:00:05. > :00:11.updated on out breaking news coming from Toulouse. But now it is time
:00:11. > :00:21.for HARDtalk. Politics is a rough business. My guest has the scars to
:00:21. > :00:24.
:00:24. > :00:28.prove it. John Prescott, now Lord Prescott, was Deputy Prime Minister
:00:28. > :00:31.during the prime ministership of Tony Blair. During his time in that
:00:31. > :00:34.Labour government, his phone was hacked by an investigator working
:00:34. > :00:37.for the News of the World. The hacking scandal has prompted a
:00:37. > :00:47.fierce debate on the press, the police and the practice of politics.
:00:47. > :01:05.
:01:05. > :01:09.When the talk is done, what will John Prescott, welcome to HARDtalk.
:01:09. > :01:14.Are you confident that the media culture that led to the widespread
:01:15. > :01:20.phone hacking that we now know about has been banished for good?
:01:20. > :01:29.wish I could say yes to that. I don't think the media is going to
:01:29. > :01:33.change. The social network system has taken readers away from them
:01:33. > :01:43.and they are desperate to keep that up front. They want to keep the
:01:43. > :01:46.
:01:46. > :01:50.influence on politicians. Murdoch has not changed this for some he
:01:50. > :01:52.want favours from politicians. It is absolutely crucial that the
:01:52. > :01:55.Leveson committee recommends fundamental change and politicians
:01:55. > :01:58.have got the guts to implement it. We should explain - the Leveson
:01:58. > :02:08.committee sees a senior judge leading an inquiry into the
:02:08. > :02:09.
:02:09. > :02:15.practices of the press and considering how it could change.
:02:15. > :02:19.Does there have to be fundamental change? There needs to be greater
:02:19. > :02:22.transparency and accountability. The press took the view that
:02:22. > :02:25.whatever they did, they were the ones to make the judgement.
:02:25. > :02:33.Unfortunately my own government in 1997 did not bring in an
:02:33. > :02:40.independent press complaints procedure. They have had a separate
:02:40. > :02:49.one which they control as editors and it has led to this. Nothing
:02:49. > :02:55.like this would have happened if that was implemented. That is what
:02:55. > :02:59.is so curious. There were criminal acts and when they first found out
:02:59. > :03:04.they said it was one reporter, one paper. The law is there to prevent
:03:04. > :03:08.that happening. You can implement the law. In many cases I wanted to
:03:08. > :03:18.sue the press against something said about me as a liar. They said,
:03:18. > :03:22.
:03:22. > :03:27."Well, sue us". They have all the money and the resources. To be able
:03:27. > :03:31.to do that and not pay the bill. The press have been lying and have
:03:31. > :03:38.had content with influence over politicians and within the police.
:03:38. > :03:45.You keep referring to the press. These are allegations that centre
:03:45. > :03:51.on the News of the World from the years 2000 to 2007. I do not think
:03:51. > :03:55.it is just the News of the World. It was the Times that said they
:03:55. > :04:05.misled the judge, did not give the full information. Other newspapers,
:04:05. > :04:08.
:04:08. > :04:13.sometimes the television as well. I hope they will open that up so we
:04:13. > :04:17.can get a clear and transparent idea of what has happened. The fact
:04:17. > :04:21.is that the News of the World is dead, finished and gone. If people
:04:21. > :04:31.like Rupert Murdoch learn lessons, surely that is more powerful as a
:04:31. > :04:32.
:04:32. > :04:41.motivator. He has the Sun on Sunday, a newspaper in place of it, run by
:04:41. > :04:49.the same people. You have had an apology. It was difficult to get an
:04:49. > :04:53.apology, I was able to pursue them without having to cover the cost.
:04:53. > :05:00.On the judicial inquiries I brought about, the first was opposed by the
:05:00. > :05:10.police and then... We will get to the police in a moment. They all
:05:10. > :05:10.
:05:11. > :05:19.lied! Why did you settle with the Murdoch empire in the end? Why did
:05:19. > :05:26.you agree? I went through judicial review. I wanted the police to
:05:26. > :05:32.admit they were wrong, hiding the evidence. The civic case, a group
:05:32. > :05:37.of people and they settled and found they had to make an apology.
:05:37. > :05:43.That was after lying, hiding evidence, denying everything. It
:05:43. > :05:47.did not come freely. When we got to the stage of them settling damages,
:05:47. > :05:57.they knew they were breaking the law day and night, in contempt of
:05:57. > :05:59.
