25/04/2012

:00:45. > :00:49.Good morning, folks, this is Daily Politics. Culture secretary Jeremy

:00:49. > :00:53.Hunt's special adviser Adam Smith, just as we were coming on air, has

:00:53. > :00:59.resigned. There was a call for the Culture Secretary himself to resign

:00:59. > :01:03.over contacts with the Murdoch. Jeremy Hunt is making a Commons

:01:03. > :01:09.statement at 12:30pm, and we will bring it to you live after PMQs.

:01:09. > :01:13.Yesterday it was the son and today it is the media mogul himself. He

:01:13. > :01:17.is under oath at the Royal Courts of Justice and we will bring you

:01:17. > :01:23.the latest from the Leveson Inquiry. We are in recession, it is the

:01:23. > :01:26.official. The economy shrank by 0.2% in the first three months of

:01:26. > :01:29.this year, the second consecutive quarter in which the economy has

:01:29. > :01:33.contracted. The news could hardly be worse for

:01:33. > :01:42.the Prime Minister as he faces Ed Miliband in what could be the final

:01:42. > :01:46.PMQs of this parliamentary session. Joining us for the next 90 minutes

:01:46. > :01:52.of action packed public service broadcasting at its finest, can I

:01:52. > :01:55.say more? Double-dip Britain, here we are. We have got the

:01:55. > :01:59.universities minister of David Willetts and the shadow environment

:01:59. > :02:05.secretary Mary Creagh go. Welcome to you both on this very busy news

:02:05. > :02:09.day. In a moment we will bring you more on the resignation of Jeremy

:02:09. > :02:14.Hunt's special adviser at the latest on the Rupert Murdoch

:02:14. > :02:17.evidence at the Leveson Inquiry, but first to the Office of National

:02:17. > :02:20.Statistics. The economy shrank by 0.2% in the first three months of

:02:20. > :02:24.this year. That is the second consecutive quarter in which the

:02:24. > :02:28.economy contracted, the technical definition of a recession. It is

:02:28. > :02:34.just the first estimate of the first quarter from the LMS, but the

:02:34. > :02:38.City thought we would avoid the double-dip. -- from the Office of

:02:38. > :02:41.National Statistics. It is a big blow for the Chancellor. It is very

:02:41. > :02:44.disappointing news and it is a tough economic situation when you

:02:44. > :02:48.are recovering from these enormous debts that the Government build up

:02:48. > :02:52.in the good years. That is not made easier by the fact that much of

:02:52. > :02:56.Europe is in recession or heading into recession. And we have got to

:02:56. > :03:00.go on dealing with those debts, making our businesses more

:03:00. > :03:03.competitive so they can create jobs, helping young people get into work,

:03:03. > :03:08.and making sure we do not deliberately add to borrowing, do

:03:08. > :03:12.not deliberately spend more and make the difficult situation worse.

:03:12. > :03:17.I am joined now by the chief UK economist at Capital Economics,

:03:17. > :03:20.Vicky Redwood. We said that there was an expectation that there might

:03:20. > :03:25.be a slight inching up of growth and it has gone the other way. Why

:03:25. > :03:28.do you think that is? Construction output was a key factor pulling

:03:28. > :03:32.down growth, but in fact that was widely expected. The big

:03:32. > :03:35.disappointment was that services output was weaker than expected.

:03:35. > :03:39.Even though consumers were spending on the High Street, they were

:03:39. > :03:44.cutting back on things like eating out. Perhaps there was more

:03:44. > :03:48.widespread weavers in the economy than was generally anticipated. --

:03:48. > :03:53.widespread weakness. The Chancellor was blaming the eurozone. What

:03:53. > :03:55.impact will this have on the deficit-reduction plans? So far the

:03:55. > :03:58.deficit-reduction plans have been going broadly to plan. Borrowing

:03:58. > :04:02.has been coming down as the Chancellor expected but I think

:04:02. > :04:06.things will get much harder now. The plans to bring down borrowing

:04:06. > :04:10.depend very crucially on a strong pick-up in economic growth over the

:04:10. > :04:18.next year. If that is not mad, then borrowing will be harder to bring

:04:18. > :04:22.down, if it is not brought down at all. -- if that is not met. Will

:04:22. > :04:27.there be a change of course for the Government? The Chancellor faces a

:04:27. > :04:31.tricky dilemma. Spending more money to boost the economy and risking an

:04:31. > :04:35.adverse reaction or sticking to austerity plans and wrapping them

:04:36. > :04:39.up further if borrowing does not come down as he expects? I think he

:04:39. > :04:44.will want to remain wedded to the fiscal plans at the moment. We

:04:44. > :04:48.might see even more spending cuts in the future. This is only a

:04:48. > :04:51.preliminary estimate. Do you predict that it could change? More

:04:51. > :04:55.positive the further on we go perhaps? I think it could be

:04:56. > :05:01.revised up a bit, this estimate. It might be that down the road the UK

:05:01. > :05:04.did not fall back into recession at all. But I think the underlying

:05:04. > :05:08.picture will still look very weak and it is very disappointing that

:05:08. > :05:12.the economy is even stagnating at this stage, and it is certainly

:05:12. > :05:17.doing worse than in other developed economies. I think even revisions

:05:17. > :05:20.further ahead will not change the bleak picture. Thank you. We all

:05:20. > :05:23.thought that Rupert Murdoch's testimony was going to dominate the

:05:23. > :05:30.news today but the fact that we are in recession is bigger news where

:05:30. > :05:36.everybody else and matters much more to people around the country.

:05:36. > :05:40.What is it like to preside over this double-dip, the worst since

:05:40. > :05:44.the 1970s? We knew when we came into office that we would face a

:05:44. > :05:49.big challenge, inheriting record levels of borrowing. And also a

:05:49. > :05:52.deep financial crisis in the banking system. He did not tell us

:05:52. > :05:57.you would take us back into recession. We did not do that

:05:57. > :06:03.deliberately. You have done. have done everything to get the

:06:03. > :06:08.economy going and sort it out. In my area of speciality, science,

:06:08. > :06:12.when I was with the Prime Minister in Asia, he was taking people into

:06:12. > :06:16.British businesses. The eurozone is dragging us down, but exports

:06:16. > :06:19.outside the eurozone are growing well. We should have confidence in

:06:19. > :06:24.the ability of our economy to perform, even when we have got a

:06:24. > :06:27.terrible problems in the eurozone holding us back. How can we have

:06:27. > :06:35.confidence in your macro-economic policy once the size of the British

:06:35. > :06:40.economy is still 4% smaller than it was in 2007? In 2012, five years on,

:06:41. > :06:45.this economy is 4% smaller, it under your Government. That is not

:06:45. > :06:50.true of the American economy or the German economy. It is the British

:06:50. > :06:53.economy. The American economy had a far smaller financial sector.

:06:53. > :07:03.Britain had become an unbalanced economy, with not just excessive

:07:03. > :07:06.

:07:06. > :07:11.levels of Government borrowing. You will see that the banking sector

:07:11. > :07:14.has shrunk. It is the exporting industries that we are backing,

:07:14. > :07:17.outside the troubled eurozone. The Government is doing the right thing

:07:17. > :07:22.to tackle the problems in private and Government debt, that we

:07:22. > :07:27.inherited. Minister, you are presiding over a shrinking economy.

:07:27. > :07:33.It is not flat lining. It is not anaemic growth. This country is

:07:33. > :07:38.shrinking under your policy. Today, this morning, your economic

:07:38. > :07:42.credibility lies in shreds. Look behind those totals at what is

:07:42. > :07:45.growing and what is shrinking. Yes, there is a problem of exporting to

:07:45. > :07:49.the eurozone because of the problems in the eurozone at exports

:07:49. > :07:54.outside the eurozone are growing. Yes, the banking sector is

:07:54. > :07:57.shrinking, and that is the part of the process of focusing on what

:07:57. > :08:02.matters, with manufacturing growing. We are backing industries that will

:08:02. > :08:06.bring as income in the future. When I look at the sectors that we are

:08:06. > :08:09.focusing on backing, we have got a success in exporting outside the

:08:09. > :08:12.eurozone. When you have got the local market in Europe suffering

:08:12. > :08:17.and when you have inherited an economy with a far bigger banking

:08:17. > :08:20.sector than the USA, you have a unique set of challenges. If you

:08:20. > :08:26.knew all that, it would have been nice if you had told us at the time

:08:26. > :08:29.but he did not. Is it Labour's policy now in result of these

:08:29. > :08:33.figures, that the deficit reduction programme that the Government has

:08:33. > :08:38.introduced, not all that different to Alistair Darling's now, should

:08:38. > :08:41.that be torn up and should you start to borrow more? We have

:08:41. > :08:45.always said that the Chancellor should change tack and we believe

:08:45. > :08:49.the figures today emphasise that even more. We set out our

:08:49. > :08:57.alternative plan for jobs and growth. We talked about a tax on

:08:57. > :09:01.bank are bonuses to create 25,000 affordable houses. -- bankers's

:09:01. > :09:04.bonuses. We looked at infrastructure spending which would

:09:04. > :09:09.not have involved more spending but as bringing it forward. Should

:09:09. > :09:14.there now be a bigger fiscal stimulus? The Government should

:09:14. > :09:18.change track to secured jobs and growth in the economy. When we left

:09:18. > :09:22.office, unemployment was falling and growth was running at 2% a year.

:09:22. > :09:26.Growth needs to be at 2% a year before unemployment will start

:09:26. > :09:30.coming down. Let me get this clear. The British Government should now

:09:30. > :09:33.go into the bond markets and borrow more to increase the fiscal

:09:33. > :09:38.stimulus? We are saying the Government should bring forward

:09:38. > :09:43.infrastructure spending... You have said that already. I will repeat my

:09:43. > :09:46.question. It is a specific question and I think it deserves a specific

:09:46. > :09:50.answer, so we can understand your economic policy. Because of what

:09:50. > :09:53.has happened and because of your previous critique, which many

:09:53. > :09:56.people think you have been vindicated as the result of these

:09:57. > :10:02.figures, so should the British Government in your view go into the

:10:02. > :10:06.bond markets and now borrow more to increase the fiscal stimulus?

:10:06. > :10:10.we are saying is that the Budget has failed to deliver. You are not

:10:10. > :10:14.going to answer my question, are you? Instead of giving a

:10:14. > :10:18.corporation tax cut to the shrinking financial services sector,

:10:18. > :10:23.we should spend within the envelope but... I don't know what spent

:10:23. > :10:27.within the envelope means. She is not answering my question. With

:10:27. > :10:31.these figures today, you deficit- reduction plan is in danger of

:10:31. > :10:38.being shot to hell. We are committed to our plan. You maybe.

:10:38. > :10:44.We are committed to it because it enables us to key interest rates

:10:44. > :10:48.down. If interest rates went up, then mortgage prices would go up.

