. There will be
:27:47. > :27:56.renewed scrutiny as it should but it should go through the proper
:27:56. > :28:01.channels. It is a bad signal for business. September would be a good
:28:02. > :28:08.time to go back and look at it. Rebekah Brooks, can she stayed in
:28:08. > :28:17.her job? News International had been hugely good employers and have
:28:17. > :28:20.learnt my respect. That's all for this week. Anita will be back with