:00:08. > :00:14.It's like an entire immune system going into violent reaction.
:00:14. > :00:18.Suddenly the politicians who wanted him to smile upon them find Rupert
:00:18. > :00:22.Murdoch repellant. If I was running that company right now, with all of
:00:22. > :00:25.the problems and difficulties and the mess that there is, they should
:00:25. > :00:28.be focusing on clearing those up rather than on the next corporate
:00:28. > :00:31.move. The affliction spread, as other
:00:31. > :00:37.News International papers are accused of invading the privacy of
:00:37. > :00:40.Gordon Brown and his family. Newsnight has new details of how Mr
:00:40. > :00:45.Brown reacted when Rebekah Brooks broke the story of his son's
:00:45. > :00:51.illness. It has happened at the moment Mr
:00:51. > :00:58.Murdoch was poised to take an even bigger role in British life. Can
:00:58. > :01:01.his ambitions survive this deluge of opprobrium.
:01:01. > :01:06.Rumours this afternoon is to save the Sky deal, Murdoch might dump
:01:06. > :01:08.all of his UK newspapers. More accusation that is policemen
:01:08. > :01:11.were corrupted in exchange for informationment
:01:11. > :01:16.Also tonight, enough air conditioning to play football in
:01:16. > :01:21.the desert, how did a country with a smaller population than West
:01:21. > :01:26.Yorkshire persuade FIFA to let them stage the World Cup. The attack on
:01:26. > :01:34.2022 is because it fits the prejudice that people have in their
:01:34. > :01:38.mind, an Arab nation cannot have won.
:01:38. > :01:43.No-one, it seems, was safe from the attention of corrupt journalists.
:01:43. > :01:47.There were allegations today that they even tried to hack the phones
:01:47. > :01:51.of members of the Royal Family, and that reporters from the Sun and
:01:51. > :01:55.Sunday Times, blagged details of Gordon Brown's bank account and of
:01:55. > :01:59.his son's medical reports. David Cameron, meanwhile, stood by his
:01:59. > :02:03.decision to appoint the former editor of the News of the World,
:02:03. > :02:07.Andy Coulson, as his communications director. There is no sign of this
:02:07. > :02:11.scandal diminishing any time soon. First tonight, we have this
:02:11. > :02:15.reportment Today, the hacking story moved on.
:02:15. > :02:21.With new victim, Gordon Brown and his family. New charges, against
:02:21. > :02:25.more Murdoch newspapers. Both broadsheet and tabloid. And the
:02:25. > :02:29.exposure of more unethical methods by members of the press. The Brown
:02:29. > :02:32.revelations came from investigations by the BBC and the
:02:32. > :02:37.Guardian. The first relates to a flat Mr
:02:37. > :02:43.Brown bought in this block in Westminster, in 1992. Eight years
:02:43. > :02:47.later, the Sunday Times ran a story suggesting it was bought for a
:02:47. > :02:51.knock-down sum. The BBC has received a tape of a call to a firm
:02:51. > :03:01.of solicitors, which seems to suggest how the details were
:03:01. > :03:16.
:03:16. > :03:21.The caller, beard beard beard, is known to have been working for the
:03:21. > :03:25.Sunday Times at that time. Another charge is also from 2000,
:03:25. > :03:32.that someone rang the Abbey National in Bradford six times, and
:03:32. > :03:35.got details of Mr Brown's account. The Ab by-election y wrote to him
:03:35. > :03:41.warning him somebody was pretending to be him, a letter was sent to the
:03:41. > :03:49.Sunday Times too, the Abbey never got firm proof that the paper was
:03:49. > :03:57.behind the calls. The worst charges are about Gordon Brown's son Fraser,
:03:57. > :04:01.born in 2006, the Brown's think that the front page story that he
:04:01. > :04:06.had cystic fibrosis, came from his medical records. These are serious
:04:06. > :04:12.allegations, indeed many Members of Parliament and like many members of
:04:12. > :04:15.the public I'm shocked and horrified that people could do this
:04:15. > :04:19.to Gordon and his family, it is extremely serious and needs to be
:04:19. > :04:23.looked at with urgency. Tonight Gordon Brown said his family were
:04:23. > :04:28.shocked by the scale of law breaking and intrusion into their
:04:28. > :04:34.private lives. He is expected to do an interview tomorrow.
:04:34. > :04:37.It all seemed to happen today in one extraordinary mad rush around
:04:37. > :04:42.4.00. Not long after those revelations about what may have
:04:42. > :04:46.happened to Gordon Brown and his family started trickling out over
:04:46. > :04:49.the Internet, came the extraordinary news from News
:04:49. > :04:55.Corporation, that they are withdrawing their undertakings
:04:56. > :05:00.about spinning off Sky News. That, only minutes before the Culture
:05:00. > :05:05.Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, was due to address MPs about the future of the
:05:05. > :05:09.News Corporation bid for Sky. Whilst at the same time, David
:05:09. > :05:15.Cameron was six miles away in Canary Wharf, fielding questions
:05:15. > :05:19.from journalists. The PM sent a clear warning to the
:05:19. > :05:23.Murdochs, don't think of taking over Sky until you have cleaned up
:05:24. > :05:27.your act. All I would say is this, if I was running that company right
:05:27. > :05:31.now, with all of the problems and the difficulties, and the mess,
:05:31. > :05:34.frankly, that there is, they should be focused on clearing those up
:05:34. > :05:40.rather than on the next corporate move. That is the view I would take
:05:40. > :05:43.if I was running that company. at the house it was Ed Miliband who
:05:43. > :05:49.wanted to grill Cameron about Sky, but the PM passed the issue to
:05:49. > :05:55.Jeremy Hunt. And now Hunt suddenly had to cope
:05:55. > :06:01.with the dramatic news from the Murdochs. I understand that in the
:06:01. > :06:08.last few minutes News Corporation have withdrawn their undertakings
:06:08. > :06:12.in news. On January 25th, John January 25th I said I was minded to
:06:12. > :06:17.refer News Corporation's proposed merging to buy BSkyB, to the
:06:17. > :06:21.Competition Commission, in the absence of any specific
:06:21. > :06:26.undertakings in lieu. As a result of News Corporation's announcement
:06:26. > :06:31.this afternoon, I will refer this to the Competition Commission, with
:06:31. > :06:35.immediate effect. And will be writing to them this afternoon.