:06:00. > :06:03.it and trying to hide it. Mr Murdoch is still there. Some of the
:06:03. > :06:07.allegations you have made are being investigated by the police. They
:06:07. > :06:10.have to make major investigations. Until they have published their
:06:10. > :06:16.findings we can't be sure exactly what is an allegation and what is
:06:17. > :06:20.the truth. That is true. But all of the evidence came from the
:06:20. > :06:30.newspapers themselves. The police forced them, they did not give the
:06:30. > :06:30.
:06:30. > :06:36.information willingly. Even Mr Murdoch denied it to the
:06:36. > :06:40.parliamentary committee. These are not people who are really sorry.
:06:40. > :06:49.Your passion is obvious. How far do you believe the change has to go?
:06:49. > :06:52.You talk about ending voluntary codes of conduct. Do you want to
:06:52. > :06:55.see a statutory body with very tough rules and a register for
:06:55. > :07:01.journalists, like doctors and other professionals, so if they misbehave
:07:01. > :07:11.they are passed up, struck off? you are talking about the Press
:07:11. > :07:13.
:07:13. > :07:18.Complaints Commission, that was totally... Everybody accepts that
:07:18. > :07:21.now. They did not before. We have to change it. We made the mistake
:07:21. > :07:25.not making them independent. The press argued for, they wanted
:07:25. > :07:28.control of the body. Now we must go back to a regulated framework where
:07:28. > :07:37.the Press Complaints Commission can take up action against the press
:07:37. > :07:47.themselves. These are the frameworks being considered at the
:07:47. > :07:48.
:07:48. > :07:51.moment. It has to be independent, it has to have sanctions. Maybe
:07:51. > :07:56.people watching this around the world would wish that their own
:07:56. > :08:00.media culture was as free as that of Britain. They wonder if there is
:08:00. > :08:02.a danger that the very essence of the British press, that it is free
:08:02. > :08:12.to ask difficult questions and difficult investigations, that the
:08:12. > :08:13.
:08:13. > :08:17.spirit could be lost. In Bristol they found a person and said they
:08:17. > :08:23.are guilty and stuck them on the front of the papers... I can quote
:08:23. > :08:30.you many of the triumphs of investigative journalism...
:08:30. > :08:37.they accountable for what they put on their pages? No, they are not.
:08:37. > :08:43.If they get an apology they put it on page 22. We need to get an
:08:43. > :08:46.understanding of fairness. The press have shown themselves to be
:08:46. > :08:52.utterly contemptuous of law and regulation. We want an independent
:08:52. > :09:02.body to give an independent assessment. Those with a complaint
:09:02. > :09:10.should be able to go to a body that they can have confidence in. Do you
:09:10. > :09:17.except that Michael Gove said the danger is? He says the cure could
:09:17. > :09:27.be worse than the disease. In the end we undermine our freedom of the
:09:27. > :09:28.
:09:28. > :09:38.press by trying to control it. do you decide, who is the one that
:09:38. > :09:43.
:09:43. > :09:52.says "That is a breach of that person's privacy?" The press argue
:09:52. > :09:58.it should be the editors. Our law says it should be a judge. What do
:09:58. > :10:02.you prefer? I prefer a judge. mention privacy and it is a grey
:10:02. > :10:05.area. I imagine thinking of your own case - you have been open that
:10:05. > :10:09.you had an affair, a sexual relationship with another member of
:10:09. > :10:15.staff in your department when you were a minister, going back to 2002.
:10:15. > :10:18.In the end it was a splash story in the newspapers in 2006. Under your
:10:18. > :10:25.new institutions, guarantees of privacy, are you saying it should
:10:25. > :10:27.privacy, are you saying it should have been kept out? I have to face
:10:27. > :10:34.have been kept out? I have to face up to the consequences, have to be
:10:34. > :10:39.accountable, I don't have a problem. When there is a clear breach of
:10:39. > :10:43.someone's rights... You had no problem... I had an affair, if you
:10:43. > :10:53.like, with this person which the press found out about and then sold
:10:53. > :10:55.
:10:55. > :11:05.the story. You talk about private rights - they buy those stories,
:11:05. > :11:10.
:11:10. > :11:15.they sell them every day of the week. It takes eight willing seller.
:11:15. > :11:18.== a. In this case the woman you had an affair with was a willing
:11:19. > :11:22.seller. I did not complain about that. I did not object. What I say
:11:22. > :11:29.when there is a breach, there should be an independent assessment
:11:29. > :11:32.if you are complaining against it. The present Press Complaints
:11:32. > :11:42.Commission accepted all of the arguments of the media, this was a
:11:42. > :11:43.
:11:43. > :11:53.rogue story and a rogue paper. talk about the cosy relationship
:11:53. > :11:54.