:10:49. > :10:53.This is a tough fiscal policy that is delivering. Excuse me, I want to

:10:53. > :10:57.ask this question. Your fiscal deficit reduction plan is not

:10:57. > :11:02.predicated on a return to recession. And it follows that if we return to

:11:02. > :11:06.recession, as we have, then the deficit will get bigger. If you

:11:06. > :11:11.want to stick to your deficit reduction targets, you will have to

:11:11. > :11:15.cut more tax more. Correct? We have got a commitment on public spending.

:11:16. > :11:23.We have also got a clear commitment to reducing the structural deficit

:11:23. > :11:27.on... Is it your plane today that even though we are now back in

:11:27. > :11:32.recession, that you can hit your deficit reduction targets without

:11:32. > :11:40.either additional tax or additional cuts? It is very hard to make these

:11:40. > :11:45.judgments on the basis of one- quarter's figures. It is two

:11:45. > :11:49.quarters. The Office for Budget Responsibility has set out figures

:11:49. > :11:53.for public borrowing, spending and growth, and it would be wrong two

:11:53. > :11:57.weeks later to change that Government. -- to change that

:11:57. > :12:04.judgment. We are committed to our plan. The plan assumed growth and

:12:04. > :12:11.we have not got any growth, minister. Do they still do O-level

:12:11. > :12:16.economics? Not in Britain. O-level economics tells you that when the

:12:16. > :12:20.economy slows down, you lose tax revenue, welfare spending goes up.

:12:21. > :12:24.You will have to borrow more. have to allow for those effects and

:12:24. > :12:27.those are allowed for an Office for Budget Responsibility's reports.

:12:27. > :12:32.Behind that is the structural deficit, the underlying position of

:12:32. > :12:37.these public finances. That is absolutely the commitment of the

:12:37. > :12:42.Government. All right. We should move on. Yesterday was James

:12:42. > :12:45.Murdoch, today his father, Rupert Murdoch. The media mogul himself is

:12:45. > :12:47.that the Royal Courts of Justice giving evidence before the Leveson

:12:47. > :12:51.Inquiry into the culture, the practice and the ethics of the

:12:51. > :12:56.press. It has had a pretty slow start this morning but we will

:12:56. > :13:00.bring you some in a minute. Yesterday the inquiry looked at the

:13:00. > :13:06.cash of emails releasing the extent of contact between News Corp

:13:06. > :13:10.lobbyists and Government over the proposed take-over of BSkyB. Of

:13:10. > :13:15.course it never happened. Labour have called for the resignation of

:13:15. > :13:19.the culture secretary, Jeremy Hunt. More revelations are expected today

:13:19. > :13:23.when we eventually get round to that. Here is Jo to say what has

:13:23. > :13:26.happened so far. Yesterday was a day of dramatic

:13:26. > :13:29.revelations at the Royal Courts of Justice, because the Leveson

:13:29. > :13:34.Inquiry heard of the close contact between News Corporation and senior

:13:34. > :13:38.politicians during the company's failed bid to take over broadcaster

:13:38. > :13:44.BSkyB. A cache of emails exposed discussions between Murdoch

:13:44. > :13:47.lobbyist Fred Michel and the office of the culture secretary, Jeremy

:13:48. > :13:52.Hunt. They appeared to reveal details of a Commons statement

:13:52. > :13:57.before the minister had delivered it. This has been described by Fred

:13:57. > :14:02.Michel as absolutely illegal. Others suggested that Jeremy Hunt

:14:02. > :14:07.was predisposed to backing the BSkyB deal, quoting him saying that

:14:07. > :14:13.they would get there in the end. Jeremy Hunt insists that he has

:14:13. > :14:17.acted with propriety at all times. The BSkyB deal was signed off by

:14:17. > :14:21.top officials. Now it is the turn of Rupert Murdoch to appear before

:14:21. > :14:24.Lord Leveson, where he is being asked to talk about his

:14:24. > :14:30.relationships with politicians for decades. They are probing for

:14:30. > :14:33.evidence that he traded support from his newspapers for the BSkyB

:14:34. > :14:37.bid. This could make uncomfortable listening for any of the recent

:14:37. > :14:41.inhabitants of Number 10. Let's get the flavour of what has been

:14:41. > :14:47.happening so far. Why do you say there is a need for this inquiry,

:14:47. > :14:54.Mr Murdoch? Well, I think the need is fairly obvious. There have been

:14:54. > :15:02.some abuses shown. I could say there are many other abuses, but we

:15:02. > :15:10.can go into that in time. And, you know, the state of the media in

:15:10. > :15:15.this country is of absolutely vital interest to all its citizens.

:15:15. > :15:24.Frankly, I welcome the opportunity because I want to put certain myths

:15:24. > :15:28.You use the term abuses, is it your perception or understanding that

:15:28. > :15:35.abuses go further than the issue of phone hacking or are they limited

:15:35. > :15:41.to the issue of phone hacking? they go further. Some recent tweets

:15:41. > :15:48.of yours betray a hostile approach to right-wingers and toffs. Who

:15:48. > :15:54.were you referring to? Don't take my tweets too seriously. LAUGHTER.

:15:54. > :16:00.I think I was really saying that the extremists on both sides were

:16:00. > :16:07.piling in on me. I never gave instructions to the editor of the

:16:07. > :16:11.Times or the Sunday Times. I didn't say what are you doing, what are

:16:11. > :16:18.you saying? Sometimes when I was available on a Saturday I would

:16:18. > :16:24.call and say what's the news today, idle curiosity perhaps. Other times

:16:24. > :16:29.I would ring on a Tuesday, in New York, say that was a dam fine paper

:16:29. > :16:34.you had this week. I probably wouldn't have read the editorial.

:16:34. > :16:37.Colourful answers there from Rupert Murdoch. We can speak to Adam

:16:37. > :16:40.Fleming who has been watching developments. What about

:16:40. > :16:43.information relating to relationships between Rupert

:16:43. > :16:47.Murdoch and the corporation and politicians over decades? Watching

:16:47. > :16:51.some of that evidence from Rupert Murdoch was like watching rolling

:16:51. > :16:57.news from 1981, if it existed, they were going back to historic things.

:16:57. > :17:01.Things like lunches at Chequers, Rupert Murdoch had with Margaret

:17:01. > :17:04.Thatcher. They were talking about a dinner on polling day for the

:17:04. > :17:08.election in 87 which might seem strange to people watching but what

:17:08. > :17:12.the QC for the inquiry is trying to do is establish a pattern of

:17:12. > :17:15.influence over politicians by Rupert Murdoch that goes back

:17:15. > :17:19.several decades. Of course, Rupert Murdoch has denied any of that. He

:17:19. > :17:26.said he wasn't trying to influence Margaret Thatcher to smooth his

:17:26. > :17:29.passage of trying to buy the times and Sunday Times in 81. Robert Jay

:17:29. > :17:32.saying you wouldn't do that blatantly, you would try it more

:17:32. > :17:38.subtlely. The other line of questioning has been about how much

:17:38. > :17:41.influence Rupert Murdoch had over his editors of his titles. Rupert

:17:41. > :17:45.Murdoch says hardly any, I am a guy who has strong opinions and I find

:17:45. > :17:50.it hard to bite my tongue but never told editor what is decisions to

:17:50. > :17:55.make. We might have a debate on that later. Let's bring it up to

:17:55. > :18:00.date with the resignation of the special advisor of Jeremy Hunt,

:18:00. > :18:04.what more do we know about the statement? While Leveson is looking

:18:04. > :18:09.at the 1980s, we are up to date with events here. Yesterday we got

:18:09. > :18:14.all the e-mails released between James Murdoch's public affairs man

:18:14. > :18:20.and Jeremy Hunt's office. Adam Smith has resigned in the last 15

:18:20. > :18:24.minutes, we are had a a statement from the department on his behalf.

:18:25. > :18:28.He says while he was authorised to be the point man with News

:18:28. > :18:31.International during that merger talks about BSkyB, he said the

:18:31. > :18:36.content and extent of his contacts were done without the authorisation

:18:36. > :18:41.of the Secretary of State, Jeremy Hunt. He says that he doesn't

:18:41. > :18:43.recognise everything that Fred Michel said in his e-mails,

:18:43. > :18:47.nevertheless it's given the perception that the department was

:18:47. > :18:49.too close to News International, that's why he has decided to resign.

:18:50. > :18:52.That's been welcomed by Downing Street. The Prime Minister's

:18:52. > :18:58.official spokesman saying it's the right decision but Downing Street

:18:58. > :19:04.not commenting on the content of the e-mails. Thank you.

:19:04. > :19:11.Adam Smith, the special advisor to Jeremy Hunt, now knows what the

:19:11. > :19:18.invisible hand really means. University Minister David Willets

:19:18. > :19:24.and shadow Environment Secretary Mary Creagh are here.

:19:24. > :19:28.There was a lot of communication, including texts between Mr Smith

:19:28. > :19:33.and the News Corp. Mr Smith on resignation says I appreciate my

:19:33. > :19:37.activities at times went too far and I have taken together created

:19:37. > :19:44.the perception that News Corp had too close a relationship with the

:19:44. > :19:48.department, contrary to the clear requirements set out by Jeremy Hunt.

:19:48. > :19:51.It's right, therefore, for me to step down. Are you still calling

:19:51. > :19:53.for Jeremy Hunt's resignation? are and this is an attempt by the

:19:53. > :19:58.Culture Secretary to put distance between himself and his special

:19:58. > :20:03.advisor. I went and looked through these e-mails. We have all done

:20:03. > :20:07.that. There's one from the 15th of 11th, just as Jeremy was about to

:20:08. > :20:13.take over the review of the decision, the BSkyB takeover, it's

:20:13. > :20:18.very clear, it says: My advice advice don't meet Jeremy today, it

:20:18. > :20:23.could be counterproductive. I will liaise with the team. We don't know

:20:23. > :20:27.if that call took place. It could be a game-changer, understand that,

:20:27. > :20:31.but we don't know if that call took place. It's secondhand reporting.

:20:31. > :20:35.It's the chief lobbyist who had an incentive to big himself up in the

:20:35. > :20:39.eyes of James Murdoch, that he was right at the centre of what was

:20:40. > :20:46.going on. But we heard from Adam Smith, now resigned, he is implying

:20:46. > :20:51.that he bigged himself up in this process and he thinks - he says: I

:20:51. > :20:56.firmly believe the process was conducted scrupulously, fairly.

:20:56. > :20:59.That's what he said. Why are you still call fog for Mr Hunt's --

:20:59. > :21:02.calling for Mr Hunt's resignation? We have evidence in the e-mails

:21:02. > :21:09.that the Culture Secretary needs to build political cover on the

:21:09. > :21:14.process. Who is saying that? wants ammo against the Ofcom report.