:06:35. > :06:40.wasn't Cameron there to answer questions himself, Labour wanted to
:06:40. > :06:45.know? Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister was wrong not to come to
:06:45. > :06:50.the House of Commons today. As on every occasion during this crisis,
:06:50. > :06:56.he has failed to show the necessary leadership the country expects. He
:06:56. > :07:02.saw no need for a judicial inquiry, he saw no need to change course on
:07:02. > :07:06.BSkyB, and he has failed to come clean on Andy Coulson. This is a
:07:06. > :07:10.Prime Minister running scared. Some stories think Rupert Murdoch
:07:11. > :07:17.shouldn't just wait for the Competition Commission, but ditch
:07:17. > :07:21.the BSkyB all together. I know it is very unusual for people in the
:07:21. > :07:25.position of Mr Murdoch to behave honourably and simply with decency,
:07:25. > :07:32.but he ought to recognise what's gone on in his organisation, why
:07:32. > :07:36.there is doubt about its integrity and he ought to withdraw the bid
:07:36. > :07:40.for BSkyB, just leave it. Only three weeks ago both Cameron and
:07:40. > :07:43.Miliband were happily drinking with Rupert Murdoch at his summer bash.
:07:43. > :07:52.The mood has change today dramatically, you would be hard
:07:52. > :07:56.pressed now to find any politician who would want to be seen there.
:07:56. > :08:00.I gather you have new information tonight? Newsnight has been talking
:08:00. > :08:06.to one of Gordon Brown's senior colleagues from his days in Downing
:08:06. > :08:11.Street, who has told us how in 2006, in the autumn, the office received
:08:11. > :08:18.a phone call, that somebody from, the political editor of the Sun
:08:18. > :08:26.rang to say that the paper had a tip-off from Edinburgh infirmary,
:08:26. > :08:30.from somebody inside, that Fraser had cystic fibrosis. This was right
:08:30. > :08:34.in the middle of the Pre-Budget Report. Gordon Brown acted very
:08:34. > :08:40.badly, how could they know, how could they report it, how was that
:08:40. > :08:43.in the public interest, he wouldn't let them make a story out of his
:08:43. > :08:47.son's illness. Mr Brown was concerned it would come out in a
:08:47. > :08:53.positive way, not in a way that would be described as tragic or
:08:53. > :08:59.heart-breaking. Mr Brown wanted to issue a pre-emptive statement to
:08:59. > :09:03.stop the Sun coming out with an exclusive story on this. Whereupon
:09:03. > :09:10.Rebekah Brooks phoned up Paul McBride, Gordon Brown's press
:09:10. > :09:13.spokesman, and - Damien McBride and got heavy on it, saying there was
:09:13. > :09:16.no justification of a pre-emptive story and this was not the way
:09:16. > :09:23.things were done, she was frightened Gordon Brown would stop
:09:23. > :09:26.the Sun exclusive, in the end the Sun managed to get the story out by
:09:26. > :09:29.being interviewed on Sky News, and Gordon Brown did manage to issue
:09:29. > :09:35.the positive statement about the situation a few minutes later.
:09:35. > :09:38.With us now are the Labour MP, Tom Watson, who has unearthed many of
:09:39. > :09:44.the allegations against News International, and the former press
:09:44. > :09:47.secretary to David Cameron. You are a very good friend of Gordon Brown,
:09:47. > :09:53.how significant is this story about his son? I didn't know about it
:09:53. > :09:58.until I actually saw it today. But, I wouldn't want that kind of thing
:09:58. > :10:02.about my children slapped all over the papers, and I would be very
:10:02. > :10:10.upset if it came out. It is yet another tragic story in this saga
:10:10. > :10:15.that isn't over. And yet, having had that done to him, he still went
:10:15. > :10:18.to Rebekah Brooks's wedding? Yeah, isn't that the weird thing about
:10:18. > :10:21.politics. You are on this tread mill, you have to do these things.
:10:21. > :10:24.There is a sense he has a big responsibility, he has to win
:10:24. > :10:27.elections and a lot of people behind him. He probably didn't want
:10:27. > :10:34.to go to the wedding but felt he had to. You will have to ask him
:10:34. > :10:38.why he went. This frankly twaudry relationship between politicians,
:10:38. > :10:43.not just of your party but all parties and this particular empire
:10:43. > :10:46.is being increatesingly exposed isn't it? Yeah, and the good that
:10:46. > :10:51.is already coming out of this, we have to get the criminals in jail.