:11:54. > :11:57.newspapers and politicians have had. Would you agree that Tony Blair was
:11:57. > :12:07.one of the prime examples of politicians too close to media
:12:07. > :12:19.
:12:19. > :12:23.barons? Yes. Are used to tell him that. -- buy. -- I. The same for
:12:23. > :12:26.Gordon Brown as well. These people - I will have nothing to do with
:12:26. > :12:29.them. They are seeking influence for their own interest. Politicians
:12:29. > :12:33.tend to believe... I believe it gets too close. When you learnt in
:12:33. > :12:35.2010 that Tony Blair went to Jordan to participate in a christening
:12:35. > :12:38.ceremony for one of Rupert Murdoch's daughters and was
:12:38. > :12:48.nominated as godfather, at the same time you were digging into the
:12:48. > :12:53.
:12:53. > :13:00.Murdoch papers intercepting your phone calls, what did you feel?
:13:00. > :13:07.kept saying the same to all people I had close contact with. I even
:13:07. > :13:17.said to David Cameron that he was too close to Murdoch. You work with
:13:17. > :13:20.
:13:20. > :13:29.Tony Blair. How do you feel about I would rather tease out your
:13:29. > :13:32.feelings. I told them time and time again. For example, in the
:13:32. > :13:37.relationship between Gordon Brown and Tony Blair, it was a sensitive
:13:37. > :13:43.one. Tony Blair used to tell me something that Brown was really
:13:43. > :13:49.saying because he had met someone who had dinner with him. Rebekah
:13:49. > :13:53.Brooks used to play these two off each other. I used to say to them,
:13:53. > :13:56.why do you take any notice of her for? It was the relationship of
:13:56. > :14:03.feeling that Murdoch was powerful and producing the possibility of
:14:03. > :14:12.They took more notice of her than they did have you. You're asking me
:14:12. > :14:16.about the Murdoch influence. I was wondering about the sense of
:14:16. > :14:20.betrayal you probably now have? have spent 40 years in politics. I
:14:20. > :14:24.call the issue as I see it. Sometimes I win, sometimes I lose,
:14:24. > :14:33.but I never give up saying what I believe. You also believe that the
:14:33. > :14:37.Met Police lied to you for years. That is what is going out in the
:14:37. > :14:41.Leveson Inquiry. They used to say that there was no tapping, then the
:14:41. > :14:49.police came along saying, we have a new inquiry and you have had your
:14:49. > :14:53.phone tapped 44 times. What do you say to that? There is one aspect
:14:53. > :14:57.that intrigues me. A senior Scotland Yard officer told the Home
:14:57. > :14:59.Secretary at the time that you and a few other Cabinet ministers were
:14:59. > :15:09.under surveillance from private investigators working for News of
:15:09. > :15:14.
:15:14. > :15:24.the World. You never knew that. I did not. You read the papers, he
:15:24. > :15:24.
:15:24. > :15:31.denied it. It is not just a question of him, but notes were
:15:31. > :15:35.sent to the cabinet officers and MI5. Mr Clarke said it was more
:15:35. > :15:40.important to pursue terrorism. Nobody could be killed by listening
:15:40. > :15:44.to a message on a phone. He said his problem was security. So the
:15:44. > :15:52.judge said, why did you not tell us that Prescott was a name on the
:15:52. > :15:57.inquiry? The inspector said, we'd better investigate. Somebody said
:15:57. > :16:03.no. Clarkson said, it is not my job to tell Prescott so he told the
:16:03. > :16:08.government. He sent me e-mails that he sent to the government. He was
:16:08. > :16:11.looking into it. But did your government cover this
:16:11. > :16:19.up because they wanted to retain a warm relationship with Murdoch?
:16:19. > :16:23.do not think for a second. What do you think about that one? I don't
:16:23. > :16:29.act without evidence. Everything I've given you, I quote the
:16:29. > :16:33.evidence for you. In this case, Mr Clarke is said that, Mr Reid said
:16:33. > :16:43.no, if they did know it was a Cabinet member, his job would be to
:16:43. > :16:44.
:16:44. > :16:54.tell the Prime Minister. Mr Levison said has now asked for the emails.
:16:54. > :16:56.
:16:56. > :17:03.He will no doubt get to the bottom of it. A final thought on the
:17:03. > :17:09.police. You have decided to run as a police Commissioner, one of the
:17:09. > :17:12.newly elected ones come November. In the past, you have expressed
:17:12. > :17:22.grave doubts about politicising the police by putting elected officials
:17:22. > :17:22.