:21:14. > :21:22.He is saying that. It's the News Corporation lobbyist saying that

:21:22. > :21:29.sarplt of being briefed by Adam Smith - as a result. A specialist

:21:29. > :21:32.advisor in a Minister's office. The idea that a special advisor would

:21:32. > :21:36.have these type of back channels without the knowledge of their

:21:36. > :21:40.culture secretary is unthinkable. He may have had knowledge that he

:21:40. > :21:44.was speaking, but what he is saying is that the Minister didn't have

:21:44. > :21:48.knowledge of what I was saying. I created the perception that I had

:21:49. > :21:54.too close a relationship. That's what he is saying. He is saying

:21:54. > :21:57.it's not Mr Hunt's fault, it was my fault. I made too much of it. I

:21:57. > :22:01.implied too much. We have no evidence whether that's true or not,

:22:01. > :22:05.but you have no evidence that's not true and yet you are still calling

:22:05. > :22:13.for Mr Hunt to resign. Absolutely right and he will see what he has

:22:13. > :22:17.to say at 12.30. David Willets, it's quite clear from everything we

:22:17. > :22:21.know Jeremy Hunt was a self-styled cheerleader for Rupert Murdoch,

:22:21. > :22:29.it's on his website. It's pretty clear from what we know he wanted

:22:29. > :22:35.this to go ahead. It really is incredible that you put it all on

:22:35. > :22:39.the head of an unknown special advisor. What's clear is that at

:22:39. > :22:45.every stage Jeremy acted on independent advice and nobody's

:22:45. > :22:49.been able to provide evidence that he took a decision that was in

:22:49. > :22:52.conflict with independent outside advice. Second, which gets to the

:22:52. > :22:57.heart of the reason why we set up the inquiry and indeed which the

:22:57. > :23:00.Labour Party welcomed, and that is it's for the judge to take an

:23:00. > :23:04.overall assessment when he has heard everyone's account of what

:23:04. > :23:08.happened as to what he then thinks we should conclude and he himself,

:23:08. > :23:12.as I think rightly, warned today that you shouldn't take one set of

:23:12. > :23:17.e-mails - I think he says you can take one set of documents out of

:23:17. > :23:20.context and they can bear different interpretations. We have to let the

:23:20. > :23:23.judge in this inquiry get to the bottom. I understand that, judges

:23:23. > :23:27.don't have a monopoly of opinion or even judgment in this country. We

:23:27. > :23:32.are all allowed a say and we are all allowed to make a judgment. If

:23:32. > :23:39.you take the e-mails Mary has got there, and there are more than that,

:23:39. > :23:42.you take them in the aggregate, and they do show an unhealthy

:23:42. > :23:48.relationship between the company that wants to do the biggest

:23:48. > :23:50.takeover in British media history and the Ministerial office of the

:23:50. > :23:56.Minister responsible for determining that takeover. It

:23:56. > :24:00.doesn't look good. Andrew, there are indeed a whole host of opinions

:24:00. > :24:03.floating around today. The judgment that I will respect is the judgment

:24:04. > :24:08.that's finally reached by the the judge after he has heard everyone's

:24:08. > :24:13.account, including Jeremy's and Jeremy is an honourable man. I

:24:13. > :24:17.believe what Jeremy says. As a minimum, Jeremy has the right to

:24:17. > :24:20.explain what he did and Jeremy has made it clear throughout he acted

:24:20. > :24:25.on independent objective advice. understand that and we will hear

:24:25. > :24:30.this at 12.30 what he has to say. Have you met Adam Smith? I don't

:24:30. > :24:34.recall. Possibly I have. It's not a trick question. I have no direct

:24:34. > :24:38.recollection, I probably have at some point. I tended to think of

:24:38. > :24:42.him as a great 18th century political economist, as you said.

:24:42. > :24:48.From the University of Glasgow. My point is, I spoke to political

:24:48. > :24:51.correspondents this this morning, most of them hadn't heard of him.

:24:51. > :24:55.This is not a special advisor known for going off the reservation, he

:24:55. > :24:59.was a special advisor who kept it low key, did little briefing,

:24:59. > :25:03.didn't say things that he couldn't - didn't big himself up as how

:25:03. > :25:08.important he was. I think given his previous behaviour until these e-

:25:08. > :25:12.mails came out, there's a kind of credibility test that isn't quite

:25:12. > :25:17.passed that suddenly he goes completely off the reservation on

:25:17. > :25:22.this. Some people I suggest to you will be suspicious that he has been

:25:22. > :25:26.made the fall guy. Andrew, these are your ingenious speculations

:25:26. > :25:31.about the character of someone that you have never met. I think that

:25:31. > :25:37.what we should do is let the process agreed go its course. We

:25:37. > :25:41.have to allow, as as Lord Leveson has said, we are to accept these e-

:25:41. > :25:46.mails can be interpreted in different ways. All I can say is so

:25:46. > :25:50.far the one thing we know, nobody's been able to show any decision he

:25:50. > :25:53.took in conflict with the advice. What about the Ministerial code? It

:25:53. > :25:57.states the responsibility for the management and conduct of special

:25:57. > :26:00.advisers, including discipline rests with the Minister who made

:26:00. > :26:03.the appointment. You stand by that? Absolutely and Jeremy does, too.

:26:03. > :26:09.It's clear from the statement that's been released that the

:26:09. > :26:14.special advisor was not... Sorry, we are going to crash PMQs, I

:26:14. > :26:24.wouldn't as a Labour MP wouldn't want me to do that today. Of all

:26:24. > :26:25.

:26:25. > :26:30.days! Our weekly guess the year competition might be excluding some

:26:30. > :26:33.viewers with its complexity. We are concerned about one particular

:26:33. > :26:43.viewer, Mrs T May of Westminster. We don't want to exclude anybody

:26:43. > :26:48.

:26:48. > :26:57.here. So Mrs May, here is your own Can I get back to you. Mrs May, to

:26:57. > :27:07.tenner Guess the -- to enter Guess the Day: Let's see if you can

:27:07. > :27:20.

:27:21. > :27:30.Special masks are the latest # With love that's true

:27:31. > :27:31.

:27:31. > :28:13.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 42 seconds

:28:13. > :28:16.From Sandringham to Windsor, the We love the music. To be in with a

:28:16. > :28:22.chance of winning a Daily Politics mug send your answer to our special

:28:22. > :28:29.quiz e-mail address. You can see the full terms and

:28:29. > :28:32.conditions on our website. Coming up to midday, a couple of

:28:32. > :28:40.minutes to go. Let's look at Big Ben.

:28:40. > :28:44.Soon to be Queen Elizabeth Tower, we are told, we will see about that.

:28:44. > :28:54.The tkroulgt is going -- drought is going well! Prime Minister's

:28:54. > :28:59.

:28:59. > :29:04.questions on the way and Nick Robinson is here. A veritable

:29:04. > :29:07.cornupio of things. Hunt and Murdoch? I would think so. The Adam

:29:07. > :29:10.Smith resignation. There are more resignations on a Wednesday than

:29:10. > :29:13.any other day of the week, why? They're to save the Prime

:29:13. > :29:16.Minister's skin. Midday on a Wednesday is a day people go.

:29:16. > :29:18.Usually Ministers go to protect the Prime Minister's skin. The advisor

:29:19. > :29:22.has gone to protect the Minister, to protect the Prime Minister's

:29:22. > :29:27.skin. The question is simply is it enough? We know the Ministerial

:29:27. > :29:30.code says the Minister is responsible for his advisor. Jeremy

:29:30. > :29:34.Hunt, as late as yesterday, was telling colleagues his advisor had

:29:34. > :29:37.done nothing wrong, that the contact between the advisor and the

:29:37. > :29:42.Murdoch empire was approved by the permanent Secretary. What has

:29:42. > :29:46.obviously gone wrong is the content, rather than the contact. What

:29:46. > :29:48.Jeremy Hunt is going to face in half an hour's time and the Prime

:29:48. > :29:52.Minister might now, is the question of is he really saying he didn't

:29:52. > :29:56.know anything about the content of what his advisor was saying to the

:29:56. > :30:02.Murdoch empire? At no stage his individualser say -- his advisor

:30:02. > :30:06.say what shall I say? Have you come across Adam Smith? No. He was low

:30:06. > :30:09.key. There are advisers who are spin doctors and he was policy.

:30:09. > :30:14.understand that, but the point I was trying to make to the Minister

:30:14. > :30:20.is that Adam Smith was not well known as some special advisers are

:30:20. > :30:23.around Westminster for being very gobby when it comes to briefing or

:30:24. > :30:29.bigging himself up. People I speak to in the BBC and the BBC of course

:30:30. > :30:33.has to have have its own contacts, say Adam Smith is not the sort of

:30:33. > :30:35.guy who talks without talking on behalf of his his Secretary of

:30:35. > :30:40.State. He is not someone who just goes around - doesn't mean that his

:30:40. > :30:43.choice of phrase is approved by the Secretary of State, e-mails are

:30:43. > :30:48.read by the Secretary of State, but the decision of a constant traffic

:30:48. > :30:50.of reassurance and information, it is stretching credibility to say

:30:50. > :30:53.the Secretary of State knew nothing. And you put your finger on

:30:53. > :30:57.something that's dawned on me, because you said it, that's why we

:30:57. > :31:02.have you on the programme, you are brighter than me! Reassuring.

:31:02. > :31:07.are other reasons. Last night the Secretary of State said that his

:31:07. > :31:10.special advisor had done nothing wrong. 12 hours later he says

:31:10. > :31:15.actually I did do a lot wrong and I have had to resign. That doesn't

:31:15. > :31:19.pass the smell test. possibilities. Three possibilities,

:31:19. > :31:23.one they woke up and thought we were wrong. Secondly the civil

:31:24. > :31:26.service pulled the plug that the Secretary said this is intolerable

:31:26. > :31:34.or the Prime Minister's pulled the plug. Let's go straight to the

:31:34. > :31:40.Thank you, Mr Speaker. I am sure the whole House will want to join

:31:40. > :31:45.me in paying tribute to Sapper Connor Ray, who died on 18th April

:31:45. > :31:51.from wins that he sustained in Afghanistan. He was described by

:31:51. > :31:55.ordinary servicemen as a superb soldier. His courage will never be

:31:55. > :31:58.forgotten and we send our condolences to his family and is

:31:58. > :32:02.loved ones. This morning I had meetings with ministerial

:32:02. > :32:06.colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in this House, I will

:32:06. > :32:11.have further such meetings later today.

:32:11. > :32:15.I would like to associate myself with the Prime Minister's tribute

:32:15. > :32:21.to Sapper Connor Ray, and in doing so ask my right honourable friend

:32:21. > :32:24.if he will confirm that although British servicemen are due to leave

:32:24. > :32:28.Afghanistan in 2014, the actual pace of withdrawal will be

:32:28. > :32:33.determined first and foremost by then need to minimise the risk to

:32:33. > :32:36.members of the armed forces serving in Afghanistan at that time?

:32:36. > :32:40.honourable friend makes an important point. I can confirm that

:32:40. > :32:44.by the end of 2014, we won't have anything like the numbers we have

:32:44. > :32:49.now and we will not be in a combat role. Post 2014 we do believe in

:32:49. > :32:51.having a training role with the Afghan army, particularly the

:32:51. > :32:56.officer training role that Hamid Karzai has personally asked for us

:32:56. > :33:00.to undertake. The speed of the reductions between now and the end

:33:00. > :33:06.of 2014 will be done in accordance with the conditions on the ground

:33:06. > :33:10.and what is right in terms of transition length from Allied

:33:10. > :33:16.Control to Afghan control. What is paramount in our minds is the

:33:16. > :33:23.safety and security of our armed forces, who I pay tribute to today.