:10:51. > :10:58.But the good coming out of it is those days are over. The
:10:58. > :11:02.familiarity between these people is going to be reduced. If you ask for
:11:02. > :11:06.the Prime Minister's diary, when Rupert Murdoch visits Number Ten,
:11:06. > :11:09.if he goes downstairs it is published, but if he has a private
:11:09. > :11:12.meeting in the flat it is considered a private meeting. Those
:11:12. > :11:17.silly little arrangements have to stop. Do you think this is a
:11:17. > :11:23.turning point? I do, I think we have a real problem, it has gone on
:11:23. > :11:28.for decades, swaggering editors and newspaper proprietor, cutting
:11:28. > :11:32.across newspaper editorials of their newspapers, it is counter-
:11:32. > :11:38.productive and undermined journalism itself. If what comes
:11:38. > :11:43.out of it is a proper regulatory framework, and the kind you have in
:11:43. > :11:53.broadcasting and on the print press it would be a good outcome. There
:11:53. > :11:53.
:11:53. > :11:59.is nothing new, Tom Baldwin, the prerogative of the harlot, this is
:11:59. > :12:03.since newspapers began. Why did David Cameron hire Andy Coulson?
:12:03. > :12:09.was going to explain. There was a very concerted attempt not to play
:12:09. > :12:13.this game, to keep the media at arm's length to focus on an agenda.
:12:13. > :12:17.By hiring a tabloid editor? What happened is in 2007 there was a
:12:17. > :12:20.feeling that actually there would be an election immediately. Gordon
:12:20. > :12:25.Brown would do everything to get headlines for the next day, there
:12:25. > :12:30.was a modification in that approach. That may have been wrong. All I'm
:12:30. > :12:36.saying now is. What you call a modification is an abandonment of
:12:36. > :12:40.what you said would be a new policy? Not an abandonment, but not
:12:40. > :12:45.putting them at arm's length. was a mistake? With hindsight it
:12:45. > :12:48.was. To be fair, both parties on this have had a problem. Alastair
:12:48. > :12:51.Campbell, for the best part of ten years was telling Tony Blair that
:12:51. > :12:55.we needed to do something about the media, and he was right. There was
:12:55. > :13:01.a period where actually there was a cross-party consensus on this, that
:13:01. > :13:04.broke in 200. Now, from where we are, if something good comes out it
:13:04. > :13:09.means proper regulation of the media. Once and for all we can put
:13:09. > :13:13.the profession of journalism into a I hooer plain. Everyone is
:13:13. > :13:17.incredibly pious at a time of embarrassment like this. Let's try
:13:17. > :13:22.to engage with practical mechanisms, for how this relationship, which
:13:22. > :13:26.has been the dominant feature of what has come out today. This
:13:26. > :13:30.relationship between a particular media empire, but let's say all
:13:30. > :13:35.media empires and politicians ought to be reconstructed? Yeah, get rid
:13:35. > :13:39.of the PCC and rebuild it. No Press Complaints Commission? You need
:13:39. > :13:45.independent representation on a new body. You need sanction that is
:13:45. > :13:49.people would volunteer to so when an editor make as mistake and is
:13:49. > :13:53.guilty of a wrongdoing they can oblige the paper to put it right.
:13:53. > :13:56.You need far more transparency at the heart of Government. These
:13:56. > :14:06.private sessions needing to. Do you think there should be a requirement
:14:06. > :14:09.to make it public? The meetings between owners and editors. When a
:14:09. > :14:15.proprietor meets someone in Downing Street. They will get around it by
:14:15. > :14:21.sending a flunky? They may try to get round the world, now Rupert
:14:21. > :14:28.Murdoch can go in the back passage and have a meeting in the Number
:14:28. > :14:35.Ten flat and no-one knows about it, that is remarkable. You have to
:14:35. > :14:39.separate proprietors from their editorial and decisions, you don't
:14:39. > :14:43.have them dictating what to do. Because there is a proper code, if
:14:43. > :14:47.you break the code you have to put it right. The other really
:14:47. > :14:52.tarnished outfit to come out of this so far, and doubtless there
:14:53. > :14:58.may be many more, is the police, who are both incompetent, and some
:14:58. > :15:02.of them corrupt. What should happen to Assistant Commissioner Yates?
:15:02. > :15:06.John Yates misled parliament, he was task today review this 2006
:15:06. > :15:09.evidence, within that evidence was the signs that Milly Dowler's phone
:15:09. > :15:13.had been hacked and the Soham families were in there, he came to
:15:13. > :15:19.parliament and said there was no new evidence. I think his position
:15:19. > :15:22.is untenable. He should be sacked? He should resign with dignity.
:15:22. > :15:26.have certainly questions to answer the police, the fact that they had
:15:26. > :15:31.access to this information, the only ones that did and they didn't
:15:31. > :15:39.take it. Do you have confidence in John Yates? I don't, personally.
:15:39. > :15:45.you think he should resign? position is not good, frankly, yeah.
:15:45. > :15:48.Commercial confidence in Rupert Murdoch is leaking like a sieve,
:15:48. > :15:52.shares in BSkyB dropped again today, as did the shares in the American
:15:52. > :15:56.operation. In the long and inglorious history of newspaper
:15:56. > :16:00.Barons there have occasionally been some who are sane and decent, they
:16:00. > :16:03.are comfortably outnumbered by the Conrad Blacks and Rupert Murdoch
:16:03. > :16:07.and others. Murdoch claimed to be something different, a newspaper
:16:07. > :16:11.man who happened to become a multimedia tycoon. He never
:16:11. > :16:17.surrendered his close, personal control of his empire. As we report,
:16:17. > :16:21.that is increasingly seen as part of the problem.