:17:23. > :17:27.into the system. So why on earth do you now want the job? Look at it
:17:27. > :17:32.this way. I have seen what I have seen between the met police and
:17:32. > :17:36.politicians there may well be a framework of corruption. I do not
:17:36. > :17:40.think that should happen. putting a partisan politician on
:17:40. > :17:44.top of the police will solve the problem? Isn't the Home Secretary a
:17:44. > :17:49.partisan and politician? But he does not get involved in day-to-day
:17:49. > :17:54.police activities. We will see how far police are involved in this
:17:54. > :18:01.process. The chief commissioner was having lunch with the people he was
:18:01. > :18:06.investigating. That is quite unusual. They have now decided they
:18:06. > :18:11.will be an election. We as a party and have decided we will contest
:18:11. > :18:14.this. We will fight the elections and to try to make that new
:18:14. > :18:24.framework between the police and community and to become the voice
:18:24. > :18:25.
:18:25. > :18:29.of the community. I will have a go at that. Your own constituency
:18:29. > :18:31.might be quite confused because not long ago, you said you opposed the
:18:31. > :18:35.idea of bettering the operational independence with an elected
:18:35. > :18:45.official, and now you say, the police argue that what they do is
:18:45. > :18:46.
:18:46. > :18:56.operational and politicians should not be involved. You are confused.
:18:56. > :18:57.
:18:57. > :19:02.Let me explain. Give me a chance to explain. The police have the right
:19:02. > :19:05.of operational functions. Here are committees, should they have
:19:05. > :19:11.everything or do you want someone responsible for the community, do
:19:11. > :19:14.you not negotiate would you think the priorities are? Secondly, in my
:19:14. > :19:24.judicial review, the judge told the police that they should always
:19:24. > :19:24.
:19:24. > :19:34.inform anybody they had evidence of criminal acts against them. The
:19:34. > :19:34.
:19:34. > :19:38.judge has now intervened with that. That is between the Chief of Police
:19:38. > :19:45.and the man who is the elected Commissioner. Between them, they
:19:46. > :19:51.have reduced the plan. That will be the new police policy. You will run
:19:51. > :19:57.on a Labour ticket for the police Commissioner job. But you are seen
:19:57. > :20:06.as one of the most tribal Labour warriors of the last 20 years.
:20:06. > :20:15.Labour is in a mess. Why are they behind the Tories in the polls?
:20:15. > :20:22.is not unusual to be behind in the polls at this present stage. And
:20:22. > :20:26.please let me answer. Give me the courtesy of having a reply. I am
:20:26. > :20:30.saying first of all, it is not unusual for a new leader to be
:20:30. > :20:34.behind. It is up to them to begin to establish their personality, he
:20:34. > :20:42.is right to say, let us see that new framework and he is working on
:20:42. > :20:46.it. It is a big challenge at this point. David Miliband, brother of
:20:46. > :20:56.Ed Miliband, says Labour can't go back to its old ideas of the big
:20:56. > :20:57.
:20:57. > :21:04.state. He says it has to be a party which appeals to business. Right
:21:04. > :21:10.now, business is not backing Labour. Ed Miliband said that first. There
:21:10. > :21:14.were all surprised when he said that at the conference. Now David
:21:15. > :21:19.is coming along when all this was done. He should get a bit more
:21:19. > :21:23.behind the party. But to do you think that analysis is right? There
:21:23. > :21:33.seems to be debate in the party. There are some people calling it
:21:33. > :21:33.
:21:33. > :21:36.class war. It is all about class. Is it? Reducing the benefits of
:21:36. > :21:46.people who are the poorest in society, letting the bankers go
:21:46. > :21:47.
:21:47. > :21:53.free, reducing 50p, it sounds like class warfare to me. The rich are
:21:54. > :22:01.better off, the poor are worse off. Are you saying that Britain is as
:22:01. > :22:05.class-based as it was when you enter politics? Yes! Don't you
:22:05. > :22:13.understand that? Let me give you an example. Look at our education
:22:13. > :22:17.system. 7% of our children go into private schools. They get into the
:22:17. > :22:24.top universities, and all the top jobs in the banks and in insurance
:22:24. > :22:31.from that very small base of 7%. Why do think that comes about? Are
:22:31. > :22:39.those 7% just better educated or is it the old school tie? So what has
:22:39. > :22:42.13 years of Labour actually achieved? Will you settle for 2
:22:43. > :22:50.million more jobs? More money into hospitals and education? That is
:22:50. > :22:57.what I came into politics for. Now the opposite is happening. We're
:22:57. > :23:02.back to 3 million unemployed. is suggesting to me that New Labour
:23:02. > :23:06.did not change the fundamentals of British economics and society.
:23:06. > :23:10.was beginning to change it. Look of the differential between the north
:23:10. > :23:20.and the south economically. We improved it but if you are asking
:23:20. > :23:26.