:33:23. > :33:28.Mr Ed Miliband. Mr Speaker, can I join the Prime Minister in paying

:33:29. > :33:33.tribute to Sapper Connor Ray? He carried out his duties with the

:33:33. > :33:38.utmost courage, saving many Afghan and British lives by what he did,

:33:38. > :33:42.and our deepest condolences go to his family and friends. Today we

:33:42. > :33:46.had the catastrophic news that Britain is back in recession. I am

:33:46. > :33:50.sure the Prime Minister has spent the last 24 hours thinking of an

:33:50. > :33:57.excuse as to why this has nothing to do with them. What is his excuse

:33:57. > :34:02.this time? These are very, very disappointing figures. I don't seek

:34:02. > :34:06.to excuse them. I don't seek to try and explain them away. Let me be

:34:06. > :34:11.absolutely clear, there is no complacency at all in this

:34:11. > :34:16.Government in dealing with what is a very tough situation that frankly

:34:16. > :34:21.has just got tougher. I believe that the truth is this. It is very

:34:21. > :34:26.difficult recovering from the deepest recession in living memory,

:34:26. > :34:29.accompanied as it was by the debt crisis. Our banks had too much debt.

:34:29. > :34:33.Our households had too much debt. Our Government had too much debt.

:34:33. > :34:37.We have got to rebalance our economy. We need a bigger private

:34:38. > :34:42.sector, more exports, more investment. This is painstaking,

:34:42. > :34:46.difficult work, but we will stick with our plans, stick with the

:34:46. > :34:52.lower interest rates and do everything we can to boost growth

:34:53. > :34:57.competitiveness and jobs in our country. Mr Speaker, typical of

:34:57. > :35:01.this arrogant Prime Minister, he tries to blame everyone else. The

:35:01. > :35:07.reality is this is a recession made by him and the Chancellor in

:35:07. > :35:12.Downing Street. Over the last 18 months since his catastrophic

:35:12. > :35:20.spending review, our economy has shrunk. And this is now a slow

:35:20. > :35:24.recovery from recession event than the 1930s. -- even compared to the

:35:24. > :35:28.1930s. It is families and businesses paying the prices for

:35:28. > :35:32.his arrogance and complacency. Why doesn't he admits that it is his

:35:33. > :35:38.catastrophic economic policy and his plan for austerity, cutting too

:35:38. > :35:42.far and too fast, that has landed us back in recession? There is not

:35:42. > :35:46.a single business organisation or serious commentator or

:35:46. > :35:51.international body that thinks these problems emerged in the last

:35:51. > :35:54.24 months. The debt crisis has been long in the making, the failure to

:35:54. > :35:59.regulate our banks has been long in the making, the Government

:35:59. > :36:02.overspending has been long in the making. This is a tough and

:36:02. > :36:06.difficult situation that the economy is in. But the one thing

:36:06. > :36:10.that we must not do is to abandon public spending and deficit-

:36:10. > :36:17.reduction plans because the solution to a debt crisis cannot be

:36:17. > :36:21.more debt. We must not put at risk the low interest rates that are

:36:21. > :36:26.absolutely essential to our recovery. That would be absolute

:36:26. > :36:32.folly and that is why there is no business organisation, their

:36:32. > :36:36.international economic organisation, that suggests that we follow that

:36:36. > :36:41.course. -- no international economic organisation. It is all

:36:41. > :36:44.bluster. His plan has failed. That is the reality. They are the people

:36:44. > :36:48.but said that Britain is a safe haven, the Chancellor even said it

:36:48. > :36:52.on Monday, and we are back in recession. He was the person who

:36:52. > :36:56.said we are out of the danger zone and this is what has happened. Even

:36:56. > :37:04.his own backbenchers are saying that the complacent, arrogant posh

:37:04. > :37:09.boys just don't get it. Now let's turn from the economic disaster of

:37:09. > :37:13.this Government to the political disaster that is the culture

:37:13. > :37:17.secretary. We now know that throughout the time the culture

:37:18. > :37:22.secretary was supposed to be acting in an impartial manner, he and his

:37:22. > :37:26.office were providing a constant flow of confidential information to

:37:26. > :37:30.News Corporation about statements to be made in this House in advance,

:37:30. > :37:36.his private discussions with the regulators, and his discussions

:37:36. > :37:40.with the opposing parties. Having seen a 163 pages published

:37:40. > :37:43.yesterday, is the Prime Minister seriously trying to tell us that

:37:43. > :37:49.the Secretary of State was acting as he should have done in a

:37:49. > :37:58.transparent, impartial and fair manner? Let me just finish off on

:37:58. > :38:01.the economy, which he has moved off. Order. Let's hear what the Prime

:38:01. > :38:05.Minister has to say on the economy and anything else. The Prime

:38:05. > :38:15.Minister. We will not let anyone forget who got us into this mess in

:38:15. > :38:17.

:38:17. > :38:23.More spending, more borrowing, more debt. That is what caused these

:38:24. > :38:30.problems. It cannot be the solution to these problems. Now let me turn,

:38:30. > :38:35.Mr Speaker, to the Leveson Inquiry. I set up the Leveson Inquiry, the

:38:35. > :38:40.terms of reference of the inquiry were agreed by the leader of the

:38:40. > :38:43.Liberal Democrat Party, and the leader of the Labour Party. And I

:38:43. > :38:53.believe that to step in and try and prejudge that inquiry would be

:38:53. > :39:03.

:39:03. > :39:07.And let me be clear, let me be clear. Lord Justice Leveson has

:39:07. > :39:14.made that precise point this morning. Let me read to the House

:39:14. > :39:17.what he has said. Perhaps the House would like to listen? Let's hear

:39:17. > :39:21.what the Prime Minister has to say, and then the questioning will

:39:21. > :39:25.continue. The Prime Minister. Justice Leveson said this this

:39:25. > :39:32.morning. It is very important to hear every side of the story before

:39:32. > :39:35.drawing conclusions. And then he said this. Although I have seen

:39:35. > :39:39.requests for other inquiries and investigations, and of course I do

:39:39. > :39:45.not seek to constrain Parliament, but it seems to me that the better

:39:45. > :39:53.course is to allow this inquiry to proceed. Having set up this inquiry,

:39:53. > :39:56.having agreed with this inquiry, he should listen to the inquiry.

:39:56. > :40:00.Speaker, Lord Justice Leveson is responsible for a lot of things,

:40:00. > :40:07.but he is not responsible for the integrity of the Prime Minister's

:40:07. > :40:11.Government. In case he had forgotten, that is his

:40:12. > :40:15.responsibility, Mr Prime Minister. It beggars belief that the Prime

:40:15. > :40:20.Minister can defend the culture secretary, because he was not

:40:20. > :40:27.urging this bid. He was helping the bid by News Corporation. -- not

:40:27. > :40:30.judging this bid. On 25th January, the culture secretary's office was

:40:30. > :40:36.colluding with the score to provide them information in advance and

:40:36. > :40:43.they were hatching a plant to ensure, and I quote, that would be

:40:43. > :40:47.game over for the opposition to the bid. Does the Prime Minister really

:40:47. > :40:50.believe that that is how a judge and his advisers should act?

:40:50. > :40:55.Leader of the Opposition clearly does not think that what Lord

:40:55. > :41:04.Leveson said this morning matters. Let me remind him what he said

:41:04. > :41:09.yesterday about the Leveson Inquiry. He said this. I think that it is

:41:09. > :41:13.right that the Leveson Inquiry takes its course. He went on, the

:41:13. > :41:18.most important thing is that the Leveson Inquiry gets to the bottom

:41:18. > :41:23.of what happened, of what Labour did, for the Conservatives did, and

:41:23. > :41:28.we reach a judgement about that. Isn't it typical of the right

:41:28. > :41:32.honourable gentleman? In the morning he said that his very clear

:41:32. > :41:42.position but in the afternoon he cannot resist the passing political

:41:42. > :41:48.

:41:48. > :41:53.Total... Totally, totally... Order. I said the Prime Minister must be

:41:53. > :41:58.heard. The Leader of the Opposition must be heard. Both will be heard,

:41:58. > :42:03.however long it takes. It is very clear. Mr Speaker, totally pathetic

:42:03. > :42:07.answers. He is the Prime Minister! If he can't defend the conduct of

:42:07. > :42:13.his own ministers, his ministers should be out the door. He should

:42:13. > :42:18.fire them. He does not even try and defend the Secretary of State on

:42:18. > :42:21.what he did. The Secretary of State told this House on 3rd March this

:42:21. > :42:26.year, in answer to a question from the honourable member for Banbury,

:42:26. > :42:30.and I quote, today we are publishing all the consultation

:42:30. > :42:37.documents, all the submissions we receive, all the exchanges between

:42:37. > :42:43.my department and News Corporation. But he did not. 163 pages have now

:42:43. > :42:47.emerged. The Prime Minister does not defend her in over giving

:42:47. > :42:51.controversial information to one party in the case. -- defend him.

:42:51. > :42:55.He does not offend him over collusion so is he really going to

:42:55. > :42:58.defend him about not being straight with the House of Commons? That may

:42:58. > :43:03.be absolutely clear about the culture secretary, who has my full

:43:03. > :43:09.support for the excellent job that he does. -- let me be absolutely

:43:09. > :43:13.clear. The culture secretary will be giving a full account of himself

:43:13. > :43:16.in this House of Commons this afternoon and in front of the

:43:16. > :43:23.Leveson Inquiry. And he will give a very good account of himself for

:43:23. > :43:26.this very simple reason, that in judging this important bit, the

:43:26. > :43:32.culture secretary sought independent advice from independent

:43:32. > :43:34.regulators at every stage, although he did not need to, and the culture

:43:34. > :43:39.secretary took that independent advice at every stage, although he

:43:39. > :43:42.did not need to. The way that the culture secretary has dealt with

:43:42. > :43:51.this issue is in stark contrast to the Government of which he was a

:43:51. > :43:56.member. I do so this to the Prime Minister. While his culture

:43:57. > :43:59.secretary remains in place, one who refuses to come clean on his

:43:59. > :44:09.meetings with Rupert Murdoch, the shadow of sleaze will hang over

:44:09. > :44:10.

:44:10. > :44:14.this Government. Mr Speaker, Andy Coulson, Rebekah Brooks and another

:44:14. > :44:21.culture secretary. When is he going to realise it is time to stop

:44:21. > :44:25.putting his cronies before the interest of the country? I have to

:44:25. > :44:28.say to the right honourable gentleman, he called for an

:44:28. > :44:32.independent judicial inquiry and that is the inquiry I have set up.