:16:21. > :16:26.Rupert Murdoch sits atop a complex British arm of his News Corp
:16:26. > :16:29.operation. His son James oversees the company's European and Asian
:16:29. > :16:33.interests, including News International, that is the company
:16:33. > :16:38.that owns the Times, the Sunday Times and the Sun, and until
:16:38. > :16:42.yesterday, the News of the World, James is also chairman of BSkyB, of
:16:42. > :16:47.which, News Corporation owns 31%, they want to own it all. In an
:16:47. > :16:51.effort to save the deal in which they would get it all they have
:16:51. > :16:55.sacrificed the News of the World. As Rupert Murdoch left his London
:16:55. > :17:03.home today, it was clear this wasn't going to go any where near
:17:03. > :17:13.as swaujing the anger threatening to - assuageing the anger
:17:13. > :17:14.
:17:14. > :17:19.threatening to overcome the deal. They were going to buy off BSkyB,
:17:19. > :17:23.limiting the amount of British news media they were in charge of. This
:17:23. > :17:25.afternoon they withdrew that undertaking, triggering the
:17:25. > :17:30.Competition Commission investigation that they had been
:17:30. > :17:35.working so hard to avoid. Why would they do that? The answer is given,
:17:35. > :17:38.where they are now, given the position that they can see going
:17:38. > :17:47.forward, getting a Competition Commission investigation is about
:17:47. > :17:49.the best position they can hope to be in. I think they are giving it
:17:49. > :17:53.time and letting things quieten down while the Competition
:17:53. > :17:57.Commission does their job, hopefully that will deal with
:17:57. > :18:02.questions about whether or not News Corp is a fit and proper
:18:03. > :18:05.organisation to hold this license. Once that is all dying down the
:18:05. > :18:09.Competition Commission will have progressed and hopefully find in
:18:09. > :18:13.favour of the ablgquigs. Then it will go ahead, with nobody really
:18:13. > :18:17.complaining that much. That question of whether News Corp
:18:17. > :18:20.executives are fit and proper people to be involved in
:18:20. > :18:25.broadcasting is another headache for the company. A question to be
:18:25. > :18:29.judged by offcome. Up until 2010 Stuart Purves was in charge of
:18:29. > :18:34.standards for Ofcom. If you were to decide today, that members of the
:18:34. > :18:39.BSkyB, because of their connection say with News International, not
:18:39. > :18:44.many have one, but some do, that they were not fit and proper people,
:18:44. > :18:48.how can they hold the BSkyB license today. You have to say what will be
:18:48. > :18:53.done about the present BSkyB license, put aside the acquisition.
:18:53. > :19:03.The American side of the Murdoch empire may prove problematic. Now
:19:03. > :19:05.
:19:05. > :19:11.running the Dow Jones in the wall treat journal, Les Hinton was in
:19:11. > :19:16.charge there at the alleged time of bribes. Even if he wasn't in charge,
:19:16. > :19:22.the company could full foul of the American law. In the US law you can
:19:22. > :19:26.be found liable for an FTCA accusation. For anyone acted within
:19:26. > :19:30.the scope of their employment makes payments intended to benefit at
:19:30. > :19:35.least in part the business organisation. So there really are
:19:35. > :19:41.potentially two pronging of this investigation from a US standpoint
:19:41. > :19:44.if it doesn't sue, the kprot level, or perhaps, although we don't know
:19:44. > :19:49.at this point as to culpable individuals. James Murdoch, some
:19:49. > :19:55.believe, could be vulnerable too, he approved huge payments to the
:19:55. > :20:01.victims of hacking. You embarked on a sustained and deliberate cover-up,
:20:01. > :20:07.this is the ago saying, because you knew how terrible it was and you -
:20:07. > :20:17.this is what people are saying, because you knew how terrible it
:20:17. > :20:21.was. I acted on the advice of executives and lawyers. Within the
:20:21. > :20:26.complete investigation, that is a regret for me. The investigation
:20:26. > :20:30.buys the Murdoch's time, but to do what. The rumour swirling around
:20:30. > :20:34.the Times newspaper this afternoon, is that title might be the subject
:20:35. > :20:38.of the Murdoch's next drastic move. To the guys in New York, this
:20:38. > :20:42.Wapping appears to be in a bit of a time warp, it is about the Murdoch
:20:42. > :20:47.heritage, it is about how he first got into newspapers in Britain,
:20:47. > :20:51.rather than the future of News Corp. It could go? I'm not suggesting it
:20:51. > :20:55.happens today, or in five years time. Maybe if there is a post-
:20:55. > :20:58.Rupert Murdoch moment, who knows when that will be, when the guys in
:20:58. > :21:01.New York actually want to run it as a different kind of company.
:21:01. > :21:06.Remember that the only ground that is the Competition Commission are
:21:06. > :21:11.going to judge the Sky deal on is plurality, that is its impact on
:21:11. > :21:17.the number of distinct voices in British news. If the Murdoch empire
:21:17. > :21:25.gets rid of its British newspaper, well the plurality problem goes
:21:25. > :21:28.away. Michael Wolf is a contributing editor to Vanity Fair,
:21:28. > :21:32.and knows Rupert Murdoch better than most, after spending 50 hours
:21:32. > :21:36.interviewing him and his family for a biography. This talk that we hear
:21:36. > :21:40.over on this side of the Atlantic, that Murdoch might just get rid of
:21:40. > :21:46.all his newspapers here, in order to concentrate on television, does
:21:46. > :21:51.it make sense to you? We hear it on this side of the Atlantic too. What
:21:51. > :21:57.we are hearing is the voice of panic. Nobody knows what to do. I
:21:57. > :22:02.think every scenario is open for discussion. There are also, there
:22:02. > :22:06.has always been a faction within News Corp here that says why do we
:22:06. > :22:11.have these newspapers. Newspapers, British newspapers, makes no sense
:22:11. > :22:17.to us. We own a lot of businesses which are growing, that business is
:22:17. > :22:22.shrinking. So this becomes inside of News Corporation a political
:22:22. > :22:26.moment to say let's get rid of them. In a more general way, it is
:22:26. > :22:32.looking at this crisis, and saying we are really in trouble. It is
:22:32. > :22:35.also looking and saying how do we continue to run the News
:22:35. > :22:44.International. So many of its executives are now utterly
:22:44. > :22:48.discredited. Are you referring to members of his family?
:22:48. > :22:52.referring to Rebekah Brooks, I'm referring to James Murdoch, who
:22:52. > :22:57.obviously has suffered an enormous loss of credibility. Is part of the
:22:57. > :23:03.problem here the way in which Rupert Murdoch runs what is a
:23:03. > :23:09.public company, as if it were a private thiefdom? That is a
:23:09. > :23:12.question that is coming up in this country more and more, that this is
:23:13. > :23:18.an issue of governance. That is a question that will have to go to
:23:18. > :23:23.the board. We now have a situation of course where the Murdochs,
:23:23. > :23:30.people named Murdoch, are not accountable in conventional ways,
:23:30. > :23:34.we have a situation in had which people named Murdoch have and are
:23:34. > :23:37.you suffering a heamorrhage of credibility. I think they are
:23:37. > :23:42.reasonably at the point where this heamorrhage has been so great that
:23:42. > :23:48.you have to ask are these people who caught to be running a great
:23:48. > :23:54.public company. He's a pretty old man now, look 20 years down the
:23:54. > :23:59.road s this going to be a company, do you think, controlled by a
:23:59. > :24:04.Murdoch? You know, I would say, you know a matter of months down the
:24:04. > :24:10.road, this may not be a company controlled by someone named Murdoch.
:24:10. > :24:17.Do you think have any insight into why it is he's so protective of
:24:17. > :24:23.Rebekah Brooks? Well, I do. I think it is a family issue, number one,
:24:23. > :24:33.and remember, the Murdochs see this as a family company. The first
:24:33. > :24:39.issue is what is good for the family. Rebekah is very close to
:24:39. > :24:46.James and close to his daughter Elizabeth and her husband Matthew
:24:46. > :24:55.Freund. I know Murdoch and Rebekah themselves are very close. Rebekah
:24:55. > :24:59.told me the story once about she stopped smoking about - because
:24:59. > :25:06.Murdoch challenged her in a swimming race. If she won she would
:25:06. > :25:14.give up cigarettes. We are talking about a really family intimate
:25:14. > :25:21.relationships. The other aspect of this is that traditionally when
:25:21. > :25:25.someone in News Corp is attacked outside by someone outside the
:25:25. > :25:31.company, they close ranks, they never fire anyone. In the New York
:25:31. > :25:36.post they had to admit that the editor of page 6, Richard Johnson,
:25:36. > :25:45.was taking bribes, being paid to write stories. Richard still works
:25:45. > :25:50.for News Corporation. This is an entire newspaper should
:25:50. > :25:58.down here? Absolutely. They shut down a newspaper so that, in part,
:25:58. > :26:03.the executives could cope their jobs. Do you hear anything about
:26:03. > :26:08.potential lawsuits there? There has been a shareholders lawsuit filed
:26:08. > :26:18.in Delaware today. I expect there will be more suits, of course there
:26:18. > :26:21.will be. What are they trying to claim?
:26:21. > :26:26.are trying to claim that there is a level of unfitness here.
:26:27. > :26:32.Thank you. No-one, neither the Murdoch empire,
:26:32. > :26:36.nor the politicians who courted it, nor journalism, more broadly, is
:26:36. > :26:40.emerging from this scandal smelling good. For the police the smell is
:26:40. > :26:45.especially bad, the best they can get away with are accusations of
:26:45. > :26:49.being feeble and incompetent, at worst our suspicions of corruption
:26:49. > :26:54.and accusation that is individual officers were bought and sold.
:26:54. > :27:00.Scotland Yard got testy today claiming people were trying to
:27:00. > :27:06.wreck the current inquiry that the News of the World tried 0 get phone
:27:06. > :27:10.numbers for the Royal Family by bribing police officers.
:27:10. > :27:14.Once again, the ethics which should underminute the relationship
:27:14. > :27:20.between police and journalists, is under scrutiny as never before.
:27:20. > :27:25.When it works it is symbiotic, hacks need story, police need to
:27:25. > :27:30.investigate. A shrew of allegations in recent days shows the darker
:27:30. > :27:35.side. Any journalist worth his salt will try to persuade police
:27:35. > :27:40.officers to share information, that is what good information is all
:27:40. > :27:45.about. There is a line that can't be crossed. News today that a
:27:45. > :27:50.member of the Royal Protection Squad, has passed on information in
:27:50. > :27:55.return for cash has come as a shock. Personal protection officers travel
:27:55. > :28:01.in the same car as the royals, close ones in back-up vehicles.