:44:32. > :44:37.He agreed the terms of reference. Now he is flip-flopping all over

:44:37. > :44:40.the place on it. The fact is that the problem of closeness between

:44:40. > :44:46.politicians and media proprietors had been going on for years and it

:44:46. > :44:49.is this Government that is going to sort it out. Whether it is the

:44:49. > :44:54.proper regulation of the press, or whether it is cleaning up our

:44:54. > :45:04.financial system, whether it is dealing with our debt, I don't dock

:45:04. > :45:15.

:45:15. > :45:19.my responsibilities. What a pity he Order. Order. Mr Carl McCartney.

:45:19. > :45:25.Thank you. Is my right honourable friend aware of recent good news in

:45:25. > :45:35.the manufacturing and engineering sectors in Lincoln, an increase in

:45:35. > :45:41.turnover over 20%, and investments in a new tooling press and a new

:45:41. > :45:46.engineering school in our country for 20 years. Would my honourable

:45:46. > :45:50.friend accept my personal invitation to see for himself the

:45:50. > :45:55.excellent process our city is enjoying. I am grateful to my

:45:55. > :45:58.honourable friend's invitation and I will try and take it up. As I

:45:58. > :46:02.said earlier, what's happening in our economy with the disappointing

:46:02. > :46:07.news today, but underneath that there is a rebalancing that needs

:46:07. > :46:09.to take place and that is taking place in terms of manufacturing and

:46:09. > :46:12.investment and in terms of exports and in terms of the Government

:46:12. > :46:16.getting behind that with more investment in apprenticeships, more

:46:16. > :46:19.investments in technical hubs at our universities, like the one at

:46:19. > :46:27.the University of Lincoln, and cutting business taxes so we get

:46:27. > :46:33.Britain working and making things again.

:46:33. > :46:36.Mr Speaker, on Monday the Prime Minister said that an economic

:46:36. > :46:38.rescue mission, is it not fair to say that mission has failed

:46:38. > :46:43.spectacularly in light of the figures released today?

:46:43. > :46:47.The point I would make is if you look at the recession that we

:46:47. > :46:52.suffered, a 7% contraction of our GDP, that was much bigger even than

:46:52. > :46:55.what happened in America. It is worth remembering the biggest bank

:46:56. > :46:59.bail-out anywhere in the world, it wasn't in America, it was here in

:46:59. > :47:04.Britain, getting out of the recession, the financial crisis and

:47:04. > :47:12.the debt crisis is difficult pain- staking work but this Government is

:47:12. > :47:16.committed to doing just that. week I met the chief executive of

:47:16. > :47:22.the fourth largest manufacturing group in the UK, who have a

:47:22. > :47:28.substantial factory in Burnley, He has been instructed by his US board

:47:28. > :47:31.to increase the turnover of his UK operations, so as to take advantage

:47:31. > :47:35.of the Government's industrial strategy. He is concerned about the

:47:35. > :47:40.lack of skills. Can my right honourable friend assure me that

:47:40. > :47:43.the Government investment in apprenticeships and technical

:47:43. > :47:47.colleges will increase over the coming years?

:47:47. > :47:51.What is interesting, Mr Speaker, is that if any member of parliament

:47:51. > :47:55.wants to talk about manufacturing success or business success in

:47:55. > :47:58.their constituency, they are shouted down by the opposition.

:47:58. > :48:03.Because all they want to hear is bad news and to talk our economy

:48:03. > :48:06.down. We are investing in skills. We are putting more money into the

:48:06. > :48:10.apprenticeship schemes. We are putting money into the university

:48:10. > :48:13.technical colleges. I was at Airbus in Filton this week seeing

:48:13. > :48:18.expansion and growth plans there and it's good to hear what's

:48:18. > :48:24.happening in his constituency. the Prime Minister agree with his

:48:24. > :48:28.Chancellor who said in 2008 that once you have a downturn you cannot

:48:28. > :48:33.possibly slash public expenditure, will he stick to his complacent

:48:33. > :48:43.plan of cutting too far and too fast which is's delivered a double-

:48:43. > :48:43.

:48:43. > :48:48.dip recession? Well, well read. The point is we

:48:48. > :48:53.inherited from the party opposite a budget deficit of 11%. The budget

:48:53. > :48:57.deficit we inherited was bigger than Greece, than Spain, bigger

:48:57. > :49:00.than Portugal. If you don't deal with your debts and your deficit,

:49:00. > :49:04.you will never keep interest rates low and it is low interest rates

:49:04. > :49:14.that offer us the best prospects of getting out of this difficult

:49:14. > :49:17.

:49:17. > :49:27.economic situation we are in. you, Mr Speaker.

:49:27. > :49:28.

:49:28. > :49:33.Order. At least half a million children

:49:33. > :49:35.died from malaria last year. On world malaria day may I thank the

:49:35. > :49:40.Prime Minister for his personal commitment to combating this

:49:40. > :49:46.disease and will he join me in recognising the international

:49:46. > :49:51.leadership which British scientists, aid workers and volunteers,

:49:51. > :49:55.including in my constituency, show in combating malaria.

:49:55. > :49:59.I am very grateful to join the honourable gentleman and to wish

:49:59. > :50:05.the people well. He did rather better in convincing the people to

:50:05. > :50:11.vote for him than I did in 1997. He is absolutely right to raise the

:50:11. > :50:13.issue of malaria, 15,000 children die every week from what is a

:50:13. > :50:16.preventable illness. That's why I am proud of the fact that Britain

:50:16. > :50:21.is leading on this issue, is putting money into our aid budget,

:50:21. > :50:24.putting money into malaria bed nets and to the scientific advances that

:50:24. > :50:29.he refers to. This is a vital agenda and even in difficult

:50:29. > :50:35.economic times I think we are right to pursue it.

:50:35. > :50:39.Does this out of touch Prime Minister still believe that the

:50:39. > :50:44.British economy is out of the danger zone?

:50:44. > :50:47.One of the biggest problems we faced on taking office was the

:50:47. > :50:52.danger that financial markets would take a view of Britain like they

:50:52. > :50:56.had taken a view of Greece or Spain or Portugal where interest rates

:50:56. > :50:59.were rising. The fact that we have such low interest rates in Britain

:50:59. > :51:02.demonstrates that we have credibility. These are difficult

:51:02. > :51:06.decisions to get on top of debt and deficit and to deal with public

:51:06. > :51:09.spending, but they're the right decisions, not least because the

:51:09. > :51:18.Shadow Chancellor once said that low interest rates are the mark of

:51:18. > :51:24.economic credibility. The head teachers have within

:51:24. > :51:28.calleder valley both very much welcome the educational reforms.

:51:28. > :51:32.Two schools who never qualified from the previous Government

:51:32. > :51:37.because they abstained too highly. Can the Prime Minister tell the

:51:37. > :51:41.pupils of those schools when they can expect an announcement on the

:51:41. > :51:45.priority school buildings project to which they both applied?

:51:45. > :51:50.What I can tell him is that compared with the first two

:51:50. > :51:53.parliaments of the party opposite ran, we are investing more in

:51:53. > :51:57.school building than they did. I think the figure now is something

:51:57. > :52:00.along the lines of �17 billion during this spending review period,

:52:00. > :52:04.so there are opportunities for new classrooms and new buildings and I

:52:04. > :52:09.am sure the Secretary of State for education is listening carefully to

:52:09. > :52:14.my honourable friend and will be in touch with him about the prospects.

:52:14. > :52:19.Does the Prime Minister agree with the member from mid-Bedfordshire

:52:19. > :52:27.when she said that the Prime Minister and the Chancellor...

:52:27. > :52:31.Order. Order. Let's hear the question. Posh boys showing no

:52:31. > :52:34.compassion or understanding for the lives of others and will he admit

:52:34. > :52:41.admit further evidence of being out of touch and why we are in a

:52:41. > :52:51.double-dip recession? I agree with my honourable friend

:52:51. > :52:51.

:52:51. > :52:58.about many, many things. Over the last two years UK exports

:52:58. > :53:04.have grown by 23%, with faster growth to the - with my friend join

:53:04. > :53:10.me in congratting the 150 winners of the Queen he is award for

:53:10. > :53:14.enterprise this week for success in international trade, particularly

:53:14. > :53:18.in my constituency. I certainly join him on congratulating this

:53:18. > :53:25.business. When we look at some of the fastest growing markets in the

:53:25. > :53:30.world, whether India or China our export performance compared with

:53:30. > :53:34.2009 in some of those markets is up by as much as 60%. As well as those

:53:34. > :53:37.markets, we also have to remember our old friends as it were, and the

:53:37. > :53:42.fact that we still export more to the Republic of Ireland than to

:53:42. > :53:47.Brazil, Russia, India and China combined. So expanding our existing

:53:47. > :53:53.markets but much more work to get into the fast growing markets in

:53:53. > :53:57.the world. Recently the Prime Minister conceded that the

:53:57. > :54:02.Government had made an important mistake in the handling of the fuel

:54:02. > :54:08.crisis. Can I ask him wouldn't it be a positive step in correcting

:54:08. > :54:15.that mistake if the Government were to scrap the 3p increase in August,

:54:15. > :54:18.in order to help motorists, haulage companies, and hard-pressed

:54:18. > :54:23.families in the United Kingdom? First of all, the Government has

:54:23. > :54:27.actually used around �4 billion of budget money to keep petrol prices

:54:27. > :54:32.down and petrol prices are about 6p lower than they would be under the

:54:32. > :54:36.plans of the party opposite. Let me update the honourable gentleman and

:54:36. > :54:40.the House on the issue of the fuel strike. It now looks as if there is

:54:40. > :54:45.a longer period of time before any potential strike could take place.

:54:45. > :54:49.I am determined that we use that time to make sure there is every

:54:49. > :54:53.piece of resilience in place. The plans we inherited would have

:54:53. > :54:59.allowed the military to provide maybe 10% of our fuel needs. We

:54:59. > :55:01.have now managed to lift that to something like 60 or 70 %. We are

:55:01. > :55:05.in much better place now because of the proper emergency planning that

:55:05. > :55:13.this Government has done, rather than the party opposite that just

:55:13. > :55:20.crossed their fingers and hoped the best from the trade unions. Next

:55:20. > :55:25.Wednesday my mother will celebrate her 100th birthday. Living as she

:55:25. > :55:28.does five minutes from the Olympic stadium, she has agreed to be Usain

:55:28. > :55:34.Bolt's pace-maker in order to give the other athletes a chance. Will

:55:34. > :55:37.my right honourable friend now call on the indomitable spirit of former

:55:37. > :55:44.land army girls such as my mother, and encourage our Olympic athletes

:55:44. > :55:48.to go for gold? I will certainly do that. I have

:55:48. > :55:53.written to Maude to congratulate her on this fantastic milestone. I

:55:53. > :55:57.am sure that as she speeds past Usain Bolt she will just turn round

:55:57. > :56:01.and reflect that indeed the only way is Essex.

:56:01. > :56:07.I am delighted the Prime Minister has written to her, that makes two

:56:07. > :56:17.of us. Thank you. The Prime Minister has spent plenty of time

:56:17. > :56:17.