:28:01. > :28:05.Others guard buildings. The BBC was told today that News of the World's
:28:05. > :28:15.former royal editor asked his editor, at the time, Andy Coulson,
:28:15. > :28:16.
:28:16. > :28:18.who went on to work for the PM, or �1,000 for a protection officer to
:28:18. > :28:22.give information. There were phone number force the royals and others
:28:22. > :28:28.in the household. It is unforgivable, for a protection
:28:28. > :28:32.officer who is trusted and trusted by the principles themselves,
:28:32. > :28:39.protection comes in variety of different falls. Protecting their
:28:39. > :28:44.personalities and identity is something that all police should
:28:44. > :28:50.sign up to. The story gets so much worse, the e-mail suggesting these
:28:50. > :28:54.payments were made was discovered by the internal investigation in
:28:54. > :28:58.2007. They didn't disclose until last month. The met police have
:28:58. > :29:03.serious questions to answer about the failure of a previous
:29:03. > :29:07.investigation to uncover the truth. John Yates carried out what the
:29:07. > :29:12.home affairs committee referred to as a review in 2009, but decided no
:29:12. > :29:18.further action was needed. He said this so-called review was not a
:29:18. > :29:28.review at all. John Yates said today he suggests he informed the
:29:28. > :29:40.
:29:40. > :29:45.committee he had thoroughly looked I think it is a matter of semantics.
:29:46. > :29:52.When is a review not a review, and when is the checking of facts a
:29:52. > :29:57.review. I think we will need to clarify these questions with John
:29:57. > :29:59.Yates. John Yates is a very experienced police officer, who has
:29:59. > :30:03.held some of the most important jobs in the Metropolitan Police. I
:30:03. > :30:05.think we need to give him the benefit of the doubt until he
:30:05. > :30:10.appears before the committee and plains the difference between the
:30:10. > :30:13.two. He said there were very few victims. He said all the victims
:30:13. > :30:19.had been contacted, he said that all the mobile phone companies had
:30:19. > :30:22.been put on notice in relation to this. All of these things are lies.
:30:22. > :30:25.Some have claimed that senior police officers were too scared at
:30:25. > :30:29.being turned over themselves to tackle News of the World. Something
:30:29. > :30:34.that has always been denied. Can we expect police officers to
:30:34. > :30:38.follow a different moral code to the rest of the law-abiding
:30:38. > :30:41.population. If not, from time to time there will be embarrassing
:30:41. > :30:44.stories about alleged affairs. Are these purely personal matters, or
:30:44. > :30:50.does it lead to the perception that some police officers are open to
:30:50. > :30:57.influence. There is former Assistant
:30:57. > :31:01.Commissioner Andy Hayman who headed the first inquiry in 2006 into
:31:01. > :31:06.phone hacking. He found himself in the headlines over a relationship.
:31:06. > :31:16.The solicitor behind it wrote to the home affairs committee last
:31:16. > :31:42.
:31:42. > :31:45.Mr Hayman didn't respond to our questions. Newsnight has been told
:31:45. > :31:48.that police officers from other units were leaking information too.
:31:48. > :31:53.In connection with this diamond heist at the Dome for example,
:31:53. > :31:58.though it remains unconfirmed. Even in terror investigations, we are
:31:58. > :32:04.told the tabloids have deep pockets. The tabloids came and said open
:32:04. > :32:13.check book, they were offering very, very big money. How much, roughly.
:32:13. > :32:20.I can tell you it was six figures. �100,000 plus, with these sums
:32:20. > :32:24.swirling around, it is easy to assume other revelations will come.
:32:24. > :32:31.Bob Milton who headed up the Special Branch protection squad and
:32:31. > :32:35.was in charge of security vetting. Let's deal with the royal security.
:32:35. > :32:40.Are you surprised an officer was prepared toe enter into
:32:40. > :32:46.negotiations to sell a brift royal telephone book? I'm devastated this
:32:46. > :32:55.has been made. Royalty protection, VIP protection at the highest level
:32:55. > :33:00.of integrity, this is a very bad day. This is presumably someone who
:33:00. > :33:04.you vetted? I was responsible for the high standards of vetting in
:33:04. > :33:08.the United States. This family would have had the same as everyone
:33:08. > :33:14.else, if they had access to confidential information. What
:33:14. > :33:19.should be done? A full and hope inquiry has to what why this person
:33:19. > :33:24.was, was it a principal protection officer, someone who sits next to
:33:24. > :33:30.the Queen, or someone who stood outside Buckingham Palace and got
:33:30. > :33:34.hold of the book, we don't know. this, as far as you know, widely
:33:34. > :33:40.available? Anyone working in the environment of the royal protection
:33:40. > :33:43.may have had access to 0 it at some point. That would have had to have
:33:43. > :33:47.had access on security grounds. The point I'm a making is the police
:33:47. > :33:54.officers are vetted at different levels. It may well not be someone
:33:54. > :33:58.at the highest level of vetting. The broader question of the
:33:58. > :34:02.relationship between the tabloid% and the police, this is a murky
:34:02. > :34:08.area? The police and press need to speak to each other, and they need
:34:08. > :34:11.to get their message across. There need to be some strict rules about
:34:11. > :34:15.passing of confidential information, it should not happen. It certainly
:34:15. > :34:19.shouldn't happen for money. That is despicable and a betrayal of the
:34:19. > :34:23.trust that people who have given that information, whether it is
:34:23. > :34:28.police officers working in the community, and working with
:34:28. > :34:37.families of victims, or in this case somebody working close to the
:34:37. > :34:40.Royal Family. It is a criminal offence? Yes it is, they should be
:34:40. > :34:43.have the full wait of the law applied to them. What about the
:34:43. > :34:47.fear that some police have of being turned over in the tabloid press,
:34:47. > :34:52.have you come across that, ever heard of it? The worry we have
:34:52. > :34:56.always is are you vulnerable to an approach from an outside agency. We
:34:56. > :35:00.carry significant responsibility, we have access to very, very secret
:35:00. > :35:03.and confidential material. If you are not squeaking clean yourself,
:35:03. > :35:11.you may well behind that you are vulnerable to an outside agency
:35:11. > :35:14.trying to axe fire that knowledge. They are human - Access that
:35:14. > :35:17.information. They are human beings, and someone will have an affair?