:56:17. > :56:24.cosying up to News Corporation, in return for political support. I can

:56:24. > :56:31.wait. I can wait. So he is well qualified to answer this question,

:56:31. > :56:35.when Alex Salmond agreed to to act as a lobbyist for News Corp was he

:56:35. > :56:39.acting in self-interest or in the interests of Scotland?

:56:39. > :56:42.First of all, I think Alex Salmond can answer for himself. Secondly,

:56:42. > :56:46.think-tank this is another issue that -- I think that is another

:56:46. > :56:51.issue the Leveson inquiry properly set up, that's going to interview

:56:51. > :56:53.all the politicians, including all sorts of people who cosied up to

:56:54. > :56:58.News International over the years, and I think on all sides of the

:56:58. > :57:02.House there is a need for a hand on heart, we all did too much cosying

:57:02. > :57:10.up to Rupert Murdoch, I think we would agree, on that basis I am

:57:10. > :57:15.sure that Lord Leveson will make some important recommendations.

:57:15. > :57:22.the Prime Minister seen the research published today by the

:57:22. > :57:28.Taxpayers' Alliance which shows that there are 3,097 town hall

:57:28. > :57:34.employees earning more than �100,000 and 52 earning more than

:57:34. > :57:38.�250,000. My conconstituteents can't understand the salaries. What

:57:38. > :57:43.can we do about it? I think he is entirely right to

:57:43. > :57:46.raise this issue. The important thing that we have done is made

:57:46. > :57:51.completely transparent the pay in our town halls and in local

:57:51. > :57:54.Government. Sadly, I believe there is still one local council, a

:57:54. > :57:58.Labour-controlled council in Nottinghamshire, that's not making

:57:58. > :58:03.this information available. Every council should be transparent about

:58:03. > :58:09.how they spend council taxpayers money.

:58:09. > :58:13.to those people warning him that cutting too far and too fast would

:58:13. > :58:18.cause a double-dip recession should apologise. Now he's delivered a

:58:18. > :58:22.double-dip recession, shouldn't he appoll apologise? The point I make

:58:22. > :58:26.is this, we faced a very difficult situation with an 11% budget

:58:26. > :58:29.deficit. If we had listened to the plans of the party opposite and

:58:29. > :58:34.spent more, borrowed more and increased our debt, that would have

:58:34. > :58:37.only made the debt crisis worse. How can the answer to a debt crisis

:58:38. > :58:46.be more borrowing? That is the question the party opposite can

:58:46. > :58:51.never answer. After weeks of ducking and diving, Ken Livingstone

:58:51. > :58:56.has given a partial publication of his tax affairs. Sadly, he refuses

:58:56. > :59:01.to publish the tax affairs of the company he set up to avoid paying

:59:02. > :59:05.his fair share of tax. Does my right honourable friend agree that

:59:05. > :59:10.Ken Livingstone has ceased to be the old pretender and now become

:59:10. > :59:13.the artful tkopbler -- dodger? think my friend speaks for all of

:59:13. > :59:17.London when he makes this point, Ken Livingstone owes the people of

:59:17. > :59:22.London some proper transparency about this company and about his

:59:22. > :59:25.tax bill. There are still several days to go before this key election.

:59:25. > :59:29.He should make that information available. I have to say, Mr

:59:29. > :59:32.Speaker, I had something of a shock this week when I hardly ever agreed

:59:32. > :59:41.with anything Alan Sugar has ever said, but in saying Londoners

:59:41. > :59:45.shouldn't back Ken, he was spot on. Now that the Prime Minister's

:59:45. > :59:52.admitted that he's created the economic mess the country's in, can

:59:52. > :59:58.I be helpful to the Prime Minister? Drop his ridiculous proposals for

:59:58. > :00:02.regional pay cuts and accelerate the capital programme for schools

:00:02. > :00:06.in the West Midlands. We are spending more on capital on schools

:00:06. > :00:09.in this parliament than either of the first two Labour parliaments. I

:00:09. > :00:12.am happy again for Education Ministers to look specifically at

:00:12. > :00:17.the case in his constituency and see what can be done. I also hope

:00:17. > :00:23.that he will be joining me and inviting people in Coventry on the

:00:23. > :00:26.3rd May to vote yes to a mayor for Coventry. Every year millions of

:00:26. > :00:31.British people donate money to charities. They do it for the

:00:31. > :00:35.simple reason they want to help the cause and help others worse worse

:00:35. > :00:38.off than themselves. Wye call these actions by members of the public as

:00:38. > :00:42.being honourable, kind and selfless. We have all heard recently that

:00:42. > :00:46.some, not all, but some of our wealthy citizens only want to

:00:46. > :00:51.donate money to charity if they can tb to trb trb continue to reduce

:00:51. > :00:54.their tax bill. Does the Prime Minister think their motives are

:00:54. > :00:58.honourable and selfless? We should support in our country people who

:00:58. > :01:02.give money to charity. And that's why this Government has expanded

:01:02. > :01:07.Gift Aid in a generous way and made available a change to help people

:01:07. > :01:12.with inheritance tax if they leave quests to charity. There were set

:01:12. > :01:15.out in the Budget a number of limits to relieves, we specifically

:01:15. > :01:20.identified the potential problem for charities and my friend the

:01:20. > :01:23.Chancellor is going to consult widely about how we can make sure

:01:24. > :01:30.we encourage charities and encourage what they do in our

:01:30. > :01:35.country. The Prime Minister's dismissive response to the fact the

:01:35. > :01:40.UK is back in recession suggests that his mind is on other things.

:01:40. > :01:45.Shouldn't he just sack his Culture Secretary and concentrate properly

:01:45. > :01:48.on the job of sorting out the British economy? I think the

:01:48. > :01:52.honourable lady would recognise there is absolutely nothing

:01:52. > :01:57.dismissive about either my reply on the economy, or indeed what I think

:01:57. > :02:01.we need to do. We are in a difficult economic situation in

:02:01. > :02:05.Britain. Just as you see now recessions in Denmark, in Holland,

:02:05. > :02:09.Italy, in Spain, that's what is happening across the continent that

:02:09. > :02:13.we trade with. What is absolutely essential is we take every step we

:02:13. > :02:17.can to help our economy out of recession. Investing in

:02:17. > :02:23.apprenticeships, setting up enterprise zones, cutting business

:02:23. > :02:26.taxes, prioritising investment in our Africa, we are -- in our our

:02:26. > :02:31.infrastructure, we are doing all of these things to help get our

:02:31. > :02:34.economy out of the mess the last Government left in.

:02:34. > :02:38.Far from being dismissive, the Prime Minister acknowledged that

:02:38. > :02:42.the figures were disappointing. But would he agree with me that getting

:02:43. > :02:45.out of a debt crisis you don't spend more money and there is no

:02:45. > :02:50.international organisations suggesting this country changes its

:02:50. > :02:53.force and spend more money to get out of a debt crisis?

:02:53. > :02:56.My honourable friend is right, it's not just there is no international

:02:56. > :03:01.body body that's making that case, there is no business organisation

:03:01. > :03:03.making that case. Indeed, the IOD and the CBI are both saying that

:03:03. > :03:07.while these figures are disappointing, we must not give up

:03:07. > :03:10.the low interest rates and the credible fiscal policy we have,

:03:10. > :03:16.that would be the way to land our economy in the problems that they

:03:16. > :03:22.left it in. It's a sorry state of affairs, in two years the economy

:03:22. > :03:25.is in deep recession and now the Government is deep in sleaze. Same

:03:25. > :03:35.old Tories? I think Russell Brand got it about

:03:35. > :03:40.

:03:40. > :03:50.right yesterday. Order. STUDIO: We are going to stay

:03:50. > :03:51.

:03:51. > :03:56.in the Commons now. We are going to stay because Jeremy

:03:56. > :04:01.Hunt, the culture secretary, whose special advisor resigned this

:04:01. > :04:06.morning, just as we were coming on air, because of revelations in the

:04:06. > :04:12.Leveson inquiry yesterday, over his communications with the chief

:04:12. > :04:19.lobbyist for News Corp as they were trying to buy BSkyB, he has fallen

:04:19. > :04:23.hpb oeus sword this morning. Here is Jeremy Hunt.

:04:23. > :04:28.With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement

:04:28. > :04:36.following yesterday's developments in the Leveson inquiry. Although I

:04:36. > :04:39.intend to respond fully to allegations about my conduct and my

:04:39. > :04:45.department when I present my evidence to Lord Justice Leveson,

:04:45. > :04:51.it's important to update the House on actions that have been taken as

:04:51. > :04:59.a result of evidence released yesterday. We are 273 days into a

:04:59. > :05:09.process that's first stage will last until October. This is not the

:05:09. > :05:11.

:05:11. > :05:15.time to jump on a political bandwagon. What the public want to

:05:15. > :05:19.hear is not the right hopb honourable gentleman's views, not

:05:19. > :05:24.my views, but the views of Lord Justice Leveson when he has

:05:24. > :05:28.considered all the evidence. I do, however, think it is right to set

:05:28. > :05:34.the record straight on a number of issues in the light of evidence

:05:34. > :05:37.heard yesterday at the inquiry. Specifically, on the merger of News

:05:38. > :05:44.Corp with BSkyB, I would like to remind the House of the process I

:05:44. > :05:49.followed. Throughout I have strictly followed due process.

:05:49. > :05:52.Seeking the advice of independent regulators, something I didn't have

:05:52. > :05:59.to do, and after careful consideration acting on their

:05:59. > :06:04.advice. I have published all advice that I have received from Ofcom and

:06:04. > :06:09.the OFT, together with core respondence with myself including

:06:09. > :06:14.details of all meetings I have heard in relation to this process.

:06:14. > :06:17.As part of this process, my officials and I have engaged with

:06:17. > :06:27.News Corporation and its representatives as well as other

:06:27. > :06:32.

:06:32. > :06:36.interested parties, both supporters Messages have been alleged to

:06:36. > :06:40.indicate that there was a back channel through which News

:06:40. > :06:49.Corporation were able to influence my decisions. This is categorically

:06:49. > :06:54.not the case. Order. The House must calm down a bit. The statement must

:06:54. > :06:57.be heard. There will be a full opportunity for questioning of the

:06:57. > :07:03.Secretary of State, which he would expect, and whether he expected or

:07:03. > :07:07.not that is what will happen and that is right and proper. But it is

:07:07. > :07:11.also right and proper that the state and be heard with courtesy.

:07:11. > :07:16.However, the volume and tone of those communications were clearly

:07:16. > :07:25.not appropriate in a quasar judicial process, and today Adam

:07:25. > :07:29.Smith has resigned as my special adviser. -- quasi-judicial process.

:07:29. > :07:34.Although Adam Smith accepts that he overstepped the mark on this

:07:34. > :07:40.occasion, I want to set on record that I believe he did so

:07:40. > :07:44.unintentionally. I did not believe that he was doing anything more

:07:44. > :07:50.than giving advice on process. I believe in to be someone of

:07:50. > :07:56.integrity and decency, and it is a matter of huge regret to me that

:07:56. > :07:59.this has happened. Mr Speaker, I only saw the transcripts of these

:07:59. > :08:04.communications yesterday. They did not influence my decisions in any

:08:04. > :08:08.way at all. Not least because I insisted on hearing the advice of

:08:08. > :08:12.independent regulators at every stage of the process. I will give

:08:12. > :08:17.my full record of events when I give evidence to Lord Justice

:08:17. > :08:21.Leveson. However, I would like to resolve this issue as soon as

:08:21. > :08:25.possible, which is why I have written to Lord Justice Leveson,

:08:25. > :08:28.asking if my appearance can be brought forward. I am totally

:08:28. > :08:34.confident that when I present my evidence, the public will see that

:08:34. > :08:39.I conducted this process with scrupulous fairness throughout.

:08:39. > :08:44.Harriet Harman. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

:08:44. > :08:48.We are going to leave the Commons now, but worry not, we will listen

:08:48. > :08:53.to what Harriet Harman has to say at she responds to Jeremy Hunt and

:08:53. > :08:57.we will bring you what the shadow culture secretary says in response

:08:57. > :09:03.to that statement. He said that he followed to process throughout in

:09:03. > :09:07.the Murdoch bid for all of BSkyB. Murdoch owned 40% of it and he

:09:07. > :09:12.wanted to buy the 60% who did not have. He acted on independent

:09:12. > :09:17.advice, he said from Ofcom and the Office of Fair Trading, two of the

:09:17. > :09:20.regulators in media takeovers. He said that the emails and texts

:09:20. > :09:23.published in the Leveson Inquiry yesterday showed a close

:09:23. > :09:28.relationship between his special adviser and the chief lobbyist at

:09:28. > :09:31.News Corp, but he claimed that did not amount to a back channel. He

:09:32. > :09:35.said that the special adviser Adam Smith had resigned this morning,

:09:35. > :09:42.but he believed that if Adam Smith had acted in appropriately, he had

:09:42. > :09:46.not done so intentionally. He said there was a huge regret and he now

:09:46. > :09:56.wants his day in court in front of Leveson. Our panellists is still

:09:56. > :09:56.

:09:56. > :09:59.here, and Nick Robinson has also stayed with us. What happened, do

:09:59. > :10:03.you think, between the minister saying last night that he had

:10:03. > :10:07.complete faith in Adam Smith and that he had done nothing wrong, and

:10:07. > :10:11.Adam Smith resigning this morning? Presumably just a review of exactly

:10:12. > :10:15.what happened, the messages and e- mails, and the decision that they

:10:15. > :10:20.had gone too far. It was suggested last night that the civil servant

:10:20. > :10:23.in charge of Culture, Media and Sport had designated Adam Smith to

:10:23. > :10:28.be the point of contact with News Corporation, and you would expect

:10:28. > :10:31.such contacts in a high-profile media bit. Jeremy Hunt said that he

:10:31. > :10:36.had contacts with opponents of the bid as well. These were minuted

:10:36. > :10:40.meetings with civil servants present. Yes, indeed. The adviser

:10:40. > :10:44.accepts that he went too far and he resigned. But it is a mark of

:10:44. > :10:48.Jeremy Hunt's character that he defended him in the Commons today.

:10:48. > :10:51.Is it credible when you read the substance of these emails and text

:10:51. > :10:55.messages, in which to details all sorts of things that are going to

:10:55. > :10:59.happen, all of which did then happen, he was a particularly well-

:10:59. > :11:04.informed special adviser, and that he also in a number of text

:11:04. > :11:10.messages which are more interesting than the emails said that things

:11:10. > :11:15.are going well, fine, things are in a good place, is it credible that

:11:15. > :11:18.he did all of that unintentionally? Yes, I think so. He was a point of

:11:18. > :11:22.contact from the department with News Corporation but he probably

:11:22. > :11:25.went too far. For that reason he has quite properly offered his

:11:25. > :11:30.resignation but I am certain that Jeremy Hunt is right that he did

:11:30. > :11:38.not intend to do that. It is your contention that the special adviser

:11:38. > :11:42.had this extensive correspondence digitally with the head of lobbying

:11:42. > :11:46.at News Corp and that Jeremy Hunt knew nothing about that? I do not

:11:46. > :11:49.intend that at all. The special adviser was authorised to be the

:11:49. > :11:52.point of contact with News Corporation, as you would expect

:11:53. > :12:00.there to be content with News Corporation over the bird and other

:12:00. > :12:03.interested parties, but he went too far. -- the bid. I have no doubt

:12:03. > :12:07.that Jeremy Hunt did not authorise him to reveal special information

:12:07. > :12:15.and did not expecting to do so and there is no doubt in my mind about

:12:15. > :12:17.that. At a point in this whole process, when things have gone well

:12:17. > :12:21.for BSkyB, at this point, I know they did not in the end, but at

:12:21. > :12:27.this point they did, the chief lobbyist texted Mr Smith and said,

:12:27. > :12:34.we are in a good place tonight, I think. Mr Smith replied, yes, I

:12:34. > :12:39.think we are. But let's see what the press says tomorrow. This is

:12:39. > :12:41.complicit in BSkyB's bid. It is the fact that he gave the impression

:12:41. > :12:45.that the Government was too close to BSkyB that prompted his

:12:45. > :12:49.resignation. You are right, that cannot be defended and that is why

:12:49. > :12:57.he had to resign in the end. would he do so? A key overstepped

:12:57. > :13:02.the remit that he was given by the Secretary of State. -- he

:13:02. > :13:06.overstepped the remit. But why would he do that since we know that

:13:07. > :13:11.without his master's voice giving him support, when we know from

:13:11. > :13:14.Jeremy Hunt's previous statements, that he is a cheerleader for Rupert

:13:14. > :13:18.Murdoch, that he wanted the BSkyB bid to go ahead, that he was in

:13:18. > :13:25.favour of that sort of thing? You must only have thought he was doing

:13:25. > :13:28.his master's bidding. I don't think so. Jeremy Hunt took extreme care.

:13:28. > :13:32.He took independent advice when that was not compulsory. In order

:13:32. > :13:37.to seek the proper form, he had proper advice given to him at every

:13:37. > :13:39.stage when he did not have to. That is how seriously he took his quasi-

:13:39. > :13:43.judicial responsibility and it is important that he would have an

:13:43. > :13:48.opinion on this when Vince Cable said that he would go to war on

:13:48. > :13:54.Rupert Murdoch. But he sought independent advice. What do you say

:13:54. > :13:57.to that? It beggars belief that when Jeremy Hunt was publishing a

:13:57. > :14:02.cache of emails and meetings between himself and Murdoch over

:14:02. > :14:05.the BSkyB bid, that Adam Smith sat in the office, next door to the

:14:05. > :14:10.culture secretary, I did not say, hold on, boss, there is something

:14:10. > :14:14.that I have to tell you. That is extraordinary. These emails were

:14:14. > :14:19.carried on on his private account. The idea that Jeremy Hunt had

:14:19. > :14:22.absolutely no idea about this simply beggars belief. I think that

:14:22. > :14:28.is exactly the question that will now be pursued by the Labour Party

:14:28. > :14:32.in the state bed and potentially by end of the inquiry. What did Jeremy

:14:32. > :14:36.Hunt know? -- in a statement. It is perfectly possible that there could

:14:36. > :14:40.be some point of contact between the department and an interested

:14:40. > :14:45.party. Why make that party political contact and not official?

:14:46. > :14:50.Why make it as special adviser rather than a civil servant who

:14:50. > :14:56.would take notes? They think that his question number one. If you are

:14:56. > :14:59.News Corp with an �8 billion bid and you are an important company

:14:59. > :15:03.for Britain, the Government will keep you informed about the dates

:15:03. > :15:06.of processes and give you copies of statements, all sort of background

:15:06. > :15:09.information, provided that we are not giving you things that you

:15:09. > :15:17.should not have before Parliament, before the markets and before the

:15:18. > :15:21.public. That his Test No. 1, so why did he do it? The impression

:15:21. > :15:26.created here is that the department wanted to give the impression that

:15:26. > :15:34.it was acting in a semi- judicial way, while simultaneously giving

:15:34. > :15:39.news got the impression that it was on its side. -- News Corp. The next

:15:39. > :15:43.question is whether Jeremy Hunt new about this duality. He is based in

:15:43. > :15:48.this way and his minister, his adviser, a party political

:15:48. > :15:52.appointment, is facing the other way. Just to boil it down, what is

:15:52. > :15:55.critical is whether he is the Minister for Murdoch or the

:15:55. > :16:01.minister for public interest and the only way of establishing that

:16:01. > :16:07.is if we find the e-mail traffic with officials about what he knew

:16:07. > :16:12.with his special adviser. Let me bring in the minister among us, who

:16:12. > :16:17.knows how things operate in Government. If there was a

:16:17. > :16:23.necessity to create a link between the Department and the interested

:16:23. > :16:30.parties, why was that Labour given to a political adviser and not his

:16:30. > :16:33.civil servant? -- that link. We know that these meetings are toxic.

:16:34. > :16:38.The meetings with Margaret Thatcher have been a running problem since

:16:38. > :16:44.1981. Why was it not given to the civil servant? Why was it to only

:16:44. > :16:48.one side of the argument? Why was the information only given to BSkyB

:16:48. > :16:53.and not to the coalition of media companies that were against BSkyB?

:16:53. > :16:58.The judgment would have had to have been taken within the department,

:16:58. > :17:03.including by somebody who was best able to advise a News International

:17:03. > :17:07.on the process that was being followed. That should be a civil

:17:07. > :17:13.servant. Special advisers are subject to most of the regulation,

:17:13. > :17:16.remember. They have special status. But special advisers cannot run

:17:16. > :17:21.amok. They are also bound by large obligations on how they should

:17:21. > :17:24.behave. I think the answer to Nick Robinson's challenge of how they

:17:24. > :17:27.are behaving, we actually know the answer because we know the

:17:28. > :17:31.decisions that were taken. The decisions at each stage that were

:17:31. > :17:35.taken by that department followed objective, independent, external

:17:35. > :17:41.advice. Something that was not suggested yesterday by James

:17:41. > :17:44.Murdoch or anything else, is that Jeremy was looking after the

:17:44. > :17:48.interest of News International. Jeremy Hunt was following the due

:17:48. > :17:52.process to the frustration of News International sometimes. Why was

:17:52. > :17:57.the flow of information only to the BSkyB side and not of the coalition

:17:57. > :18:02.of interest against BSkyB? I don't know. Well, I can tell you because

:18:02. > :18:06.I have spoken to those opposing the BSkyB bid, and they got nothing.

:18:06. > :18:09.Nothing like the information that Adam Smith was passing to the News

:18:09. > :18:16.Corp lobbyists. They have won rather stilted meeting that was

:18:16. > :18:21.called wooden and that was the end of it. -- they had one meeting.

:18:21. > :18:28.is the end of speculation... That is not speculation, it is factual.