:35:17. > :35:20.They need to be open and honest about that. They can't hide the
:35:20. > :35:25.affairs and risk somebody using that information to try to put them
:35:25. > :35:30.under pressure. They have to be open and honest, if they are having
:35:30. > :35:34.an affair, they need to declare it? To whom? They have a vetting
:35:34. > :35:43.officer. If they are cleared to that level of vetting they should
:35:43. > :35:47.be speaking direct to the officer. If Peter Hain was - Andy Hainaut
:35:47. > :35:52.was performing an investigation what should have happened?
:35:53. > :35:55.can't put senior police officers in the hands and the way of delivering
:35:55. > :36:01.information. If you have done something that makes you vulnerable,
:36:01. > :36:04.then you need to do something about The other person who is under close
:36:04. > :36:11.scrutiny at the moment, is John Yates, the assistant commissioner
:36:11. > :36:14.at the yard, is his position tenable any longer? Somebody should
:36:14. > :36:19.take responsibility. Whether a police officer, or somebody else, I
:36:19. > :36:22.don't know, nobody seems to step up and take responsibility. John Yates
:36:23. > :36:27.vm a very professional and competent police officer. He has
:36:27. > :36:30.admitted he had a lack of judgment two years ago. He will have to make
:36:30. > :36:35.his own decision on whether or not he feels his position is untenable.
:36:35. > :36:39.I couldn't answer that. What do you think personally, would you resign?
:36:39. > :36:43.It depends why he made the decision. If he made it on operational
:36:43. > :36:49.grounds, then fair enough. For any other reason, if he was influenced
:36:49. > :36:54.by any other way he should step down.
:36:54. > :36:58.It was 45 degrees in the gulf state of Qatar today, FIFA, the governing
:36:58. > :37:01.body of world football has ruled that sweltering heat to that is no
:37:01. > :37:09.bar to run around a football pitch. The decision to hold the World Cup
:37:09. > :37:15.there in 2022, is one of the most astonishing for an organisation
:37:15. > :37:22.that seems to like defying belief. Qatar has not what you call a
:37:22. > :37:31.world-boating reputation for soccer. How did it get the world's most
:37:31. > :37:36.glittering football tournament. The head of the bid has spoken to us.
:37:36. > :37:42.Doha's skyline is designed as a display of wealth. Gas and oil
:37:42. > :37:45.reserves turn into steel and glass. In just 20 years this gleaming
:37:45. > :37:49.Metropilis has risen out of the desert, and the rate of range for
:37:49. > :37:56.the people who live here, some of the richest in the world, has been
:37:56. > :38:01.breath-taking. The 2022 FIFA World Youth Cup
:38:01. > :38:07.is...Qatar. And it has a new catalyst for
:38:07. > :38:09.development, the 2022 World Cup. Awarded by FIFA last December, but
:38:10. > :38:16.dogged ever since by murky allegation, that they won the prize
:38:16. > :38:19.using corrupt means. Now for the first time the head of
:38:19. > :38:24.the bid has hit back, strenuously denying the allegations and saying
:38:24. > :38:28.they are being unfairly targeted. Attack on 2022 is because it fits
:38:28. > :38:33.the prejudice that people have in their mind, an Arab nation could
:38:33. > :38:38.not have won. That is what I'm trying to say.
:38:39. > :38:45.Qatar says the real reason for its victory was its promise to spend
:38:45. > :38:49.more than �60 billion. Not on bunging officials, but on 12
:38:49. > :38:52.new stadium, new roads and new airports and a new Metro system,
:38:52. > :38:58.all built for FIFA's month-long football party.
:38:58. > :39:04.This is perhaps the best example of Qatar's bold vision for its future.
:39:04. > :39:10.Ten years from now, they say, this will be a brand new megacity,
:39:10. > :39:14.housing 190,000 people. Over there behind me will be the new 8 6,000
:39:14. > :39:19.seater stadium, build for the 2022 world come final. As you can see,
:39:19. > :39:24.there is a lot of work to be done. Representatives from other
:39:24. > :39:34.countries, who bit against Qatar, still say FIFA got it wrong.
:39:34. > :39:35.