:18:28. > :18:33.The coalition did not get any of the updates or briefings on process

:18:33. > :18:37.that the BSkyB people got. Why? Jeremy Hunt, the Prime Minister,

:18:37. > :18:42.all of us in the Government, a trust Lord leathers and to reach an

:18:42. > :18:47.overall judgment on the conduct of what was done. -- trust law Leveson

:18:47. > :18:52.to reach an overall judgment. is not what I was asking. You can

:18:52. > :18:56.go to the Daily Mail, the BBC, the other newspapers. I will ask Louise

:18:56. > :19:00.Mensch if I cannot get an answer from you. If it was important that

:19:00. > :19:05.the interested parties had a man, but decide whether that should have

:19:05. > :19:13.been a civil servant or not, why was the flow of information to only

:19:13. > :19:15.First of all, Jeremy will publish his contact. It was the permanent

:19:15. > :19:24.Secretary who decided that Adam Smith should be the point of

:19:24. > :19:30.contact. Why was it all one-way. if Adam Smith had contact with

:19:30. > :19:35.those opposing the bid. Should Adam Smith now publish the unauthorised

:19:35. > :19:39.corerespondence with the anti-BSkyB people? Jeremy Hunt has said that

:19:39. > :19:47.he is going to publish details of all his meet stphaogs and all his

:19:47. > :19:51.contacts with. Every interested party pro and kropb. Let's hear

:19:51. > :19:58.what the shadow Culture Secretary had to say in response to Jeremy

:19:58. > :20:01.Hunt's statement a few minutes ago. Here is Harriet Harareman. Everyone

:20:02. > :20:05.-- Harman. Everyone recognises the bid was of huge commercial

:20:05. > :20:10.importance and had profound implications for newspapers and for

:20:10. > :20:14.all of broadcasting, including the BBC. The Business Secretary had

:20:14. > :20:19.been stripped of his responsibility for deciding on the bid because he

:20:19. > :20:24.had already made up his mind against the bid. But the Culture

:20:24. > :20:29.Secretary too had made up his mind, in favour of the bid. So how could

:20:29. > :20:33.he have thought it proper for him to take on that decision? Of course

:20:33. > :20:38.he could take advice, but the decision as to whether he should do

:20:39. > :20:42.it and could do it fairly was a matter for him and him alone. The

:20:42. > :20:47.Secretary of State took on responsibility and assured this

:20:47. > :20:54.House that he would be acting in a quasi-judicial role, like a judge

:20:54. > :20:57.and be transparent, impartial and fair. But, Mr Speaker, isn't it the

:20:57. > :21:01.case that James Murdoch was receiving information in advance

:21:01. > :21:05.about what the Secretary of State was going to do and what he was

:21:05. > :21:09.going to say. Information which was given only to one side, which had

:21:09. > :21:14.not been given to those opposed to the bid and before it was given to

:21:14. > :21:19.this House. Does he think it's acceptable that Murdoch knew not

:21:19. > :21:25.only about what he was going to do and say, but crucially, what the

:21:25. > :21:30.regulator Ofcom had said to the Secretary of State on 10th January

:21:30. > :21:36.2011 and what the bid's owe opponents had said on 20th March

:21:36. > :21:46.and 31st March, 2011? Is he really going to to suggest to this House

:21:46. > :21:51.

:21:51. > :21:53.that James Murdoch's advisor, Fred Miclel, knowing all this was just a

:21:53. > :21:56.coincidence? Can the Secretary of State explain to the House how Fred

:21:56. > :21:58.Michel in a series of e-mails beginning on 23rd January was in a

:21:58. > :22:02.position to tell Murdoch the full detail of a statement the Secretary

:22:02. > :22:08.of State was not going to give to this House until two days later?

:22:08. > :22:12.Whatever interpretation is put on e-mails, there can be no doubt that

:22:12. > :22:18.Michel's e-mail accurately and in detail described meetings that the

:22:18. > :22:25.Secretary of State had had and accurately foretold what the

:22:25. > :22:30.Secretary of State was going to do. Either Michel was Mystic Meg, or he

:22:30. > :22:34.had been told. When it comes to the transparency the Secretary of State

:22:34. > :22:40.promised, there appear to be a great deal of transparency for

:22:40. > :22:44.Murdoch, but precious little for opponents of this bid or for this

:22:44. > :22:47.House. If, has been suggested on his behalf in the media, he was

:22:47. > :22:51.negotiating with Murdoch, why didn't he tell the opponents to the

:22:51. > :22:54.bid and why didn't he tell the House? Will he tell the House now

:22:54. > :22:59.whether he believed himself to be negotiating, is that what he says

:22:59. > :23:06.is going on? On 3rd March he told this House that he had published

:23:06. > :23:09.details of all the exchanges between his department and News

:23:09. > :23:15.Corporation. In the light of all the information that we now know

:23:15. > :23:19.that Fred Michel had, does he still maintain that's the case? His

:23:19. > :23:26.special advisor has admitted that his activities at times went too

:23:26. > :23:29.far and he has resigned. But will the Secretary of State confirm that

:23:29. > :23:35.under paragraph 33 of the Ministerial code, it is the

:23:35. > :23:38.Secretary of State himself who is responsible for the conduct of his

:23:38. > :23:43.special advisor? Mr Speaker, this was a controversial bid. He could

:23:43. > :23:47.have refused to take it on, but he didn't. He could have referred it

:23:47. > :23:51.to the Competition Commission, but he didn't. His role was to be

:23:51. > :23:55.impartial, but he wasn't. His conduct should have been quasi-

:23:55. > :24:00.judicial, but it fell far, far short of that. And fell short of

:24:00. > :24:05.the standards required by his office. The reality is that he

:24:05. > :24:10.wasn't judging this bid, he was backing this bid and so should

:24:10. > :24:13.resign. Harriet Harman asking questions off

:24:13. > :24:16.Jeremy Hunt after he made his statement. This morning, it's like

:24:16. > :24:21.waiting for a bus, nothing happens and three come at once. While we

:24:21. > :24:27.have been broadcasting all of that, Rupert Murdoch has continued to to

:24:27. > :24:31.testify to the Leveson Inquiry. We are going to keep our panel for a

:24:32. > :24:35.few moments. Jo, give us an update. We are going to find out more on

:24:35. > :24:38.what Rupert Murdoch has been saying, that had been going on just before

:24:38. > :24:42.Prime Minister's questions. He was giving evidence to the Leveson

:24:42. > :24:45.Inquiry and they had actually focused at the Royal Courts of

:24:45. > :24:49.Justice on relations between Rupert Murdoch and previous Prime

:24:49. > :24:51.Ministers over the decades. We left it when he was talking about

:24:51. > :24:56.relationships with Margaret Thatcher. Our correspondent Adam

:24:56. > :24:59.Fleming has been watching and I believe they've moved on to to

:24:59. > :25:04.relations between Rupert Murdoch and the former Labour leader Tony

:25:04. > :25:08.Blair. Yes, in the last hour, Rupert Murdoch's been talking about

:25:08. > :25:10.that period running up to the 97 election where the News

:25:10. > :25:15.International titles decided to swing their support behind Tony

:25:15. > :25:20.Blair. It's resembled a book club at times, they've been quoting from

:25:20. > :25:24.books, diaries, books by Lance Price as well, and one by someone

:25:24. > :25:28.called Andrew Neil who used to work for Rupert Murdoch. Who is he!

:25:28. > :25:31.They've been talking about why Rupert Murdoch changed his mind. He

:25:31. > :25:36.said he got to know Tony Blair and decided to make the endorsement of

:25:37. > :25:40.Tony Blair when Mr Blair wrote a eurosceptic editorial piece for the

:25:40. > :25:44.Sun and that was when the Sun decided to support Mr Blair. He

:25:44. > :25:49.denied there was any deal done with Mr Blair in return for that support,

:25:49. > :25:52.he said if there had Tony Blair chucked it out the window by

:25:52. > :25:57.creatinging Ofcom which had powers to interfere with BSkyB and they've

:25:57. > :26:01.moved from the Blair era to the Brown era in the last few minutes.

:26:01. > :26:04.Interesting, I have to say. But not exactly surprising. I am not quite

:26:04. > :26:07.sure of the relevance of going through all this questioning of

:26:07. > :26:12.past relations with Prime Ministers. I think they're trying to establish

:26:12. > :26:17.a pattern as to what the relationship was between press

:26:17. > :26:21.proprietors and politicians from the left and right. What is the

:26:21. > :26:25.reply to the Harriet Harman point that under the Ministerial code

:26:25. > :26:27.Ministers are responsible for the behaviour of their special advisers.

:26:28. > :26:33.That's absolutely true but Ministers are responsible for the

:26:33. > :26:36.terms of of reference they set hout how special advisers should act. A

:26:36. > :26:39.Minister cannot know at all times if he employs a special advisor and

:26:39. > :26:42.they're doing nothing wrong, that would be ridiculous. Jeremy Hunt

:26:42. > :26:47.would be at fault if it were to be shown he had instructed Adam myth

:26:47. > :26:50.to act inappropriately. I am certain he has not done so. Last

:26:50. > :26:54.night Jeremy Hunt was telling colleagues his special advisor had

:26:54. > :26:58.done nothing wrong. That was my first question. I think there is

:26:58. > :27:02.something important here, if on the publication of these e-mails there

:27:02. > :27:07.had been a look of shock and horror, my goodness what has been done in

:27:07. > :27:12.our name, in my office, out you go, that's one thing. But if the

:27:12. > :27:15.message coming from Whitehall all day is actually there's nothing

:27:15. > :27:19.incriminating, lots embarrassing, that doesn't look great, but

:27:19. > :27:22.nothing wrong. And then hours later you say the following morning,

:27:22. > :27:27.after perhaps a little intervention from someone in Whitehall or indeed

:27:27. > :27:31.from treat, no, no, the special advisor has to go. Some explanation

:27:32. > :27:36.is required as to how you move from position one to two. A lot of

:27:36. > :27:42.unravelling to go yet. Mary Creagh, you need to pick the Guess the Year

:27:42. > :27:52.winner. I want to know whether David Cameron had a chat with James

:27:52. > :27:54.

:27:54. > :27:59.Murdoch. There we go. 1952.

:27:59. > :28:04.The year there. Graham Sowter from Blackburn.

:28:04. > :28:09.Could be Bradford if you are George Galloway, I think it's Blackburn.

:28:09. > :28:14.He is the one who has won. A couple of seconds. The final 30 seconds on

:28:14. > :28:17.this whole business, on the Jeremy Hunt situation. It's clear from the

:28:17. > :28:21.e-mails Jeremy Hunt had to build political cover on the process.

:28:21. > :28:24.When he talks about the process he carried out he was building his own

:28:24. > :28:27.cover. The tide of scandal is lapping at his feet and the

:28:27. > :28:31.question is also about David Cameron. What was he he doing

:28:31. > :28:39.discussing the bid in the fringes of the dinner party at Rebekah

:28:39. > :28:46.Brooks house? I would like an answer, I would have like to be

:28:46. > :28:50.there actually! Thank you all of you for doing here today. 1 o'clock

:28:50. > :28:55.news is starting on BBC1 now. We will be back tomorrow at noon with