:39:35. > :39:37.still think it is unusual to say the least to hold an event of such
:39:38. > :39:42.extraordinary magnitude in such a city. You have to question whether
:39:42. > :39:50.it makes sense to build the kind of infrastructure it takes to create
:39:50. > :39:54.the World Cup. By far the biggest challenge will be combatting the
:39:54. > :40:01.scourging summer sun. Temperatures can reach more than 50 degrees,
:40:01. > :40:04.posing a serious risk to help. typical day we can see up to 40
:40:04. > :40:10.heat presentations. Most are not life threatening, I remember some
:40:10. > :40:17.days we had on a regular, at least once day we would see a life-
:40:17. > :40:21.threatening heat stroke. This is what Qatar says is the
:40:21. > :40:29.solution to its problem with the heat. 12 air conditioned stadiums
:40:29. > :40:33.like this one, with jets puching cool air out across the pitch, and
:40:33. > :40:37.with smaller ones in the stands. At the pitch side it is pleasant. Up
:40:37. > :40:42.there in the stands it is stickier, and the problem for Qatar is, it
:40:42. > :40:47.isn't air condition the whole country.
:40:47. > :40:50.The other more mofgs answer would be to move the World Cup to -
:40:50. > :40:54.controversial answer would be to move the World Cup to winter.
:40:54. > :41:00.This man led the bid and has the task of delivering the project?
:41:00. > :41:03.Would you be prepared to move the World Cup to winter. This is not a
:41:03. > :41:07.question for us, it is for the entire football community. If they
:41:07. > :41:11.said they would prefer it, would you do it? It is a question for
:41:11. > :41:19.them, for the football family, for us we are ready to host it in the
:41:19. > :41:23.winter in the summer, whenever it First impressions of a modern,
:41:23. > :41:28.westernised city, with the usual freedoms are quickly disspelled.
:41:28. > :41:32.Drinking alcohol is banned, except in some hotels and restaurants and
:41:32. > :41:37.there are severe restrictions on sexual behaviour and on the freedom
:41:37. > :41:41.of eggs presidential. There is a perception that Qatar is
:41:41. > :41:45.a human rights compliant country, in fact, it isn't. When people go
:41:45. > :41:49.to Qatar and find out the true situation, they are often shocked
:41:49. > :41:56.at the level of restrictions that they could face. For example, if
:41:56. > :42:00.they say anything in relation to Islam, or to the Amir, or being
:42:00. > :42:06.seen drunk in public, for example, that could land them a sentence of
:42:06. > :42:11.up to six months in prisement. Nearly all the places Newsnight
:42:11. > :42:14.went, we were accompanied by media minders. This is not a country
:42:14. > :42:19.where you can be completely open. The media is not completely free?
:42:19. > :42:23.Can I ask you a question, why do you think the media is not
:42:23. > :42:28.completely free. I understand if you insult the amount mir here you
:42:28. > :42:33.could be liable to a jail sentence of seven years, that doesn't happen
:42:33. > :42:37.in a country that is truly free? think the World Cup will accept
:42:37. > :42:41.accelerate a lot of the initiatives Qatar is doing. Among them freedom
:42:41. > :42:46.of speech, human rights, and so on. A lot of things Qatar is taking on
:42:46. > :42:52.now. There is a level of freedom of speech, maybe not the same as in
:42:52. > :42:56.some countries, like the US and England. Each country has its own
:42:57. > :43:00.factors, culture and tradition. Certain things would be within
:43:00. > :43:04.acceptable norms, certain things would not be. Can any sport, even
:43:04. > :43:08.one as big as football, really deliver that source of social and
:43:08. > :43:13.political change. This man has worked in sports
:43:13. > :43:18.marketing for the gulf for over 20 years? What they have done is very
:43:18. > :43:22.much identified sport as wait to put their country on the map. In
:43:22. > :43:32.the Middle East other countries have tried to do other things,
:43:32. > :43:32.
:43:32. > :43:35.Dubai is a commercial hub, Abu Dhabi is a cultural hub. It has
:43:35. > :43:39.brought global recognition for this tiny country, not necessarily for
:43:39. > :43:45.the reasons it might have imagined. Since the vote Qatar's bid has been
:43:45. > :43:51.mired in corruption allegations. A whistle-blower claimed three FIFA
:43:51. > :43:55.members were paid $1.5 million to vote for Qatar, claims she has
:43:55. > :43:59.since retracted. Even if she is now tl telling the truth, the bid is
:43:59. > :44:03.still under scrutiny, especially with the country's most powerful
:44:03. > :44:08.football executive facing accusations he bribed officials,
:44:08. > :44:13.during a bid for the FIFA presidency.
:44:13. > :44:19.Qatar fears its reputation will also be tarnish.
:44:19. > :44:22.Did you bribe FIFA members to get the World Cup? No. At no point you
:44:22. > :44:28.bought any money or gifts or anything beyond the controls to win
:44:28. > :44:38.the race? Had We never broke FIFA's rules. The problem is people will
:44:38. > :44:38.
:44:38. > :44:42.look at FIFA's own Ethics Committee to say that he was bribing people
:44:42. > :44:48.to get votes, and people will believe that they was doing that
:44:48. > :44:52.for this vote too? His issues are separate from the bid. We ran our
:44:52. > :45:02.campaign, we lobbied, out of all people we lobbied him the strongest,
:45:02. > :45:05.
:45:05. > :45:08.because he from the very first day was not on board with the bid.
:45:08. > :45:13.Football has grown so much in popularity and power over the last
:45:13. > :45:17.few years, that for a country like this, hosting the World Cup is seen
:45:17. > :45:21.as an opportunity to build a nation. But ever since it won the vote back